volume 1: appendix a eia summary report - alberta · appendix a: eia summary report december 2007...

Volume 1: Project Description TOTAL Upgrader Project Appendix A: EIA Summary Report

TOTAL E&P Canada Ltd. December 2007 Page A-1

Appendix A EIA Summary Report

TOTAL Upgrader Project Volume 1: Project DescriptionAppendix A: EIA Summary Report

December 2007 TOTAL E&P Canada Ltd.Page A-2

Environmental ImpactAssessment

Summary Report

December 2007

TOTAL Upgrader

Cover Page - Volume 2 EIA Summarcover1 cover1Cover Page - Volume 2 EIA Summarcover1 cover1 12/12/2007 8:40:53 AM12/12/2007 8:40:53 AM

Environmental Impact Assessment TOTAL Upgrader ProjectSummary Report Table of Contents

TOTAL E&P Canada Ltd. December 2007 Page i

Table of Contents

1 Environmental Impact Assessment Summary Report ............................................... 1-1 1.1 Overview of Assessed Project ......................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Assessment Summary ...................................................................................................... 1-4

List of Tables

Table 1.2-1 Environmental Impact Assessment Summary ..................................................... 1-4

List of Figures

Figure 1.1-1 Location of Project Development Area ............................................................... 1-2 Figure 1.1-2 Process Flow Diagram ......................................................................................... 1-3

TOTAL Upgrader Project Environmental Impact AssessmentTable of Contents Summary Report

December 2007 TOTAL E&P Canada Ltd.Page ii

Environmental Impact Assessment TOTAL Upgrader ProjectSummary Report Acronyms and Abbreviations

TOTAL E&P Canada Ltd. December 2007 Page iii

Acronyms and Abbreviations

AAAQO ................................................................... Alberta ambient air quality objectives BMPs ........................................................................................ Best Management Practices BPSD ................................................................................................. barrels per stream day C&R ....................................................................................... conservation and reclamation CASA ....................................................................................... Clear Air Strategic Alliance CCME ................................................... Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment CO ............................................................................................................. carbon monoxide CO2 ................................................................................................................ carbon dioxide COPCs .................................................................................. chemicals of potential concern CSL ............................................................................................ comprehensive sound level CWS .............................................................................................. Canadian Wide Standard dBA ...................................................................................................... A-weighted decibels DSA ..................................................................................................... deposition study area EIA .................................................................................. environmental impact assessment EUB ............................................................................................ Energy and Utilities Board FAP ........................................................................................................ Fort Air Partnership GHG ............................................................................................................. greenhouse gas HHRA .................................................................................... human health risk assessment HRIA .................................................................... Historical Resources Impact Assessment HRO .................................................................................... Historical Resources Overview keq H+/ha/a .................................... hydrogen ion equivalents per hectare per annum (year) kg N/ha/a ............................. kilogram of nitrogen equivalent per hectare per annum (year) LDAR ............................................................................................ leak detection and repair LEED ....................................................... Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Leq .......................................................................................... energy-equivalent sound level LSA .............................................................................................................. local study area NO2 ............................................................................................................. nitrogen dioxide NOX ......................................................................oxides of nitrogen (sum of NO and NO2) O3 ................................................................................................................................. ozone PAH .................................................................................. polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon PAI ......................................................................................................... potential acid input PDA .............................................................................................. project development area PM ............................................................................................................. particulate matter PM2.5 ................................ particulate matter with aerodynamic diameters less than 2.5 µm ppm ........................................................................................... parts per million by volume PSL .................................................................................................. permissible sound level RSA ........................................................................................................ regional study area RSC ........................................................................................... reduced sulphur compound SO2 ............................................................................................................... sulphur dioxide SOX .................................................................................................................. sulphur oxide SRU .................................................................................................... sulphur-recovery unit TGCU .................................................................................................... tail gas cleanup unit the upgrader ................................................................................. TOTAL Upgrader Project TOTAL ....................................................................................... TOTAL E&P Canada Ltd. VOC ........................................................................................... volatile organic compound

TOTAL Upgrader Project Environmental Impact AssessmentAcronyms and Abbreviations Summary Report

December 2007 TOTAL E&P Canada Ltd.Page iv

Environmental Impact Assessment TOTAL Upgrader ProjectSummary Report

TOTAL E&P Canada Ltd. December 2007 Page 1-1

1 Environmental Impact Assessment Summary Report

1.1 Overview of Assessed Project TOTAL E&P Canada Ltd. (TOTAL), a wholly owned subsidiary of TOTAL SA, is applying to the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board and Alberta Environment for approval to construct and operate an oil sands bitumen upgrader (the upgrader). The proposed upgrader is near Fort Saskatchewan, Alberta (see Figure 1.1-1, Map A) in the County of Strathcona, in Alberta’s Industrial Heartland, an area designated for industrial use.

The upgrader is designed to process 39,200 m3/stream day (245,000 barrels per stream day [BPSD]) of oil sands bitumen blend (see Figure 1.1-2 for process flow diagram). After optimization, the expected processing capacity, for which approval is being sought, will be 47,200 m3/stream day (295,000 BPSD). Synthetic crude oils will be produced and transported by pipeline to refinery markets.

The upgrader has six primary components:

• distillation • coking • hydrotreatment for conversion and desulphurization • hydrogen production • byproduct management • supporting infrastructure and ancillary facilities

Subject to regulatory approvals and corporate sanction, start of construction is planned for late 2009, operations in 2014 and optimized production in 2018.

The environmental impact assessment (EIA) assessed potential effects of the upgrader within a 425.9 ha project development area (PDA) (see Figure 1.1-1, Map B), and potential effects associated with the withdrawal of water from and discharge of treated water to the North Saskatchewan River.

TITLE

FIGURE 1.1-1Location of Project Development Area

SCALE

North Saskatchewan River

Redwater River

Sturgeo

n River

ManawanLake

CookingLake Beaverhill

Lake

Lamont

TofieldBeaumontDevon

GibbonsBonAccord

Legal

Bruderheim

Redwater

Morinville

Leduc

Edmonton

21

28A2

831

45

637

16

FortSaskatchewan

STURGEONMUNICIPAL DISTRICT

LAMONTCOUNTY

BEAVERCOUNTY

STRATHCONACOUNTY

LEDUCCOUNTY

COUNTY OFTHORNHILD NO.7

WESTLOCKCOUNTY SMOKY LAKE

COUNTY

IMPROVEMENTDISTRICT 13

DRAFT

North Saskatch

ewan

River

15

RR 22

0

830TWP RD 552

TWP 55RGE 21

W4M

TWP 55RGE 22

W4M

TWP 56RGE 21

W4MTWP 56RGE 22

W4M

Sturgeon River

Astoti

n Cree

k

RR 21

5

RR 21

4

TWP RD 554

5 0 5 10 15

Distance in Kilometres

500 0 500 1,000 1,500

Distance in Metres

Project Development AreaPaved Access - DividedPaved AccessUnpaved AccessRailwayWatercourse

Alberta Industrial HeartlandEnvironmental Policy AreaHeavy Industrial Policy AreaLight/Medium Industrial Policy AreaMunicipal BoundaryProject Development AreaPaved AccessUnpaved AccessRailwayWatercourseUrban Area

A B

A

B



Figure 1.1-2 Process Flow Diagram

TOTAL Upgrader Project Environmental Impact Assessment Summary Report

December 2007 TOTAL E&P Canada Ltd.Page 1-4

1.2 Assessment Summary For a summary of the following for each discipline assessed in Volume 2: Environmental Impact Assessment, see Table 1.2-1:

• assessment method • key issues • environmental setting • project components • effects management • residual effects

Table 1.2-1 Environmental Impact Assessment Summary Air

Assessment Method

To provide data for the assessment of potential effects on human health (as assessed in the human health assessment), the local study area (LSA) was a circle of 7.5-km radius centred on the upgrader project. The regional study area (RSA) was 50 km by 50 km and the deposition study area (DSA) was 80 km by 80 km, all within the air modelling domain of 100 km by 100 km. Alberta Environment’s Air Quality Model Guideline was followed. Description of baseline conditions included: • a regional source and emission inventory for each assessment case (base, application and

planned development) • a summary of ambient air quality measurements • preparation of meteorological and surface topographical data to determine regional transport

and dispersion patterns Assessment of effects included application of the CALPUFF/CALMET models to predict ambient concentrations and deposition patterns for each assessment case. Ambient monitoring measurements and air quality predictions were then compared with ambient air quality and deposition criteria to identify the incremental and cumulative air quality changes caused by the upgrader.

