s

333.91 M26prar

1999

1999 ANNUAL REPORT

to the

GOVERNMENTS OF CANADA, UNITED STATES,

SASKATCHEWAN AND MONTANA

STATE DOCUMENTS COLLECTION

MAY 2 3 2001 MONTANA STATE LIBRARY 1515 E. 6th AVE. HELENA. MONTANA 59620

by the

POPLAR RIVER

BILATERAL MONITORING

COMMITTEE

'opiar

COVERING CALENDAR YEAR 1999

November 2000
3 0864 0015 6017 9
1999 ANNUAL REPORT

to the

GOVERNMENTS OF CANADA, UNITED STATES,

SASKATCHEWAN, AND MONTANA

by the

POPLAR RIVER BILATERAL MONITORING COMMITTEE

COVERING CALENDAR YEAR 1999

November, 2000

Poplar River Bilateral Monitoring Committee

Department of State Washington, D.C., United States

Governor's Office

State of Montana

Helena, Montana, United States

Ladies and Gentlemen:

Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada

Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Saskatchewan Environment and

Resource Management

Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada

Herein is the 19"" Annual Report of the Poplar River Bilateral Monitoring Committee. This report discusses the Committee activities of 1999 and presents the proposed schedule for the year 2000.

During 1999, the Poplar River Bilateral Monitoring Committee continued to fulfil the responsibilities

assigned by the governments under the Poplar River Cooperative Monitoring Agreement dated September

23, 1980. Through exchange of Diplomatic Notes, in March 1987, July 1992, and July 1997, the Arrangement was extended. The current extension expires in March 2002.

The enclosed report summarizes current water-quality conditions and compares them to guidelines for

specific parameter values that were developed by the International Joint Commission under the 1977

Reference from Canada and the United States. After evaluation of the monitoring information for 1999,

the Committee finds that the measured conditions meet the recommended objectives. The Committee notes

that the flow-weighted concentration oftotal dissolved solids in streamflow in the East Poplar River at the

International Boundary remains close to the long-term objective of 1 ,000 milligrams per litre, but did not exceed the objective in 1 999. The Committee after discussing and reviewing the Water-Quality Objectives

agreed to suspend monitoring and reporting of several parameters since they were no longer considered of concern. The parameters affected are: dissolved aluminum, un-ionized ammonia, total and dissolved chromium, mercury in fish, and fecal and total coliform.

Based on IJC recommendations, the United States was entitled to an On-Demand release of370 dam^ (300

acre-feet) from Cookson Reservoir in 1 999. A volume of 1 , 200 dam^ (989 acre-feet) was delivered to the United States during this period. In addition, except for a few days in July and August, daily flows in 1999 met or exceeded the minimum flow recommended by the IJC.

During 1999, monitoring continued in accordance with Technical Monitoring Schedules outlined in the 1992 Annual Report of the Poplar River Bilateral Monitoring Committee.

Yours sincerely,

Robert Davis

Chairman, United States Section

J^icStults Member, United States Section

Richard Kellow

Chairman, Canadian Section

Chuck Bosgoed

Member, Canadian Section

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Highlights for 1999 iii

1.0 Introduction 1

2.0 Committee Activities 2

2.

1

Memberships 2

2.2 Meetings 2

2.3 Review of Water-Quality Objectives 3

2.4 Data Exchange 4

3.0 Water and Air: Monitoring and Interpretations 6

3.1 Poplar River Power Station Operation 6

3.2 East Poplar River 6

3.2.1 Streamflow 6

3.2.2 Apportionment 7

3.2.3 Minimum Flows 7

3.2.4 On-Demand Release 8

3.2.5 Water Quality 9

3.2.5.1 Total Dissolved Solids 10

3.2.5.2 Boron 14

3.2.5.3 Other Water-Quality Variables 17

3.3 Ground Water 19

3.3.1 Operations 19

3.3.2 Ground-Water Levels 21

^'' 3.3.2.1 Saskatchewan 21

3.3.2.2 Montana 23

3.3.3 Ground-Water Quality 26

3.3.3.

1

Saskatchewan 26

3.3.3.2 Montana 30

3.4 Cookson Reservoir 31

3.4.1 Storage 31

3.4.2 Water Quality 33

3.5 Air Quality 33

3.6 Quality Control 33

3.6.1 Streamflow 33

3.6.2 Water-Quality 34 ANNEXES

1 .0 Poplar River Cooperative Monitoring Arrangement,

Canada-United States Al

2.0 Poplar River Cooperative Monitoring Arrangement, Technical Monitoring Schedules, 1 999, Canada-United States A2

3.0 Recommended Flow Apportionment in the Poplar River Basin A3

4.0 Metric Conversions A4
TABLES

Table 2.1 Water-Quality Objectives 5 Table 3.1 Recommended Water-Quality Objectives and Excursions, 1999 Sampling

Program, East Poplar River at the International Boundary 18 Table 3.2 Water-Quality Statistics for Water Pumped from Supplementary Water Supply Project Wells Sampled at Site "C3" on Girard Creek 26

Table 3.3 Water-Quality Statistics for Water Pumped from Soil Salinity Project Wells Sampled at the Discharge Pipe 27

Table 3.4 Cookson Reservoir Storage Statistics for 1999 31 Table 3.5 Streamflow Measurement Results for July 19,1999 34

Table 3.6 East Poplar Water-Quality Measurement Results for August 24, 1999 35 FIGURES

Figure 3 .

1

Discharge during 1 999 Compared with the Median Discharge for 1 96 1

- 1 990

for the Poplar River at the International Boundary 6

Figure 3.2 Flow Hydrograph of the East Poplar River at the International Boundary 8 Figure 3.3 Cumulative Volume Hydrograph of On-Demand Release 9

Figure 3.4 TDS Concentrations for 1999 Grab Samples from East Poplar River

at the International Boundary 1

1

Figure 3.5 Three-Month Moving, Flow-Weighted TDS Concentration for East Poplar River at the International Boundary 1

1

Figure 3.6 Five-Year Moving, Flow-Weighted TDS Concentration for East Poplar River at the International Boundary 13 Figure 3.7 Daily TDS Concentration, 1982 to 1999, East Poplar River

at the International Boundary 13 Figure 3.8 Boron Concentrations for 1999 Grab Samples from East Poplar

River at the International Boundary 15 Figure 3.9 Three-Month Moving, Flow-Weighted Boron Concentration for East Poplar River at the International Boundary 15 Figure 3.10 Five-Year Moving, Flow-Weighted Boron Concentration for East Poplar River at the International Boundary 16 Figure 3.11 Daily Boron Concentration, 1982 to 1999 East Poplar River

at the International Boundary 16 Figure 3.12 Supplementary Water Supply 19

Figure 3.13 Pumpage from Salinity Control Projects 20

Figure 3.14 Drawdown for Hart Seam Aquifer as of December 1999 22

Figure 3.15 Cone of Depression in the Empress Sands Due to the

Salinity Projects as of December 1999 23

Figure 3.16 Hydrographs of Selected Wells: Fort Union-Hart Coal Aquifers 24

Figure 3.17 Hydrographs of Selected Wells: Alluvium and Fox Hills Aquifers 25

Figure 3.18 Total Dissolved Solids in Samples from Montana Wells 30

Figure 3.19 Cookson Reservoir Mean Daily Water Levels for 1 999 and Mean Daily

Monthly Water Levels for 1981-1991 32

-u
HIGHLIGHTS FOR 1999

The Poplar River Power Station completed its sixteenth full year of operation in 1999. The two 300- megawatt coal-fired units generated 4,185,100 gross megawatt hours of electricity. The average capacity

factors for Units No. 1 and 2 was 88.6 percent and 81.1 percent, respectively. The capacity factor is based on the maximum generating rating of 305 MW/h for Unit #1, and 310 MW/h for Unit #2. Similar to other

years, scheduled maintenance was completed in the fall and spring of 1 999.

