MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT PORCUPINE RIVER STUDY (1998 - 2000)

Effluent Sources and Nutrient Monitoring

Internal Technical Report Prepared by:

Nadine Dubois & Todd Kondrat Technical Support Section

Northern Region

January 2003

000019

Introduction:

One of Ontario's major gold fields is located within the Porcupine River watershed. Mining activity and subsequent urban development have influenced water quality in the Porcupine River and its tributaries. The primary water quality concerns pertain to nutrients and metal loadings.

In 1997, the Timmins District requested that a comprehensive investigation of the Porcupine Ri ver system be carried out. The request was initiated in an attempt to determine where efforts on source control or potential remedial action needed to be focused. Water, sediment, benthic invertebrate and fish samples were collected in September of 1998. Sampling was complemented by c lam in-situ toxicity and sediment bioassays. The resulting report, re leased in May 2001 and entitled "Porcupine River Environmental Monitoring Study September 1998", included a summary and interpretation of the 1998 sampling results, and identified 4 locations where efforts be directed towards source control.

Water sampling at a reduced number of stations was continued throughout 1999 and the spring of 2000. The primary objective of this report is to compile and analyze the nutrient data. A summary of general chemjstry and metals results is also provided, however, detailed interpretation of this data is beyond the scope of this report.

Phase I below, includes a description of the watershed, identification of effluent sources and a summary of the 1998 study findings. Phase II inc I udes a summary of 1999 to 2000 monitoring results, and focuses on the compilation and interpretation of nutrient data.

2

000020

PHASE I: STUDY AREA AND PREVIOUS FINDINGS

1. Watershed Description

The Porcupine River watershed is characterized by gently rolling terrain that rises gently from the Hudson Bay Lowlands. Much of the drainage area is wetland overlying a clay plain. According to the 2001 report, the Porcupine River and it's tributaries within the study area are generally slow-flowing and meandering. Substrates at most ri ver sampling locations are underlain by clay.

A map of the Porcupine Ri ver system (taken from the 2001 report) is presented in Appendix A (Fig. 1). As the watershed is relatively complex, the system will be discussed in terms of six "reaches" described below:

A. Upper Porcupine River:

The Upper Porcupine River, upstream of Porcupine Lake, is formed by two branches which converge approximately 1.5 km west of Porcupine Lake. The upper branch of the main Porcupine River originates at Pearl Lake and drains eastward for approximately 8.5 km where it joins the south branch. The south branch, also called the "South Porcupine River", originates as drainage from Simpson and McDonald Lakes, and flows northeasterly for 11 km where it joins the upper branch and flows into Porcupine Lake.

B. Porcupine Lake & Bob's Lake:

Porcupine Lake is a 269 hectare water-body which receives flow from the Upper Porcupine River and Bob's Creek (which drains Bob's Lake located northeast of Porcupine Lake). The communities of Porcupine and South Porcupine are situated on the shores of Porcupine Lake at the northeast and south ends.

C. Porcupine River (main), downstream of Porcupine Lake:

From it's outlet at the northeast end of Porcupine Lake, the Porcupine River flows northeast and then southeast for approximate ly 35 kilometers and eventually enters Night Hawk Lake.

D. North Porcupine River & Bell Creek:

The North Porcupine River originates at Bigwater Lake and flows eastward for approximately 25 km to its confluence with the Porcupine River (main arm). Bell Creek enters the North Porcupine River from the south and is a major tributary.

Bigwater Lake and the portion of the North Porcupine River located upstream of Bell Creek have been considered representative of background quality as there is little development and no mining acti vity in the area.

E. Three Nations Creek (& "South Branch" of Porcupine River):

The "south branch" of the Porcupine River originates as drainage from the area northwest of Three Nations Lake.

Three Nations Lake is a small (57 ha) headwater lake with no major inflowing streams or tributaries. There is one primary outflow at the north end known as Three Nations Creek. From its outlet at the lake, the creek flows approximately 6 km to its junction with the main branch of the Porcupine River. The entire "south branch" is also referred to as Three Nations Creek.

3

000021

F. Night Hawk Lake:

From it's confluence with Three Nations Creek, the Porcupine River flows southeast for approximately 4 km and empties into Night Hawk Lake.

2. Effluent Sources

a) Mining:

Mining activities have been ongoing in the Porcupine area for over 100 years. There are currently 4 active mining operations discharging to the Porcupine Ri ver and its tributaries. A summary of these sites is provided below.

TABLE I: Active Mine Effluent Discharges to the Porcupine River System

TvoeofMine Comoanv Primarv Receiver

Base Metal Falconbridge Ltd. • north via "Kidd Metsite tributary stream"

• Kidd Creek Metallurgical to Porcupine Ri ver (main), and

Site ("Kidd Metsite") & • south to Three Nations Creek

TMA

Gold Porcupine Joint Venture (formerly • west to Porcupine River (main), 2 km d/s owned by Royal Oak Mines) Porcupine Lake, and

• Pamour Mine • east to Three Nations Lake & Three Nations Creek

Gold Porcupine Joint Ven ture (formerly • Upper Porcupine (south branch, 2 km u/s Placer Dome Inc.) of confluence with upper branch)

• Dome Mine (current site includes the original Dome site and the former Preston & Paymaster mines)

Gold Porcupine Joint Venture (formerly • "Clearwater Pond" thru bog to Bell Cr. * Kinross Gold Corp.)

• Bell Creek Mine/Mill*

* 1he Bell Creek discharge was discontinued in 2000 and routed 4 km to the Owl Creek Pit, which discharges to the Porcupine River

In addition, there is a gold mine located on the west shore of Night Hawk Lake (P JV Night Hawk Lake Mine) which discharges to the lake.

Though many of the earlier mine sites are currently inactive, tailing di sposal areas and waste rock piles are still potenti al sources of contaminants. A list of closed mining sites (taken from the 2001 report) is provided below in Table II:

4

000022

TABLE II: Inactive Mines

Mine Years Ooerated Primarv Receiver

Schumacher-Mcintyre mine -1900 - 1988? Pearl Lake & Upper Porcupine River (north & tailings area arm)

ERG Resources tailings 1988 - 1989? Upper Porcupine River (north arm) & Bell disposal area (reprocessed Lake Schumacher tailings)

Hollinger mine & tailings 1910-1968 Upper Porcupine (north arm through Pearl area L.)

Coniarum mine & tailings 1913-1961 Upper Porcupine (north arm) area

Aunor mine & tailings area 1940-1968 Upper Porcupine (south arm)

Delnite mine & tailings area 1937 - 1964 Upper Porcupine (south arm)

Hoyle mine (ore to Bell Creek uncertain uncertain mine)

Buffalo-Ankerite mine & 1926 - 1952 Upper Porcupine (south arm) tailings area

Paymaster mine & tailings 1922 - 1966 Upper Porcupine (south arm) area (currently part of the Dome site)

Preston mine (currently part n/a Upper Porcupine (south arm) of the Dome site)

Broulan (currently considered n/a Porcupine River (main arm, dis of Porcupine part of the Pamour site) L.)

Halnor (currently considered 1930 - current Porcupine River (main arm, dis of Porcupine part of Pamour site) L.)

Owl Creek (part of Kidd n/a • west to Porcupine R. (main) TMA) • east to Porcupine R. (main) via Owl

Creek

According to the 2001 report, the gold mining areas in the Upper Porcupine as well as those downstream of Porcupine Lake are comprised of basic and ultrabasic rock with localized acid intrusions. Since most mining activity has been localized around the occurrence of gold veins, the acid generating potential of mine tailings within these areas is generally low. However, ore from the Kidd Creek deposit (which is processed at the Kidd Metallurgical site) has considerable acid-generating potential due to the high sulphite content of these deposits.

The report also notes the presence of arsenopyrites in some of the gold mining areas, and indicates that gold mine tailings could consequently be sources of arsenic.

5

000023

b) Municipal Sewage:

Mining activity Jed to significant urban development in the Timmins area. Residential communities of Golden City, Porcupine, South Porcupine and Schumacher historically discharged untreated sewage to Porcupine Lake. The following 3 municipal sewage facilities currently discharge treated effluent to the Porcupine River and its tributaries:

• Whitney-Tisdale STP (serves communities of Porcupine & South Porcupine) -discharges to the Porcupine Ri ver, downstream of Porcupine Lake

• Bob's Lake Lagoon (serves the Bob's Lake subdivision at Porcupine) -discharges to Bob's Creek (upstream of Porcupine Lake)

• Ontario Government Complex lagoon - discharges to the Porcupine River, downstream of Porcupine Lake

These systems will be discussed in detail in later sections of this report.

3. 1998 Study Findings

In 1997, the Ministry initiated an environmental survey of the Porcupine River system. The study was undertaken with the intent of assessing the cumulative impacts of current and historicaJ mining operations on water and sediment quality. The objective was to determine where efforts on source control or potential remedial action needed to be focused. As part of this assessment, the severity of contamination within the system was determined through the use of biological tests that measured both toxicity and bioaccumulation effects.

A total of 47 locations along the Porcupine River system were sampled during September of 1998. Sites were selected for water, sediment and benthic community analysis. This work was complemented by clam in-situ toxicity, sediment bioassays and fish collection at several stations. The study focussed on metals contamination from mining operations in the watershed. The North Porcupine River, especially that portion above the confluence of Bell Creek, has no history of mining activity and was chosen as a background or reference area.

a) Conclusions

The subsequent report entitled Porcupine River Environmental Monitoring Study September 1998 (May 2001) includes a summary of previous monitoring studies conducted at specific sites within the watershed. Findings of the 1998 study are summarized in Table l of Appendix A. The report provided the following conclusions:

6

000024

1. A number of metals are present at elevated concentrations below the mine sites.

TABLE III: Metal Loadinl!.s Mine Site Effect Further

Invest 'gn Recomm.

Kidd Creek • TMA appears to be a substantial source of Cd, Zn & Se . Meta llurgical Site & ln addition, the discharge contributed Cu, As, Pb & Ni. TMA Through processes designed to treat discharge water for •

acidity, the si te is also responsible for elevated levels of CaS04 (gypsum) in the water column & sediments below the discharge. Gypsum appears to be having a severe biological impact. The toxic effect to benthic invertebrates was due to changes in pH towards the acidic range, possible production of C0 2 and the physical coating of gypsum material over the body surface.

• Low pH in water below the Kidd TMA suggests that there could be significant mobilization of metals from the sediments (low pH resulting in increased solubility of metals held in sediments).

• Metallurgic Site appears to have also contributed to elevated levels of Cu, Cd and Zn in both water &

./

sediment in Three Nations Creek; high Cu, Ni & Zn in TNL below Jarosite Pond

• fish tissue residue data strongly suggests that metals are being carried to Night Hawk Lake and accumulating in biota

PamourMine • does not appear to be a substantial source of contamination . elevated levels of Cu, Cd and Zn in both water & sediment in Three Nations Creek may be due in part to Pamour site

Dome Mine (incl. • elevated Cu & Ni in water and sediments former Preston Mine) • significant benthic community impairment Bell Creek Mine . relatively minor contributor of metals

Schumacher- . sediment in Pearl Lake with Cu, Zn, As, Cd & Pb Mcintyre mine & elevated over background tailings area ERG Resources • may be significant source of Cu in water column ./

tailings disposal area (reprocessed Schumacher tai lings) Buffalo-Ankerite, • high As, Cn & Ni in downstream sediments ./

Aunor & Paymaster sites Broulan & Halnor • minor contributions of sediment bound Zn & As sites (currently considered part of Pamour site) Owl Creek (part of • high levels of sediment As, Cu, Cd & Zn may be due to Kidd TMA) losses from this mine site

ii. Porcupine Lake sediments appear to trap a large percentage of metals from upstream sources.

iii. A strong d irect relationship between sediment metal concentrations for As, Cd, Cu, Ni & Pb, relative to the concentration measured in minnows, suggests the potential transfer of sediment-associated metals into the food chain. In particular, sediments

7

000025

with low TOC ( < 2%) have the highest potential for chemical availability and true uptake in tissue.

iv. Cadmium bioavailability appears to be low. Cd is not being accumulated by organisms despite high levels in sediment and the water column.

b) Report Recommendations

The study report recommended that efforts should be directed towards source control at the following locations:

1. a number of closed tailings areas along the Upper Porcupine River (both north and south arms), which appeared to be contributing e levated metals levels in both the water column and sediment;

ii. the Dome active tailings discharge, which had elevated levels of copper and nickel in the discharge;

111. the Kidd TMA discharge, which had contributed to elevated metals as well as gypsum in Porcupine R. sediments, resulting in impacts on the benthic community downstream of the site and elevated metals in fish tissue from Night Hawk Lake; and,

iv. the area around Three Nations Creek, which had elevated levels of cadmium and zmc.

It was also recommended that additional monitoring be conducted once source control measures are implemented.

8

000026

PHASE II: FOLLOW-UP STUDY 1999 - 2000

1. Monitoring Results • Genera l

Water quality monitoring was continued throughout 1999 and the spring of 2000 at a reduced number of sites along the Porcupine Ri ver System. A list of monitoring stations and sample parameters are included in Appendix A (Tables 2 & 3). Stream flow was measured at seven of the sampling stations in order to gain a better understanding of water balance and relative contributions of contaminants within the watershed.

Sample results and stream flow measurements are compiled in Appendix B. Field data and laboratory results for sampling conducted in 1999 through 2000 are summarized in Tables 1 through 5. Results for specific parameters are graphed in Figures l through 12. Graphs include September 1998 results for 17 sites that were sampled again in 1999 and/or 2000. For comparison purposes, the graphs include September 1998 results for sites which were chosen as representative of background conditions (i.e. BL-1 & NP-1).

The primary objective of this document is to examine the nutrient data, identify areas of concern and provide recommendations for source control. With the exception of the nutrient data, assessment of monitoring results has not been requested. However, upon cursory review, the following observations are made with respect to general chemistry and metals data.

)i> Metals and General Chemistry:

a) Upper Porcupine

1. unionized ammonia ranged from 0.01- 25 ug/L, and was below the PWQO of 20 ug/L at all stations except SP-6 (south arm of the Upper Porcupine, downstream of the Dome active tailings di scharge) which had very high levels in the August and October 1999 samples (App. C, Fig. 2); unionized ammonia at these concentrations is not likely acutely toxk to aquatic life, however concentrations above 20 ug/L are known to cause sub-lethal effects in rainbow trout (OMOE, 1979);

11. free cyanide ranged from the MDL of 1 ug/L to 24 ug/L, exceeding the PWQO of 5 ug/L in the Upper Porcupine (south arm) at SP-4 and SP-6 (App. B, Fig. 4); at these levels, cyanide is not expected to be acutely toxic (i.e . threshold is 50 - 200 ug/L for most fi shes), however sub-lethal effects in fish have been noted at cyanide concentrations above 10 ug/L (OMOE, 1979);

iii. nickel concentrations ranged from under 2 ug/L at background sites to as high as 130 ug/L in the Upper Porcupine; levels were higher than background at most sites and exceeded the PWQO of 25 ug/L in the Upper Porcupine at UP-7 (3x PWQO) and at SP-6 (4x PWQO) (App. B, Fig. 6); this level of nickel is not expected to be acutely toxic to aquatic life, however chronic exposure to daphnia has caused mortality at 130 ug/L and reproduction impairment at levels as low as 30 ug/L (OMOE, 1979);

1v. copper exceeded the PWQO of 5 ug/L at all locations except background sites (BL-1, BP-1, B-2); levels ranged from 0.55 to 442 ug/L, with highest results occurring at UP-7 and SP-6 (App. B, Fig. 7); copper is generally acutely toxic to algae at 40-50 ug/L, daphnia at 26-30 ug/L and some fi sh at levels as low as 10 ug/L (Wren et al., 1990a);

9

000027

v. iron levels were variable, ranging from 16 - 968 ug/L; exceedences of the PWQO for iron occurred in the background stations (Bell Creek and the North Porcupine) and in the Upper Porcupine at UP-6 (App. B, Fig. 9); iron concentrations in excess of 300 ug/L can form ferric hydroxide floe which can alter the physical characteristics of streams, affecting primary productivity and reproduction of aquatic organisms (OMOE, 1979); and,

vi. arsenic levels were below the PWQO of 100 ug/L at all sites, ranging from 0.5 ug/L at background to as high as 58 ug/L in the south arm of the Upper Porcupine (App. B, Fig. 5).

b) Porcupine River (main) 1. zinc showed significant increases at PR-6, PR-7 and PR-19 (App. B, Fig.

8); concentrations ranged from 0.5ug/L to as high as 2160 ug/L; acute toxic ity of zinc tends to decrease with increased water hardness -- levels as low as 344 ug/L are reportedly toxic to daphnia in water with hardness between 54-196 mg/L, while 96-hr LC50's for rainbow trout ranged from 66-4460 ug/L as water hardness increased from 9.2 mg/L to 387 mg/L (Wren et al., 1990b);

11. significant increases in cadmium also occurred at PR-6 , PR-7 and PR-19 (App. B, Fig. 12) where levels significantly exceeded the PWQO of 0.2 ug/L; cadmium levels in the study area ranged from 0-24 ug/L; cadmium is reportedly acutely tox ic to salmonids at concentrations between 1-5 ug/L, and chronic effects to fish are documented at 0.5-1 ug/L (Wren et al., 1990c); thresholds of acute toxicity to invertebrates range from 7-34,600 ug/L depending on species and water hardness, while adverse chronic effects are documented at concentrations of 0.28-3 ug/L (Wren et al., 1990c);

111. high copper levels were evident in the Porcupine River downstream of Porcupine Lake; copper levels in the Porcupine River ranged from 3 to 48 ug/L (App. B, Fig. 7); highest results were observed at PR-7, where levels were above acute toxicity thresholds for algae, daphnia and some fish species (Wren et al., 1990a);

iv. pH varied from 3.6 - 8.4, with very low pH levels observed in the Porcupine River downstream of the Kidd TMA discharge at PR-7 (App. B, Fig. 2);

v. aluminum ranged from 5 - 530 ug/L, exceeding the PWQO of 75 ug/L (for pH 6.5-9.0) at 9 stations; highest levels were observed at NP-1 (background), PR-4, PR-7, PR-14 and the Night Hawk Lake stations (App. B, Fig. 11); toxicity of aluminum varies with pH (more toxic at lower pH); at pH of 6.6-9.0, the range of acutely toxic concentrations for several species of fish , invertebrates and algae is documented as 150-832 ug/L (OMOE, 1988);

vi. lead levels varied from 0-22 ug/L, with highest results occurring at the background sites (NP-1 & B-2) as well as PR-19 (App. B, Fig. 10); PWQO's for lead vary from 1-5 ug/L depending on alkalinity; lead at these levels is below acute toxicity thresholds for aquatic invertebrates and fi sh, however chronic and sub-lethal effects have been noted in daphnia at 16.7 ug/L (at 52 mg/L CaC0 3) and 8-10 ug/L (at 250 mg/L Ca C03) respectively (Wren et al., 1990d);

10

000028

v11. iron exceeded the PWQO of 300 ug/L in the main Porcupine River (at PR-1, PR-6, PR-7 & PR-14) and in all the Night Hawk Lake stations (App. B, Fig. 9);

vm. conductivity ranged from as low as 68 uS/cm at background sites to as high as 3230 uS/cm at PR-7; conductivity showed significant increases in the Porcupine River downstream of the Kidd TMA discharge (PR-6 and PR-7) (App. B, Fig. 3).

The data confirms findings of the previous report which suggest that further assessment is required, particularly in regard to:

• the Kidd TMA site, including Owl Creek site (source of zinc, cadmium, copper, low pH and high conductivity),

• the Kidd Jarosite pond (high zinc and cadmium to Three Nations Creek),

• the Dome tailings discharge (source of copper, nickel and ammonia), and

• the ERG site (copper source).

More detailed analysis of the metals data is required, which is beyond the scope of this report.

Interference of suspended colloids associated with clay substrates could possibly be resulting in artificially high metals readings. Therefore, further sampling programs should consider collection of filtered/non-filtered duplicates to determine dissolved constituents and obtain a better understanding of the bioavailability of metals in this system.

11

000029

2. Nutrient Monitoring

A nutrient component was added to the original sampling program in order to assess effects of the three municipal sewage discharges on the Porcupine River system. The T immins District has requested review of nutrient data collected to date, with particular focus on the Bob's Lake lagoon and its potential impact on Porcupine Lake.

In September 1998, water samples were collected at 43 sites and analyzed for a wide spectrum of parameters including phosphate, total ammonia, nitrite and nitrate. Total phosphorous and TKN were not included in the 1998 analyses. In 1999, continued water quality monitoring was focused on 12 of the original sites. In the 2000 spring sampling program, nutrient monitoring was conducted at 17 of the original sites and at 2 additional stations on Night Hawk Lake. The results of nutrient monitoring are summarized in Appendix C.

a) Point Sources of Nutrient Loading:

The three municipal sewage facilities that currently discharge to the Porcupine River system are briefly described below in Table IV:

Bob's Lake single-cell 35+ 250 50,000 continuous Bob's Cr. (u/s of 70

Whitney/ Tisdale STP

Ontario Gov't Complex

passive lagoon Porcupine L.)