Key Issues Key issues include: • air quality changes associated with upgrader and regional emissions compared with the

following air quality-related criteria: • Alberta ambient air quality objectives (AAAQO) for sulphur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen dioxide

(NO2), carbon monoxide (CO) and other substances • Canada Wide Standards (CWS) for particulate matter with aerodynamic diameters less

than 2.5 µm (PM2.5) and ozone (O3) (oxides of nitrogen [NOX] and volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions are precursors to O3 formation)

• CASA potential acid input (PAI) target loads • human health implications for substances that could have adverse health effects, and for

which there are no criteria (assessed in the human health assessment) • nitrogen deposition (which has the potential to produce eutrophication effects on terrestrial

and aquatic systems) • greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (compared with provincial and national values), and effects

of potential future climate change on the upgrader



Table 1.2-1 Environmental Impact Assessment Summary (cont’d) Air (cont’d)

Environmental Setting

Air quality in the Fort Saskatchewan region is influenced by existing industry sources in that region and by urban traffic and heating sources from the Fort Saskatchewan and Edmonton areas. Ambient measurements and dispersion model predictions indicate that higher ambient SO2 concentrations occur near existing SO2 emissions sources. Similarly, measurements and model predictions indicate higher NO2 and PM2.5 predictions occur in urban areas. Alberta Environment analyses of ambient PM2.5 and O3 data indicate the need for regional actions to further monitor and manage these emissions. Environment Canada modelling indicates a potential for photochemical production of O3 from precursor NO2 and VOC emissions. In summary, ambient air quality in the region is consistent with local and regional emission source influences.

Project Components

Project components that may contribute to potential effects on air quality include: • Combustion: The upgrader will be serviced by 21 conventional stacks and 2 flare stacks. The

combustion processes will be a source of SO2, NOx, CO, VOC, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) and PM2.5 emissions. Combustion sources will also produce carbon dioxide (CO2), a greenhouse gas.

• Fugitive emissions: Fugitive emissions will result from 32 storage tanks and ancillary facilities, and from 21 identified process areas. The upgrader will also be serviced by one 13-cell forced draft cooling tower. Fugitive sources will also produce VOC and reduced sulphur compound (RSC) emissions. Additionally, fugitive sources release smaller amounts of methane, a greenhouse gas.

Effects Management

A number of design and mitigation measures will be implemented to control emissions to the atmosphere during operations, including: • on a long-term (annual) basis, a minimum sulphur-recovery efficiency of 99.7%, with a design

basis of 99.8% recovery, will be met for the proposed sulphur recovery unit (SRU) and tail gas cleanup unit (TGCU) complex. On a quarterly basis, the expected minimum sulphur recovery for the SRU/TGCU complex will be 99.4%.

• heaters and furnaces will be fired with a combination of natural gas and plant fuel gas. The sulphur content of the plant fuel gas will be 368 ppm or less.

• NOx and CO emissions from furnaces, heaters and boilers will be less than CCME guidelines. Low-NOx burners will be used to reduce flue gas NOx emissions.

• floating roofs and internal pans on storage tanks will be used to reduce volatilization of contents. Storage tanks carrying a sour product will be tied into a vapour recovery system.

• low-emission packing on control valves, seals and gaskets will be used to reduce fugitive emissions. A leak detection and repair program (LDAR) will also be implemented during operations to identify and reduce fugitive emissions.

• operations will be managed to control the duration and frequency of major upset flaring events. To increase energy efficiency and reduce GHG emissions, pre-heat combustion air will be used to increase combustion efficiency, transport pipelines and hot process vessels will be insulated and thermally efficient heaters, furnaces and boilers will be used.



Table 1.2-1 Environmental Impact Assessment Summary (cont’d) Air (cont’d)

Residual Effects SO2 emissions: Maximum SO2 concentrations due to the upgrader are predicted to occur in the immediate vicinity of the upgrader (i.e., along and within the project fenceline). The AAAQO may be exceeded at the upgrader fenceline during occasional atmospheric conditions of poor dispersion. AAAQO are not exceeded when operating at annual sulphur recovery of 99.7%. This conclusion is similar to other approved and proposed upgraders in the region. NO2 emissions: Maximum NO2 concentrations due to the upgrader are predicted along the project fenceline. Predicted NO2 concentrations do not exceed the AAAQO along and outside the project fenceline. The regional NO2 concentration pattern is dominated by Edmonton urban sources. PM2.5 emissions: Maximum PM2.5 concentrations due to the upgrader are predicted along the project fenceline. Predicted PM2.5 concentrations do not exceed the 24-h CWS along and outside the project fenceline. The regional PM2.5 concentration pattern is dominated by Edmonton urban sources. PAI: The approved and proposed upgraders increase potential acid input (PAI) contribution because of their associated SO2 emissions. The urban areas provide a large contribution to the regional PAI because of their associated NOX emissions. The maximum predicted PAI depositions in Elk Island National Park are 0.32, 0.35 and 0.43 keq H+/ha/a for the Base, Application and Planned Development cases, respectively. The 80 km by 80 km dispersion study area (DSA) average for the Base, Application and Planned Development cases are 0.14, 0.15 and 0.19 keq H+/ha/a, respectively. This is less than the most stringent target load criterion of 0.22 keq H+/ha/a for sensitive areas. NOX emissions: Urban sources dominate regional nitrogen deposition patterns due to associated NOX emissions. Values in excess of 10 kg N/ha/a are predicted in the Edmonton and Fort Saskatchewan areas because of urban emissions. The predicted nitrogen depositions in Elk Island National Park are 4.41, 4.58 and 5.21 kg N/ha/a for the Base, Application and Planned Development cases, respectively. Odour emissions: For human health and odour related concentrations, maximum predicted 1-h H2S concentrations for the Application Case at the most exposed agricultural/residential location is 14 µg/m3, and the maximum predicted 24-h H2S concentrations at the most exposed agricultural/residential location is 8 µg/m3 (exceeds AAAQO 24-h). Air quality implications of the other substances are discussed in the human health assessment. Ozone emissions: Environment Canada model predictions indicate that future upgraders could potentially increase peak ozone concentrations by 3% to 5% in the Fort Air Partnership (FAP) region, and by as much as 8.6% east of the FAP region. Greenhouse gas emissions: Upgrader operations greenhouse gas emissions of 5458 kt CO2e/a represents 2.15% of the projected 2015 provincial total estimate, and 0.76% of the projected 2015 national total estimate. Future climate change might influence the availability of source water and could influence summer cooling capabilities. The sensitivity of operations to future climate changes is assessed to be low.

Noise

Assessment Method

The LSA extends 3 km beyond the PDA. An RSA was not required for the noise assessment because effects of facility-related noise during normal operations are expected to be local. The noise assessment followed a method consistent with the requirements of EUB Directive 38, which included: • establishing baseline conditions by determining noise levels of existing operations in the area • predicting noise levels of project operations Once the sum of all contributing sources was calculated, predicted comprehensive sound levels (CSL) at each residence were compared with applicable permissible sound levels (PSL). Directive 38 does not specify limits for construction noise. Guidance on acceptable construction noise levels was obtained from Environment Canada’s Codes of Practice.



