level ii groundwater assessment eastern portion of pid … · 2017-06-22 · level ii groundwater...

Report

Level II Groundwater AssessmentEastern Portion of PID 00513788

Old Post Road, EnfieldHRM, NS

Prepared by:

Fracflow Consultants Inc.2 Fielding Avenue, Suite D

Dartmouth, NSB3B 1E1

Submitted to:

Jim TaylorCygnet Properties Limited/Foxwood Developments Inc.

187A Bluewater RoadBedford, NS

B4B 1H1

File 775 November 22, 2013

Level II Groundwater Assessment ReportPID 00513788, Old Post Road, Enfield November 22, 2013

Fracflow File 775 i

Overview

Fracflow Consultants Inc. was contracted by Cygnet Properties Limited/Foxwood DevelopmentsInc. to undertake a Level II Groundwater Assessment of the eastern portion of PID No.00513788 located on Old Post Road in Enfield, Halifax Regional Municipality (HRM). Theeastern half of the subject property encompasses approximately 364 hectares (900 acres). Thedeveloper is preparing a preliminary application for a Development Agreement Approval (notOpen Space Design) to facilitate the construction of approximately 550 residential dwellings in amini-home trailer park. The groundwater assessment was conducted in accordance with the withHRM’s Guidelines for Groundwater Assessment and Reporting. The findings are summarizedbelow.

Future Use of Test Wells

Five test wells were drilled at the site and designated TH1 through TH5. All wells were designedto function as future production wells.

Expected Range of Well Yields and Aquifer Properties

The fractured-bedrock aquifer beneath the Black Brook sub-watershed appears to behave as aleaky-confined aquifer. Based on the results of a constant-rate pump test at TH3, withmonitoring in observation wells TH2 (100 m away) and TH1 (200 m away), the mostrepresentative estimates for transmissivity, hydraulic conductivity and storativity are:

• Transmissivity (T): 1.7 × 10-4 m2/s;• Hydraulic conductivity (K): 1.4 × 10-6 m2/s; and• Storativity (S): 0.00179.

Estimates for T and K were also developed for the fractured-bedrock aquifer in the Beaver Brooksub-watershed. The calculated values for each parameter were two to three orders of magnitudelower than the estimates provided above, but partially reflect the head losses in test wells TH4and TH5, which have low efficiencies.

The expected range of well yields from each of the five test wells are:

• TH1: 20 - 25 Lpm• TH2: 30 - 40 Lpm• TH3: 40 - 50 Lpm• TH4: 8 - 10 Lpm• TH5: 5 - 10 Lpm


Fracflow File 775 ii

The above estimates for well yield fall between the upper and lower limits calculated using theQsafe and Q20 formulations, and represent Fracflow’s best professional judgement of the shapeand extent of the drawdown curves.

Sustainability of the Groundwater Supply

A reasonable demand figure for this mixed residential development, which will consist of twoand three bedroom homes, is approximately 700 litres per day. The water demand per residenceis not expected to exceed 1,000 litres per day, even when additional water uses such as carwashing and lawn car are considered. If all dwellings are constructed, the total water demandwill be in the order of 550,000 litres per day. Based on available data, it would appear that thefive test wells can deliver between 148,000 and 194,000 litres of water per day, which has thepotential to meet between 25 and 35 percent of the estimated water demand of the development.Another five to ten production wells will likely be required to meet the total demand.

The area available for groundwater recharge, between the eastern boundary of the developer’sproperty and Black Brook, totals approximately 3.7 km2, of which the development representsonly 8.8 percent. The estimated recharge in the Shubenacadie/Stewiacke primary watershed isaccepted to be 188 mm per annum and 50 percent of the available groundwater recharge is beingreserved for streamflow and ecological support. The estimated volume of available recharge isapproximately 856,000 litres per day. There appears to be an adequate volume of water to meetthe demand of the development and the natural demand of the environment.

Expected Effects of Groundwater Withdrawal on Existing Wells and the Environment

As noted above, the water balance calculations have included a 50 percent reserve forstreamflow and ecological support. Therefore, the expected impact of groundwater withdrawalon the environment is expected to be minimal provided that the additional wells required to meettotal demand are properly located and spaced to take into account the various flow systemcomponents and the inherently heterogeneous nature of the fractured-bedrock aquifer.

Test wells TH4 and TH5 are within 250 m of the residential dwellings on Hescott and RichardStreets. Those and any other wells drilled in the lower reaches of the Beaver Brook sub-watershed have the potential to impact some of the existing residential wells. If the developerwishes to include those wells as production wells, a 72-hour constant rate pumping test should becarried out to better characterize the aquifer properties and potential for well interference in thatarea.


Fracflow File 775 iii

Groundwater Quality and Drinking Water Guidelines

A number of water quality parameters exceeded the Health Canada Guidelines for CanadianDrinking Water Quality, as detailed in Section 3. The coliform bacteria, chloroform, and toluenethat were detected are all believed to be associated with the drilling and pump testing work thatwas carried out and are not expected to be indicative of ambient conditions.

All of the other water quality issues that were identified are probably indicative of backgroundvalues and can be readily addressed through conventional treatment systems. Elevated colourand turbidity will likely diminish with time as the wells are fully developed through continuedpumping. Elevated arsenic, iron and manganese can be removed using chlorination and standardsoftening equipment. Arsenic is readily removed using an adsorption media such as activatedalumina AAFS-50. The elevated TDS at TH4 and TH5 can also be addressed by ion exchangeusing a dealkalizer.


Fracflow File 775 iv

Table of Contents

Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i

List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi

List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii

List of Appendices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii

1.0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 - 11.1 Site Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 - 11.2 Overview of Site Development Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 - 11.3 Purpose and Scope of Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 - 1

1.3.1 Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 - 11.3.2 Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 - 3

1.4 Statement of Qualifications and Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 - 3

2.0 DESCRIPTION OF HYDROGEOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 12.1 Geology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 12.2 Hydrology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 1

2.2.1 Topography and Watersheds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 12.2.2 Water Budget . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 2

2.3 Hydrogeology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 32.3.1 Description of Test Wells . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 32.3.2 Step Drawdown and Pump Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 32.3.3 General Aquifer Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 4

3.0 DRILLING PROGRAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 13.1 Site Selection for Drilling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 13.2 Test Well TH1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 13.3 Test Well TH2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 23.4 Test Well TH3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 23.5 Test Well TH4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 33.6 Test Well TH5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 33.7 Hydraulic Stimulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 4

3.7.1 Test Well TH1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 43.7.2 Test Well TH2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 4

4.0 STEP DRAWDOWN AND CONSTANT-RATE TESTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 - 1


Fracflow File 775 v

4.1 General Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 - 14.2 Well TH1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 - 2

4.2.1 Step Drawdown Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 - 24.2.2 Water Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 - 3

4.3 Well TH2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 - 34.3.1 Step Drawdown Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 - 34.3.2 Water Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 - 4

4.4 Well TH3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 - 44.4.1 Step Drawdown Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 - 44.4.2 Constant-Rate Pump Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 - 54.4.3 Water Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 - 6



5.0 PRELIMINARY AQUIFER CHARACTERIZATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 15.1 General Approach and Rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 15.2 Theoretical Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 2

5.2.1 Well Efficiency and Specific Capacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 25.2.2 Transmissivity, Conductivity and Storativity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 35.2.3 Sustainable Well Yield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 5

5.3 Aquifer Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 55.3.1 Well Efficiency and Specific Capacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 55.3.2 Transmissivity, Hydraulic Conductivity and Storativity . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 6

5.4 Flow System and Aquifer Boundaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 75.5 Potentially Sustainable Well Yields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 85.6 Well Interference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 95.7 Water Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 11

6.0 CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 - 1

7.0 REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 - 1


Fracflow File 775 vi

List of Figures

Figure 1 General location map, Old Post Road, Enfield, Nova Scotia.

Figure 2 Topography and drainage patterns on the subject property.

Figure 3 Black Brook and Beaver Brook sub-watersheds, Enfield, Nova Scotia.

Figure 4 Approximate locations of test wells on the subject property.

Figure 5 Flow rate and pressure curves for stimulation with packer set at 248 feet in testwell TH1.



Figure 8 Time versus drawdown for the Step Drawdown Test at Test Well TH1.

Figure 9 Log-log plot of recovery data (time versus water level) after the termination of thestep drawdown test at TH1.

Figure 10 Time versus drawdown for the Step Drawdown Test at Well TH2.




Figure 14 Log-log plot of time versus drawdown for the constant-rate pump test at test wellTH3.

Figure 15 Semi-log plot (Jacobs straight line method) of time versus drawdown for theconstant-rate pump test at test well TH3.


Fracflow File 775 vii

Figure 16 Log-log plot of recovery data (time versus water level) after the termination of theconstant-rate pump test at TH3.

Figure 17 Semi-log plot of time versus drawdown at observation wells TH1 and TH2 duringthe constant-rate pump test at TH3.

Figure 18 Water quality trends during the constant-rate pump test at TH3.





List of Tables

Table 1 Summary of well construction details.

Table 2 Summary of water quality readings at the end of drilling.

Table 3 Bacteriological results.

Table 4 Volatile organic compounds in water.

Table 5 Standard water analysis, including fluoride, total metals and dissolved metals.

Table 6 Step test data and calculated values for specific capacity and well efficiency.

Table 7 Calculated values for transmissivity, hydraulic conductivity, and storativity.

Table 8 Range of potentially sustainable well yields based on the Qsafe and Q20 methods.


Fracflow File 775 viii

List of Appendices

Appendix 1 Tables and Figures

Appendix 2 Borehole and Well Construction Logs

Appendix 3 Analytical Reports from AGAT Laboratories

Appendix 4 Output from AquiferTest (V3.0) Analysis


Fracflow File 775 1 - 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Fracflow Consultants Inc. was contracted by Cygnet Properties Limited/Foxwood DevelopmentsInc. to undertake a Level II Groundwater Assessment of the eastern portion of PID No.00513788 located on Old Post Road in Enfield, Halifax Regional Municipality (HRM). Thisreport contains the results of that assessment. Note that all figures and tables referenced hereincan be found in Appendix 1.

1.1 Site Location

The subject property comprises the eastern half of PID 00513788, which covers an area ofapproximately 364 hectares (900 acres). The property, which has no specific civic address, islocated to the east of Old Post Road, in Enfield, and to the north of Oldham Road in the HalifaxRegional Municipality (Figure 1).

1.2 Overview of Site Development Plan

Cygnet Properties Limited is preparing a preliminary application for a Development AgreementApproval (not Open Space Design) to facilitate the construction of approximately 550 residentialdwellings in a mini-home trailer park. The development will include a mix of two and threebedroom dwellings on 29 hectares of land. The sewage treatment system associated with thatdevelopment will occupy another 3.5 hectares of land. The current groundwater investigationwas focused on that portion of PID 00513788 located to the east of Black Brook.

1.3 Purpose and Scope of Study

1.3.1 Purpose

A Groundwater Assessment Report is required as part of the Development Agreement andSubdivision Approval processes for Open Space Design Developments, in HRM, where they areto be serviced by groundwater. While the proposed development is not an Open Space Design,completion of a groundwater assessment, in accordance with HRM’s Guidelines forGroundwater Assessment and Reporting, is an essential part of the approval process. A Level IGroundwater Assessment was completed in January (Fracflow, 2013) and the findings justifiedsite-specific intrusive investigations that constituted a Level II Groundwater Assessment.

The purpose of this work is not to provide a guarantee that future home owners will have anadequate supply of potable water, but rather to provide a qualified opinion of the likelihood of



obtaining an adequate supply of potable water for the proposed development without impactingother users in the area. The Level II objectives as outlined in Section 2.3 of HRM’s Guidelinesare summarized as follows:

Test Well Installation

The objective of this component of work under the HRM guidelines is to:

1. Locate and construct suitable test wells for aquifer testing, including pumping tests andwater quality analyses. The minimum number of test wells for this development area,which is approximately 29 hectares, is five;

2. The test wells must be located such that the hydrogeological conditions across the site areadequately represented;

3. The test wells will be located and constructed to permit the prediction of the quality andquantity of groundwater supplies, as required to supply the proposed development; and

4. Test well construction must comply, at a minimum, with Provincial Regulations. Morestringent standards, such as increased casing length and full annular space grouting ofcasing, may be necessary in some cases; and test well installation should be fullysupervised by a Qualified Person, and detailed information on the site geology should becollected and recorded during the test well installation program.