• contact uncertain 5,000 1.300.000 continuous Porcupine R. 2,400

stabilization (expanded/ (dis Porcupine

plant upgraded in L.)

• seasonal 1978)

chlorination (Apr-Oct)

• single-cell 35+ uncertain 16,200 seasonal Porcupine R. II passive lagoon (-2 weeks (dis Porcupine (1999

per year) L.) only)

All three facilities are operated by the Corporation of the City of Timmins. Several years of effluent quality results for each of the three discharges are summarized in Appendices D, E and F. Accordi ng to the District Environmental Officer, the files indicate that C of A's for these sites are old, single-page documents which do not include effluent limits. Therefore, the data will be discussed in terms of loading to the receiver as well as compliance with the Ministry's Guideline F-5 of the Manual of Guidelines and Procedures, which describes levels of treatment required at munic ipal and private sewage treatment works discharging to surface water. Guidel ine F-5 takes the approach that all sewage treatment works shall provide secondary treatment or equi valent as the "normal" level of treatment, unless indi vidual receiving water assessment studies indicate the need for higher levels of treatment.

According to Ministry policy, "normal" levels of treatment should be able to produce annual average effluent quality that does not exceed the Effluent Guidelines criteria identified in Table l of Guideline F-5-1. BOD and TSS Guidelines for lagoons with

12

000030

continuous or seasonal discharges are 30 mg/L BOD and 40 mg/L TSS. Guidelines of 25 mg/L for both TSS and BOD are identified for contact stabilization plants.

1. Whitney-Tisdale Sewage Treatment Plant

The Whitney-Tisdale system is a contact stabilization treatment plant that serves the communities of Porcupine and South Porcupine. The plant was expanded in 1978 to accommodate average day capacity sewage flows of 1.5 million !gal/day (6,800 m3/day). Final effluent is discharged on a continuous basis to the Porcupine River, at a point approxi mately 1250 meters downstream of Porcupine Lake. Effluent is chlorinated prior to discharge during the ice-free season (April to October). The system does not include nutrient removal facilities.

According to the most recent inspection report for this facility (September 17, 2001), the municipality is currently adhering to the Minimum Municipal Sampling Program for mechanical STP's, which consists of daily chlorine residual (when effluent is being chlorinated) and monthly sampling of the treated effluent for TSS, BODS, ammonium (NRi), TKN, nitrite, nitrate and E. coli. Analysis for total phosphorous is also being conducted monthly and effl uent discharge volumes are recorded daily. Sample results and flow records for 1998, 1999 and 2000 are summarized in Appendix E.

From the data, it is evident that the system produced between 1.1 and 1.5 million cubic meters of effluent annually. With respect to TSS and BOD, effluent quality is generally very good. Over the 3-year period, TSS ranged from 2 to 19 mg/Land BOD ranged from 1 to 24 mg/L. Annual average concentrations were under 10 mg/L for both parameters, which are well below the Effluent Guidelines criteria of 25 mg/L. Ammonia (NH3) ranged from 0.9 to 5.3 mg/L, and averaged 3.3 mg/L. Total phosphorous ranged from 0.6 to 2.6 mg/L, and averaged 1.8 mg/L.

Daily loading rates (kg/day) to the Porcupine River were calculated and graphed as shown in Appendix E. TSS and BOD loadings were generally highest in March and April, while nutrient loadings remained relatively consistent throughout the year. Calculated average annual loading rates are shown below:

1998 7,984 6,844 3,205 3,798 2,122

1999 I 0,694 6,684 4,304 5,053 2,500

2000 13,065 5,806 5,676 7,781 2,526

3 Year Avg. 10,581 6,445 4,395 5,544 2,383

Increases in loading from 1998 to 2000 appear to be associated with increased discharge flows over the 3-year period, and are not a result of decreasing effluent quality.

This faci lity discharges to the Porcupine River downstream of Porcupine Lake, at a point between sampl ing stations PR-1 and PR-3. PR- I is located approximately 500 meters upstream of the outfall and PR-3 is located approximately 1500 meters downstream.

13

000031

Information regarding flow patterns in the Porcupine River is provided in historic flow records from a WSC station at Hoyle (04MD004), located downstream of the confluence with the North Porcupine River. Flows peak during spring freshet (April/May), with a secondary pulse in the fall. Low flows generally occur between January and March.

Stream flows were measured in the Porcupine River at station PR-4 during May, June and August of 1999 (data shown in Appendix B). Measured flows ranged from 128 to 1230 Lis. Based on this data, di lution of the STP discharge effluent (at the annual average discharge rate) was estimated to be between 2: l and 28: 1, with highest dilution occurring during June. From this information, it is evident that the STP discharge would receive very little dilution (possibly< l : 1) during low flow periods in the ri ver.

Sewage Bypasses: Bypassing of raw sewage at several of the lift stations occurs during periods of high rainfall and freshet, when inflow volumes exceed pump capacity. Bypassed sewage from Pump Stations # 1 through #5 is discharged via bypass lines directly to Porcupine Lake. Sewage from Pump Station #6 discharges to the Porcupine River immediate ly downstream of Porcupine Lake (between monitoring stations PL-2 and PR-1). Bypass events, taken from the previous two inspection reports (1999 and 200 1), are listed in Appendix E. According to the District Environmental Officer, sampling of bypass effl uent is not being conducted as bypass lines are inaccessible.

Potential loadings from bypassed sewage are calculated below in Table VI. Loads have been calculated based on the typical composition of medium strength raw sewage. Actual loads are expected to be somewhat lower due to dilution of sewage with infiltrating stormwater.

TABLE VI: Potential Loadings from Bypass Events

Pump Stn.

# I 1,964 I 393 . ___ .... _:_:_i __

#2 5,892 1,178

#3 7,437 1,487 -------

#5 447 89

#6 600 120

TOT. 16,340 3,268

393

1,178

1,487

89 I ·---·-·· 120

3,268

19.6 39 8 --~ ··-·----·--·

58.9 --3,388 678 678 I

74.4 9,083 1,8 17 1.8 17 ·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-

4.5 396 79 79 ---·-·-·--- ·-·--·-·--·--·-· ---152 I 6.0 758 1s2 I

163 13,664 2,734 2,734

0.4

33.9

90.8

4

7.6

137

• potential loads calculated based on raw sewage composition (medium strength) of 200 mg/L TSS, 200 mg/L BOD and 10 mg/L TP (Hammer, 1986)

Bypass data has been evaluated over two annual periods from October 1998-99 and May 2000-01. From the data it is evident that approximately 15,000 m3/year (on average) of raw sewage bypassed the system, most of which discharged directly into Porcupine Lake. Bypasses were estimated to contribute 140-160 kg of phosphorous annually, based on a concentration of IO mg/L total phosphorous expected in raw sewage (Hammer, 1986).

14

000032

Volumes bypassed during spring freshet (Apr/May) varied from 32% to 88% of total annual volumes. Fall/winter (October-March) accounted for approximately 60% of annual bypass volumes during the October 98-99 period, however no bypasses were recorded during this period in 2000. Summer (June-August) bypass volumes accounted for 11 % of annual bypasses during both one-year periods.

During May 2000-2001, bypasses at Stations #2 and #3 accounted for over 90% of the total bypassed sewage. Discharged wastewater from these stations is being chlorinated by injection of chlorine gas into the bypass lines, which automatically occurs when the holding tank/wet well senses an overflow.

ii. Bob's Lake Lagoon

The Bob's Lake sewage system consists of a 1.67 acre single-cell passive lagoon with continuous discharge to Bob's Creek, which flows into Porcupine Lake. The system does not include disinfection or nutrient removal facilities.

The Bob' s Lake lagoon has been in operation since the early 1960's and serves the Bob's Lake Subdivision area, which currently consists of 67 homes, housing approximately 250 people. Loading to the system exceeds design criteria by over 65%. As a result, the City has put a development freeze on the area serviced by the lagoon. In 1997, substantial maintenance of the lagoon was undertaken, including raising and widening of berms to increase retention time, brush removal, repairs to the outlet structure, and relocation of the inlet pipe to prevent short-circuiting.

Samples of the discharge effluent are being collected on a monthly basis and analyzed for TSS, BOD, ammonia (NH3), TKN and total phosphorous. Discharge flow monitoring was initiated in May of 2002. Based on data collected between May and October 2002, the system produces an estimated 50,000 m3/year of effluent.

Results of final effluent samples collected between 1998 and 2001 are presented in Appendix D. From the data, the following is evident:

• Biochemica l Oxygen Demand (Fig. 1): BOD ranged from under 10 mg/L to as high as 85 mg/L. Levels were highest during winter, peaking in March and dropping below 20 mg/L in the summer months. Annual average BOD concentrations are approaching the guideline of 30 mg/L.

• Suspended Solids (Fig. 2): TSS ranged from under 10 mg/L to as high as 86 mg/L. High TSS levels tended to occur during the summer months and may be a result of algae production in the lagoon. The annual average TSS concentration was consistently below the 40 mg/L guideline level.

• Nitrogen (Fig. 3): Ammonia (NH3) ranged from 0.7 to 25 mg/L, with highest levels occurring between January and Apri l. TKN followed the same pattern and ranged from l. 7 to 26 mg/L.

• Phosphorous (Fig. 4): Total phosphorous ranged from 0.4 to 3.9 mg/L, with highest concentrations occurring between January and April.

From discharge flow data reported for May through October of 2002, the average discharge rate was calculated as 132 m3/day. Based on this flow rate, average annual loadings from the system have been estimated as follows:

15

000033

1998 1,123 1,783 332 438 59

1999 1,614 867 385 453 66

2000 1,320 1,108 342 424 66

2001 1,320 915 438 501 87

4 Year Avg. 1,344 1,168 374 454 70

Effluent from the Bob's Lake system discharges to Bob's Creek, at a point approximately 1750 meters upstream of Porcupine Lake. In May 2000, stream flow was measured in Bob's Creek at station BC-2 (500 meters dis of the discharge). Based on the measured flow of 39.35 Us, dilution of the lagoon effluent (at the estimated average discharge rate of 132 m3/day) is calculated to be approximately 25: 1. Creek flows are expected to follow a similar pattern to the Porcupine Ri ver, with low flows occurring between January and March and highest flows occurring during April/May. Therefore, dilution in Bob's Creek is expected to be below 25: 1 during most of the year, with dilution of less than 5: l occurring during the winter months when effluent quality is the poorest.

iii. Ontario Government Complex (OGC) Lagoon

The South Porcupine government office building is serviced by a single-cell , passive lagoon that discharges to the Porcupine River on a seasonal basis (approximately 2 weeks/year). The system has been in place since the 1960's and does not include disinfection or nutrient removal facilities. According to the District Environmental Officer, the lagoon is currently used at approximately 25% of its design capacity (i.e. the complex was originally a psychiatric hospital with laundry and full lcitchen facilities).

Results of final effluent samples collected in 1999, 2000 and 200 l are shown in Appendix F. Discharge flow is not being measured at this site. From the data it is evident that effluent quality from this facility is generally very good. Annual average BOD and TSS concentrations are well below the F-5 Guideline of 30 mg/L and 40 mg/L respectively. Total ammonia and phosphorous results (available for the spring of 1999 only) are all below l mg/L.

T he volume of effluent discharged from the system annually has been estimated as approximately 16,200 m3/year, based on lagoon dimensions and average draw-down depth. Using this effluent volume, average annual loadings from the system are estimated as follows:

1999 181 386 4.3 78 II

2000 45 41 nd nd nd

2001 84 32 nd nd nd

3 Year Avg. 103 153

nd = no data collected

16

000034

This facility discharges to the Porcupine River downstream of Porcupine Lake, at a point approximately 550 meters upstream of the Whitney-Tisdale STP outfall, and 50 meters upstream of sampling station PR-1.

b) Nutrients in the Porcupine River System

i. Porcupine River

Results of nutrient monitoring conducted in 1999 and 2000 are summarized in Tables 1 and 2 of Appendix C. September 1998 data is also shown for sites that were monitored subsequent to the initial sample collection.

Ammonia: Total ammonia concentrations are graphed in Figure 1 (Appendix C). Table 2 shows unionized ammonia (NH3) concentrations, which were calculated from total ammonia, pH and temperature data. These NH3 results are graphed in Figure 2. In the absence of temperature data for the September 1998 monitoring program, unionized ammonia concentrations have not been calculated from the September '98 data.

Unionized ammonia ranged from 0.01 - 25 ug/L, and was below the PWQO of 20 ug/L at all stations except SP-6 (south arm of the Upper Porcupine, downstream of the Dome active tailings discharge), where high ammonia occurred in August and October 1999. With the exception of station SP-6, unionized ammonia was generally higher at sites downstream of Porcupine Lake, particularly at PR-1, PR-3 and PR-4. Unionized ammonia at these concentrations is not likely to be acutely toxic to aquatic life, however concentrations above 20 ug/L are known to cause sub-lethal effects in rainbow trout (OMOE, 1979).

Phosphorous: Phosphate and total phosphorous results are depicted in Figures 3 and 4 of Appendix C. From the data, it is evident that measured phosphorous concentrations in Bell Creek and the Upper Porcupine River (upstream of Porcupine Lake) are below the interim PWQO of 30 ug/L for protection from "excessive plant growth in rivers and streams".

Porcupine River stations downstream of Porcupine Lake showed significantly increased phosphorous levels over the Upper Porcupine. PWQO's were consistently exceeded at stations PR-3, PR-4, PR-6, PR-7 and PR-14. P levels were particularly elevated in the reach between stations PR-3 and PR-7, where average concentrations ranged from 133 to 187 ug/L.

The single sample collected from Bob's Creek (BC-2) in May 2000 contained 40 ug/L of total phosphorous, which exceeds the PWQO. Measured P levels in Three Nation's Creek (PR-19) ranged from 8-116 ug/L, exceeding the PWQO in 3 of 4 samples.

ii. Lakes

Spring phosphorous data collected since 1975 for Bigwater Lake, Bob's Lake, Porcupine Lake and Night Hawk Lake is summarized in Table 3 (App. C) and graphed in Figure 5. Based on trophic status, these four lakes are Level 3 or 4 waterbodies, and are considered at capacity with respect to further development.

Bigwater Lake has been considered an appropriate control site as there is no history of mining activity in the watershed and little development around the lake. The historical average P concentration for Bigwater is 20 ug/L (n=9), making it a Level 3

17

000035

waterbody and suggesting naturally elevated P concentrations that may be associated with colloidal clay.

Porcupine Lake is considered Level 4 (i.e. highly nutrient enriched, poor water quality). Historical spring phosphorous concentrations have been highly variable and range from 16 to 55 ug/L, and average 38.9 ug/L (n=20). Spring P concentrations for Bob's Lake average 29.2 ug!L (n=7), making it Level 3. Night Hawk Lake is also considered Level 3, based on an average spring P of 25.6 ug/L (n=5).

111. Sediment Quality

Sediment samples were collected at 44 sites in September 1998. Total phosphorous, TKN and sediment composition (% sand/silt/clay) at 19 focus sites are summarized and graphed in Appendix C (Table 5 and Figures 6-8).

Average clay, sand and silt content in lake and stream sediments are graphed in Figure 8. Lake sediments are predominantly silt with little sand and varying degrees of clay ( 10-30%). Stream sediments were also predominated by silt at all stations except UP-7 and PR-14, where sand predominated. Clay in stream sediments ranged from 6% to 30 %.

Lake sediments are relatively high in phosphorous (Fig. 6), particularly Bob's Lake. The PSQG lowest effect level (LEL) was exceeded in Bigwater Lake, Porcupine Lake, Bob's Lake, Bob's Creek and in the Porcupine River at stations PR-1 and PR-3. Slight exceedences of the LEL were also noted at SP-4, PR-19 and PR-23.

TKN in lake sediments (Fig. 7) was particularly high at Bob's Lake and Night Hawk Lake. The concentration at Bell Creek (background station) at 5-10 cm depth was much higher than concentrations at the upper and lower depths at the same station, suggesting that this result may be a reporting error. TKN concentrations exceeded the PSQG Severe Effect Level (SEL) at Bigwater Lake (BL-1), Bob's Lake (BC-1), Bob's Creek (BC-2), Night Hawk Lake (PR-19) and in the Porcupine River (PR-3) immediately downstream of the STP.

18

000036

3. Discussion

Phosphorous levels in the Porcupine River are significantly higher at stations located downstream of Porcupine Lake. Possible sources of phosphorous to the Porcupine River include point source discharges of municipal sewage, as well as inputs from Porcupine Lake.

a) Point Source Discha rges:

1. Whitney-Tisdale STP

E ffluent Discharge: In 2000, the Whitney-Tisdale STP produced close to 1.5 million cubic meters of effluent and contributed approximately 2,500 kg of phosphorus to the Porcupine River. Annual discharge vol umes increased by 27 % between 1998 and 2000. Dilutions of less than 2: 1 are expected during low flow periods in the river. Phosphorous concentrations downstream of the Whitney-Tisdale STP at station PR-3 are three times higher (on average) than at the upstream station (PR-1). Thus, nutrient loadings from the plant appear to be the dominant contributing factor to elevated phosphorous levels in the Porcupine River.

Given the current level of phosphorous loading, the volume of effluent being produced at the STP, and the limited d ilution available in the Porcupine River, phosphorous removal at this facility is clearly needed in order to reduce impacts on the receiver and maintain compliance with Ministry of Environment policy. Further monitoring and assimilative capacity evaluation (based on 7Q20) should be conducted in order to assess impacts of this discharge on the river under various loading scenarios and determine the degree of phosphorous removal needed.

Bypasses: Lift station bypasses, which occur during freshet and rain events, result in the discharge of raw sewage directly into Porcupine Lake. High sewage flows are associated with inflow and/or infiltration of stormwater into the sanitary sewer. Although bypassed sewage is expected to be significantly diluted with stormwater, collection of samples to confirm wastewater quality has not been possible due to inaccessibility of the bypass lines for sampling.

The discharge of untreated sewage has the potential to impair local surface water quality and is not consistent with Ministry of the Environment policy. The primary concern associated with the direct discharge of inadequately treated human sewage is the potential for introducing pathogens such as E. coli into the aquatic environment. This is especially critical if the water body is used for either drinking water or recreational purposes. In addition, uncontrolled release of sewage could result in:

• high BOD loads causing an unacceptable reduction in dissolved oxygen conditions required by aquatic biota;

• release of an over-supply of nutrients which could lead to excessive algae and/or aquatic weed growth; and,

• high suspended solids which may settle and physically blanket a stream or lake bottom, thus leading to habitat disturbance or impairment for bottom dwelling aquatic organisms.

Between May 2000 and May 2001, over 13,500 m3 of sewage bypassed the ST P, resulting in an estimated contribution of 2,700 kg TSS, 2,700 kg BOD and 130 kg of phosphorous to Porcupine Lake. Approximately 1,500 m3 (11 % of annual total) was bypassed during June through August, which is the critical time with respect to water contact recreation as well as algal response.

19

000037

Human health concerns associated with pathogens in raw sewage are being addressed through chlorination of bypassed sewage at stations #2 and #3. However, limited contact time, as we ll as high suspended solids and organic matter in sewage could limit the effectiveness of chlorination. Uncontrolled chlorine dosing may also cause adverse effects in Porcupine Lake. Discharge of chlorinated wastewater into a receiving water body may involve some re lease of chlorine residuals and chlorine byproducts. Free chlorine and combined chlorine residuals are toxic to aquatic life at certain concentrations. Chlorine may also react with organic matter to form chlorinated hydrocarbons (i.e. trihalomethanes) which are suspected carcinogens.

The City of Timmins currently conducts ongoing investigation/maintenance to identify and correct problematic areas of stormwater infiltration. As the Whitney­Tisdale sewage system currently operates at approximately 60% of design fl ows, treatment capacity is not an issue with this plant. Therefore, efforts should be directed towards reducing infiltration into the system, as well as upgrading lift stations to handle excess flows and deliver all sewage to the treatment plant. If bypass events continue to occur, some means of sampling the bypassed sewage should be developed in order to monitor wastewater quality, particularly with respect to pathogens, nutrients and chlorine residual. In addition, sampling within the receiver should be implemented to monitor local impacts on the aquatic environment.

11. Bob's Lake Lagoon

It is estimated that the Bob's Lake lagoon produces approximately 50,000 m3

of effluent annually. Recent upgrades were not adequate to ensure that effluent quality is maintained below 30 mg/L BOD and 40 mg/L TSS. Annual average BOD levels are approaching the 30 mg/L limit.

Nutrient concentrations in the effluent are high during winter conditions (Jan -April). According to the Environment Canada document "Sewage Lagoon Design Using Wetlands and Other Upgrading Technologies to Achieve Non-Acutely Toxic Effluent for Cold & Temperate Climates" (NovaT ec Consultants Inc ., 1995), lagoon effluents are typically toxic above a total ammonia concentration of 10 to 11 mg/L-N. Based on this assumption, effluent from the Bob's Lake lagoon is like ly toxic during the winter. This should be confirmed by toxicity monitoring.