Table 1.2-1 Environmental Impact Assessment Summary (cont’d) Noise (cont’d)

Key Issues Key issues include: • construction noise on local residents • railway and truck traffic noise on local residents • flaring noise on local residents


Activities affecting existing sound levels in the area include road traffic along Highway 15 and other access roads, operation of existing industrial facilities, railway traffic, other human-related activities and nature sounds. Noise contribution from other existing industrial facilities during normal operation forms part of the existing baseline CSLs measured during the 24-h noise survey at the receptors. The results of the 24-h sound monitoring at each of the five residences of concern indicated that existing sound levels at the residences ranged from 46 to 52 dBA Leq during the daytime and 37 to 48 dBA Leq during nighttime.

Project Components

Project components that may contribute to potential effects on noise include: • normal operation of the upgrader • construction and decommissioning of the upgrader

Effects Management

During construction and decommissioning: • where practical, noisy construction activity will be restricted to daytime hours of 07:00 to 20:00

on weekdays, and 09:00 to 20:00 on weekends • nearby residents will be notified of substantial noise-causing activities • noise mitigation measures installed on construction equipment (e.g., mufflers) will be kept in

good working condition • screening effects of barriers around construction equipment will be used where practical • construction equipment not in use will be turned off For road traffic: • construction traffic will be restricted to approved access routes to and from the site • where practical, vehicle-related traffic will be restricted to the hours of 07:00 to 22:00 • appropriate mufflers will be equipped on the vehicles where applicable • vehicles will be routinely maintained and serviced to ensure suitable operation • vehicle speed limits will be followed Building and equipment components will be designed, where applicable and practical, to attenuate sound levels. In the event a noise complaint is received: • a local survey will be done to determine if the upgrader is the cause • if the upgrader is identified as the cause, additional mitigation measures will be identified and,

where feasible, implemented to reduce the noise • TOTAL will collaborate with other industrial noise generators in the area to address noise

issues. Residual Effects Predicted sound levels by the upgrader during normal operation are below applicable PSLs at

nearby residences. The highest predicted sound level contribution by the upgrader is 32 dBA at one residence (Residence 3). This is 23 dB less than the daytime PSL of 55 dBA Leq(15) and 13 dB less than the 45 dBA Leq(9) nighttime PSL. Overall residual effects of the upgrader on local residents is predicted to be negligible with implementation of the design and mitigation measures.



Table 1.2-1 Environmental Impact Assessment Summary (cont’d) Light

Assessment Method

The light LSA extends 2 km from PDA. The RSA includes lands within a 5 km radius of the PDA. The estimation of illuminance and luminance levels at residential receptors was based on a practical approach using measured light levels from similar existing facilities. The distance from the upgrader to a given receptor was combined with measurements taken at the same distance from existing facilities to estimate upgrader light levels at that receptor. The light used at the upgrader was assumed to be similar to that used at other upgraders that are constructed and operating. As such, the luminance and illuminance measurements taken at other facilities were used for the upgrader.

Key Issues Key issues include: • light that escapes the site (known as light trespass) that is seen by property owners near the

upgrader (luminance) • light that is reflected from the upgrader at those nearby properties (illuminace)


Baseline illuminance measurements at selected residential receptors were all below the LEED criteria for rural residential areas (1.1 lux) and also below the lower limit of the light meter (0.63 lux). Luminance measurements at the selected residential receptors were typically below levels associated with an industrial facility at 2 km; the maximum of these measurements was below levels associated with car headlights at 1 km.

Project Components

Project components that may contribute to potential effects on light include: • building lighting • safety lighting • road lighting

Effects Management

Occupational health and safety standards require minimum lighting levels for facility operation and maintenance. With this priority met, mitigation measures may be implemented to reduce illuminance and luminance levels at receptor locations, including where possible: • reducing the amount of lighting in facility areas when not required • selecting light locations such that they light only required areas • using shielded/directional luminaries to reduce stray lighting • using spotlights on the ground that shine no higher than 45º above vertical and are located no

farther away than the structure height • lighting exterior signs from the top • using low-reflectance ground cover beneath outdoor lighting • installing vegetation or berms to block direct lines of sight

Residual Effects Illuminance: Current illuminance levels at selected receptors are below LEED criteria for rural residential areas and the measurable limit of the light meter. Illuminance levels decrease rapidly with distance from the light source and, as the selected receptors are typically beyond 500 m from the upgrader, they will not experience a measurable increase in illuminance levels. Luminance: The upgrader will increase the number of lights in the area (i.e., more bright spots in the distance) but luminance levels associated with these lights will typically not be different than baseline measurements. Maximum luminance estimates are typically a magnitude less than measurements from a full moon and are less than the high beams of a car at 1 km. Terrain and vegetation features are also expected to block direct views of the upgrader from many receptors. Receptors south of Highway 15 will experience their highest luminance values from the highway rather than the upgrader. Cumulative effects: Cumulative effects are expected to be minimal. Specifically, receptors are far enough from the upgrader and new or existing light sources that overlapping illuminance effects will not occur. As well, it is not possible to see both the upgrader and new or existing facilities at the same time so cumulative luminance effects will not occur. However, there will be an increase in the number of potential sources of light with development of this and other facilities. In summary, the upgrader will not cause a light effect of concern to local residents.



Table 1.2-1 Environmental Impact Assessment Summary (cont’d) Visibility

Assessment Method

A 20 km by 20 km study area centred on the upgrader was selected to evaluate the effects of the upgrader on visibility. Cooling tower condensation occurs under low temperature (i.e., winter), high relative humidity conditions. The cooling tower visible plumes can result in ground-level fog when the wind speeds are above 3 m/s (~10 km/h). The CALPUFF/CALMET model system was used to predict heights of visible plumes from upgrader combustion sources and from the cooling tower, and to predict the occurrence of fog due to the operation of the cooling tower on adjacent public roads. One year of meteorological data was evaluated to represent all seasons.

Key Issues Key issues include: • the sight by the public of plumes, especially in the winter • fogging along adjacent public roads, especially potential implications to driving safety in the

winter Environmental Setting

The Industrial Heartland includes a number of petroleum, petrochemical and chemical industries that are sources of air emissions. These emissions include water vapour from combustion sources and from cooling towers. The nearest major roadway to the upgrader is Highway 15, which is about 900 m southwest of the cooling tower.

Project Components

Project components that may contribute to potential effects on visibility include: • 21 conventional stacks venting the products of combustion • one 13-cell mechanical draft cooling tower About 61% of the upgrader water vapour emissions will be from the cooling tower, and the remaining 38% from the stacks. Upgrader facilities will be visible at offsite locations due: • presence of visible structures such as process vessels and stacks • small flames from flares due to pilot gas; and larger flames when flares are required for

upset/emergency service • condensation of water vapour in the combustion plumes released from the stacks • condensation of water vapour from the cooling tower emissions

Effects Management

Mitigation measures include: • increased combustion efficiencies and heat conservation to reduce water vapour emissions • installing warning signs along the highway advising motorists of possible reduced visibility

Residual Effects During the day, visible fog plume heights of 150 to 250 m are most frequent (~230 h during the winter). There is a potential for fog to occur due to cooling tower emissions, mostly in the winter, up to 28 hours per year along Range Road 220, 33 hours per year along Highway 15 and 16 hours per year along Range Road 214. These results are similar to results of other upgrader projects and less than natural fog events recorded at airports in the region.

Groundwater

Assessment Method

The groundwater LSA is the PDA. The RSA includes the area within a 3.2 km radius of the LSA. A field-verified survey of existing water wells was conducted in the LSA. Numerical modelling using USGS MODFLOW was used to analyze groundwater flows.

