CAMECO CORPORATION B-ZONE WASTE ROCK PILE UTILIZATION OF WETLANDS FOR REMOVAL OF ARSENIC AND NICKEL July, 1998 SUMMARY In planning the activities for decommissiong the B-zone waste rock pile, research on the use of the wetlands in the vicinity as natural treatment systems for toe seepages was also undertaken. The 1996 final report, "Decommissioning of the B-Zone waste rock pile", summarized the information generated on the waste rock characteristics: hydrology, geochemistry, contaminant generation and removal rates. This work made clear that the B-zone waste rock pile and the surrounding wetlands lend themselves to a self-sustaining decommissiong approach. The mechanisms that remove As and Ni from toe seepage water to sediments in the muskeg ponds were identified by work in both the field and the laboratory. The contaminants are adsorbed in the water columns to particulate matter, and in the deeper portions of the sediment, microbial activity stabilizes them. When design criteria for the use of the wetlands were defined, it became clear that sufficient space is available and that the proposed mechanism of contaminant removal is already taking place naturally. It is possible that the occasional input of organic matter would further stimulate microbial activity. The proposal to use the muskeg as a self-sustaining system was challenged by work carried out in 1997. If contaminant removal and biomineralisation occur naturally, then evidence of these processes should be found in the conditions of the wetlands themselves. Periodically, some muskeg areas receive run-off and seepage from the orelwaste rock pile, and dust material transported aerially would likely accumulate in the vicinity of the piles. In order to provide this evidence, data on the chemicallphysical characteristics of pond sediments and muskeg vegetation were analysed empirically. The solid-sample collection accumulated since 1992 was supplemented with samples of sediments and muskeg vegetation submitted for chemical analysis in 1997. This data interpretation lead to the following conclusions: CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 e o o j u m II..L"E* LI"I,sD I Comparison of the distribution of As and Ni, on a kglha basis, in the vicinity of the B-Zone waste rock pile in muskeg pond sediment and water confirmed that pond sediments are the most effective accumulators of contaminants. The total mass of As and Ni that accumulated in the sediment was higher for muskeg areas receiving periodic contaminated seepage than in hydrologically- isolated muskeg areas. Although mining activity increases the extent of aerial transport of contaminants, the concentration ranges that were determined fall within those reported in the literature for mineralized areas. The differences in the ratios of As and Ni in waste rock samples to those in pond sediment suggests that biomineralisation has altered the form of the contaminants in the latter. Concentrations of As and Ni are higher in surface strata (25 cm) than in the deeper strata, suggesting aerial transport and deposition. Quantiication of the physical characteristics of the solid material served to reinforce the inference that microbial activity takes place. The findings of experimental field and laboratory work were consistent, in that both determined that As and Ni are adsorbed to organics and particulates in the water column and then transported to the sediment. Nickel is transformed into nickel sulphides and carbonates, while arsenic is associated with iron. The contaminant removal processes require the presence of pond sediments, which are limited on the lvison Bay side. Shallow ground water characteristics in the vicinity of the waste rock pile were described, with particular emphasis on the migration of contaminants towards lvison Bay. Monitoring data on toe seepages CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 I I from the waste rock pile have been summarized to facilitate the estimation of contaminant loadings from the pile for decommissioning. A further objective of the 1997 work was to determine whether the contaminants are indeed retained in the rnuskeglponded sediments, rather than being redissolved by run-off events if a diffusion gradient occurs between sediment pore water and pond water. This question was addressed by quantifying the easily extractable As and Ni from solid samples with distilled water. . The easily exchangeable fraction of the contaminants is not related to the total concentrations of As and Ni in the solid material indicating that, in the sediments, the contaminants do not accumulate by adsorption alone. They are present in solid forms more resistant to leaching than easily exchangeable forms. Solid material with low concentrations release higher fractions of contaminants. Therefore, As or Ni total concentration gradients between the sediment and overlying water phases will not result in contaminant re-release from the sediment. A final objective of the work carried out in 1997 was to explore the level of stability with which secondary precipitates and evaporates, which form in association with the waste rock, release contaminants. . It was determined that precipitates/evaporates release more contaminants than waste rock, but leachability is affected by the ratio of water to solids and the contaminant type. CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utiliiation ofwetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 Eoojum IS.lt."D* LIu,TIn iii TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2.0 METHODS AND MATERIALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.1 Sample Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.2 Field sampling methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.3 Laboratory Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 2.3.1 Sample Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 2.3.2 Sample preparation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.3.3 Moisture Content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.3.4 Wet Density Determination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.3.5 Distilled Water Extraction of Arsenic and Nickel . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.3.6 Batch leaching of precipitateslevaporates on waste rock pile . . 11 2.4 Calculations of the Mass of As, Ni, Fe, S and LOI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 2.5 Estimation of Easily Exchangeable As and Ni in Muskeg and WetlandSolids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2.6 Shallow Piezometer sampling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.7 Surface Waters Southeast of the WRP Toward lvison Bay . . . . . . . . . . 15 3.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 3.1 Easily Exchangeable As and Ni in Muskeg and Sediments . . . . . . . . . 27 3.2 As and Ni Migration in the Muskeg Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 3.3 35 3.4 As and Ni in Shallow Groundwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 3.5 As and Ni Migration in BT-3 and BT-4 Surface Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Contaminants Sources Precipitates and Evaporates on Waste rock Surfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 4.0 CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July. 1998 iv Table 1: Table 2: Table 3: Table 4: Table 5: Table 6: Table 7a: Table 7b: Table 8: Table 9: LIST OF TABLES Solids Sampling Locations, 1992, 1993 and 1997 Muskegand Wetlands B-Zone . _ . . . _ . . _ _ . . . . . _ . . _ . . _ , . . . . . . . , 5 Qualitative Description and Chemistry for Waste Rock Pile Solids , . . . 12 Comparison of Total As and Ni Concentrations in Sediment and Muskeg. Samples Collected in Similar Locations in Different Years . . 18 Arsenic, Nickel, Iron, Sulphur and L.O.I. Mass in BT-I, BT-2, BT-3, BT-4 and Lake 1 Muskeg, Sediments and Pond Water. . . . . . . . 21 Comparison of [As] and [Nil for Extracts and Excess Pore Water. . . . . 28 Comparison of As with Ni . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 As Concentration Intervals and Sample Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Ni Concentration Intervals and Sample Description . . . . , . . . . . . , . . . 33 Comparison of Pairs of Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . , . . . . . . 34 Percentage of Extracted-NilAs from Waste Rock Pile . , , . . . . . . . , . . . 44 CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization ofwetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 V LISTS OF FIGURES Figure l a : Comparison of As Concentration with Depth (SP1,2,3,4,5, LOCI) . . . . 19 Figure 1b: Comparison of As Concentration with Depth (SP7,8,9,Stn 300, Lakel) 19 Figure 2a: Comparison of As Concentration with Depth (SPI ,2,3,4,5, LOCI) . . . . 20 Figure 2b: Comparison of As Concentration with Depth (SP7,8,9,Stn300, Lakel ) 20 Figure 3: Comparison of % L.O.I. with TOC B-Zone Wetland Substrates and B-Zone Pit Sediments . . . . , . . . . . . . 25 Figure 4a: Distribution of Arsenic . . . . . . . , . . . , . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . 26 Figure 4b: Distribution of Nickel . . , . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . 26 Figure 4c: Distribution of Iron . . . . . , . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . 26 Figure 4d: Distribution of Sulphur . . . . . , , . , , , , , . , , , , . . . . , , , , , . . , . . . . . . . . 26 Figure 5a: B-Zone Vicinity Wetland Substrates, 1992-1 993. Total Arsenic vs Easily Exchangeable Arsenic . 29 Figure 5b: B-Zone Vicinity Wetland Substrates, 1992-1 993. Total Nickel vs Easily Exchangeable Nickel . . . . , , , . , . , . . , , , . , . . . 29 Figure 6a: Run-off Southeast of WRP: 1991 -1 997 As Concentrations in Surface Waters , . , . . . , . . . . . . . , . . . . . . , , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utiiization of Wetiands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 e o o j u m "ss%.ns* LIw".rj vi Figure 6b: Run-off Southeast of WRP: 1991-1997 Ni Concentrations in Surface Waters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Figure 7a: B-Zone Wetland Shallow Piezometers SP-6, 7 and 8. Dissolved Arsenic and Nickel Concentrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Figure 7b: B-Zone Wetland Shallow Piezometers SP-1, 3, 4 and 5. Dissolved Arsenic and Nickel Concentrations . . . . . . . . LIST OF MAPS Map 1: B-Zone Sediment and Muskeg Profile Sampling Stations, 1992-97 Map 2: Direction of Assumed Surface Water Flows in B-Zone Wetlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 40 40 6 36 LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 : Raw Data Summary APPENDIX 2: Data Analysis APPENDIX 3: Total Water Soluble Quantity APPENDIX 4: Wetlands for Treatment of Arsenic and Nickel: A Decommissioning Approach for Waste Rock Pile Seepage CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 vii 1.0 INTRODUCTION With the completion of the B-Zone waste rock pile in 1991, field and laboratory investigations were initiated in 1992 to evaluate whether the existing wetlands surrounding the pile could be used effectively in the decommissioning process. The wetlands and their ponds could, potentially, serve as natural retention areas for the contaminants in toe seepages from the waste rock pile. The major contaminants in the seepages are arsenic and nickel, whose entrance into the surrounding environment will not be entirely eliminated through re-contouring of the waste rock pile surface. A primary aim of decommissioning the 6-Zone waste rock pile is to develop an environmentally sustainable system, one which ideally contains the option of a zero- maintenance solution. In such a scenario, retaining structures for seepage collection is undesirable, since ditches require continued maintenance. Afinal decommissioning design which allows the un-contained flow of residual seepages into the surrounding wetlands would represent a desirable amendment to the decommissioning scenario. The use of wetlands as contaminant removal systems, although widely discussed, is frequently poorly applied when put into practice. The most important component of a wetlands' ability to facilitate contaminant removal, lies in the capacity of its sediment to support the microbial activity which lead to biomineralization, rendering metals to stable non-toxic forms. The sediment component of the wetland design is often ignored, which results in the failure of the wetlands to perform their desired function. The capacity of wetlands to serve as permanent sinks for contaminants is of the utmost importance when wetlands are incorporated into the design of a decommissioning process. In the case of the muskeg and wetland areas surrounding the B-Zone waste rock pile, however, biomineralization processes in the sediments have been defined in detail. The characteristics of the wetlands in the B-Zone area, specifically the sediments in the ponds and their ability to serve as contaminant removal systems, were summarized in the 1996 report entitled "Collins Bay Decommissioning B-Zone Waste Rock Pile: 1996 Final CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 (Boojum .1.11m* Llllrr* 1 Report". The evaluation of these characteristics represented five years of laboratory and field work. The mechanisms responsible fortransferring contaminantsfrom the waterto the sediments appear to be similar for both Ni and As. The contaminants are adsorbed to particulate matter - a combination of organic matter generated by biological activity, iron hydroxides and inorganic suspended matter. The processes which lead to biomineralization in the sediment, however, are different forthetwocontaminants. Laboratory reactor experiments carried out with pond sediment and seepage from the collection ditch, indicate that nickel in the sediment is associated with carbonates and sulphides, whereas arsenic is associated with both the organic matter and iron hydroxide phases of the sediments. In the wetland ponds (near BT-2 Stn 250), enclosures were charged with seepage from the collection ditches several times over a period of four years. As and Ni were removed to the sediments in the enclosures at rates (As, 0.076 g d ' d ' : Ni, 0.078 gm2.d") similar to those recorded in the laboratory reactors (As, 0.10 gw'd ' : Ni, 0.1 g.m-*.d-'). Several publications have summarized the details of these experiments. The publications are included in the Appendices of the 1996 final report and in Appendix 4 of the current report. Contaminant loads from the seepages of the waste rock pile were estimated from the pumping records of the seepage collection ditch (Stations 6.11 and 6.11 SE), taking hydrological considerations into account. The expected contaminant load from the toe seepages of the waste rock pile are such, that the removal capacities of As and Ni of the sediment can balance the input from the waste rock pile. Sufficient pond sediment area is available to provide the desired contaminant sink. When the decommissioning approach is considering healthy growing muskeg as part of its design component, the long term stability of the contaminants in the sediments is assured due to the biomineralization processes , which immobilize both As and Ni in the sediments. Due to the physical conditions of the roads adjacent to the ore stockpile and the waste rock pile, some seepage and run-off from the waste rock pile does enter the BT-2 area (" Boojum .... "<" CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 2 periodically. This provided an opportunity to assess the field conditions through a sampling program of wetland sediments and determine if the characteristics of the samples reflect the results obtained from the field and laboratory experiments. Through evaluating the surface areas of both muskeg and sediments in the wetland ponds it should be possible to empirically infer the proposed contaminant removal processes for the wetlands. A primary objective of the 1997 work was to estimate the existing mass of iron, sulphate and organic carbon - the three major compounds involved in the removal processes. These compounds should be present in abundant quantities, since they are the components of the sediment which enable it to function as a permanent sink for As and Ni. Since it is proposed that these removal processes should occur naturally, they should operate without amendments, such as the organic carbon additions made to the field enclosures, even though higher removal rates would be anticipated with sediment amendment. As expected, the control enclosure (with no amendment) demonstrated moderate contaminant removal, with rates somewhat lower than if they had been amended. In addition tosubstantiating the natural contaminant removal capacityofsediments, a base loading of contaminant for the area surrounding the B-Zone waste rock pile will be established through estimates of the mass of As and Ni in the areas surrounding the waste rock pile. CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 3 2.0 METHODS AND MATERIALS 2.1 Sample Summary The B-Zone waste rock pile (WRP) was constructed between 1984 and 1991. The first samples of sediments from the ponds and muskeg were collected in the following year, i.e., in June of 1992. Muskeg material consists of several components. The uppermost vegetation cover is that which is growing, partly submerged in water. Below this layer, generally a layer of decaying vegetation is found. Due to the nature of the muskeg this layer is consisting of recalcitrant (hardly decaying woody, leathery vegetation parts) vegetation components. Below this layer a peaty layer forms, which depending on the topography converts very slowly to gyttja or ' loonshit'. In Table 1, an overview is given of all the sampling episodes, the results of which are used in this report to assess the wetlands and its ponds. The locations of the samples are shown in Map 1. In red letters, the areas represented by the sample type are given referred to on page 14 of this report for loading calculations. Pond sediment (3 locations) and peripheral muskeg (2 locations) samples were collected and described as part of the initial survey of the B-Zone WRP wetlands, and were presented in the 1992 B-Zone Final Report, Boojum Research Limited. Sequential extractions on sediments from the enclosures, where 6.1 1 seepage water was added, to determine the fate of As and Ni in the sediments through biomineralization were carried out in 1993. This work was summarized in 1994 as a CANMET report (Arsenic and Nickel removal from waste rock seepages using muskeg sediment; Final report Contract No 23440-3-9275/01, Energy Mines and Resources Canada). These sediments do not represent natural transport mechanisms of the contaminants from the source through the muskeg environment as the seepage was loaded from the surface and sludge/ precipitates formed in the toe seepages was added to test re-solubilisationl fixation of either Ni or As in the sediments. Two cores were collected in 1992. The first was collected from BT-1 Stn 300, and consists of a muskeg core collected as a top sample from 0 to 25 cm depth, and a bottom CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wellands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 4 Table 1: Solids Sampling Locations, 1992, 1993 and 1997 Muskeg and Wetlands B-Zone Year :ollected LOCATION BT-I I BT-2 I BT-3 I BT-4 LAKE I sample covering a depth from 25 to 50 cm. The second core was collected from the shore at Lake 1 Stn 100 (a control lake), where four 20 cm thick consecutive samples could be obtained, covering the profile to a depth of 80 cm. Stn200 E Stn 100 E 1992 In June 1993, substrates from ten (10) muskeg profile sampling locations were collected during the process of installing shallow piezometers (SP-I to SP-9, LOC 1). These samples were stored frozen (-20°C). No pond sediment samples were collected in 1993, but major strata were determined in the field. In 1993 sampling of the muskeg, the uppermost strata (e.g. 0 - 25 cm) was not specifically sampled (as was the case in 1997) unless an identifiable surface stratum, other than live vegetation, was present. Centre E CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 (Boojum “.IYr* LIU,,. 5 1993 1997 1992 1993 1997 SEDIMENT ENCLOSURES ONLY Stn100 E Stn100 E Stn150 G Stn 150 E Stn 250 E Stn205 E Stn350S E Stn240 E ET-2 N End E MUSKEG Stn 100 K SP6 C SP5 C SP-2 C SP-1 C SP-9 C SP7 C SP-3 C SP-4 C spe C LOCI c BT-1 N C Stn 100N C BZT-K#l G Stn200 C Stn400N C Stn50 C Stn400 C Stn200 C Stn69 3 DH C Stn 500 C SP-3DH C Stn300 K I E - Ekman C - Cutting G - Grab K - Core Map 1 : B-Zone Sediment and Muskeg Profile Sampling Stations, 1992-97. CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal ofAs and Ni 6 July. 1998 &.. Boojum ."." L,"".O In August 1997, muskeg samples were collected at eleven (1 1) locations, either where substrate profiles were examined previously, or where additional samples would complement information from previously established transects in the respective wetland areas. At these locations, samples were typically collected from specific depths where possible, 0-25 cm, 25-50 cm, 50-75cm and 75-100 cm, using the soil sampling auger. 