Currently, there is insuffic ient monitoring data to assess the impact of phosphorous loading from the Bob's Lake lagoon discharge on the receiver or provide substanti ve guidance for abatement action. However, the single phosphorus result for the downstream station was more than twice as high as at the upstream station (40 ug/L versus 18 ug!L). This limited data (n= l ) suggests that e ffluent from the Bob' s Lake lagoon is contributing to increased phosphorous levels downstream of the discharge. Additional nutrient monitoring in Bob's Creek is required to confirm what effect the di scharge is having on the creek, Porcupine Lake or other downstream watercourses. Creek monitoring should include E.coli to ensure levels are be ing maintained below the PWQO of 100 /100 mL.

ii. Ontario Government Complex Lagoon

Due to the small effluent volumes and good quality of effluent being produced by the system, it is unlikely that the OGC lagoon is having a measurable impact on the Porcupine River. Discharge from this system is typically conducted for approximately two weeks during the spring or early summer. Factors such as dilution ratio and effluent quality should be considered when selecting the season of

20

000038

discharge. Depending on available dilution, discharge during the fall may be preferable in order to maximjze effluent quality, reduce the potential for algal response and lessen the likelihood of public exposure to E.coli. Nutrient monitoring of the discharge effluent should be continued. In addition, discharge dates and annual volumes of effluent being discharged should be recorded.

b) Porcupine Lake

Mean phosphorous concentrations in the Porcupine River at stations located upstream (UP-7) and downstream (PR-1) of Porcupine Lake were l 0.4 ug/L and 49 .2 ug/L respectively (n=5). This data suggests that Porcupine Lake contributes a substantial phosphorous load to the Porcupine River.

Since 1975, spring phosphorous sampling has been conducted at Porcupine Lake approximately every second year. Phosphorous concentrations have ranged from 16-55 ug/L, and average 38.9 ug/L, exceeding the PWQO of 20 ug/L to "avoid nuisance concentrations of algae in lakes" . According to the District Environmental Officer, weed problems in Porcupine Lake have resulted in numerous complaints to the City of Timmins. Attempts at mechanical harvesting of weeds have been made in the past.

High phosphorous levels in Porcupine Lake may be originating from urbanization around the lake, the Whitney-Tisdale system lift station bypasses, inputs from upstream sub­watersheds (i.e. the Upper Porcupine and Bob's Creek/Lake), as well as releases from sediment.

1. Urbanization (Lakeshore Development)

Cursory modeling of Porcupine Lake indicates a significant contribution of phosphorous from anthropogenic sources. Modeled background phosphorous for Porcupine Lake was 13 ug/L, while the measured mean concentration is 39 ug/L (n=20). More detailed modeling of Porcupine Lakes is required to gain a better understanding of the quantity of phosphorous being contributed by the various sources, and determine where source control efforts should be directed. Additional information regarding lakeshore development (i.e. serviced versus unserviced lots) is required to determine contributions from development around the Jake.

11. Whitney-Tisdale Lift Station Bypasses

The primary concern with the direct discharge of inadequately treated sewage is the human health risks associated with exposure to pathogenic organisms. However, bypassed sewage is also a source of phosphorous, which could contribute to excessive algae and/or aquatic weed growth during the summer months. Modeling of Porcupine Lake should take into account loadings from bypassed sewage. Consideration should be given to conducting receiving water monitoring during bypass events to determine what impacts are occurring.

u1. Upper Porcupine

Mean phosphorous levels in the Upper Porcupine at UP-7 (10.4 ug/L) were lower than the mean background level at B-2 (12.4 ug/L), which suggests that phosphorous in the Upper Porcupine originates from natural sources. Nutrient monitoring at UP-7 should be continued in order to quantify phosphorous inputs from the Upper Porcupine.

21

000039

iv. Bob's Lake

Bob's Lake is a small headwater lake that drains to Porcupine Lake via Bob' s Creek. The "Bob's Lake Lagoon" discharges to Bob's Creek at a point approximately 250 meters downstream of Bob's Lake.

Simi lar to Porcupine Lake, cursory modeling of Bob's Lake indicates a significant contribution of phosphorous from anthropogenic sources. Modeled background phosphorous was under 12 ug/L, while measured phosphorous concentrations in the lake average 29 ug/L (n=7).

A sampling station should be established in Bob' s Creek downstream of Bob's Lake and upstream of the sewage lagoon discharge. This station would allow monitoring of phosphorous outputs from Bob's Lake as well as stream qua I ity upstream of the sewage discharge.

Therefore, in order to quantify the sources of nutrient loading to Porcupine Lake, it is important that a nutrient budget analysis be conducted on a watershed basis. Spring phosphorous monitoring should be continued at Porcupine and Bob's Lakes. Water quality specifics such as colour, DOC, suspended solids and chlorophyll "a" should be included in the monitoring program to gain a better understanding of phosphorous bioavailability and li miting parameters for algal response. Detailed modeling of the Jakes is required to quantify the various sources of phosphorous. Prior to modeling, further assessment of the lakes should be conducted to gather additional data, confirm bathymetry, and collect information regarding lakeshore development (i.e. serviced versus unserviced lots).

22

000040

4. Recommendations

a) Further Monitoring:

• The following monitoring program should be commenced in 2003 and continue for a period of at least two consecutive years. Further discussion is required to define roles and responsibilities with respect to continued monitoring within the Porcupine River system. Following collection of additional data, the issue of nutrient reduction should be reassessed.

• Since interference of suspended colloids associated with clay substrates could possibly be resulting in artificially high phosphorous readings, phosphorous samples should be collected as filtered/non-filtered duplicates.

• Colour, DOC, suspended solids and chlorophyll "a" should be included in the monitoring program to gain a better understanding of phosphorous bioavailability and its correlation to algal response.

• Geo-referencing of all monitoring stations should be carried out using OPS equipment.

1. Bob's Creek:

To assess potential impact of the Bob's Lake lagoon discharge on Bob's Creek, it is recommended that the following monitoring program be carried out:

Recommended Monitoring Program for Bob's Creek

upstream of the lagoon discharge (site to be established),

approximately 100 m downstream of the lagoon discharge (si te to be established),

approximately 500 m downstream of the lagoon discharge (BC-2)

August

October, and

once during winter conditions (Jan - March)

• • •

conductivity

temperature

dissolved oxygen

stream flow (upstream station only)

•

• •

pH

Conductivity

Total Suspended Solids

Chloride

E. coli

Total Ammonia

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen

Total phosphorous*

Chlorophyll a

DOC

Colour

* phosphorous samples should consist of fi ltered/non-filtered duplicates

11. Porcupine and Bob's Lakes:

Spring phosphorous monitoring should be carried out at Bob's Lake (BC-1) and Porcupine Lake (PL-1 & PL-2). Data should also be gathered to confirm bathymetry. In addition, lakeshore development information should be collected, including an inventory of serviced and unserviced lakeshore lots.

Following collection of additional data, an assessment of phosphorous inputs to Porcupine Lake should be conducted, including modeling to determine significant P sources and identify possible control measures. This will also aid in determining the role of sediments in phosphorous cycling.

23

000041

•

111. Porcupine River:

Receiving water monitoring should continue in the Porcupine River, upstream and downstream of the Whitney-Tisdale STP, in order to monitor impacts of that system on the river. In addition, continued nutrient monitoring at UP-7 in the Upper Porcupine is recommended, in order to quantify inputs to Porcupine Lake from that sub-watershed. The following monitoring program is recommended for the Porcupine River:

Recommended Monitoring Program for the Porcupine River

Upper Porcupine al UP-7,

approximately 500 m upstream of • August the STP discharge (PR- I), October, and approximately 500 m downstream • once during winter of the STP discharge (site to be conditions (Jan -established), March) approximately 1500 m downstream of the STP discharge (PR-3)

conductivity

temperature

dissolved oxygen

stream flow (upstream station only)

• •

• •

pH

Conductivity

Total Suspended Solids

Chloride

E.coli

Total Ammonia

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen

Total phosphorous*

Chlorophyll a

DOC

• Colour

* phosphorous samples should consist of lillered/non-filtered duplicates

b) Point Source Controls:

The existing data indicates a need to undertake further monitoring and implement control measures at the sewage treatment fac ilities, in order to protect receiving water from adverse effects associated with phosphorous loading.

1. Amending Certificates of Approval (C of A's)

According to the Senior Environmental Officer, the C of A's for all three sites are old, single-page documents which impose minimal conditions. There is a need to re­open and re-examine these documents for updating to include conditions and limits that are reflective of current policy and protective of the receivers. Consideration should be given to requiring continued receiving water monitoring as a condition of the C of A.

11. Effluent Discharge Monitoring

Whitney-Tisdale STP: The City of Timmins should adhere to the Minimwn Municipal Sampling Program for Mechanical Sewage Treatment Plants. Analysis of the effluent for nutrients should be continued.

Bob's Lake Lagoon: The City should adhere to the Minimum Municipal Sampling Program for Continuous Discharge Sewage Lagoons. Analysis of the effluent for nutrients should be continued. The City should also continue measuring discharge flows from lagoon in order to calculate loadings to the creek. In addition, effluent should be analysed for acute toxicity (i.e. 96hr LC50) during each winter period (i.e. once during Jan - Mar).

24

000042

Ontario Government Complex Lagoon: Effluent sampling should be conducted in accordance with the Minimum Municipal Sampling Program for Seasonal Discharge Sewage La.goons. Samples should be collected from the lagoon prior to commencing the annual discharge and at least twice weekly during the discharge period. In addition, some means of measuring or estimating annual discharge flow volumes should be provided. The City should maintain a record of dates on which discharge occurred and record the quantity of effluent discharged on a daily basis.

iii. Lift Station Bypasses (Whitney-Tisdale)

Discharging untreated sewage into a water body has the potential to impair local surface water quality is not consistent with Ministry of the Environment policy. The City of Timmins should be encouraged to develop a progressive plan for reduction/elimination of lift station bypasses. The plan should consider the following:

• assessing the frequency, duration and intensity of bypass events, and their relationship to precipitation events;

• implementing an ongoing program aimed at reducing inflow and infiltration (l&I) of storm water and/or groundwater into the sanitary sewer system, including developing an annual report which, (i) provides a summary of the previous year's activities and progress at reducing I&I, and (ii) includes a plan which identifies l&I related activities proposed for the upcoming year;

• upgrading of pump stations to increase capacity and/or provide overflow containment (surge protection) systems, with focus on Stations #2 and #3 where the majority of bypass volumes are produced;

• monitoring of bypass effluent quality in order to define potential effects on the receiver and assess the effectiveness of the chlorination process; and,

• evaluating water quality impairment through monitoring in Porcupine Lake during bypass events.

1v. Phosphorous Removal

Nutrient loadings from the Whitney-Tisdale plant appear to be the dominant contributing factor to elevated phosphorous levels in the Porcupine River. Given the level of phosphorous loading and the water quality data, phosphorous removal is needed at this facility. Further monitoring and assimilative capacity evaluation (based on 7Q20) should be conducted in order to assess impacts of this discharge on the river under various loading scenarios and determine the degree of phosphorous removal needed. It is recommended that the "best available treatment technology­based" effluent limit of 0.3 to 0.5 mg/L total phosphorous should be applied to this facility. This limit has been imposed on similar sized operations discharging to sensitive receivers e lsewhere in Ontario.

Based on further monitoring and nutrient budget analysis, improved treatment may also be required at the Bob's Lake lagoon, including provision of aeration, seasonal storage and/or phosphorous removal facilities.

25

000043

REFERENCES

Hammer, Mark J. 1986. Water and Wastewater Technology, 2°d edition. Prentice Hall, New Jersey.

Jaagumagi, R., D. Bedard and A. Laine. 2001. Porcupine River Environmental Monitoring, Study September I 998. Ontario Ministry of Environment. May 200 1.

NovaTec Consultants Inc. 1995. Sewage Lagoon Design Using Wetlands and Other Upgrading Technologies to Achieve Non-Acutely Toxic Effluent for Cold and Temperate Climates. Report DOE FRAP 1994-34. Prepared for Environment Canada and the B.C. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks. February 1995.

OMOE (Ontario Ministry of Environment). 1979. Rationale for the Establishment of Ontario's Provincial Water Quality Objectives. September 1979.

OMOE. 1988. Scientific Criteria Document for Development of Provincial Water Quality Objectives and Guidelines Aluminum. September 1988.

Wren, C., K. Holtze, I. Gray, N. Bazinet and C. Neville. 1990c. DRAFT Provincial Water Quality Objective Development Document -- Cadmium. August 1990.

Wren, C., K. Holtze, I. Gray, K. Nordick, N. Bazinet and C. Nevi lle. 1990d. DRAFT Scientific Criteria Document for Development of Provincial Water Quality Objectives and Guidelines -Total Inorganic Lead. August 1990.

Wren, C., K. Holtze, I. Gray, K. Nordick, N. Bazinet, C. Neville and N. Yan. 1990a. DRAFT Scientific Criteria Document for Development of Provincial Water Quality Objectives and Guidelines - Copper. August 1990.

Wren, C., K. Nordick, I. Gray and N. Waddell . 1990b. FINAL DRAFT Provincial Water Quality Objective Development Document for Zinc. August 1990.

26

000044

LIST OF A TI ACHMENTS

Appendix A

Table 1 - 1998 Study Conclusions Table 2 - 1999 - 2000 Sampling Stations Table 3 - Water Quality Parameters List

Figure 1 - Map from 1998 Study Report

Appendix B: 1999 · 2000 Water Quality Monitoring Results Table 1 - May 1999 Table 2 - June 1999 Table 3 - August 1999 Table 4 - October 1999 Table 5 - May 2000 Table 6 - Staistical Analysis (Metals)

Appendix C: Nutrient Sampling Results Table 1 • Nutrient Data (1998 - 2000) Table 2 - Ammonia Data Table 3 - Lake Spring Phosphorous Data Table 4 - Statistical Analysis (Nutrients) Table 5 - Sediment Data (1998)

Appendix D: Bob's Lake Lagoon Effluent Quality

Table 1 • Discharge Effluent Quality (1998-2001)

Appendix E: Whitney Tisdale STP Effluent Quality Table 1 • Discharge Effluent Quality (1998 • 2000) Table 2 • Recod of Bypass Events

Figure 1 - Stream Flow Figure 2 • pH Figure 3 • Conductivity Figure 4 - Free Cyanide Figure 5 - Arsenic Figure 6 - Nickel Figure 7 - Copper Figure 8 • Zinc Figure 9 - Iron

Figure 10 - Lead Figure 11 - Aluminum Figure 12 - Cadmium

Figure 1 • Total Ammonia Figure 2 - Unionized Ammonia Figure 3 - Phosphate

Figure 4A • Total Phosphorous (all stations) Figure 48 • Total Phosphorous in the Porcupine R. Figure 5 - Spring P in Lakes Figure 6 - Total Phosphorous in Sediments Figure 7 - TKN in Sediments Figure 8 - Sediment Composition

Figure 1 - BOD Concentration Figure 2 - TSS Concentration Figure 3 - NH3 Concentration Figure 4 - Tot-P Concentration

Figure 1 • BOD Concentration Figure 2 - BOD Loading Figure 3 - TSS Concentration Figure 4 - TSS Loading Figure 5 • NH3 Concentration Figure 6 - NH3 Loading Figure 7 • Tot-P Concentration Figure 8 - Tot-P Loading

Appendix F: Ontario Government Complex Lagoon Effluent Quality

Table 1 - Discharge Effluent Quality (1999 - 2001)

000045

APPENDIX A

000046

0 0 0 0 .... .......

Table 1 -Conclusions From September 1998 Study Report (May 2001)

Porcupine River System Waler Quality Sediment "Reach"

A Upper Porcupine . As & Cn increased in the south . sediments u/s of Porcupine Lake River (u/s of Porcupine arm below the closed mines contained elevated levels of As, Lake) (Buffalo-Ankeri1e/Aunor/ Cu, Ni, Hg & Zn relative to controls . north arm Paymaster) (As, Cu, Ni & Zn exceeded SEL) . south arm . high As & Cu in the south arm likely

related to current and historical gold mining . elevated Cu & Zn in Peart L(north arm) li<ely due to his1orical Cu & Zn minina

B. Porcupine Lake & . elevated Cu, Hg, Ni & As (lo a Bob's lake lesser extent) in Porcupine L. -

appears to trap a large percentage ol metals from u/s sources

c. Porcupine River . elevated Cu & Ni below the . elevated Cu below Porcupine L. -(main), dis of Porcupine Dome active tailings die indicates that not all contaminants L. . Cd, Zn & Se were primarily have been trapped & held in lake . Porcupine L to associated with the Kidd TMA sediments

confluence with North die . elevated Cu & Ni in sediments Porcupine R. . Kidd TMA appears to be a below the Dome active taiings die . North Porcupine R. substantial source of Cd, Se & . minor sources of metals identffied confluence to Night Zn to the Porcupine R. - Cu, as Pamour, Halnor, Broulan and Hawk Lake As, Pb & Ni are also elevated Owl creek sites

below die

D. North Porcupine River . only As showed a minor increase below the discharge & Bell Creek . no evidence of effects oersistina dis to North Porcuoine R.

E. Three Nations Creek & . Cu & Ni increased in Three . elevated Cu, Cd & Zn in Three "south branch " of Nations Creek below the former Nations Creek sediments - likely Porcupine River Jarosite pond die due to Kidd Metallurgical site and . high levels of Zn also noted Royal Oak Pamour site

below the former Jarosite Pond die

F. Niaht Hawk Lake

Benthlcs Mussel Biomonitoring Lab Sediment FishTissue Bioauavs . linited benthic . As was biologically available below . wafteye & pike

community the (Buffalo- exceeded consuption impairment u/s of Ankerite/Aunor/Paymas1er sites in res1riction for Hg Porcupine L the south arm . Pb elevated in 3 f1Sh

species . As & Ni higher than control lake . no change in Cd over control

. elevated metals in sediments appears to have resuHed in a reduction in the benthic community of Porcuoine L. . severe reduction of . despite higl Cd in water & . gypsum benthic community sediment below the Kidd TMA, present dis of apparent below the tissue levels were low and sugges1 the KiddTMA Kidd TMA die (could Cd bioavaiablity was tow caused acute be due to high metals . Cu & Ni were elevated in tissues toxic effects or physical effects ol below the Dome active taiings die gypsum) . Se in tissue was elevated below

the Kidd TMA and increased with distance dis - sugge.sts that avaiabiity was being enhanced by the chanoe in oH . no biological effects detected due to mine discharge

. an effect on benthic community noted in Three Nations Creek below the Jarosite pond die prior to re-routi'lg in 1998

. Pb & Se elevated

0 0 0 0 .... 00

PORCUPINE RIVER SYSTEM -· REACHES

A Upper Porcupine River (upstream of Porcupine Lake) 1. north arm 2. south arm (aka 'South Porcupine River')

B Porcupine Lake & Bob's Lake

C Porcupine River (main) downstream of Porcupine L. 1. Porcupine L. to confluence with North Porcupine R 2. North Porcupine R. confluence to Night Hawk Lake

O North Porcupine River & Bell Creek

E Three Nations Creek & 'south branch' of Porcupine River

F Night Hawk Lake

WATER QUALITY SAMPLING LOCATIONS 1999 -2000 Reach Sin id Station Name

A1 UP-6 'UnnPr' Porcuoine R. at Hwv 101 lbelow ERG & Schumacher Tailinas· A1 UP-7 'UnMr' Porcuoine R., dis confluence of north & south branchei A2. SP-4 'South' Porcupine R., u/s of Dome Mine (below Buffalo-Ankerite, Aunor/Pavmaster' A2. SP-6 'South' Porcupine R., dis of Dome Tailings DIC B BC-1 Bob's Lake B BC-2 Bob's Creek, -500 m dis of sewage laaoor ,L_ Pl-1 Porcuo ine Lake (South l B Pl-2 Porcuo ine Lake INorthl Cl PR-1 Porcueine R. (-750 m dis of Porcueine Lake outlet; C1 PR-3 Porcueine R. Crossir19 at Brouland (- 2 km dis PR-1' ,f!_ PR-4 Porcueine R. at Owl Cr. Bridge Hkm dis of Halnor' Cl PR-6 Porcueine R. dis of Owl Cr. Mine drainage C1 PR-7 Porcueine R. below Owt Cr. (dis Kidd TMA discharge' C2 PR-14 Porcueine R. at Ho}'.!e {-1 km N of Hwy 101 bridge; 0 B-2 Bell Creek, u/s of Mine Site DIC E PR-19 Three Nations Cr. At Hwy 101 (below Pamour and Kidd'sJarosite Pong) F NHL2 Night Hawk Lake #2 F NHL6 N!ght Hawk Lake #6 F PR-23 Niaht Hawk Lake • 1 (near inlet from Porcuoine R.'