Water Quantity Test

The objective of this component of work under the HRM guidelines is to perform pumping testsand collect groundwater samples for the purpose of:

1. Calculating aquifer properties, such as transmissivity and storativity;

2. Identifying the type of aquifer and aquifer boundaries;

3. Determining the sustainable yield;

4. Determining the potential for interference to existing groundwater users and sensitivefeatures; and

5. Assessing water quality and requirements for water treatment where applicable.



1.3.2 Scope

The scope of work involved the following activities:

• Five open-bedrock wells were drilled on the property, outside of the footprint of themini-home trailer park. Those wells are designated TH1 through TH5;

• Two of the five drilled wells, TH1 and TH2, were hydraulically stimulated to evaluatethe potential for increasing well yield;

• Step-drawdown tests were completed on all five test wells and those data were analyzedto develop estimates of aquifer transmissivity and hydraulic conductivity;

• One 26-hour constant-rate pumping test was completed on test well TH3, and two nearbywells were monitored as observation wells. All data were analyzed to develop estimatesof aquifer transmissivity and hydraulic conductivity;

• Water samples were collected from all wells for general chemistry, trace metal and VOCanalysis, along with bacteriological determinations; and

• All of the pertinent information was compiled, interpreted and presented in this report.Note that some of the factual data that were previously submitted as technicalmemorandums to the client have been appended to this report.

1.4 Statement of Qualifications and Limitations

This hydrogeological assessment was conducted by Glenn Bursey, M.Sc., P.Geo. Mr. Bursey is aSenior Hydrogeologist with Fracflow Consultants Inc. He has 23 years of post-graduateconsulting experience and is a registered Professional Geoscientist with APGNS.

This report has been prepared for use by Cygnet Properties Limited/Foxwood Developments Inc.in support of its application to HRM for the proposed development. The work completed byFracflow constitutes an assessment of the groundwater potential of the eastern portion ofPID No. 00513788. The findings and conclusions presented in this report are, therefore,probabilities based on professional judgement of the significance of the data gathered. Thefindings are not scientific certainties.



2.0 DESCRIPTION OF HYDROGEOLOGY

As per Section 2.1 of HRM’s Guidelines for Groundwater Assessment and Reporting, Fracflowcompleted a desktop assessment of the geology, hydrology and hydrogeology of the subjectproperty as part of the Level I Groundwater Assessment (Fracflow, 2013). Site-specificinformation has also been gathered on the geology, hydrology and hydrogeology as a result ofdrilling and testing at five locations around the proposed development area. A summary of thegeology, hydrology and hydrogeology of the site is presented below.

2.1 Geology

There are two soil types present on the subject property (MacDougall, Cann and Hilchey, 1963).All but the northwest corner of the property is covered by shallow, stony, porous and well toexcessively drained soil of the Halifax Series. The parent material for that soil is derived from anolive to yellowish-brown sandy loam to gravelly sandy loam glacial till, that is in turn derivedfrom quartzite. At the northwest corner of the property, soil consists of a sandy clay loam of theWolfville Series, which is derived from reddish-brown till and in turn derived from shale,sandstone and mudstone. The till cover is reported to form a thin and discontinuous veneer overbedrock (Stea et al., 1992).

The subject property is underlain by bedrock of the Goldenville Formation, which is part of theMeguma Group suite of rocks. The Goldenville Formation is characterized by thickly-beddedmetasandstone with minor interbedded metasiltstone and slate. Those rocks are also folded into aseries of northeast-southwest trending anticlines and synclines. The Oldham anticline is located afew hundred metres to the south of the subject property. Northwest trending joints, perpendicularto the fold axes, are common n the metasandstone and there is a poorly -developed pressure-solution cleavage in the metasandstone (Lewis, et al., 1996).

2.2 Hydrology

2.2.1 Topography and Watersheds

The maximum elevation of 105 m above mean sea level occurs at the southwest corner of thesubject property (Figure 2). The minimum elevation of 15 m occurs along the lower reaches ofBlack Brook at the northern edge of the subject property. The average surface gradient isbetween 7 and 9 percent. The area is heavily vegetated with significant areas of wetland thathave been mapped by another consultant on behalf of the developer.



The subject property falls within the Shubenacadie/Stewiacke Primary Watershed, which has atotal area of 2,614 km2. Three percent of that surface area is occupied by surface water (NSE,2008). Two relatively small sub-watersheds of that primary watershed drain the subject propertywith the discharge from each flowing northward into the Shubenacadie River (Figure 3). Thosesub-watersheds are the Black Brook sub-watershed on the west side (19 km2) and the BeaverBrook sub-watershed on the east side (11 km2).

2.2.2 Water Budget

According to Environment Canada’s climate normals (1971-2000) for its station at Halifax’sStandfield International Airport (www.climate.weatheroffice.ec.gc.ca), the mean annualprecipitation (MAP) was 1,452 mm and 85 percent of that total occurred as rain. The meanannual temperature for the same climate station was 6.3°C with above average dailytemperatures occurring between April and November.

In the Atlantic Region, it has been estimated that the average annual value for runoff is 1018 mmper year (Environment Canada, 1991). Evapotranspiration, which includes direct evaporationfrom soil and water bodies combined with transpiration from vegetation varies, is reported tovary between 200 and 400 mm a year across Nova Scotia (Nova Scotia Museum, 1996).According to Nova Scotia Environment (NSE), the mean annual rate of recharge within theShubenacadie/Stewiacke Primary Watershed is estimated to be 188 mm per year, or 12.9 percentof MAP (NSE, 2011). The estimated volume of water infiltrating the ground surface over theentire 364 hectares (900 acres), or 3.64 km2 of the subject property, would be 684,000 m3 peryear. That volume of water equates to an average infiltration rate of approximately 1,300 litresper minute (Lpm).

According to a municipal water survey completed by Environment Canada (2010), residentialwater use averages 292 litres per person per day based on a survey of single-family and multi-family homes. According to Statistics Canada (2007), the average number of people perhousehold in Nova Scotia is 2.4, which would place the average water demand per household atapproximately 700 litres per day. In Fracflow’s opinion, that is a reasonable demand figure for a development of this nature, which will consist of a mix of two and three bedroom homes. Thewater demand per residence is expected to be in the order of 1,000 litres per day when additionalwater uses, such as car washing and lawn car are considered. The minimum design sewage flowfrom any three-bedroom residential structure or dwelling with low-flow fixtures is set at 1,000litres per day (NSE, 2009).

The footprint of the development will encompass approximately 29 hectares, with an additional3.5 hectares being reserved for the wastewater treatment system. Each of the 550 lots will havean average area of 527 m2. Using the Lot Water Balance Calculator in the Groundwater



Assessments for Subdivisions Developments Toolkit (NSE, 2011), the available groundwater perlot would be 75 litres per day (Lpd), assuming 50 percent of the surface area is covered byimpermeable surfaces and assuming that 50 percent of the available groundwater recharge isreserved for streamflow and ecological support. The calculated recharge within the 29 hectarefootprint of the development area is 37,342 Lpd. That simple calculation demonstrates that themajority of the groundwater supply needs to be derived from areas outside of the mini-hometrailer park, but within the developer’s property boundaries.

The area available for groundwater recharge, between the eastern boundary of the developer’sproperty and Black Brook, totals approximately 3.64 km2, of which the development arearepresents about 8.8 percent. Using NSE’s Lot Water Balance Calculator, the estimated volumeof available recharge will be approximately 856,000 litres per day. That calculation indicates thatan adequate volume of water should be available to balance the demand of the development withthe natural demand of the environment.

2.3 Hydrogeology

2.3.1 Description of Test Wells

Five test wells were drilled on the developer’s property, to the south of the proposeddevelopment area, between August 22 and September 30, 2013. Brewster Well Drilling wasretained by the developer to complete the drilling under the supervision of a qualified personfrom Fracflow (G. Bursey).

Test Wells TH1, TH2 and TH3 were drilled in the Black Brook sub-watershed, while TH4 andTH5 were drilled in the Beaver Brook sub-watershed. The locations of all five wells are shownin Figure 4. The five wells were drilled to depths of between 122 m (400 feet) and 134 m(440 feet), with 12.2 (40 feet) to 21.3 m (70 feet) of bentonite-sealed casing. The geology wasconsistent with what was expected based on existing geological mapping, as described in anearlier section of this report.

Wells TH1 and TH2 were hydraulically stimulated to evaluate the potential for using thatapproach to increase well yield at this site. A detailed description of the drilled wells and thestimulation process is described in Section 3 of this report.

2.3.2 Step Drawdown and Pump Testing

Step drawdown and constant-rate pumping tests were completed between September 30 andOctober 9, 2013. Step drawdown tests were completed on all five wells, while a 26-hour constant



rate test was completed on TH3. A detailed description of the test procedures and data collectedis described in Section 4 of this report. Data processing and interpretations are presented inSection 5.

2.3.3 General Aquifer Properties

The thin and discontinuous nature of the surficial deposits preclude their ability to form asignificant hydrostratigraphic unit. In localized areas, however, the surficial materials may bethick enough to play an important role in storing water for recharge to the underlying primaryhydrostratigraphic unit, which is the fractured metasandstone.

Hydrogeological properties of fractured-bedrock aquifers, in general, can be highly variabledepending on the nature of the porosity and permeability (Fracflow, 2004). The metasandstone isa hard rock that has no significant matrix porosity. The capacity of that rock to store and transmitwater depends on the extent of fracturing and whether or not a producing well has beencompleted in the regularly-fractured rock or if it intersects some high permeability, water-bearing features such as large fractures or shear zones, or open bedding planes. The subjectproperty is situated upon, and surrounded by, metasandstone of the Goldenville Formation andthe fracture networks that exist in that rock type are quite variable in three dimensional space(i.e., anisotropic and heterogeneous). At two locations, bedding planes were found to strike in anortheast-southwest direction and were steeply dipping, between 50 and 70 degrees to the east.The zone of influence that forms around a pumping well in that rock type will often be moreelliptical than circular, with the long axis of the ellipse oriented parallel to the most permeablefracture set.

Water supply wells in Nova Scotia are almost always completed as vertical wells and those wellsare predisposed to intersecting a greater number of horizontal and sub-horizontal discontinuitiesthan they are to intersect vertical discontinuities. Horizontal fractures can have a hightransmissivity, but tend to contribute little in the way of yield in the long term (Gale, 1975). Thatfinding underscores the importance of the vertical fractures in delivering water to the sub-horizontal features and, thereby, creating aquifer systems.

The average direction of groundwater flow can be inferred from the surface topography, wherethe shape of the water table tends to be a subdued reflection of that topography. Hilltops andareas of high elevation usually coincide with areas of recharge, while valleys and low-lying areasusually coincide with areas of groundwater discharge. Within the sub-catchments where thesubject property is located, the average direction of groundwater flow is expected to benorthwest toward the Shubenacadie River, with localized groundwater discharge into the lowerreaches of Black Brook and Beaver Brook.



3.0 DRILLING PROGRAM

3.1 Site Selection for Drilling

Areas along the lower reaches of Black Brook and Beaver Brook were considered to be the mostfavourable locations for groundwater exploration because they appear natural groundwaterdischarge areas.

A Senior Hydrogeologist (Glenn Bursey) and an Environmental Engineer (Colleen Gosse) fromFracflow visited the site on August 22, 2013 and met with the client (Jim Taylor), a driller fromBrewster Well Drilling (Phillippe Gingras) and a staff member from Lively’s Construction(Mike Lavalee) to identify the locations for exploratory well drilling. The wetland boundarieshad been previously delineated by MacCallum Environmental. All drill sites were at least 60 maway from either Black Brook or Beaver Brook, which are two significant water courses on theproperty, as well as being 60 m away from any mapped wetlands to minimize the potential for aGroundwater Under Direct Influence (GUDI) of surface water condition to develop. Shallow pitswere excavated adjacent to each drill pad to contain the majority of the drill cuttings and fluids.Those pits were backfilled once the drilling was completed.

The well locations are shown in Figure 4. Well construction details are summarized in Table 1.

3.2 Test Well TH1

Test well TH1 was completed on August 26, 2013. The well was constructed using 12.2 m(40 ft) of 152 mm diameter steel casing that was driven into bedrock and sealed using bentonitepellets. The well was advanced to a final depth of 122 m (400 ft) below ground surface.

Approximately 0.9 m (3 ft) of overburden was encountered at that location. The overburden wasa typical glacial till consisting of a brown sandy silt with cobbles and boulders. The underlyingbedrock varied from a medium to dark grey metasandstone with alternating layers of dark-greyto black slate. Some quartz-rich zones and areas with visible sulphide were noted. A water-bearing fracture was encountered at an approximate depth of 44.2 m (145 ft) below groundsurface. There were no significant increases in the discharge rate below that depth. A short-duration air lift test at the end of drilling produced a flow of approximately 1.9 Lpm (0.42 Igpm).

Drilling time was recorded for every 0.6 m (2 ft) that the well bore advanced below groundsurface. The relative changes in drilling rates were plotted versus depth to assist with astratigraphic interpretation. The mean drilling rate for TH1 was recorded as 0.54 m/min(1.8 ft/min). A detailed well log for TH1 is shown in Appendix 2.



The static water level that was recorded on August 27, 2013 was 4.68 m below ground surface.