Monitoring information collected in both Canada and the United States during 1 999 was exchanged in the

spring of 2000. In general, the sampling locations, frequency of collection, and parameters met the requirements identified in the 1 999 Technical Monitoring Schedules set forth in the 1 998 annual report.

In 1999, the Committee also inifiated the Cookson Reservoir Study to investigate the potential salinity problems associated with the Reservoir and its impact in the East Poplar River flows downstream.

The recorded volume of the Poplar River at International Boundary from March 1 to May 31, 1999 was

35,440 dam^ (28, 730 acre-feet). Based on IJC recommendafions and the assumpfion that the recorded flow

is the natural flow, the United States was entitled to a minimum discharge on the East Poplar River of 0.085

cubic metres per second (m^/s) (3.0 cubic feet per second (ft^ /s)) for the period June 1 , 1 999 to August 3 1

,

1999 and 0.057 mVs (2.0 ft^ /s) for the period of September 1, 1999 to May 31, 2000. The minimum flow of

0.028 mVs ( 1 .0 ft^ /s) for the period January 1 to May 31,1 999 had previously been determined on the basis ofthe Poplar River flow volume for March 1 to May 3 1

, 1998. Except for few days in July and August, daily flows in 1999 met or exceeded the minimum flow recommended by the IJC.

In addition to the minimum flow, the IJC apportionment recommendation entitles the United States to an on- demand release to be delivered on the East Poplar River during the twelve-month period commencing June

1 . Based on the runoff volume of 4,420 dam^ (3,580 acre-feet) recorded at the Poplar River at International Boundary gauging station for March 1 through May 31, 1998, the United States was entitled to an additional

release of 370 dam^ (300 acre-feet) from Cookson Reservoir during the succeeding twelve month period

commencing June 1, 1998. Montana requested this release to be made between May 1 and May 31, 1999. A volume of 1 , 220 dam^ (989 acre-feet) was delivered during this period.

The 1999 five-year total dissolved solids (TDS) flow-weighted concentrations were below the long-term

objective of 1 ,000 milligrams per litre (mg/L). The maximum monthly value calculated in 1 999 wasjust under 989 mg/L. The gradual increase in five-year flow-weighted concentrations for TDS is due to insufficient

surface runoff over the long term, which has not allowed for sufficient flushing of Cookson Reservoir. Boron

concentrations for 1999 continued to remain well below the long-term objective of 2.5 mg/L.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The Poplar River Bilateral Monitoring Committee was authorized for an initial period of five years by

the Governments of Canada and the United States under the Poplar River Cooperative Monitoring

Arrangement dated September 23, 1 980. A copy ofthe Arrangement is attached to this report as Annex

1. Through exchange of Diplomatic Notes, on March 12, 1987, July 1992, and July 18, 1997, the Arrangement was extended. The current extension expires in March 2002. A more detailed account of

the historical background of the Monitoring Arrangement is contained in the 1990 Annual Report of

the Poplar River Bilateral Monitoring Committee.

The Committee oversees monitoring programs designed to evaluate the potential for transboundary

impacts from SaskPower's (formerly Saskatchewan Power Corporation) coal-fired thermal generating

station and ancillary operations near Coronach, Saskatchewan. Monitoring is conducted in Canada and

the United States at or near the International Boundary for quantity and quality of surface and ground

water and for air quality. Participants from both countries, including Federal, State and Provincial

agencies, are involved in monitoring.

The Committee submits an annual report to Governments which summarizes the monitoring results, evaluates apparent trends, and compares the data to objectives or standards recommended by the

International Joint Commission (IJC) to Governments, or relevant State, Provincial, or Federal

standards. The Committee reports to Governments on a calendar year basis. The Committee is also responsible for drawing to the attention of Governments definitive changes in monitored parameters

which may require immediate attention.

A responsibility of the Committee is to review the adequacy of the monitoring programs in both

countries and make recommendations to Governments on the Technical Monitoring Schedules. The

Schedules are updated annually for new and discontinued programs and for modifications in sampling

frequencies, parameter lists, and analytical techniques of ongoing programs. The Technical Monitoring Schedules listed in the annual report (Annex 2) are given for the forthcoming year. The

Committee will continue to review and propose changes to the Technical Monitoring Schedules as information requirements change.
2.0 COMMITTEE ACTIVITIES

2.1 Membership

The Committee is composed of representatives of the Governments of the United States of America

and Canada, the State Government of Montana, and the Provincial Government of Saskatchewan. In addition to the representatives of Governments, two ex-officio members serve as local representatives

for the State of Montana and Province of Saskatchewan.

During 1999, the members of the Committee included: Mr. R. Davis, U.S. Geological Survey, United

States representative and Cochair; Mr. R. Kellow, Environment Canada, Canadian representative and Cochair; Mr. J. Stults, Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, Montana

representative; Mr. C. Bosgoed, Saskatchewan Environment and Resource Management,

Saskatchewan representative; Mr. C.W. Tande, Daniels County Commissioner, Montana local exofficio representative; and Mr. J.R. Totten, Reeve, R.M. of Hart Butte, Saskatchewan local ex-officio

representative.

2.2 Meetings

The Committee met on August 3"* and 4"", 1999, in Helena, Montana. Delegated representatives of Governments, with the exception of the two ex-officio members from Montana and Saskatchewan,

attended the meeting. In addition to Committee members, several technical advisors representing

Federal, State, and Provincial agencies participated in the meeting. During the meeting, the Committee

reviewed the operational status of the Poplar Power Plant and associated coal mining activities; examined data collected in 1 998 including surface-water quality and quantity, ground-water quality and

quantity, and air quality; established the Technical Monitoring Schedules for the year 2000; discussed proposed changes in water-quality objectives and the possibility of replacing the flow-weighting

method currently used to compute total dissolved solids and boron. The Committee also prepared the

first draft of the 1998 annual Report to Governments.
2.3 Review of Water-Quality Objectives

The International Joint Commission in its Report to Governments, titled " Water-Quality in the Poplar River Basin", recommended that the Committee "periodically review the water-quality objectives within the overall Basin context and recommend new and revised objectives as appropriate". In 1 99 1

,

the Committee undertook a review of water-quality objectives.

The Committee approved changes in water-quality objectives recommended by the 1 99 1 subcommittee

which was formed to review the objectives. Revised objectives approved by the Committee are listed

in Table 2.1.

The Committee discussed the water-quality objectives for 5-year and 3-month flow-weighted

concentrations for total dissolved solids and boron. Although the Committee agreed that calculation procedures to determine flow-weighted concentrations are time consuming and probably scientifically

questionable, no consensus was reached on alternative objectives or procedures. Some of the discussions and decisions that were made at this meeting include: Suspending most of the parameters

that were recommended for discontinuance back in 1991 such as dissolved aluminum, bacteria, pH,

mercury in fish, and un-ionized ammonia. Canada has expressed concern about the need for the flow- weighted boron and TDS objectives given the uncertainty of the scientific validity of how the

objectives are calculated.