TABLE 2

GPS Reference (Zone 171 Sample Dates Easting Northing lshadilo indicates stream flow measured}

482300 5370700 20-Mav-99 21.Jun-99 24-Auo-99 05-0ct-99.j_ __ 02:!,Aay_-OO 484200 5368700 20-Mav-991 21.Jun-99 24-Aua-99 OS-Oct-99 02-Mav-OC 483200 5366400 20-Mav-991 21.Jun-99l 24-Aua-99 OS-Oct-99' 02-Mav-OO 483600 5366100 20-Mav-99' 21.Jun-99 24-Aua-99 05-0ct-991 02-Mav-OO -489000 5371200 09-May-OO 488100 5370300 02-Mav-OO 485500 5369500 03-Mav·OO 486900 5370900 03-Mav-OO 487500 5371600 20-May-99 21 -Jun-99 24-Aua-99 05-0ct-991 02-Mav-OO 488600 5373400 20-Mav-99 21.Jun-99 24-Aua-99 05-0ct-99 02-Mav·OO 488900 5376000 20-Mav-99 21.Jun-99 24-Auo-99 05-0ct-99 02-May-OO 490100 5378700 20-Mav-99 21.Jun-99 24-Aug-99 05-0ct-99 02-Mav-oo 491100 5378800 20-Mav-99, 21.Jun-99 24-Aua-99 05-0ct-99 02-Mav·OO 495700 5378000 20-Mav-99 21.Jun-99 24-Auo-99 05-0ct-99 02-Mav-oo 487200 5375300 20-Mav-99 21.Jun-99 24-Aua-99 05-0ct-99 02-Mat:QQ 493200 5375600 21.Jun-99 24-Aua-99 05-0ct-99 02-Mav-OO 504820 5373947 03-Mav-OO 501900 5359342 03-Mav-OO 498900 5374100 03-Mav·OO

TABLE 3

Water Quality Parameters Measured

Au -99 I Oct-99 Ma -00 x x x x x

x x x x x x Alkalinity x x x x x x ----Hardness x Chloride Tot-Solids Dis-Solids x TSS x DOC x x x x x x DIC x x x x x x Si x x x x x x NH3+NH4 x x x x x x N02 x x x x x x N02+N03 x x x x x x TKN x x x x x P04 x x x x x Tot·P x x As Se x Ca x Mg x Na x K x --Sulphate x CN-total x x x x x x --CN-free x x x x x x Al x x x x x x Ba x x x x x x Be x x x x x x Ca x x x x x x Cd x x x x x x --Co x x x x x x Cr x x x x x x Cu x x x x x x Fe x x x x x x M x x x x x x Mn x x x x x x Mo x x x x x x --Ni x x x x x x Pb x x x x x x -Sr x x x x x x Ti x x x x x x v x x x x x x Zn x x x x x x

000049

•

Ill' i ot'

~ 0

. ··~~f~~;..

('~ .. ~,., ·~1-:.

" ~\

y ---<

~ :::;.,·/- ... ·-~

t (. -

..

j -tJ ( F ~

~

~ \

Figure 1

Study Area Showing Station Locations for

Water, Sediment and Benthos

A Stations

Pitpile

t~it~f Gravel Pit

I< HF! Tailings

Vegetation

1: Kidd Tailings Management Area (TMA) 2. Kidd Metallurgical 3. Jarosite Pond 4. Owl Creek Mine & Tailings 5. Bell Creek Mine 6. Hainer 7. Royal Oak Pamour 8. Broulan 9. ERG Tailings 10. Schumacher Tailings 11 . Coniarum Tailings 12. Placer Dome Old Tailings 13. Hollinger Tailings 14. Delnite 15. Aunor 16. Paymaster 17. Buffalo Ankerite 18. Preston 19. Placer Dome Mine 20. Placer Dome Active Tailings

2 0 2 4 N

® O~t;rio W+ E Minislt)' ol the Environment env,,onmenlal Monitoring and Rep()l1ing Branch s

:i1 0 0 0 0

APPENDIXB

000051

0 0 0 0 (11 ....,

Porcupine River Study May 1999 Water Quality Samples (shaded values are< MDL)

B-2 FIELD

cono:ictivitv us.ian 182 temoorature dll!lrees c 13.2 dissolved oxvaen m~ 5.4 stream flow Us

~anide, total m!YL cvanide, free m!YL conductivitv us.ian 178 oH pH units 7.24 alkalinitv mall.CaCO 45 N; amnonla+ammonium m<Yl O.IXt! unionized ammonia (calcl ug.lL 0.01 N;nilrite m!YL 0.003 N; nitrate+nilrite m!YL 0.015 P; ohosohate m!,'l 0.IYW' P; lotal mcvl 0.o1< N; total Kjeldahl mall 0.6E Carbon; diss. Ora. mg/L 19.9 Carbon; <iss. lnor9. mg/L 10.8 Si mG'L 0.48 Al u<VL 43.80 Ba u<VL 7.96 Be UO'l 0.00910 Ca mg/L 23.3 Cd uo'L 0.312 Co uo'L 0.74 Cr

I u9l 0.000

Cu ~~ 2.96

Fe 200 Ma mg/L 8.0 Mn u!YL 45.3 Mo u!YL 0.000 Ni u~ 1.5 Pb u<VL 0.00 Sr u<VL 58 n uall. 0.386 Va u~ 0.2270 Zn ug/L 11.00

UP-6 UP-7 SP-4 SP-6

588 707 __ 500 6-05 13.3 12.2 9.6 10.6 6.5 6.5 7.3 6.5

64.02 435.50 9.37 55.72 0.002 0.016 0.003 0.001 0.004 0.001

~ 665 467 565 7.68 ~ 7.85 7.73 122 ~ 167 169

0.032 0.030 o.iw. o.im 0.36 0.39 0.03 0.02

0.005 0.012 0001 o.w 0.040 1.770 0.010 1.18(

0.0020 0.0020 0.0030 0.001! 0.024 0.016 0.008 o.mi: 0.60 0.76 0.40 0.64 11.8 9.8 9.9 9.5 29.0 38.8 40.2 40.6 0.60 0.62 1.16 0.32

78.50 23.3( 10.50 10.10 16.20 16.60 11.20 12.70

0.00863 0.00817 0.00724 0.0025a 65.6 84.9 62.1 74.0

0.344 0 0 0.0467 1.26 2.14 1.95 2.99

0.139 0.000 0.000 0.139 15.80 19.60 7.17 28.10

402 149 191 94 21 .1 29.9 26.5 29.2

209.( 74.2 49.6 25.9 0.454 5.110 0.000 1.740 10.1 27.5 8.8 24.6 0.00 1.79 1.79 1.79 267 261 110 180 2.36 ~ 0 0

0.0000 0.0000 0.0703 0.0000 5.86 4.47 2.15 1.97

TABLE 1

BC-1 BC-2 PL-1 Pl-2 PR-1 PR-3 PR-4 PR-6 PR-7 PR-14 PR-19 PR-23 NHL2 NHL6

742 828 685 2020 2870 396 1500 -14.7 14.4 14.6 13.7 12.8 14.2 9.9 12.8 13.4 6.4 4.9

138.43 37.37 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001

695 790 658 1850 2660 387 8.15 8.12 8.43 7.10 4.30 7.32 151 149 135 45 O.! 46

0.270 0.278 0244 0.158 0.514 0.046 9.81 9.24 --- 16.24 0.49 0.25

0.060 0.124 0.087 0.210 0.350 0.020 0.725 1.820 1.150 0.820 0.900 0.185

0.0360 0.1500 0.0620 0.0125 0.0095 0.0175 0.100 0.254 0.18C 0.160 0.234 0.076 1.2( 1.46 1.46 o.zg 1 .. 28 0.92 8.1 9.0 10.7 9.0 4.4 22.1

34.4 34.0 30.6 10.6 1.2 10.6 1.26 0.04 ·nno: 0.48 0.80 0.36

22.10 33.90 65.1( 118.00 196.00 304.00 20.90 14.60 13.50 24.20 31.30 11.30

0.01140 0.01330 0.011j!j 0.04820 0.07890 0.02310 80.1 87.6 72.4 401.0 641.0 58.5 0.23 0 0 2.46 14.1 0.0441 4.93 5.82 4.70 1.78 3.11 0.76

0.381 0.000 0.187 0.284 1.350 0.272 5.20 7.42 8.72 15.50 47.70 9.07

51 83 100 363 350 575 26.2 36.4 26.5 123 7.5 6.4

118.0 187.0 151.0 130.0 126.0 50.5 2.060 4.060 2.220 45.200 71.100 5.030

19.4 14.7 14.0 6.9 6.2 2,8 0.61 1.02 0.00 5.33 9.08 2.34 263 302 241 1440 2190 195

0 0.0333 1.13 0 0 9.81 0.4630 0.0000 0.6370 0.0000 0.0000 0.7420

3.86 5.31 3.08 150.00 857.00 16.40

0 0 0 0 01 (,)

TABLE 2

Porcupine River Study June 1999 Water Quality Samples (shaded values are < Mil.)

-:] 1:1·1 FIELD

uS/cm 120 aao I ~ 680 700 680 13501 26501 4901 7901 degreesC 19.9 19.9 22.9 21 .6 20.4 20.51 21 .61 19.7 18.8 t==J I

i-:==~=.:.._--1-_ ..::.:mG'!c 5.9 6.2 . 9.6 11.1 8.4 4.91 2.51 5.6 3.8_ ~ stream flow Us-- 115.72 1230.oa 1 1

lcvanide, tolal mwt. _ ~ 0.003 0.001 0.001 0.002 I I I lcvanide, free mG'!, 0.002 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 con<klctMlv uS/cm 129 570 787 373 455 803 644 650 1290 2500 484 762 loH oH units 7.12 7.67 7.83 7.68 7.62 8.24 8.18 7.83 7.47 6.51 7 .. 27 7.43

1 1 1 alkalinilv mw\. CaCO 46 121 157 145 150 141 136 135 100 23 53 115 N: ammonia+anmonium mG'!, 0.016 0.018 0.012 0.008 0.006 0.050 0.016 0.030 0.044 0.158 0.070 0.038

1un~ edammonia fcalcl ug/L 0.08 0.33 0.32 ~ 0.08 . ·---~ 1.01 0.80 0.53 0.23 0.50 0.37

1 N: nitlite mG'!, 0.001 0.002 0.014 0.002 0.004 O.Q18 0.026 0.029 0.100 0275 0.006 0.003

IN: nitrale+nitrite mwl 0.010 0.010 4.610 0.010 0.695 0.705 0.325 0.780 0.625 0.495 0.230 O.Q15 P: ohosohate mwt. 0.IIIl' 0.0010 0.0010 0.0020 o.ooos 0.0005 0.0315 0.0420 0.0140 0.0005 0.0195 0.0035 I P; total I mgL 0.010 0.014 0.008 o.w 0.008 0.020 0.076 0.072 0.100 0.160 0.052 0.048 N; total Kjeldahl . mgl. 0.86 0.68 0.92 0.52 0.68 0.68 0.84 0.76 0.76 0.66 1.00 0.90 Caroon; diss.Ora. !!!!>.'.'.!: 25.5 14.5 11.8~~ 9.2 11.3 11.5 10.3 5.2 24.6 16.2 Carbon; diss. lnor9: mwL 11.4 28.8 37.2 34.2 36.0 32.8 31.4 31.6 23.8 6.0 11.4 272 Si mwt 1.08 0.80 0.84 1.52 0.52 0.30 0.60 0.48 0.42 1.04 0.80 0.28 I Al ua/1. 55.10 71 .40 18.80 9.78~ 31.10 24.90 36.20 75.60 61.50 252.00 34.1( Ba lJg'L 6.25 13.30 19.00 8.71 10.50 19.80 14.70 16.00 18.00 21.00 11.50 14.7( Be ua/1 0.00576 0.00847 0.00901 0.00576 0.00141 0.00358 0.00358 0.00955 0.02690 0.06820 0.01930 0.00684

lea mo'L 19.1 64.8 95.8 47.6 58.5 75.3 72.3 10.5 243.o 615.o 71.6 85.3 Cd ug\, 0.0981 0.253 0 0 0255 0.468 0.41 0.00216 0.312 2.08 0.466 2.51 Co uwL 0.59 1.53 2.57 0.87 2.00 5.08 4.47 4.44 2.62 0.00 1.87 4.83 Cr uwl 0.874 0.564 0.042 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.493 0.691 0.000 0.000 0.747 0.465 Cu ugil. 2.17 13.U 17.40 7.36 34.70 10.60 10.80 724 10.20 12.20 6.17 6.52 Fe uQI\. 321 357 116 211 86 215 65 103 224 94 551 266

1Mg mnil 5.8 24.0 34.6 19.6 23.4 25.0 25.4 25.9 18.0 2.0 8.0 36.9 Mn ugil. 39.2 109.0 59.3 35.7 27.9 63.0 27.9 292 55.8 82.9 57.6 218.0 Mo uQI\. 0.000 0.296 4290 0.068 1.440 2.350 1.780 2.920 11.500 26.800 2.920 1.ssc Ni uwl 1.9 6.1 25.6 8.7 19.5 19.9 13.8 13.1 9.1 1.8 3.9 4.6 Pb uwl 0.00 0.00 2.39 0.00 1.64 4.07 0.00 021 0.21 6.24 0.00 4.06 Sr ugit. 47 278 336 91 147 260 252 247 696 m o 214 231 n ugit.__ 0.684 2 o o o 0.249 o 0.361 o o 129 0.495 Va ua,t 0.0000 0.2380 0.3400 0.0000 0.5450 0.0529 0.2890 0.6890 0.4220 0.1 140 0.9970 0.0000 I I I

IZn ug/L 5.40 3.85 3.36 1.43 2.11 3.40 4.39 2.ss 11.60 40.60 21.90 212.00

0 0 0 0

~

Porcupine River Study August 1999 Water Quality Samples (shaded values are < MIX.)

: . ' RELD

conductivitv uS/cm 150 820 1070 fi.1(

temoerature de<irees C 18.8 19.8 20.4 18.( dissolved oxvaen mall 3.2 5.2 7.2 6.8 stream flow Us 310.98 3.58

cyariide total mall 0.046 cvanide, free IMII

,-0.009

As mglL 0.001 O.cxr, 0.011 0.056 conduclivitv uS/cm 159 no 1030 600 IDH DH units 7.53 7.87 8.00 7.94 alkalinitv mg/LCaCO 74 182 130 234 N; ammonia~mmonium mall 0.010 0.024 0.018 0.006 unionized ammonia fca/cJ ua/l 0.12 0.67 0.71 0.17 N; nitrite mglL 0.004 0.002 ""o.oi7 0.002 N; nitrale+nitrite mwt 0.010 0.040 7.500 0.010 P; DhosDhate mwt 0.0005 0.0010 0.0015 0.0055 P; total mg/1 0.012 0.018 0.012 0.012 N; total Kieldaht mwt 0.80 0.72 1.00 0.56 Carbon; diss. Org. mn/l 23.2 13.0 8.5 12.5 Carbon; diss. lnora. ~ 17.2 44.0 30.8 56.6 Si ~ 3.48 3.28 1.80 4.44 /iJ u!)t 16.0C 39.20 14.60 6.27 Ba ug,1. 6.93 22.20 25.10 12.70 Be u~ o.ooooc 0.00098 0.00867 0.00028 Ca mC>'l 22.3 93.0 92.8 72.6 Cd u<Yl 0.012 0.401 0.375 0 Co ug,1. 0.86 0.81 71.30 1.00 Cr u!)t 0.650 0.372 0.471 0.310 Cu uwl 0.57 13.30 284.0C 3.64 Fe ug/1 172 298 103 i----!§_7 ~ ma/l 6.9 34.7 26.4 ~ Mn ua/l 32.2 105.0 21.8 72.1 Mo ua/l 0.322 0.036 8.040 0.000 Ni ua/l 1.2 5.3 98.2 6.7 Pb Uw\. 4.79 3.29 2.28 0.59 Sr ug/L 55 487 302 144 n uwt 0.0558 0.484 0 0 Va uwl 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Zn u!)t 1.03 13.30 53.40 1.65

TABLE 3

: : .. .. .. . l•l••. .. ..,. .. . .. . . 1120 640 680 680 1350 2230 1000 263C 19.1 22.9 23.8 23.0 21.3 21 .8 20.7 17.C 4.3 12.7 5.8 6.0 1.9 1.9 5.4 2.1

288.74 127.73 0.010 0.002 0.001 0.004 0.009 0.002 0.001 0.00:-

.__Q,Q12 0.012 0.009 0.010 0.009 0.001 0.003 o.oo, 1040 631 643 655 1200 1880 930 952 7.70 8.41 8.17 7.96 7.48 5.53 7.70 1.n

95 100 116 122 79 5 87 197 1280 0.020 0.068 0.088 0.052 0.032 0.036 0.018 23.35 2.23 4.87 3.78 ~ 7 - 0.74 0.33 0.219 0.003 0.025 0.0,8 0.073 0.1 27 0.005 O.oo; 8.550 0.030 0.160 0.170 0.185 0.285 0.070 0.010

0.0010 0.llll5 0.0685 0.1140 0.0500 O.M'lli 0.0200 0.0590 0.014 0.032 0.098 0.496 0.146 0.148 0.052 0.116 2.0C 0.76 0.80 3.60 0.72 0.52 0.72 1.00 6.3 10.0 10.9 11.4 9.0 5.6 15.7 18.2

23.2 22.8 27.0 30.4 19.2 1.0 20.6 50.( 1.16 0.32 1.32 1.76 1.50 1.20 0.96 5J)( 8.57 7.40 11.30 13.6(1 37.20 45.90 94.40 33.9C

20.10 13.50 15.40 15.20 18.80 22.80 17.90 28.SC 0.02090 0.00000 0.00000 0.00028 0.02510 0.05270 0.02020 0.00797

74.2 56.3 61.5 63.2 244.0 522.0 165.0 118.0 0.333 0 0.166 0.222 0.527 1.71 0.583 1.7!

109.00 6.81 6.12 5.42 4.46 1.07 2.87 3.4' 0.000 0.686 0.000 0.435 0.363 0.363 0.766 0.54<

442.00 5.89 5.36 4.96 6.39 7.10 5.56 3.51 89 16 35 53 284 378 223 292

__ill. 25.9 26.3 26.5 17.8 3.3 16.2 47.E 19.4 33.0 69.5 57.6 85.1 76.9 76.2 831.C

14.800 3.180 1.660 2.130 7.~ 13.800 3.850 o.51: 130.0 12.7 12.3 12.1 6.9 1.4 5.3 2.2 1.03 1.09 2.72 0.00 4~ 3.03 1.78 5.42 209 190 252 264 705 1360 476 291

0 0 0 0 0 0 1.44 0 0.0000 0.5030 0.1290 0.2310 0.IVW1 0.0000 0.5510 0.0000 38.70 1.64 1.78 3.75 24.40 3920 34.50 138.0C

0 0 0 0 01 01

Porcupine River Study October 1999 Water Quality Samples (shaded values are < MDL)

B-2 UP-6 FIELD

conductMtv uS/cm 150 870 temoerature d~ reesC 5.7 5.7 dissolved oxygen malt. 9.0 10.0 stream now Us

cvaniM total ~ cvanide, free malt.