3.3 Test Well TH2

Test well TH2 was completed on August 27, 2013. The well was constructed using 12.2 m(40 feet) of 152 mm diameter steel casing that was driven into bedrock and sealed usingbentonite pellets. The well was advanced to a final depth of 122 m (400 ft) below groundsurface.

The overburden thickness at that location was 0.9 m (3 ft) and consisted of brown sandy silt withcobbles and boulders. The underlying bedrock varied from a medium-to-dark greymetasandstone with alternating layers of dark grey to black slate. Some quartz-rich zones andareas with visible sulphide were noted. A water-bearing fracture was encountered at a depth of49 m (160 ft) below ground surface. There was a general increase in the rate of discharge belowthat depth, but no discrete water-bearing zones were identified. A short-duration air lift test at theend of drilling produced a flow of approximately 12 Lpm (2.6 Igpm).


The static water level that was recorded on October 1, 2013 was 1.25 m below ground surface.

3.4 Test Well TH3

Test well TH3 was completed on September 17, 2013. The well was constructed using 12.2 m(40 feet) of 152 mm diameter steel casing that was driven into bedrock and sealed usingbentonite pellets. The well was advanced to a final depth of 134 m (440 ft) below groundsurface.

The overburden thickness at TH3 was 0.3 m (1 ft) and consisted of brown sandy silt withcobbles and boulders. The underlying bedrock varied from a greenish grey to dark greymetasandstone with alternating layers of dark-grey to black slate. Some quartz-rich zones wereencountered. The main water-bearing zone was encountered between 116 m (380 ft) and 128 m(420 ft) below ground surface. A short-duration air lift test at the end of drilling produced a flowof approximately 67 Lpm (14.7 Igpm).




The static water level that was recorded on October 2, 2013 was 1.426 m below ground surface.

3.5 Test Well TH4


The overburden at TH4 was 2.7m (9 ft.) thick and consisted of sandy silt with cobbles andboulders. The underlying bedrock varied from a greenish grey to grey metasandstone with thicksequences of dark grey to black slate. A water-bearing fracture was encountered at a depth of93.9 m (308 ft) below ground surface. The flow increased slightly with depth. A short-durationair lift test at the end of drilling produced a flow of approximately 15 Lpm (3.3 Igpm).

Drilling time was recorded for every 0.6 m (2 ft) that the well bore advanced below groundsurface. The relative changes in drilling rates were plotted versus depth to assist with astratigraphic interpretation (see Appendix 2). The mean drilling rate for TH4 was recorded as0.55 m/min (1.9 ft/min). A detailed well log for TH4 is shown in Appendix 2.

The static water level that was recorded on October 7, 2013 was 0.19 m above ground surfaceand was indicative of an artesian condition.

3.6 Test Well TH5


The overburden at this location was 17 m (56 ft.) thick, consisting of a fine sand at the topchanging to a typical sandy silt with cobbles and boulders at depth. The underlying bedrockvaried from a greenish grey to grey metasandstone with thick sequences of dark grey to blackslate. There were some areas with visible quartz. A water-bearing fracture was encountered at a



depth of 100 m (330 ft) below ground surface. The flow increased slightly with depth. A short-duration air lift test at the end of drilling produced a flow of approximately 8 Lpm (1.8 Igpm).

Drilling time was recorded for every 0.6 m (2 ft) that the well bore advanced below groundsurface. The relative changes in drilling rates were plotted versus depth to assist with astratigraphic interpretation (see Appendix 2). The mean drilling rate for TH5 was recorded as0.62 m/min (2.0 ft/min). A detailed well log for TH5 is shown in Appendix 2.

The static water level that was recorded on October 7, 2013 was 0.12 m above ground surfaceand was indicative of an artesian condition.

3.7 Hydraulic Stimulation

Test wells TH1 and TH2 were both hydraulically stimulated by Brewster Well Drilling using asingle-packer system. The results are discussed separately below.

3.7.1 Test Well TH1

Test well TH1 was stimulated on September 11, 2013. The first stimulation was conducted withthe bottom of the packer set at a depth of 75.6 m (248 ft). Approximately 9,300 L of chlorinatedwater were injected into the well over a 60-minute period at an average flow rate of 153 Lpm.The pressure peaked at 7,234.5 kPa (1,050 psi) after 18 seconds and then proceeded to decreaseto a final value of 2,928 kPa (425 psi) at the end of the stimulation period. Figure 5 shows thechanges in flow rate and pressure with time.

The second stimulation was conducted with the bottom of the packer set at a depth of 94 m(308 ft). Approximately 9,100 L of chlorinated water were injected into the well over a 60-minute period at an average flow rate of 154 Lpm. The pressure rose steadily to a final value of3,617 kPa (525 psi) at the end of the stimulation period. Figure 6 shows the changes in flow rateand pressure with time.

3.7.2 Test Well TH2

Test well TH2 was stimulated on September 12, 2013. The stimulation was conducted with thebottom of the packer set at a depth of 87 m (285 ft). Approximately 9,100 L of chlorinated waterwere injected into the well over an 63-minute period at an average flow rate of 148 Lpm. Thepressure peaked at 13,090 kPa (1,900 psi) after 15 seconds and then proceeded to decrease to a



final value of 4,650 kPa (675 psi) at the end of the stimulation period. Figure 7 shows thechanges in flow rate and pressure with time.



4.0 STEP DRAWDOWN AND CONSTANT-RATE TESTS

Between September 30 and October 9, 2013, step-drawdown tests were conducted on all fiveexploratory water wells and a 24-hour constant rate test was completed on one of those wells.The methods and results are discussed below.

4.1 General Procedure

The purpose of a step drawdown test is to determine well efficiency and the safe pumping rateand depth setting for the submersible pump for a full-scale aquifer test. Fracflow normallymonitors water levels for one-to-two hours at three different, and successively higher, pumpingrates until a relatively stable drawdown condition develops. The HRM guidelines state that foursteps, lasting a minimum of 30 minutes each, are required. Fracflow endeavoured to exceed thatminimum requirement.

The step drawdown and 26-hour aquifer tests were conducted using either a 1.0 hp or a 1.5 hpFranklin Electric submersible pump that was installed to a depth of 76 m (250 feet) below top ofcasing and powered using a 5,500 watt portable generator. Installation of the pump and dischargeline was completed by a qualified pump installer from Brewster Well Drilling. A constant headtank was used during the step drawdown tests to ensure steady flow rates could be maintainedduring the initial low-flow settings. A return loop was installed back to the well to recirculate theexcess water delivered by the pump and help to maintain a controlled, low rate of groundwaterextraction. The discharge hose was placed 100 m (330 ft) away from each well head and releasedinto low-lying areas, on the down-gradient side of each well, to ensure the discharge water didnot create an artificial recharge condition.

A stilling tube was installed to a depth 64 m (210 ft) below top of casing and used to smooth outthe water level and permit accurate water level readings under pumping conditions. Water levelsin each pumping well were recorded manually, using an electronic water level tape, with backupdata being recorded using a solid-state levelogger. Water levels in the observation wells werealso recorded manually and automatically every five minutes using solid-state leveloggers.

Flow rates were monitored using a Badger E-series ultrasonic flow meter. The meter recordedcumulative flow in cubic metres and instantaneous flow rates in US gallons per minute.Data collected during the step drawdown test permit a general assessment of each well’sresponse to pumping and provided a rough indication of specific capacity (i.e., numbers of litresof water available per minute per metre of drawdown). Those data were also used to make agross estimate of the potential sustainable yield of each well, although there is considerableuncertainty associated with those estimates. A 26-hour constant rate pumping test was completedat TH3 to develop a more reliable estimate of the long-term sustainable yield of that well, which



was expected to be the most productive well at the site. The minimum requirement in the HRMguidelines is to complete the constant-rate test on at least one well, as noted above.

Water level recoveries were also monitored at the end of the pumping period until the water levelreturned to within 95 percent of the static water level.

The pH, temperature and electrical conductance of the discharge water was monitored duringeach step using a calibrated Oakton pH/Con meter. Water samples were also collected at the endof the pumping period and submitted to AGAT Laboratories for analysis of the parametersspecified in the HRM guidelines.

4.2 Well TH1

4.2.1 Step Drawdown Test

The step drawdown test at Well TH1 was completed on September 30, 2013 and consisted offive steps.

• Step 1 - The well was pumped at an average flow rate of 1.9 Lpm. The measureddrawdown was 1.80 m after 45 minutes of pumping and the water was still drawing downat a rate of 0.025 m per minute. The discharge water was light grey and cloudy.

• Step 2 - The flow rate was increased to 3.2 Lpm. The total drawdown was 4.74 m after106 minutes of pumping and the water level was still drawing down at the rate of 0.025m per minute. The discharge water remained light grey in colour and cloudy.

• Step 3 - The flow rate was increased to 5.5 Lpm. The total drawdown was 6.54 m after167 minutes of pumping and the water level was still drawing down at the rate of 0.017m per minute. The discharge water remained light grey in colour, but was noticeablyclearer.

• Step 4 - The flow rate was increased to 7.9 Lpm. The total drawdown was 8.83 m after206 minutes of pumping and the water level was still drawing down at the rate of 0.032m per minute. The discharge water remained cloudy but clearer.

• Step 5 - The flow rate was increased to 14.8 Lpm. The total drawdown was 25.05 m after316 minutes of pumping and the water level was still drawing down at the rate of 0.032m per minute. The discharge water was clear.



The estimated specific capacity of the well decreased from 1.07 Lpm per metre for the first stepto 0.59 Lpm per metre for the last step. The estimated sustainable yield of this well could bebetween 20 and 25 Lpm with a predicted drawdown of up to 60 m, assuming there is nosignificant interference from any adjacent pumping wells. A constant-rate pumping test would berequired to confirm that boundary conditions that may reduce the estimated yield do not exist.

Figure 8 presents the time versus drawdown curves for all five steps at TH1. Figure 9 presentsthe time versus water-level recovery at TH1.

4.2.2 Water Quality

Water samples were collected at the end of the last step for analysis of total and fecal coliformand E. Coli (Table 3), volatile organic compounds or VOCs (Table 4), and general chemistry,including fluoride, and total and dissolved trace metals (Table 5). Each data table compares theresults with the Canadian drinking water guidelines. A copy of all analytical reports that werereceived from AGAT are presented in Appendix 3.

4.3 Well TH2


The step drawdown test at Well TH2 was completed on October 1, 2013 and consisted of foursteps.


• Step 2 - The flow rate was increased to 7.4 Lpm. The total drawdown was 5.07 m after121 minutes of pumping and the water level was still drawing down at the rate of 0.005m per minute. The discharge water remained light grey in colour and cloudy, but areduction in suspended solids was noticed.

• Step 3 - The flow rate was increased to 15.1 Lpm. The total drawdown was 11.00 m after183 minutes of pumping and the water level was still drawing down at the rate of 0.035m per minute. The discharge water remained light grey in colour, with a notablereduction in suspended solids.



• Step 4 - The flow rate was increased to 22.9 Lpm. The total drawdown was 19.61 m after280 minutes of pumping and the water level was still drawing down at the rate of 0.016m per minute. The discharge water was clear.

The estimated specific capacity of the well decreased from 1.5 Lpm per metre for the first step to1.17 Lpm per metre for the last step. The estimated sustainable yield of this well could bebetween 40 Lpm and 50 Lpm with a predicted drawdown of up to 60 m, assuming there is nosignificant interference from any adjacent pumping wells. A constant-rate pumping test would berequired to confirm that boundary conditions that may reduce the estimated yield do not exist.

Figure 10 presents the time versus drawdown curves for all four steps at TH2. Figure 11presents the time versus water-level recovery at TH2.

4.3.2 Water Quality


4.4 Well TH3


The step drawdown test at Well TH3 was completed on October 2, 2013 and consisted of sixsteps.


• Step 2 - The flow rate was increased to 8.3 Lpm. The total drawdown was 3.67 m after121 minutes of pumping and the water level was still drawing down at the rate of 0.017m per minute. The discharge water remained light grey in colour and cloudy, but areduction in suspended solids was noted.



• Step 3 - The flow rate was increased to 18.5 Lpm. The total drawdown was 6.87 m after197 minutes of pumping and the water level was still drawing down at the rate of0.021 m per minute.

• Step 4 - The flow rate was increased to 22.2 Lpm. The total drawdown was 8.55 m after260 minutes of pumping and the water level was still drawing down at the rate of 0.016m per minute.

• Step 5 - The flow rate was increased to 56 Lpm. The total drawdown was 20.28 m after309 minutes of pumping and the water level was still drawing down at the rate of 0.196m per minute.

• Step 6 - The flow rate was increased to 66 Lpm. The total drawdown was 39.33 m after431 minutes of pumping and the water level was still drawing down at the rate of 0.068m per minute. The discharge water was clear at the end of this final step.