According to the IJC report titled, "Water-Quality in the Poplar River Basin", the Committee can "recommend new and revised objectives as appropriate". After a lengthy discussion, members agreed

not to remove any objectives at this time. Instead, the Committee decided to suspend the monitoring and reporting of several parameters after reviewing the water-quality objectives. The suspended

parameters are: dissolved aluminum, un-ionized ammonia, total chromium, mercury in fish, fecal

coliform, and total coliform. In addition, the Committee agreed there was a need to review the flow- weighted objectives for Boron and TDS. The Committee also agreed to other minor revisions to the

water-quality objectives for clarification. For example, changing the designation for pH from "natural"

to "ambient".
Another responsibility of the Committee has included an ongoing exchange of data acquired through

the monitoring programs. Exchanged data and reports are available for public viewing at the agencies of the participating governments or from Committee members.

2.4 Data Exchange

The Committee is responsible for assuring exchange of data between governments. The exchange of

monitoring information was initiated in the first quarter of 1981 and was an expansion ofthe informal

quarterly exchange program initiated between the United States and Canada in 1 976. Until 1 991 , data were exchanged on a quarterly basis. At the request of the Committee, the United States and Canada

agreed to replace the quarterly exchange ofdata with an annual exchange effective at the beginning of

the 1 992 calendar year. Henceforth, data will be exchanged once each year as soon after the end ofthe calendar year as possible. However, unusual conditions or anomalous information will be reported and exchanged whenever warranted. No unusual conditions occurred during 1 999 which warranted

special reporting.
Table 2.1 Water-Quality Objectives

PARAMETER
3.0 WATER AND AIR: MONITORING AND INTERPRETATIONS

3.1 Poplar River Power Station Operation

In 1999, the average capacity factor for Unit No. 1 was 88.6 percent. The average capacity factor for Unit No. 2 was 81.1 percent. The capacity factors are based on the maximum generation rating of

305.0 MW/h for Unit No. 1 and 310.0 MW/h for Unit No. 2. Total power generated from both units was 4, 1 85, 100 gross megawatt-hours. There were no construction projects undertaken during 1999. Similar to other years, scheduled maintenance was completed in the fall and spring of 1 999.

3.2 East Poplar River

3.2.1 Streamflow

Streamflow in the Poplar River basin was well above normal in 1999 due to near-record level snowpack

in the region. The March to October recorded flow of the Poplar River at International Boundary, an

indicator ofnatural flow in the basin, was 38,010 cubic decametres (dam^) (30,830 acre-feet), which was

377 percent of the 1 93 1 to 1 990 median seasonal flow. A comparison of 1 999 monthly mean discharge

with the 1931-90 median discharge is shown in Figure 3.1.

• O--- Med Ian ofMonthly Mean Discharge for 1931-90 -O— Monthly Mean Discharge for 1999

. 400

T3

. 350 §

o

o> 300 «

o

a. 250 g

u.o

200 3

o

150 .Eo

D) 100 s

JZo

50 -^ —6

OCT

Figure 3.1 Discharge during 1999 as Compared with the Median Discharge from

1931-1990 for the Poplar River at International Boundary.
The 1 999 recorded flow volume of the East Poplar River at International Boundary was 26,990 dam^

(21,880 acre-feet). This volume is 906 percent of the median annual flow since the completion of Morrison Dam in 1975.

3.2.2 Apportionment

In 1976 the International Souris-Red Rivers Engineering Board, through its Poplar River Task Force, completed an investigation and made a recommendation to the Governments of Canada and the United

States regarding the apportionment of waters of the Poplar River basin. Although not officially adopted

by the two countries, the Poplar River Bilateral Monitoring Committee has adhered to the Apportionment

Recommendations in each of its annual reports. Annex 3 contains the apportionment recommendation.

3.2.3 Minimum Flows

The recorded volume ofthe Poplar River at International Boundary from March 1 to May 31,1 999 was

35,440 dam^ (28,730 acre-feet). Based on IJC recommendations and the assumption that the recorded flow is the natural flow, the United States was entitled to a minimum discharge on the East Poplar River

of 0.085 cubic metres per second (mVs) (3.0 cubic feet per second (ftVs)) for the period June I, 1999 to August 31, 1999 and 0.057 mVs (2.0 ftVs) for the period September 1, 1999 to May 31, 2000. The

minimum flow 0.028 mVs (1.0 ftVs) for the period January 1 to May 31, 1999 had previously been

determined on the basis of the Poplar River flow volume for March 1 to May 31, 1998. A hydrograph

for the East Poplar River at International Boundary and the minimum flow as recommended by the IJC

are shown in Figure 3.2.

Daily flows during 1999 met or exceeded the minimum flow recommended by the IJC throughout the year except for July 27 to August 8, August 14-18, and August 21 -26 when daily flows fell slightly below

the recommended minimum.
10

0.1

0.01

1
1400

1200

1120

960

- On-Demand Release Delivery -On-Demand Ftelease Request 800 uj

1999

Figure 3.3 Cumulative Volume Hydrograph of On-Demand Release.

3.2.5 Water-Quality

The 1981 report by the IJC to Governments recommended:

For the March to October period, the maximumflow-weighted concentrations should not exceed 2.5 milligrams per litre (mg/L) for boron and 1500 mg/Lfor TDSfor any three consecutive months in the East Poplar River at the International Boundary. For the March to October period, the long-term average offlow-weighted concentrations should be 2.5 mg/L or lessfor boron, and 1000 mg/L or less for TDS in the East Poplar River at the International Boundary.

For the period prior to 1982, three-month moving flow-weighted concentration (FWC) for boron and

total dissolved solids (TDS) was calculated solely from monthly monitoring results. Since the beginning of 1982, the USGS has monitored specific conductance daily in the East Poplar River at the

International boundary, making it possible to derive boron and TDS concentration using a linear regression relationship with specific conductance. Thus, the three-month FWC for boron and TDS for the period 1 982 to 1 999 was calculated from both the results of monthly monitoring (grab samples

collected by both Canada and the USA) and the statistical analysis of daily specific conductance

readings collected by the USGS.
10

The Bilateral Monitoring Committee adopted the approach that for the purpose ofcomparison with the proposed IJC long-term objectives, the boron and TDS data are best plotted as a five-year moving FWC

which is advanced one month at a time.

Prior to 1988, long-term averages were calculated for a five-year period in which 2.5 years preceded and 2.5 years followed each plotted point. Beginning in 1988, the FWC was calculated from the five year period preceding each plotted point. For example, the FWC for December 1999 is calculated from

data generated over the period December 1993 to December 1999. The calculations are based on the

results of samples collected throughout the year, and are not restricted to only those collected during

the months bracketing the period of irrigation (March to October) each year.

3.2.5.1 Total Dissolved Solids

TDS is inversely related to streamflow at the International Boundary station. During periods of high

runoff such as spring freshet, TDS decreases as the proportion of streamflow derived from ground

water decreases. Conversely, during times of low streamflow (late summer, winter) the contribution of ground water to streamflow is proportionally greater. Because ground water has a higher ionic strength than the surface water entering the river, the TDS ofthe stream increases markedly during low

flow conditions.