As mn/1 O.IIOO!i 0.0010 COOOJCtivity uS/cm 145 705 IPH pH units 7.38 7.92 alkalinity m!lil.CaCO 58 183 N; ammonia+ammonium malt. 0.004 0.006 unionized ammMia (calcJ u!iL 0.01 0.07 N; nttrite mn/1 0.002 0.002 N; nttrate+-nitrite mn/1 0.024 0.015 P; phoschate mn/1 0.0010 0.0020 P; total ~ 0.008 0.016 N; total Kieldahl mo/L 0.60 0.52 Carbon; diss. Oro. ma. 17.0 13.2 Carbon; diss. lnorg. ma. 126 42.0 Si ma~ 3.14 3.12 ~ UQ 13.70 50.10 Ba ug/1. 4.96 21.40 Be u!lil 0.00249 0.01890 Ca malt. 19.1 992 Cd u!lil 0 0 Co uo'l o.oc 0.76 Cr uo'l 0.27l 0.115 Cu u~ O.SE 12.20 Fe uG'L 87 193 Ma mall 6.4 37.7 Mn u~ 11.8 25.1 Mo oo'l 0.CIX 0.035 Ni uni[ 1.( 5.0 Pb ,""1 0.00 0.00 Sr l!9'l: 46 570 Ti l!9'l: 0 0.398 Va uo'L 0.1730 0.0000 Zn uo'l 1.52 326

UP-7 SP-4 SP-6

1070 _!_00 __!_!_1_Q 6.0 4.4 6.6

11.0 12.0 6.0 862.63 21.62 451.57 0.005 0.024 0.028 0.004 0.002 0.024

0.0075 0.0320 0.0110 878 597 908 8.01 8.02 7.75 127 227 115

0.312 0.010 3.160 4?11 0.12 25.00

0.143 0.002 0.081 8.140 0.005 7.580

O.OOO!i 0.0020 0.000! 0.012 0.012 0.012 ~ 0.44 ~

7. 10.7 5.4 29.0 532 26.4 1.96 4.20 1.70

13.10 9.33 9.67 18.60 11.60 14.00

0.01170 0.00864 0.0079! 89.6 75.1 73.8

0 0.214 0.232 66.50 122 104.00 0.395 0.097 0.582

111.00 ~ 159.QQ 62 155 47

26.2 36.3 16.9 18.0 31.6 20.0

8.930 0.000 16.600 64.4 5.9 105.( 0.00 1.55 1.SC 314 ~ 211

0 0 0 0.0000 0.1 310 0.0000

29.20 0.82 12.SC

TABLE 4

BC-1 BC-2 PL-1 PL-2 PR-1 PR-3 PR-4 PR-6 PR-7 PR-14 PR-19 PR-23 tl HL2 NHL6

780 810 800 910 1390 1180 1240 >---

8.3 7.8 7.6 13.E 10.5 8.1 6.4 13.0 10.0 7.0 7.5 7.0 7.5 5.0

0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 -- 0.002 .Jl!Q.! 0.001 0.002 0.0160 0.0050 0.0050 0.0015 0.000! 0.0010 0.0020

672 711 685 1530 1870 917 932 8.10 7.72 7.97 7.37 4.75 7.31 7.59 122 144 141 53 2 54 194

0.044 0.112 0.054 0.114 0.290 0.028 0.016 0.88 0.91 0.76 0.65 0.09 0.09

0.020 0.075 0.037 0.154 0.280 0.059 0.003 0.487 1Tso 0.592 0.861 0.953 0248 0.024

0.0030 0.1600 0.0880 0.01 10 0.0020 0.0440 0.0400 0.074 0.212 0.124 0.128 0.144 0.080 0.062 1.16 0.88 0.82 0.76 0.60 0.72 0.76 10.6 10.6 12.2 8.3 3.3 16.7 14.4

.._ 26.4 32.8 32.0 11.8 1.2 11.8 46.0 1.40 2.76 3.32 1.60 0.56 2.04 4.02

71 .40 12.70 61.00 129.00 140.00 178.00 76.80 18.70 20.60 21.70 20.50 21.90 15.90 32.60 - 0.0127( 0.00522 0.0168ll 0.05440 0.07970 0.03430 0.0192( 66. 80.4 81.7 446.0 705.0 214.0 139.(

0.261 0 0.231 129 2.05 0262 0.63' 16.40 6.68 620 2.52 1.13 1.60 0.45 0.000 0.647 0.237 0.600 0.143 0.516 0.638 2220 8.01 5.75 7.79 9.34 5.01 5.12

429 43 120 236 192 344 150 25.E 32.4 35.3 16.3 6.1 10.2 55.5 69.7 22.1 19.5 70.9 83.8 46.0 86.3

2.470 1.120 1.190 11.300 16.100 7.070 0.099 30.0 17.1 17.0 7.0 2.7 4.8 2.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.30 1.79 0.00 247 279 300 1140 1680 589 353 1.69 0 1.2 0 0 3.46 1.1

0.3630 0.0000 0.1160 0.2500 0.0000 0.6530 0.2720 9.SS 8.19 7.80 104.00 148.00 69.60 79.40

0 0 0 0 01 C1)

Porcupine River Study May 2000 Water Quality Samples (shaded values are< MOL)

B-2

f1W2 conductivitv uSlcm temcerature dMreesC 8.5 dissolved o~ m!tL 8.8 streamtlow Us

lcvanide, tOlal mo'L lcvanide, free mot /l.s mot Su:snMd,,rl Soldis mo'L Total Solids mo'L Dissolved Sdids m~ condurtivitv uSlcm 176 loH DH lrits 7.17 alkalinitv moll.CaCO 33 N; ammooia+ammonium m~ 0.022 IJ(li(){)ized ammonia leak:! ugn. 0.05 N; rilrite m9'1.. 0.004 N; nilrate+nilrile m!)'L 0,018 P; phosphate m!)'L 0.0010 P; total m!)'L 0.020 N; total Kjeldahl m!)'L 0.50 Carbon; diss. Qrg. m!)'L Carbon; diss. lnorg. m!)'L Si mo'!. Al uo'L 49.70 Ba uo'L 6.99 Be uo'L 0.00236 Ca mo'!. 20.2 Cd u~ 0.196 Co ~ 0.56 Cr uot 0.138 Cu uo'L 2.31 Fe uo'L 141 Mg mo'L 8.5 Mn uo'L 18.3 Mo uo'L 0.000 Ni I.I(} 0.8 Pb u<>l 0.00 Sr u<>l 49 n uo 0.657 Va uo 0.1270 Zn uo 4.50

UP-6 UP-7

7.0 7.0 10.2 9.8

142.73 624.98

0.0010 0.0090 3.5 2.0

388 410 384 408 592 628

7.75 7.86 98 122

0.012 0.008 0.10 0.08

000 0.002 0.054 1.100

0.0030 0.0010 0.008 0.004 0.40 0.40 8.3 7.1

22.2 28.4 0.44 0.26

111.00 26.10 14.80 12.50

0.01250 0.00662 60.0 67.0

0.0601 0.167 1.67 1.64

0.418 0.324 10.30 10.90

271 98 22.6 25.7 73.5 31.6

0.308 3.070 5.8 19.4

1.99 2.32 246 239 3.18 0.0448

0.0375 0.3890 4.49 2.45

TABLE 5

SP-4 SP-6 BC-1 BC-2 PL-1 PL-2

5.0 5.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 10.8 10.2 9.4 13.0 13.0

59.94 145.36 39.35 0.005 0.002 0.001 0.001

0.0230 O.OISO 0.0005 0.0005 0.0050 0.0050 2.0 1.0 3.0 1.5 5.5 6.0 280 348 238 224 486 490 278 346 236 224 400 484 427 532 362 343 739 746 7.87 7.84 7.97 7.74 7.99 8.00 121 128 125 120 130 129

0.002 n,rn 0.018 0.028 0.206 0.148 0.02 0.02 0.24 3.14 2.47

0.002 0.001 0.008 0.002 0.027 0.026 0.008 0.897 0.210 0.107 1.420 1.430

0.0010 0.0005 0.0090 0.0270 0.0020 0.0010 0.010 0.008 0.020 0.040 0.042 0.046 0.40 0.40 0.56 0.60 1.04 1.06 7.5 6.9 9.0 10.0 7.4 7.5

28.2 30.4 28.4 28.6 29.6 30.0 0.38 0.20 0.80 0.16 1.76 1.84

15.60 5.19 12.00 17.00 20.70 18.50 9.64 10.60 16.90 15.10 18.20 18.40

0.00643 0.00000 0.00206 0.00006 0.00863 0.00510 49.1 59.7 39.3 37.8 75.4 75.7

0.181 0.272 0.0925 0206 0.098 0.047 2.29 3.31 0.45 0.00 6.95 7.74

0.448 0.537 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.064 4.44 10.30 1.37 1.34 12.80 13.20 127 26 36 43 87 87

22.7 25.8 8.5 9.3 27.3 27.6 20.5 7.4 36.0 13.0 137.0 144.0

0.000 0.937 0.000 0.000 1.970 1.730 6.7 19.7 0.8 0.7 23.5 24.3

3.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.48 2.84 92 176 72 76 273 2SO 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.0000 0.0056 0.3690 0.4220 0.0000 0.0500 1.56 1.26 1.48 1.69 9.75 9.31

PR-1 PR-3 PR-4 PR-6 PR-7 PR-1 4 PR-19 PR-23 NHL2 NHL6

10.0 10.0 9.0 9.5 9.0 9.0 11.0 10.0 8.5 9.0 12.6 14.0 11.4 7.8 11.1 9.7 9.2 102 11.5 11.4

0.001 0.001 0.002 - 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.0050 0.0030 0.0030 0.0005 0.0020 0.0010 0.0080 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005

4.0 3.5 3.5 3.0 4.5 12.0 1.5 14.5 10.5 9.0 516 476 496 2330 966 266 366 202 92 60 512 472 492 2330 962 254 364 188 82 50 787 728 758 2300 1170 391 562 289 126 77 7.99 8.00 7.96 5.73 7.65 7.46 7.81 7.64 7.78 7.70 130 131 133 6 99 44 94 43 40 36

0.080 0.192 0.128 0.212 0.108 0.036 0.020 0.048 0.040 0048 1.43 3.50 1.97 0.82 0.18 0.26 0.39 0.39 0.41

0.026 0.004 0.004 0.350 0.106 0.025 0.002 0.017 0.006 0.007 1.520 1.240 1.440 1.330 1.390 0.396 0.083 0.251 0.099 0.035

0.0010 0.0430 0.0310 0.0010 0.0110 0.0060 O.roll 0.0040 0.0050 0.0070 0.020 0.084 0.064 0.130 0.068 0.044 0.008 0.050 0.026 0.022 0.70 0.84 0.92 1.32 1.36 0.76 0.46 0.80 0.52 0.44

7.3 9.2 4.2 9.3 18.0 11.4 16.8 11.8 10.3 30.6 31.2 3.2 23.6 9.4 21 .4 9.4 8.0 7.0 1.84 1.28 0.68 0.94 0.54 0.08 0.56 1.50 1.64

19.20 20.70 52.00 70.30 91.40 291.00 57.80 280.00 258.00 246.00 18.60 17.30 18.80 18.90 19.20 11.00 16.50 9.56 7.89 7.79

0.00328 0.00236 0.00895 0.05440 0.02490 0.01460 0.00530 0.01380 0.01270 0.01180 77.3 72.3 76.0 526.0 187.0 54.6 57.8 37.7 17.7 11.8

0.0219 0.602 0.162 3.5.3 0.75 0.517 2.02 0.437 0.223 0 7.33 5.51 4.86 2.39 4.60 0.00 2.84 1.10 0.00 0.36

0.017 0.153 0.000 0.000 0.071 0.304 0.483 0.414 0.458 0.000 13.40 10.80 11.30 14.60 11.50 7.90 7.29 6.88 3.24 1.61

99 58 92 166 187 540 98 493 421 400 28.0 26.3 27.9 6.8 22.0 7.7 25.8 6.0 3.8 32

m.o 76.1 88.9 64.9 90.7 44.7 20.4 35.0 18.5 16.7 1.760 1.970 1.660 33.800 8.790 1.970 1.660 0.714 0.000 0.000 23.9 20.0 20.8 5.8 15.9 4.5 5.4 3.9 1.3 12 0.00 3.14 0.00 s.n 0.61 0.00 0.00 1.79 0.00 3.48 287 258 263 1290 512 155 157 99 35 19

0 0 0.708 0 0.265 8.68 1.31 8,52 7.65 7.28 0.0607 0.7270 0.8190 0.0000 0.3310 0.8950 0.4530 1.4100 0.9440 1.3200

9.96 8.60 10.10 211.00 62.20 66.90 321.00 55.50 7.54 1.69

0 0 0 0 (11 .......

Station BL-1 NP-1 B-2 UP-6 UP-7 SP-4 SP-6 BC-1 BC-2 PL-1 PL-2 PR-1 PR-3 PR-4 PR-6 PR-7 PR-14 PR-19 PR-23 NHL2 NHL6

Porcupine River Study (1998 - 2000) Statistical Analysis of Specific Parameters

TABLE 6

......,-rroll r~ I UJl lf-•ot..-.,,~. •

I ranae I mean STD n 1 7.92 1 154 1 1 6.89 1 68 1 6 7.12 - 7.53 7.321 0.16 6 129 - 178 I 160 18 1 6 1 7.67 - 7.96 7.81 0.11 6 564 - 993 699 152 1 6 7.78 - 8.01 7.90 ' 0.08 6 628 - 1160 858 190 2 6 I 7.68 - 8.04 7.90 0.12 6 373 - 783 541 137 6

l~.1-"J•-.-.Y~ltffe •lllllf•t tr.i•

ranae I mean STD 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.001

0.001 - 0.004 0.003 1 0.002 0.001 - 0.009 0.004 0.003

6 7.56 - 7.84 7.701 0.09 6 455 - 1170 778 274 ~ .001 - 0.024 0.007 0.008 2 7.97 - 8.25 8.11 0.14 2 287 - 362 325 38 0.001 2 7.49 - 7.74 7.62 0.13 2 343 - 431 387 44 1T 0.002 2 7.99 - 8.31 8.15 0.16 2 739 - 755 747 8 1 0.002 2 8.03 - 8.33 8.18 0.15 2 742 - 746 744 2 1 0.002 6 7.54 - 8.41 8.07 0.27 6 631 - 803 704 68 2 0.002 - 0.002 0.002 6 7.72 - 8.18 7.99 0.19 6 643 - 958 746 108 6 0.001 - 0.002 0.001 0.000 6 7.76 - 8.43 7.99 0.21 6 557 - 758 661 59 1 0.002 6 5.73 - 7.65 7.13 0.65 6 474 - 2300 1441 567 2 0.001 - 0.003 0.002 0.001 6 3.62 - 7.65 5.39 1.36 6 1170 - 3230 2218 662 6 0.001 - 0.001 0.001 6 7.27 - 7.7 7.39 0.15 6 387 - 936 674 256 1 0.002 5 7.43 - 7.81 7.68 0.15 5 562 - 1250 892 228 5 0.001 - 0.003 0.002 0.001 2 7.64 - 7.97 7.81 0.1 7 2 289 - 292 291 2 1 0.001 1 7.78 1 126 1 7.70 1 77

n ra~';:~·~ 1 0.50 1 0.50 , 3 0.5 - 1 0.83 0.24 4 1 - 2 1.38 0.41 4 5.5 - 11 8.25 2.02 4 23 - 58 42.25 15.11 4 11 - 18 13.75 2.68 2 0.5 - 0.5 0.50 0.00 2 0.5 - 0.5 0.50 0.00 2 5 - 6 5.50 0.50 2 5 - 6 5.50 0.50 4 2.5 - 16 8.88 5.39 4 3 - 8.5 5.50 1.97 3 3 - 10 6.00 2.94 4 0.5 - 8.5 4.50 3.54 4 0.5 - 5 2.13 1.75 4 1 - 3 1.50 0.87 4 2 - 8 6.00 2.35 2 0.5 - 0.5 0.50 0.00 1 0.50 1 I 0.50

0 0 0 0 01 00

Station BL-1 NP-1 B-2 UP-6 UP-7 SP-4 SP-6 BC-1 BC-2 PL-1 PL-2 PR-1 PR-3 PR-4 PR-6 PR-7 PR-14 PR-19 PR-23 NHL2 NHL6

n 1 1 6 6 6 6 6 2 2 2 2 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 2 1 1

., ... ... ranae mean I STD

0.17 0.22

0.827 - 1.89 1.24 0.35 5.01 - 11 7.23 2.39 19.4 - 98.2 43.58 28.51 5.94 - 8.8 7.38 1.08 19.5 - 130 58.271 43.80 0.8 - 0.903 0.85 0.05 0.7 - 0.903 0.80[ 0.10

15.8 - 23.5 19.65 3.85 16 - 24.3 20.15 4.15

6.95 - 30 18.81 7.42 5.59 - 20 13.92 4.47

5.9 - 20.8 13.82 4.57 5.75 - 9.12 6.92 1.12 1.09 - 15.9 4.86 5.22 1.11 - 5.32 I 3.73 1.42 1.46 - 5.95 3.61 1.78

0.259 - 3.9 2.08 1.82 1.30 1.20

TABLE 6

OJl]oT:J .. IIlo'TI•

n range I mean I STD 1 0.71 --1 2.24 6 0.55 - 2.96 1.66 0.90 6 10.3 - 36.3 16.83 8.86 6 10.9 - 284 76.05 99.38 6 3.64 - 7.36 5.33 1.53 6 10.3 - 442 116.55 153.77 2 0.615 - 1.37 0.99 0.38 2 1.34 - 4.06 I 2.70 1.36 2 8.06 - 12.8 10.43 2.37 2 7.66 - 13.2 I 10.43 2.77 6 1 5.2 - 22.2 r 10.95 5.74 6 2.86 - 10.8 7.54 2.83 6 4.86 - 11.3 7.14 2.30 6 3.2 - 15.5 9.61 4.37 6 7.1 - 47.7 16.74 13.97 6 3.6 - 9.07 6.22 1 1.81 5 3.51 - 14.8 7.45 3.90 2 5.22 - 6.88 6.05 0.83 1 3.24 1 1.61

1 ......... 1[.t11•-••r1

n ranae mean I STD nl range mean STD 1 0.54 1 76.4 1 10.50 1 968.0 6 1.03 - 11 5.11 3.39 6 87.4 - 321 173.7 74.9 6 3.26 - 13.3 7.34 4.29 6 193 - 402 305.2 65.7 6 2.45 - 53.4 16.23 19.07 6 61.8 - 149 99.3 29.3 6 0.646 - 2.15 1.38 0.51 6 127 - 211 173.3 29.3 6 1.26 - 38.7 9.97 13.44 6 26.1 - 240 97.0 68.5 2 0.775 - 1.48 1.13 0.35 2 16.7 - 36 26.4 9.6 2 1.69 - 15.4 8.55 6.86 2 43 - 229 136.0 93.0 2 0.684 - 9.75 5.22 4.53 2 17.4 - 87 52.2 34.8 2 0.527 - 9.31 4.92 4.39 2 15.9 - 87 51.5 35.6 6 1.64 - 9.96 5.87 3.15 6 15.8 - 429 147.1 140.5 6 1.64 - 8.6 4.99 2.75 6 34.7 - 108 65.2 24.6 6 2.96 - 10.1 5.41 2.66 6 53.1 - 532 166.7 164.6 6 11.7 - 211 86.45 75.32 6 166 - 370 273.8 74.0 6 39.2 - 857 207.07 293.04 6 93.7 - 378 226.6 102.6 6 11.7 - 69.6 36.83 23.29 6 223 - 575 459.5 130.1 5 79.4 - 2160 594.08 787.82 5 97.9 - 292 , 201.0 71.8 2 8 - 55.5 31.75 23.75 2 493 - 749 I 621.0 128.0 1 I 7.54 1 421.0 1 I 1.69 1 400.0

0 0 0 0 01 (0

Station BL-1 NP-1 8-2 UP-6 UP-7 SP-4 SP-6 BC-1 BC-2 PL-1 PL-2 PR-1 PR-3 PR-4 PR-6 PR-7 PR-14 PR-19 PR-23 NHL2 NHL6

n 1 1 6 6 , 6 6 ' 6 1 2 2 2 2 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 1 1 1

1•z r,•11r,

range mean STD nl 0.10 1

11.90 1 0 - 22 4.47 8.03 6 0 - 9.35 2.44 3.33 6 0 - 3.47 2.04 1.04 6 0 - 3.48 1.35 1.13 6 0 - 1.8 1.31 0.64 6 0 - 1.62 0.81 0.81 2 0 - 0.229 0.11 0.11 2

4.37 - 4.48 4.43 0.05 2 2.84 - 7.96 5.40 2.56 2

0 - 4.07 1.38 1.47 6 0 - 6.16 2.17 2.16 6 0 - 2.86 0.51 1.05 6 0 - 6.77 3.07 2.56 6

0.607 - 9.08 3.49 3.16 6 0 - 2.34 1.06 0.94 6 0 - 13.9 4.68 5.09 5

1.79 2 0.00 1 3.48 1

TABLE 6

., "'"

, ..... lW:1111111 ... 1•• •

range I mean STD n range mean STD 38.40 1 0.0151 - 0.0151 0.015 0.000

375.00 1 I 0.0105 - 0.0105 0.011 0.000 13.7 - 55.1 33.38 16.66 6 0 - 0.893 0.252 0.306 39.2 - 111 65.17 25.21 6 0 - 0.401 0.241 0.157 13.1 - 26.1 19.13 4.53 6 0 - 0.375 0.146 0.159 6.27 - 15.6 10.40 2.77 6 0 - 0.427 0.137 0.157 5.19 - 26 11.55 6.67 6 0.0467 - 0.333 0.200 0.107

12 - 13.8 12.90 0.90 2 0.0925 - 0.429 0.261 0.168 17 - 25.3 21.15 4.15 2 0.0788 - 0.206 0.142 0.064

12.6 - 20.7 16.65 4.05 2 0.098 - 0.104 0.101 0.003 7.73 - 18.5 13.12 5.39 2 0.047 - 0.104 0.076 0.029

7.4 - 71.4 28.98 20.22 6 0 - 0.468 0.227 0.171 11.3 - 33.9 19.88 7.79 6 0 - 0.602 0.230 0.217 13.6 - 195 70.48 58.28 6 0 - 0.467 0.181 0.159 37.2 - 129 82.08 31.82 6 0.0954 - 3.53 1.369 1.246 45.9 - 196 108.47 50.21 6 0.75 - 14.1 3.715 4.665 94.4 - 304 217.40 72.85 6 0.0441 - 0.583 0.385 0.181 33.9 - 76.8 52.86 16.66 5 0.635 - 23.7 6.123 8.810 280 - 530 405.00 125.00 2 0.437 - 0.495 0.466 0.029

258.00 1 0.223 - 0.223 0.223 0.000 246.00 1 0 - 0 0.000 0.000

0 0 0 0 en 0

::3

FIGURE 1

Porcupine River Study

-- Stream Flow (L/s) 1,400.00 ...---------------------------------------,

1,200.00 -j • a May-99

•Jun-99

•Aug-99

D Oct-99

1.000.00 I • •May-00

800.00

600.00

400.00 ...