The estimated specific capacity of the well increased from 0.68 Lpm per metre for the first stepto 1.68 Lpm per metre for the last step, which is indicative of progressive well developmentduring pumping. Although the well was pumped at relatively high rates during Steps 5 and 6, therates of drawdown at the end of each step suggested that a more conservative rate should be usedduring the constant rate pump test.

Figure 12 presents the time versus drawdown curves for all six steps at TH3. Figure 13 presentsthe time versus water-level recovery at TH3.

4.4.2 Constant-Rate Pump Test

Based on the results of the step drawdown test, it was decided to pump Well TH3 at the rate ofbetween 50 and 55 Lpm. The test was started on October 3 at a flow rate of 53 Lpm. After240 minutes of pumping the drawdown had reached 50.8 m and the concern was that the waterlevel would fall below the end of the stilling tube before the end of the test. The test was stoppedand the well was allowed to recover. The test was restarted on October 4 and ended on October 5after 1,590 minutes of pumping. The flow rate averaged 40.8 Lpm with a standard deviation of1.5 Lpm. The maximum drawdown was 36.685 m.

Figure 14 shows time versus both flow rate and drawdown on a log-log plot, which was used inthe Theis analysis to calculate the aquifer properties. Figure 15 shows time versus drawdown ona semi-log plot, which was used in the Jacob straight-line analysis to also calculate the aquiferproperties. The recovery data are shown in Figure 16.



During the pumping test, water levels were monitored in test wells TH1 and TH2. Those wellsare respectively located approximately 100 m and 200 m southwest of TH3.

Figure 17 shows the measured drawdown at wells TH1 and TH2. At the closest observationwell, TH2, the maximum observed drawdown was 0.304 m, while the maximum observeddrawdown at TH1 was 0.066 m.

4.4.3 Water Quality

The pH, temperature and electrical conductance of the discharge water was monitored duringthe constant-rate pumping test using a calibrated Oakton pH/Con meter. Dissolved oxygenmeasurements were also made in late time using a HACH meter. Water quality trends thatdeveloped at TH3 during the constant-rate pump test are shown in Figure 18.

Water samples were collected at the end of the pumping period, on Saturday October 5, andsubmitted to AGAT Laboratories on the following Monday for analysis of volatile organiccompounds or VOCs (Table 4), general chemistry, including fluoride, and total and dissolvedtrace metals (Table 5). AGAT Laboratories would not accept the bacteriological samples on theweekend and given the 24-hour holding time, Fracflow was forced to collect a second set ofsamples on Monday October 7 for bacteriological analysis (Table 3), as well as for a secondround of general chemistry analyses (Table 5). Three well volumes were purged prior to thesecond round of sampling. Each data table compares the results with the Canadian drinkingwater guidelines.

A copy of all analytical reports that were received from AGAT are presented in Appendix 3.

4.5 Well TH4


The step drawdown test at Well TH4 was completed on October 7, 2013 and consisted of threesteps.

• Step 1 - The well was pumped at an average flow rate of 4 Lpm. The measureddrawdown was 8.299 m after 60 minutes of pumping and the water was still drawingdown at a rate of 0.055 m per minute. The discharge water was light grey and cloudy.



• Step 2 - The flow rate was increased to 7.7 Lpm. The total drawdown was 19.546 m after166 minutes of pumping and the water level was still drawing down at the rate of 0.058m per minute. The discharge water remained light grey in colour and slightly cloudy.

• Step 3 - The flow rate was increased to 15 Lpm. The total drawdown was 56.964 m after303 minutes of pumping and the water level was still drawing down at the rate of 0.192m per minute. The discharge water remained slightly cloudy but was noticeably clearer.

The HRM guidelines require that four steps be carried out for a minimum of 30 minutes each.The drawdown at the end of the third step was close to the end of the stilling tube and it was notpossible to complete a fourth step. The three steps that were completed were conducted overperiods of between 60 and 137 minutes and, Fracflow’s opinion, provide data that are morereliable for estimating specific capacity than four shorter steps.

The estimated specific capacity of the well decreased from 0.48 Lpm per metre for the first stepto 0.26 Lpm per metre for the last step. The estimated sustainable yield of this well could bebetween 10 and 12 Lpm with a predicted drawdown of up to 60 m, assuming there is nosignificant interference from any adjacent pumping wells. A constant-rate pumping test would berequired to confirm that boundary conditions that may reduce the estimated yield do not exist.Figure 19 presents the time versus drawdown curves for all three steps at TH4. Figure 20presents the time versus water-level recovery at TH4.

4.5.2 Water Quality


4.6 Well TH5


The step drawdown test at Well TH5 was completed on October 8, 2013 and consisted of threesteps.

• Step 1 - The well was pumped at an average flow rate of 3.3 Lpm. The measureddrawdown was 8.42 m after 90 minutes of pumping and the water was still drawing down



at a rate of 0.051 m per minute. The discharge water was brown in colour with a highconcentration of suspended solids.

• Step 2 - The flow rate was increased to 7.6 Lpm. The total drawdown was 27.90 m after258 minutes of pumping and the water level was still drawing down at the rate of 0.048m per minute. The discharge water was brown in colour with a high concentration ofsuspended solids.

• Step 3 - The flow rate was increased to 11.7 Lpm. The total drawdown was 55.13 m after415 minutes of pumping and the water level was still drawing down at the rate of 0.137m per minute. The discharge water was brown in colour with a high concentration ofsuspended solids.

The HRM guidelines require that four steps be carried out for a minimum of 30 minutes each.The drawdown at the end of the third step was close to the end of the stilling tube and it was notpossible to complete a fourth step. The three steps that were completed were conducted overperiods of between 90 and 168 minutes and, in Fracflow’s opinion, provide data that are morereliable for estimating specific capacity than four shorter steps.

The estimated specific capacity of the well decreased from 0.39 Lpm per metre for the first stepto 0.21 Lpm per metre for the last step. The estimated sustainable yield of this well could bebetween 10 and 12 Lpm with a predicted drawdown of up to 60 m, assuming there is nosignificant interference from any adjacent pumping wells. A constant-rate pumping test would berequired to confirm that boundary conditions that may reduce the estimated yield do not exist.

Figure 21 presents the time versus drawdown curves for all three steps at TH5. Figure 22presents the time versus water-level recovery at TH5.

4.6.2 Water Quality




5.0 PRELIMINARY AQUIFER CHARACTERIZATION

5.1 General Approach and Rationale

The scope of this Level II groundwater assessment was designed to permit characterization ofthe aquifer properties at a level sufficient to render a qualified opinion on the likelihood that anadequate supply of potable water is available for the proposed development, without causingsignificant impact to other users in the area. The minimum number of test wells, step drawdowntests, and a 26-hour constant-rate test were completed as per the HRM guidelines in accordancewith the 29 hectare size of the development area.

Considerable resources were committed to the drilling and testing program to ensure that highquality, representative data were collected to meet or exceed the minimum requirements definedby HRM for each Level II activity. Note the following points:

• Brewster Well Drilling was retained to drill and construct each of the five test wells. Theminimum requirement under the Well Construction Regulations is to construct each wellusing a minimum of 6.1 m of casing. All test wells were constructed using at least 12.2 mof casing with a bentonite seal in the annular space;

• Test wells TH1 and TH2 had low yields at the end of drilling. Each of those wells werehydraulically stimulated to assess the potential for improving fracture connectivity andincreasing well yield;

• Submersible pumps were temporarily installed (and extracted) by Brewster Well Drillingfor the purpose of conducting the pump tests, which were carried out by Fracflowpersonnel. Drillers who normally undertake such tests in consultation with ahydrogeologist maintain flow control by using a valve on the discharge line, however, itcan be extremely difficult to maintain a constant rate of discharge when large drawdownsdevelop. Low flow rates are often encountered in bedrock wells that are completed infractured-bedrock of the Goldenville Formation. Fracflow constructed and used aconstant-head tank during each of the step drawdown tests to ensure that low pumpingrates could be maintained within the tolerances specified by HRM; and

• HRM’s requirement for a step drawdown test includes a minimum of four pumpingintervals consisting of a minimum period of thirty minutes each. It is essential that atleast three steps be conducted and that the length of each step be dictated by the timerequired to develop an approximate equilibrium drawdown. Fracflow completed betweenfour and six steps at test wells TH1, TH2 and TH3. At test wells TH4 and TH5, relativelylarge drawdowns developed at low pumping rates and it was only feasible to complete



(1)

three steps at each well. Each step required periods of between 60 and 168 minutes toachieve a quasi-steady state drawdown.

Potential surface water quality issues in Beaver Brook and Black Brook were noted in the LevelI groundwater assessment report (Fracflow, 2013). Those potential issues are associated withhistorical mining activities in the Oldham area. The test wells were set back 60 m or more fromthose brooks and drilled in suspected areas of groundwater discharge to minimize the risk ofinduced infiltration. Once the development agreement is in place, it is likely that additional workwill be undertaken to characterize the degree of groundwater/surface water interaction, includingsurface water quality.

5.2 Theoretical Concepts

Step test data were analyzed with AquiferTest Version 3.01 software (Waterloo Hydrogeologic,2001) and used to estimate specific capacity, well efficiency, transmissivity (T), hydraulicconductivity (K) and storativity (S). Each of those theoretical concepts are discussed in somedetail below.

5.2.1 Well Efficiency and Specific Capacity

The purpose of a step-drawdown test is two-fold:

1) Evaluate the efficiency of the test well; and

2) Select the pumping rate for the constant-rate pump test.

Each step test was run in a series of three to six steps, with each step representing a successivelyhigher pumping rate that lasted for at least 30 minutes.

Drawdown in a pumping well can be described by Equation 1 below:

where,s = drawdown,Q = pumping rate,B = coefficient for the laminar component of drawdown (intercept), andC = coefficient for the turbulent component of drawdown (slope).



(2)

(3)

Well efficiency, Ew, is then defined by Equation 2 below:

The efficiency of the well was analyzed by plotting s/Q versus Q. If a well is 100 percentefficient, which means the water level in the well is equal to the water level in the formationduring pumping, then the data points on the plot would define a horizontal line. If animpermeable boundary condition was encountered, or if the well showed decreasing efficiency,then the data points would define a line that was sloping upward. When data points define a linewith a negative slope, that is indicative of progressive development, well efficiency cannot becalculated. It is also important to note that the concept of well efficiency was developed with theassumption that flow to the well is laminar (i.e., as would occur in porous media).

Specific capacity (SC) is the production rate of a well divided by the maximum drawdownobserved at the end of each step (Smax) and is mathematically expressed by Equation 3:

SC is reported here in units of litres per minute per metre (Lpm/m).

5.2.2 Transmissivity, Conductivity and Storativity

For wells that were not tested at a constant rate (TH1, TH2, TH4 and TH5), an analyticaltechnique developed by Birsoy and Summers (1980) was used. The authors of that workdetermined that short step drawdown tests can be used reliably to estimate transmissivity and theelastic storage characteristics of fractured-rocks close to a pumping well.

Constant-rate pump test data for TH3 were evaluated used two different analytical methods.AquiferTest software, Version 3.01 (Waterloo Hydrogeologic, 2001) was used to assist with thecomputations and plotting routines associated with the Theis and Cooper-Jacob methods. Bothmethods are based on the principles of flow through porous media and one must broadly assumethat the hydraulic characteristics of fractured-bedrock aquifers approximate those of porousmedia if those methods are being applied to a fractured-bedrock aquifer. The proper applicationof those analytical solutions relies heavily on the expertise of the hydrogeologist to understandthe effect of that limiting assumption, as well as other specific assumptions that are inherent toeach method, on data interpretations.



The three key properties of an aquifer that one attempts to calculate using aquifer test data aretransmissivity (T), hydraulic conductivity (K) and storativity (S). K describes the ease throughwhich water can move through pores spaces or fractures and in this report is expressed in unitsof metres per second (m/s). T is a measure of how much water can be transmitted horizontallythrough an aquifer and is defined as K multiplied by the aquifer thickness, b, and is expressed inthis report in units of square metres per second (m2/s). S is the Storativity of an aquifer and it is adimensionless parameter than relates to the volume of water that can be released from storage,per unit surface area, per unit change in hydraulic head. Values of S for confined aquifers areusually 0.005 or less, while the value of S for unconfined aquifers ranges from 0.02 to 0.3(Fetter, 1980). The calculation of S requires that drawdown data from an observation well beused.

Theis Method (Confined Aquifer): Field measurements are plotted as log-log values for timedivided by the radius of the pumping well (t/r2) on the X-axis versus drawdown (s) on the Y-axis. Plotted data are compared to the standard Theis curve which is a theoretical relationship inlog-log space for values of 1/u on the X-axis versus W(u) on the Y-axis where u is a calculatedvalue and W(u) is the integral of the dimensionless parameter, u. The following equation is usedto calculate u:

u = r2S/4Tt

where r is the radius of the pumping well, S is storativity, T is transmissivity, and t is time.The assumptions are that the aquifer is confined and of infinite extent, the aquifer is alsohomogeneous, isotropic and of uniform thickness. It is also assumed that the well is fullypenetrating and pumped at a constant rate and that well storage is small.