2.2 Field sampling methods In Table 1, the sample types obtained to describe the surface and subsurface material are designated by E for Ekman, C for cuttings from the soil auger, G for grab and Kfor cores collected by removing intact profiles using a shovel. Whenever the consistency of the material allowed, the top 0.2 m of the sediments were sampled using an Ekrnan dredge. A grab sample was obtained with a shovel when the Ekman dredge could not be operated. Muskeg samples were collected with a soil auger, and all major strata were identified in the field. Similarly, all samples were described in the field, then stored frozen (-20°C) until laboratory processing. When sufficient water was present, field measurements of pH, conductivity and Eh were carried out. These samples were stored in plastic bags. In addition to the muskeg samples, precipitate I evaporate samples were collected from the B-Zone waste rock pile surface, the toe seeps and the collection ditches. The sample selection was guided by the frequent visual appearances of colouring on rock surfaces on the waste rock lifts. This sample type is referred to as the As/Ni oxidized material. In acidic toe seeps solid precipitate accumulates regularly which had previously been analysed, reporting high concentrations of As and Ni. This sample type is referred to as WRP- P sludge. On the perimeter ditch, a floating solid foam forms after precipitation events, which was considered part of mobile solid or TSS fraction originating from the waste rock pile, described as ditch foam. As a comparison to these precipitates, rock samples representative of the main rock mass, graphitic coarse gneiss , heamatized sandstone and clean sandstone was selected for the batch leaching experiment (Section 2.3.6). CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 7 2.3 Laboratory Methods For the current study, the samples that were previously collected in 1992, 1993 and 1997 were re-described with respect to their texture and composition, and compared to the field descriptions that were originally made. This confirmed the identity of the samples and generated a consistent data set for the physical parameters of the material. Sub-samples were taken several times, in order to determine the wet density, moisture content and % Loss On Ignition (%L.O.I., 480’ C for one hour on air dried material). A dried and ground sample was then prepared for chemical analysis. Some sub-samples were subjected to slurry tests, to determine water extractable As and Ni. On June 13, 1997, the previously collected samples were thawed, re-described and processed in the laboratory. All 1992 and 1993 samples were oven dried at 70°C and ground in a Wiley mill. One (1) g samples of the material were digested (nitric-HCI- perchloric) and assayed for several elements, including As, Ni, Fe and S. Selected samples were subjected to multi-elemental analysis with CAP. For 1997 sediment samples, the Total Organic Carbon (TOC) concentrations were also determined using a Leco apparatus, to ascertain the relationship of organic carbon and % L.O.I. Since the relationship between these two parameters, in areas with similar productivity and decomposition rates, is expected to be constant, it can be used to reliably evaluate the organic carbon content of the sediment. 2.3.1 Sample DescriDtion Samples were described according to their texture, colour, smell, and qualitative moisture content. The types of samples vary from organic (i.e. peat) to rockykandy (inorganic). The descriptions for all these samples are presented in Appendix 1, Table 1, which provides the comparison of the field and laboratory descriptions. In general, the qualitative description of a sample included the following parameters: excess water - moist or dry ; type of matter - rocks, sandy, organic, inorganic, sediment I peat; colour; odour - smell of CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 LBoojum L,”R.n 8 H,S ; and the presence of roots and other intact vegetation parts. These observations may be used as semi-quantitative indicators to characterize the distribution of the elements derived from the chemical analysis, should further investigation be required. 2.3.2 Sample Preparation From each sample, 60 mL (wet volume) was taken and put in a volumetric beaker, which generally produced a wet weight of around 49 g to 200 g. The remainder of the sample materials were re- frozen. From the entire data set, only two of the eleven locations sampled produced material which was dry representative of terrestrial or only temporarily submerged (of a siltykandy texture). Seventeen (1 7) samples contained excess water (described as very wet) and the rest were moist. With the exception of the two dry samples, no water had to be added in order to determine the pH, Eh and electrical conductivity. Details are given in Appendix 1, Table 2. For the samples which produced excess water from the sample bag, this water was separated from the sample and measured separately. 2.3.3 Moisture Content The wet weight was recorded, and the sample was air-dried then oven-dried at 70% for twenty-four hours. Moisture content was calculated as follows: wet weight -dry weight wet weight Moisturecontent = x 100% 2.3.4 Wet Densitv Determination A wet volume of 60 mL of each sample was the starting point, and a wet weight for this volume was obtained. The wet weight, in grams, divided by the wet volume, in mL, gives the wet density, in gml- ’ . It should be noted that this wet density determination performed CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 (Boojum I..sUI* LIYnso 9 on sampled materials in the laboratory, follows loosening of the materials, particularly muskeg samples, during field sampling. It is likely, therefore, that the reported wet density values underestimate the actual wet densities in the field. The measurement of wet density is obtained to estimate a pore water volume in the wetland substrates. 2.3.5 Distilled Water Extraction of Arsenic and Nickel The objective of this procedure was to determine the mass of arsenic and nickel which could be mobilized from the samples when distilled water, to simulate fresh water recharge, was added. Fresh water additions will produce a concentration gradient for the sediment pore waters, which can result in mobilisation of elements by diffusion. This As and Ni may represent the very easily exchangeable fractions, if the contaminants are deposited only on the surface material, rather than adsorbed and integrated into the sediment. The extraction procedure used a 120 mL sample of distilled water, added to a second sub- sample of 60 mL wet volume. The solid/water mixture was slurried and placed in a refrigerator for one week to equilibrate at a low temperature, simulating sediment conditions. The pH, conductivity and temperature of the supernatant were measured after one week of equilibration. After measurement of pH and conductivity a supernatant was obtained from the solid/water mixture. In order to test for arsenic, a sediment-free water sample (supernatant) was required. To obtain the supernatant, approximately 40 mL of water, containing as little sediment as possible, was poured off, and a centrifuge was used for 10 minutes at a setting equivalent to 1500 rpm, in order to separate water from solid. A semi-quantitative test kit (E. Merck EM Quant) was used as a screening test to determine if any contaminants had been mobilized by the leach test. A test strip was placed in a test tube after zinc dust and hydrochloric acid (32%) were used to convert the arsenic compounds in solution to arsine, which reacts with the test strip. The colour which formed on the test strip was then compared to a colour scale (between 0 and 3 mglL), in order to estimate the amount of arsenic present in the sample. CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 10 Screening level nickel determinations using a spectrophotometerwere not possible, as the muskeg colouration interfered with the absorption used in the Hach determinations . As the As and Ni screening tests revealed potential release, the leachates were filtered (0.45 pm), acidified (1 % HNO,) and submitted to an analytical laboratory to accurately determine the As and Ni concentrations. The measures of moisture content, density and the associated raw data are presented in Appendix 1, Table 3. Detailed results of the leaching experiments and the concentrations reported in the leachate are given in Appendix 1, Table 4. The excess pore water characteristics and the As and Ni concentrationsfor those samples which contained excess water, are given in Appendix 1, Table 5. 2.3.6 Batch leachins of DreciPitates/evaPorates on waste rock Dile Supernatant preparation for wet sample 'as received': From each sample bag, 60 mL ofwet sample was weighed to obtain wet weight. To this volume, 120 mL of distilled water was added and stirred 1 minute on a magnetic stirrer. The obtained wet volume to water volume ratio was 1:2. The sample slurry was allowed to settle for 1 hour and the following measurements were obtained: pH (Corning M103 pH metre), Conductivity (Orion Conductivity, Salinity Metre, Model 140), Em (Corning M103 pH Metre, VWR Scientific 34105-023 probe) (Table 2). The measurement for distilled water was: pH = 6.76, Em = 301 mV, Conductivity = 36 VSlcm. The slurries were then dried at 6OoC until no further water loss occurred to obtain a dry weight equivalent to an air dried sample and moisture content was determined. The samples had a wet density (glmL) ranging between 1.25 to 1.4 with the exception of the NW ditch foam which had a density of 0.49 glml (Table 2). Table 2 also lists the total Ni and As concentration of the six solids. CAMECO Corporation: RabbR Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 11 Table 2: Qualitative Description and Chemistry for Waste Rock Pile Solids Supernatant preparation from dry sample material: After the supernatant was prepared on the wet ‘as received’ samples, the entire sample was dried to obtain dry weight. This dried material was then used in batch leach tests. To 1 g air dried sample, 100 mL of distilled water was added resulting in a ratio was 1 O O : l . The slurry was stirred for 1 minute, allowed to settle for 1 hour and then centrifuged the slurries at 800 RPM (HN-S Centrifuge) for 10 minutes prior to obtaining the pH and nickel measurements reported in Table 2. Ni was determined colorimetrically (EM Science 14785-2 Spectroquant Nickel, Spectronic 70 Metre at 445 nm). Cumulative supernatant preparation: The Ni leached during the batch leach test, covering a period of 427.5 h included the AslNi oxidized sample (BZWR-6) which had high As and Ni concentrations. In the first round of slurries, only Ni concentrations determined. As the results from the chemical analysis indicated that both metals are high in some of these solids, the batch leach test included monitoring of As concentration in supernatant was added to the experiment. The supernatant was decanted, after regular contact time, and a fresh 100 mL distilled water to the solids after centrifuging. The new slurry was stirred for 1 minute, allowed to settle for 1 hour, followed by centrifugation again prior to the measurement of pH, CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 12 conductivity, Em, Ni and As (decant cycle 1). The measurements of pH , Eh and electrical conductivity were carried out on the decanted supernatant and the sample was stored without water in the refrigerator. The experiment was carried out over 10 days from April 14'h to April 23rd, 1998. The next decant cycle started with adding the next volume of 100 mL distilled water to the solids which was treated in the same fashion as before. For the first 8 decant cycles 100 mL of distilled water was added, followed by 200 mL for decant cycle 9 to 13. 2.4 Calculations of the Mass of As, Ni, Fe, S and LOI. In Appendix 1, the results of the elemental analysis of the sediment samples (dry weight basis) are presented in Tables 6a and 6b. A summary of As, Ni, Fe, S, TOC and LOI converted to g m 3 or % used in the calculations is given in Appendix 1, Table 7 . Estimates of the mass of As, Ni, Fe, S and Total Organic Carbon (TOC) in the top 25 cm of muskeg and sediments were derived in the following manner. For muskeg areas, the results ofelemental analysis ofthe most shallow samples collected in 1992 and 1993, and the top 25 cm samples collected in 1997 were used. For pond sediments, the Ekman or grab sample concentrations were used. As the elemental concentrations are performed on a dry weight basis, the elements' concentration in wet sample volumes were back-calculated, using the moisture content and sample density data obtained from the laboratory measurements. These calculations yielded concentrations in units of g.mJ wet substrate, according to the relationship: 1 l d w l w . g.m-3 = [ 1 dw, g.t-1 (=ug.g-1) * densitywhv t.m-3 * (1 -Moisture Content %) The concentrations of elements in wet solids, in g.m", were multiplied by 0.25 m to yield mass per m2 to a 0.25 m depth. The mass per rn2 was then multiplied by the area of the muskeg or pond sediment, which was derived from aerial photographs. CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 13 Estimates of the mass of elements in pond water were made by using the pond water concentration data in mgC' and calculating the volume of the pond by assuming an average depth of 0.5 m. This average depth is based on field observations and considered a reasonable estimate. Depending on the annual precipitation, the water depth in the pond can vary, but usually it is by less than 0.5 m. In zones where samples were collected from more than one location, the mass per m2 data were averaged, then multiplied by the area of the zone. In Appendix 1, the data used for the compilation of the mass estimates are given in Tables 8a to 8f. 2.5 Estimation of Easily Exchangeable As and Ni in Muskeg and Wetland Solids Easily exchangeable (EE) As and Ni is expressed in units of weight of As or Ni per unit volume of muskeg or sediment in, for example, gm3. The following calculation was performed using the laboratory moisture content determinations and the dissolved As and Ni concentrations following extraction with distilled water: EEAs,Ni = 'diss AsorNi v s Easily Exchangeable As or Ni, in g m 3 (= mg.L-') Volume (in L) of original pore water in 0.06 L wet sample. Volume of extract (D-H,O); 0.12 L used. Concentration of dissolved As or Ni in filtered supernatant, in mg.L-' Volume of wet sample; all samples had original volume of 0.06 L. The EE, or in g&, for muskeg or pond sediment samples are expressed as a percentage of the total mass of As and Ni per m3 of substrate. The percentage of easily exchangeable contaminant mass would represent the total concentration in the solid material, if As or Ni has originated predominantly from adsorption to the substrate from the water, reflecting the adsorption capacity of the substrate. A somewhat consistent CAMECO Corporation Raboir lake Operat on Utilization of Wetlands for Remova of As and NI JAY. 1998 14 relationship between the total and easily exchangeable fraction of either element, if the majority of the element had originated in the water, but an irregular relationship is expected if the elements originated from solid phases (either sediment or natural mineralization). 2.6 Shallow Piezometer sampling In the years 1993 to 1995, the piezometers were sampled using a vacuum pump with a tube suspended to the screened section of the piezometer to withdraw the sample, without prior bailing of the standpipe. The piezometers are located in the water table which is very close to the surface (saturated muskeg) and bailing the water may not be of great importance to determine representative water. However in 1997, 5 litres of water were withdrawn from the piezometers and the sixth litre was sampled. SP-1 through SP-9 generally recover very fast. The samples were filtered through 0.45 pm filters and submitted to SRC for elemental analysis, always including the concentrations of As and Ni. Water quality characteristics for all years where samples were collected are presented in Appendix 1, Tables 9a to 9e. 2.7 Surface Waters Southeast of the WRP Toward lvison Bay Over the years, several surface water sampling stations have been established, and new ones have been added to the areas as required. Map 1 shows all the surface sampling stations, representing two old drainage areas. Water samples from Stations 6.9.44,6.9.4, 6.9.3, BT-3 Stn 50, BT-3, Stn 100, BT-3 Stn 150 and a shallow pool in the lvison Wetland were collected during the August, 1997 site visit, and these were later analysed by SRC for As and Ni, among other parameters (see Appendix 1). CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of AS and Ni July. 1998 15 3.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION In order to estimate the mass of the elements in the different components of the wetlands in the vicinity of the B-Zone waste rock pile, structurally different units (ponded- and muskeg-covered areas, indicated by the swamp symbol on Map 1, were defined. The areas of drier boreal forest upland are excluded from the estimates, since they do not receive seepage or run-off. Surrounding the waste rock pile, 4 muskeg areas are differentiated. BT-1 to BT-4, named after the original numbers of the transects, were marked with rebars in 1992. In addition, one area, designated as Lake 1, serves as a control muskeg, i.e., does not receive seepages and represents background values. The total area under consideration for estimating the distribution of contaminants on the uppermost strata (25 cm depth) is 124ha. This area comprises 107ha of muskeg and 17ha of wetlands ponds. The four areas, BT-I (19ha), BT-2 (26ha), BT-3 (4ha) and BT-4 (3.3ha) and Lake 1 (71 ha) are subdivided, relating the sampling stations to sections within them, for estimation purposes (referred to by letters in red, A to F). In was not considered appropriate to derive isoclines of the surface contaminant concentrations, since the sampling points are not equally distributed among the area. Within each of the BT sections, the proportion covered by ponds ranges from 3% to 18%. The remaining area of each section is muskeg. Details of the calculations of the mass of As, Ni , S , Fe and L.0.I are given in Appendix 1, which lists the individual samples used to represent specific respective areas, as well as the cases where average concentrations of the element were used to arrive at the estimates. In total, 52 samples have been analysed for As, Ni, Fe and 50 for L.O.I., including surface and deeper strata in the 6-Zone area. For sulphur, only 30 sample analyses were completed. The overall average concentration in the solid material are: As = 114 pgg’ (min 0.5 pgg ’ - max 1200 pgg’); Ni = 82 p9.g.’ (min 1.4 pgg’ - max 690 pgg’); Fe = 1.3% (min 0.04% - max 28%); and Sulphur = 0.14 % (min 0.008% - max 0.6%). The organic matter as L.O.I. CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July. 1998 16 averages 77 %, with a min of 1.5 % and a maximum of 98%. These concentration ranges can be compared to literature ranges to obtain a reference point to the mineralized area of the B-Zone. S. E. Allen, in “Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials” (Blackwell 1974), gives natural background concentrationsfor organicsoil as: Ni - 5 to 500 pgg’; As - 0.1 to 10 pgg’ ; S - 0.03% to 0.4%; Fe - 0.2% to 0.5%. He reports the range for L.O.I. to be 30 to 50%. In 1985, A. Buchnea and A. van der Vooren reported in “Review and Assessment of the Known Naturally Occurring Concentrations of Radionuclides and Selected Non-Radionuclides Relevant to Uranium Mill Waste Management (DSS File no: 26SQ 23241-4-1691) concentrations in soill rock environments of 9 pgg ’ for As, and means of several sample populations from different locations in Canada ranging from 1.6 pg.g-’ to 153 pgg’. For nickel, they report in the same publication, a mean of 31 pgg’ , and a range of concentrations from 3.5 pgg ’ to 605 (n =2686). The B-Zone wetland Ni concentrations fall into the reported range, although for As, the concentrations are somewhat higher than those reported. This is not surprising, since the reported range of 1.6 pgg’ to 153 pgg’ for As includes the mineralized areas of the Athabaska region. An average of 114 pg.g-‘ for As in an area close to a former As-bearing ore body and directly exposed to waste rock pile, ore stock pile and haul road influences, in fact suggests good containment of contaminants. Concentrations much higher than those reported for naturallmineralized areas in Canada might have been expected. Albeit the presence of the waste rock pile, the ore pile and the natural mineralization sediments and muskeg might have been expected to show higher range of contaminants. The increases in the concentrations range indicates that the sediments and the muskeg retain the contaminants and do not release them to the environment at large. Although the number of sample analyses from the same location is limited which is separated by a time span, an increase over time can be noted (Table 3). Some locations were sampled both in 1992 and in again in 1997. For all locations, As and Ni concentrations have increased between 1992 and 1997 as expected, with the exception of Stn. 200. For Stn. 200, the concentrations essentially remained the same: 260 pg.g-’ dry weight in 1992 and 230 pg.g-’ in 1997for Ni and 390 pgg’ and 420 pg.9.’ dry weight of As respectively. CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 17 Table 3: Comparison of Total As and Ni Concentrations in Sediment and Muskeg Samples Collected at Similar Locations in Different Years. BT-2 BT-3 LOCATION 1992-93 Stn 200 Stn 200/205 LOC 1 SP6 BT-I N Stn 100 Stn 100 SP-3 DH SP-4 Stn 200 Sediment 390 Muskeg Sedime;ti 16 1 !I Muskeg Muske d.w. Total ~~ 1997 -230 54 46 34 35 - d.w. - dry weight One of the question which needs to be addressed is the mode (water or air) by which the increases in the vegetation orthe sediment have taken occurred.. Both aerial and seepage transport would result in accumulation of metals on the surface. Therefore the first step in determining the pathway, is to evaluate if indeed the surface material differs from that collected from deeper strata. In Figure l a and I b the sampling locations for which material was collected at the same place, but integrated over depth are presented with the respective As concentration. With the exception of three locations (SP-2, SP-5 and SP-8) the surface samples have higher concentrations of As than at deeper strata. In Figure 2a and 2b the concentrations of Ni are presented and the same locations have higher concentrations at depth than at the surface. They are located in BT- 1 , BT-2 and BT- 3 at the edge of the muskeg areas and may not be submerged all year round. However, the remainder of the samples indicate that the surface strata is enriched with the contaminants, which may imply both aerial and water transport. The next step, is to evaluate how much has accumulated on the uppermost layers of the wetlands surrounding the waste rock pile. This is carried out through estimating the mass CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 18 40 - 30 5 I Figure la: Comparison of As Concentration with Depth (SP1,2,3,4,5 8 LOCI) ~ ~ Figure Ib: Comparison As Concentration with Depth Location 8 Depth (cm) ~ ~ . ~~~ ~~~ (SP7,8,9, Stn 300 and Lake 1) an ~ l0 L I- Location 8 Depth (cm) CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal ofAs and Ni 19 July. 1998 &Boojum I."."_ .,""_ h) 0 Total Ni. ug.g-I 2 A N " 0 VI 0 SP7:0-150 SP8:0-95 SPB:O-l50 Lake1:O-20 Lakel 2040 Lakel :40-60 Lakel 60-80 n ln 5 N 0' 5. f F z 5 Total Ni, ug.g-I W 0 N UI A 2 N D VI 0 ul 0 SP1:0-105 SP1:O-140 SP1:O-165 n ln SP3:O-ZO % SP3:0-80 s 8 3 P I SP5:O-30 SP5:0-120 5. s F z 5 of an element in an environmental compartment. Although such estimates may be prone to a relative error, due to the assumptions which have to be used in the calculations, However the error will be consistent throughout the calculations, and facilitates relative comparison. Such comparisons can be used as indicators of the functions of environmental compartment comparing sediments, water and vegetation. These comparison will allow to evaluate the relative distribution of the contaminants in the different components of the wetlands, ie muskeg, pond water and sediment. - Surface - 0.25 m In Table 4 estimated masses of As, Ni, S , Fe and L.O.I. in muskeg and sediment solids in the vicinity of the B-Zone WRP are presented. The data used to calculate the specific estimates are presented in Appendix 1, Table 8a to Table 8e and a summary, from which the kglha values are derived is given in Appendix 2, Table A2-8. Water - 0.5 m Surface - 0.25 m Table 4: Arsenic, Nickel, Iron, Sulphur and LOI in BT-I, BT-2, BT-3, BT-4 and Lake 1 Muskeg, Sedirnents and Pond Water. I n 1 Muskeg II Sediment II Pond II I BT- l I 7 G q kg/ha kgha kglha kgha Vha kgha kgha kgha kgha Vha kglha kgha kgha kglha 4.1 3.6 1,287 630 342 116 82 5,763 1,131 202 0.4 0.1 2.3 4.6 2.0 2.0 858 2,616 170 84 78 2,555 1,580 286 2.0 0.2 1.6 2.6 127 80 2,516 670 211 30 23 465 490 167 25 62 6.5 387 13 6.5 12,599 1,205 255 -1- 0.18 0.11 71.4 34.6 2.0 0.9 125 98 158 0.5 4.4 2,197 1,308 495 0.003 0.01 1.6 0.2 The estimates of the mass of As and Ni in the sediments/muskeg have used data integrated over time (Table 3) and a larger more recent set of samples might show a higher accumulated mass of metals.. On the other hand the relative differences between the different components of the muskeg/wetland areas which serve as a compartment for retention of contaminant will not change. The samples used for the mass estimates of the elements utilize 24 muskeg samples and 12 sediment surface samples, representing a (Booj ... Y.C. u ""R.D m CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of AS and Ni July. 1998 21 total area of 124 ha of muskeg and ponds. The overall objective is to determine if the distribution of the contaminants reflects what would be expected , ie a greater mass accumulated in the sediment as compared to the vegetation. The results are discussed below summarizing the distribution for each element of relevance to the contaminant removal processes expected to take place, when the transport mechanism is through contaminated seepage. In section 3.1 and 3.2 the same data are used to evaluate the mode of transport and the sample characteristics which have lead to the accumulated mass of the elements. The estimates are derived from the actual area of the different sections of wetland surrounding the waste rock pile. The areas of pond or muskeg vary from location to location, ranging for example for muskeg from the smallest area E in BT-1 with 1.2 ha to the largest area B in Lake 1 with 58 ha. The estimates are derived from the actual area of the different sections of wetland surrounding the waste rock pile. The areas of pond or muskeg vary from location to location, ranging for example for muskeg from the smallest area E in BT-1 with 1.2 ha to the largest area B in Lake 1 with 58 ha (Map 1 red letters). Arsenic Distribution : Arsenic concentrations found in sediment are generally one to two orders of magnitude greater than those found in shallow muskeg solids with the exception of Lake 1 and BT-3. BT-3 has the highest quantity of As in the water. The area of ponds in the BT-3 area is very small and essentially has not permanent ponds, and the muskeg samples are collected from an area of a temporal pool/ pond which dry out easily, thus concentrating contaminants through evaporation resulting in not so healthy vegetation/ muskeg. There are no permanent ponds in the BT-4 area, while in the Lake 1 area no seepage reaches the pond and only aerial transport would account for the accumulation on the vegetationlmuskeg. The As mass BT-1 (4.1 kglha) and BT-2 (2.0 kglha to that of Lake 1 and suggest that this type of mass accumulation is derived mainly from the air. On the other hand, the mass accumulated in BT- 3 and BT-4 on the muskeg is much higher with 127 kglha and 13 kglha. These distributions suggest an accumulation in those pond sediments which have received seepages. eoojum I..L."C" CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 22 The area of BT-3 that is covered with muskeg contains a relatively large mass of As (127 kg/ha). This is due to the relatively high As concentrations (up to 372 C1g.g-l) in the muskeg samples collected close to the WRP. WRP run-off to this area via seepages from beneath the perimeter road is the likely cause of these accumulation, as reflected in the mass of As in the water compartment (25 kglha). Overall, the estimate of As mass in muskeg and sediment in the B-Zone WRP vicinity indicates that the wetland pond sediments serve as sinks for As and water transport is suggested the major route, for those areas were seepages have entered ponds. Nickel Distribution : The distribution of Ni mass in muskeg and sediments in the B-Zone WRP vicinity is, in many ways, similar to that for As. Pond sediments contain concentrations of at least one order of magnitude higher than muskeg solids, again with the exception of BT-3. The BT-3 Zone A area muskeg, which has accumulated Ni from WRP run-off passing beneath the WRP perimeter road has also more Ni in the water compartment with 62 kgl ha as compared to generally 0.1 to 0.2 kg Iha for the other areas. The mass of Ni in the sediment, compared to the water column, particularly for the low water mass areas of BT-1 , BT-2 and Lake 1 reflect the pathway of the contaminants well. The muskeg mass of Ni is clearly lower with 0.9 kglha compared to the sediment with 4.4 kglha. Lake 1 is considered uncontaminated background area. Iron Distribution: Iron is included in the estimates of the mass of elements, since both the literature and field and laboratory reactor experiments implicate iron in the removal process. The mass of Fe in muskeg compared to sediments is again higher in the sediment, with the same exception of BT-3. Iron is element, which is easily precipitated from the water and retained in sediment and on submerged vegetation. Iron in muskeg is reflecting more the content of the living vegetation. The mass of iron in the water in BT-3 and BT-4 is higher than in all other areas, and the iron precipitation onto the muskeg is evident in the accumulation of an estimated 12 t /ha on the muskeg form 71 kglha of the water. The mass of Fe generally in the water ranges from 1 to 6 kg/ha. Iron is not considered a element which is environmentally mobile in the same way than metals, as it readily precipitates and forms bog iron in the long term. Rather iron is cycled from the CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 coojum I.I*UI* LlY,,lD 23 sediment to the water and a iron pool has to be available in the muskeg, which is evident from the distributions presented in Table 4. Sulphur Distribution: Sulphur concentrations in muskeg are generally similar to those in pond sediments for BT-1 and BT-2. This is expected, since the vegetation component of muskeg is greater than that of sediments, and vegetation generally has a larger component of organic sulphur. In BT-3 the lower mass of sulphur in the sediments might be , a reflection of the volatile bog gas (H2S), which is lost from aquatic ecosystems under appropriate biogeochemical conditions. H,S was detected by smell in the BT-1 and BT-3 sediments (measured low redox), but not in the Lake 1 sediments (measured moderate redox) where the sediment mass of sulphur is similar to BT-1 and BT-2 with 1 t of S in the sediment. Although anecdotal and evidence expressed by smell of H2S could reflect be used to reflect the microbial activity, which would be stimulated by nutrients supplied with the seepage. A systematic observation of smell was carried out on the laboratory samples. These are presented and discussed later in Section 3.2. Loss on icinition: The distribution of organic matter as expressed by loss on ignition should reflect the fact that, in these muskeg/wetland type of ecosystems, organic matter decomposes relatively slowly, and muskeg should be higher in L.O.I. than sediments. This is indeed the case for all areas were samples were available (Table 4). The lower L.O.I. values for the BT-3 area, reflects the fact that these substrates represent old streambed, where organic matter does not readily accumulate. It is possible to derive the organic carbon component of the material in a given area by deriving a relationship of L.O.I. and TOC. The relationship between these two variables was derived for the 1997 samples and, as shown in Figure 3. About 50 % of the L.O.I. is present as organic carbon. With this relationship, the carbon supply for the microbial activities for contaminant removal and biomineralization in the sediments can be assessed for each area. From these evaluations it is clear that, for the areas BT-3 and BT-4, for example, organic amendments or reconfiguration of wetland to promote vegetative growth may be required. eoojum . I .S .Y” ,,“IT.D CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 24 Fig. 3: Comparison of % L.O.I. with TOC B-Zone Wetland Substrates and B-Zone Pit Sediments 100, 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 X T.O.C. (SRC) 70 80 90 100 To further confirm the general principle of the contaminant retention capacity of wetland sediments, the distribution of the elements in the wetland compartments are calculated for the entire area surrounding the waste rock pile, considering the same compartments, water, sediment and muskeg. Based on a kglha basis using the entire area, the results are independent of the specific locations and the seepages. Figures 4a to 4d represent the percentages of the total element concentration (kg.ha-’) that are distributed in the different environmental compartments. They show clearly that these elements are distributed primarily in the pond sediments, followed by the muskeg solids, with a relatively small fraction in the water. The question that immediately presents itself, is, of course, the following: once the contaminants are in the sediment, will they remain there. One could argue, that the stability of a muskeg lays in its history. Muskeg vegetation has been developed since the retreat of the continental ice sheet, reported for northern central Canada to have taken place about 7000 years ago. This would support a relatively stable long term environmental compartment. CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 25 Fig. 4a: Distribution of As, kglha I Water Muskeg 2.06% 1 7 1 ~ Sediment 85.84% Fig. 4c: Distribution of Fe, kglha Water 0.06% Fig. 4b: Distribution of Ni, kglha Water MJskeg 285% 918% Sediment 87.97% Fig. 4d: Distribution of S, kglha Water 0.48% CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 26 3.1 Easily Exchangeable As and Ni in Muskeg and Sediments The generally accepted way of determining the chemical form of a contaminant in soil is a sequential extraction series. These have been carried out on the sediments and it was identified that Ni is present as either a carbonate or sulphide and As is associated with organic extractable fraction and iron (Kalin, 1994. And Fyson , Kalin and Lui 1995). For the transport of metals in the toe seepages the ultimate form in which the metals are retained represents only one component of the use of muskeg for seepage treatment. The question of how the contaminant behaves in the muskeg I pond system during run-off events or intense rainstorms is equally relevant. Such events would create a strong concentration gradient in the ponds. If contaminants are not well adsorbed, they would be released into the water due to a diffusion gradient overthe sediment. During spring run-off, the contaminant loading from the seepages could be higher, since weathering products formed and stored in the waste rock pile would be flushed out. To determinate this fraction of As and Ni which might be mobilized during storms, runoff and snow melt an easily exchangeable fraction of As and Ni was defined as that fraction which would be extracted by distilled water. Such extractions were carried out on the solid samples collected in 1992 and 1993. Sub-samples of 60mL wet volume were slurried with 120mL of distilled water, in aerobic conditions at room temperature. The concentrations of As and Ni were measured in the resultant extracted water. For same samples excess water was contained in the bags. The excess water from the bag was compared to the extracts or leachates derived with distilled water for the same samples (Table 5). Although these comparison could be carried out for only a few samples (because few existed with excess water in the sampling bag), they give some insight into the effects of freezing and thawing, as compared to leaching. The concentrations reported essentially confirm that freezing and thawing does not alter greatly the leachability of the elements of concern. CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 27 Table 5: Comparison of [As] and [Nil for Extracts and Excess Pore Water In Figures 5a and 5b, the easily leachable fraction is plotted as a function of the total concentration of As and Ni. From such a plot, a well defined relationship is expected as is evident for Ni and part of the sample population for As. The samples with low solids concentrations have a high fraction of easily exchange As and Ni , reflecting their low adsorption capacity. As the concentrations in the solids increase removal of the contaminants by water is no longer possible. It is argued, that if the original transport mechanism of the contaminant from the water column to the sediments which is mainly adsorption, would be the dominant mechanism of contaminant accumulation, than the samples with higher concentrations in the solids should release the same fraction. As this is not the case, it is postulated, that in the deeper portions of the sediments the organic material serves to facilitates biomineralization processes which convert the contaminants into more stable forms. On the other hand, if biomineralization is not taking place, then the material with higher concentrations should have the same quantity of easely exchangable contaminat than the material with lower contamiant concentrations, as the removal is just adsorption and not biomineralization. For As where two mechanisms of mineralization were identified , both adsorption onto organic matter and precipitation with oxidized iron. For arsenic one could expect two types Fig. 5a: B-Zone Vicinity Wetland Substrates, 1992-1993 Total As vs Easily Exchangeable As 0% 1 ** , a 0.01 0.10 1 .oo 10.00 Total As, g.mJ substrate 100.00 Fig. 5 b B-Zone Vicinity Wetland Substrates, 1992-93 Total Ni vs Easily Exchangeable Ni 40% 30% a m m m a3 r 5 20% x W 21 v) m W -._ 10% s 0% 0.01 0.10 1 .oo 10.00 Total Ni, g.m-' substrate 100.00 c Boojum .a. '. . "".. 29 CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetiands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 of samples, where the higher concentrations are due to iron co-precipitation (lower water solubility) and those due to adsorption processes similar to Ni. The relationship for As (Figure 5a) between % easely exchangable and total concentrations in substrate defines essentially two types of samples. One set of samples (diamonds) reflects that low concentrations in the material have higher fraction of easily exchangeable As, whereas the population of samples identified by circles show a less defined trend and display the second removal mechanism, precipitation with iron. For Ni, which is proposed to be removed from the water column by only one mechanism, namely adsorption to organics , all samples follow the expected trend, representing a uniform sample population, where the lower concentration solid samples have higher exchangeable fractions (Figure 5b). This relationship is in clear contrast to that of As where the removal process identified in the laboratory has been associated with both adsorption onto organics and precipitation with iron. Although this represents indirect evidence of the proposed mechanisms of contaminant relegation from the water to the sediment, the data seem to support the results from the laboratory. A different argument used in the interpretation of the relationship between the fraction of the desorbed material (easily exchangeable %) would suggest that the higher concentration of the material has a lower adsorption capacity or fewer adsorption contaminants sites for the contaminants. As the adsorption capacity of the material increases, the fraction removed by an easily exchangeable extract, i.e., distilled water, should decrease. When the concentrations in the solid material are very low, the fraction of easily exchangeable As is highest. The easily exchangeable As fraction displays two adsorption sites, with only for the second type rarely releasing more than 20% of the arsenic, i.e. 80% is retained in the material. For the second adsorption site, the percentage retained is generally more than 90% or, conversely,lO% is exchangeable. Ni displays a consistent and uniform inverse relationship between the percentage of easily exchangeable Ni, and the total Ni concentration in the solid sample, i.e., the higher the total Ni concentration, the lower the percentage that is easily exchangeable. CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 LBoojum I..S."I* LI"I .0 30 . . .. . . . . . Sample Form r ratio n Seepage total 0 7973 0 57 70 drs 0 7313 0 55 121 Rock 0 8963 0 44 96 Muskeg Surface 0 4843 121 37 Sediment 0 9670 0 75 12 3.2 As and Ni migration in the muskeg areas P <0.001 25cm NS H2S,P other Bk Bn other 1 10 9 2 0 5 3 3 1 10 7 3 1 7 3 1 11 7 2 10 6 4 10 4 12 0 1 11 0 0 12 0 25 27 19 26 7 16 2a a Smell: NS-no smell, H2S-H2S smell, P-pungent Colure: Bk-black, Bn-brown. As Concentration interval ug.g-1 n 1.4-2.7 a 3.4-9.2 14 12.0-54.0 19 110.0-690.0 11 SUM 52 Depth Smell Colour Bn other 0-25cm >25cm NS H2S,P other Bk 1 7 8 0 0 5 1 2 3 11 8 5 1 a 5 1 12 7 3 11 5 4 11 4 11 0 1 10 0 0 11 0 27 25 20 26 6 17 2a 7 remove and immobilize As and Ni in the sediments. As biomineralization processes are evident in the sediments it is now possible to examine the muskeg samples further correlating those parameters relevant to the removal process from the water to the sediment, in a similar fashion that was carried out for rocks I seepage and muskeg samples. These regressions are carried out on the concentrations determined, as removal process from water to sediment has no stoichiometric basis as is the case for the mineralization. The negative correlation of both As and Ni with L.0.I in the sediment suggests, that organic matter in the sediment is not associated with high concentrations of contaminants and therefore organic matter adsorption is not a dominant process, once the contaminant is relegated to the sediment. As of course the LOI concentrations are related to the content CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 LBoojum "..*..O* ,".