Key Issues Key issues include effects of: • dewatering activities during construction on local groundwater levels, flow regimes, surface

waterbody levels and vegetation • dewatering during construction on local groundwater users • leaks, surface spills and pond seepage on shallow groundwater quality and local groundwater

users



Table 1.2-1 Environmental Impact Assessment Summary (cont’d) Groundwater (cont’d)


The preglacial Beverly Channel is located to the east of the North Saskatchewan River, approximately follows the present alignment of the North Saskatchewan River, and trends southwest–northeast in the study area. The Beverly Channel has been partially infilled with sands and gravels of the Empress Formation, glacial till and lacustrine clay. The general geology in the LSA, from the ground surface down, consists of: topsoil (0.1 to 0.5 m thick), surficial sand unit (0.7 to 16.9 m thick), clay unit (0.3 to 12.4 m thick), clay till unit (5 to 20 m thick), preglacial sand unit (0.6 to 13.4 m thick), preglacial sand and gravel unit (3.3 to 9.7 m thick), and bedrock. The combined thickness of the low permeability clay and clay till unit ranges from a minimum of 5 m up to about 22 m. The clay and clay unit provide an effective barrier for the protection of the Beverly Channel aquifer. On a regional scale, groundwater flows toward, and discharges to, the North Saskatchewan River. On the east side of the river, regional groundwater flow is toward the preglacial sands and gravels of the Beverly Channel and eventually discharges to the river. In the surficial sand unit the general groundwater flow direction is eastward, toward Astotin Creek. Groundwater velocity is in the order of 1.5 m/a. In the Beverly Channel aquifer, groundwater flow is generally northwestward across the LSA with a velocity in the order of 70 m/a. Total dissolved solids range from 60 to 1210 mg/L in the surficial sand, from 650 to 4120 mg/L in the clay and clay till units, and from 860 to 2160 mg/L in the Beverly Channel aquifer.

Project Components

Project components that may contribute to potential effects on groundwater include: • dewatering during construction • spills and pond seepage during operations

Effects Management

The engineered mitigation measures and operational measures that will be implemented provide protection to groundwater. In the unlikely event that a spill or leak did reach the ground or subsurface, measures will be implemented to recover the spilled product, identify the extent of effects, and remediate the soil and groundwater to acceptable levels.

Residual Effects Dewatering: Effects of dewatering on the water table are predicted to extend up to 680 m, or less, from excavations. Dewatering effects beyond 680 m will be negligible. Between 360 m and 680 m, the dewatering effects are predicted to be of the same order of magnitude as the seasonal fluctuations in the water table levels (0.15 m to 1.24 m; median of 0.58 m); therefore these effects are negligible. Within 360 m or less from the excavations, the water table will be lowered by 0.60 to about 5 m for a short period of time, generally 5 to 17 weeks. No residual effects are expected from dewatering of groundwater. Once dewatering stops, groundwater levels will return to natural water levels in a time frame similar to the period of dewatering. It is not expected that localized, temporary dewatering will affect Astotin Creek or existing water wells completed in the surficial sand unit. Dewatering will have no effect on the Beverly Channel aquifer. Groundwater quality: No offsite effects on shallow groundwater quality are expected. Also, no effects are expected in the Beverly Channel groundwater quality because of the thick, low permeability clay and clay till units that separate the surficial sand unit from the Beverly Channel. In summary, no effects on existing groundwater users are predicted.



Table 1.2-1 Environmental Impact Assessment Summary (cont’d) Hydrology

Assessment Method

The LSA includes all land areas in the PDA, local watercourses east of the PDA that drain to Astotin Creek and the downstream reaches of Astotin and Beaverhill creeks, local watercourses west and northwest of the PDA that drain to the North Saskatchewan River and the reach of the North Saskatchewan River from the Sturgeon River to the Redwater River. The RSA includes additionally a longer reach of the North Saskatchewan River; from Devon to Pakan. Baseline data collection included collection and analysis of available data, including mapping, digital elevation data, and review of meteorological and hydrological monitoring records and water licenses. Ground truthing of flow patterns was also performed. Quantitative methods were based on regional hydrological analysis and changes to natural flow areas for assessment of North Saskatchewan River tributaries. The North Saskatchewan River assessment was based on frequency analysis of Environment Canada flow records and the stage-discharge rating curve for the North Saskatchewan River at Edmonton. Qualitative methods were applied to assessments to which objective judgments could be made, including erosion, sedimentation, navigability and instream flow needs.

Key Issues Key issues include potential effects on: • flow patterns due to land use changes • peak, mean and low flows, including volume, rate and timing, due to land use changes and

withdrawals for water supply (including consideration of low-flow conditions and instream flow needs)

• water levels, erosion and sedimentation • navigability of local and regional waterways


The upgrader is located in the tablelands of the North Saskatchewan River; runoff from the site flows to the river via local tributaries and the Astotin–Beaverhill Creek system. Upgrader lands have low relief, with overland slopes of approximately 1% and swale slopes of 0.25% or less. Lands consist of pasture and cultivated fields, with stands of shrubs and denser treed areas, and wetlands in local depressions. The upgrader is located on a local high and drains to natural watercourses via roadside ditches. The mean annual runoff depth from is estimated to be 20 mm. The North Saskatchewan River in the LSA has a mean annual discharge of 195 m3/s, with an estimated 100-year instantaneous discharge of 5050 m3/s and a 7Q10 low flow of 59.1 m3/s. Flows on the river are regulated by two upstream hydropower facilities, which reduce flood flows and increase low flows relative to the natural flow regime.

Project Components

Project components that may contribute to potential effects on hydrology include: • site development of all land area within the PDA • surficial aquifer dewatering during construction • domestic water supply and sanitary sewage disposal • process water withdrawal and wastewater release



Table 1.2-1 Environmental Impact Assessment Summary (cont’d) Hydrology (cont’d)

Effects Management

Mitigation measures include: • stormwater management and erosion and sediment control during construction • storage and evaporation of surficial aquifer dewatering water during construction • closed-circuiting of the PDA to manage stormwater releases, including stormwater

management during construction and operation • diversion of runoff from natural areas around the PDA to natural receiving watercourses • onsite stormwater management with separate process and non-process area stormwater

systems • stormwater release to the North Saskatchewan River rather than small, local receiving

waterbodies • use of existing municipal infrastructure for domestic water supply and sanitary sewage disposal • process water recycling to reduce process water demands • release of treated discharge water to reduce net water demand from the North Saskatchewan

River

Residual Effects Tributary flows: Changes to flow in Astotin and Beaverhill Creeks will occur due to closed-circuiting of the PDA. Baseline low flows at Astotin Creek and Beaverhill Creek are often nil, so only mean and flood flows were addressed. Reductions in flow at Astotin Creek due to the upgrader are estimated to be 0.43% of mean annual flow, 0.25% of 2-year maximum instantaneous flow and 0.29% of 100-year maximum instantaneous flow. Related effects on water levels and timing are also expected to be negligible. Reductions in flow at Beaverhill Creek due to the upgrader are estimated to be 0.20% of mean annual flow, 0.07% of 2-year maximum instantaneous flow and 0.04% of 100-year maximum instantaneous flow. Related effects on water levels and timing are also expected to be negligible. North Saskatchewan River flows: Reductions in flow at the North Saskatchewan River due to the upgrader are estimated to be 0.10% of the mean annual flow and 0.02% of the 2-year maximum instantaneous flow. The 7Q10 low flow is estimated to be reduced by 0.33%. These correspond to reductions in river water level of 1 mm during mean annual and 2-year maximum instantaneous flow, and 2 mm during 7Q10 low flow (2 mm under ice-covered conditions). Effects on the timing of flood and low flows are also expected to be minimal. In summary, effects of the upgrader on hydrology are negligible.