Cooper-Jacob Time-Drawdown Method (Confined Aquifer): This is a simplification of theTheis Method. Field measurements are plotted in semi-log space with time on the X-axis anddrawdown on the Y-axis. The same assumptions described above for the Theis Method areapplicable here. The equations for T and S are as follows:

T = 2.3Q/4��s

where Q = rate of discharge from the pumping well and �s is the change in drawdown over onelog cycle;

S = 2.25Tto/r2

where to is the time at which the straight-line fit intersects the time axis. Again, as with the Theisanalysis, the calculation of S requires that drawdown data from an observation well is used.



5.2.3 Sustainable Well Yield

There are two methods available that are often used to estimate safe or sustainable yield of anaquifer. The first is the specific capacity (SC) method or Q(safe). The other is the Q20 method. Bothmethods were developed based on groundwater flow theories in porous media and were neverintended for application to fractured-bedrock aquifers. The results from those calculations arenot definitive and need to be interpreted with caution.

The following formula is used to calculate Q(safe):

Q(safe) = SC × Useable Drawdown

The specific capacity is calculated as follows:

SC = Qtest / Smax

where, Qtest is the pumping rate used during the aquifer test and Smax is the maximum drawdownobserved in the pumping well during the aquifer test.

Using the Q20 method, the safe yield is calculated as follows:

Q20 = (0.683 × T) × H × 0.7

where, T is the transmissivity of the well and H is the useable drawdown in the well and theconstant value of 0.7 is the factor of safety. This is considered to be a relatively conservativemethod of calculating the long-term safe yield of a well constructed in porous media.

5.3 Aquifer Properties

5.3.1 Well Efficiency and Specific Capacity

Test wells TH1, TH2 and TH3 were all drilled within the Black Brook sub-watershed,approximately 100 m apart. TH1 and TH2 were hydraulically stimulated prior to testing. Testwells TH4 and TH5 were drilled in the Beaver Brook sub-watershed. Calculated values for



specific capacity and well efficiency are summarized in Table 6. The output from theAquiferTest analysis is presented in Appendix 4.

The estimated specific capacities and well efficiencies for test wells TH1 and TH2 wererelatively high for fractured-bedrock wells in the Goldenville Formation, based on Fracflow’sexperience. The specific capacity of TH1 decreased from 1.07 to 0.59 Lpm/m with aconcomitant decrease in efficiency from 92.8 to 62.5 percent. The specific capacity of TH2decreased from 1.50 to 1.17 Lpm/m with an associated decrease in efficiency from 94.3 to 73.3percent.

The estimated specific capacity of test well TH3 was also relatively high. The estimated specificcapacity of the well decreased from 2.71 to 1.75 Lpm/m. The results suggest that the well wasdeveloping with continued pumping. A reliable estimate of well efficiency cannot be calculatedfor a developing well.

The estimated specific capacities and well efficiencies for test wells TH4 and TH5 were low andmore typical of fractured-bedrock wells in the Goldenville Formation that have not beenhydraulically stimulated. The specific capacity of TH4 decreased from 0.48 to 0.26 Lpm/m witha concomitant decrease in efficiency from 68.8 to 37.0 percent. The specific capacity of TH5decreased from 0.39 to 0.21 Lpm/m with an associated decrease in efficiency from 67.7 to37.1 percent.

5.3.2 Transmissivity, Hydraulic Conductivity and Storativity

Calculated values for T, K and S are summarized in Table 7, while the output from theAquiferTest analysis are presented in Appendix 4. The results are discussed below.

Results from Analysis of Step Test Data for all Wells

There was reasonably good agreement between the calculated values of T and K whencomparing the results for TH1 and TH2, which were both stimulated, with the results for TH3.The average value of T was 4.2 × 10-6 m2/s and the average value of K was 3.7 × 10-8 m/s ascalculated using the Cooper-Jacob Step Test method.

Test wells TH4 and TH5 were not hydraulically stimulated and lower values for T and K wereobtained. Using the Cooper-Jacob Step Test method, the average T was 1.2 × 10-6 m2/s and theaverage value of K was 9.7 × 10-9 m/s.



Analysis of Step and Constant Rate Data for Test Well TH3

Based on the straight-line nature of the Theis curve during the first 120 minutes of pumping, itappears that a shallow fracture was being dewatered. The response of the deeper aquifer topumping was not apparent until after that time, at which point the associated drawdown wasapproximately 15 m. The saturated aquifer thickness assigned to this analysis was assumed to be119 m for this 134 m deep well.

There was reasonably good agreement between all calculated values of T and K for both Theisand Cooper-Jacob methods when analyzing step test and pumping well data for TH3. The meanvalue of T was 5.6 × 10-6 m2/s and the mean value of K was 4.7 × 10-8 m/s. Using recovery datafrom the pumping well, which are often considered more reliable than drawdown data from apumping well, T was 1.1 × 10-5 m2/s and K was 9.3 × 10-8 m/s. The values of T and K from therecovery data are a factor of two higher compared with pumping well data.

Analysis of Observation Well Data from TH2 During Constant Rate Test at TH3

Observation well data collected at TH2, while pumping TH3, were also used to calculate T andK, as well as S (storativity should only be calculated using observation well data). Using theTheis method, T was 1.7 × 10-4 m2/s, K was 1.4 × 10-6 m/s and the dimensionless value of S was0.00179. Note that the T and K values calculated using the observation well data are 15 timeslarger than the respective values calculated using recovery data from the pumping well. Whenone considers the head losses that occur when pumping wells in fractured-bedrock (i.e., pumpinglevel in the well is often much lower than the water level in the adjacent aquifer), the calculatedK values tend to be lower than the actual K values. That is because the lower water level in thewell will yield a higher calculated hydraulic gradient, which is a variable in the K equation. Forthat reason, the T and K values calculated from the observation well analysis above are expectedto provide the best reflection of the true permeability of fractured-bedrock aquifer in the area oftest wells TH1, TH2 and TH3.

5.4 Flow System and Aquifer Boundaries

A recharge boundary was intercepted at TH3 after 1,350 minutes of pumping. The maximumdrawdown that was observed in test well TH2, which was approximately 100 m away from thepumping well, was 0.32 m. The fractured-bedrock aquifer in the area around TH2 and TH3appears to be behaving as a leaky-confined aquifer system based on the shape of the drawdowncurves and the low value of S noted above.

The static water levels that were recorded at each of the test wells were as follows:



• TH1: 4.68 m below ground surface on August 27;• TH2: 1.25 m below ground surface on October 1;• TH3: 1.43 m below ground surface on October 2;• TH4: 0.19 m above ground surface (artesian) on October 7; and• TH5: 0.12 m above ground surface (artesian) on October 7.

Test wells TH1, TH2 and TH3 are located at elevations that are between 20 to 25 m above meansea level and up-gradient from Black Brook. Test well TH4 and TH5 are located at elevationsthat are between 25 and 30 m above mean sea level and up-gradient from Beaver Brook. Allwells are located in the lower reaches of the respective sub-watersheds. The artesian conditionsat TH4 and TH5 are indicative of an upward directed vertical hydraulic gradient (i.e.,groundwater discharge area).

The areas to the south of the existing drilled wells are expected to be important areas forgroundwater recharge. Any future development in those areas needs to take into account thevarious flow system components.

5.5 Potentially Sustainable Well Yields

There are two methods available that are often used to calculate safe yield of an aquifer. The firstis the specific capacity (SC) method or Q(safe). The other is the Q20 method. Estimates ofsustainable well yield using both methods were calculated and the results are presented inTable 8.

It is Fracflow’s opinion that the Qsafe method provides an overestimate of sustainable well yields,while the Q20 method provides a much more conservative estimate of sustainable well yield.Both methods were developed based on groundwater flow theories in porous media and werenever intended for application to fractured-bedrock aquifers. The calculated ranges of well yieldsfor each of the test wells, based on the Qsafe and Q20 methods, are listed in the table below. Thepotentially sustainable well yields are based largely on the shape and slope of the drawdowncurves and Fracflow’s experience in dealing with flow and transport issues in fractured-bedrockaquifers.



Well No. Qsafe(Lpm)

Q20(Lpm)

PotentiallySustainable

(Lpm)

TH1 31 3.7 20 - 25

TH2 69 9.3 30 - 40

TH3 116 6.5 40 - 50

TH4 14 2.6 8 - 10

TH5 11 1.6 5 - 10Note: The recommended maximum drawdown is 60 m.

One has to understand that the above estimates are based on relatively short pumping periods.Low-permeability boundary conditions that would limit the overall well yields could beencountered during extended periods of pumping.

Based on available data, it would appear that the five test wells can deliver between 148,000 and194,000 litres of water per day, which has the potential to meet 25 to 35 percent of the estimatedwater demand of the development.

5.6 Well Interference

There are no land uses or existing large water users on the subject property (east half of PID no.00513788), which is wooded and vacant at this time. Activities on the property appear to belimited to recreational travel on woods roads by all terrain vehicles.

The five test wells were drilled outside of the footprint of the planned mini-home trailer park.Three wells, TH1, TH2, and TH3 were drilled in the lower reaches of the Black Brook sub-watershed, more than 1 km away from any existing developments or other groundwater users.Two wells, TH4 and TH5, were drilled in the Beaver Brook sub-watershed in an area wheregroundwater withdrawal from those wells has the potential to impact some residential wells onHescott Street and Richard Street, located about 250 m to the east. All test wells were designedand constructed to be potential production wells, but the option exists to reserve TH4 and/or TH5as observation wells to ensure that any groundwater withdrawal by the developer within theBeaver Brook sub-watershed does not impact the existing residential wells.

One of the recommendations from CBCL to HRM, following its review of the Level IGroundwater Assessment report, was that a residential well survey be carried out on Hescott andRichard Streets. Such a survey was contemplated by the developer, but was not carried out as a



result of the attention Fracflow received from local residents while the field program wasunderway. Many of those residents were hunters who appear to have little or no interest in seeinga new development activity in the area despite the fact that they trespass on private land whenhunting or conducting recreational travel on ATVs. The developer decided that it would be bestto not solicit the cooperation of residents in a well survey until the application for a DevelopmentAgreement is submitted to HRM. That way residents can be directed to HRM to view the detailsof the development plan.

The potential scale of well interference was examined in the area of test wells TH1, TH2 andTH3 during the 26-hour pumping test on TH3. Figure 17 shows a plot of drawdown versus timein test wells TH1 and TH2. The maximum observed drawdown in TH2, 100 m away from TH3,was less than 0.35 m. The maximum observed drawdown in TH1, 100 m away from TH3, wasless than 0.1 m. The Theis prediction for drawdown after pumping TH3 for 20 years, using the Tand S values derived from analysis of the observation well data at TH2, suggest that themaximum drawdown would be in the order of 2 m at a distance of 500 m from pumping wellTH3 (see plot attached in Appendix 4).

Test wells TH4 and TH5, in the Beaver Brook sub-watershed, are approximately 250 m awayfrom the nearest residential wells on Hescott Street and Richard Streets. Using the average Kvalue from those two wells, and an assumed S value of 0.001 for a leaky confined aquifer, theTheis prediction for drawdown in a pumping well at that location, after 20 years, suggests thatthe maximum drawdown could be in the order of 35 m at a distance of 500 m from a pumpingwell in that area (see plot attached in Appendix 4). Bear in mind, the T and K values that wereused in the Theis prediction are based on a large drawdown that is associated with inefficientwells and large head losses. If the actual K value of the aquifer at that location was an order ofmagnitude higher, the predicted drawdown at a distance of 250 m would be less than 10 m. Notealso that if TH4 and TH5 were to be used for groundwater production, it is possible that theconstant-head boundary condition represented by Beaver Brook would develop into a rechargeboundary, which would mitigate any impacts to the existing residential wells, although otherissues associated with Groundwater Under the Direct Influence (GUDI) of surface water wouldhave to considered. A 72-hour aquifer test on TH4 while observing drawdown and recovery inTH5 is needed to make a proper assessment of the aquifer properties, sustainable well yields andpredicted drawdown.

Improving the fracture connectivity in and around the well bore of TH4, by hydraulicstimulation, will likely improve well efficiency, reduce head losses, and provide for a morereliable prediction of the aquifer properties during the aquifer test.



5.7 Water Quality

The pH, temperature and electrical conductance of the discharge water was monitored duringeach step and pumping test using a calibrated Oakton pH/Con meter. Water samples were alsocollected at the end of the pumping period and submitted to AGAT Laboratories for analysis ofthe parameters specified in the HRM guidelines. Data were previously presented and describedin Section 4 of this report.