200.00

0.00 UP-6 UP-7 SP-4 SP-6 PR-4 PR-19 BC-2

0 0 0 0 0) ......

FIGURE 2

Porcupine River Water Quality (1998 - 2000)

-- pH

9 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--,

8

7 ~ .. :Jo -· ····- ··- . ...... - ··- -···· ··- ····-···· ··-

6

~ 5 c ::I

:::c c.. 4 -I _.__ Sept 1998

-II-May 1999

3 ~ -.-June 1999

2 i ~ Aug 1999

---Oct 1999

...-May2000

. ·- -·-· ...... ··- ·-· -··· .. ·-···-·-·· .. ···-·-···~······-·

Porcupine R. below Kidd TMA drainage

O +-~~~~~-.-~~~~~-----,-~--,r--~-,--~~~~~.,-~--.-~-,-~--,-~~~~~~~~~~,-----!

:-. ~'v

~:-. ~

qf <"l, ~9:> ~,:.. '5 --::s

~)< ~9:> (;~ (;~ :-. g g ~ ~ q_'v q_'.:"' q_~"

Monitoring Station

R!'"'J ~ R!<o R!'\ q_ q_ q_ q_ b<

q_~" ...,.~

~~ R!"V .i-Y"' ~ ~-

0 0 0 0 a> ....,

E

FIGURE 3

Porcupine River Water Quality (1998 - 2000)

-- Conductivity (uS/cm)

4000 ,-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

3500

3000

2500

-.- sept 1998

-a- May 1999

__,._ June 1999

~ Aug 1999

"""*-" Oct 1999

Porcupine R. below Kidd TMA drainage

~ 2000 u,

_._May2000

:I

1500 Upper Porcupine

1000

500

0 - -

~ ~-" <o'), ~/> ~-:- ~..b< ~~ c/' 0')., ~" ~'), ~" ~":J ~ ~<o ~'\. ..... ~ ..... ~ ~":J -~J <o'v ~ '.J '.J g g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~.

Monitoring Station

0 0 0 0 en (,)

...I

FIGURE 4

Porcupine River Water Quality (1998 - 2000) -- Free Cyanide (mg/L)

*PW00=0.005; MDL=0.001

0.03 -.-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--,

0.025

0.02

Upper Porcupine (south arm), dis Dome

Mine &':!Sept 1998

Ill May 1999

• June 1999

C3 Aug 1999

D Oct 1999

i1 May2000 a, 0.015 ::s

0.01

0.005 PWQO

O lhl , .... , , bl , N ,, I I • ......., .. . lYW:111 , N , tJ , bl i hJ , bl I I i l'f'W1A , tJ , LE , r:rw.,a ,w , bJ WIP , N l

:,.. «;'v ~-" ~

<?)<); ,§fo ~;\ -.:::!

~-b< 0

~fo 0 v"

~ r.? ~

:-­<?.'v ~--.;<);