TDS grab-sample data collected by Environment Canada and the USGS in 1999 are shown in Figure

3.4. The TDS ranged from 570 mg/L on March 30 to 1 040 mg/L on December 20. The proposed short- term objective for TDS is 1500 mg/L. A time plot of the three-month moving FWC for TDS is presented in Figure 3.5.
11

Figure 3.4: TDS Concentration for 1999 Grab Samples from East Poplar River

at the International Boundary

1200

"a 1000 o 996 #968

800

600

400

200

951 808

904 ^874

"555^ 1Q2Q it 1040

b'/O 615

691

CO &

788

Figure 3.5: Three-Month Moving Flow-Weighted TDS Concentration for East

Poplar River at the International Boundary

UOO n
12 The total dissolved solids objective has not been exceeded during the period of record. On inspection

of the plot, it is apparent that the three- month moving FWC has been increasing gradually, year by

year, up until the spring runoff of 1 997, when an exceptionally heavy snowmelt contributed sufficient water of low ionic strength to the river and the reservoir to dilute the accumulated salts built up in the system. Dissolved solids declined slightly in 1998 and remained lower in 1999.

The five-year moving FWC for TDS (Figure 3.6) did not exceed the long-term objective of 1000

mg/L in 1 999. The maximum monthly value calculated in 1 999 wasjust under 989 mg/L, which is less than the previous year maximum monthly value of 1014 mg/L.

The daily TDS values, as generated by linear regression from the daily specific conductance readings

from 1989 to 1 999 are shown in Figure 3.7. The data show an abrupt drop in TDS corresponding to the snowmelt runoff occurring during the spring of each year.

The relationship between TDS and specific conductance applied to data collected from 1975 to 1999

is as follows:

TDS = (0.626 X specific conductance) + 31.542

(R^ = 0.85, n = 555)
13
14

3.2.5.2 Boron

Figure 3.8 shows that during 1999, boron concentrations in the East Poplar River at the International Boundary varied from 0.90 (March 30 and May 18) to 1.86 mg/L (December 20).

The three-month moving FWC for boron for the period of record is shown in Figure 3.9. The short- term objective of 3.5 mg/L has not been exceeded over the period 1975 to 1999. It can be seen that the data derived from grab samples and that derived from regression with specific conductance are similar, with the highs and lows in some degree ofcorrespondence. This suggests that the regression generation of boron and TDS values is, in general terms, a valid procedure despite problems which arise from

attempting to generate representative concentration and flow data for an entire month, based on a

limited number of samples.

The five-year moving FWC for boron displayed in Figure 3.10 remained well below the long-term

objective of 2.5 mg/L. From mid-1993 to the end of the data period there is a distinct drop in the computed boron concentrations.

It is apparent that TDS is better-correlated with specific conductance than is boron. Boron is a relatively

minor ion, and does not in itself contribute to a large degree to the total load of dissolved constituents

in the water. Accordingly, it appears likely that the standard deviation of dissolved boron (relative

to the long term mean boron concentration) in ground water discharge may be greater than that of the major cations (sodium, potassium, magnesium) and anions (sulphate, bicarbonate, and chloride) around

their respective long-term mean concentrations. Daily boron concentrations for the period December

1988 to December 1999 are shown in Figure 3.11.

The relationship between boron and specific conductance at the East Poplar River sampling location during the period 1975 to 1999 is described by the equation:

boron = (0.0013 x specific conductance) - 0.034

(R^ = 0.58, n = 555)
15

Figure 3.8: Boron Concentration for 1999 Grab Samples from East Poplar River at the

International Boundary

2.2

1.8 i

1.74 1.75

i «i i.a

< 1 .86

1.6<M-61. 1.6

1.64

1.5

1.29

1.2

0.8

1.15

0.90 0.9

Figure 3.9: Three-Month Moving Flow-Weighted Boron Concentration for East Poplar

River at the International Boundary

3 .

2.5

<o (b n o> f& <b

-Grab sample derived data Regression derived data

O o o o

o» to o -» CO 00 OS 09 » W n(9ttn(b(b<btb(b(b(t(0(b "OOOOOOOOOOO

<DO-'row4koia>-joo«>
16 2 n

1.8 1 n
17

3.2.5.3 Other Water-Quality Variables

Table 3.1 contains the multipurpose water-quality objectives for the East Poplar River at the

International Boundary, recommended by the International Poplar River Water Quality Board to the

IJC. The table shows the number of samples collected for each parameter and the number oftimes over

the course of the year that the objectives were exceeded. In the table, multiple replicate samples

collected during the annual quality control exercise are treated as a single sample, but where an

objective was exceeded in a replicate sample, this is charged against the single sample noted. As the

table shows, all parameters were within the appropriate objectives, with the exception of dissolved oxygen which exceeded the objective once in January. Dissolved-oxygen concentration can be low

during winter as a result ofice cover and during low-flow conditions in summer as a result ofbiological

activity.
18

Table 3.1 Recommended Water-Quality Objectives and Excursions, 1999 Sampling Program,

East Poplar River at the International Boundary (units in mg/L except as otherwise

noted)

Parameter
19

3.3 Ground-water

3.3.1 Operations - Saskatchewan

SaskPower's supplementary supply continued to operate during 1999, with the majority of groundwater production occurring during the fall to spring period. This is a typical operational pattern for the

project and is done to minimize water losses. Limited production occurs during the summer months

in order to supply domestic users, including the Town of Coronach. In 1999, the project produced a

total of 4,410 cubic decameters (dam^) of ground water. This is lower than the 1998 production of

5,006 dam-' and the average 1991 to 1999 production rate of 5,279 dam^ per year. Prior to 1990 the wells used for the supplementary supply were part ofa dewatering network for coal mining operations,

which resulted in the high production levels experienced in the early to mid 1 980's. With the drought

of the late 1980's and early 1990's it was evident that there was a continued need for ground water to supplement water levels in Cookson Reservoir. Consequently the wells were taken over by SaskPower

for use as a supplementary supply. Figure 3.12 shows the historical pumpage volume since 1976.

Poplar River Power Station

Supplementary Supply

10000

8000

6000

4000

2000

Year

Figure 3.12 Supplementary Water Supply
20

SaskPower has an approval for the supplementary supply project to produce an annual volume of 5,500

damVyear. This approval was extended by Sask Water in 1996. Future revisions to the approval will

likely include conditions requiring termination of pumping (with the exception of wells supplying

domestic users) when the reservoir is above a specified level. Sask Water is currently undertaking a hydrology study to determine the best reservoir level for a ground-water pumping cutoff. SaskPower's

supplementary supply well network currently consists of 21 wells with a total of 10 discharge points.

No wells were added to or deleted from the well field during the year.

In addition to the supplementary supply, SaskPower also operates what is known as the Soil Salinity

Project, which is located south of Morrison Dam. The project was initiated in 1989 to alleviate soil

salinity which had developed below the dam. The salinity project consists of a network ofproduction

wells which discharge into the cooling water canal, which in turn discharges to Cookson Reservoir. Operation of the salinity project continued in 1999 with production of 881.1 dam^ of ground water. This was above the 1998 production level of 767.2 dam\ and slightly below the project's average

annual production of 910 damVyear from inception of the project in 1990 to 1998.

Approximately 7 1 % ofthe total volume pumped came from wells PW87 1 03 and PW87 1 04 which are located on the east side of the river and most ofthe remainder (29%) was produced from PW90109 on

the west side of the river. Figure 3.13 shows the pumpage volume from the Salinity Control Project.