Coliform bacteria were detected in all samples that were collected. It is Fracflow’s opinion thatthose bacteria were most likely introduced during drilling and/or during temporary installation ofthe submersible pumps. All wells were disinfected after the pump testing was completed and willbe tested again prior to commissioning of the water supply system. A water treatment systemwill be incorporated into the design of the water supply system and disinfection will be anintegral part of the treatment process. Chlorination and UV light disinfection are recommended.

The VOC analyses identified chloroform in the groundwater samples from TH1 and TH2, whichis likely indicative of residual THMs that were formed when the wells were disinfected afterdrilling. Toluene was also detected in the four test wells that were pumped for a limited period oftime (TH1, TH2, TH4 and TH5). TH3, which was pumped for 26 hours, did not contain anytoluene. From past experience, it seems likely that the source of the toluene is blowby from theair compressor during drilling operations. The drillers also use biodegradable pipe dope and rockoils and those products could also have been potential sources of toluene.

The inorganic chemical analyses identified a number of water quality parameters that were inexcess of the drinking water guidelines:

• Colour exceeded the aesthetic objective of 15 TCUs in one sample that was collectedfrom TH3;

• Turbidity exceeded the health-based guideline value of 0.1 NTUs in all wells;

• Total dissolved solids concentrations at TH4 and TH5 were 843 and 848 mg/L,respectively, and in excess of the aesthetic guideline value of 500 mg/L. The mainconstituents that contributed to the elevated TDS were calcium and sulphate;

• Total and/or dissolved arsenic in samples from TH1, TH2 and TH4 were in excess of thehealth-based guideline value of 10 µg/L. The concentrations ranged from a low of 3 µg/Lin TH5 to a high of 31 µg/L in TH1;



• Total and/or dissolved iron in TH1 through TH4 exceeded the aesthetic guideline valueof 300 µg/L. The total concentrations ranged from a low of 99 µg/L in TH3 to a high of7,080 µg/L in TH1; and

• Total and/or dissolved manganese in all wells exceeded the aesthetic guideline value of300 µg/L. The total concentrations ranged from a low of 78 µg/L in TH3 to a high of320 µg/L in TH1.

All of the water quality issues noted above are readily addressed through conventional watertreatment equipment. The elevated TDS at wells TH4 and TH5 suggest the Beaver Brook sub-watershed has less favourable water quality as a result of the high calcium and sulphateconcentrations.



6.0 CONCLUSIONS

The purpose of this Level II Groundwater Assessment was not to provide a guarantee that futurehome owners will have an adequate supply of potable water, but rather to provide a qualifiedopinion of the likelihood of obtaining an adequate supply of potable water for the proposeddevelopment without impacting other users in the area. Fracflow’s opinions in that regard areexpressed below under headings that reflect the key questions to be addressed in the HRMguidelines.

Future Use of Test Wells

The five test wells that were drilled at the site were designed to function as future productionwells. Test Wells TH1, TH2 and TH3 will likely become production wells. Test wells TH4 andTH5 are within 250 m of the residential dwellings on Hescott and Richard Streets and could alsoused as production wells, but there is the potential for an impact to occur to those existinggroundwater users. If the developer wishes to include those wells as production wells, additionaltesting should be carried out to better characterize the aquifer properties and potential for wellinterference in that area.

Expected Range of Well Yields and Aquifer Properties

The fractured-bedrock aquifer beneath the Black Brook sub-watershed appears to behave as aleaky-confined aquifer. Based on the results of a constant-rate pump test at TH3, withmonitoring in observation wells TH2 (100 m away) and TH1 (200 m away), the mostrepresentative estimates for transmissivity, hydraulic conductivity and storativity are:

• Transmissivity (T): 1.7 × 10-4 m2/s;• Hydraulic conductivity (K): 1.4 × 10-6 m2/s; and• Storativity (S): 0.00179.

A range of estimates for T, K and S are provided in Table 7 for all test wells and they varydepending on the analytical methods and data sets being used.

The expected range of well yields from each of the five test wells are:

• TH1: 20 - 25 Lpm• TH2: 30 - 40 Lpm• TH3: 40 - 50 Lpm• TH4: 8 - 10 Lpm• TH5: 5 - 10 Lpm



The above estimates fall between the upper and lower limits calculated using the Qsafe and Q20formulations, and represent Fracflow’s best professional judgement of the shape and extent ofthe drawdown curves and the company’s experience in dealing with flow and transport issues infractured bedrock.

Sustainability of the Groundwater Supply

According to a municipal water survey completed by Environment Canada (2010), residentialwater use averages 292 litres per person per day based on a survey of single-family and multi-family homes. According to Statistics Canada (2007), the average number of people perhousehold in Nova Scotia is 2.4, which would place the average water demand per household atapproximately 700 litres per day. That is a reasonable demand figure for this mixed residentialdevelopment, which will consist of two and three bedroom homes. The minimum water demandper residence is not expected to exceed 1,000 litres per day, even when additional water usessuch as car washing and lawn car are considered. If all dwellings are constructed, the total waterdemand will be in the order of 550,000 litres per day.

Based on available data, it would appear that the five test wells can deliver between 148,000 and194,000 litres of water per day, which has the potential to meet between 25 and 35 percent of theestimated water demand of the development. Another five to ten production wells will likely berequired to meet the total demand.

The area available for groundwater recharge, between the eastern boundary of the developer’sproperty and Black Brook, totals approximately 3.7 km2, of which the development representsonly 8.8 percent. According to Lot Water Balance Calculator in NSE’s GroundwaterAssessments for Subdivision Developments Toolkit, the estimated recharge in theShubenacadie/Stewiacke primary watershed is accepted to be 188 mm per annum and 50 percentof the available groundwater recharge should be reserved for streamflow and ecological support.Based on those assumptions, the estimated volume of available recharge is approximately856,000 litres per day. There appears to be an adequate volume of water to meet the demand ofthe development and the natural demand of the environment.

Expected Effects of Groundwater Withdrawal on Existing Wells and the Environment

As noted in the preceeding paragraphs, the water balance calculations have included a 50 percentreserve for streamflow and ecological support. Therefore, the expected impact of groundwaterwithdrawal on the environment is expected to be minimal provided that the additional wellsrequired to meet total demand are properly located and spaced to take into account the variousflow system components and the inherently heterogeneous nature of the fractured-bedrockaquifer.



Test wells TH4 and TH5 are within 250 m of the residential dwellings on Hescott and RichardStreets. Those and any other wells drilled in the lower reaches of the Beaver Brook sub-watershed have the potential to impact some of the existing residential wells. If the developerwishes to include those wells as production wells, a 72-hour constant rate pumping test should becarried out to better characterize the aquifer properties and potential for well interference in thatarea.

Groundwater Quality and Drinking Water Guidelines

A number of water quality parameters exceeded the Health Canada Guidelines for CanadianDrinking Water Quality, as detailed in Section 3. The coliform bacteria, chlorform, and toluenethat were detected are all believed to be associated with the drilling and pump testing work thatwas carried out and are not expected to be indicative of ambient conditions.

All of the other water quality issues that were identified are probably indicative of backgroundvalues and can be readily addressed through conventional treatment systems. Elevated colourand turbidity will likely diminish with time as the wells are fully developed through continuedpumping. Elevated arsenic, iron and manganese can be removed using chlorination and standardsoftening equipment. Arsenic is readily removed using an adsorption media such as activatedalumina AAFS-50. The elevated TDS at TH4 and TH5 can also be addressed by ion exchangeusing a dealkalizer.



7.0 REFERENCES

Birsoy, Y.K. and W.K. Summers. Determination of aquifer parameters from step tests andintermittent pumping data. Ground Water, 18:2, 137-146.

Environment Canada (1991) Historical Streamflow Summary: Atlantic Provinces to 1990. WaterResources Branch, Ottawa.

Environment Canada, 2010. 2011 Municipal Water Use Report - Municipal Water Use 2011Statistics. Available on-line at: www.ec.gc.ca/doc/publications/eau-water/com1454/survey2-eng.htm.

Fracflow, 2004. Screening-Level Assessment of the Groundwater Resource Potential of Bedrockin HRM: a Component of HRM’s Wastewater Management Options Study. IN: Optionsfor On-Site & Small Scale Wastewater Management, Halifax Regional MunicipalityReport #03-134, March 2005.

Fracflow, 2013. Level I Groundwater Assessment, Eastern Portion of PID 00513788, Old PostRoad, Enfield, HRM, NS. Report submitted by Fracflow Consultants Inc. to CygnetProperties Limited, 48 p, January 7.

Gale, John E., 1975. A Numerical, Field and Laboratory Study of Flow in Rocks withDeformable Fractures. Ph.D. Thesis in Engineering Geoscience, University of Californiaat Berkeley, Berkeley, California, US.

Keppie, J.D., 2000. Geological Map of the Province of Nova Scotia. NS Department of NaturalResources, Minerals and Energy Branch, Map ME 2000-1, Scale 1:500,000.

MacDougall, J.I., Cann, D.B., and Hilchey, J.D., 1963. Soil Survey of Halifax County, NovaScotia. Nova Scotia Soil Survey Report No. 13 prepared by Canada Department ofAgriculture and Nova Scotia Department of Agriculture, 53 p. (with maps at 1:63,360scale).

Nova Scotia Museum, 1996. Natural History of Nova Scotia, Volume I: Topics. Available on-line at: www.gov.ns.ca/bse/surface.water/docs/nsmuseum_freshwaterhydrology.pdf

NSE, 2008. Primary Watersheds of Nova Scotia. Map (1:10,000 scale), originally produced byNova Scotia Environment in 2007, later updated December 2008. Available online athttp://gov.ns.ca/nse/water/docs/waterstrategy_nswatershedmap.pdf.



NSE, 2009. On-Site Sewage Disposal Systems Technical Guidelines. Guidelines developed inaccordance with Regulations Respecting On-Site Sewage Disposal Systems, April.

NSE, 2011. Groundwater Assessments for Subdivisions Developments Toolkit. Prepared byNova Scotia Environment and Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources, Version 1,June.

Price, M., 1985. Introducing Groundwater. George, Allen and Unwin, London.

Stea, R.R., H. Conley, and Y. Brown, 1992. Surficial Geology of the Province of Nova Scotia.Map Sheet 92-3, 1:500,000 scale, published by the NS Department of Natural Resources,Mines and Energy Branches.

Statistics Canada, 2007. Household size, by province and territory (2006 census). Available on-line at: www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/I01/cst01/famil53a-eng.htm.

Waterloo Hydrogeologic, 2001. User’s Guide for AquiferTest. Licensed Software and UsersGuide prepared by Waterloo Hydrogeologic, Inc.

APPENDIX 1

Figures and Tables

Pro

ject

No.

Sca

le

775

As S

how

n L

ocat

ion

Dat

e

FFC

Nov

embe

r 201

3

Figu

re 5

Fl

ow ra

te a

nd p

ress

ure

curv

es fo

r stim

ulat

ion

with

pac

ker s

et a

t 248

feet

in te

st

wel

l TH

1.En

field

0200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

05101520253035404550

010

2030

4050

6070

Pressure�(psi)

Flow�Rate�(Igpm)

Time�(m

inutes)

Flow

�Rat

e

Pres

sure

Pro

ject

No.

Sca

le

775

As S

how

n L

ocat

ion

Dat

e

Figu

re 6

Fl

ow ra

te a

nd p

ress

ure

curv

es fo

r stim

ulat

ion

with

pac

ker s

et a

t 308

feet

in

test

wel

l TH

1.En

field

FFC

Nov

embe

r 201

3

0100

200

300

400

500

600

0510152025303540

05

1015

2025

3035

40

Pressure�(psi)


Time�(m

inutes)

Flow

Rate

Pro

ject

No.

Sca

le

775

As S

how

n L

ocat

ion

Dat

e

FFC

Nov

embe

r 201

3

Figu

re 7

Fl

ow ra

te a

nd p

ress

ure

curv

es fo

r stim

ulat

ion

with

pac

ker s

et a

t 285

feet

in te

st

wel

l TH

2.En

field

0200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

0510152025303540

010

2030

4050

6070

80

Pressure�(psi)


Time�(m

inutes)

Flow

�Rat

e

Pres

sure

Pro

ject

No.

Sca

le

775

As S

how

n L

ocat

ion

Dat

e

FFC

Figu

re 8

Enfie

ldN

ovem

ber 2

013

Tim

e ve

rsus

dra

wdo

wn

for t

he S

tep

Dra

wdo

wn

Test

at T

est W

ell T

H1.

0.01 0.

1 1 10 100

050

100

150

200

250

300

350

Drawdown Below Casing (m)

Tim

e Si

nce

Pum

p St

arte

d (m

inut

es)

Test

: Pum

p Te

st

Site

: Enf

ield

Wel

l No.