Monitoring Station

<?.~" <?.~'I:) ~~b< ~'o ~

~~~ b<

~~" C!)

<?.~" ~~ri,<>:J

0 0 0 0 CJ)

""

..J a, ::,

FIGURE 5

Porcupine River Water Quality (1998 - 2000)

-- Arsenic (ug/L) *PW00=100; interim PW00=5; MDL=0.5

70.00 .-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

60.00

50.00

40.00

30.00

20.00

10.00

Upper Porcupine (south arm), dis Buffalo-Ankerite & Aunor­

Payrnaster sites

E.1 Sept 1998

li!!I May 1999

• June 1999

C3 Aug 1999

DOct 1999

RI May 2000

000 ' " n R 0, tJ ll'JIIJ IIAIJ HIIN Hl!n en -N !IN !It! Hllll Hlilll llilt:1 tn,N n,lilg 11:wtl nan - - - I • f I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I i

:-,-. <o'v ~:-,-.

~ <Q<t, ~!<:> ~~ ~,1>< ~!<:> c;'' v<t, v v 0 0 ~ ~ " ~.....; ~.....;'"!, ~«!" ~'?) ~I>< ~<o ~"\

~ ~ ~ ~

Monito ring Station

,...._I><

~«! ~

~«!" ~«!'"I,'?) ~..:;- ~..$> ~ ~

-0 0 0 C\I

co 0, 0, ,... -~::::. ·; a,

CD :::, :::, ~ ex:> UJ 0- 11 0)

0) a: - o ... a., a :::> C1) 0. (9 -~ ~ «J Q)

u.. ;: -~ 0.. Cl)

z • E"J ... C1)

-~ a: C1) c ·a :::, (.) ... 0

0..

0) 0)

O> 0 0) O>

0) 0) 0 O> 0) 0) 0) 0 ..- 0) C\J

>. Q) >. (lj c: Ol u (lj

:::J :::J ~ ""') <( 0 ~ 151 • I:::] D II

ai,s awoo S/P '9U!dnOJOd Jaddn JO WJe 41nos

0 C\J

0 0

swJe 41nos ,g 4µou 10 aouan11uoo S/P •au,dnoJOd Jaddn

0 ex:>

1f6n

0 CD

0 "<f"

0 0 ~ 0..

0 C\J

-

0

'9~ ~"V

'7)~ ~

~ ~<$.'.

()'

6' :t <$.'.

()'

J!. :t <$.'.

()'

<<$.'. ()'

'9<$.'. ()'

J!., <$,()'

<9<$.'. ()'

.( <$.'. ()'

~2 ()'

.('):. ()'

~o <$)

.(,

06)

.9, ()'IS\

J!., ()'IS\

<, ()'-?

.9, ()'-?

~<$)

.(,

<)'"V

.(,~

<$)

c: 0 .. ca -U)

Cl c: ·;: 0 ~ c: 0 :i:

000065

0 0 0 0 CJ) CJ)

50 I

45 -j

40 -j

35 -l

30 -l

i 25 i 20 -j

15 -j

10 ~

FIGURE 7

Porcupine River Water Quality (1998 - 2000)

-- Copper (ug/L) *PW00=5; interim PWQ0=1 to 5 (depending on alkalinity)

,1 ~,. ' 284 ug/L 159 ug/L

2 42 ug/L

'iii Q)

E - ..... 0 ~ Q) 0 E .c - rn 1:1 ... 0 o E rn (ll (ll ..._ .c E Q) ... "O

0 (ll t: ::J c .c Q) 0 .c

Q) - .!: C O ::J ::J a. Et --:. (/) ; 0 ::J c (J)

~~ s~ e ·5. CJ 0

rn .c a. ~ ::J cc =a t: ..... ew 0 Q)

0 := Q) c a. a. a. 0 c ::> Q) ai ·5.

a..O ::J 0 J:I §- e E n 0

a. <ii Q) .c a. :i Iii Ill ~ 0

(/)

E.:::! Sept 1998 <(

~ li!IMay 1999 I-"O "O

• June 1999 sz rn

=a C3 Aug 1999

r:i D Oct 1999

~ ii May 2000

:1. --~-- iJ-Ullll. -.-~---.lJtJlllJIIIIIIIIHlll-1 I :,..

«;'-' " ~, ~

qj()., ~$(> ~,:,.. '5 '5

5?'t>c 0

5?!<> (f" 0 '<>

(f().,

'<> ,"-

«.'-' !l, ~" ~~ ~t>c ~'o ~ '\ "t>c "Q) ~ ~ 0> ~ «. «. «. «. «. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Monitoring Station

I

0 0 0 0 0) .......

..J a, ::::,

FIGURE 8

Porcupine River Water Quality (1998 - 2000)

-- Zinc (ug/L) 350 *PW00=30· interim PW00=20

300

250

200

150

100

50

b1 Sept 1998

IZI May 1999

• June 1999

C3 Aug 1999

D Oct 1999

Ill May 2000

PWQO

/' 0)

857 ug/L g

0) O> as c -~ "O (]) c ~ ...: (.)

~ 0

~

c "iii i5 <(

~ 1-"0 "O

2

~

····-··· ·····-········- ···-··•••••-··-··· - ·· - ·············--·-··

00••••••••••••1Fi········-···-······-···-···-••••• .. -f•••• 00•••••••············-·••-•••-·•·-····-························-···-···-•••••••••••-··-···-···-····-···-··················-····-····- -·1

/ 2160 ug/L

"O c 0 a. 2 "ii,

e as ..., ~ .:.t!­(l)

~ (.) (/) c .Q co z (I)

~ .c I-

...................... ,11 ...... ....................... _,, ..... .

O I , t1 , til'P P,twl:9 ,•a•-o, , 1....j1L 1 - ,ti - . H, H1D-,Ul 1 • CP ,twfl ,NIJA ,tm::11 ,tUllll ,B IJl ,l;I 11 1 11 , -1

:,.. ~-' <(!<'/., ~9) ~t ~,b< ~9) 0:,.. 0;1; ,, ;1; ~' ~<>:J ~b< ~ro /' ..._b< ,~ ;1;<>:J -~<'/., .~ro <o'v ~ v v 0 0 <o <o q_'v ~'v q_ ~ q_ q_ q_ q_Q! q_Q! ~Q! ~. ~ .

Monitoring Station

0 0 0 0 m 00

FIGURE 9

Porcupine River Water Quality (1998 - 2000)

-- Iron (ug/L) *PW00=300

1200 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-.

1000

800

...J c, 600 :::,

400

200

oJ .... ....

<ov -#-'

b1 Sept 1998

IZI May 1999

• June 1999

C3 Aug 1999

D Oct 1999

lillMay 2000

···········-······-··-······-··-······ewa.Q .. -........................................................................ H················-···-1:t-·······-···- ·············- · ... ··•···

llll~g I I I

al I

lg I

I g I

I DIJI ~ I~ 1111111~1 I I I I i 4 I

«;'1, ~fo ~~ v v ~,t>< ~fo 0'>- c? ,, Cj Cj ~ ~ <l,v

~ ':' ~ ~t>< ~fo ~ '\ ,t>< ..._Q> ~Cb ;:,J 0' <l,v <l,~ <l,~ <l, <l, ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~

Monitoring Station

0 0 0 0 en (0

..J Cl ::,

25

I

20 i B

15 I N

10

FIGURE 10

Porcupine River Water Quality (1998 - 2000)

-- Lead (ug/L) *PW00=1 to 5 (depending on alkalinity)

~ Sept 1998

Ill May 1999

• June 1999

C3 Aug 1999

D Oct 1999

lill May 2000

max. PWQO 5 J ····-···-·········H·· .. ············tt-···-··-···tt-·· .. ··-· .. -···-···-········-········-···-········-···-··················-········-···· .. ··-···-···-···-···-···-···-·i.f ···-···-···- ... -............. -... .............. _ ... -... -... -... -.............. ..... ._ .. -... -···-···-···-· .. -··••··-•·•· .. -· ... ······-···················-···-···-····- ···-·······

Q I 1N 1b1 II 1N HA 1rMIJA 1t:Mllll 1t:Mlll 1N 1m 1N 11 1N 11 1tMII 1NJHll 1Nw 1NM l !l 1Nflllll 1WIII 1N•I 11 1 Il l

"' "' <o'v ~, <or-,,. ~!<, ~,:... ~,b< ~!<, v"' vr-,,. ~"' ~r-,,. ~"' ~(?) ~b< ~X) ~" ..,_b< ..,_C?> ~'?) .wr-,,. .*3' 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ q q q q q q q ~ ~ ~ ~- ~-

Monitoring Station

0 0 0 0 ...... 0

..J

FIGURE 11

Porcupine River Water Quality (1998 - 2000) -- Aluminium (ug/L)

*PWQO = 75 (at pH 6.5-9.0)

600 -p-"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-,

500

400

Background

<i5

E.":! Sept 1998

lii!!I May 1999

• June 1999

O Aug 1999

D Oct 1999

ill May 2000

Porcupine River, dis Porcupine Lake

~ Q) Q) .... (.) (/) c

.Q ca z Q) Q) .... .c I-

Night Hawk Lake

a, 300 > er ~

200

100

<I> .£ a. ::::, e 0 a.. ..c t:: 0 z

..................................... t-··-···' I I I

PWQO (at pH 6.5-9.0) ·-···-··-···-···-···-···-···-········-···-··-···-···-···-···-···-···-···-···-·········-·············-···-···-···-···"1··- ·- ····-··· .. ··············-···F"I··- ·- ·- ··..,

I I I I I

I I

--~·········1r1 I I

I I I I I

O IN •"' , NW1M , LTWIR i l.JWIM INllllll i LlJ!III .. I N • ,a a ,N w , N R 1NKlMaf'"''"· bl•1n , L'IIClH 1N-,N , 1.._..,n , ne:tw , a " , " • • 1

,"- ~/' <oci, ~9::i ~,:,.. ~-1>< ~9::i v" vci, :-.. !"t.- ~" ~~ ~1>< ~<o ~" ....._1>< ...... ~ ~~ -~ .J> (?;'v ~ ',) ',) g g ~ ~ ~'v ~'v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~. ~.

Monitoring Station

0 0 0 0 ...... ......

5

4.5 i C3 Sept 1998

4 1 li!!I May 1999

• June 1999

3:1 C3 Aug 1999

D Oct 1999

ii May 2000

...J

FIGURE 12

Porcupine River Water Quality (1998 - 2000) -- Cadmium (ug/L)

*PW00=0.2

14.1 ug/L

/ OJ

Ill c ·~ "'O <( :::? 1-"'0 "'O 52 (/)

"'O c 0

Cl..

2 "ii)

e <1l -,

~ ~ Q)

"' 23.7 ug/L

a, 2.5 Q)

Cl

~ 0 (/) c .Q 1ij z Q)

:J

2

1.5

1

0.5

~ .c I-

o I 1,1w " 1r::tA:4 • 1n 11 A I N I N 16W'J P 1 N N 1 fJ a , w M1 N • 1NA11 L , N R::t • , .., 11 A 1h7W:t a 1rte.1 a .r•• • R 1N "'a , N n 1 111 1 I

-" ~-" «fri, ~9) ~,:... ~-b< ~9) v" v<t, -" .ci- f<'" f<'n;, f<'b< f<'<o f<''\ ..._b< ..._<?) ~n;, .w<t, . .:J> <Qv ~ V V 0 0 <q <q <?_'v <?_V <?_ <?_ <?_ <?_ <?_ <?_«: <?_«: <?_«: ~. ~.

Monitoring Station

APPENDIXC

000072

0 0 0 0 ...... (,)

Station B-2 UP-6 UP-7 SP-4 SP-6 BC-1 BC-2 PL-1 PL-2 PR·1 PR-3 PR-4 PR-6 PR-7 PR-14 PR-19 PR-23 NHL2 NHL6

Porcupine River Study (1998 • 2000) Nutrient Data (mg/L) (shaded values are < MDL)

Sep-98 NH3+NH4 N02 N03+N02 I Po. Tot-P

0.028 0.002 0.015 0.0005 I 0.020 0.002 0.010 0.0015 I 0.096 0.2721 8.000 0.0005 0.028 0.003 0.010 0.0055 I 5.600 0.790 7.400 0.0010 I 0.022 0.001 0.005 0.0005 I 0.074 0.0041 0.020 0.0735 0.050 0.0341 0.590 0.0010 0.050 0.0161 0.300 0.0010 0.620 0.273 4.140 1.0900 -0.088 0.003 0.010 0.0520 0.164 0.003 0.005 0.1000 I 0.216 0.020 0.065 0.0900 I 0.010 0.188 0.385 0.0065 I 0.094 0.008 0.025 0.01 40 0.056 0.002 , 0.020 0.0250 0.020 0.009 0.055 0.0165

I

TABLE 1

May-99 TKN NH3+NH• N02 N03+N02

0.002 0.003 0.015 0.032 0.005 0.040 0.030 0.012 1.770 0.002 0.001 0.010 0.002 0.002 1.180

0.270 0.060 0.725 0.278 0.124 1.820 0.244 0.087 1.150 0.158 0.210 0.820 0.514 0.350 0.900 0.046 0.020 0.185

I

1 of 2

Jun-99 P04 Tot·P TKN NH3+NH4 N02 N03+N02 P04 Tot-P I TKN

0.0005 0.012 0.66 0.016 0.001 0.010 0.0005 0.010 0.86 0.0020 0.024 0.60 0.018 0.002 0.010 0.0010 0.01 4 0.68 0.0020 0.016 0.76 0.012 0.014 4.610' 0.0010 0.008 0.92 0.0030 0.008 0.40 0.008 0.002 0.010 0.0020 0.008 0.52 0.0015 0.006 0.64 0.006 0.004 0.695 0.0005 0.008 0.68

' ;

0.0360 0.100 1.20 0.050 0.018 0.705 0.0005 0.020 0.68 0.1500 0.254 1.46 0.016 0.026 0.325 0.0315 0.076 0.84 0.0620 0.180 1.46 0.030 0.029 0.780 0.0420 0.048 0.76 0.0125 0.160 0.72 0.044 0.102 0.625 0.01 40' 0.100 0.76 0.0095 0.234 1.28 0.158 0.275 0.495 0.0005 0.160 0.66 0.0175 0.076 0.92 0.070 0.026 0.230 0.0195 0.052 1.00

0.038 0.003 0.015 0.0035 0.072 0.90

0 0 0 0 ......

""

Station B-2 UP-6 UP-7 SP-4 SP-6 BC-1 BC-2 PL-1 PL-2 PR-1 PR-3 PR-4 PR-6 PR-7 PR-14 PR-19 PR-23 --·

NHL2 NHL6

Aug-99 NH3+NH4 I N02 N03+N02 I PO. I Tot-P I TKN

0.010 0.004 0.010 0.0005 0.012 0.80 0.024 0.002 0.040 0.0010 0.018 0.72 0.018 0.017 7.500 0.0015 0.012 1.00 0.006 0.0021 0.010 0.0055 0.012 0.56 1.280 0.2191 8.550 0.0010 0.01 4 2.00 - ,_

0.020 0.0031 0.030 0.0005 0.032 0.76 0.068 o.~ 0.160 0.0685 0.098 0.80 0.088 0.018 0.170 0.1140 0.116 3.60 0.052 0.073 0.185 0.0500 0.146 0.72 0.032 o~ 0.285 0.0005 0.148 0.52 -0.036 0.005 0.070 0.0200 0.052 0.72 0.018 0.003 0.010 0.0590 0.116 1.00

I I

TABLE 1

Oct-99 May-00 NH3+NH4 I N02 I N03+N02 PO• I Tot-P I TKN NH3+NH4 N02 N03+N02 P04 I Tot-P TKN

0.0041 0.002 0.024 0.0010 0.008 0.60 0.022 0.004 0.018 0.0010 0.020 0.50 0.006( 0.002 0.015 0.0020' 0.016 0.52 0.012 0.001 0.054 0.0030 0.008 0.40 0.3121 0.143 8.140 0.0005 0.012 1.06 0.008 0.002 1.100 0.0010 0.004 0.40 0.010 0.002 0.005 0.0020 0.012 0.44 0.002 0.002 0.008 0.0010 0.010 0.40 3.160 0.081 7.580 0.0005 0.012 4.08 0.002 0.001 0.897 0.0005 0.0081 0.40

I 0.018 0.008 0.210 0.0090 0.020 0.56 0.028 0.002 0.107 0.0270 0.040 0.60

-l- 0.206 0.0271 1.420 0.0020 0.042 1.04 I 0.148 0.026 1.430 0.0010 0.046 1.06 I

0.044 0.020 0.487 0.00301 0.074 1.16 0.080 0.026 1.520 0.0010 0.020 0.70 0.112 O.D75 1.180 0.1600 0.212 0.88 0.192 0.034 1.240 0.0430 0.084 0.84 0.054 0.037 0.592 0.0880 0.124 0.82 0.128 0.042 1.440 0.0310 0.064 0.92 0.114 0.154 0.861 0.01 10 0.128 0.76 0.212 0.350 1.330 0.0010 0.130 1.32 0.290 0.280 0.953 0.0020 0.144 0.60 0.108 0.106 1.390 0.0110 0.068 1.36 0.028 0.059 0.248 0.0440 0.080 0.72 0.036 0.025 0.396 0.0060 0.044 0.76 0.016, 0.003 0.024 0.0400 0.062 0.76 0.020 0.002 0.083 0.00301 0.008 0.46

I 0.048 0.017 0.251 0.0040 0.050 0.80 0.040 0.006 0.099 0.0050 0.026 0.52

I 0.048 0.007 0.035 0.0070 0.022 0.44

2 of 2

0 0 0 0 ...... (71

. . 8-2

UP-6 UP-7

SP-4 SP-6 BC-1

BC-2 PL-1 PL-2

PR-1 PR-3

PR-4 PR-6 PR-7 PR-14

PR-19 PR-23

NHL2 NHL6

TABLE 2

Total Ammonia NH3+NH41 u Unionized Ammonia (NH3) u ~ ,1• 11..!l•t; ... lllhf4 •1.•l~l• '•Ut•11..•L~l• •r.i •I! .. ;uw111111J t:-"l;1 tl.ti!.l:.I: :llal l! •• ,m .T.-01 It • [l[I. I I I •r.i•I!~

28.00 2.00 16.00 10.001 4.00 22.00 0.01 0.08 0.12 0.01 0.05 20.00 32.00 18.00 24.00 6.00 12.00 0.36 0.33 0.67 0.07' 0.10 96.00 30.00 12.00 18.00 312.00 8.00 T 0.39 0.32 0.71 4.261 0.08 28.00 2.00 8.00 6.001 10.00 2.00 e 0.03 0.13 0.17 0.12 0.02

m 5600.00 2.00 6.00 1280.00 3160.00 2.00 p 0.02 0.08 23.35 25.00 0.02

22.00 18.00 I 0.26 74.00 I

d I 28.00 a 0.24

I 1---- -

50.00 206.00 t 3.14 50.00 148.00 a 2.47

>-620.00 270.00 50.00 20.00 44.00 80.00 u 9.81 3.91 2.23 0.88 1.43 88.00 278.00 16.00 68.00 1 112.00 192.00 n

a -

9.24 1.01 4.87 0.91 : 3.50 164.00 244.00 30.00 88.00 54.00 128.00 v 16.24 0.80 3.78 0.76 1.97 216.00 158.00 44.00 52.00 114.00 212.00 a 0.49 0.53 0.67 0.65 0.02

i 10.00 514.00 158.00 32.00 290.00 108.00 I 0.00 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.82 94.00 46.00 70.00 36.00 28.00 36.00 a 0.25 0.50 0.74 0.09 0.18 56.00 38.00 18.00 16.00 20.00

b 0.37 0.33 0.09 0.26 I

20.00 48.00 e 0.39

I 40.00 0.39 --I 48.00 0.41

shaded values are inaccurate as they were extrapolated from pH < 6, which is beyond the range of the calculation (PWQO's p. 10)

TABLE 3

Spring Phosphorous Monitoring Results (ug/L)

Year Bigwater Bob's Lake Porcupine Night Hawk Lake Lake Lake

1975 44 -1976 42

- -1977 1978 23.3 35.7 -1979 22 23.5 52.5 1980 21.3 32.5 38.1 -1981 24.2 44 53.1

--1982 52.8 1983 19 42 51.3 1984 30.8 38.3 1985 38.5 ,_ 1986 24.7 ,_ 1987

-1988 22 1989 1990 55.3 1991 15.5 35.5 18.5 -1992 17.2 27 -1993 41 1994 38.8 -1995 14.3 19.4 7.7 -1996 28 1997 16 32 1998 16 ·-1999 46 2000 20 44 24

Averaae 20.0 29.2 38.9 25.6 Level 3 4 4 3

000076

0 0 0 0 ...... ......

Stn 8-2 UP-6 UP-7 SP-4 SP-6 BC-1 BC-2 PL-1 PL-2 PR-1 PR-3 PR-4 PR-6 PR-7 PR-14 PR-19 PR-23 NHL2 NHL6

Porcupine River Study (1998 - 2000) Statistical Analysis of Nutrient Data (ug/L)

TABLE 4

Phosphate (P04) Total Phosphorous (TP) n I Ranae I Mean I SD n Ranae Mean I SD

6 0.5 - 1.0 0.7 0.2 5 8 - 20 12.4 4.1 6 1.0 - 3.0 1.8 0.7 5 8 - 24 16.01 5.2 6 0.5 - 2.0 1.1 0.5 5 4 - 16 10.4: 4.1 6 1.0 - 5.5 I 3.2 1.7 5 8 - 12 10.0 1.8 -6 0.5 - 1.5 I 0.8 0.4 5 6 - 14 9.6 2.9 2 0.5 - 9.0 I 4.8 4.3 1 20.0 2 27.0 - 73.5 I 50.3 23.3 1 40.0 2 1.0 - 2.0 I 1.5 0.5 1 42.0 2 1.0 - 1.0 1.0 0.0 1 46.0 6 0.5 - 1090.0 188.5 403.4 5 20 - 100 49.2 32.2 6 31.5 - 160.0 84.2 51.4 5 76 - 254 144.8 73.6 6 31.0 - 114.0 72.8 30.2 5 48 - 180 106.4 47.0 6 1.0 · 90.0 I 29.8 31.0 5 100 - 160 132.8 20.1 6 0.5 - 1J:R- 5.0 4.2 ~ 68 - 234 150.8 52.8 6 6.0 - 44.0 20.2 11.6 5 44 - 80 60.8 14.4 5 3.0 - 59.0 26.1 21 .5 4 8 -116 1 64.5 38.4 2 4.0 - 16.5 10.3 6.3 1 50.0 1 5.0 1 I 26.0 1 7.0 1 22.0

Total Ammonia (NH4+NH3) Unionized Ammonia (NH3) n I Ranae Mean SD n Ranae I Mean SD

6 2 - 28 13.7 9.3 5 0.01 - 0.12 0.06 0.04 6 6 - 32 18.7 8.3 5 0.07 - 0.67 0.31 0.22 6 8 - 312 79.3 108.2 5 0.08 - 4.26 1.15 1.56 6 2 - 28 9.3 8.8 5 0.02 - 0.1 7 0.09 0.06 6 2 - 5600 1675.0 2087.7 5 0.02 - 25.00 9.69 11.84 2 18 - 22 20.0 2.0 1 0.26 2 28 - 74 51 .0 23.0 1 0.24 2 50 - 206 128.0 78.0 1 3.14 2 50 - 148 99.0 49.0 1 2.47 6 20 - 620 180.7 213.2 5 0.88 - 9.81 3.65 3.24 6T 16 · 278 125.7 86.2 5 0.91 - 9.24 3.91 3.06 6 30 - 244 118.0 71 .7 5 0.76 - 16.24 4.71 5.87 6 44 - 216 132.7 69.0 4 0.49 - 0.67 0.59 0.08 6 10 - 514 185.3 173.2 2 0.23 - 0.82 0.52 0.30 6 28 - 94 51 .7, 23.1 5 0.09 - 0.74 0.35 0.24

-+--5 16 - 56 29.6 15.4 4 0.09 - 0.37 0.26 0.11 2 20 , - 48 34.0 ' 14.0 1 ' 0.39 1 40. - .40 40.0 0.0 11 0.39 1 48 -148 48.0I 0.0 1' 0.41

0 0 0 0 ...... 00

Stn B-2 UP-6 UP-7 SP-4 SP-6 BC-1 BC-2 PL-1 PL-2 . PR-1 PR-3 PR-4 . PR-6 PR-7 PR-14 PR-1 9 PR-23 NHL2 NHL6

,~F.il~.-r,:m~ 11, ... • 11~t~

n I Range Mean I SO 5 500 - 860 684 131 5 400 - 720 584 115 5 400 - 1060 828 237 5 400 - 560 464 65 5 400 - 4080 1560 1379 1 560 1 600 1 1040 1 1060 5 680 - 1200 900 230 5 800 - 1460 964 249 5 760 - 3600 1512 1073 5 720 - 1320 856 233 51 520 - 1360 884 360 5 720 - 1000 824 115 4 460 - 1000 780 203 1 800 1 520 1 I 440

TABLE 4

; r.11 ,-:.. ~ (· .....

n Range Mean 6 1 - 4 2.7 6 1 - 5 2.3 61 2 - 272 76.7 6 1 - 3 2.0 6 1 - 790 182.8 2 1 - 8 4.5 2 2 - 4 3.0 2 27 - 34 30.5 2 16 - 26 21.0 6 3 - 273 66.7 6 3 - 124 47.8 6 3 - 87 36.0 -6 20 - 350 151 .5 6 106 - 350 2.21.0 6 5 - 59 23.8 5 2 - 3 2.6 2 9 - 17 13.0 , 1 6.0 1 7.0

,1r.u-- 1n 1•• ~,~1e1Cn~1• SD n Ranae Mean SD

1.1 6 10 - 24 15.3 4.8 1.2 6 10 - 54 28.2 17.2

99.8 6 1100 - 8140 5186.7 2906.8 0.6 6 5 - 10 8.8 1.9

282.3 6 695 - 8550 t 4383. 7 3480.9 3.5 2 5 - 210 107.5 102.5 1.0 2 20 - 107 63.5 43.5 3.5 2 590 - 1420 1005.0 415.0 5.0 2 300 - 1430 865.0 565.0

93.9 6 30 - 4140 1267.8 1358.1 40.3 6 10 - 1820 789.2 663.0 26.1 6 5 - 1440 689.5 505.2

107.0 6 65 - 1330 647.7 427.2 87.7 6 285 - 1390 734.7 384.4 -17.6 6 25 - 396 192.3 121 .8 0.5 5 10 - 83 30.4, 26.7 4.0 2 55 - 251 153.01 98.0

1 ' 99.0I 1 35.0 '

0 0 0 0 ...... (0

TABLE 5

SEDIMENT DATA FROM SEPTEMBER 1998

Total Phosphorous in Sediments (mg/g)

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Sediments (mg/g)

5 - 10 cm 10 - 20 cm

Clay Content (%)

5 - 10 cm 10 - 20 cm

Silt Content (%)

0- 5 cm 75 53 52 47 65 51 63 76 72 69 57 54 5 - 10 cm 74 54 49 54 19 44 74 76 71 69 58 59 10 - 20 cm 75 44 52 60 25 58 76 79 70 68 65 66

Sand Content (%)

10 - 20 cm

0.58 0.66

2.7 1.8

65 58 50 37 32 40 57 63 53 50 42 37 45 61 67 59 64 68 32 52 58

0 0 0 0 co 0

1.400

1.200

1.000

~ 0.800 Cl E

0.600

0.400

0.200

~ = 5.6 mg/L

Q)

E 0 0

~ E ~

.r:. 3 0 .e Q) c: ·5. ::, ~ 0 a.. Q) 0. 0.

::::>

FIGURE 1

Porcupine River Study (1998 - 2000)

Ammonia+Ammonium - Nitrogen (mg/L)

~3.16mg/L

0.000 IN• w1E111 Le , rwi 1- 1 N -- 1 t1 d 11 1 fiJ • ,N w,a Y ,a r, 1 1,

,.,_,'!, nX> ~~ ~,b< ~9:> r./' 0;1,, ~"- ~'l,, ~"- ~~ ~b< ~<o ~'\ ,ti. ...._<?> ;/,,~ -~ • .J' v ~ ~ g g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~- ~-

Monitoring Station

L.':3 Sept 1998 II May 1999 • June 1999 D Aug 1999 GOct 1999 !;l! May 2000

0 0 0 0 co ......

_J

0, :I

25

FIGURE 2

Porcupine River Study (1999 - 2000) - Unionized Ammonia (ug/L) *PWQ0=20

20 +-······ ···· ·················-···-···-----·-·-·-.-!Ii-- ··-···-····-··------··············-··-·-··-·-·-----PWQO ---- - -- · -·-- ···-······ ··- ···-······· ··-· -·· - ·-··-·--·-··- .. . ................ ,

15

10

5

E ctl

..c :5 0 ~ (1)

.£:

::>;

O I - 1b- 1ta-tt 1 - 1 m:111 1 n 1 n 1 11 , 11 , h'

n..-'i- <>!o <>~ ~-b< ~!o (j' 0;1,, ;,...;' ;,...;'i- <>-.'' <>-.~ ~b< ~<o ~" ,b< ,__(?} ;i,'>:> -~ .w<o v v' v' 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' · ~' · ~ ~ ~ <?.~ ~~ 4<~ ~ · ~ ·

Monitor ing Station

~ May 1999 II June 1999 • Aug 1999 D Oct 1999 G May 2000

0 0 0 0 co ....,

FIGURE 3

Porcupine River Study (1998 - 2000)

Phosphate (mg/L) 0.2000 ...__

0.1800

0.1600

0.1 400

0.1 200

...J a, 0.1 000 E

0.0800

0.0600

0.0400

0.0200

= 1.09 mg/L

0.0000 I .- nt , ---ftn-m ,l'WD- , - W, N u,, • •• - , NI--JJ,., , h

~ii <')9:> ~;'\ ~,1>< ~9:> c/' 0~ ....;" ,...;ii n...-"- n...-"b f<:'1>< Rf<o Rf" ...._1>« ..... ~ !'l,."b -~ -~ ~ ~ g g ~ ~ q q ~- ~- q q q ~ ~ ~ ~- ~-

Monitoring Station

C'.3 Sept 1998 Bl May 1999 • June 1999 D Aug 1999 O Oct 1999 Ill May 2000

0 0 0 0 co (,)

0.500

0.450 I ..:,i:

G) G)