Poplar River Power Station

Salinity Project

1^ 19B7 1^

Figure 3.13 Pumpage from Salinity Control Project
21

3.3.2 Ground-Water Levels

3.3.2.1 Saskatchewan

In 1996 nineteen new piezometers were installed in the Hart Coal Seam and a further eighteen

piezometers from the Frenchmen aquifer testing program were added to the supplementary supply

monitoring network that year. With these extensive additions, no new piezometers have been added

to the monitoring network since that time. Currently, about 1 80 piezometers are monitored as part of

this project. Figure 3.14 shows the December 1999 drawdowns of the Hart Coal Seam. There were no significant changes in the magnitude and extent of drawdowns from previous years. The one meter drawdown contour currently remains about two kilometers north ofinternational boundary. There have

not been significant changes in the cone of depression for the past several years suggesting that the system has approached a semi-equilibrium condition. However, minor drawdown fluctuations in response to climatic and production variations can be expected.

The goal of the Salinity Project is to lower ground-water levels in the Empress Sands below Morrison

Dam to approximately pre-reservoir levels. This is equivalent to roughly two to three metres of drawdown, and was achieved by the end of 1995 and again by the end of 1996. However, reduced

production over the past four years and increased recharge from higher reservoir levels and

precipitation have led to a significant contraction in the project's cone of depression. One-meter drawdown cones are now restricted to the area around PW87103 and PW87104 on the east side of the

river and the immediate vicinity of PW90 1 09 on the west side. Figure 3.15 shows the December 1 999

drawdowns.

Increased salinity in the project area has resulted in questions as to whether the current project design

is sufficient to control salinity. SaskPower conducted a study ofthe salinity project which has provided

recommendations for a long-term solution for the operation of the project. SaskPower expects to provide a recommended course of action in 2000.
contour intervals in meters

Figure 3.14 Drawdown for Hart Seam Aquifer as of December 1999

24

3.3.2.2 Montana

Water-levels in monitoring wells (6, 7, 9, 13, 16, 17, 19, and 22) that penetrate the Fort Union

Formation and/or Hart Coal Seam were rising during 1 997 and 1 998, and have leveled off or dropped

slightly during 1 999. Hydrographs of selected Fort Union/Hart Coal wells (6, 7, 1 7, and 1 9) are shown

in Figure 3.16.

Hydrograph of Selected Wells

Fort Union - Hart Coal Aquifers

?2460

::'2458

g 2456

•2 2454

cd I 2452

I 2450

CO

-g 2448

Hi I

2446
25

The potentiometric surface in the Fox Hills / Hell Creek artesian aquifer (well 1 1 ) has shown very little

fluctuation or change throughout the 21 year (1979-1999) monitoring period.

Water levels in monitoring wells (5, 8, 10, 23, and 24) that penetrate the alluvial and / or outwash

aquifer show considerable fluctuation due to seasonal and / or pumping changes; however, they rose during the period 1996 to 1998 and leveled off during 1999. Hydrographs of selected alluvial wells

(10, 23, and 24) and Fox Hills well (1 1) are shown in Figure 3.17.

OA'XA
26

3.3.3 Ground-Water Quality

3.3.3.1 Saskatchewan

The water quality from the Supplementary Supply Project discharge points has been consistent with no trends indicated. A summary of the more frequently tested parameters during 1999 is provided in Table 3.2. Statistical averages of the results since 1992 are included in this table.

TABLE 3.2 Water-Quality Statistics for Water Pumped from

Supplementary Water Supply Project Wells*
27

The water quality of the common discharge point from the Salinity Control Project wells is generally

better than the water quality in Cookson Reservoir. The TDS concentration was larger at the discharge

point than in the reservoir in 1999. Average results from the common discharge point for 1999, and

the average of the 1992-1999 results are provided in Table 3.3. Results have remained relatively

consistent since 1992.

TABLE 3.3 Water-Quality Statistics for Water Pumped from Salinity

Control Project Wells Sampled at the Discharge Pipe*
28

Ground-water quality in the vicinity of the ash lagoons can potentially be affected by leachate movement through the ash lagoon liner systems. The piezometers listed in the Technical Monitoring

Schedules are used to assess leachate movement and calculate seepage rates. Piezometric water level, boron and chloride are the chosen indicator parameters to assess leachate movement.

The ground-water monitoring program was expanded in 1 994 as a result of Ash Lagoon #3 South

construction. In total, 20 new pneumatic piezometers and 28 new standpipe piezometers were

completed within their target zones. Testing of these piezometers began in 1 995. The limited data so

far do not show any unusual or unexpected values.

Piezometers C867A, C868A and C87 1 A are completed immediately above the liner system, within the ash stack ofAsh Lagoon # 1 . The 1 999 monitoring results continue to suggest confirmation ofthe trend

first observed in 1993 that the boron concentration decreases with depth within the ash stack. The

effect of ash thickness on leachate quality is, however, not completely understood.

The chemistry of water immediately above the liner systems is therefore expected to differ from the chemistry of surface water in the lagoons. Meaningfiil information is only available from piezometers

installed within Ash Lagoon #1 where ash has been deposited for many years. New piezometers

C886A, C887A, C890A and C893A have been completed above the liner system of new Ash Lagoon

#3 south and are now being monitored. Future monitoring of all piezometers completed above the lagoon liner systems will continue with the purpose of confirming the boron trend noted above and to improve the understanding of leachate quality and flow from the ash lagoons.

The piezometric surface measurements for the oxidized till continue to show the presence ofa groundwater mound beneath the ash lagoons. The mound extends from the west side of the polishing pond

to the east side of Ash Lagoon No. 2. Isolated ground-water mounds have developed within the area ofthe oxidized ground-water moimd. Piezometers located in the oxidized till suggest limited leachate

activity. No seepage activity is evident in the unoxidized till.

The greatest changes in chloride and boron concentrations within the oxidized till have occurred where piezometric levels have changed the most. Although increasing levels do not automatically

suggest that the water affecting the piezometers is leachate, changing piezometric levels do suggest
29

ground-water movement. Oxidized till piezometers C868B and C869B located in the middle of the lagoons, between Ash Lagoon No.l and No.2, have shown increased levels but no chemical

information to suggest leachate influence. On the west side of the polishing pond, the boron levels have changed slightly in the oxidized till piezometers C728A and C728D, which is in sharp contrast

to the chloride results.

The chloride level for C728A has decreased from 403 mg/1 in 1983 to 247 mg/1 in 1999, a decrease of

156 mg/1. The chloride level for C728D has increased, moving from 185 mg/1 in 1983 to 421 mg/1 in

1 999. Although these piezometers are close in proximity and installed at the same level, they are being

influenced by different water. Chloride results for C728A suggest initial seepage and it is to be

expected that over time the same observation will be seen in C728D.

The piezometric surface of the Empress gravels indicates a regional flow from northwest to southeast below Morrison Dam. As a general observation. Empress piezometers respond to changing reservoir

levels. Results for the Empress layer do not indicate obvious seepage activity with the majority ofthe analyses showing little real change in boron or chloride results.

Sand lens piezometers C712B, C766 and C767 are located between the polishing pond and the cooling water canal. C767 is located on the top of dyke G and C766 and C712B are located at the toe of dyke

G. These piezometers have historically been ofinterest as the sand lens provides a preferential pathway

for leachate migration of boron concentrations. C766 shows an increasing trend up to October 1988

with a peak of 43.0 mg/1 in 1995 April. Since that time the boron levels have declined modestly and

have remained stable between 25 to 35 mg/1.

Up to April 1 988 the boron concentration for C767 was increasing and peaked at 49.4 mg/1. Since this peak, the boron concentration steadily decreased to the end of 1991 where the concentration levelled off near 5 mg/1 and has since remained.