Surface Water Quality

Assessment Method

The LSA and RSA are the same as for hydrology. The LSA includes all land areas in the PDA, local watercourses east of the PDA that drain to Astotin Creek and the downstream reaches of Astotin and Beaverhill creeks, local watercourses west and northwest of the PDA that drain to the North Saskatchewan River and the reach of the North Saskatchewan River from the Sturgeon River to the Redwater River. The RSA includes additionally a longer reach of the North Saskatchewan River; from Devon to Pakan. Baseline conditions were characterized in the LSA and RSA using available historical data and results from an August 2007 baseline water quality survey. Issues with the potential to affect water quality in local tributaries were assessed qualitatively, taking into account proposed mitigation measures and the magnitude of project-relative flows relative to background flows. Potential effects of upgrader treated discharge water release to the North Saskatchewan River were assessed using three water quality models: WASP, CORMIX and a customized two-dimensional river model for the North Saskatchewan River. Application of these models followed the approach used for recent City of Edmonton loading limit studies. The potential for acidification of standing waters was evaluated by comparing lake-specific critical loads with the corresponding predicted acid inputs for 20 regional lakes. Eutrophication was assessed by quantifying changes in the molar nitrogen/phosphorus ratios for 20 lakes included in the acidification assessment.



Table 1.2-1 Environmental Impact Assessment Summary (cont’d) Surface Water Quality (cont’d)

Key Issues Key issues include: • increased sediment release due to land clearing, road construction and plant construction • changes in surface water quality from releases associated with construction dewatering

activities • changes in North Saskatchewan River water quality from release of treated process water • acidification of lakes and streams from air emissions • changes in the quality of runoff and sedimentation from the PDA • changes in surface water quality from spills


Water quality of the North Saskatchewan River is affected by several discharges upstream and downstream of the proposed upgrader site. A number of water quality parameters currently exceed chronic water quality guidelines for the protection of aquatic health, including several metals (e.g., aluminum, chromium and iron) and nutrients. Elevated nitrogen and phosphorus levels are typical downstream of municipal wastewater treatment outfalls. Water quality of the North Saskatchewan River varies seasonally, longitudinally and laterally. Astotin Creek water quality is different compared to the water quality of the North Saskatchewan River. Many water quality parameters were two or more times higher in Astotin Creek than in the North Saskatchewan River as determined from a 2007 survey. Organic compounds and metals had similar concentration ranges in both watercourses. Acid sensitivity of regional waterbodies is low due to high pH levels and subsequent high buffering capacity.

Project Components

Project components that may contribute to potential effects on surface water quality include: • land clearing, road construction, plant construction • plant site runoff • treated process water outfall • sources of air emissions

Effects Management

Mitigation measures during construction and decommissioning include: • erosion- and sediment-control measures • management of water from excavation dewatering • design, construction and best management practices related to protection of fish and fish

habitat Mitigation measures during operations include: • process water recycling throughout project operations to reduce the volume of water withdrawn

from the North Saskatchewan River and minimize substance loading to the river • constructing a stormwater system designed to collect all stormwater from the developed portion

of the facility outside the process area. Stormwater from this system will be directed to a lined stormwater retention pond and tested for compliance with Alberta Environment discharge standards before release

• constructing a collection system for potentially process-affected stormwater. Water from this system will be directed to an oily water pond, and treated and reused onsite

• incorporating design features and management practices to minimize spills and reduce the potential for spills to reach waterbodies, watercourses or groundwater according to TOTAL’s oil spill contingency plan



Table 1.2-1 Environmental Impact Assessment Summary (cont’d) Surface Water Quality (cont’d)

Residual Effects Sediment release, dewatering, runoff and spill effects: Changes associated with increased sediment release during construction, from dewatering, and from runoff and sedimentation from the PDA and spills will be negligible due to implementation of mitigation measures. The dewatering and runoff water will be tested for compliance with Alberta Environment discharge standards before release. These mitigation and management practices are well-established and have a high likelihood of success. Treated process water release: For the treated process water release, no additional guideline exceedances were predicted for the Application Case beyond those already identified in the Base Case, except for total phenolics. For those constituents that exceed guidelines under Base Case, the increase in Application Case concentration was less than 5% at the mixing zone boundary. Although concentration of predicted total phenolics at the mixing zone boundary was above the guideline value, the concentration was lower than chronic toxicity threshold values for aquatic organisms. Furthermore, the concentration of total phenolics is predicted to fall below the guideline downstream of the mixing zone. Changes in the dissolved oxygen regime are considered to be the most limiting adverse effect of nutrients and biological oxygen demand loading on aquatic life in the North Saskatchewan River. The changes in nutrient concentrations from Base to Application Case are unlikely to affect aquatic life because the predicted changes in dissolved oxygen concentrations are negligible. Air emissions: Deposition from project-related emissions will not result in any exceedances of critical loads or change in nutrient status for any of the 20 lakes included in the analysis. Predicted change in snowmelt pH is too small to result in a measurable change in episodic acidification in streams. Emissions of acidifying substances from the project are therefore predicted to have a negligible effect on water quality and aquatic life.

Aquatic Resources

Assessment Method

The LSA and RSA are the same as for surface water quality. The LSA includes all land areas in the PDA, local watercourses east of the PDA that drain to Astotin Creek and the downstream reaches of Astotin and Beaverhill creeks, local watercourses west and northwest of the PDA that drain to the North Saskatchewan River and the reach of the North Saskatchewan River from the Sturgeon River to the Redwater River. The RSA includes additionally a longer reach of the North Saskatchewan River; from Devon to Pakan. Historical information and field data were combined to provide a summary of aquatic resources. The aquatic resources considered fish species composition, relative abundance and distribution in local watercourses and the use of available habitats by resident fish species. Field studies also focused on the benthic invertebrate communities present. The sampling and information review included the presence of listed fish species (i.e., species listed by federal or provincial agencies as sensitive or at some level of risk) and other management or indicator fish species. Effects on aquatic resources were qualitative, based largely on information from the surface water quality and hydrology assessments. Impact of the project on fisheries (i.e., recreational angling) was also assessed.

Key Issues Key issues include: • changes in aquatic habitat in Astotin Creek • alteration or loss of fish and aquatic and riparian habitat caused by construction in the North

Saskatchewan River • fish mortality caused by fish entrainment at the river water intake and pump house • changes in tributary water levels and flow • increase in water demands on North Saskatchewan River flow and effects on aquatic

resources and habitat • effects of treated discharge water releases on North Saskatchewan River fish and fish habitat • effects on fish and fish health • effects of acidification and other air emissions on aquatic resources • effects on recreational resource use



Table 1.2-1 Environmental Impact Assessment Summary (cont’d) Aquatic Resources (cont’d)


The upgrader is located in the North Saskatchewan River tablelands on the south side of the river There is one small depression wetland within the PDA, however, no flowing watercourses were identified. Astotin Creek is east of the upgrader site and currently receives some surface runoff from the PDA. The northwest corner of the PDA is located approximately 1.3 km from the North Saskatchewan River. The North Saskatchewan River in the LSA is predominantly single-channelled and exhibits an irregular meander pattern. Instream habitat is characterized mainly by deep run habitat, with some small backwater pools and isolated riffle habitats. The river banks are dominated by armoured, depositional and erosional bank habitats.

Project Components

Project components that may contribute to potential effects on aquatic resources include: • water intake and outfall • acidifying emissions from stacks.

Effects Management

Project construction and operations best management practices will be implemented to prevent or minimize impacts. Where permanent loss of productive aquatic habitat is unavoidable, a conceptual habitat compensation plan has been prepared that provides an estimate of potential habitat affected and proposed compensation measures. These practices are dictated by federal and provincial legislation, which include the Federal Fisheries Act and the Provincial Water Act. A water licence will be required under the Water Act; conditions stipulated in the Code of Practice for Outfall Structures on Waterbodies will be applied. All surface runoff from the PDA will be conveyed to stormwater retention ponds. Water from these ponds will be tested for compliance with discharge standards before release. Any shallow groundwater encountered during construction will be dewatered and conveyed to either tanks or ponds. These waters will be tested for compliance with Alberta Environment discharge standards before release. In addition to these construction designs and practices, the use of Best Management Practices (BMPs) is planned. These BMPs are designed to prevent input of deleterious substances into Astotin Creek and the North Saskatchewan River during construction.