Upper Porcupine ... ()

0.400 l ! 0.350

0.300

...J

FIGURE 4A

Porcupine River Study (1998 - 2000)

Total Phosphorous (mg/L)

G) ..:.i: co ..J G) c ·a. ::I u ... 0 a..

I I I I

: Porcupine R.ltifs Porcupine L.)

..:.i:

al ... ()

Ill c 0 .:: co z G)

! ~ ....

G) ..:.i: co ..J ..:.i: 3: co ::c .. ~ Cl z

a, 0.250 E

0.200

0.150 ..:.i:

al ...

0.100

G) ..:.i:

()

co ·"' ..J .c .111

0 m

.c 0 m

0.050

0.000 t••vq-.-rr1 ,-,,,. 1_,r., ,-,ra1 I ., , n , I "' , n,1

D..''2, DX, D~ D'l>< DX, r.,, r.~ ,, ~ <)...'" <)...~ <)..'I>< D...X) <)...~ ..._I>< ...._q, ~~ -~ • ~ v '0' '0' 0' 0' ~v ~v <?_V <?_V <?.' · <?.' · <?.' · <?.' · <?.' · <?.«: <?.«: <?.«: ~. ~.

Monitoring Station

II May 1999 • June 1999 D Aug 1999 13 Oct 1 999 r.a May 2000

0 0 0 0 co

""

0.5

0.45

0.4

0.35

0.3

...J c, 0.25 E

0.2

0.1 5

0.1

0.05

0

~X> '0

Upper Porcupine R. (u/s Porcupine Lake)

PWQO = 30 ug/L (streams)

'0~,;,. 4 'b, 4X>

(I) :,e. ct!

...J (I) c: 'a. ::::,

~ 0 a..

FIGURE 48

Porcupine River mg/L Total Phosphorous

Porcupine R.

Whitney-Tisdale STP Discharge

~«:' ~«:<>;,

Monitoring Station

~«:b,

(d/s Porcupine L.)

~«:'o ~«:"'

II May 1999 • June 1999 D Aug 1999 C3 Oct 1999 Fa May 2000

b,

~«:'

980000

ug/L total P ...... tv w .:,.. 0, CJ)

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1975

1976

1977

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

"' 1984 I ~ ~. 1985 I :::s

cc 1986 i I '1J

::r ~ 1987 ~ ! ! !

I 0

I ! ! en l i I I i ~

~ 1988 ! ::r "Tl :

0 G)

1989 I I j ! I .., c

j 0 :::0 c rn

1990 I en UI ! -1991 I

..I. CD

""' 1992 l I <.n

i ! I

1993 "' • • • D 0 0

1994 o,o,,:::, z 0 - · 0 0 - · (00"_,(0 -::E - 0 ::,-

1995 l Q)cnc .-.. ..... r "O I ~ Q) 5 · Q)

1996 ! r 7' ro ::E Q) <l> r 7' 7' Q) r

1997 I (l) 7' Ill

i I ; (l) 7'

! (l)

!

1998

1999

2000

6' :c'~

(,)'

;!,.

E E ;,,~

E (.)

(.) 0 (,)'

(.) 0 C\J <~ I!) ,-

I I 0 (,)'

0 I!) ,-

• FJ ISi .9~

(,)'

.t!>, <$-(,)' -C) ~~ .........

C)

E (,)' - .(~ u, (,)' - en c: :E (7~ C1)

E < <$) w "C a: l

J5., c:

I 0 C1) I- (.)'SI ;

<D "' en co

~I -l1J (/)

a: c: .9, Cl ::) o , (,)'SI c: (!) u, II i ·;:

u:::: :::s ....I i 0

0 W ! <, == ....J; (,)'"? c: :i..

c, ! 0 0 ::!: ~ O ! .9, Cl) ! c. Q. l (,)'"?

"' "'O i 0 §

(7;s> ~ e a. ~ 0

C'CI 113 .(, - J:)

(,)'1,, 0 I-

'1 )IM8H l46!N ~ ~~

(,)'

.(,

o~ en l - ·1 au1dn:>JOd

~2 w (,)' ~ ~ - ·1 au1dn:>JOd < .(,>.. ..J

(puno16>peq) JateM6!B (,)'

.(,):

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 <$>

~ ~ "! C! a:, <D ~ C\J 0 ci ci ci ci ci

6J6w

000086

0 0 0 0 co .......

~ C)

E

18.0

I LAKES

16.0

14.0 't>' §

12.0 ~ e ~ .~ (.J

l;l .:,e.

as -e. as ~ ..J cu

1001 _j

(II :I:

.. :0 1: Cl) g ~ .. cu ~ .El

8.0 m

6.0

I.U ................. -.. 4 o 11 Po.cuplne Lake

2.0 ~

FIGURE 7

TKN in Sediments (mg/g)

STREAMS

backgrcitld

Depth

• o- 5 cm

C:1 5 - 10 cm

li3 10 - 20 cm

. ..... : ...................................... ~ ............ ~~9~ .. ~~-~ ... ~ ... ~.:~ ................. ;;;; .. ···a-L··· .. ···................. .................... .

O. O I 11:'U 1 -.;R 9',JOI , ......,.-;, , 9',P(I , , &'ll5I , W>ffl , • " 1 " " , " , W>N , W>Tll 1 -)PCI , Wl't()I I W'>P:J 1 ->M , ... Y')'J , . , .,. W>:WV I

:--- ,"- !1, :--- 9-,"b ~'v ~'v ~'v ~() ~«! ~:--- ~0., ~!o ~~ ~!o ~,b< c? ~" ~"b ~b< ~ro ~'\ .._b< "~

~ 0 0 g 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Monitoring Station

0 0 0 0 Cl) Cl)

"#-

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

~ <o'v

LAKE STATIONS

r.::

t-

~ !"l, r .~ :V «._'v «._'v <ov «._«:

FIGURE 8

Porcupine River Study Sediment Composition {average 0-20 cm)

Ei sand D silt D elay

STREAM STATIONS

i 11"~ I,:~ I;! I'; I

II~ l!I~ Ii I! !I II II ~/' <o~ ~!<> ~::\. ~!<> ~,b< (? ~:'' ~'>:> ~t>< ~'o ~'\ ,t>< .._Q, ~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~ «.. «.. «.. «.. «.. ~ ~

Monitoring Stations

100

90

80

70

60 en en .... ...J 50 C> E

40

30

20

10

0

0 0 0 0 co (0

FIGURE 2

Bob's Lake Lagoon Effluent Quality TSS (1998 - 2001)

- .. _ 1998

• 1999

~~2000

--* --2001

I

Jl. , I

I , °" ' • I , • I' JI I : \•, I \

I I ' \•, I \ I II.. I ' \, I \

... _ . .,_ .......... -...... t. ........ -.. G~i.9.~HD.~ . .: .. ~Q . .rng/!,, ..... -·· ,.-............ .! ....... ~ ...................... -, ..... .1................. . ..... /. ................................ \ :,... ·-···········- ··· ....... ················· ........ L . .................. \ ._,,_ ................... . I I, I · · I \

I I , / "/(. \•, I \ I I ' ii \., I \ /\ I \, I \

I I ~ Jllf \

. ,,' 6 //~ \'. ";:('

-~(

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

APPENDIXD

000090

TABLE 1

Bob's Lake Lagoon Effluent Quality

Effluent Quality (mg/L) ~-mm Jan-98 10.3 25 10.0 12.7 1.67 Feb-98 8.6 50 13.9 15.8 1.89

->--Mar-98 Apr-98 42.0 17 14.6 16.6 2.18

May-98 21.0 45 8.7 11.5 2.06 Jun-98 35.0 32 0.9 2.9 0.48 Jul-98 20.0 64 4.4 6.1 0.79

~ g-98 26.Q_ 54 4.5 7.1 0.86 Sep-98 14.0 17 2.2 4.7 0.47 Oct-98 25.0 27 3.9 5.7 0.64 Nov-98 33.0 53 5.3 6.9 0.93 __ ,_

- -Dec-98 21 .0 20 7.3 9.8 1.42

Averaae 23.3 · 37 6.9 9.1 1.22

Jan-99 38.0 38 12.4 13.9 1.84 Feb-99 57.0 18 14.3 17_1 _233 Mar-99 85.0 13 20.3 21 .2 3.01 Apr-99 68.0 10 20.2 23.0 3.51

~ -99 32.0 25 10.1 10.7 1.58 Jun-99 16.0 9 3.9 4.9 0.75 Jul-99 15.0 12 3.7 4.3 0.49

Aua-99 26.0 21 2.2 5.2 0.45 Sep-99 14.0 24 2.1 3.1 0.41 Oct-99 10.0 12 1.5 2.4 0.49 Nov-99 24.0 23 0.7 2.0 0.52 Dec-99 17.0 13 4.1 5.0 1.10

Averaae 33.51 18 8.0 9.4 1.37

Jan-00 27.0 8 9.2 11.~ 2.15 - -Feb-00 40.0 4 13.8 15.4 2.19 Mar-00 74.0 18 19.1 19.6 3.03 Apr-00 33.0 19 17.3 16.1 2.06 ,-

~-00 16.0 19 4.7 7.4 1.25 Jun-00 17.0 16 1.8 3.5 0.94 Jul-00 14.0 44 0.6 1.7 0.71

·->-Aug-00 26.0 86 2.4 3.4 0.84 Sep-00 14.0 12 0.8 1.9 0.40 Oct-00 22.0 25 1.8 3.6 0.51 - -Nov-00 26.0 15 4.2 5.7 0.78 -Dec-00 20.0 11 9.7 15.3 1.58

Averaae 27.4 23 7.1 8.8 1.37

Jan-01 34.0 10 14.8 15.6 2.70 Feb-01 55.0 10 18.0 17.~ 2.54 -Mar-01 73.0 4 18.7 22.4 3.21 Apr-01 25.0 17 24.9 26.0 3.88

Maz'.·01 17.0 8 11.1 10.6 _ 1.79 Jun-01 12.0 15 1.1 3.2 1.80 Jul-01 19.0 37 1.4 3.5 0.69

~ g-01 22.0 60 3.6 5.2 1.11 __ See:Ql 14.0 17 6.1 7.6 1.05

Oct-01 8.0 19 1.1 2.8 0.73 Nov-01 40.0 19 2.1 3.7 0.92 Dec-01 10.0 8 5.7 6.3 1.22

Average 27.4 19 9.1 10.4 1.80

000091

0 0 0 0 co ....,

FIGURE 1

Bob's Lake Lagoon Effluent Quality BOD (1998 - 2001)

90.0 ..--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

80.0 ' ' - .. _ 1998

70.0 j //\ \ .-1999

H 2000

60.0 · - -* ··2001

g 50.0 m ..J 0) E 40.0 i I ,' ~ ·. \ ·, \ J(

"' Guideline - 30 mg/L 30.0 i ........ 7 ,,_,,_,, ......................................... ,-.................... \ \ .l. / \.

X,

20.0 -~ "

4 •

' . -x· -~ ' ' 10.0 -- --- ... ::t: ·x

0.0

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

0 0 0 0 co (,)

FIGURE 3

Bob's Lake Lagoon Effluent Quality Ammonia (NH3) - 1998 to 2001

30.Q -,-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-,

,x, 5.0 ---<' '"----,..c..,.~ - .x· ',~ ,,.

A ~~ ,.... ... -

0.0+-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

0 0 0 0 co

""

FIGURE 4

Bob's Lake Lagoon Effluent Quality Total Phosphorous (1998 - 2001)

4.50 .-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

4.00

3.50

3.00 Cl)

::J e 0

-g_ 2.50 Cl)

0 ~ c..

~ 2.00 -~ E 1.50

1.00

0.50

::( ...

.A ,,, ,,, ,,,

Guideline - 1.0 mg/L

::( ' .

-:-. . \ X'\· .... -:.:,

\ \ \ \ ~

- .. _ 1998

_.,_ 1999

M 2000

· · * · ·2001

0.00 +-~~-,-~~-,-~~-..-~~--.-~~---.~~~~~~~~~~~~-,-~~-..-~~~~~----'

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

APPENDIXE

000095

-

-

-

TABLE 1

Whitney-Tisdale STP Effluent Quality

--Jan-98 57, 131 _ 1,84~ 2,162 5 2 3.71 3.74 2.41 8.3 3.7 6.8 6.9 4.4 Feb-98 55,916 1,997 2,300 1 12 3.78 4.64 2.29 2.0 24.0 7.5 9.3 4.6 Mar-98 117,650 3,79§_ 12,817 7 6 4.10 - 4.30 2.28 26.6 22.8 15.6 16.3 8.7 Apr-98 158,321 5,277 11 ,691 12 19 1.70 2.50 0.76 63.3 100.3 9.0 13.2 4.0 May-98 79,542 2,566 4,713 7 6 4.50 4.80 2.05 18.0 15.4 11.5 12.3 5.3 Jun-98 105,346 3,512 10,052 3 3 2.80 3.30 1.88 10.5 10.5 9.8 11.6 6.6 Jul-98 76,678 2,473 3,580 12 3 1.60 1.60 2.29 29.7 7.4 4.0 4.0 5.7

Aug-98 76,893 ,_ 2,4~ 4,258 6 4 2.50 2.50 1.85 14.9 9.9 6.2 6.2 4.6 - ,-- - f---

Seo-98 96,260 3,209 5,119 6 4 3.30 5.30 2.26 19.3 12.8 10.6 17.0 7.3 Oct-98 95,380 3,07]_ 4,895 7 3 2.20 2.80 1.83 21.5 9.2 6.8 8.6 5.6

f-- >- ---Nov-98 110,610 3,687 12,430 6 4 2.60 3.10 1.79 22.1 14.7 9.6 11 .4 6.6 Dec-98 110,877 3,577 9,665 7 3 0.90 1.40 0.60 25.0 10.7 3.2 5.0 2.1 TOTAL 1.140.604 MEAN 3,124' 7 6' 2.81 3.33 1.86 21.8 20.1 : 8.4 10.1 5.5

STD 905 3 5 1.06 1.201 0.57 14.7 24.8 3.3 4.1 1.6 Jan-99 65,891 2,126 2,621 15 6 3.60 3.70 2.42 31.9 12.8 7.7 7.9 5.1 Feb-99 65,156 ..... 2,327 6,388 6 4 3.80 --5.00 2.45 14.0 _,_ 9.3 8.8 11.6 5.7 Mar-99 95,327 3,075 8,923 21 9 4.20 4.40 2.27 64.6 27.7 1~ 11:.§ __].0 Apr-99 167,523 5,584 13,277 24 9 2.00 2.30 1.04 134.0 50.3 11 .2 12.8 5.8

May-99 124,261 4,008 10,240 3 4 3.20 3.40 1.80 12.0 16.0 12.8 13.6 7.2 - --Jun-99 136,426 4,548 8,799 2 3 2.00 2.80 1.16 9.1 13.6 9.1 12.7 5.3 - ._ Jul-99 100,326 3,236 5,673 7 5 2.80 3.80 1.22 22.7 16.2 9.1 12.3 3.9

Aug-99 103,376 3,3~ 8,086 4 3 3.80 3.80 2.10 13.3 10.0 12.7 12.7 7.0 -Sep-99 78,942 2,631 4,883 5 4 4.90 6.20 2.57 13.2 10.5 12.9 16.3 6.8 ,.. ,_ Oct-99 173,994 5,613 10,638 2 4 2.80 2.8.Q_ _ 2.16 11.2 22.5 15.7 15.7 12.1 Nov-99 134,926 4,498 5,462 3 2 2.70 3.60 1.58 13.5 9.0 12.1 16.2 7.1 --Dec-99 90,620 2,923 3,960 6 3 2.80 3.50 1.61 17.5 8.8 8.2 10.2 4.7 TOTAL 1,336,768 :

I

MEAN 3,659 8 5 3.22 3.78! 1.87 29.7 17.2' 11 .1 13.0 6.5 STD 1.136 7 2 0.84 1.001 0.52 34.7 11.4· 2.4 2.3 2.0

Jan-00 65,40~ - 2,110 2,545 16 4 5.20 5.50 2.35 33.8 8.4 11.0 11.6 5.0 -Feb-00 86,399 2,979 11 ,347 7 3 _ 5.30 7.80 2.18 920 20.9 8.9 15.8 23.2 6.5 Mar-00 157,206 5,071 8,077 24 12 3.30 3.60 1.39 94000 121.7 60.9 16.7 18.3 7.0 Apr-00 135,036 4,5.Ql _ 5,510 18 6 4.70 5.30 1.20 81 .0 27.0 21 .2 23.9 5.4 -

May-00 140,852 4,544 8,145 4 4 2.70 4.00 1.46 <2 18.2 18.2 12.3 18.2 6.6 Jun-00 147,120 _ 4,904 ._8,722 5 3 4.40 5.80 1.83 <2 24.5 14.7 21.§ 28.4 9.0 Jul-00 119,026 3,840 4,605 5 2 4.00 4.20 1.56 <2 19.2 7.7 15.4 16.1 6.0 -Aug-00 144, 12_§_ 4,649 10,020 7 3 3.80 7.30 1.78 10 32.5 13.9 17.7 33.9 8.3

Sep-00 110,628 3,688 5,352 4 4 3.30 4.50 1.60 <2 14.8 14.8 12.2 16.6 5.9 Oct-00 120,569 3,889 8,995 4 2 2.50 3.30 1.55 60 15.6 7.8 9.7 12.8 6.0 -Nov-00 124,08~ ~.136 ,___Z.244 7 4 4.30

+--7.90 2.37 <2 29.0 16.5 17.8 32.7 9.8

Dec-00 101 ,158 3,263 3,888 5 2 3.40 5.10 1.60 7000 16.3 6.5 11 .1 16.6 5.2 TOTAL 1.451608 I :

MEAN 3965 9 4 3.91 5.361 1.74, 35.6 17.1 15.2 21.0 6.7 STD 828 6 3. 0.87 1.52; 0.36 31.2' 14.3• 3.8 7.1 1.5

3yr MAX 173,994 5,613 13,277 24 19 5.30 7.80 2.57 134.0 100.31 21 .6 33.9 12.1 3yr MIN 55,91 61 9051 1 2 0.84 1.00 0.52 2.0 3.7 2.41 2.3 1.6

3yr MEAN I 3,583 8 5 3.31 I 4.1 61 1.82 29.0 18.2 11.6 14.7 6.2 3vrSTD 952 6 4 1.02 1.58 0.48 29.8 18.41 4.31 6.81 1.8

000096

Date

08-0ct-98 23-Nov-98 30-Nov-98

-31 -Dec-98 05-Feb-99 12-Feb-99

28-Mar-99 27-Apr-99

08-Apr-99

24-May-99

31-May-99

11-Jun-99 29-Jun-99 30-Jun-99

05-Jul-99 24-Jul-99

13-Aug-99

08-0ct-99

08-May-00 01-Aug-00 07-Aug-OO

07-Apr-01

TABLE 2

WHITNEY-TISDALE STP BYPASS EVENTS

Pump Duration Volume• Stn. (hrs) (imp. Gals.) m3

#6 2.40 72,000 327 #5 0.11 3,300 15 #2 11.80 637,200 2,897 #3 4.80 259,200 1, 178 #5 0.54 16,20Q 74 - -#6 0.20 6,000 27 #6 0.10 3,000 14 -#5 0.50 15,000 68 #6 0.10 3,00Q 14 --#5 0.12 3,600 16 #1 5.50 297,000 1,350 #3 6.60 356,400 1,620 #5 0.32 9,600 44 #1 2.50 135,000 614 #3 3.30 178,00Q 809 -#2 0.20 10,800 49 #3 1.90 102,600 466 #5 0.33 9,900 45 #6 0.20 6,000 27

-#5 0.11 3,300 15 #6 0.90 27,000 123

--#5 0.10 12,900 59 #5 0.43 12.~ 59 #2 0.90 48,600 221 #3 0.10 5,400 25 - -#3 2.80 151 ,000 686 #2 1.90 102,600 466 #2 0.60 32,400 147 - -#5 0.13 3,900 18 #2 8.60 464,400 2, 111

-#3 10.80 583,200 2,651 #5 0.26 7,800 35 #6 0.50 15,000 68 #2 0.20 10,800 49 #6 0.30 9,000 41 #1 0.50 8,580 39 #2 3.60 194,400 884 #3 1.80 97,200 442 #5 6.52 15,600 71 #6 0.50 15,000 68 - --#3 1.50 81 ,000 368 #6 1.50 45,000 205

000097

TABLE 2

Date Pump Duration Volume*

Stn. {hrs) {imp. Gals.) m3

08-Apr-01 Plant 337 2 #2 0.80 43,200 196 #3 9.40 507,600 2,308 #5 0.09 2,~ 12 #6 2.50 75,000 341

11-Apr-01 #2 2.80 151 ,200 687 #3 10.60 572,400 2,602 --#5 0.52 15,600 71 #6 0.75 22,50Q_ 102 -

12-Apr-01 #2 6.10 329,400 1,497 #3 9.60 518,400 2,357 #5 1.58 47,400 215

13-Apr-01 #2 0.30 16,200 74 #3 0.80 43,200 196

21-Apr-01 #3 1.70 91 ,800 417 ~ay-01 #5 0.19 5,700 26

22-Mat 01 #3 1.30 70,200 319 23-May-01 #3 0.30 16,200 74 --25-Sep-01 #2 0.50 27,000 123

#3 1.90 102,000 464 - -

#5 0.69 20,700 94 • calc. from time recorded and pump capacity

Average Bypass Volumes (m3)

Oct 98 - Oct 99 Mav 00 - Mav 01 Pump Stn # Avg. Vol. # events I Avg. Vol.

events

#1 2 981 1 39 #2 6 982 6 565 -#3 7 1,062 9 1,009 #5 11 41 5 79 #6 7 86 5 151

000098

0 0 0 0 co co

30

I

25 i

20 j I c

0 m ...J 15 -C)

E

10

5 .

I 0

-

v Jan Feb

.• ' . .

h-\ .

. . . .. ' .

Mar Apr

FIGURE 1

Whitney-Tisdale STP Effluent Quality BOD (mg/L) -- 1998 to 2000

- -- · . ... ----

May Jun Jul Aug Sep

.-1998

- - • - -1999

* 2000

--.. ... . Oct Nov Dec

0 0 0 ..... 0 0

FIGURE 2

Whitney-Tisdale STP Effluent Quality BOD Loading (kg/day) -- 1998 to 2000

160 ...--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~----.

c 0

140

120

100

m 80 :g, .\I::

60

40

20

0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct

~ 1998 El 1999

• 2000

Nov Dec

20

18

16

14

12 Cl) Cl)

~ 10 0) E

8

61 •• 4

2

0 Jan Feb Mar Apr

0 0 0 ..... 0 .....

FIGURE 3

Whitney-Tisdale STP Effluent Quality TSS (mg/L) -- 1998 to 2000

.•.

May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct

+- 1998

· · • · · 1999 ..-2000

.•.. Nov Dec

0 0 0 ..... 0 ....,

FIGURE 4

Whitney-Tisdale STP Effluent Quality TSS Loading (kg/day) -- 1998 to 2000

120 ....-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~---.

en en

100

80

~ 60 1 .:,e,

40

20

0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct

&:31 998

Ell 1999

• 2000

Nov Dec

0 0 0 ..... 0 (,)

FIGURE 5

Whitney-Tisdale STP Effluent Quality Ammonia (mg/L) -- 1998 to 2000

6.oo ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--.

5.00

4.00

M ::c z ...J 3.00 a, E

2.00

1.00

0.00 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct

l..':11 998

Iii 1999

• 2000

Nov Dec

0 0 0 ..... 0

""

M :I: z "C -0, ..:.::

FIGURE 6

Whitney-Tisdale STP Effluent Quality Ammonia Loading (kg/day) -- 1998 to 2000

25 .00 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-,

20.00

15.00

10.00

5.00

0.00 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct

&31998

El 1999

• 2000

Nov Dec

0 0 0 ..... 0 <71

FIGURE 7

Whitney-Tisdale STP Effluent Quality Total Phosphorous (mg/L) -- 1998 to 2000

3.oo ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--,

2.50

2.00

a. I

0 I- 1.50 ..., a, E

1.00

0.50

0.00 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct

~ 1998

Ei\! 1999

• 2000

Nov Dec

0 0 0 N 0 -~ co

· - 0) ca en ::::, ,.... 0 --c: > G) cu ::::, "C --~ C)

GO w~ -w c.. C) er: ...... c: ::>

"' (!) "C u:::: ~ cu

cu 0 "C ...J

"' "' ·- ::::, t-;- 0 > ... G) 0 c: ..r:: :: c. ..r:: "' 3: 0

..r:: c.. cu -0

......

0 0 '«:t

GO 0) 0)

rJ

0) 0) 0)

II

0 0 0 C\I •

0 0 C\i

0 0 0

0 0 CX)

0 0 <.O

d-101 p/6)1

0 0 ,q-

0 0 C\I

0 0 0

(.) Q)

0

> 0 z

-(.) 0

c.. Q) (/)

O> :::, ct:

"5 ....,

c: ::::, ....,

>, ro ~

..... c.. ct:

..... ro ~

.0 Q)

LL

c: ro ....,

000106

APPENDIXF

000107

TABLE 1

Ontario Government Complex Lagoon (S. Porcupine) Effluent Quality

Sample BOD5 TSS Total NO a N02 TKN Tot-P ECOLI/ Date (mg!L) (mg/L) Ammonia (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) 100 ml

(ma/LJ 28-Apr-99 13.9 42 7.85 0.935 14-May-99 9.5 17 0.343 <0.020 <0.020 3.83 0.657 <1000 18-Mal ·99 8.0 22 <0.050 <0.020 4.16 0.493 <1000 21-May-99 13.4 14 0.405 <0.020 3.20 0.658 <1000 30-May-OO 2.9 <2 <0.020 <0.020 06-Jun-OO 2.7 3 0.235 <0.020

28-May-01 2.7 <2 <0.060 <0.060 01-Jun-01 4.7 2 <0.020 0.026 06-Jun-01 5.7 <2 0.038 <0.020

1999 Ava. 11 .2 23.8 0.266 <0.020 <0.020 4.8 0.7 2000Ava. 2.8 2.5 0.128 <0.020 2001 Ava. 5.2 2 0.039 0.035

000108

Receiving Water Monitoring Plan for Porcupine River and Porcupine Lake

Background

The City of Timrrnns has experienced a significant amount of bypass events within the Whitney-Tisdale

sewage works, spec,fically 113 reported events bypasses during 2005-2011 time period. These bypas5es

have resulted 111 the discharge of untreated sewage directly into the environment, mainly Porcupine

Lake. Though the City regularly takes samples of bypass events, no monitoring is being undertaken in

the receiving body of water; Porcupine Lake, to monitor for impacts resulting from bypass events.

Purpose

Monitor/study water ql1ality in the Porcupine River and Porcupine Lake to help the City of Timmins

monitor any potential negative irnoacts to the Porcupine River and Porcupine Lake receiving waters.

Proposed Sampling Plan

The City of Timmins receiving water monitoring plan proposes to collect water samples at the following

locations [see attached map]:

1. Tributary heading into Porcupine Lake (Evans Street) [upstream of bypasses]

2. Porcupme Lake

3. After Pump Station# 6 (Shallow Lake), before Whitney-Tisdale WWTP (downstream of bvpasses]

4. Location After Whitney-Tisdale WWTP

The sampling program will be conducted bi-annually (Spring and Fall) and will be commence over a three (3) year period

The following parameters will be collech·d and sampled for.

Dissolwd Oxygen (DO)

Total Ammonium

Tota! Nitrate

Total Organic Carbon

(TOC)

Un-ionized Ammonia

Total Nitrite

Hardness

Total Kjeldahl N

pH

000109

Oxvgen Dermmd (

Temperature

l otal Suspended Solios

lfSS)

lhe City of fim111ins wdl submit a copy of the ,rnnua! ret:ort to the MOE ~Jistr!ct office

000110

-.._P"UM'P'rMO STATION fl(4"

\....rUMf'l.HG StA.1'tiHl1iS

CRAY.!'f !:n'P'.l.'SS '!Ul?~!n'P'li,S:SJl,l)W'-

PO~Ct,fPVi~

~~~~

CITYCF TIMMINS

SANtrA•Y St.Wl!:R DA.AllolA-GE AR'U.$

l'O"f'EHTIAL SAMf'\.f'((i t.OCA.TitlNS

;;:I R:.V. Anderson \ii ~soc~te~- w_~,~~

PORCUPINE SANITARY $Ev.ER $Y$1!M

PROPOSED MONITORING PLAN

¢<1>/t'U'. ""'~-!'.>.

~

000111