: TH

1D

ate:

9/3

0/20

13

Ste

p 1

Q =

1.9

Lpm

Ste

p 2

Q =

3.2

Lpm

Ste

p 3

Q =

5.5

Lpm

Ste

p 4

Q =

7.9

Lpm

Ste

p 5

Q =

14.

8 Lp

m

Pro

ject

No.

Sca

le

775

As S

how

n L

ocat

ion

Dat

e

FFC

Figu

re 9

Enfie

ldN

ovem

ber 2

013

Log-

log

plot

of r

ecov

ery

data

(tim

e ve

rsus

wat

er le

vel)

afte

r the

term

inat

ion

of th

e st

ep d

raw

dow

n te

st a

t TH

1.

0.010.1110100

0.1

110

100

1000

Recovery (m)

Tim

e Si

nce

Pum

p St

oppe

d (m

in)

Test

: Rec

over

y Te

st

Site

: Enf

ield

Wel

l No.

: TH

1D

ate:

Sep

t. 30

, 201

3

Pro

ject

No.

Sca

le

775

As S

how

n L

ocat

ion

Dat

e

FFC

Figu

re 1

0

Enfie

ldN

ovem

ber 2

013

Tim

e ve

rsus

dra

wdo

wn

for t

he S

tep

Dra

wdo

wn

Test

at W

ell T

H2.

0.1 1 10 100

050

100

150

200

250

300


Tim

e Si

nce

Pum

p St

arte

d (m

inut

es)

Ste

p 2

Q =

7.4

L/m

in

Test

: Pum

p Te

st

Site

: Enf

ield

Wel

l No.

: TH

2D

ate:

10/

01/2

013

Ste

p 1

Q =

3.8

Lpm

Ste

p 3

Q =

15.

1 Lp

m

Ste

p 4

Q =

22.

9 Lp

m

Pro

ject

No.

Sca

le

775

As S

how

n L

ocat

ion

Dat

e

FFC

Figu

re 1

1

Enfie

ldN

ovem

ber 2

013

Log-

log

plot

of r

ecov

ery

data

(tim

e ve

rsus

wat

er le

vel)

afte

r the

step

dr

awdo

wn

Test

at T

H2.

0.1110100

0.1

110

100

Recovery (m)

Tim

e Si

nce

Pum

p St

oppe

d (m

in)

Test

: Rec

over

y Te

st

Site

: Enf

ield

Wel

l No.

: TH

2D

ate:

Oct

ober

1, 2

013

Pro

ject

No.

Sca

le

775

As S

how

n L

ocat

ion

Dat

e

FFC

Figu

re 1

2

Enfie

ldN

ovem

ber 2

013

Tim

e ve

rsus

dra

wdo

wn

for t

he S

tep

Dra

wdo

wn

Test

at W

ell T

H3.

0.1 1 10 100

050

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500


Tim

e Si

nce

Pum

p St

arte

d (m

inut

es)

Ste

p 2

Q =

8.3

Lpm

Test

: Pum

p Te

st

Site

: Enf

ield

Wel

l No.

: TH

3D

ate:

10/

02/2

013

Ste

p 1

Q =

4.9

Lpm

Ste

p 3

Q =

18.

5 Lp

m

Ste

p 4

Q =

22.

2 Lp

m

Ste

p 5

Q =

56

Lpm

Ste

p 6

Q =

66

Lpm

Pro

ject

No.

Sca

le

775

As S

how

n L

ocat

ion

Dat

e

FFC

Figu

re 1

3

Enfie

ldN

ovem

ber 2

013

Log-

log

plot

of r

ecov

ery

data

(tim

e ve

rsus

wat

er le

vel)

afte

r the

term

inat

ion

of th

e st

ep d

raw

dow

n te

st a

t TH

3.

0.1110100

0.1

110

100

1000

Recovery (m)

Tim

e Si

nce

Pum

p St

oppe

d (m

in)

Test

: Rec

over

y Te

st

Site

: Enf

ield

Wel

l No.

: TH

3D

ate:

Oct

ober

2, 2

013

Pro

ject

No.

Sca

le

775

As s

how

n L

ocat

ion

Dat

e

FFC

Figu

re 1

4

Enfie

ldN

ovem

ber 2

013

Log-

log

plot

of t

ime

vers

us d

raw

dow

n fo

r the

con

stan

t-rat

e pu

mp

test

at t

est

wel

l TH

3.

0.1110100

01

1010

010

0010

000

Drawdown (m)

Tim

e Si

nce

Pum

p St

arte

d (m

inut

es)

Dra

wdo

wn

(m)

Flow

Rat

e (L

pm)

Test

: 24-

hr A

quife

r Tes

t S

ite: E

nfie

ldW

ell N

o.: T

H3

Dat

e: O

ctob

er 4

-5, 2

013

Aver

age

Q�=

�40.

8�Lp

mSt

.�Dev

�=�1

.5�L

pm

Pro

ject

No.

Sca

le

775

As S

how

n L

ocat

ion

Dat

e

FFC

Figu

re 1

5

Enfie

ldN

ovem

ber 2

013

Sem

i-log

plo

t (Ja

cobs

stra

ight

line

met

hod)

of t

ime

vers

us d

raw

dow

n fo

r the

co

nsta

nt-r

ate

pum

p te

st a

t tes

t wel

l TH

3.

0 10 20 30 40 50 600.

11

1010

010

0010

000

Drawdowm (m)

Tim

e Si

nce

Pum

p St

arte

d (m

inut

es)

Test

: 24-

hr A

quife

r Tes

t S

ite: E

nfie

ldW

ell N

o.: T

H3

Dat

e: O

ctob

er 4

-5, 2

013

Aver

age�

Q�=

�40.

8�Lp

mSt

.�Dev

.�=�1

.5�L

pm

Pro

ject

No.

Sca

le

775

As S

how

n L

ocat

ion

Dat

e

FFC

Figu

re 1

6 Lo

g-lo

g pl

ot o

f rec

over

y da

ta (t

ime

vers

us w

ater

leve

l) af

ter t

he te

rmin

atio

n of

the

cons

tant

rate

pum

p te

st te

st a

t TH

3.En

field

Nov

embe

r 201

3

0.1110100

0.1

110

100

1000

1000

0

Recovery (m)

Tim

e Si

nce

Pum

p St

oppe

d (m

in)

Test

: Rec

over

y Te

st

Site

: Enf

ield

Wel

l No.

: Wel

l TH

3D

ate:

Oct

. 4-5

, 201

3

Pro

ject

No.

Sca

le

775

As S

how

n L

ocat

ion

Dat

e

FFC

Figu

re 1

7 Se

mi-l

og p

lot o

f tim

e ve

rsus

dra

wdo

wn

at o

bser

vatio

n w

ells

TH

1 an

d TH

2 du

ring

the

cons

tant

-rat

e pu

mp

test

at T

H3.

Enfie

ldN

ovem

ber 2

013

�0.1

00

�0.0

50

0.00

0

0.05

0

0.10

0

0.15

0

0.20

0

0.25

0

0.30

0

0.35

010

100

1000

1000

0

Drawdown�(m)

Elap

sed�Time�(m

inutes)

TH2

TH1

Pro

ject

No.

Sca

le

775

As S

how

n L

ocat

ion

Dat

e

FFC

Figu

re 1

8 W

ater

qua

lity

trend

s dur

ing

the

cons

tant

-rat

e pu

mp

test

at T

H3.

Enfie

ldN

ovem

ber 2

013

050100

150

200

250

300

350

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.0

0

12.0

0

14.0

0

16.0

0

020

040

060

080

010

0012

0014

0016

0018

00

Conductance�(uS/cm)

pH�(units),�Temperature�(oC),�Dissolved�Oxygen�(mg/L)

Elap

sed�Time�(m

inutes)

pH Diss

olve

d�O

xyge

n(m

g/L)

Pro

ject

No.

Sca

le

775

As S

how

n L

ocat

ion

Dat

e

FFC

Figu

re 1

9

Enfie

ldN

ovem

ber 2

013

Tim

e ve

rsus

dra

wdo

wn

for t

he S

tep

Dra

wdo

wn

Test

at W

ell T

H4

1 10 100

050

100

150

200

250

300

350

400


Tim

e Si

nce

Pum

p St

arte

d (m

inut

es)

Ste

p 2

Q =

7.7

Lpm

Test

: Ste

p Te

st

Site

: Enf

ield

Wel

l No.

: TH

4D

ate:

Oct

. 7, 2

013

Ste

p 1

Q =

4 L

pm

Ste

p 3

Q =

15

Lpm

Pro

ject

No.

Sca

le

775

As S

how

n L

ocat

ion

Dat

e

FFC

Figu

re 2

0

Enfie

ldN

ovem

ber 2

013

Log-

log

plot

of r

ecov

ery

data

(tim

e ve

rsus

wat

er le

vel)

afte

r the

term

inat

ion

of th

e st

ep d

raw

dow

n te

st a

t TH

4.

0.1110100

0.1

110

100

1000

Recovery (m)

Tim

e Si

nce

Pum

p St

oppe

d (m

in)

Test

: Rec

over

y Te

st

Site

: Enf

ield

W

ell N

o.: W

ell T

H4

Dat

e: O

ctob

er 7

, 201

3

Pro

ject

No.

Sca

le

775

As S

how

n L

ocat

ion

Dat

e

FFC

Figu

re 2

1

Enfie

ldN

ovem

ber 2

013

Tim

e ve

rsus

dra

wdo

wn

for t

he S

tep

Dra

wdo

wn

Test

at W

ell T

H5.

0.1 1 10 100

050

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500


Tim

e Si

nce

Pum

p St

arte

d (m

inut

es)

Ste

p 2

Q =

7.6

Lpm

Test

: Pum

p Te

st

Site

: Enf

ield

Wel

l No.

: TH

5D

ate:

Oct

. 8, 2

013

Ste

p 1

Q =

3.3

Lpm

Ste

p 3

Q =

11.

7 Lp

m

Pro

ject

No.

Sca

le

775

As S

how

n L

ocat

ion

Dat

e

FFC

Figu

re 2

2

Enfie

ldN

ovem

ber 2

013

Log-

log

plot

of r

ecov

ery

data

(tim

e ve

rsus

wat

er le

vel)

afte

r the

term

inat

ion

of th

e st

ep d

raw

dow

n te

st a

t TH

5.

110100

0.1

110

100

1000

Recovery (m)

Tim

e Si

nce

Pum

p St

oppe

d (m

in)

Test

: Rec

over

y Te

st

Site

: Enf

ield

Wel

l No.

: TH

5D

ate:

Oct

. 8, 2

013

Table 1 Summary of well construction details.

Well ID CasingLength

CasingStickup Well Depth

(m) (m) (m) Date Measured (m btoc) (m bgs)

TH1 12.2 0.620 122.0 September 30, 2013 4.253 3.633TH2 12.2 0.531 122.0 October 1, 2013 1.786 1.255TH3 12.2 0.682 134.1 October 2, 2013 2.108 1.426TH4 12.2 0.420 121.9 October 7, 2013 0.230 -0.190TH5 21.3 0.650 128.0 October 7, 2013 0.532 -0.118Notes:1. 'm btoc' means metres below top of casing.2. 'm bgs' means metres below ground surface.3. Negative values for static water levels are indicative of an artesian conditions.

Table 2 Summary of water quality readings at the end of drilling.

Well ID Temperature pH Conductance

(°C) (units) (µS/cm)

TH1 25.7 8.7 137TH2 25.1 8.4 181TH3 17.0 7.7 272TH4 19.4 7.5 1248TH5 24.7 7.7 1160

Static Water Level

Tabl

e 3

Bac

terio

logi

cal r

esul

ts.

775-

TH1

775-

TH2

775-

TH3

775-

TH4

775-

TH5

09/3

0/20

1310

/01/

2013

10/0

7/20

1310

/07/

2013

10/0

8/20

13

4791

347

4796

172

4810

412

4815

128

4817

275

E. C

oli (

MP

N)

MP

N/1

00 m

L0/

100

mL

14

4<1

<167

Tota

l Col

iform

s (M

PN

)M

PN

/100

mL

0/10

0 m

L1

131

131

5213

0010

11

Feca

l Col

iform

MP

N/0

.1 L

0/10

0 m

L1

<12

<11

59Notes:

1. R

DL

mea

ns re

porte

d de

tect

ion

limit.

2. C

CM

E g

uide

lines

refe

r to

the

drik

ing

wat

er g

uide

lines

issu

ed b

y th

e C

anad

ian

Cou

ncil

of M

inis

ters

of E

nviro

nmen

t, as

det

aile

d on

the

AG

AT

lab

repo

rts.

3. A

ny e

xcee

danc

e of

a g

uide

line

valu

e is

sho

wn

in b

old

with

yel

low

sha

ding

.