* 33 of vegetation or undegraded biomass this relationship is reasonable for the solids. As the organic matter is utilized through degradation, the biomineralization takes place and removes organic content, converting it to carbon dioxide and water or utilizing it as energy for biomineralization. As was suggested previously, iron is not very mobile and samples with high iron content, should contain low organic matter reflected by the negative correlation coefficient. Sulphur concentrations in relation to L.0.I display two types of samples. In the samples with a low L.0.I content, ie those where the biodegradable organic matter has been utilized, the correlation is positive and very significant, suggesting that sulphate reducing activity as taken place, utilized the organic matter and converted the sulphate into sulphide minerals. On the other hand, when an abundance degradable organic matter is present in the sample, the correlation is less significant and weaker. The correlation coefficient between As and S in Table 8 is non existent and non significant at both high and low concentration ranges. For Ni the same holds true, however the scatter plot in Appendix 2 (fig A2-8) for the lower concentration range suggest a trend although not linear. For both contaminants the correlation with iron is reasonable and significant, supporting to the suggested processes. Table 8: Comparison of pairs of elements n = number of samples; r = correlation coefficient; p = significant levels (a): Range S: 0-6000 ug.g-1; LOI: 80-100 % (b): Range S: 0-2500 ug.g-1; LOI: 0-25 % Boojum Il...W* CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wellands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 34 In summary the data generated from the wetland muskeg area surrounding the waste rock pile support the presence ofthe natural processes which provide a permanent sink for the contaminants released from the mining activity. The data interpretation provides evidence of the presence of biomineralization processes almost unequivocally. 3 . 3 As and Ni Migration in BT-3 and BT-4 Surface Water The removal of contaminants from seepages from the waste rock pile appears to be taking place in sediments, thus wetlands or muskeg areas require ponds to efficiently remove contaminants ie. residence time of the water in contact with the sediments. Map 2 outlines the general direction of surface water run-off, which is generally diffuse, determined by the surface topography. No surface water flow pathways obviously link the WRP run-off collection system with the BT-1 area. Similarly, drainage from the vicinity of the ore pile, lined with a polyliner only occasionally enters the BT-2 area. However, some WRP run-off water contains elevated As and Ni concentrations which appear to have moved beneath the WRP perimeter road into the BT-3 Stn 50 and Stn 100 areas. Elevated As and Ni concentrations have been measured in ponds in these areas (Figures 6a and 6b). The stations are arranged in the figure by date, and by the assumed direction of the water flow, although the stations are not linked directly by surface streams. Actual streams emerge from the muskeg down gradient towards lvison Bay, draining BT-3 (Stn 6.9.44 and Stn 6.9.4) and BT-4 (Stn 6.9.3). Water quality has been periodically determined at these stations to examine whether As and Ni are being transported towards lvison Bay. To date, there is little evidence that As or Ni is being transported by surface streams or shallow groundwater via the ET-4 area to Stn 6.9.3 to the lvison wetland. Arsenic concentrations at Stn 6.9.44 have ranged from between 0.001 and 0.01 mg.L-', and Ni concentrations have ranged from 0.001 to 0.34 mg+'. In 1995 and 1996, As and Ni concentrations at Stn 6.9.44 remained below 0.01 mg+'. Further downstream at Stn CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 Boojum I.-."=* LI"R.D 35 sampled from these piezometers has contained elevated As concentrations, compared to the SP-3 piezometers. SP-4 shallow groundwater contained particularly high As (up to 0.76 mg.L‘) and Ni (0.18 mg.L-’) concentrations in 1995. In 1997, Ni concentration continued to increase to 0.65 mg.L-’ while As concentration decreased to 0.14 mgK’ . The shallow piezometer SP-9 is located near a section of the ore pile haul road and may periodically receive some surface run-off from the perimeter road, although this has not been directly observed. Dissolved As and Ni concentrations have remained elevated, compared to SP-3, in the years following 1993 to present (1997). This could be due to dusting from the ore pile. Limited data exist for the shallow piezometers. An interpretation of the shallow hydrology together with the stratigraphy of the piezometers, may be required to define the shallow water movement in the vicinity of the wetlands. The wetland ponds during the summer can virtually dry out. This in turn may well affect the water quality in the shallow piezometers. 3.5 contaminants sources: Precipitates and evaporates on waste rock surfaces Based on the seepages emerging at the base of the B-Zone waste rock pile a contaminant generation and release concept was developed and presented in the Collins Bay Decommissioning B-Zone waste rock pile; 1996 Final Report. The differences in chemical characteristics and contaminant release noted among approximately 29 temporal toe seepages suggested that, within the waste rock pile, weathering and oxidation products precipitate. In these precipitates Ni and As can accumulate. In turn the re-solubilisation of newly generated seepage from infiltrating water may result in different chemical characteristics of the emerging toe seepages. As these processes do not take place uniformly throughout the waste rock pile, toe seepages have different characteristics and those are different than having originated from weathering the waste rock. In order to understand the stability or solubility of such secondary minerals I precipitates or evaporates, samples were collected during the September 1997 field trip from the CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal OFAS and Ni 41 July, 1998 surface of the waste rock pile, which appeared to have formed on rock surfaces or they had precipitated in the toe seepages. This work is considered as exploratory to obtain some insight into understanding of the weathering/ precipitation processes which are associated with the waste rock pile. A better understanding of weathering and precipitation I evaporate formation processes could optimize environmental management in the long term. Six solid samples from B-Zone waste rock piles are chosen for pH, conductivity, Em, Ni and As analysis. The qualitative description and chemistry derived from the slurries prepared with the field material 60 mL slurries prepared from the six samples are presented in Table 2. The code BZWR -6 or 7 code refers to the sampling location of the seepages around the waste rock pile. The concentrations in the dried sample material of As and Ni in the AdNi oxidized material and the WRP-P sludge are quite high with 1.7 % Ni and 1.5 % As respectively, in comparison to the other material which ranged from 0.03 % to 0.2 % for Ni and 0.02 % to 0.3 % for As (Table 2). The ratios of As and Ni concentrations in all but one of the samples are about 1 suggesting that they are the result of a reaction which involves similar proportions of both elements. The exception is the WRP-P sludge, which is enriched with As up to 6 %. Ni is not concentrated in the precipitated sludge (0.07 %) or not precipitated in the acidic seepage or alternatively Ni is not weathered in this particular seepage path in this location of the waste rock pile. The electrical conductivities are elevated for the samples with high concentrations of As and Ni and the pH values of these thick slurries, ie high solid ratio are low ranging from 2.7 to 3.9 with one exception the foam on the ditch, which has a higher pH of 5.1 (Table 2). As the fresh slurries of the samples had low pH values, the dilution effects of water on the dry sample was quantified and the data are reported in Appendix 2 (Table A2-3). CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 42 The low pH measured in the fresh samples is a reflection ofthe wet volumelliquid ratio and not a result of oxidation reactions. This has been determined by storing the dilute 1 g/lOO mL slurries in the refrigerator over time. The pH was measured periodically over a period of 404 h. It was confirmed that no reactions were evident, when the pH values were compared to the initial 1 h measurements (Table A24 in Appendix 2). It was however noted from these series of experiments, that the nickel concentrations increased in two samples, the precipitated sludge of the WRP -P seepage and in the evaporate/ precipitate on the rocks ASlNi oxidized. These results suggest, that when these precipitates are sitting in water they continue to release Ni. This is in contrast to the other materials evaluated with this series of experiments, where the concentrations remains the same. The precipitates are not stable, compared to the other material in this experimental series. Foam which forms on the ditch is quite stable and does not release too much Ni. The interpretation which may be derived from these preliminary results is that rain water would only transport a particular fraction of Ni to the seepages, not from the total rock mass. Cumulative batch leaching was also performed on these precipitate / evaporate samples, which indicated that the solubility or release of contaminants can be a result of the solid liquid ratio . After 404 h of leaching the slurries , additional 125 mL of distilled water was added as each determination of Ni used about 5 mL of solution. The concentrations of nickel would be expected to be about 50 % of the original, if no further nickel is released from the solids (Data in table xxx in Appendix 2). This is the case for the sandstone, the sludge, the As/Ni oxidized sample and the ditch foam. However the heamatizxed sandstone and the Graphitic gneiss release more Ni. This suggests that the solubility in water is related to a continued oxidation process and or that the release is related to the ratio of the solid to the liquid of the slurry until equilibrium is reached. Using these results, to assess the fraction which is water soluble contaminant in the precipitates % extractable has been calculated (Table 9). These percentages are interesting, since the precipitate on the rocks, referred to as As/ Ni oxidized , containing Boojum L,"I"D CAMECO Corporation Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and NI 43 July, 1998 Table 9: Percentage of Extracted-Ni/As in Total-Ni/As from Waste Rock Pile BZWR-6 Hematiied the highest concentrations in the solid of As and Ni, shows the lowest fraction of both contaminants released to water. The sludge formed in the acid seepage at station WRP-P toe seepage, releases nearly all nickel to the water, but not the arsenic. All other materials tested release 44 YO to 61 YO of their nickel content and 28 to 53 % of their arsenic mass. In summary the exploratory assessment of secondary precipitates I evaporates in comparison to the rocks on the waste rock pile surface allow the following conclusions. The precipitates are more leachable then the waste rock . Leachability of the contaminants is affected by the ratio of water to solids and the contaminants . Some precipitates, formed in acid toe seepages have low contaminant release but contain high concentrations of both As and Ni. Furthermore the gneiss and the sandstones have a finite quantity of Ni and As to release. ~.*'.."." Boojum L,Y..D CAMECO Corporation: Rabbl Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 44 4.0 CONCLUSIONS The experimental work on As and Ni retention by sediments, which had been carried out over the past 5 years in the field and the laboratory, was reported in the 1996 final report. In the same report, contaminant removal process from the water to the sediment was formulated and contaminant forms which accumulate in the sediment were identified, for both As and Ni. The ultimate challenge, however, lays in presenting evidence that these processes actually take place in the muskeg areas at large. Although it was noted from the control enclosures in BT-2 that even without organic amendment additions contaminant removal took place, such evidence can only be derived through empirical interpretation of characteristics of the samples in the key environmental components of the wetlands; ponds with water and sediment and the muskeg vegetation. In addition, concern was expressed, that if the contaminants are merely absorbed onto the organic matter and not biomineralized in the sediment, heavy rain events and snow melt would produce a diffusion gradient leading to release of the contaminants. To address the ultimate challenge, solid samples from the muskeg and ponded areas that were collected in the past were used, in addition to new samples obtained in 1997. To address the concern that release due to a diffusion gradient would occur, distilled water extracts were prepared from the samples to quantify an easily exchangeable fraction of the contaminants. It can be concluded that this is not the case as the contaminants are biomineralized. The data interpretation of the distribution of the contaminants in the muskeg and pond sediment lead us to conclude that As and Ni are being retained in the sediments. The processes which lead to the accumulation in the sediments seem to be those identified in the laboratory and enclosure experiments. Although the data can only be used to indirectly confirm biomineralization, the behaviour of the easily extractable fractions of both As and Ni and the correlation coefficients between key operative parameters in the processes are a strong indication that biomineralization is taking place. Although the data interpretation is somewhat complicated by the presence of contaminant enrichment on the surface of the muskeg substrates due to aerial deposition, the differences between muskeg substrate and CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 45 sediment are clearly defined. Organic carbon and sulphur are abundantly present in those areas where contaminants accumulate. Iron, required for the removal of the contaminants from the seepage is also abundant. It can be concluded through empirical interpretation of the data, that the proposed biomineralization processes take place in the muskeg areas around the waste rock pile. The mining activity has resulted in some aerial deposition of contaimants, but the accumulation in the pond sediments is significantly higher. Although the metals could be present throughout the area due to the natural mineralization this would be evidenced by higher concentrations in all strata regardless of depth. Clearly higher concentrations of As and Ni in solids material which represent the surface stratum were found compared to the concentrations in the material from deeper strata. The sediments of BT-1 and BT-2 ponded areas have a higher mass of As and Ni than the control area (Lake 1) and are also higher than the respective values for the muskeg areas on a kglha basis. Even if all of the muskeg contaminant mass is attributed to aerial transport, the ponds which receive seepage from the ore pile and the waste rock pile periodically have significantly higher concentrations then from an aerial loading. Linear correlation coefficients between As and Ni in the waste rock reflect their mineralization. When the same correlations are made for muskeg and water, further evidence of biomineralization can be provided due to the differences in the slopes of the correlations. In the sediments a different minerals form is suggested, as compared to the waste rock. This supports further the conclusion that biomineralization in the sedirnents has taken place. Descriptive evidence derived from the samples of the muskeg or sediments, such a hydrogen sulphide smell, location and textural structure inferred microbial activity. The data interpretation leads to the inevitable conclusion, that the sediments are actively sequestering contaminants to stable forms in the wetlands surrounding the waste rock pile and reflect the proposed contaminant removal processed identified from the experimental work. CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands For Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 eoojum I..Y"O* L I I I . 0 46 APPENDIX 1 RAW DATA SUMMARY LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Table 2: Table 3: Table 4: Table 5: Table 6a: Table 6b: Table 7: Table 8a: Table 8b: Table 8c: B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data Lab Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AI-3 B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data Field and Lab Bulk Sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AI-6 B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data Moisture, Density and Associated Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AI-9 B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data Leaching Experiment . . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , A I - I2 B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data Excess Pore Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . A I - I5 B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data Elemental Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AI- I8 B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data Elemental Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , , . . . , . AI-21 B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data Whole Sample Analyses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . , . . A I -24 Arsenic Mass in BT-I, BT-2, BT-3, BT-4 and Lake 1 . . , . . . , . . . . AI-27 Nickel Mass in BT-I, BT-2, BT-3, BT-4 and Lake 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . AI-28 Iron Mass in BT-1, BT-2, BT-3, BT-4 and Lake 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AI-29 CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni Jujy. 1998 Al-I Table 8d: Sulphur Mass in BT-1, BT-2, BT-3, BT-4 and Lake 1 . . . . . . . . . . . AI-30 Table 8e: L.O.I. Mass in BT-I, BT-2, BT-3, BT-4 and Lake 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . AI-31 Table 9a: Shallow Piezometers Water Quality Piezometers SP-1 and SP-2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AI-32 Table 9b: Shallow Piezometers Water Quality Piezometers SP9A and SP-3B . . Table 9c: Shallow Piezometers Water Quality Piezometers SP-4 and SP-5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AI-33 a1-34 Table 9d: Shallow Piezometers Water Quality Piezometers SP-6 and SP-7 . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AI-35 Table 9e: Shallow Piezometers Water Quality Piezometers SP-8 and SP-9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AI-36 Table 1Oa: SRC Detection Limits for Solid and Filter Paper Samples . . . . . . . AI-37 Table lob: SRC Detection Limits for Water Samples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AI-38 Table 1 1 : Toe Seepage, 1992-1 997 Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .AI -39 CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni Jujy, 1998 AI-2 Table 1: B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data - Lab Description - Sample Sampled Sample Local Depth Date Area Location Type Subsmate (cm) 19/06/92 BT-1 A Stn2W dredge sed top20 _Ic_ 25/08/97 BT-1 A 25/08/97 BT-l A 25/08/97 BT-1 A 25/08/97 ET-1 A 20/06/92 BT-1 B 20106192 BT-1 B 09/06/93 BT-1 C 09106193 BT-1 C 09/06/93 BT-1 D 09/06/93 BT-I E 09/06/93 BT-1 E 09106193 BT-1 F 31/08/97 BT.1 F 09l06193 BT-1 F 09/06/93 BT-1 F 31/08/97 BT-1 F 31/08/97 BT-1 F 31/08/97 BT-1 F 09/06/93 BT-2 A 25/08/97 BT-2 A 25/08/97 BT-2 A 25/08/97 BT-2 A 09/06/93 BT-2 A 31/08/97 BT-2 B 31/08/97 BT-2 B 19/06/92 ET-2 8 25/08/97 ET-2 B 31/08/97 BT-2 B 31/08/97 BT-2 B 31/08/97 BT-2 B 31/08/97 BT-2 B 31/08/97 BT-2 B 31/08/97 BT-2 B 1 w 150 205 240 Stn 300 Stn 300 SP-7 SP-7 SP-6 SP-8 SP-8 LOC 1 North L o c 1 LOC 1 North North North SP-5 250 350 S N End SP-5 1WN 4WN StnlW 1W 400N 100N 4WN 1 OON 4WN lOON dredge dredge dredge dredge core core Cut Cut cut Cut cut Cut cut cut cut C u t Cut Cut cut dredge dredge dredge cut cut cut dredge dredge Cut Cut Cut Cut cut cut sed oed sed sed mu5 mus mus mus mu5 mus mus mu5 mus mus muo mus mus mus mu3 sed sed Sed mus mus mus sed sed mus mus mus rnus mu5 sed top 20 top 20 top 20 top 20 0-25 25-50 60 150 115 95 150 40 0-25 60 120 25-50 50-75 75-1W 30 top 20 top 20 top 20 120 0-25 0-25 top 20 tap 20 25-35 25-50 3560 5075 60-1 00 75-100 LAB DESCRIPTION Driller Lab Description Description Colour Texture Smell Moistur Very fibrous mat. old root layer peat wll0 GyBn P W/IO,F.Sf.R.Tw P EW sat. gray-d.br. coarse peat w roots sat. coarse peat worg.debris sat.d.br. fine sediment sat. I.br. coarse sed w org.debris peat peat peat peat peat peat peat peat I.br.coarse peat w mob peat sand w gravel m.br.coarse peat w roots m.br.coarse peat w roots m.br.coarse peal w roots peat m.br. LS sat. I.br./y fine sed with arg.debris m.br. LS peat dead sphagnum. rn.br. live sphagnum, shrub +roots grey, org fins particles m.br. LS sat. I. br peat fine m.br. grainy peat siky peat, m br., viscous m.br. fine peat liquid, sandsili. gravel Lbr. peat coarse peat Gy.Bn coarse peat DBn.Gy fine sediment 6n.Gy.Y coarse sediment Bn,Gy coarse peat Y,DO fine peat Bn,O peat Y,O.B peat Bk.0 peat Bk.0 peat Bk.0 peat Bk.O peat Bk.0 peat LB" clay wlorganics Bk.0 sand wlpebbles Bn.0 peat Bn.LBn Peat B".LB" peat Bn.LBn peat Y.Bn gytia Bn fine sediment LBn,YGy gytia DBn peat Bk,O.Y peat LE"$" sphagnum LBn fine peat Bk,Bn aytia DB" peat LB",B" peat LBn.Bn peat DB" peat Bn,Lbn fine peat DBn peat Bn.Dbn,LBn MOD.St.R.Sp.Si SoTw,SoR,SoSt MSt.SoR,LtOD,F,SI. MTw,R,OD,MeGt,SI FaU.St.Ce FU/F, Ch,DeO P.MR.Mle.MTw.G R,Tw,G P.O. R. Tw.Sf G.Sp.SoR.F P.Cy.FwR MTw.MR,MDeO,P MR.0 cy.0.SoP CeSd.VaPe,SoR, SoTw. CyCh P.FwR,Sp, Sf P.FwTw.VFwR.Sp.Sf P,FwTw.VFwR.Sf,Sp P.G.MTw.MR LIOD.VF,ThSI MR.MGr.F.Th.3 MR,SoTw,SoOD,F,ThSI P,VF,Gt,SoR P,MTw,SoR,Sp,Sf MOD,MR.MTw,Mo.Sp P,O,F,Sf,MR FwR.LtSt.FwOD.VF.ThSI P,SoTw.SoR.Sf,Sp P.FwR.Sf,Sp P.SoTw,FwR,H,Sf,Sp P,RFw,FwTw,Sp,Sf FwR.FwTw.Pe,FGt.Si P.VFwR.Sf.Sp H2S P,H+ SgHS S9H2S P P P NS NS NS NS NS 0, NS NS Or For NS P P P.H+ P NS Or Or P P.HS NS NS NS NS NS NS EW EW EW EW M M S EW W M EW M vw M D vw vw vw W EW EW Ew vs W M vw EW w>vw vw vw vw EW W Table 1: 8-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data - Lab Description (continuation) Sample Sampled Sample Local Depth Date Area Location Type substrate (cm) 28108197 61-3 A sZWTZons grab mus 0-25 - 31/08/97 31/08/97 09/06/93 24/08/97 24108197 09/06/93 31108197 31/08/97 31108197 31/08/97 31/06/97 31/08/97 09/06/93 31108197 31108197 31/08/97 31108197 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 09/06/93 09/06/93 09/06/93 31108197 31108197 31/06/97 31/08/97 31108197 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31108197 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 09106193 09106193 09106193 61-3 A BT-3 A BT-3 A 61-3 A BT-3 A BT-3 A BT-3 A ET-3 A BT-3 A 61-3 A BT-3 A BT-3 A ET-3 B BT-3 B ET-3 B ET-3 B BT-3 B 61-3 B 61-3 B BT-3 B 61-3 B 81-3 B BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A ET-4 A BT-4 A ET-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A 61-4 A BT-4 A ET-4 A BT-4 A ET-4 A M 200 SP-2 150 150 SP-2 50 200 M 200 50 200 SP-3 500 SP-3 DH 500 SP3 DH 500 SP-3 OH 500 SP3 DH SP-3 SP-1 SP-4 200 400 6.9.3 DH Stn 6.9.3 200 400 6.9.3 DH 200 400 6.9.3. DH 200 400 6.9.3 DH SP.1 SP-1 SP-4 Cut Cut cut grab grab cut cut Cut cut cut cut Cut Cut cut cut cut Cut cut Cut cut cut cut cut Cut Cut .cut Cut grab cut cut cut cut CUt CUt CUt cut cut cut cut cut mus 0-25 mus 0-25 mvs 75 algae surface sed top20 mus 180 mus 25-50 mus 25-50 mus 50-75 mus 50-75 mus 75-100 mus 75-1W mus 20 rnus 0-25 mus 0-25 rnus 2550 mus 25-50 mur 50-75 mus 50-75 mu5 75.100 mus 75-100 mus 80 mus 105 mus 50 mus 0-25 mus 0-25 mu5 0-25 flocc 0-10 mus 25-50 mus 25-50 mu5 2550 mus 50-75 mus 50-75 mur 50-75 mus 75-100 mus 75.100 rnus 75-90 mu5 140 m m 165 mus 105 LAB DESCRIPTION Driller Lab Description Description Colour Texture Smell Moistu moss LB" MO. Solid NS W gray milky particulates on I.br.peat sat. Ibr. coarse peat w roots Deal peat I.br.peat. some particulates sat. Ibr. coarse peat m.br.peat sat. Ibr. coarse peat m.br.peat sat. Ibr. coarse peat peat I.br.old sphagnum. live sedge roots sat I.br. spahnumpeat. roots I.br. saphnum. roots. coarse sat I.br. spahnumpeat. roots m.br. saphnum. rods. coarse sat 1.br. spahnurnpsat. roots red-.br. saphnum. roots. coarse sat i.br. spahnumpeat, roots peat peat peat m.br.sat peat w sedge roots coarse peat. d.br. m.br. peat. coarse. red floc stain Iron rich loose floc in pools sat. m.br. peat sat. peatd br. coarse sat. cars8 d.br.peat sat. m.br. peat. LS compact sat. peatd br. coarse sat. medium coarse d.be.peat i.br. granular peat sat very wet d.br. fine LS-like peat coarse peat peat ND sediment peat peat peat peat peat m peat peat peat sphagnum sphagnum peat sphagnum sphagnum peat peat sphagnum p a t peat p a t peat coase peat peat precipitate peat peat peat peat peat peat peat fine sphagnum sat silt @ 0.9 m, refusal sin gray till sand w organin gray till w sand siltlsend clay clayey till 6n.W LBn Bk.0 ND DB" Bk.0 LBn B",DB" Bn.Lbn B".LB" Bn,Dbn Bn,LBn Bk,Y,O LBn LB" LBn Bn.LBn LB".B" DBn.Dn LBn.Bn DB".B" Bk,O D,SIO Bk.0 BnDBn Bn.DBn DBtl DBn.Bn E" DBn DBn DBn.Bn DB" ' DBn DBn Bn.Gy 6.Gy.W Gy.W Bk.Gy.W Sg0r.P P.VSgH,S ND MOD.R.Tw,Sf,Sp MOD.St,Tw,R.Sf.Sp VSg H a P.Gt ND MTw.R MO.P.R.Tw.De0 P,MR.MOD.FwTw,FwSt,Sf.Sp P,MR.SoTw,Sf.Sp P,FwR,St.Tw,Sp P,SoR,SoSt.FwTw,Sf,Sp MOD,R,St,Tw,Sp P.FwR,SoSt.FwTw,Sf.Sp P,DsO,R,Tw,Gt MSt.MR,SoTw,Mo,Sp MMa,MSt,MR.MTw,Sf P,MSt,MTw.SoR,SoMo,Sp MMo.MR.MTw.soSt.VSf.Sp MTw.St.Mo,Sp P.MR.SoSt.Tw.Sf.Sp P,MSt.SoR,Mo.Sp OD.MTw.SoR.LtSt.F,Sf,Sp P,R.Tw.DeO.Gt P.MO,R,Tw P,O.DeO.R.Twch P.MR,SoSt.OD,Sf,Sp MSt.Tw.SoR,Sp P,MR,Tw,FwLe,Sf,Sp P,SoOD,R,Tw,St.F,Sf,Sp P.SaTw,SoR,Sf.Sp P.H,SoTw.SoSt,Sf,F FP.SoR.SoSt,VF,Sf,Sp FP.FwR.FwSt.Sf.Sp P,H,FwR.SoTw,SoSt..F,Sf,Sp P.FwR.St,H.Sf,Sp H,FwR,FwSt.VF LtOD,Sd,Pa,Gt Sd.lO.SoTw.SoR Si.Sd,VF.MIO.SoTw P.T,Cy.MIO,SoR,SoCh.Sd M M vw ND EW M->YU EW W W vw M W vw M+W vw W W EW W W W W VM M vw W M vw vw M vw vw M W M M M D M Table 1: B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data - Lab Description (continuation) Sample Sampled Sample Local Depth Date Area Location Type Substrate (cm) -09/06/93 LAKE1 A SP.9 cut mus 65 09/06/93 LAKE1 A SP.9 cut muskeg 90 19/06/92 LAKE1 E Stn100 core mur 020 19/06/92 LAKE 1 B centre dredge sed top20 19/06/92 LAKE1 E StnlW core mu5 20-40 19106192 LAKE1 E StnlW core mur 40-60 19/06/92 LAKE1 B StnlOO core mus 6 W 0 ma: BT1.2.3.4: Locations originally named according to position along 0-21 -LAB DESCRIPTION Driller Lab Smell Moisturt Description Description Colour Texture peat peat Y.0" P,G.O NS D+M clay peat w clay Bk.0 P.Cy.SoR.SoTw NS EW peat 0 P NS EW fine organics DBn.Bk U.O.FwR,F.Sf P EW peat Gn.0 P.MR.MTw NS M peat Ek P.VSP NS Dr peat 0,Bn P.VF NS VM - m e transects (ET) A to F: Area on map Location: T r a n d map 100 intervals: DH=Drill Hole, LOC-Location. N-North, S-South. SP-Shallow Piho. StnmStation Sample type and loca substrate: Cut=Cuttings, DrediDredge, Mus=Muskeg, Sed=Sediment Driller Description: be=beige, bFbrown. d=dark. i=light. LS=gyiia. m=mdium, sat=saturated, red=radimnt. org=organic. w n i t h Colour: Bk-Black. Bn-Brom. D-Dark, Gn-Green, GyGrey, L-Light, 0-Orange, Rd-Red, SI-Slight, Tn-Tan, W M i e Texture: CbCoane. ChChunk. CyClay. De-Decomposing. Dr-Drier, F-Fine. Fa-Fairly. FwFew, G-Grainy. Gr-GrassGtGrii. H-Humus. 10-Inorganic, La-Larger, Le-Leaf, Lt-Lmle. M-Many. Me-Medium, MO-Moss. O-Organic, OD-Organic Debris. P-Peat. PbPsbble. R-Root. Sd-Sand, SISoR. Si-Siliy. SISludge. So-Som. Sp-Spcngy. St-Straw. T-Till. Th-Thick, TwTwig. U-Uniform. V-Very. Va-Various. WI-Mth Smell: Ds-Decomposing. F-Faint, M: Moderate. NS-No Smell, Or-Organic Smell, P-Pungent, SgStrong, SI-Slight, V-Very Moisture: D-Dry, EW-Excess Wter. M.Moist. S-Saturated, V-Very. WWet NA=Not Analyzed, ND=Not Determinated. NM-Not Measureable because of no enough water Table 2: B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data - Field and Lab Bulk Sample Sampled Sample Sample Local Depth Date Area Location Type Substrate (an) 19/06/92 ET-I A Stn200 dredge sed tOD 20 25/08/97 ET-I A 25/08/97 ET-1 A 25/08/97 ET-1 A 25/08/97 ET-I A 20/06/92 ET-I E 20106192 BT-I B 09/06/93 ET-1 C 09/06/93 ET-I C 09/06/93 ET-1 D 09/06/93 ET-1 E 09/06/93 ET-I E 09/06/93 ET-I F 31/08/97 BT-I F 09/06/93 BT-I F D9/C6/93 ET-I F 31/08/97 ET-I F 31/08/97 ET-I F 51/08/97 ET-1 F 19/06/93 ET-2 A 25/08/97 ET-2 A 15/08/97 ET-2 A 25/08/97 ET-2 A 19/06/93 ET-2 A 11/08/07 ET-2 E 11/08/07 ET-2 E 19/06/82 BT-2 E !5/08/97 ET-? E 11/08/97 ET-2 6 11/08/97 BT-2 E 11/08/97 ET-2 E 11/08/97 ET-2 B 11/08/97 ET-2 E 31/08/97 ET-2 E 100 150 205 240 Sm 300 Stn 300 SP-7 SP-7 SP-6 SP-8 SP-8 LOC 1 North LOC 1 LOC 1 North North North SP-5 250 350 S N End SP-5 1 OON 400N StnlOO 100 400N lOON 400N 1 OON 400N 100N dredge dredge dredge dredge Wre core Cut w t cut cut cut Cut cut wt cut w t cut "' w t dredge dredge dredge Wt Cut wt dredge dredge wt w t cut cut w t w t hed sed red red mus mus mus mus mus mu6 mus mus mus mus mus mus mus mus rnus sed sed Sed mus mus mus sed mus mus mus mus rnus sed 6ed top 20 top 20 top 20 top 20 0-25 25-50 60 150 115 95 150 40 0-25 60 120 25-50 50-75 75-100 30 top 20 top 20 top 20 120 0-25 0-25 top 20 top 20 25-35 25-50 35-60 50-75 60-100 75-100 FIELD BULK SAMPLE 6.24 6.12 6.21 6.18 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM 5.87 5.91 5.74 NM NM NM NM 5.46 NM NM NM NM NM NM 11.7 11.5 12.3 12.1 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM 13 13.1 12.5 NM NM NM NM 12 NM NM NM NM NM NM 118 112 74 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM 91 68 68 NM NM NM NM 04 NM NM NM NM NM NM a7 -66 -55 -58 4 6 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM -12 -19 -3 NM NM NM NM 6 NM NM NM NM NM NM LAB BULK SAMPLE 6.22 5.92 5.77 5.87 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM 5.64 5.54 5.33 NM NM NM NM 5.28 NM NM NM NM NM NM 25.5 24 24 24 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM 25 24 24 NM NM NM NM 24 NM NM NM NM NM NM 59 81 70 59 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM 55 68 63 NM NM NM NM 85 NM NM NM NM NM NM -148 -139 -148 -122 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM -95 -120 4 1 NM NM NM NM 4 6 NM NM NM NM NM NM Table 2: B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data -Field and Lab Bulk Sample (continuation) Sampled Samplc Sample Local Depth Date Area Location Type Substrate (cm) 28/08/97 ET-3 A BNY-T- grab mus 0-25 31/08/97 BT-3 A 31/08/97 BT-3 A 09/06/93 ET-3 A 24/08/97 BT-3 A 24/08/97 ET-3 A 09/06/93 ET-3 A 31/08/97 ET-3 A 31/08/97 BT-3 A 31/08/97 BT-3 A 31/08/97 BT-3 A 31/08/97 BT-3 A 31/08/97 BT-3 A 09/06/93 BT-3 8 31/08/97 ET-3 B 31/08/97 ET-3 E 31/08/97 BT-3 B 31/08/97 ET-3 B 31/08/97 ET-3 B 31/08/97 ET-3 B 31/08/97 BT-3 B 31/06/97 BT-3 E 09/06/93 BT-3 E 09/06/93 ET4 A 09/06/03 BT4 A 31/08/97 ET4 A 31/08/97 BT4 A 31/08/97 BT4 A 31/08/97 BT4 A 31/08/97 BT4 A 31/08/97 ET4 A 31/08/97 ET4 A 31/08/97 BT4 A 31/08/97 ET4 A 31/08/97 BT4 A 31/08/97 BT4 A 09/06/93 B T 4 A 09/06/93 BT4 A 09/06/93 ET4 A 31108m7 BT-~ A 31108/97 er4 A 50 200 SP-2 150 150 SP-2 50 200 50 200 50 200 SP-3 500 SP-3 DH 500 SP3 DH 500 SP-3 DH 500 SP3 OH SP-3 SP-I SP-4 200 400 6.9.3 DH Sln 6.9.3 200 400 6.9.3 DH 200 400 6.9.3.DH 200 400 6.9.3 DH SP-1 SP-1 SP-4 cu1 cut w t grab grab Cut cu1 cu1 WI WI Wt cul cu1 Wt cu1 Wl Wl cu1 CUl CUI cu1 WI cut Wl cu1 cut cut grab CUL WI WI cut cut w t CUI cu1 CUI cut cu1 cut rnus mus mu6 algae Sad rnus muo mus mu5 mus mus mus mu6 mus mus mus mus rnus mus mus rnus mus mus mus mus mus rnus nocc rnus mus rnus mus mus mus mus mus rnus mus mus mus 0-25 0-25 75 surface top 20 180 25-50 25-50 50-75 50-75 75-100 75.100 20 0-25 0-25 25-50 25-50 50-75 50-75 75-100 75-100 80 105 50 0-25 0-25 0-25 0-1 0 25-50 25-50 25-50 50.75 Jc-75 50-75 75-100 75-100 75-90 140 165 105 FIELD BULK SAMPLE pH Temp Cond Em NM NM NM ND NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM ND NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM ND NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM ND NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM LAB BULK SAMPLE pH Temp Cond Em NM NM NM ND NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM ND NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM ND NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM ND NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM Table 2: B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data - Field and Lab Bulk Sample (continuation) 19/06/92 LAKE1 B StnlW NM NM I Table 3: B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data - Moisture, Density and Associated Data Sampled Sample Sample Local Depth Oate Area Location Type Subsbte (m) IWW92 BT-I A Stn2W dredge sod tOD 20 ~ 25/08197 ET4 A 25/08197 BT-1 A 25/08/97 BT-1 A 25108197 BT-I A 20/08/92 BT-I B 20/08/92 BT-I B WW93 BT-1 C 09/08/93 BT-I C W 9 3 ET-1 D WW93 BT-I E ffl106/93 BT-I E 09/06/93 BT-I F 31/08/97 BT-I F WO3393 BT-I F 09/W93 BT-I F 31/08/97 BT-I F 31/08/97 BT-I F 31/08/97 BT-I F 09/06/93 BT-2 A 25/08/97 BT-2 A 25x18197 ET-2 A 25/08197 BT-2 A 09106193 BT-2 A 31/08/97 BT-2 B 31/08/97 BT-2 S 19/08/92 BT-2 B 2YW97 BT-2 B 31/08/97 BT-2 B 31/08/97 BT-2 B 31/08/97 BT-2 B 31/08/97 BT-2 B 31/08/97 BT-2 B 31/08/97 BT-2 B 100 150 205 240 Stn 3CU Stn SP-7 SP-7 SP-6 SP-8 SP-8 Loc I North Lcc 1 Loc 1 North North North SP-5 250 350 S N End SP-5 IWN 4WN StnlW I00 400N IOON 4WN IWN 4WN IWN dredge dredge dredga con con Cut cut Cut Cut Cut cut Cut Cut Cut Cut Cut Cut cut dredge dredge dredge cut cut cut dredge dredge Cut cut cut cut cul Cut dredgs sd sod wd Sed mus mus mus mus rnus mus mw m s rnus rnus mus mus rnw m m s Sed sed sd mus m w rnus sed Sad mu8 rnus rnus rnus sed mu% top m top m top 20 top 20 0-25 25-50 60 150 115 95 150 40 0-25 60 120 2550 50.75 75-100 30 top 20 top 20 top 20 120 0-25 0-25 top 20 top 20 25-35 25-50 3560 55-75 So100 75-1W M m k Hach MarckMach Moktun Sample Sample Sample Extradon Asin Nlin Extractable knsity Content mtv.t,g drywt porewater watervol. extnCt extract ama g.mJ gmL % 60mLsafnple (g) VOLL ~ ( + 1 2 0 m ~ ) mg.c' mg.c' AS Ni 0.99 78.3 5 9 . m 12.920 0.047 0.167 0.8 0.050 2.2 0.14 1.27 1.22 1.35 1.19 0.86 0.94 0.86 1.24 0.93 0.93 0.95 0.97 0.71 0.81 1.31 0.71 0.85 0.76 1.07 1.22 1.15 1.17 1.10 0.75 0.29 1.05 1.35 0.78 0.73 1 .a 0.77 1.74 0.64 85.8 85.6 86.6 88.6 91.7 80.4 86.9 87.7 76.9 86.4 82.7 75.4 91.6 61.2 91.7 94.3 94.7 85.2 92.1 86.1 90.9 79.9 89.1 85.5 71.3 92.8 92.8 87.2 63.6 92.2 26.7 90.6 89.7 76.1 73 92.1 71.2 51.400 5 8 . m 52.6M) 74.500 55.700 56.Mx) 56.700 58.400 42.8 48.400 78.800 42.6 50.8 45.5 64.100 73.2 69.1 70.3 65.900 44.8 17.3 62.m 81 47.1 43.7 64.6 46 104.4 38.3 10.8 10.5 12.3 8.1 4.260 11.100 6.900 9.200 12.870 7.610 9.840 14.303 3.6 18.790 63.410 4.4 2.9 2.4 9.510 5.8 9.6 6.4 13.270 4.9 2.5 18.050 5.8 3.4 5.6 23.5 3.6 78.5 3.6 0.065 0.053 0.080 0.063 0.047 0.046 0.046 0.065 0.043 0.048 0.047 0.044 0.039 0.030 0.072 0.038 0.048 0.043 0.055 0.007 0.060 0.084 0.053 0.040 0.015 0.045 0.075 0.044 0.041 0.042 0.028 0.038 o.ms 0.185 ND 0.183 ND 0.200 ND 0.163 ND 0.157 0.25 0.188 0.05 0.166 0.05 0.185 c 0.05 0.183 < 0.05 0.168 0.05 0.157 0.05 0.164 c 0.05 0,159 ND 0.150 < 0.05 0.192 c 0.05 0.158 ND 0.188 ND 0.183 ND 0.175 < 0.05 0.187 ND 0.180 ND 0.184 ND 0.173 0.1 0.160 ND 0.135 ND 0.165 0.25 0.195 ND 0.164 ND 0.158 ND 0.161 ND 0,182 ND 0.148 ND 0.155 NO ND ND ND ND 0.118 0.315 0.514 0.418 0.017 0.416 1.278 0.324 ND 2.474 ND ND ND 0.548 ND ND ND 0.646 ND ND 0.339 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.032 ND ND ND ND 0.70 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 ND 0.12 0.16 ND ND ND 0.15 ND ND ND 0.29 ND ND 0.69 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND 0.33 0.87 1.42 1.28 0.05 1.17 3.55 0.89 ND 6.17 0.10 ND ND ND 1.59 ND ND ND 1 .a ND ND 0.93 ND ND NO ND NO ND ND Table 3: B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data - Moisture, Density and Associated Data (continuation) Sampled Sample Sample Local Depth Date Area Location Type Subsbate (em) 28/08/97 BT-3 A W T Z o n e grab mus 025 3 1 M 7 31/08/97 09106(93 24/08/91 24/08/97 09/w93 31108/91 31108/97 31/08/91 31/08/97 31/08/91 31/08/97 09/06/93 311MV97 31108197 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 09IW93 09/08/93 WIW93 31/08/97 31/08/97 311W97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31108(97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 09/W93 03/06/93 W W 9 3 BT-3 A 50 BT-3 A 200 BT-3 A SP-2 BT-3 A 133 BT-3 A I50 BT-3 A SP-2 ET-3 A 50 BT-3 A 200 BT-3 A 33 BT-3 A 200 BT-3 A 50 BT-3 A 2 w BT-3 B SP-3 BT-3 B 500 BT-3 B SP-3DH BT-3 B MO BT-3 B SP3DH BT-3 B 5w BT-3 B SP-3 DH BT-3 B 500 BT-3 B SP3DH BT-3 B SP-3 BT-4 A SP-1 BT-4 A SP-4 BT-4 A 200 BT-4 A 400 BT-4 A 6.9.3 DH BT-4 A Stn 6.9.3 BT-4 A 200 BT-4 A 400 BT-4 A 6.9.3 DH BT-4 A 200 BT-4 A 400 BT-4 A 6.9.3. DH BT-4 A 2 w BT-4 A 4 w BT-4 A 6.9.3 DH BT-4 A SP-1 BT-4 A SP-1 BT-4 A SP-4 cut cut Cut gnb grab cut Cut Cut cut Cut Cut Cut Cut Cut Cut cut cut wt cut Cut Cut Cut cut Cut cut Cut cut grab cut cut Cut cut Nt Cut cut cut Cut Cut cut Cut mus mus mus algae €4 mus mus mus mur mu. mus mus mus mus mus m mu$ mUS mus mus mur mus mUS mm mus mus mus mus mur mus mus mus mus mus mus mus nocc mus M S mus 025 0-25 75 SUltaCO top 20 180 25-50 25-33 52-75 5075 75100 75-100 20 025 0-25 25-50 25-50 5075 5075 75-103 75-100 80 105 50 0-25 0-25 0-25 0 1 0 25-50 25-50 25-50 50-75 50-75 5075 75-100 75100 75-90 140 165 105 Merck Hach MerckAiach Moisture Sample Sample Sample Exhadion As in NI in Extractable hnsiiy Content Wawt,g dtyul porewater watervol. extract extract g.mJ g.m’ dmL % 80mLsampla (9) VOLL ~(+120mL) mg.c’ mg.c’ AS Ni 1.04 70.1 62.3 18.6 0.044 0.164 ND ND ND ND 0.67 0.69 0.98 ND 0.87 0.94 0.87 0.89 0.88 0.80 0.72 1.09 0.97 0.83 0.90 0.79 0.84 0.88 0.82 0.88 0.98 1.28 0.89 0.95 0.82 0.84 0.79 1.01 0.81 0.85 1.09 0.76 0.90 0.69 0.87 1.08 0.90 1.19 1.21 83.2 89.4 86.1 ND 86.3 87.8 89.4 92.5 91.2 92.1 88.5 93.3 84.3 89.8 93.5 93.1 93.4 93.4 90.9 93.3 90.5 61.2 83.4 84.8 89.6 89.7 77.2 87.8 92.8 77.4 83.7 86.9 76.4 84.1 68.6 31.3 42.1 16.8 33.7 40.4 41.6 58,800 ND 52 56.200 52.1 53.5 52.5 48.3 43.3 65.3 58.300 49.8 53.9 58 50.2 53 49.4 52.5 58 76.900 53.600 57.m 49 50.7 47.3 60.6 48.4 50.8 65.5 45.8 53.9 41.4 52.2 64.9 54.1w 71.200 72.400 6.8 4.4 8.190 ND 7.1 6.840 5.5 4 4.6 3.8 5 4.4 9.133 5.1 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4.5 3.5 5.5 10.710 8.880 8.860 5.1 5.2 10.8 7.4 3.5 11.5 10.7 6 12.7 6.6 16.4 44.6 31.940 59.420 47.990 0.034 0.037 0.051 ND 0.045 0.049 0.047 0.050 0.048 0.045 0.036 0.081 0.049 0.045 0.050 0.054 0.047 0.050 0.045 0.049 0.053 0.047 0.045 0,048 0.044 0.046 0.037 0.053 0,045 0.039 0.055 0 . m 0.041 0.035 0.036 0,020 0.023 0.012 0.024 0.154 ND 0.157 ND 0.171 0.4 ND ND 0.185 ND 0.169 0.4 0.167 ND 0.170 ND 0.188 ND 0.165 ND 0.158 ND 0.181 ND 0.169 c 0.05 0.165 ND 0.170 ND 0.174 ND 0.167 ND 0.170 ND 0.165 ND 0.169 ND 0.173 ND 0,167 c 0.05 0.165 0.4 0.168 0.05 0.164 ND 0.166 ND 0.157 ND 0.173 ND 0.165 ND 0.159 ND 0.175 ND 0.160 ND 0.161 ND 0.155 ND 0.156 ND 0.140 ND 0.143 0.05 0.132 < 0.05 0.144 0.1 ND ND ND ND 0.416 1.14 ND ND NO ND 0.493 1.13 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.545 0.14 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.332 0.14 0.170 1.10 0.155 0.14 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.103 0.12 0.075 0.11 0.195 0.24 ND ND 1.18 ND ND 1.39 ND ND ND ND ND ND 1.54 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.84 0.47 0.43 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO ND ND ND ND 0.25 0.16 0.47 Table 3: B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data - Moisture, Density and Associated Data (continuation) Moisture Sample Ssmpla Sample Extraction A+ in NI in Extractable w/o8/93 LAKE1 A 0.92 89.1 55.109 5.990 0.049 0.169 1.0 0.201 2.82 0.57 09/06193 LAKE1 A cut muskeg 90 1.07 79.0 M.2W 13.510 0.051 0.171 0.1 1.092 0.28 3.11 19/06/92 LAKE1 B StnlW 45.200 3.720 0.041 0.181 0.05 0.078 0.13 0.21 19/W92 LAKE1 B dredge sed 19/06/92 LAKEI B 19/06/92 LAKEI B Table 4: B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data - Leaching Experiment Sampled Sample Sample Local Depth Date Area Location Type Subsbate (cm) 19106192 BT-1 A Stn2W dredge S d tOD20 -25/08/97 25/08/97 25/08/97 25/08/97 2 0 / m 20/08/92 09/06/93 09/06/93 09/06/93 W 9 3 mmm 09/06/93 31/08/97 09/08/93 w06/93 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 09/06/93 25/08/97 25/08/97 25/08/97 09/06/93 31/08/97 31/08/97 19/06/92 25/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/06/97 ET4 A BT-1 A BT-1 A ET-1 A ET-I B BT-1 B ET4 C BT-I C BT-1 D BT-I E BT-1 E BT-1 F BT-I F BT-I F BT-1 F BT-I F BT-I F BT-1 F BT-2 A BT-2 A BT-2 A ET-2 A ET-2 A ET-2 B BT-2 B ET-2 B BT-2 B BT-2 B BT-2 B BT-2 B ET-2 B BT-2 B BT-2 E iw 150 205 240 Stn 300 Stn 300 SP-7 SP-7 S P 8 SP-8 SP.8 L M : 1 North L o c 1 L o c 1 North North North SP-5 250 350 S N End SP-5 IWN 4WN StnlM) 1W 4WN 1 WN 4CQN 1 WN 4WN IWN dredge dredge drdge dredge cow COW cut Cut Cut Cut Cut Cut cut Cut Cut cut Cut Cut cut dredge dredge dredge cut Cut Cut dredge dredge Cut cut cut Cut Cut cut top 20 top 20 top 20 top 20 0 2 5 25-50 60 150 115 95 150 40 0 2 5 60 120 25-50 5075 7 5 1 00 30 top 20 top 20 top 20 120 0-25 0-25 tap 20 top 20 25-35 2550 3560 50-75 801W 75-100 SRC SRC B a r d on SRC X T R A C T Extractable pH Temp Cond’ Em Assay As,Asay Ni,Assay g.mJ g.m“ 5.64 5.72 5.63 5.41 5.63 5.08 5.20 5.33 5.24 4.90 4.58 5.13 4.59 5.03 4.52 4.24 4.79 4.21 5.20 4.96 5.62 5.71 4.42 3.84 4.19 6.13 5.54 4.13 3.78 4.06 3.88 4.5 4.02 23 23 23 23 21.8 21.9 21.7 21.8 21.8 21.8 21.8 21.7 20 21.7 22.1 19.5 20 19.5 21.6 23 22 23 21.8 20 20 21 .8 n 19.5 19 20.5 19 20 21 50 60 60 32 35 30 37 40 50 55 50 139 25 90 155 21 28 22 42 45 53 41 53 50 30 33 50 26 48 42 42 19 31 -130 -120 184 -128 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO 284 ND ND 352 322 348 ND -58 -110 104 ND 344 303 ND 90 388 356 239 353 301) 333 ND ND ND ND 0.44 0.18 0.12 0.06 0.005 0.W 0.11 0.01 ND 0.m 0.006 ND ND ND 0.W ND ND ND 0.16 ND ND ND 0.37 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NO 0.028 0.028 0.028 0.031 0.027 0.028 0.028 0.027 ND 0.025 0.032 ND ND ND 0.029 ND ND ND 0.029 ND ND ND 0.027 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND OC us.cm-’ mv NO. mg.L-’ mg.P AS NI 6.63 21.8 104 ND 6379 0.199 0.04 0.55 0.11 I ND ND 8380 8381 6371 6372 6388 < 6374 c 6373 6370 < 6369 c 6367 < 6377 c 6366 6378 ND ND ND ND ND ND o.1n < 0.01 0.065 c 0.01 0.044 < 0.01 0.02 c 0.01 0.002 c 0.01 0.m < 0.01 0.041 < 0.01 0.m < 0.01 ND ND 0.002 c 0.01 0 . m < 0.01 ND ND ND ND ND ND 0 . m c 0.01 NO ND ND ND ND ND 0.054 < 0.01 ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.133 0.01 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Table 4: B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data - Leaching Experiment (continuation) Sample E X T R A C T I SRC SRC sax- on SRC ExtractaMa Sampled Sample Local Depth pH Temp Cond Em Assay As.Assay Ni.Assay g.mJ g.mJ Date Area Location Type Substnte (cm) O c us.cm” mv NO. mg.C’ mg.P AS NI 28/08/97 BT-3 A 0-25 5.1 21 306 102 ND ND ND ND 31/06/97 31/08/97 ogMBl93 24/08/97 24/08/97 m 3 31/08/97 31/08/97 3 1 W 9 7 31/08/97 09/06/93 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 09/06/93 WO6193 w w 9 3 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 09IW93 09/06/93 091w93 31/08/97 31/08/97 BT-3 A BT-3 A BT-3 A BT-3 A BT-3 A BT-3 A BT-3 A BT3 A BT-3 A BT-3 A BT-3 A BT-3 A BT-3 B BT-3 B BT-3 B BT-3 B BT-3 B BT-3 B BT-3 B BT-3 B BT-3 B BT-3 B BT-4 A 87-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BTd A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A 50 200 SP-2 1M 150 SP-2 50 200 M 2 w 50 2 w SP-3 5w SP-3 DH 5w SP3 DH 5w SP-3 OH 500 SP3 DH SP-3 SP-1 SP-4 200 m 6.9.3 DH Sin 6.9.3 2 w 400 8.9.3 OH 200 4 w 6.9.3. DH 2 w 400 6.9.3 DH SP-1 SP-1 SP-4 g n b CIA Cut cut grab grab Cut cut Cut cut cut cut cut cut cut Cut cut Cut Cut Cut Cut Cut cut Cut nn Cut cut cut grab cut Cut Cut Cut Cut Cut Cut Cut Cut cut Cut C A N I S mur M O mur algae Sal M S M S mus mus mtm mus mur mus N I S mUs N I S mu6 mus mua mus mus rnus NIE N S N I S mur M S nocc mUs mus mus mus mu8 mus mus inUS mus mur mu- mus 0-25 5.74 75 5.26 0-25 I 4.77 W h W top 20 180 25-50 25-50 5075 5075 75-1 w 75-100 20 0-25 0-25 25-50 25-50 5075 5075 75-103 75-100 80 105 50 0-25 0-25 0-25 0-10 25-50 25% 25-50 5075 5075 5075 75-100 75-1 w 75-90 140 165 105 ND 4.86 5.69 5.49 4.26 5.11 4.41 5.08 4.51 5.w 5.58 4.24 5.42 4.2 5.24 4.11 5.24 4.2 5.26 5.48 4.46 4.65 5.47 6.53 4.98 5.33 6.2 5.26 5.52 6.13 4.91 5.51 5.17 4.55 4.75 5.85 20 19 21.8 ND 21 21.7 20 19 20 20 20 19.5 21.7 24 23.5 24 24 24 24 23.5 24 ’ 21.7 21.7 21.8 23.5 23.5 23 24 24 24 23.5 24 24 24 24 24 21.8 21.7 21.8 52 24 97 ND 651 82 28 30 25 28 20 25 49 32 37 20 40 41 35 29 32 72 I44 226 a5 144 122 70 74 53 69 40 41 64 63 57 272 219 88 128 242 ND ND 88 ND 198 289 215 324 247 327 ND 5 253 309 371 74 282 2% 152 ND ND ND 31 -52 2 w -2 23 -132 -46 49 1 1 8 27 41 27 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 6361 0.187 6360 0.279 6363 < 0.m ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 6362 c 0 . m 6359 0.2 6365 c 0.m ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 6358 c 0.002 6357 c 0.m 6364 < 0.m ND ND 0.01 ND ND < 0.01 ND ND NO ND ND ND c 0.01 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND < 0.01 c 0.01 L 0.01 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND c 0.01 c 0.01 c 0.01 ND ND 0.53 ND ND 0.79 ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.006 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.m 0.55 0.m ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.m 0.004 0.005 ND ND 0.028 ND ND 0.028 ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.028 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.028 0.027 0.028 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.024 0.022 0.024 Table 4: 8-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data - Leaching Experiment (continuation) SRC SRC Based on SRC Extractable 09/08/93 LAKE1 A 5.09 21.8 77 ND 6576 0.4 c 0.01 1.2 0.028 09K)61Q1 LAKE1 A cut muskeg 90 5.24 21.8 59 ND 6375 0.074 c 0.01 0.21 0.028 19/08/92 LAKE1 B StnlOO NO 6386 C 0.002 C 0.01 0 . W 0.027 dredge d Table 5: B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data - Excess Pore Water I Sampled Sample Me& SRC SRC I Sampl Local Depth pH Ccnd Temp Em As A=Y Ass.AUsy Nl.A=Y Date Area Location ~ y p e ubsbat (cm) I ~ . S m ” OC mV mg.C’ No. mg.L“ mg.C’ 19/06/92 ET-1 A Stn2W dredge ad too20 I 6.W 219 21.9 < 0.05 6392 x0.002 a 0 1 - 291W97 ET4 A 1W dredge sod top20 2yMv97 ET4 A 150 dredge sod lop20 25/08/97 ET-I A 205 dredge red top20 25/08/97 ET-1 A 240 dredge sed top20 20/06/92 ET4 E Stn3W core mus 0-25 2 W 9 2 ET-1 E S t n W core mu5 2550 09/06/93 ET4 C SP-7 cut mus 60 09/06/93 ET4 C SP-7 cut mua 150 09/06/93 ET4 D SP-6 cut rms 115 09/06/93 ET4 E SP-8 cut mu5 95 09/06/93 ET-I E SP-3 cut mu4 150 5.98 24 97 1 37 ND NO 5.83 24 98 155 NO ND 5.9 24 96 160 ND ND 5.05 24 79 197 ND ND NM NM NM NM ND ND NM NM NM NM ND ND NM NM NM NM ND ND NM NM NM NM ND ND 5.08 52 22.5 0.1 6389 0,061 co.01 NM NM NM NM ND ND O’Og I NM NM NM NM 2 6391 0.289 4.66 80 22.2 0.2 63go 0.092 <0.01 09/06/93 ET4 F LOCI cut mur 40 NM NM NM NM 31/08/97 ET-I F North cut mu% 025 I NM NM NM NM 09/06/93 09/06/93 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 09/06/93 25/08/97 25/08/97 25/08/97 09/06/93 31/08/97 31/08/97 19/06/92 25/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 ET-1 F ET-1 F ET4 F ET-I F ET4 F ET-2 A ET-2 A ET-2 A ET-2 A ET-2 A ET-2 E ET-2 E ET-2 E ET-2 E ET-2 E ET-2 E ET-2 E ET-2 E ET-2 E ET-2 E L o c 1 LOC 1 North North North SP-5 250 350 s N End SP-5 1WN 4WN StnlW 1W 4WN IWN 4WN IWN 4WN IWN Cut cut cut cut wt Cut dredge dredge dredge Cut cut Cut dredge dredge Cut Cut cut cut cut cut mua mur mur mur mus mur ad ad sed m S N1s mus Sed sed mus M S mur M S N1S red W 120 2560 50-15 75100 30 top 20 top 20 top 20 120 0-25 0-25 top 20 top 20 25-35 25-50 3560 5075 6DIW 751W NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM 5.75 24 50 5.89 25 147 5.63 24.5 65 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM 5.6 24 51 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM 4.52 19 37 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM 1 73 -34 116 NM NM NM NM NM 9s NM NM’ NM NM 346 NM ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NM ND NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM Table 5: B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data - Excess Pore Water (continuation) Sampled Sample Sampl Local Depth Date Area Location Type u h t (cm) 28/08/97 ET-3 A B Z W T Z ~ ~ grab mus 025 31/08/97 ET-3 A 31/08/97 ET73 A 09/06/93 ET-3 A 24/08/97 ET-3 A 24/08/97 ET-3 A 09/06/93 ET-3 A 31/08/97 ET4 A 31/08/97 ET-3 A 31/08/97 ET3 A 31/08/97 ET3 A 31/08/97 ET-3 A 09/06193 ET4 E 31/08/97 ET-3 E 31/08/97 ET3 E 31/08/97 ET-3 B 31/08/97 BT-3 B 31/08/97 ET3 E 31/08/97 ET3 E 31/08/97 BT-3 E 31/08/97 ET3 E 09/06/93 ET3 E 31/08/97 BT.~ A 09/06/93 ET4 A 09/06/93 ET4 A 31/08/97 ET4 A 31/08/97 ET4 A 31/06/97 ET4 A 31/08/97 ET4 A 31/08/97 ET4 A 31/08/97 ET4 A 31/08/97 ET4 A 31/08/97 ET4 A 31/08/97 ET4 A 31/08/97 ET4 A 31/08/97 ET4 A 31/08/97 ET4 A 31/08/97 ET4 A 09/05193 ET4 A 09/08/93 ET4 A 09/06/93 ET4 A 50 2 w SP-2 150 150 SP-2 50 200 50 2 w 50 2 w SP-3 500 SP-3 DH 500 SP3 DH 500 SP-3 DH 500 SP3 DH SP-3 EP-1 S P 4 200 400 6.9.3 DH Stn 6.9.3 2 w 4 w 6.93 DH 200 4 w 6.9.3. DH 200 4 w 6.9.3 DH SP-1 SP-1 SP-4 cut Cut cut grab grab cut Cut Cut Cut Cut Cut cut Cut Cut Cut Cut cut cut Cut cut Cut Cut cut Cut Cut Cut cut grab cut Cut Cut Cut Cut Cut Cut Cut Cut Cut Cut Cut mut 025 mus 025 mus 75 algae sulraca €44 top20 mM 180 mut 2550 mut 2550 nnm 50-75 mut 50-75 mu5 75100 mus 75100 mur 20 mur 025 mus 025 mus 25-50 mus 2550 nnm 5a-75 mut 50-75 mus 75-103 mus 751W mus 80 mus 105 mus 50 mus 025 mur 0-25 mur 025 mus 2550 mus 25-50 mus 2550 mus 50-75 mu8 50-75 mus 50-75 mus 75-100 mus 75100 mua 7590 mus 140 mus 165 mus 105 nocc 0.10 X C E S S P O R E W A T E R M0rck SRC SRC PH a n d Temp Em As Assay &,Assay NIAMa! us.m.’ *C mv mg.c’ NO. mg.c’ mg.c’ NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM ND NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM 5.82 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM ND NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM 24 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM ND NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM 30 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM 0.4 -7 0.213 ND ND NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM c 0.05 6388 ~0.002 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM 207 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM 0.02 ND NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM <0.01 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM Table 5: B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data - Excess Pore Water (continuation) 19/06/92 LAKE 1 E StnlW core mn 0-20 19106192 LAKE1 B centre dredge aed top20 19/06/92 LAKE1 E StnlW core m s 2040 19/06/92 LAKE1 B StnlW core m a 4080 19106192 LAKE1 B StnlW core m r 6wo Sample Morck SRC SRC Dab Area Location T y p ubstrat (cm) Us.m-' OC mV mg.L" No. mg.C' mg.C' Aa Array As.Auay Nl.Astay Sampled Sampl Local Depth PH Cond 'Temp Em U NM NM NM NM NM NM 6.32 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM M1W93 LAKE1 A SP-9 CIA rnur 09W93 LAKE1 A SP-9 cut m k e g 90 I NM NM I NM NM Table 6a: 8-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data -Elemental Analyses b I I Sampled I Sample Sample Local Depth Element (U&, W Date Area Location Type Subsbate (crn) I Ag AI As B Ba Be Ca Cd CO Cr Cu Fe K 19/06/92 BT-1 A Stn2W dredge ssd top20 1 0.5 1- 390 17 110 4.5 36W 4.5 12 30 23 164w 41W 2- BT-1 A 1w dredge %ed top20 25/08/97 BT-1 A 150 dmdge sod top20 25/08/97 BT-1 A 205 dredge sed top20 25/08/97 BT-1 A 240 dredge red top20 I 4.5 241W 350 22 110 0.9 3SW 4.5 11 26 20 18300 5100 4.5 251W 4 3 22 91 0.8 3403 4.5 10 23 18 188W 4700 4.5 20900 420 23 91 0.8 2803 0.5 9.7 22 17 161W 4100 0.5 141W 210 14 89 0.6 44w 4.5 7 15 13 126W 2800 20/[18192 BT-1 B Stn3W core mus 0-25 I 4.5 52W 54 19 33 4.5 17W 4.5 2.3 7.2 4.7 4800 I 20/[18192 ET-1 B Stn3W core mus 2550 4.5 1400 5.8 8 23 4.5 1330 4.5 1.2 2.1 2.7 15W 320 WoMa BT-1 C SP-7 nR m W 091- BT-1 C SP-7 cut m 150 09/06/93 BT-1 D SP-6 Cut m 115 09/06/93 ET-1 E SP-8 Cut mus 95 091- BT-1 E SP-3 Cut mus 150 4 . 5 1803 14 13 28 4.5 2500 4.5 1 2.1 2.7 16W 690 4.5 720 1.7 8 25 4.5 4103 0.5 0 . 5 0.7 1.3 12W 170 0.5 4900 1.2 6 lM 4.5 3ooo 0.5 2.4 6 6.7 4400 490 4.5 510 2.1 12 23 0.5 3100 0.5 4.5 1.1 1.5 1200 1W 4.5 910 3.8 17 26 4.5 31W 0.5 4.5 0.9 1.5 13W 250 0.5 2300 1.9 12 39 4.5 1700 0.5 0.8 5.4 4.4 1800 0-25 57 27W WOW93 ET4 F L O C I Cut m 31/08/97 BT-1 F North Cut m I 091W93 BT-1 F L O C I cut mur W 03/06/93 BT-1 F LOCI cut m 120 31/08/97 BT-1 F North Cut m 2550 31/08/97 BT-1 F North cut mus 50.75 31/08/97 ET-1 F North cut mus 75-100 09/06193 25/08/97 25/08/97 25/08/91 09/06/93 31/08/97 31/08/97 19106192 25/08/97 31/08/97 31108/97 31/08/97 311MV87 31/08/97 31/08/97 ET-2 A BT-2 A BT-2 A BT-2 A ET-2 A ET-2 E ET-2 E ET-2 B BT-2 B BT-2 B BT-2 E BT-2 E BT-2 E ET-2 B BT-2 E SP-5 250 350 s N End SP-5 1WN 4WN StnlW 1W 4WN 1 WN 4WN 1WN 4WN 1WN cut dredge dredge dredge cut cut cut dredge dredga cut Cut cut cut cut Cut mus sed sed sed M S mus sed red m s mUS m mus mUS mus ssd Jo top 20 top 20 top 20 120 0-25 0-25 top 20 top 20 25-35 2550 35gO 50-75 W.1W 75-100 4.5 5800 0.5 2 39 4.5 870 0 . 5 0.9 13 6.5 WO 220 4.5 6wo 0.5 2 15 4.5 8M 4.5 2.6 9.7 3.3 44W 660 4.5 6300 4.6 11 56 4.5 0.5 176W 210 34 88 0.7 0.5 SMX) 90 16 €4 4.5 0.5 48900 no 110 130 1.8 4.5 370 5.6 12 24 4.5 16 8.2 4.5 27W 16 8 57 0.5 4.5 4500 66 7 71 4.5 26w 0.5 2.8 5.9 5.8 66w 37W 4.5 6.2 13 15 64W xxxl 4.5 17 M 42 19900 94w 0.5 4.1 7.2 9.2 39M) 1800 4.5 4.5 0.7 1 M O 36w 13W 27W 0.5 1.5 3.9 6.4 16W 3500 4.5 3.9 5.7 7.5 3ooa 16w 44w 13200 15W 120 640 1wO Table 6a: B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data - Elemental Analyses (continuation) Sampled Sample Sample Local Depth Date Area Location Type Substrate (cm) 28/08/97 BT-3 A BmTZon. grab mn 025 31/08/97 BT-3 A 31/08/97 BT-3 A 09/06/93 BT-3 A 24/08/91 BT-3 A 2 W 7 BT-3 A WWB3 BT-3 A 31/08/97 BT.3 A 31108197 BT-3 A 31/06/97 BT-3 A 31/08/97 BT-3 A 31/08/97 BT-3 A W/06/93 BT-3 B 31/08/97 BT-3 8 31/08/97 BT-3 B 31/08/97 ET-3 B 31/08/97 BT-3 B 31/08/97 BT-3 B 31/08/97 BT-3 B 31/08/97 BT-3 B 31IMV97 BT-3 B 19/06/93 BT-3 B 19/06/93 BT-4 A 19/06/93 BT-4 A 31/08/97 BT-4 A 31/08/97 BT-4 A 31/08/97 BT-4 A 31/08/97 BT-4 A 31/08/97 BT-4 A 31/08/97 BT-4 A 31/08/97 BT-4 A 31/08/97 BT-4 A 31/08/97 BT-4 A 3 imw7 BT-3 A 3110~97 B T - ~ A 31rnw7 B T - ~ A 31mwg7 B T - ~ A 31/08/97 BT-4 A 39/06/93 BT-4 A x)/06/93 BT-4 A )9/06/93 BT-4 A 50 2w SP-2 150 150 SP-2 50 2w 50 2w 50 2w SP-3 MO SP-3 DH MO SP3 DH 5 w SP-3 DH 5w SP3 DH SP-3 SP-1 SP-4 2 w 400 6.8.3 DH Stn 6.9.3 200 4 w 6.9.3 DH 2w 4 w 6.9.3. DH 2w 400 6.9.3 DH SP-1 SP-1 s P-4 Cut Cut Cut grab gnb Cut cut Cut eul Cut Cut c u Cut Cut cut Cut Cut cut cut Cut cut Cut Cut Cut Cut Cut cut grab Cut Cut Cut Cut Cut cut cut Cut cut Cut cut Cut mu6 muS mUS PlgB. S d mn m(1S mus mu$ f lNS mus M S mus mur mus mus mus mus mu6 mus mus mus mus mus mu5 mus mu6 mus mu8 mus mus mus mus mua mus mus mus now mus muS ~ 025 025 75 surface top 20 180 25-50 2550 50-75 50-75 761W 75100 20 025 025 2550 25-50 5075 50-75 75-103 7P1W 80 105 50 025 025 025 0.10 2550 25-50 25-50 50-75 5075 52-75 7 5 1 w 75-1 w 75-90 140 165 105 Element (uglp. dw) Ag Al As B Ba Be Ca Cd CO Cr Cu Fe K 12w 157W 0.5 22w -0.5 3Bw -0.5 2Mo -0.5 1700 0.5 28W -0.5 2603 -0.5 31W -0.5 1800 0.5 61w) 0.5 swo 0.5 76w ~ 7W 63 37 140 M 63 1.8 60 56 1.1 11 14 51 140 31 78 5 1 2.2 10 14 11 9 14 9 11 70 5 4 5 42 39 41 27 43 63 44 59 37 22 48 126W 3x0 9.5 6Mo 0.5 2.1 2.5 4.1 39w -0.5 37M) -0.5 4 5.6 5.5 22W -0.5 5400 -0.5 2.1 1.9 5.4 28W 3x0 -0.5 2603 0.5 1.1 1.9 5.1 2wO 9403 3Bw 0.5 97W -0.5 1.3 2.5 7 3100 0 . 5 5400 -0.5 1.6 2.3 6.4 28M) 0.5 4900 -0.5 1.8 3.5 8.1 55w 184M1 38300 106000 -0.5 4 m 5.3 1.3 4.1 4.5 28ww -0.5 3ooo -0.5 2.5 15 7.2 3900 0.5 2300 0.5 2.9 10 3.1 4COl -0.5 3600 -0.5 3.4 17 8.2 7303 4 3 C 91c 2% 270 460 2 w 320 3 w 910 I1W 1303 Table 6a: B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data - Elemental Analyses (continuation) Element (uglg. W 09/MY93 LAKE1 A WW93 LAKE1 A 4 .5 Qw 5 19/08/92 LAKE1 B Stnl00 19/0€492 LAKE1 B centre 19/08/92 LAKE1 B StnlW 19/08/92 LAKE1 B Stn100 20 4.5 2wO 4.5 d.5 0.9 3 430 270 Table 6b: B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data - Elemental Analyses 09/06/93 ET-I E SP-8 cut mu5 95 WO6193 BT-I E SP-8 Cut mus 150 09106193 BT-1 F L C C l cut mus 40 31/08/97 BT-I F North Cut mus 0-25 I Sampled 670 28 -0.5 140 1.5 150 -1 570 14 13 0.7 22 -0.5 7x1 28 4.5 150 2.2 2W -1 600 16 24 1.5 17 1.3 380 20 4.5 90 3.8 830 -I 1400 12 30 2.1 7 0.9 54 I Sample Sample Local Depth 2yMV97 ET-I A 1W dredge sed tnp20 56W 230 25 4 0 260 550 22 59 920 51 44 35 25/08/97 ET-I A 150 dredge sod top20 4700 200 27 4 0 280 603 23 55 740 47 43 33 50 710 45 43 31 2 W 9 7 BT-I A ’ 205 dredge sed top20 4700 2W 24 50 2 M BM 23 25/08/97 BT-I A 240 dredge sad top20 3400 240 15 100 170 480 15 47 480 29 35 19 20105192 BT-I B Stn3W Con mus 0-25 1800 81 9.3 410 24 290 7 SOI 19 160 12 25 5.8 2 W 9 2 BT-1 B Sln3W core mn 2550 320 33 0.5 270 3.5 410 -1 1100 8.3 29 3.5 I1 1.8 09/06/93 ET-I C SP-7 Cu t mus 80 09/06/93 BT-I C s P-7 cut mn 150 09/08/93 BT-1 D SP-6 cut mUS 115 870 92 1.2 354 19 270 4 790 12 49 3.6 23 2.3 650 35 4.5 110 1.4 230 -1 1100 16 15 0.9 12 1.2 580 89 4.5 ‘130 4.3 720 3 1SW 27 180 11 12 2.6 09/06/93 ET-I F 09/06/93 BT-1 F 31/08/97 BT-1 F 31/08/97 ET-1 F IN106193 BT-2 A 25/08/97 BT-2 A 25/08/97 BT-2 A 25/08/97 BT-2 A 09/06/93 ET-2 A 3110~97 BT-I F 31/08/97 31108197 19/08/92 25/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 BT-2 B BT-2 B BT-2 B BT-2 B BT-2 B ET-2 B BT-2 B BT-2 B BT-2 B BT-2 B L o c 1 Loc 1 North North North SP-5 250 350 s N End SP-5 IWN 400N StnlW 100 4WN 1WN 4WN IOON 400N 100N cut cut cut cut cut cut dredge dredge dredge cut sut cut dredge dredge Cut Cut Cut cut cut cut mn mn mus mus mur mu5 sed sed sed mu, mus mus sed sed mus mus mus mus Sad mu6 60 120 2550 5075 75-100 130 7.9 4.5 4 0 7 13W 2 lax, 5.3 180 4.5 8.6 2.3 1200 37 -0.5 40 3.8 190 2 83 8.1 370 13 10 3.2 30 13W 92 0.5 180 8 510 2 loo0 25 180 10 20 3.7 top20 3wo 140 12 2W 220 7W 24 52 340 44 44 26 top20 7200 180 35 170 870 910 83 110 780 1M 58 49 top20 1800 120 13 100 140 MO 12 33 190 20 32 14 120 340 18 4.5 140 1.9 220 -1 660 9.7 13 0.7 13 -0.5 0-25 0-25 top 20 top 20 25-35 25-50 35-60 5075 631W 75-1W 13 8.1 710 98 1.2 130 16 650 3 2100 18 86 6.5 27 3 1200 140 1.4 160 46 750 10 30 160 12 32 9.1 Table 6b: B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data - Elemental Analyses (continuation) I Sample Sample Local Depth Date Area Location Type S u h t e (cm) I Mg Mn MO Na Ni P Pb S Sr Ti V Zn 28/08/97 BT-3 A BZWTZone gnb mur 025 160 690 31/08/97 BT-3 A 350s Cut mur 0.25 630 31108197 09106/93 2 U W 7 24/08/97 09/06/93 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 09/06/93 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 09/06/93 09/08/93 09/06/93 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 09/06/93 09/06/93 09/06/93 BT-3 A BT-3 A BT-3 A BT-3 A BT-3 A BT-3 A BT-3 A BT-3 A BT-3 A BT-3 A BT-3 A BT-3 B BT-3 B BT-3 B BT-3 B BT-3 B BT-3 B BT-3 B BT-3 B BTJ B BT-3 B BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A BT-4 A 2 w SP-2 150 150 SP-2 50 2 w 50 2w 50 2 w SP-3 MO SP-3 DH MO SP3 DH 5W SP-3 DH 500 SP3 DH SP-3 SP-1 SP-4 200 400 6.9.3 DH Stn 6.9.3 2w 4 w 6.9.3 DH 2 w 4 w 6.9.3. DH 2 w 4 w 6.9.3 DH SP-1 SP-1 SP-4 nn nn gnb gnb Nt cut cut cut Cut cut Cut Cut cut cut Cut cut Cut Cut Cut cut cut nn Cut Cut Cut cut gnb cut Cut Cut Cut Cut Cut cut Cut Cut Cut cut cut mua mus algae osd mus mus mus mu6 rmr m N I S N I S mus mus mus mur mur mn rmr N I S rnus mus mus mn rmr rmr no% mus mus mur mus mus mus mu0 rnus mua mus mur rrmr 0-25 75 SUrtaC+ top 20 180 2550 25.50 5075 5075 75-103 75-103 20 0-25 025 25-50 2550 5075 50-75 75-100 751W 60 105 50 025 025 025 0-1 0 25-50 25-50 25-50 50-75 50-75 50-75 75-1 W 75.1 W 140 165 105 75-90 39 1800 140 2.4 220 24 1200 81 7.6 170 110 13W 130 3.2 2W 30 450 -1 1900 31 51 4.6 34 1.8 610 13 39 150 9.7 18 7.6 420 -1 22M) 25 57 5.6 12 1.8 39 &I0 72 0.5 120 3.4 420 3 1800 18 28 3.5 27 1.1 16 34 1800 1W 3.7 150 6.1 260 1 57W 38 55 6.3 28 3.3 1wO 73 0.5 120 14 5w -1 3ooo 24 62 6.4 16 0.7 11W 71 1.5 220 12 560 -1 3ax) 23 78 7.2 7.8 3.2 35 43 14 25 19 2.9 4.5 9.7 660 110 0.5 260 15 3203 10 13W 56 2.2 -40 9.2 350 1 1700 19 490 17 17 1.9 1603 63 -0.5 -40 5.2 360 2 180 18 610 12 17 7.1 2ZW 86 0.5 4 0 8 430 2 720 25 790 24 17 5.6 Table 6b: B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data - Elemental Analyses (continuation) Elwmenl (uglg, 09x)6/93 LAKE1 A 09/06/93 LAKE1 A cut rnuskeg 90 360 32 0.5 110 4.9 WO 3 1100 13 140 9.7 11 2.3 19/06/32 LAKE 1 B StnlW Table 7: B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data -Whole Sample Analyses Sampled Sample Assay &say Arspv Assay Total Total Total Total Total Sampl Local Depth Assay As NI Fe ' S TOC % As NI F* S oc Qh Dab h a Location Type Subrtate (em) I No. ug.g-'dw ug.g-'dw ug.g"dw ug.g"dw ug.g.'dw TDC g.m4 g.m" g.m" g.mJ g d L.O.1 19/06/92 BT-1 A Stn2W dredge sed top20 8435 390 260 184M) 2100 64.0 56.0 3532.7 452.4 24 25/08/97 BT-I A tw dredge sad top20 6728 350 260 18303 1908W 19.08 63.1 46.9 3298.3 34389.1 40 .25/08197 BT-1 A 150 dredge a d top20 25/CW97 BT-I A 205 dredge sed top20 2YCW97 BT-1 A 240 dredge d top20 20/06/92 BT-I B Stn3W core mus 0-25 2Wo6192 BT-1 B StnXK) core mus 25-50 6729 430 280 18800 2U38W 20.38 75.5 49.1 3299.0 35762.7 46 6730 420 230 16100 188400 18.64 75.7 41.5 2902.7 33967.2 41 6731 210 170 12600 305900 30.59 28.4 23.0 1701.0 41296.5 65 6412 54 24 4900 900 6413 5.8 3.5 1500 11w m / w m BT-I c SP-7 cut mus W 6424 14 19 1m 790 09/06/93 BT-1 C SP-7 cut mus 150 6418 1.7 1.4 12W 1100 09/06/93 BT-1 D SP-6 cut mus 115 6415 1.2 4.3 4400 I900 I 09/06/93 BT-1 E SP-8 cut mus 95 09/06/93 BT-1 E SP-8 M mus 150 6417 2.1 1.5 1200 570 6429 3.8 2.2 1m 600 09/08/93 ET-1 F L E 1 cut mus 40 6433 1.9 3.8 1900 1400 31/08/97 BT-1 F North cut mu6 0-25 I 6732 57 54 27W I 09/06/93 09/06/93 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 09/08/93 25/08/97 25/08/97 25/08/97 09/06/93 31/08/97 31/08/97 19/06/92 25/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/06/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 31/08/97 BT-I F BT-I F BT-1 F BT-1 F BT-1 F BT-2 A BT-2 A BT-2 A BT-2 A BT-2 A BT-2 B BT-2 B ET-2 B BT-2 B BT-2 B BT-2 B ET-2 B BT-2 B BT-2 B ET-2 B L o c 1 L o c t Nmth North North SP-5 250 350 s N End SP-5 IWN 4WN StnlW 1W 4WN 1WN 4WN 1WN 400N 1WN Cut Cut Cut Cut M Cut dredge dredge dredge cut cut Cut dredge dredge Cut Cut Cut Cut Cut Cut mus mus mur mus mus mu8 Sed red Sad mus mu6 mu8 sed sed m S mus mu6 mus mur sed 60 120 25-50 92-75 75100 30 top 20 top 20 top 20 120 0-25 0-25 top 20 top 20 25-35 2550 35-60 50-75 60-1 w 751W 6422 0.5 7 880 1Bw 6416 0.5 3.8 4400 83 3.8 1.7 348.3 64.0 90 1.1 0.6 277.4 203.4 95 1.6 2.2 183.9 90.8 98 0.26 0.2 183.9 188.6 98 0.26 0.9 943.9 407.6 91 0.27 0.2 152.2 72.3 98 0.82 0.4 213.1 98.4 96 0.45 0.9 454.1 334.6 96 3.4 3.2 161.0 0.16 2.2 275.6 501.1 90 0.05 0.4 479.5 9.0 4 84.03 6421 4.6 8 66W 1wO 0.73 1.3 1046.6 158.6 90 6734 210 220 6403 338700 33.87 20.3 21.3 618.7 32741.0 72 6736 770 670 1 m 170400 17.04 123.2 107.2 3184.0 27264.0 38 6738 90 140 3903 359903 35.99 9.6 14.9 416.0 38389.3 80 6427 5.6 1.9 640 880 1.2 0.4 141.5 146.0 98 6735 16 13 36w 1.3 1.1 295.3 72.75 6737 8.2 8.1 1300 0.34 0.3 54.5 96.18 E437 16 16 18W 2100 4.8 4.8 541.5 631.8 93 6733 66 46 3oM) 384100 38.41 6.4 4.4 290.0 37129.7 85 Table 7: B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data -Whole Sample Analyses (continuation) Sampled Sample Sampl Local Depth Date Area Location Type ubst'at (an) 28/08/97 ET-3 A BZWTzaU grab mus 025 31/08/97 BT-3 A 09/08/53 ET-3 A 24/08/97 ET-3 A 24/08/97 BT-3 A 09/06/93 BT-3 A 31/08/97 ET3 A 31/08/97 ET-3 A 31/08/97 ET-3 A 31/08/97 BT-3 A 31/08/97 ET-3 A 09/08/93 ET-3 E 31108/97 ET-3 E 31/08/97 ET-3 B 31/08/97 ET-3 B 31/08/97 ET3 S 31/06/97 BT-3 E 31/08/97 ET4 E 31/08/97 BT-3 E 31/08/97 ET-3 E 09/08/93 BT-3 E 09/08/93 ET4 A 09/08/93 ET-4 A 31/08/97 BT-4 A 31/08/97 BT-4 A 31/08/97 ET4 A 31/08/97 BT-4 A 31/08/97 ET4 A 31/08/97 ET4 A 31/08/97 BT4 A 31/08/97 ET4 A 31/08/97 ET4 A 31/08/97 BT-4 A 31/08/97 ET-4 A 31/08/97 BT-4 A 31/08/97 BT-4 A 09/08/93 ET4 A 09106193 BT-4 A 03/06/93 ET4 A 31/08/97 ET-^ A 31/08/97 ET-^ A 50 200 SP-2 1% 150 SP-2 50 2W 50 2W 50 200 SP-3 MO SP-3 DH 5M, SF3 DH 500 SP-3 DH 520 SP3 DH SP-3 SP-1 SP-4 2W 4 w 6.9.3 DH Stn 6.9.3 200 4 w 6.9.3 DH 200 400 6.9.3. DH 2 w 4 w 6.9.3 DH SP-1 SP-1 SP-4 Cut Cut Cut grab grab cut Cut Cut Cut Cut clil Cut Cut cut Cut Cut Cut cut Cut cut cut Cut cut Cut Cut Cut Cut grab Cut Cut Cut Cut cut Cut ail Cut Cut cut cut Cut mus 0-25 mu6 025 mus 75 algae surfacs mus 180 rnus 2550 mus 25-50 mus 5075 mus 5075 rnus 75-100 mus 75-100 nW¶ 20 mus 025 mus 025 mu, 25-50 mus 25-50 mus 50-75 mu0 5075 mus 75-1W mus 751W rnus 80 mus 105 muo 50 muri 0-25 mw 025 mus 0-25 llom 0-10 mus 25-50 mus 25-50 mus 25-50 mus 5075 mu* 50-75 mus 50-75 mus 75.100 mus 75-103 mus 75-90 mu6 140 mu% 165 mus 105 sod top20 H O L E S A M P L E A N A L Y S E S (-) W Y W Y Total Total Total Total Total &ay As . NI Fe ' S TOC % As NI F. 5 o c % NO. ug.g"dw ug.g-'dw ug.g"dw ug.g"dw ug.g"dw TOC 9.m" 9.m" 9.m" 9.m" 9.m" L.0. 