Residual Effects Direct habitat disturbance: Effects on aquatic habitats due to a new river water intake and associated outfall will depend on the footprint of the structure and timing of the construction activity. It is likely that a relatively small habitat area will be affected, perhaps less than 500 m2

each. Relative to the available habitat in the river, the magnitude of habitat losses is considered low. Fish entrainment: A river water intake could entrain small fish species or small life stages of fish and other aquatic organisms. Screening guidelines exist to reduce or eliminate fish entrainment at freshwater intakes. The guidelines consider the target size of fish, intake approach velocities and other variables. TOTAL will work with the responsible agencies to implement these guidelines and mitigate potential impacts. Treated process water release: Modelling results indicate that upgrader treated discharge water will not result in exceedances of chronic water quality guidelines for the protection of aquatic life for most parameters, except total phenolics. The predicted total phenolics concentration at the edge of the mixing zone is however below the concentration where chronic toxicity effects on aquatic organisms have been observed. Fish health: Water quality modelling indicates that although the mercury levels are higher than CCME Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life, upgrader treated discharge water will not increase the concentration of mercury in the North Saskatchewan River, and thus will not contribute to bioaccumulation of this metal in resident fish. Based on the predicted values for mercury and other parameters, the potential effects on fish health are considered low to negligible.Resource use: The upgrader is not expected to affect local or regional fishing activities. In summary, the environmental consequences of potential effects of the upgrader on aquatic resources are negligible or low.



Table 1.2-1 Environmental Impact Assessment Summary (cont’d) Terrain and Soils

Assessment Method

The LSA is the PDA. The RSA is based on air model output of the predicted extent of the PAI critical load for sensitive soils. Field study was used to identify soil profile and classification to the Series level of identification. Representative soil profiles were sampled and submitted for laboratory analysis to measure key physical and chemical characteristics of each mapped soil series. The final soil map was produced at a scale of 1:5000 from extrapolating data from 98 profile inspections in the LSA. A terrain map was produced from data collected at each soil inspection site and through mapping of surficial geologic characteristics. Analyses involved rating mapped soil series for soil suitability for agriculture and reclamation suitability. Post-reclamation soil delineations were presented visually on a map and rated for soil suitability for agriculture with the same criteria as before disturbance. These ratings were linked with soil handling plans documented in the Conservation and Reclamation (C&R) Plan (Volume 1, Section 6.5).

Key Issues Key issues include: • disturbance of soils in LSA • change in extent of sensitive soils exposed to acidifying emissions in RSA Potential for changes to soil properties in the RSA leading to deterioration in soil suitability for agriculture or soil suitability for reclamation are due to potential changes in: • soil quality, quantity and moisture content during construction • soil chemical properties from acidifying emissions produced during operations • soil quality and quantity from site reclamation activities during closure


The LSA is underlain by bedrock of upper Cretaceous age. Surficial geologic materials, in order of importance, are glaciofluvial, aeolian, glaciolacustrine and peat deposits. Soils developed on fine, moderately fine and moderately coarse-textured parent materials usually belong to the Black Chernozemic Great Group and have better quality topsoil. Soils developed on very coarse-textured material are classified as Black Chernozems, Dark Grey Chernozems or as a member of the Brunisolic Order. Topsoil quality is lower in the Brunisolic group than the Black Chernozem group. All soils with poor drainage belong to the Gleysolic Order, where quality is determined mainly by texture. Finer-textured Gleysolic soils are better quality than coarser textured. Although Organic soils (more than 40 cm of peat accumulation) are of low areal extent, salvage requirements mean that a substantial proportion of topsoil volume for the LSA is composed of peat. The most common soil series is the Mundare soil, a Black Chernozem formed on very coarse-textured aeolian or glaciofluvial material. Agricultural land suitability ranges from Class 2 (best) to Class 7 (worst). Median agricultural land capability class for the LSA is Class 4, with low water-holding capacity the most common limitation. Reclamation suitability of topsoils range from fair to poor, while subsoil materials usually rate as poor for reclamation suitability.

Project Components

Project components that may contribute to potential effects on soil include: • construction causing soil disturbance • effects of acidifying substances on soil chemical properties in the RSA • effects on soil properties during reclamation



Table 1.2-1 Environmental Impact Assessment Summary (cont’d) Terrain and Soils (cont’d)

Effects Management

Mitigation measures include: • an onsite inspector during topsoil salvage to ensure that salvage is done effectively • topsoil storage in piles that are stabilized and protected against wind and water erosion • prevention of erosion of sensitive soils through use of tackifiers, proper engineering of slopes

and rapid revegetation • deep tillage to reduce compacted subsoils • during closure and reclamation, implementation of a number of measures described in the C&R

plan, including return of topsoil to subsoils that have been decompacted and treated for contamination

In the Conservation & Reclamation Plan, TOTAL proposes the potential of spreading higher quality, salvaged topsoil on adjacent lands, where the application of such topsoil could improve the agricultural capability of the recipient soils. This represents an agricultural use for the soil, rather than simply stockpiling the material on lands zoned for industrial activity that have a limited probability of being returned to agricultural land uses.

Residual Effects Construction effects on soil quality and quantity: During construction, there is potential for change to soil quality and quantity, as assessed by agricultural suitability and reclamation suitability indices. However, topsoil salvage and stockpiling will ensure that soil quality does not deteriorate in comparison to baseline. Erosion prevention on stockpiled soil will also ensure that topsoil does not deteriorate. Residual effect therefore is of low environmental consequence. Air emissions: During operations, there is potential for a residual effect on soil through chemical changes caused by acidifying substances produced by upgrader emissions. Modelling shows that the Application Case results in a 26% increase in the area of acid sensitive soil that fall within PAI threshold isopleths of 0.25, 0.5, and 1 Keq H+/ha/a. The Planned Development Case results in a 166% increase in the area of acid-sensitive soil that falls within these isopleths, relative to baseline. Environmental consequence of the upgrader air emissions on soils is low for agricultural land, but moderate for non-agricultural lands. Site reclamation: The closure stage of the upgrader has the potential to result in changes in soil quality and quantity resulting from site reclamation, which could be measured in terms of soil suitability for agriculture. Reclamation activities are expected to result in an increase in area of soils with agricultural suitability Class 2 and Class 3, and a decrease in area of soils with agricultural suitability Class 4 to Class 7. Area of Class 2 soil is predicted to increase by three times, while area of Class 3 soils should increase by 50 times over baseline. The major reason for the expected improvement is that the coarse-textured topsoils salvaged from the LSA will be amended with finer-textured mineral topsoil and peat salvaged from the areas of organic soil. These amendments act principally to increase water-holding capacity of these drought-prone soil horizons. In summary, physical disturbance of the soil results in observable effects but of low environmental consequence.



Table 1.2-1 Environmental Impact Assessment Summary (cont’d) Vegetation

Assessment Method

The vegetation LSA includes the PDA and a buffer along the south of the PDA that includes wetlands directly adjacent to the PDA. The RSA is the 100 km by 100 km area air model domain centred on the PDA. Project effects during construction include direct effects related to clearing of existing vegetation communities and associated species, and potential indirect effects on wetlands from changes in surface water catchments, siltation and temporary pumping of surficial aquifers. In addition, the potential for persistent weed species establishment in and next to disturbed areas was assessed during construction, operations and closure. Potential effects of air emissions on native and economic vegetation were examined for project operations. Vegetation surveys provided an inventory of vegetation resources in the LSA. The objectives of vegetation surveys were to map the spatial distribution of vegetation types in the LSA and identify species present in each vegetation type. Particular attention was paid to the identification of rare ecological communities and species. For each project effect on vegetation, suitable mitigation measures were identified. The environmental assessment focused on effects of the upgrader (after mitigation) on vegetation community and species diversity and on the areal extent affected by air emissions. Cumulative effects were also assessed where the upgrader was identified as potentially contributing to cumulative effects.