Piezometer C712B had been monitored for several years. Historically, boron levels have been below

1 mg/1. From 1992 to 1999 boron levels have remained steady around 20 mg/1. Up to 1992 April the boron trends for C712B and C766 looked very similar.
30

The total calculated seepage from the ash lagoons in 1999 was determined to be 1 .70 litres per second. There has been little change in the individual seepage rate, or the vertical and horizontal components

that make up the total seepage rates, from 1 992. This was expected because there has been little change in the operating levels of the lagoons over the last several years.

3.3.3.2 Montana

Samples were collected from monitoring wells 7, 1 6, and 24 during 1 999. Well 7 is completed in Hart

Coal, well 16 is completed in the Fort Union Formation, and well 24 is completed in alluvium. No

significant changes in TDS were observed in monitoring well 16. The TDS in the Hart Coal (well 7) and the alluvial aquifer (well 24), however, increased about 100 mg/L during the years 1996 through

1998, but decreased about 50-70 mg/L during 1999. Graphs of total dissolved solids for selected

wells are shown in Figure 3.18.

pnn
31

3.4 Cookson Reservoir

3.4.1 Storage

On January 1 , 1 999, Cookson Reservoir storage was 37 690 dam^ or 85% ofthe full supply volume. The

1999 maximum, minimum, and period elevations and volumes are shown in Table 3.4. The reservoir

filled above its Full Supply Level (FSL) in late March. Inflows into the reservoir maintained levels

slightly above FSL throughout the spring and early summer time period. The spring spill from the

reservoir was adequate to meet the recommended Polar River basin demand release for the 1998-1999

apportionment year. A small release was required from the reservoir during late summer, to help ensure

Saskatchewan maintained the flows at the international boundary near the recommended apportionment

target flow.

In addition to runoff, reservoir levels were augmented by ground-water pumping. Wells in the abandoned

west block mine site supplied 4,410 dam^ to Girard Creek in 1999. It is estimated that less than 70%

ofthis flow volume reached Cookson Reservoir. Wells in the soil salinity project area supplied 88 1 dam^

in 1999.

Table 3.4 Cookson Reservoir Storage Statistics for 1999

Date
32

The Poplar River Power Station is dependent on water from Cookson Reservoir for cooling. Power plant

operation is not adversely affected until reservoir levels drop below 749.0 metres. The dead storage level

for cooling water used in the generation process is 745.0 metres. The 1 999 recorded water levels and

associated operating levels are shown in Figure 3.19.

1999 Cookson Reservoir

Daily Mean Water Levels

Elevation in Meters

755

753

751

749

747

745

743

741

Contents in Cubic Decammeters

t

Full Supply Level

1 999 Recorded ..^-

Median Level Minimum Desired Operating Level

Minimum Useable Storage Level

29400

19100

11400

5860

2000

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

Figure 3.19 Cookson Reservoir Mean Daily Water Levels for 1999

and Median Monthly Water levels 1981-1991
33

3.4.2 Water Quality

The period from 1987 to 1993 saw very low volumes of surface water runoff to Cookson Reservoir.

Consequently, total dissolved solids (TDS) in the reservoir increased steadily from about 780 mg/1 to

over 1800 mg/1. Since 1993, higher than normal runoff volumes have markedly improved reservoir

water quality. Reservoir TDS levels have generally been less than 1000 mg/1 since 1997. The average TDS in Cookson Reservoir in 1999 was 683 mg/1, the lowest it has been in over 10 years.

3.5 Air Quality

SaskPower's ambient SO2 monitoring for 1999 recorded no violations of SERM's hourly and 24-hour

average standards at 0.17 and 0.06 ppm, respectively. Readings from the ambient sulfur dioxide

monitor continue to be infrequent and of insignificant magnitude. The 1999 geometric mean for the

high-volume suspended particulate sampler was 1 7.7 [ig/m^ and this is the seventh consecutive year of

below average particulate readings.

3.6 Quality Control

3.6.1 Streamflow

Current-meter discharge measurements were made at the East Poplar River at International Boundary

site on July 1 9, 1 999 by personnel from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and Environment Canada

(EC) to confirm streamflow measurement comparability. Data from the two current-meter discharge

measurements are shown in Table 3.5 . The measured discharges were nearly identical and also

compared very well with the theoretical discharge computation of 0. 1 03 mVs for the 90° V-notch weir.
34

Table 3.5 Streamflow Measurement Results for July 19, 1999

Agency


ANNEX 1

POPLAR RIVER

COOPERATIVE MONITORING ARRANGEMENT

CANADA-UNITED STATES

Al-1

September 23, 1980

POPLAR RIVER COOPERATIVE MONITORING ARRANGEMENT

I. PURPOSE

This Arrangement will provide for the exchange of data collected as described in the attached Technical Monitoring Schedules in water-quality, water quantity and air quality monitoring programs being conducted

in Canada and the United States at or near the International Boundary in response to SaskPower

development. This Arrangement will also provide for the dissemination of the data in each country and will assure its comparability and assist in its technical interpretation.

The Arrangement will replace and expand upon the quarterly information exchange program instituted between Canada and the United States in 1976.

II. PARTICIPATING GOVERNMENTS

Governments and government agencies participating in the Arrangement are:

Government of Canada: Environment Canada Government of the Province of Saskatchewan: Saskatchewan Environment and Resource Management

Government of the United States of America: United States Geological Survey Government of the State of Montana: Executive Office

III. POPLAR RIVER MONITORING COMMITTEE: TERMS OF REFERENCE

A binational committee called the Poplar River Bilateral Monitoring Committee will be established to carry out responsibilities assigned to it under this Arrangement. The Committee will operate in accordance with

the following terms of reference:

Al-2
A. Membership

The Committee will be composed of four representatives, one from each of the participating Governments.

It will be jointly chaired by the Government ofCanada and the Government ofthe United States. There will be a Canadian Section and a United States Section. The participating Governments will notify each other of any changes in membership on the Committee. Co-chairpersons may by mutual agreement invite agency

technical experts to participate in the work of the Committee.

The Governor of the State of Montana may also appoint a chief elective official of local government to

participate as an ex-officio member of the Committee in its technical deliberations. The Saskatchewan

Minister of the Environment may also appoint a similar local representative.

B. Functions of the Committee |

The role of the Committee will be to fulfil the purpose of the Arrangement by ensuring the exchange of

monitored data in accordance with the attached Technical Monitoring Schedules, and its collation and

technical interpretation in reports to Governments on implementation ofthe Arrangement. In addition, the Committee will review the existing monitoring systems to ensure their adequacy and may recommend to the Canadian and United States Governments any modifications to improve the Technical Monitoring Schedules.

1. Information Exchange

Each Co-chairperson will be responsible for transmitting to his counterpart Co-chairperson on a regular, and

not less than quarterly basis, the data provided by the cooperative monitoring agencies in accordance with

the Technical Monitoring Schedules.

Al-3
2. Reports

(a) The Committee will prepare a joint Annual Report to the participating governments, and may at any time prepare joint Special Reports.

(b) Annual Reports will

i) summarize the main activities ofthe Committee in the year under Report and the data which

has been exchanged under the Arrangement;

ii) draw to the attention of the participating governments any definitive changes in the monitored parameters, based on collation and technical interpretation of exchanged data

(i.e. the utilization of summary, statistical and other appropriate techniques);

iii) draw to the attention ofthe participating governments any recommendations regarding the adequacy or redundancy of any scheduled monitoring operations and any proposals

regarding modifications to the Technical Monitoring Schedules, based on a continuing review of the monitoring programs including analytical methods to ensure their

comparability.

c) Special Reports may, at any time, draw to the attention of participating governments

definitive changes in monitored parameters which may require immediate attention.

d) Preparation of Reports

Reports will be prepared following consultation with all committee members and will be

signed by all Committee members. Reports will be separately forwarded by the Committee

Co-chairmen to the participating governments. All annual and special reports will be so

distributed.