6748 12W 690 157W 372.0 213.9 4867.0 6738 6740 6432 6588 6727 M28 6434 6741 6742 6423 6430 6414 6743 6744 6745 6747 6426 E420 6425 7W 63 37 140 38 63 1.8 Bo w 1.1 11 14 51 140 31 78 5 1 2.2 630 39 24 110 30 39 3.4 16 34 6.1 14 12 35 43 14 15 9.2 5.2 8 126W 3wo 3900 2200 28W 3wo 2wo Moo jsW 31W 2800 55W 18400 38m 106MX1 2 m 3900 4wo 7 m 78.9 4.6 1900 5.1 3 7 6 m 37.6 16.6 2200 4.3 5.2 ISW 0.3 5.1 3.3 5703 0.5 3w0 1.6 3Mx1 2.0 4.3 12.1 5.6 17W 2.6 ,180 1 .O 720 1.8 71.0 2.8 3.3 13.0 3.4 3.2 0.5 1.4 2.0 3.0 2.1 1.7 3.0 3.7 2.5 4.8 5.1 6.4 1420.9 46.0 218.9 89.1 532.3 259.3 94 260.3 44493.3 79 319.4 251.0 93 249.4 89.t 305.1 274.6 85 799.0 72.9 222.1 89.8 1542.5 2836.2 93 414.5 444.1 86 793.7 519.5 89 1589.2 90.2 3299.7 84.0 19120.3 58.3 2037.3 888.0 20 1 3951.0 177.8 5838.7 575.9 11 Table 7: B-Zone Area Muskeg and Sediment Sample Data - Whole Sample Analyses (continuation) Sample Sampled Sampl Lonl Depth Date Area Location Type ubsbat (cm) Assay Assay Assay Assay Total Total Total Total Total No. ug.g%u ug.g”dw ug.g%w ug.g”dw ug.g% TOC g.mJ g.mf g.mJ g.mJ g.mJ L.0.I. AS+S, AS Ni Fe S TOC % As NI F. s oc % 26 3400 1m 4.9 2200 1100 WWS3 LAKE1 A SP-9 09/06/93 U K E 1 A SP-9 I 19/06/92 LAKE1 B Shl00 core rms 020 19/08/92 LAKE 1 E centre dredge sed top20 19/08/92 LAKE1 B StnlW core mu8 20-40 19/08/92 LAKE1 B Stnl00 corn tram 4060 19/08/92 LAKE1 E Stnl00 core rms -0 8.8 2.6 339.5 99.9 2.0 1.1 495.2 247.6 €441 1.7 2.7 410 550 0.11 0.2 25.4 34.1 98 6436 0.9 8.4 4209 2500 0.19 1.8 878.8 523.1 9s 6440 1.1 1.5 560 MO 0.08 0.1 31.0 27.7 98 6439 0.8 1 .s 810 9sO 0.10 0.2 94.0 113.8 98 6438 0.1 1.9 rn 820 0.08 0.2 48.2 69.6 98 Table 8a: Arsenic Mass in BT-I, BT-2, BT-3, BT-4 and Lake 1 Muskeg, Sediments and Pond Water in B-Zone Vicinity. MUSleg ( d a t a b ~ e h & w ~ n l ~ e a ~ Area Sampling Total [As] Zone Location Min Max Avg N g.mU g.mJ g.mJ BT-1 A sw 1 0.26 B smm 1 3.8 c sP7 I 1.6 D sm 1 0.26 E sm 1 0.27 F 6 x 1 , BT1-N 2 0.45 3.4 1.9 SUM BT-2 A S P ~ B Isblimt4,W 0.3436 1.3 1: SLIM a BTZ-WI.SP2, BT-3 A I s m W , s b l m 4 4.6 372 115 . . ,. . . , B lsblyw 3 0.27 5.1 2.9 SUM 7 8.8 0.11 SUM 2 smm 1 0.019 Sm24-I. 1 0.019 sblzw 1 0.089 sm2M. 350, Nend 3 9.6 123 51 m?YI 14 0.01 1.6 0.5912 sbl jm. Sm IW 2 4.8 6.4 5.6 1 4EC+4 6 0.M 0.1s 0095 SmlM 1 17 I sblM.iW 15 0.44 34 7.0 sbl6.9.4, 6.9.44 16 0.W2 0.14 0.0321 I I. stn5.0.3 4 0.008 0.086 0.035 Lakeiam 1 0.19 Lab$ 1 0.wOS I Surface Area Pond Muskeg Sediment Tota Area Area Area ha ha ha 1.6 1.7 3.3 3.8 3.8 1.4 0.33 1.8 3.9 0.85 4.7 1.2 020 1.4 3.9 0.45 4.3 16 3.6 19 4.1 3.0 7.1 17 1.9 19 21 4.B 26 1.6 0.25 1.8 2.1 0.1 2.2 3.5 OA 4.0 3.2 0.1 3.3 4.9 4.9 58 8.3 66 63 8.3 71 756 I 383 I 42 I I 0.02 108 I I 'otal SUM 23 13 65 107 39.9 124 735 837 20 sampling location near, but not in, zone Table 8b: Nickel Mass in BT-I, BT-2, BT-3, BT-4 and Lake 1 Muskeg, Sediments and Pond Water in B-Zone Vicinity. Muskeg Pond Water Surface Area Muskeg sediment Pond (rsta hrrhallwursamp4w uwd) Pond Surface- Surface- Wate Area ISampling Total [Nil Sampling Total [Nil Sampling Diss. [Nil Muskeg Sediment Total 0.25 m 0.25 m 0.5 n Min Max Avg I Area Area Area1 T"i1 I T"i1 I D[Ni Zone Location Min Max Avg Location Min Max Avg Location B smm I 1.7 sm3w 1 0.W8 3.8 3.8 16 c SP? I 2.2 sm240. 1 23 sm3w 1 E SPB 1 0.19 Sm240. 1 23 smm 1 0 . m 1 2 020 1.4 0.59 11 0 . m 0.33 1.8 7.8 19 0.013 D S E 1 0.92 sbl240. 1 23 sm4w 1 0.018 3.0 0.85 4.7 9.0 49 0.08 0.w8 1.4 B T 3 A Imm,smm 4 2.8 214 73 I Sm150 1 13 I Sh5o.IW 15 0.84 76 172 I 1.6 0.25 1.8 I 282 I 8 I 21.5 BTZ-Kxl.SI'2. SPJ. SPJ-DH. Sm 6.9.4, B mm 3 0.52 2.0 1.3 0.0.44 15 0.003 0.24 0.03593 2.1 0.1 2.2 6.7 0.02 SUM 7 1 ao 5.6 OA 4.0 8 21.6 289 I ISP1,SPI. sm I I I I I I sampling location near, but not in, zone lame oc; iron Mass in U I - I , U I -L, c) I + , u 19 anu L a K e -I Muskeg, Sedirnents and Pond Water in B-Zone Vicinity. 184 1 52 B ISmlWN.4wN 2 54 295 175 .$I IM 4 SP3. SE-OH. B m5w 3 222 799 442 SUM 7 SP1,SPI Sm 2w. Sm 4w, Sm BT4 A 6.9.30~ 5 414 19120 5039 I AKE A Isp9 1 340 Smm 1 0.82 3.8 3.8 3,348 SmZ40' 1 1701 Sm3M) 1 0.82 1.4 0.33 1.8 6- 1.411 1.4 -240' 1 1701 Sm4W 1 0.15 3.9 0.85 4.7 9.174 3.628 0.64 SmZ40. 1 1701 SmlW 1 0.82 1.2 020 1.4 473 849 0.82 Sm240. 1 0.45 4.3 3.0 7.1 I 10.846 I 10.558 I 3.4 Nsnd SQl 250,350, 3 416 3184 1406 I Sm2so 14 0.10 0.44 0.22 I 4.1 Sm 1w. S m i W 2 290 S42 416 15oN 6 0.15 1.8 0.45 17 1.9 19 7.580 1.978 4.3 6 20 21 4.9 26 18428 $2688 7.6 S m m I 280sblsO,1W 14 0.04 3.6 1.4 1.6 0.25 1.8 6.819 163 1.8 I 4.9 4.9 I 4.181 I I * sampling location near, but not in, zone Table 8d: Sulphur Mass in BT-I, BT-2, BT-3, BT4 and Lake 1 Muskeg, Sediments and Pond Water in B-Zone Vicinity. 5 1.13 2.3 1.0 0.30 0.30 1.4 0.33 1.8 3.9 0.85 4.7 1.2 020 1.4 - fadlment Surface- 0.25 m T [Sl kg 1.855 375 965 226 511 4,012 - - - Pond Watei 0.5 m D P I kg - 14 0.50 1.3 0.30 0.68 16 - - 0.25 1.8 135 BT-4 A SPI.SP~ 2 444 520 482 Sm 6.9.3 3 0.0 19 0.9 3.2 0.1 3.3 1,914 3.6 AKEI A sp9 1 100 4.9 4.9 1.230 * sampling location near, but not in zone Table 8e: LOI Mass in BT-I, BT-2, BT-3, BT-4 and Lake 1 Muskeg, Sediments and Pond Water in B-Zone Vicinity. MUSKeg (alabrshdlavrampkuseq Area Sampling LOI Zone Location Min Max Avg N amJ g.mJ g.mJ BT-I A SFV 1 194937 B smm 1 84012 csP7 1 i n n 5 D SPE I 194987 E SPB 1 1241M) $ LCCi.BT1-N 2 -115 229216 1 M SllM BT-2 A sp5 1 143208 Pond Sediment Sampling LOI Location Min Max Avg N a.mJ g.mJ amJ sm 1w. 150, ZM),m,240 5 51332 87750 73102 sm 250,350. Nend 3 61232 84096 71867 Surface Area Pond Muskeg Sediment Tota' Area Area Area ha ha ha 1.8 1.7 3.3 3.0 3.8 1.4 0.33 1.8 3.9 0.05 4.) 020 1.4 12 39 0.45 4.3 16 a.6 19 4.1 3.0 7.1 BT3 A I sm~).smm 3 51954 128376 81W7 I stnfw 1 93259 I 1.6 0.25 1.8 BTZ-K1i,Sp2, 'otal SUM 22 13 107 20656 6271 0 sampling location near, but not in, zone. Table 9a: Shallow Piezorneters Water Quality - Piezorneters SP-1 and SP-2 Table 9b: Shallow Piezorneters Water Quality - Piezometers SP9A and SP9B Table 9c: Shallow Piezorneters Water Quality - Piezometers SP-4 and SP-5 I I ncatinnl SPd ~. .-- -- .. - . . AssayNo.1 4467 I 5424 I 5467 1 5591 I I I I I II Date1 12-Jun-93 126-Jun-94 108-Sep-94 127-Jun-95 I' . .. I 1 1 SP-5 5592 I 6554 11 4469 I 5425 1 5468 I 65531 4468 I Surface Bottom 30-Aug-97 12-Jun-93 12-Jun-93 26-Jun-94 08-Sep-94 27-Jun-95 30-Aug-97 13.4 13 7.6 9 13.6 13.9 4.8 5.61 5.14 6.24 5.54 6.28 133 75 102 78 142 74.7 112 151 -134 46 75 Fl Table 9d: Shallow Piezometers Water Quality - Pierorneters SP-6 and SP-7 Table 9e: Shallow Piezorneters Water Quality - Piezorneters SP-8 and SP-9 Table 10a: SRC Detection Limits for Solid and Filter Paper Samples L.O.I. I 0.01 % . CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July. 1998 (Boojum I".=* AI -37 Table lob: Detection Limits for Water Samples ~~ . . CAMECO Corporation: Rabba Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July. 1998 LBoojum ".U-* -. AI-38 Table 11: Toe Seepage, 1992 - 1997 Data SAMPLE DATE 18-Sep92 OPERATOR Boojum SAMPLING LOCATION WRP-A F I E L D Temp. (C) 4.3 pH 4.99 Cond. (umhos/cm) 1240 Em(mV) 223 Eh(mV) 478 Flow, Us 0.008 L A B PH Cond. (umhos/cm) Acidity (mgn) 15 In mgL: AI As Total As Ba Ca Dissolved Fe Total Fe K Mg DES. Mn Total Mn Na Diss. Ni Total Ni Si BqlL Diss Ra 226 BqL Total Ra 226 Diss U Total U In mg/L: Chloride Bicatbonate Sulphate FI Nitrate (as N) Ammonia (as N) N. Tot Kjeldhal P. total T.D.S. T.S.S. Total Hardness 24-Aug-9 Boojum SRC SRC Boojum SRC WRP-B WRP-B WRP-B WRP-B WRP-B 17002 5612 21 79 3.2 10.6 13.2 13.1 14.2 4.69 4.56 4.83 4.73 4.42 1480 1380 970 1429 1399 206 186 251 290 461 437 500 539 51 1 0.018 0.051 0.007 4.53 5.09 4.32 900 65 34.2 18.6 63.1 0.25 0.35 0.49 36.2 11 96 30 120 131 108 195 0.01 7 0.038 0.026 0.045 0.094 30 29 43 60 58 88 3 2.6 3.1 49 40 30 37 25 90 35 90 11 3.1 0.05 2 2 2 1 C l 7 660 595 995 650 18.18 14.09 14 3.7 1 0.28 0.57 1.8 2.6 4 12 1170 1830 CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetiands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 AI-39 Table 11: Toe Seepage 1992 - 1997 Data (continuation) SAMPLE DATE 18-Sep92 17-Aug-93 08-Sep94 OPERATOR Boojum SRC SRC SAMPLING LOCATION WRP-C WRP-C WRP-c Temp. (C) 0.8 5.1 6.8 pH 4.72 4.51 4.75 Cond. (umhodcm) 1470 1380 820 Em(mV) 208 179 249 Eh(mV) 465 433 502 Flow, Us 0.025 0.036 0.006 - A B PH 4.44 6.21 Acidity (mgn) 55 33.4 14 Cond. (umhoskm) In mcrlL: AI 0.32 - As Total As Ba Ca Dissolved Fe Total Fe K Mg Diss. Mn Total Mn Na Dss. Ni Total Ni Si BqR Diss Ra 226 BqlL Total Re 226 Diss U 34.4 1 26 0.01 29 57 2.8 46 37 10 11 108 0.01 29 58 2.6 39 25 Total U In mg/L: Chloride 2 2 Bicarbonate < I < I Sulphate 625 588 FI Nitrate (as N) 17.04 13.64 Ammonia (as N) 1 P, total 5 T.D.S. 1140 N, Tot Kjeldhal I T.S.S. 18-Sep92 15-Sep95 24-Aug-9 Boojum Boojum SRC WRP-D WRP-D WRP-D 5786 2180 5.4 5.8 8.9 4.25 4.56 4.45 1640 1736 1566 248 246 502 500 516 0.007 0.031 4.38 1200 65 147.6 0.9 78 75 79.5 170 0.016 0.019 0.45 30 86 29 96 96 99 5.3 0.02 2 916 740 17 7.4 9.7 9.2 36 33 1730 CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Uliization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July. 1998 A140 Table 11: Toe Seepage 1992 - 1997 Data (continuation) SAMPLE DATE 18-Sep-92 17-Aug-93 26-Jun-94 08-Sep94 OPERATOR Boojum SRC SRC SRC SAMPLING LOCATION WRP-E WRP-E WRP-E WRP-E1 Temp. (C) 2.3 5.5 6 15.7 pH 4.59 4.3 3.89 3.61 Cond. (umhos/cm) 1920 1950 1211 2280 Em(mV) 229 174 157 238 Eh(mV) 485 428 41 1 485 Flow, Us 0.050 0.037 0.033 L A B PH 4.43 4.79 3.84 Cond. (umhos/cm) Acidity (mgn) 175 118 150.4 652.8 In ma/L: AI 0.98 - As Total As Ba Ca Dissolved Fe Total Fe K Dss. Mn Total Mn Na DES. Ni Total Ni Si BqL Diss Ra 226 BqR Total Ra 226 Diss U Mg 94.4 177 0.098 33 83 6 34 103 19 115 196 0.028 32 92 6.1 31 130 520 284 0.074 45 147 4.8 51 270 Total U In mglL: Chloride 2 1 4 Bicarbonate c l C l 4 Sulphate 980 1060 1500 Ntrate (as N) 21.13 1.8 13.18 Ammonia (as N) 13 3.67 P, total 42 178 T.D.S. 1820 T.S.S. Total Hardness FI N, Tot Kjeldhal 18-Sep-92 26-Jun-94 Boojum SRC WRP-F WRP-F 1084 1.6 13.3 4.09 3.38 2280 1868 225 176 481 425 0.017 0.018 4.02 253 586.9 410 280 0.05 39 133 16 35 400 c l 1700 2.9 3.8 111 Boojum c-- -. CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake OperatiWn Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and NI July. 1998 A141 Table 11: Toe Seepage 1992 - 1997 Data (continuation) SAMPLE DATE 24-Aug-97 OPERATOR SRC SAMPLING LOCATION WRP-F Temp. (C) 7.6 pH 3.98 Cond. (umhoslcm) 3720 Eh(mV) 544 Flow, Us Em (mv) L A B pH 4.11 Cond. (umhoslcm) 2180 Acidity (mgm 1120 In mglL AI 4.6 As 320 Total As Ba Ca Dissolved Fe 0.18 Total Fe K Mg Diss. Mn Total Mn Na Diss. Ni 1060 Total Ni Si Bq/L Diss Ra 226 6.6 BqlL Total Ra 226 DissU 0.218 Total U In mglL: Chloride Bicarbonate FI Sulphate 3250 Nitrate (as N) 8.5 Ammonia (as N) 6.1 N, Tot Kjeldhal P. total 92 T.D.S. T.S.S. Total Hardness 18-Sep92 24-Aug-97 Boojum SRC WRP-G WRPG 2180! - 3.2 13.2 4.39 4.4 2000 1070 229 484 524 0.012 4.58 680 72 28.4 0.29 0.025 0.022 5.1 3.6 21 .I 400 13 6.9 0.28 - 18-Sep92 Boojum WRP-H 2.1 4.52 1600 230 486 0.028 25 18-Sep92 17-Aug-9: Boojum SRC WRP-I WRP-I 3.1 11 5.18 5.09 718 952 208 221 463 47 1 0.200 0.025 5.13 10 17.3 0.63 0.094 68 0.47 18 30 4.2 23 3.5 12 2 4 335 25 638 CAMECO Corporation: RabbP Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Remval of As and Ni July, 1998 eoojum M Y - U_. A142 Table I I :Toe Seepage 1992 - 1997 Data (continuation) SAMPLE DATE 26-Jun-94 08-Sep94 OPERATOR SRC SRC SAMPLING LOCATION WRP-I WRP-I 10844 1700t : I E L D ~~~ Temp. (C) 12.7 12.8 pH 4.1 4.93 Cond. (umhoslcm) 690 795 Eh(mV) 407 454 Em(mV) 158 205 Flow, Us 0.050 0.003 pH 4.63 5.02 A B Cond. (umhoskm) Acidity (mgll) 124.6 33.1 In m g L : AI As Total As Ba Ca Dissolved Fe Total Fe K Mg Diss. Mn Total Mn Na Diss. Ni Total Ni Si BqlL Diss Ra 226 BqlL Total Ra 226 Diss U 0.27 2.7 67 82 0.018 0.008 16 22 31 40 3.5 4.4 16 22 3.7 4.7 Total U In mgL: Chloride 2 2 Bicarbonate 1 2 Sulphate 293 390 FI Nitrate (as N) 20 20.45 Ammonia (as N) 5.6 6.75 P, total 0.08 0.62 T.D.S. T.S.S. Total Hardness N, Tot Kjeldhal Boojum Boojum I .4 17.1 3.7 17.6 5.56 6 5.13 3.97 645 697 676 273 154 142 188 174 41 1 388 443 420 0.233 0.035 0.010 0.003 6.45 7 4.7 15 0.11 0.215 54 0.14 11 20 3.8 23 3.6 9.4 2 5 21 9 27.27 476 CAMECO Corparatian: Rabbit Lake Operation Uliliation of WeUands for Removal of As and Ni &oojum ""._I M. Juiy. 1998 A143 Table 11: Toe Seepage 1992 - 1997 Data (continuation) SAMPLE DATE 18-Sep92 08-Sep94 OPERATOR Boojum SRC SAMPLING LOCATION WRP-L WRP-L 17001 : I E L D Temp. (C) 5.1 9.4 pH 4.57 5.01 Cond. (umhos/cm) 31 1 920 Em(mV) 260 173 Eh(mV) 514 424 Flow, Us 0.023 0.007 A B PH 5.97 Cond. (umhos/cm) In mg/L: AI As 13 Total As Ba Ca 155 Acidity (mg/l) 10 20.6 Dissolved Fe 0.006 Total Fe K 24 Mg 56 Diss. Mn 5.7 Total Mn Na 21 Diss. Ni 54 Total Ni Si Bq/L Diss Ra 226 Bq/L Total Ra 226 Diss U Total U In mg/L: Chloride 3 Bicarbonate 5 Sulphate 652 FI Nitrate (as N) 41.82 Ammonia (as N) 8.25 N, Tot Kjeldhal P. total 6.3 T.D.S. T.S.S. Total Hardness c 08-Sep94 24-Aug-97 18-Sep92 18-Aug-93 SRC SRC Boojum SRC WRP-L1 WRP-L1 WRP-M WRP-M 17007 6512 9.3 14.5 3.1 10.6 5.4 4.65 5.65 5.54 805 1440 1340 1376 144 195 111 395 515 450 362 0.007 0.067 0.035 4.58 800 I 6.21 5.7 14 46.9 20 29 0.51 0.4 5 21 25 1 24 132 0.001 0.1 1 0.1 1 22 43 5.3 20 47 4.2 20 21 46 48 46 40.45 38 6.17 12 2.4 3.8 51.36 1080 CAMECO Corporation: Rabbl Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July, 1998 A144 Table 11: Toe Seepage 1992 - 1997 Data (continuation) SAMPLE DATE 25-Jun-94 OPERATOR SAMPLING LOCATION WRP-M F I E L D Temp. (C) 15.8 pH 3.79 Cond. (umhos/cm) 653 Em(mV) 156 Eh(mV) 403 Flow, Us 0.003 L A B PH Cond. (umhos/cm) Acklity (rng/l) In mgL: AI AS Total As Ba Ca Dissolved Fe Total Fe K Mg Diss. Mn Total Mn Na Diss. Ni Total Ni Si Bq/L DES Ra 226 Bq/L Total Ra 226 I DES U Total U In mgL: Chloride Bicarbonate Sulphate FI Nitrate (as N) Ammonia (as N) N, Tot Kjeldhal P, total T.D.S. T.S.S. Total Hardness &Sep92 19Aug-93 26-Jun-94 08-Sep94 27Jun-9! Boojum SRC SRC SRC Boojum WRP-N WRP-N WRP-N WRP-N WRP-N 10845 17008 560' 3.5 15.9 16.7 11.2 15.6 4.07 4.02 3.84 3.87 4.01 1559 1625 1005 1060 936 21 1 222 142 254 312 466 469 388 504 559 0.067 0.027 0.009 0.007 0.003 4.12 4.91 4.16 170 144.1 34 131.2 1.7 0.69 116 25 97 9.2 9.6 140 0.31 23 59 5.5 25 103 22 118 162 105 0.14 0.056 0.078 0.52 12 26 13 44 66 38 4.7 5.9 4.2 14 26 15 46 110 32 32 2 2 4 2 < I < I < I 1 650 489 780 448 40.22 19 40.45 62 4 10.00 2.7 3.5 1480 808 7.3 34 5 CAMECO Coworation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of and Ni July. 1998 A145 Table 11: Toe Seepage 1992 - 1997 Data (continuation) SAMPLE DATE 24-Aug-9; OPERATOR SRC SAMPLING LOCATION WRP-N F I E L D Temp. (C) 15.3 pH 4.12 Cond. (umhoslcm) 950 Eh(mv) 553 Flow, Us Em (mv) L A B pH 4.07 Cond. (umhoslcm) 280 Acidity (mgn) 40.4 In mgIL: AI 1.1 As 1.8 Total As Ba Ca Dissolved Fe 0.082 Total Fe K Mg Diss. Mn Total Mn Na Diss. Ni 22 Total Ni Si BqL Diss Ra 226 2.4 BqlL Total Ra 226 Diss U 1.02 Total U i In mglL: Chloride Bicarbonate Sulphate 410 FI Ntrate (as N) 5.3 Ammonia (as N) 3.1 N, Tot Kjeldhal P, total 0.9 T.D.S. T.S.S. Total Hardness 19-Aug-93 26-Jun-94 08-Sep94 31-Aug-96 24Aug-97 SRC SRC SRC SRC SRC WRP-N1 WRP-N1 WRP-NI WRP-N1 WRP-NllN; 10846 17009 2180 3.6 10.8 6.8 12.5 5.22 3.57 5.05 4.75 4.5 1165 1005 630 690 840 201 142 223 266 456 392 476 515 528 0.120 0.041 0.027 5.44 4.26 5.42 4.76 480 18.7 173.9 50.9 20.2 0.3 0.61 0.52 6.24 130 5.8 0.14 0.022 0.18 0.017 103 122 93 95 0.043 0.12 0.001 0.017 0.018 0.25 20 16 21 19 49 57 50 36 5.6 4.6 4.4 7.7 23 17 19 11 18 120 17 8.5 6.1 8.6 11 2.9 6.2 5 4 3 4 432 575 41 3 400 320 37.27 7.3 32.05 27.73 19 3.4 4.33 9.2 8 0.28 45 3.4 0.1 0.46 856 CAMECO Corporation: Rabbi1 Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni July. 1998 A146 Table 11 : Toe Seepage 1992 - 1997 Data (continuation) SAMPLE DATE 19-Aug-93 26-Jun-94 OPERATOR SRC SRC SAMPLING LOCATION WRP-N2 WRP-N2 I - l t L U Temp. (C) 5.3 17.6 pH 4.71 3.38 Cond. (umhoslcm) 1885 1258 Em(mV) 263 181 Eh(mV) 517 427 ~ Flow, Us 0.110 L A B pH 4.93 4.29 Cond. (umhoslcm) Acidity (mgll) 24.6 37.1 In mglL: AI 0.72 As 11.8 12 Total As Ba Ca 195 131 Dissolved Fe 0.014 0.05 Total Fe K 28 22 Mg 94 62 Diss. Mn 9.4 4.3 Total Mn Na 24 28 Diss. Ni 51 56 Total Ni BqL Dbs Ra 226 BqL Total Ra 226 Diss U Total U Si 16 In mglL: Chloride 3 2 Bicarbonate 4 4 Sulphate 860 680 Nitrate (as N) 44.31 2.6 FI Ammonia (as N) 5 N, Tot Kjeldhal P, total 8.8 T.D.S. 1600 T.S.S. Total Hardness 18-Sep92 17-Aug-93 26Jun-94 Boojum SRC SRC WRP-0 WRP-0 WRP-0 0.7 9 18.1 4.18 3.89 3.55 1382 1770 1682 261 187 1 72 518 439 418 0.250 0.092 0.029 4.21 4.28 60 75.3 126.8 2.4 54.3 68 175 195 0.18 0.019 30 27 90 84 7.4 11 33 26 75 120 20 4 3 < I 4 865 1020 18.18 3.8 3.4 24 1590 18-Sep92 Boojum WRP-P 4.2 2.49 4550 41 3 668 0.167 91 8 56 16.4 41.2 280 63 05 50 21 0 13 24 310 320 0.25 5 27 27.6 3 NIL 2390 44.32 16 16 1.2 120 e o o j u m _UP -. ~~~ CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utiliialion of WeUands for Removal of As and Ni July 1998 A147 Table I 1 : Toe Seepage 1992 - 1997 Data (continuation) SAMPLE DATE 17-Aug-93 26-Jun-94 08-Sep94 27-Jun-95 31-Aug-96 24-Aug-9i OPERATOR SRC SRC SRC Boojum SRC SRC SAMPLING LOCATION WRP-P WRP-P WRP-P WRP-P WRP-P WRP-P 10849 17010 5613 2179 I E L D Temp. (C) 14.5 20.3 13.2 16.4 15 13.9 pH 2.68 1.94 2.19 2.08 2.5 2.51 Cond. (urnhodem) 3150 4510 3300 4060 3230 4300 Em(mV) 325 454 41 9 492 498 Eh(mV) 573 698 668 739 746 735 Flow. Us 0.045 0.030 0.004 0.0007 0.004 A B pH 2.76 2.65 2.58 Cond. (umhos/cm) 2.67 2110 Acidity (mgll) 375.9 1722.9 1079.9 1457.8 In mglL: AI 26 62 81 71 As Total As Ba Ca Dissolved Fe Total Fe K Mg Diss. Mn Total Mn Na DES. Ni Total Ni Si Bqk Diss Ra 226 Bq/L Total Ra 226 Diss U 95.7 16 197 292 3.1 220 38 56 118 253 8.6 18 20 22 236 390 17 262 120 50 204 13 20 330 4.6 6.5 273 40 41 51 191 19 15 470 470 13.1 11 13.4 0.006 245 220 110 230 43 193 12 16 310 280 320 30 5.4 1.54 Total U In malL: Chloride 3 3 4 2 3 - Bicarbonate Sulphate FI Nitrate (as N) Ammonia (as N) N, Tot Kjeldhal P, total T.D.S. T.S.S. C l <1 C l c1 C l 1560 3590 2810 2740 301 0 2530 24.09 1.2 24.77 44 16.82 15 16 10.83 14 17 16 14 7.6 3.9 1.7 5.5 2.2 0.18 2700 4290 CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and NI July. 1998 eoojum .1-1 -. A148 Table 11: Toe Seepage 1992 - 1997 Data (continuation) SAMPLE DATE 08-Sep94 27Jun-95 OPERATOR SRC Boojum SAMPLING LOCATION WRP-R WRP-R Temp. (C) 10.4 12.7 Cond. (umhoslcm) 131 0 1744 Eh(mV) 556 596 pH 4.03 3.98 Em(mV) 305 347 Flow, Us 0.146 0.096 . A B pH 4.39 Acidily (mgn) 139.5 Cond. (umhoslcm) In mgL: AI 1.3 As 55 19 Total As 19 Ba Ca 209 213 Dissolved Fe 0.27 0.002 Total Fe 0.57 K 32 31 Mg 95 91 Diss. Mn 8.9 8.2 Total Mn Na 32 30 Diss.Ni 100 65 Total Ni 65 Si BqL Diss Ra 226 BqA Total Ra 226 Diss U Total U In mglL: Chloride 4 5 Bicarbonate <1 < I Sulphate I l l 0 995 FI Nitrate (as N) 20.91 130 Ammonia (as N) 3.50 2.9 P, total 16 9.6 T.D.S. 1770 T.S.S. Total Hardness N, Tot Kjeldhal 3.4 19-Aug-93 27Jun-95 24-Aug-97 SRC Boojum SRC WRT-1 WRP-T WRP-U 561 1 21812 16.9 14.3 10.7 4.27 3.75 4.44 595 1783 891 235 375 481 623 1394 0.013 4.19 4.73 282 14.4 0.33 3 5.05 10 10 43 212 0.056 0.017 I .4 12 30 19 87 1.7 8.6 12 30 12 62 62 5.2 44.4 0.49 26 0.086 37 2.2 0.128 I 1 5 I <1 < I 236 995 380 12.04 130 2.2 2.9 5.2 416 1800 14 4 12 - 24Aug-9i SRC RP Kill 22 21 80f 14.3 5.7 87 340 5.03 48 44.2 0.36 2.6 4.8 0.53 0.3 0.06 5.9 -0.01 0.64 3.2 CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni A I 4 9 July, 1998 LBoojum I".