Key Issues Key issues include: • loss of native vegetation community and species diversity from clearing during construction • indirect effects on offsite wetlands from changes in surface water catchments, siltation and

temporary pumping of surficial aquifers during construction • potential to promote establishment of persistent weeds in and next to areas disturbed during

construction, operations and closure • upgrader contributions to air emissions that could affect native and crop species’ health, crop

yields and native species diversity during operations


The proposed upgrader site is located in the Central Parkland Subregion of the Parkland Natural Region of Alberta. A large portion of the Central Parkland Subregion, and in particular the Fort Saskatchewan area, has been converted to agricultural, residential and industrial use. The PDA is characterized by existing industrial and agricultural lands, with pockets of wetland, grassland and forested vegetation communities. The LSA consists of native uplands (22%), wetlands (12%), agricultural lands (64%) and industrial lands (4%). Native vegetation is relatively restricted in the RSA with most of the land base cleared of native vegetation for agriculture, industry and transportation. Remaining areas of native vegetation tend to be restricted to riparian areas and river valleys, dune landforms, wetlands including peatlands and moraines not suitable for tilling, or in protected areas.

Project Components

Project components that may contribute to potential effects on vegetation include: • clearing of existing vegetation • surface grading and excavation that could change surface water catchments due to temporary

pumping of surficial aquifers • exposure of soils through site preparation and movement of equipment that could result in

siltation of adjacent wetlands and promote the establishment of persistent weeds in and next to disturbed areas

• upgrader contributions to sulphur and nitrogen based regional emissions that have the potential to affect native plant species’ health and diversity and health and yields of crops



Table 1.2-1 Environmental Impact Assessment Summary (cont’d) Vegetation (cont’d)

Effects Management

As the PDA is on lands already modified by land use activities, the potential effects of project construction on native vegetation diversity will be minimal. Mitigation measures to further reduce effects include: • compensating for effects on wetlands in accordance with provincial wetland compensation

guidelines • installing and maintaining siltation fences as appropriate to prevent siltation effects on adjacent

offsite wetlands • transplanting rare plants located in the PDA to regional protected areas (e.g., Redwater Natural

Area) pending regulator approval • implementing a weed management program during construction, operations and

decommissioning • selecting areas of the PDA for native vegetation re-establishment at closure

Residual Effects Plant communities: Because all native plant communities identified in the LSA are common, effects of the upgrader on vegetation community diversity and rarity have a low environmental consequence at the regional scale. All species documented in the LSA are considered common except for two rare species. Upgrader effects on species diversity and rarity are considered to have a moderate environmental consequence at the regional scale. Although rare species located in the LSA will be affected by construction, other known occurrences of these species will persist in the RSA for the planned development case. Wetland communities: Indirect effects on wetland communities were not anticipated from changes in surface water drainage though effects were predicted within 380 m of drawdown. As predicted effects would occur at most over one season, effects were considered short term and reversible. Residual effects from siltation will be of low consequence as siltation fencing is an effective mitigation strategy. As a result, indirect effects on wetland communities are predicted to have a low environmental consequence. Weed introduction: Residual project-related weed introductions are not expected to jeopardize native species or community diversity or agricultural crops in the area. Effects of the upgrader from weed species introductions and spread are predicted to have negligible to low environmental consequence. Air emissions: Upgrader contributions to air emissions, specifically SO2, NO2 and N-deposition have the potential to affect native plant species’ health and diversity as well as the health and yield of crops. Because of their sensitivity to emissions, landforms that support diverse lichen and bryophyte communities (i.e., dune landforms and peatlands) were used as indicators to assess potential cumulative effects from air emissions in the region on native vegetation. Human-modified landforms from regional government inventories were used as a proxy for crops. The assessment noted that: • Project and cumulative effects from SO2 and NO2 concentrations were predicted to affect

sensitive landforms. As a result, sensitive species will likely be affected, but as potential habitat remains, species will persist at the RSA level. As a result, predicted effects from SO2 and NO2 concentrations on native vegetation are considered to be of moderate environmental consequence.

• No sensitive landforms were predicted to be affected by nitrogen deposition. Consequently, upgrader contributions to N-deposition are not expected to have measurable effects on indicator landforms. As a result, predicted effects from nitrogen deposition are considered to be negligible and there is no regional environmental consequence.

• No areas of human-modified landforms fall inside the critical SO2 concentration level. As a result, predicted effects from SO2 concentrations on crops are considered to be negligible and there is no regional environmental consequence.

• For NO2 a small increase in human-modified landforms occurs inside the defined NO2 critical level for both the Application Case (<1%) and Planned Development Case (2%) compared with the Base Case. As a result, predicted effects on crops from NO2 concentrations are considered to be of low environmental consequence.



Table 1.2-1 Environmental Impact Assessment Summary (cont’d) Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat

Assessment Method

The LSA consists of the PDA, a 500-m buffer of adjacent land up to the edge of the highway and a small section of land adjacent to the highway that connects the edges of the buffer. The RSA is located within the boundaries of the Strathcona County portion of Alberta’s Industrial Heartland. A review was made of existing wildlife information and baseline wildlife field surveys (amphibians, birds and mammals) within representative habitats. Multiple databases were queried for potential occurrence of various wildlife species in the region of the upgrader; and, previous EIAs in the region and published literature were reviewed. Baseline field surveys were done to determine wildlife species presence, abundance and diversity in the LSA and included: • snowtracking survey • nocturnal owl call-playback survey • breeding bird survey • waterfowl survey • amphibian call survey A combination of individual species that represent the habitat requirements of several other species, as well as special status species, was selected for detailed assessment in which habitat availability was modelled. Assessments of baseline habitat availability or potential environmental impacts for the selected species could then be extended to other species within the same guild.

Key Issues Key issues include: • reduction of critical habitat, habitat availability, and habitat quality • loss of biodiversity • increased habitat fragmentation and interference with regional wildlife movement patterns for

indicator species


The region is characterized by a landscape dominated by cultivated land and, as a result, wildlife typical of the region are characteristic of a human-modified landscape.

Project Components

Project components that may contribute to potential effects on wildlife include: • clearing existing vegetation, surface grading and excavation during site preparation • ongoing operations that could reduce adjacent habitat quality through sensory disturbance

from noise and light. Loss of habitat availability and quality will alter the distribution and abundance of certain species in the local and regional study area. This could lead to localized reductions in biodiversity.

• potential barriers to wildlife movement through the area because of removal of native vegetation during development, and ongoing operational activities

Effects Management

As the PDA is already extensively modified by current land uses (including agriculture), and the upgrader would be built within the majority of the PDA area, there is limited opportunity to avoid better quality wildlife habitat within those boundaries. In compliance with the Migratory Birds Convention Act, no disturbance to nests or nesting birds is allowed during breeding and nesting periods. Therefore, construction activities, particularly site clearing, will be planned to avoid the critical wildlife nesting period. This nesting period typically begins April 30 and ends July 15, when most young are mobile. However as the SARA listed Sprague’s pipit was recorded flying in the LSA, a clearing restriction from April 15 to July 15 on both wooded and pasture habitats is applicable. If it is deemed necessary to start construction during the breeding season, wildlife site inspections (e.g., nest searches) will be completed by qualified experts to ensure construction activities will not disturb breeding wildlife in the area. This mitigation will also ensure that the federally listed Sprague’s pipit’s potentially breeding in the LSA will not be harmed by construction activities. To reduce the level of direct effects from clearing of wetland vegetation and associated wildlife habitat, a wetland compensation program will be developed in consultation with Alberta Environment following the Provincial Wetland Restoration/Compensation Guide.



Table 1.2-1 Environmental Impact Assessment Summary (cont’d) Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat (cont’d)

Residual Effects The residual effects of reduction of critical habitat, habitat availability, habitat quality and of loss of biodiversity are of low environmental consequence. The residual effects of increased habitat fragmentation and interference with regional wildlife movement patterns for indicator species for project residual and cumulative effects are of low environmental consequence.

Human Health Assessment

Assessment Method

The LSA is an area within a 7.5-km radius of the PDA. The RSA consists of a 50 km by 50 km area centred on the PDA. The human health risk assessment considered the acute (short-term) and chronic (long-term) health risks associated with the upgrader using a conventional approach developed in part by Health Canada and the United States Environmental Protection Agency. In the past, this approach has been endorsed by provincial regulatory agencies, including Alberta Health and Wellness, Alberta Environment and the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board. Chemicals of Potential Concern to human health (COPCs) identified by other disciplines (e.g. air quality) as being relevant to the upgrader were evaluated within a quantitative human health risk assessment (HHRA). Relevant exposure pathways were identified, and conservative estimates of human exposure to the COPCs via inhalation and multi-media pathways were determined. These estimated exposures were compared to the most scientifically defensible health-based exposure limits. Potential health risks were expressed as either risk quotients (RQs) for non-carcinogenic effects, lifetime cancer risks (LCRs) or incremental lifetime cancer risks (ILCRs) for carcinogenic effects. An assessment of the potential additive effects of COPCs with common health-related endpoints was also completed. The assessment also considered the potential for nuisance odours from the upgrader’s emissions in combination with existing or approved and planned developments in the region. As part of the odour assessment, predicted short-term air concentrations were compared against established odour thresholds. The HHRA and odour assessment were designed to address concerns of the local stakeholders and provincial authorities regarding the protection of public health. The HHRA considered both acute and chronic health risks associated with the upgrader in combination with existing and approved developments in the region, as well as with planned or proposed developments. Similarly, the odour assessment considered odour effects associated with the upgrader in combination with existing and approved developments in the region, as well as with planned or proposed developments, but only on an acute basis.

Key Issues Key issues include effects on humans due to potential changes in: • ambient air concentrations • food quality • soil quality • surface water and groundwater quality • offsite odours


Baseline conditions were assessed, in part, through sampling and analyses of soil and vegetation in the LSA. COPCs were less than the analytical detection limits in soils and vegetation in all cases. In addition to the baseline sampling program, the status of public health in Sturgeon County and Strathcona County was reviewed and discussed. For the most part, indicators of overall health in the region were found to be similar to those reported in other regions in Alberta.

Project Components

Project components that could contribute to potential effects on human health include: • process (e.g., stacks and tanks) emissions to atmosphere • process or runoff releases of water

Effects Management

In addition to measures for air quality, TOTAL intends to implement a formal process in which odour complaints will be promptly investigated and appropriate remedial action taken. Air and water quality monitoring, as discussed in other discipline sections, will assist in addressing human health concerns through detection and subsequent response to COPC releases.



Table 1.2-1 Environmental Impact Assessment Summary (cont’d) Human Health Assessment (cont’d)

Residual Effects Acute health risks: Generally, the TOTAL upgrader’s contribution to acute health risks was negligible, as shown by the similarities in risks between the Base Case and Application Case. Short-term exceedances are predicted for acrolein, formaldehyde, PM2.5, SO2, respiratory irritants, nasal irritants and eye irritants for the assessment cases. The exceedances for the eye irritants were primarily due to acrolein while the exceedances for the respiratory irritants were due to SO2 and to a lesser extent, NO2 and H2S. Chronic health risks: Generally, the TOTAL upgrader’s contribution to chronic health risks was negligible, as shown by the similarities in risks between the Base Case and Application Case. All incremental lifetime cancer risks associated with the TOTAL upgrader’s emissions are within acceptable levels, as defined by Alberta Environment and Health Canada. None of the exposure estimates for the multiple exposure pathway assessment exceeded their health-based exposure limits. Odour: Overall, most individuals located in the TOTAL upgrader area are not expected to detect any odours associated with upgrader emissions. Sensitive individuals might detect nuisance odours near the TOTAL upgrader. In summary, emissions from baseline and future sources were predicted to result in potentially elevated health risks for a number of individual chemicals and mixtures of chemicals. However, due to the conservative nature of the HHRA, predicted risk estimates are not expected to result in human health effects in the region.

Land Use

Assessment Method

The LSA is the PDA. The RSA is the Strathcona County portion of the Alberta Industrial Heartland. Baseline investigations obtained a description and understanding of existing land and resource use conditions. Key information sources for collecting land use baseline data include: • existing literature, such as area structure plans (ASPs) and municipal development plans

(MDPs) • EIAs prepared for other projects in the Industrial Heartland region • government databases, such as Land Status Automated System (LSAS) and digital data • websites for government and nongovernment agencies and organizations, such as Alberta

Economic Development, Strathcona County, the City of Fort Saskatchewan, and the Northeast Capital Industrial Association

• TOTAL technical specialists’ observations of the site when conducting field studies Baseline data and descriptions were then evaluated against expected changes in the nature, location and duration of land uses as a result of development of the upgrader to assess potential effects of development on land use.

Key Issues Key issues include: • compliance with local and regional land use management • change in residential land use • change in agricultural land use • change in recreational land use • changes in or conflicts with industrial land use • changes in natural land use


The upgrader is located in portions of three sections in Township 55 Range 21-W4M, 4 km northeast of Fort Saskatchewan, Alberta. These lands are in the Central Parkland Natural Subregion of the Parkland Natural Region of Alberta within the boundaries of Alberta’s Industrial Heartland in the north-western portion of Strathcona County. The nearest urban centre is Fort Saskatchewan, Alberta; the northeast corner of the Fort Saskatchewan boundary adjoins the western boundary of the PDA. These lands are currently designated for heavy industrial and agricultural land use, with a small portion designated as medium industrial.



Table 1.2-1 Environmental Impact Assessment Summary (cont’d) Land Use (cont’d)

Project Components

Project components that may contribute to potential effects on land use include: • project construction (e.g., clearing, excavation) • emission effects and sensory disturbance (light, noise, odour)

Effects Management

Design and mitigation measures to limit project impacts on land use include: • application of appropriate separation distances, screens and buffers (e.g., setback from river,

retention of buffer zone and vegetation) between development and surrounding land uses • conformance to applicable municipal, provincial and federal safety, risk and environmental

assessment requirements and policies in any subsequent health, safety and emergency response plans

• consultation with Strathcona County regarding any rezoning requirements for Agricultural: General lands or special conditions of approval pertaining to the Conservation Policy Area (if necessary)

• implementation of commitments in the Conservation and Reclamation Plan, as required

Residual Effects Residual effects on residential, agricultural, recreational, industrial and natural land use will be of low environmental consequence. TOTAL will adhere to the objectives, policies, development regulations and performance criteria contained in the local and regional land use and development planning documents. In summary, there will be no or negligible effects from the upgrader on local and regional land use management.

Historical Resources

Assessment Method

The LSA is the PDA. The RSA includes Townships 55 to 59 and Ranges 17 to 23 W4M. An Historical Resources Overview (HRO) and Historical Resources Impact Assessment (HRIA) was completed (Permit 07-038) for the PDA.

Key Issues Key issues include removal of site content and therefore change to site context of historic resources.


Five previously recorded sites were identified in the PDA.

Project Components

Project components that may contribute to potential effects on historical resources include clearing of PDA lands.

Effects Management

Stage 1 mitigation studies are required for one site (FkPg 150). A 10 m2 controlled excavation will be made and results reviewed by Alberta Tourism, Parks, Recreation and Culture to determine further mitigation requirements, if any.

Residual Effects No residual effects are predicted following implementation of mitigation.

volume 1: appendix a eia summary report - alberta · appendix a: eia summary report december 2007...

Documents