Al-4
3. Activities of Canadian and United States Sections

The Canadian and United States section will be separately responsible for:

(a) dissemination of information within their respective countries, and the arrangement of any

discussion required with local elected officials;

(b) verification that monitoring operations are being carried out in accordance with the Technical Monitoring Schedules by cooperating monitoring agencies;

(c) receipt and collation of monitored data generated by the cooperating monitoring agencies

in their respective countries as specified in the Technical Monitoring Schedules;

(d) if necessary, drawing to the attention of the appropriate government in their respective countries any failure to comply with a scheduled monitoring function on the part of any

cooperating agency under the jurisdiction of that government, and requesting that appropriate corrective action be taken.

IV. PROVISION OF DATA

In order to ensure that the Committee is able to carry out the terms of this Arrangement, the participating governments will use their best efforts to have cooperating monitoring agencies, in their respective

jurisdictions provide on an ongoing basis all scheduled monitored data for which they are responsible.

V. TERMS OF THE ARRANGEMENT

The Arrangement will be effective for an initial term of five years and may be amended by agreement ofthe

participating governments. It will be subject to review at the end of the initial term and will be renewed

thereafter for as long as it is required by the participating governments.

Al-5
ANNEX 2

POPLAR RIVER

COOPERATIVE MONITORING ARRANGEMENT

TECHNICAL MONITORING SCHEDULES

1999

CANADA-UNITED STATES

A2- 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREAMBLE A2 - 3

CANADA

STREAMFLOW MONITORING A2 - 5

SURFACE-WATER-QUALITY MONITORING A2 - 7

GROUND-WATER PIEZOMETERS TO MONITOR

POTENTIAL DRAWDOWN DUE TO COAL SEAM DEWATERING A2 - 10

GROUND-WATER PIEZOMETERS LEVEL MONITORING

- POWER STATION AREA A2 - 12

GROUND-WATER PIEZOMETER LEVEL MONITORING

- ASH LAGOON AREA

WATER LEVEL A2 - 14 WATER-QUALITY A2 - 2

1

AMBIENT AIR-QUALITY MONITORING A2 - 30

UNITED STATES

STREAMFLOW MONITORING A2 - 33

SURFACE-WATER-QUALITY MONITORING A2 - 35

GROUND-WATER-QUALITY MONITORING A2 - 37

GROUND-WATER LEVELS TO MONITOR POTENTIAL

DRAWDOWN DUE TO COAL SEAM DEWATERING A2 - 39

A2-2

PREAMBLE

The Technical Monitoring Schedule lists those water quantity, water-quality and air quality

monitoring locations and parameters which form the basis for information exchange and reporting

to Governments. The structure of the Committee responsible for ensuring the exchange takes place

is described in the Poplar River Cooperative Monitoring Arrangement.

The monitoring locations and parameters listed herein have been reviewed by the Poplar River

Bilateral Monitoring committee and represent the basic technical information needed to identify any

definitive changes in water quantity, water-quality and air quality at the International Boundary. The

Schedule was initially submitted to Governments for approval as an attachment to the 1981 report Governments. Changes in the sampling locations and parameters may be made by Governments

based on the recommendations of the committee.

Significant additional information is being collected by agencies on both sides of the International Boundary, primarily for project management or basin-wide baseline data purposes. This additional information is usually available upon request from the collecting agency and forms part of the pool of technical information which may be drawn upon by Governments for specific study purposes. Examples of additional information are water quantity, water-quality, ground-water and air quality data collected at points in the Poplar River basin not ofdirect concern to the Committee. In addition, supplemental information on parameters such as vegetation, soils, fish and waterfowl populations and aquatic vegetation is also being collected on either a routine or specific studies basis by various

agencies.

A2-3

POPLAR RIVER

COOPERATIVE MONITORING ARRANGEMENT

TECHNICAL MONITORING SCHEDULES

1999

CANADA

) A2 - 4

I

STREAMFLOW MONITORING

Responsible Agency: Environment Canada

Daily mean discharge or levels and instantaneous monthly extremes as normally

published in surface water data publications.

No. on Map
lO Miitt

HYDROMETRIC GAUGING STATIONS (CANADA)

A2-6
SURFACE-WATER-QUALITY

Sampling Locations

Responsible Agency: Saskatchewan Environment and Resource Management* |
PARAMETERS

Responsible Agency: Environment Canada
^

LEGEND: ^ CNVAOMCICT tAtKATCHCWAN CNVMOMMCNT CAflAM

SCALE

I5 Km

S lO Miict SURFACE-WATER-QUALITY MONITORING STATIONS (CANADA)

A2-9
GROUND-WATER PIEZOMETERS TO MONITOR POTENTIAL DRAWDOWN

DUE TO COAL SEAM DEWATERING NEAR THE INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY
r

lO Miles GROUND-WATER PIEZOMETERS TO MONITOR POTENTIAL

DRAWDOWN DUE TO COAL SEAM DEWATERING

A2.11
GROUND-WATER PIEZOMETER MONITORING - POPLAR RIVER

POWER STATION AREA

SPC Piezometer Number
o "
GROUND-WATER PIEZOMETER MONITORING—

ASH LAGOON AREA--WATER LEVEL

SPC Piezometer Number
GROUND-WATER PIEZOMETER MONITORINGASH LAGOON AREA-WATER LEVEL (Continued)

SPC Piezometer Number
GROUND-WATER PIEZOMETER MONITORINGASH LAGOON AREA-WATER LEVEL (Continued)

SPC Piezometer Number
GROUND-WATER PIEZOMETER MONITORINGASH LAGOON AREA -WATER LEVEL (Continued)

SPC Piezometer Number
GROUND-WATER PIEZOMETER MONITORINGASH LAGOON AREA-WATER LEVEL (Continued)

SPC Piezometer Number
GROUND-WATER PIEZOMETER MONITORINGASH LAGOON AREA-WATER LEVEL (Continued)

SPC Piezometer Number
GROUND-WATER PIEZOMETER MONITORINGASH LAGOON AREA-WATER LEVEL (Continued)

SPC Piezometer Number
GROUND-WATER PIEZOMETER MONITORING--

ASH LAGOON AREA - QUALITY

Responsible Agency: SERM

Data Collected by: SaskPower

SPC Piezometer Number
GROUND-WATER PIEZOMETER MONITORINGASH LAGOON AREA - QUALITY (Continued)

SPC Piezometer Number
GROUND-WATER PIEZOMETER MONITORINGASH LAGOON AREA - QUALITY (Continued)

SPC Piezometer Number
GROUND-WATER PIEZOMETER MONITORINGASH LAGOON AREA - QUALITY (Continued)

SPC Piezometer Number
GROUND-WATER PIEZOMETER MONITORINGASH LAGOON AREA - QUALITY (Continued)

SPC Piezometer Number
GROUND-WATER PIEZOMETER MONITORINGASH LAGOON AREA - QUALITY (Continued)

SPC Piezometer Number
GROUND-WATER PIEZOMETER MONITORINGASH LAGOON AREA - QUALITY (Continued)