- -0 Table 11: Toe Seepage 1992 - 1997 Data (continuation) SAMPLE DATE 18-Sep-92 17-Aug-93 25Jun-94 08-Sep94 27Jun-9: OPERATOR Boojum SRC SRC SRC Boojum SAMPLING LOCATION STN 16 STN 16 STN 16 STN 16 Stn. 1E 10841 17001 5601 Temp. (C) 4.1 14.4 12.7 13.7 11.8 pH 4.89 4.3 3.42 4.14 3.07 Cond. (umhodcm) 2140 251 0 965 1220 1026 Em(mV) 225 21 4 206 227 283 Flow, Us 0.008 0.007 0.004 0.005 Eh(mV) 480 462 455 475 533 . A B PH 4.71 4.05 4.06 Cond. (umhoslcm) Acidity (mall) 45 33 53.4 108 In mgiL: AI 1.6 0.78 As 105 25 4.6 9.2 Total As Ba Ca Dissolved Fe Total Fe K Mg Diis. Mn Total Mn Na Dus. Ni Total Ni Si BqL Diss Ra 226 BqL Total Ra 226 Dss U 290 128 252 <0.001 0.064 0.057 36 22 32 147 47 91 17 5.2 10 70 20 40 138 58 88 18 9.8 121 0.017 0.16 23 48 5.5 18 51 52 Total U In mglL: Chloride 7 2 5 2 Bicarbonate S W MOD.St,Tw, P,VSgH2S M MOD,R,St,T SgH2S ' M P.MR.SoSt.0 SgH,S VW MM0.MSt.M SgH2S VW MO.P.R,Tw, DeOr M->W P,G,O NS D+M FaU,St,Ce P M P,Gt VSgH2S W P,MR.Mle,M P S MSt,MR,SoT NS M->W P,O,F.Sf,MR P MTw,R,OD,M SgH2S EW VW P,MR,Tw,Fw M H,S M P.MO,R,Tw SlOr VM P,MTw,SoR, Or W P,O,DeO,R.T NS M Sd,lO,SaTw. NS M U,O,FwR,F.S P EW MOD,MR,MT Or M P,G.MTw,MR P W P.T,Cy,MIO, NS M Table A2-2: Sorted Ni Concentrations with Sample Descriptions (continuation) Si,Sd,VF,MIO NS D P,O, R, Tw.Sf NS W MTW,MR,MD NS M FU/F, Ch,De P M P,DeO.R.Tw, H2S vw 04/06/93 LAKE1 P,Cy,SoR,So NS EW D CeSd.VaPe. NS 19/06/92 LAKE1 P,Cy,FwR NS EW P,VF.Gt,SoR NS vs 19/WD2 LAKE 1 19/06/92 LAKE 1 G,Sp,SoR,F NS M 19/ffi/92 LAKE1 P,MR.MTw NS M Area: BT1 .2,3,4: LOcatiOns originaily named according to position along B-Zone transects (BT) A to F: Area on map Location: Transect map 1W intervals; DH-Drill Hole, LOC=Location, NSNorth, S=South, SP-Shallow Pitzo, Stn-Station Sample type and local substrate: Cut=Cunings. Ored=Dredge, Mus=Muskeg, Sed=Sediment Driller Description: be=beige, bmbrown, d=dark, I=light, LS=gytia, m=medium. sakaturated, sed=sediment, org=organic, w=wth Colour: Bk-Black. Bn-Brown. D-Dark, Gn-Green, Gy-Grey, L-Light, 0-Orange, Rd-Red, SI-Slight, Tn-Tan, W W t e Texture: Ce-Coarse. Ch-Chunk, Cy-Clay, De-Decomposing, Dr-Drier. F-Fine, Fa-Fairly, Fw-Few, G-Grainy, Gr-GrassGt-Grit, H-Humus. 10-Inorganic, La-Larger, Le-Leaf, Lt-Little, M-Many, Me-Medium, MO-Moss, 0-Organic, OD-Organic Debris, P-Peat, Pe-Pebble, R-Root, Sd-Sand, Sf-SoR. si-Siky. SI-Sludge, So-Some. Sp-Spongy, St-Straw, T-Till. Th-Thick, Tw-Twig, U-Uniform, V-Very, Va-Various. WbWh Smell: Oe-Decomposing, F-Faint, M: Moderate, NS-No Smell, Or-Organic Smelt, P-Pungent. Sg-Strong. VFA Moisture: D-Dry. EW-Excess Water, M-Moist, S-Saturated. V-Very, W-Wet NA=Not Analyzed, ND=Not Deterrninated, NM=Not Measureable because of no enough water 0.008 0.006 - P I E - 0.004 z .- 0.002 Fig. A2-1 a: As vs Ni (waste rock) 0 . 0 . 0 0 0 0 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 As (mMlg) 0.005 Fig. A2-I b: As vs Ni (muskeg-surface) 0.13 0.10 0.03 0. w . . 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 As (mWJ) CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni Jujy. 1998 4&"."." Boojum .,.-~ A2-11 2 - 1.6 - 1.2 - 0.8 - 0.4 - O ? 7.2 6 4.8 3.6 2.4 1.2 0 ! * * * * * * _. * b 0.00 1.20 2.40 3.60 4.80 6.00 7.20 As (mMlg) CAMECO Corporation: Rabbit Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni Jujy. 1998 Boojum c.... . " ".* A2-12 3.00 2.40 'ij; 1.80 E 2 - Fig. A2-1 e: As vs Ni (seepage -total) 0.00 0.70 1.40 2.10 2.80 3.50 As (rnMlg) 0.45 0.36 0.27 0.18 0.09 Fig. A2-2: Comparison of Merk As with SRC As : * * ,: 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.93 1.00 Merck As, mg.L-I CAMECO Corporation: Rabbh Lake Operation Utilization of Wetlands for Removal of As and Ni Jujy. 1998 G... Boojum '",,lrnS A2-13 100 80 50 40 20 0 Fig A2-3: As vs L.O.I. '* . ) e . * e e e e e 0 100 zw 300 400 5M) MM 700 8w 900 loo0 Total As, ug.g-I Fig.AZ-4: Ni vs L.O.I. IZ0 zo 1: 0 0 100 MO 300 4w 5M) MM 700 Total Ni, ug.g-I e 3 1.5 1 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 2.5 3 >3 0.2 0.2 0 New Ditch Foan 3H20 idded (mL) 200 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 200 200 200 200 200 3e -- =3E -3ZWR-7 Graphtic 3H20 idded (mL) 200 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 200 200 200 200 200 - - c Ni - (mg/L) 0.711 0.514 0.394 0.342 0.195 0.118 0.124 0.087 0.078 0.047 0.047 0.047 0.047 0.032 --AS e 0.8 0.1 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.OOt 0.01 0.01 0.01 0 0.03 0 0 0 =3i a ~ BZWR-6 Hematiz lH20 BZWR-6 AslNi 0x1 JH20 added - (mL) 200 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 200 200 200 200 200 -- - BZWR-6 Area : 3H20 added (mL) 200 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 200 200 200 200 200 91 =ip P Ni (mg/L) ==I 0.524 0.256 0.201 0.118 0.093 0.063 0.047 0.1 0.078 0.109 0.053 0.038 0.047 0.032 --As - (mdL 0.5 0.05 0.03 0.01 O.OO! O.OO! O.OO! 0.00' 0.01 0.03 0.02 0 0 0 - 5 WRP-P Sludge )H20 ldded (mL) 200 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 200 200 200 200 200 1 - - Table A2 -6: Cumulative Extracted Ni and As in Solids from B-Zone Waste Rock Pile Table A2 -7: Chemistry in Slurries of B-Zone Waste Rock Pile AdNi pH 5.85 6.27 6.39 6.38 6.52 6.67 6.66 6.65 6.66 6.34 6.54 6.35 6.28 6.53 6.51 - ecan cycle - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 )H2C 3lank - -Oxidize( Cond. (wcm 91.4 44 43 36.7 36.4 45.2 46.2 44.9 44.8 33 33 42 41 39 33.2 - 200 5.65 100 5.96 100 6.06 100 6.3 100 6 100 6.36 100 6.25 100 6.2 200 5.97 200 6.05 200 6.66 200 6.45 200 6.33 - 6.53 - 6.51 M - 7 Grauhkk G n e b 87.6 43 41 34.2 34.4 37 36.9 37.2 43.5 31 33 39 39 39 33.2 )H2C Iddec (mL) -200 100 I00 100 100 100 100 100 200 200 200 200 200 -_. - - 200 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 200 200 200 200 200 - - pH 1 Cond (udcn 6.16 41.4 6.3 40 6.4 40 6.26 33.3 6.4 33.6 6.67 42.7 6.65 42.8 6.65 42.2 6.63 42.3 6.12 30 6.59 33 6.34 38 6.33 39 6.53 39 6.51 33.2 1ZW )H2C ldded (mL) 200 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 200 200 200 200 200 = - - = BZ DH2( adde, (mL) 200 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 200 200 200 200 200 --- - 1-6 AI PH - 6.32 6.44 6.52 5.95 6.33 6.74 6.76 6.75 5.74 3.38 5.61 5.44 5.37 3.53 3.51 --i I ss Cond :us/cn 39.6 41 40 32.9 33.4 42.6 42.3 42.1 42.2 30 31 39 38 39 33.2 -- - = idge Cond [us/cn 377 155 124 101.! 90.4 101.' 1OO. l 86 71 53 47 51 49 39 33.2 -- =P Table A2-8: Arsenic, Nickel, Iron, Sulphur and LOI Mass in BT-1, BT-2, BT-3, BT-4 and Lake 1 Muskeg, Sedirnents and Pond Water. I Surface Area II Muskes II Sediment ha ha 1,955 511 4,032 APPENDIX 3 CALCULATION OF TOTAL WATER SOLUBLE FRACTION Appendix 3: Total water soluble quantity: Extractable Ni and As in solids (mglkg) from B-Zone Waste Rock Pile are calculated based on the following equation and the results list in Appendix 2 (Table A2-5). ( [Nil in slurry - [Nil in DH20) (mglL) * DH20 added (mL) 11000 *I000 Ni (mg/kg) = -__---__.-____----______________________--------------------------- Dry sample weight (9) where: [Nil in DH20( distilled water) = 0.0319 mglL ( [As] in slurry - [As] in DH20) (mglL) * DH20 added (mL) 11000 As (mglkg) = *I000 Dry sample weight (9) where: [As] in DH20( distilled water) = 0 mglL The percentage of extracted Ni (E-Ni) or As (E-As) in total Ni (T-Ni) or As (T-As) are calculated based on the following equation (Table 9): Extracted Ni (mglkg) Extracted A s (mglkg) in T-As (”/.) = ~ ----.-------- E-Ni in T-Ni (“h) = ‘100 ‘1 00 Total Ni (mglkg) Total As (mglkg) APPENDIX 4 PUBLICATION Proceedings of the 36'h Annual Conference of Metallurgists CIM, Sudbury Ontario August 17 -20, 1997 Pages 327 - 337 Wetlands for Treatment of Arsenic and Nickel. A Decommissioning Approach for Waste Rock Pile Seepage * M. min. M.P. Smith Boojum Research Limited 468 Queen Street East, LL2 Toronto, Ontario M5A ll7 A waste rock pile in northern Saskatcbewan. Canada consisting of 5.6 million m3 of waste rock was generated by open pit mining of uranium between 1984 and 1991. Decommissioning options for the waste rock pile are based on the geochemical and hydrological conditions of the pile and the surrounding environment. The contaminants of concern are As and Ni. The total contaminant mass which is likely to be mobilized from the waste rock pile is estimated between 240 t and 403 t for As, and 357 t and 447 t for Ni. The annual release rate is estimated for As at 1.7 t.f and for Ni. 4.9 t.yl. Presently, seepage from the waste rock pile is collected and chemically treated. The waste rock pile is surrounded by fens and muskeg. the wetland equivalents in boreal ecosy~tems. This physical setting lends itself to implementing a self- sustainable decommissioning approach utilizing the muskeg and fens which surround the pile. The fens have been studied over the past fwe years for their ability to retain As and Ni in the sediments. Field experiments, complemented by laboratory studies, have established a contaminant removal capacity for Ni of between 0.07 g.m-'.d-' and 0.1 g.m-z.dl. and for As, between 0.08 g.m*2.d-* and 0.1 g.m2.d-* can be removed. The area of the wetlands available to mediate the annual contaminant load is 18 ha. At maximum. 16 ha are required during the ice free season to accommodate the seepage accumulation from spring run-off and the flow generated during the summer. Microbial community activity is the main factor facilitating ongoing contaminant removal from the seepage water. The treatment capacity has been demonstrated for both natural fen sediments. and for sediiments amended with organic matter additions to stimulate microbial activity. * Proceedings of the 36* Annual Conference of Metallurgists, CIM, Sudbury, Ontario, August 17-20, 1997. Pages 327 - 337. INTRODUCTION In decommissionhg mine waste management areas, a wide range of options for the restoration of the mine wastes are typically evaluated. The primary long-tern concern is the release of contaminant compounds from weathering mining wastes such as waste rock and tailings. With sufficient net atmospheric precipitation, contaminated seepages commonly emerge from the toe of waste rock piles which, in many cases, require treatment in order to protect surface water quality of the receiving aquatic environment. Since weathering processes are slow, contaminant release and the need for its treatment can span decades or longer. Chemical tx+tment of waste rock seepages generates sludge containing high metal concentrations, which in turn require containment and long-term storage facilities. The search for low maintenance alternatives to chemical treatment over the last decade has included assessments of natural treatment options, such as the utilization of sediments in wetlands as self-sustaining contaminant removal systems. A review of the 35 papers (I), describing various types of wetlands as treatment options for mine effluents, revealed that. when the pH of such systems is above 4.5 and the acidity is less than 300 mg-L'. these passive approaches are very effective. This paper reports the results of a five year study which has lead to the integration of existing wetlands surrounding a waste rock pile as treatment areas for removal of contaminants from toe seepages. Several studies (e.g., 2, 3) have demonstrated the capacity of wetlands to remove heavy metals from contaminated waters in a wide variety of situations. Stimulation of sediment microbiology through addition of readily degradable organic carbon, such as potato waste or alfalfa pellets, has been proven to augment metal removal and improve seepage characteristics (2). The effectiveness of such amendments was tested using sediments from the wetlands adjacent to the waste rock pile, both in the laboratory using reactors (4. 5) and in the field in enclosed sections of an adjacent fen (6). The forms of contaminants which accumulated in sediments of the enclosures and in the laboratory reactors were also identified (7). SITE DESCRIPTION An open pit uranium mining operation, located'on the Hanison Peninsula of Wollaston Lake, northern Saskatchewan, 58" 11' N, 103'41' W (Figure 1). generated a 5.6 million m' waste rock pile between 1984 and 1991. The waste rock pile is comprised of approximately 9.1 million tonnes of material placed within a 26.2 ha area, including a peripheral run-off collection ditch system (Figure 2). Over the eight year operation, waste rock was enddumped and compacted by bulldozer. The waste rock included till, overburden sand, sandstone @leached. hematized, lmonized), quartz biotite gneiss and graphitic gneiss excavated from the open pit. Since completion of pile in 1991, no contouring, capping or revegetating has taken place. The waste rock pile is exposed to an average total precipitation of 565 mm (1972-1995 average), while the net annual precipitation is estimated at 230 mm. The annual average temperature is -4.7"C (1951-1980). To address the weathering characteristics. the waste rock pile has been studied in three major sampling and laboratory testing campaigns. The conclusions drawn from these tests were-that, first, there may be sufficient neutralizing minerals present in the waste pile to buffer drainage between slightly acidic and neutral pH values; second, the graphitic gneiss material. although present in relatively limited quantities, indicates a potential for acid generation, and it is expected that drainage from this material will influence the overall average drainage water quality; and third, bleached limonitic sandstone, which represents the largest portion of the rock pile, released stored oxidations products during the initial flushing stages. indicating that potential exists for the short-term release of metals. 1 0 150 300 km - USA Figure 1 - Location of Harrison Peninsula, Wollaston Lake, northern Saskatchewan, Canada. The waste rock was deposited in a muskeg area, and three fens are located immediately adjacent to the pile (Figure 2). Hydrogeological studies of the vicinity indicate that the fens northwest of the waste rock pile, comprised of shallow, open water ponds overlying muskeg sediments, are perched water bodies. Waste Rock Pile U-. WASTE ROCK PILE ANI SURROUNDING AREA - hrfny+LnQh =s- -asapqnco-w Figure 2 - The waste rock pile and surrounding area. These wetland areas are being examined for their possible use as treatment systems for seepage draining from the waste rock pile, given their hydrological and biological conditions. Following decommissioning. seepage emerging from the waste rock pile would be directed into the wetlands where the contaminants would be retained in the sediments. SEEPAGE CHARACTERISTICS Seepages emerge from the waste rock pile principally from the first bench, or the toe of the pile. On from the firs bench of the waste rock pile, then flowing overland to the perimeter dirch. On the northwest side, all seepages emerge from the bottom of the pile. but flow overland, crossing the perimeter road and drain into the collection ditch. Seepages have not been observed along the southwest side adjacent to the ore stockpile area. The site lay-out, including the waste rock pile, the Northwest and Southeast drainage ditches and the wetlands, is given in Figure 2. ~ the southwest side, seepages emerge from the sides of the inner banks of the seepage collection ditch, or - I Seepage is collected and pumped for treatment at the Northwest Seepage Collection Station ana also at The water quality of seepage collecting at thest: [he Southeast Seepage Collection Station (Figure 2). srarions in presented in Table I. Seepage waters collected at the Northwest and Southeast pumping stations have, on average, low pH (4 .3 and 3.3, respectively) and relatively high conductivities (1100 and 1670 pS.cm-') and total dissolved solids (TDS) concentrations (1022 and 1538 mg.L', respectively). Calcium and sulphate are major comtiruents contributing to these solutions' high TDS. Both total arsenic and nickel are present in elevated concentrations in solutions collected at the Northwest and Southeast Seepage Collection Stations, averaging jo and 27 mg.L" As and 47 and 99 mg.Li Ni, respectively. Seepage waters also contain elevated concentrations of biologically-available forms of nitrogen (nitrate, ammonia, Kjeldahl nitrogen) and phosphate, essential nutrients which will support the microbial treatment process. Table 1 - ChemicallPhysical Parameters, Major Anion and Cation Concentrations in Northwest (1987-1996) and Southeast (1994-1995) Seepage Collection Stations water Northwest Seepage Collcdon Station Southcan Seepage Collection Scauon 1987 - 1996 1994 - 1996 Avg. S.D. Min Max N Avg. S.D. Min Max N TcmpcC) 12 5.7 0.50 21 24 17 5.0 11.3 26.0 5 pH 4.3 4.1 3.3 6.8 44 3.3 3.4 3.0 6.3 5 Eh(mV) 477 54 368 574 12 463 213 97 634 4 Alkaliity 5.0 1 0 TDS 1022 964 10 4170 23 1538 463 923 2040 3 TSS 384 790 1.0 3580 48 4.5 0.50 4.0 5.0 2 Cond (uS.cm-') 1104 782 35 3540 34 1669 235 1461 2010 5 In rng.L.' Acidity 72 57 3.3 158 5 186 I Tot Hardness 478 543 17 2030 12 0 C1 2.6 1.7 0.60 7.0 30 4.2 2.0 2.0 8.0 5 F 0.13 0.12 0.03 0.49 IS 0.84 I HCO, 2.8 1.8 59 g.m" -1 - I As per year 4 g.m .y -2 -1 Ni per year As: Years to capacity 10.0 g.m .y 13.9 years Ni: yeantocapacity > 5.9 years Phytoplankton (suspended microscopic algae) organic carbon production is estimated, based on literature values, at 0.37 kgrn'*f for a eutrophic lake (8), while submerged macrophyte, emergent macrophyte and allochthonous carbon input are estimated at 0.12, 1.43 and 0.04 kgm-'.y-l (8). totalling 0.64 g.m".y-'. This productivity estimate, based on the literature values, is therefore about half the organic carbon production required to replace the organic carbon content of the top 0.15 m of sediment every 6 years. The Northwest Wetland 1 phytoplankton productivities were calculated based on counts of a single, dominant phytoplankton species, Dictyosphuerium simplex, in this wetland. This species alone can be 1. . estimated to produce organic carbon at a rate of 0.008 to 0.19 kgm-*.y-'. an amount comparable to that reported for euuophic systems in more temperate latitudes (8). The high productivity is not surprising, since the nutrient supply from the waste rock pile is plentiful both in nitrogen and phosphate. The pile is estimated to leach phosphate for 4,000 at 0.5 t per year. Hence, it is reasonable to assume that any ecosystem in this area, such as wetlands, receiving nutrients borne in waste rock pile seepage can be anticipated to maintain high prcductivities in the long term. In 1995. floating wetland vegetation rafts were installed to test the possibility that additional carbon could be produced through ecological engineering measures. Floating cattail rafts have been employed elsewhere to provide a cover over passive treament systems in order to reduce wind-induced water mixing and to provide degradable organic matter to the microbial consortia responsible for contaminant removal. Systems covered with floating cattail rafts can be used for removal of metals from mine drainage through promoting and maintaining reducing conditions (1, 9). The establishment of mature plants on rafts from seedlings in 1995, and regrowth the following spring (1996) demonstrates that this approach can be used to add to the current organic carbon production. CONCLUSION This paper summarized an approach for a waste management area in the mineral sector which will lead to the integration of passive treatment systems when decommissioning is required. Based on the setting of the waste rock pile in a muskeg area, and the expected loads of contaminants in seepages. no funher addition of wetland area is required for this site. As a backup measure, additions of organic matter to the wetlands sediments can be used, should the seepage loading increase or the microbial activity of the sediment decrease. The current estimates of organic matter production suggest that the use of the wetlands in decommissioning and restoration efforts represents an environmentally acceptable sustainable solution, the ultimate objective of all restoration activities. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors wish to thank Les Adrian (CAMECO Corporation) who initiated our work, and John Jarrell who guided it to its completion. We are also grateful to Ed Cook and Rob Scott, the on-site personnel, for their assistance during the field investigations. We acknowledge the support of the National Biotechnology Strategy Program, CANMET. Natural Resources Canada, in the investigation of the fate of As and Ni in the sediments of the wetlands. Our former coworkers have contributed significantly to the project; Dr. Andrew Fyson, with his thorough understanding of microbial ecology and our chemist Dr. J.L h i in explaining the chemical complexities of contaminants in sediment-water systems. REFEXENCES 1) M. Kalin. A. Fyson and M.P. Smith, "Passive Treatment For The Mineral Sector" International Svmposium on Waste Processine. and Recvclina in Mineral and MetallurEical Industries. V01.2. Vancouver, B.C., 1995, 363-376. 2) M. Kalin, "Treatment of Acidic Seepages Using Wetland Ecology and Microbiology". Final Report. Contract #23440-2-!?217/01-SQ, 1993, MEND Program, Canada Centre for Mining and Energy Technology I Energy, Mines and Resources Canada. 3) Desian for MininF Omrations, G.A. Brcdie and T.R. Wildeman, Eds., BiTech Publishers, Vancouver. 4 ) A. Fyson, M. Kalin, and L. Adrian, "Arsenic and Nickel Removal By Wetland Sedimenu", paper presented at the International Land Reclamation and Mine Drainage Conference, Pittsburg. PA. April 24-29. T R. Wildeman. "Handbook for Constructed Wetlands Receiving Acid Mine Drainage", Wetlands 1994. 109-118. 5) A. Fyson, M. Kalin and J. h i , " Removal of Arsenic and Nickel From a Mine Wastewater By Muskeg Sediments", Paper presented at the 11th Annual BIOMINET Meeting, Ottawa, January 16, 1995. 103-1 18. 6) M.P. Smith, L. Adrian, and M. Kah, "Arsenic and Nickel Removal in Wetland Sedhents". Paper presented at the Saskatchewan Annual Conference on Environmental Management in Mining, Saskatoon, October 27-29, 1993. 7) M. Kalin. 'Arsenic and Nickel Removal from Waste Rock Seepages Using Muskeg Sediment", Final Report, Contract No. 23440-3-9275/01-SQ, 1994. Canadian Centre For Minerals and Energy Technology (CANMET), Energy, Mines and Resources Canada. 8) R.G. Wetzel, Limnology. Saunders College Publishing, Toronto, 1982, 544. 9) M. Kalin and M.P. Smith, "The Development of Floating Qpha Mats", Paper presented at the IAWPRC Conference on Wetland Systems in Water Pollution Control. Sydney, NSW. Australia, November 30. 1992. I

CAMECO Corporation

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LU|ZONE|UL