SPC Piezometer Number


PARAMETERS
Ambient Air-Quality Monitoring

Responsible Agency: Saskatchewan Environment and Resource Management

Data Collected by: SaskPower

No. On Map
LEQEND:

AweCNT AM OVAUTV MOMTO<«tM A

SCALE

^

10 IS Km

6 6 I'O Milet

AMBIENT AIR-QUALITY MONITORING (CANADA)

A2-31
POPLAR RIVER

COOPERATIVE MONITORING ARRANGEMENT

TECHNICAL MONITORING SCHEDULES

1999

UNITED STATES

A2-32
STREAMFLOW MONITORING

Responsible Agency: United States Geological Survey
r

10 Mil<«

HYDROMETRIC GAUGING STATIONS (UNITED STATES)

y

A2-34
SURFACE-WATER-QUALITY MONITORING ~ Station Location

Responsible Agency: U.S. Geological Survey
lO Mittt

SURFACE-WATER-QUALITY MONITORING STATIONS (UNITED STATES)

A2-36
GROUND-WATER-QUALITY MONITORING - Station Locations

Responsible Agency: Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology
r

5 10 :5 K'

10 Miles

GROUND-WATER-QUALITY MONITORING (UNITED STATES)

A2-38
GROUND-WATER LEVELS TO MONITOR POTENTIAL

DRAWDOWN DUE TO COAL SEAM DEWATERING

Responsible Agency: Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology
S 10 IS Km

I I i

ll u ' 1 S 10 MHet GROUND-WATER PIEZOMETERS TO MONITOR POTENTIAL

DRAWDOWN DUE TO COAL SEAM DEWATERINQ

A2-40

ANNEX 3

RECOMMENDED FLOW APPORTIONMENT

IN THE POPLAR RIVER BASIN

BY THE INTERNATIONAL SOURIS-RED RIVERS ENGINEERING BOARD,

POPLAR RIVER TASK FORCE (1976)

A3-1

*RECOMMENDED FLOW APPORTIONMENT

IN THE POPLAR RIVER BASIN

The aggregate natural flow ofall streams and tributaries in the Poplar River Basin crossing the International Boundary shall be divided equally between Canada and the United States subject to the following

conditions:

The total natural flow of the West Fork Poplar River and all its tributaries crossing the International Boundary shall be divided equally between Canada and the United States but the flow at the International Boundary in each tributary shall not be depleted by more than 60 percent of its natural flow.

The total natural flow of all remaining streams and tributaries in the Poplar River Basin crossing

the International Boundary shall be divided equally between Canada and the United States. Specific conditions of this division are as follows:

(a) Canada shall deliver to the United States a minimum of 60 percent of the natural flow of

the Middle Fork Poplar River at the International Boundary, as determined below the confluence of Goose Creek and Middle Fork.

(b) The delivery of water from Canada to the United States on the East Poplar River shall be determined on or about the first day of June of each year as follows:

(i) When the total natural flow ofthe Middle Fork Poplar River, as determined below

the confluence of Goose Creek, during the immediately preceding March 1 st to May 3 1st period does not exceed 4,690 cubic decameters (3,800 acre-feet), then

a continuous minimum flow of 0.028 cubic metres per second (1.0 cubic feet per second) shall be delivered to the United States on the East Poplar River at the

International Boundar>' throughout the succeeding 1 2 month period commencing

June 1st. In addition, a volume of 370 cubic decameters (300 acre-feet) shall be

delivered to the United States upon demand at any time during the 12 month

period commencing June 1st.

(ii) When the total natural flow ofthe Middle Fork Poplar River, as determined below

the confluence of Goose Creek, during the immediately preceding March 1 st to May 3 1 st period is greater than 4,690 cubic decameters (3,800 acre-feet), but does

not exceed 9,250 cubic decameters (7,500 acre-feet).

Canada-United States, 1976, Joint studies for flow apportionment, Poplar River Basin, Montana-Saskatchewan: Main Report, International Souris-Red Rivers Board. Poplar River Task Force. 43 pp.

A3-2
then a continuous minimum flow of 0.057 cubic metres per second (2.0 cubic feet per second) shall be delivered to the United States on the East Poplar River at the

International Boundary during the succeeding period June 1st through August 31st. A

minimum delivery of 0.028 cubic metres per second (1 .0 cubic feet per second) shall then be maintained from September 1 st through to May 3 1 st ofthe following year. In addition, a volume of 617 cubic decameters (500 acre-feet) shall be delivered to the United States upon demand at any time during the 12-month period commencing June 1st.

(iii) When the total natural flow of the Middle Fork Poplar River, as determined below the confluence of Goose Creek, during the immediately preceding March 1 st to May 3 1 st period is greater than 9,250 cubic decameters (7,500 acre-feet), but does not exceed

14,800 cubic decameters (12,000 acre-feet), then a continuous minimum flow of 0.085

cubic metres per second (3.0 cubic feet per second) shall be delivered to the United States on the East Poplar River at the International Boundary during the succeeding period June

1 st through August 3 1 st. A minimum delivery of0.057 cubic metres per second (2.0 cubic

feet per second) shall then be maintained from September 1 st through to May 3 1 st of the following year. In addition, a volume of 617 cubic decameters (500 acre-feet) shall be

delivered to the United States upon demand at any time during the 1 2 month period

commencing June 1 st.

(iv) When the total natural flow of the Middle Fork Poplar, as determined below the confluence of Goose Creek, during the immediately preceding March 1 st to May 3 1 st period exceeds 14,800 cubic decameters (12,000 acres-feet) then a continuous minimum

flow of 0.085 cubic metres per second (3.0 cubic feet per second) shall be delivered to the United States on the East Poplar River at the International Boundary during the succeeding period June 1st through August 31st. A minimum delivery of 0.057 cubic metres per second (2.0 cubic feet per second) shall then be maintained from September

1st through to May 31st of the following year. In addition, a volume of 1,230 cubic decameters (1 ,000 acre-feet) shall be delivered to the United States upon demand at any

time during the 12-month period commencing June 1st.

(c) The natural flow at the International Boundary in each of the remaining individual

tributaries shall not be depleted by more than 60 percent of its natural flow.

The natural flow and division periods for apportionment purposes shall be determined, unless otherwise specified, for periods of time commensurate with the uses and requirements of both

countries.

A3 -3
ANNEX 4

METRIC CONVERSION FACTORS

A4-1

METRIC CONVERSION FACTORS

4,047 m^ = 0.04047 ha

1.233.5 m^= 1.2335 dam^

5/9(F°-32)

0.3937 in.

0.155 in^

LO00m^ = 0.8107 ac-ft

28.3171 xlO-^m'

10,000 m^ = 2.471 ac

100 m = 328.08 ft IxlO^m^

0.0758 L/s = 2.54 cm

2.20462 lb = 1.1 X 10-^ tons

0.62137 miles

0.3861 mi^

0.3532 ft^ = 0.21997 I. gal = 0.26420 U.S. gal

0.035 cfs = 13.193 I.gpm = 15.848 U.S. gpm m = 3.2808 ft

m- = 10.765 ft^

m^ = l,000L = 35.3144ft3 = 219.97I.gal= 264.2 U.S. gal

mVs = 35.314 cfs mm = 0.00328 ft

tonne = 1 ,000 kg = 1 . 1 023 ton (short)

U.S. gpm = 0.0631 L/s

For Air Samples

ppm = 100 pphm = 1000 x (Molecular Weight of substance/24.45) mg/m^

A4-2