Uni

tsC

CM

EG

uide

lines

RD

LPa

ram

eter

Table 4 Volatile organic compounds in water.

775-TH1 775-TH2 775-TH3 775-TH4 775-TH509/30/2013 10/01/2013 10/05/2013 10/07/2013 10/08/20134791347 4796172 4810397 4815128 4817275

Chloromethane ug/L 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1Vinyl Chloride ug/L 2 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5Bromomethane ug/L 3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3Chloroethane ug/L 5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5Trichlorofluoromethane (FREON 11) ug/L 5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5Acetone ug/L 10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <101,1-Dichloroethylene ug/L 14 0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane) ug/L 50 2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <21,1-Dichloroethane ug/L 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene ug/L 1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6Chloroform ug/L 1 70 48 <1 <1 <11,2-Dichloroethane ug/L 5 2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <21,1,1-Trichloroethane ug/L 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1Carbon Tetrachloride ug/L 2 0.79 <0.79 <0.79 <0.79 <0.79 <0.79Benzene ug/L 5 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <11,2-Dichloropropane ug/L 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1Trichloroethylene ug/L 5 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1Bromodichloromethane ug/L 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ug/L 2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene ug/L 1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.61,1,2-Trichloroethane ug/L 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1Toluene ug/L 0.024 2 8 9 <2 5 52-Hexanone ug/L 10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ug/L 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1Dibromochloromethane ug/L 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <11,2-Dibromoethane ug/L 0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25Tetrachloroethylene ug/L 30 1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6Chlorobenzene ug/L 80, 30 AO 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1Ethylbenzene ug/L 2.4 AO 2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2m,p-Xylene ug/L 4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4Bromoform ug/L 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1Styrene ug/L 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <11,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane µg/L 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.51,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ug/L 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1o-Xylene ug/L 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <11,3-Dichlorobenzene ug/L 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <11,4-Dichlorobenzene ug/L 5, 1 AO 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <11,2-Dichlorobenzene ug/L 200, 3 AO 0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7Notes:1. RDL means reported detection limit.2. CCME guidelines refer to the driking water guidelines issued by the Canadian Council of Ministers of Environment, as detailed on the AGAT lab reports.3. Any exceedance of a guideline value is shown in bold with yellow shading.4. Any VOCs for which there are no guidelines, but that were detected, are highlighed with green shading.

CCMEGuidelinesParameter Units RDL

Tabl

e 5

Sta

ndar

d w

ater

ana

lysi

s, in

clud

ing

fluor

ide,

tota

l met

als

and

diss

olve

d m

etal

s.

10/5

/201

310

/7/2

013

10/5

/201

348

1039

748

1041

248

1039

7St

anda

rdD

isso

lved

Stan

dard

Dis

solv

edSt

anda

rdSt

anda

rdD

isso

lved

Stan

dard

Dis

solv

edSt

anda

rdD

isso

lved

pH6.

5-8.

5 A

O7.

807.

918.

047.

998.

027.

86R

eact

ive

Sili

ca a

s S

iO2

mg/

L0.

57.

37.

413

.813

.09.

88.

6C

hlor

ide

mg/

L25

0 A

O1

717

73

1818

Fluo

ride

mg/

L1.

50.

1<0

.10.

60.

5<0

.10.

10.

4S

ulph

ate

mg/

L50

0 A

O2

812

2017

492

493

Alk

alin

itym

g/L

557

7011

710

910

688

True

Col

orTC

U15

AO

5<5

126

62<5

<5Tu

rbid

ityN

TU0.

10.

145

.210

.60.

828

.121

.366

.9E

lect

rical

Con

duct

ivity

umho

/cm

116

419

028

726

511

3011

80N

itrat

e +

Nitr

ite a

s N

mg/

L0.

05<0

.05

0.31

<0.0

5<0

.05

0.14

0.12

Nitr

ate

as N

mg/

L10

0.05

<0.0

50.

31<0

.05

<0.0

50.

140.

12N

itrite

as

Nm

g/L

1.0

0.05

<0.0

5<0

.05

<0.0

5<0

.05

<0.0

5<0

.05

Am

mon

ia a

s N

mg/

L0.

03<0

.03

<0.0

3<0

.03

<0.0

3<0

.03

0.07

Tota

l Org

anic

Car

bon

mg/

L0.

50.

65.

2<0

.5<0

.55.

60.

7D

isso

lved

Org

anic

Car

bon

mg/

L0.

5--

-0.

91.

0<0

.5<0

.50.

8O

rtho-

Pho

spha

te a

s P

mg/

L0.

010.

010.

02<

0.01

0.01

<0.0

1<0

.01

Tota

l Sod

ium

mg/

L20

0 A

O0.

19.

65.

919

.518

.278

.088

.8To

tal P

otas

sium

mg/

L0.

11.

71.

51.

61.

63.

84.

1To

tal C

alci

umm

g/L

0.1

18.6

28.2

40.5

35.7

169

177

Tota

l Mag

nesi

umm

g/L

0.1

2.1

1.6

3.1

2.7

14.0

13.7

Tota

l Pho

spho

rous

mg/

L0.

020.

03<0

.02

<0.0

20.

06<0

.02

<0.0

2B

icar

b. A

lkal

inity

(as

CaC

O3)

mg/

L5

5770

117

109

106

88C

arb.

Alk

alin

ity (a

s C

aCO

3)m

g/L

10<1

0<1

0<1

0<1

0<1

0<1

0H

ydro

xide

mg/

L5

<5<5

<5<5

<5<5

Cal

cula

ted

TDS

mg/

L50

0 A

O1

9111

116

214

584

384

8H

ardn

ess

mg/

L55

.177

.011

410

048

049

8La

ngel

ier I

ndex

(@20

C)

NA

-0.7

6-0

.39

0.11

-0.0

20.

590.

37La

ngel

ier I

ndex

(@ 4

C)

NA

-1.0

8-0

.71

-0.2

1-0

.34

0.27

0.05

Sat

urat

ion

pH (@

20C

)N

A8.

568.

307.

938.

017.

437.

49S

atur

atio

n pH

(@ 4

C)

NA

8.88

8.62

8.25

8.33

7.75

7.81

Ani

on S

umm

e/L

1.50

2.15

2.95

2.62

12.9

12.5

Cat

ion

sum

me/

L2.

151.

923.

182.

9713

.214

.0%

Diff

eren

ce/ I

on B

alan

ce (N

S)

%17

.75.

73.

76.

31.

45.

4 A

lum

inum

ug/L

100

OG

AO

528

8070

233

2549

1419

6<5

95

Ant

imon

yug

/L6

210

119

10<2

<25

54

4 A

rsen

icug

/L10

231

2714

98

815

73

3 B

ariu

mug

/L10

005

5526

5144

5154

2625

1516

Ber

ylliu

mug

/L2

<2<2

<2<2

<2<2

<2<2

<2<2

Bis

mut

hug

/L2

<2<2

<2<2

<2<2

<2<2

<2<2

Bor

onug

/L50

005

1211

1111

4343

8395

9393

Cad

miu

mug

/L5

0.01

7<0

.017

<0.0

170.

037

0.03

3<0

.017

<0.0

170.

024

<0.0

170.

021

0.02

1 C

hrom

ium

ug/L

501

6<1

1<1

1<1

3<1

<1<1

Cob

alt

ug/L

13

<12

<1<1

<1<1

<12

2 C

oppe

rug

/L10

00 A

O1

3<2

3<2

17

<24

<22

2 Ir

onug

/L30

0 A

O50

7080

7414

2012

499

731

<50

3400

<50

187

142

Lea

dug

/L10

0.5

7.9

<0.5

3.1

<0.5

7.1

<0.5

1.5

<0.5

<0.5

<0.5

Man

gane

seug

/L50

AO

232

079

178

3578

181

8112

487

166

172

Mol

ybde

num

ug/L

23

32

<22

<27

710

10 N

icke

lug

/L2

3<2

3<2

<2<2

<2<2

99

Sel

eniu

mug

/L10

1<1

<11

<11

<1<1

1<1

<1 S

ilver

ug/L

0.1

<0.1

<0.1

<0.1

<0.1

<0.1

<0.1

<0.1

<0.1

<0.1

<0.1

Stro

ntiu

mug

/L5

9194

147

151

288

306

1930

1900

1960

1990

Tha

llium

ug/L

0.1

<0.1

<0.1

<0.1

<0.1

<0.1

<0.1

<0.1

<0.1

<0.1

<0.1

Tin

ug/L

2<2

<2<2

<2<2

<2<2

<2<2

<2 T

itani

umug

/L2

92<2

7<2

<2<2

157

88

Ura

nium

ug/L

200.

14.

42.

91.

61.

32.

62.

54.

44.

04.

14.

5 V

anad

ium

ug/L

24

<2<2

<2<2

<2<2

<2<2

<2 Z

inc

ug/L

5000

AO

512

<510

<522

21<5

13<5

2116

Notes:

1. R

DL

mea

ns re

porte

d de

tect

ion

limit.

3. A

ny e

xcee

danc

e of

a g

uide

line

valu

e is

sho

wn

in b

old

with

yel

low

sha

ding

.

4815

128

RD

L

2. C

CM

E g

uide

lines

refe

r to

the

drin

king

wat

er g

uide

lines

issu

ed b

y th

e C

anad

ian

Cou

ncil

of M

inis

ters

of E

nviro

nmen

t, as

det

aile

d on

the

AG

AT

lab

repo

rts: O

G is

Ope

ratio

nal G

uide

line;

AO

is A

esth

etic

Obj

ectiv

e; a

nd a

ll ot

hers

are

Max

imum

A

ccep

tabl

e C

once

ntra

tions

.

775-

TH1

09/3

0/20

1347

9134

7

775-

TH2

10/0

1/20

1347

9617

2

775-

TH5

10/0

8/20

1348

1727

5Pa

ram

eter

Uni

tsC

CM

EG

uide

lines

775-

TH3

775-

TH4

10/0

7/20

13

Tabl

e 6

Ste

p te

st d

ata

and

calc

ulat

ed v

alue

s fo

r spe

cific

cap

acity

and

wel

l effi

cien

cy.

Step

Dur

atio

nFl

ow R

ate

Wat

er L

evel

Dra

wdo

wn

Spec

ific

Cap

acity

Wel

lEf

ficie

ncy

(min

s)(L

pm)

(m b

toc)

(m)

(Lpm

/m)

(%)

145

1.9

6.40

1.81

1.07

92.8

261

3.2

9.33

4.74

0.68

88.5

362

5.5

11.1

36.

540.

8481

.84

387.

913

.43

8.83

0.89

75.9

511

014

.829

.65

25.0

50.

5962

.51

603.

84.

162.

531.

5094

.32

617.

46.

705.

071.

4689

.53

6115

.112

.64

11.0

11.

3780

.64

9822

.921

.24

19.6

11.

1773

.31

604.

93.

911.

792.

71--

-2

618.

35.

793.

672.

26--

-3

7718

.58.

996.

872.

69--

-4

6222

.210

.67

8.55

2.60

---

550

56.0

22.4

020

.28

2.76

---

612

166

.041

.45

39.3

31.

75--

-1

604.

08.

728.

300.

4868

.82

108

7.7

19.9

719

.66

0.39

53.4

313

515

.057

.39

56.9

60.

2637

.01

933.

38.

938.

510.

3967

.72

172

7.6

28.4

128

.26

0.27

47.6

315

011

.755

.64

55.1

30.

2137

.1Note:

Test

wel

l TH

3 w

as d

evel

opin

g du

ring

the

step

dra

wdo

wn

test

. Mea

ning

ful v

alue

s fo

r wel

l effi

cien

cy c

ould

not

be

calc

ulat

ed.

TH4

TH5

TH1

Wel

l ID

Step

TH2

TH3

Tabl

e 7

Cal

cula

ted

valu

es fo

r tra

nsm

issi

vity

, hyd

raul

ic c

ondu

ctiv

ity, a

nd s

tora

tivity

.

(m2 /s

)(m

/s)

TH1

Ste

p Te

stD

raw

dow

n D

ata

Coo

per-

Jaco

b S

tep

Test

2.15

× 10

-61.

95×

10-8

---

TH2

Ste

p Te

stD

raw

dow

n D

ata

Coo

per-

Jaco

b S

tep

Test

5.43

× 10

-64.

93×

10-8

---

Ste

p Te

stD

raw

dow

n D

ata

Coo

per-

Jaco

b S

tep

Test

5.09

× 1

0-64.

28×

10-8

---

24-H

our P

ump

Test

Dra

wdo

wn

Dat

aC

oope

r-Ja

cob

Tim

e D

raw

dow

n8.

05 ×

10-6

6.77

× 10

-8--

-24

-Hou

r Pum

p Te

stD

raw

dow

n D

ata

Thei

s3.

77 ×

10-6

3.17

× 10

-8--

-24

-Hou

r Pum

p Te

stR

ecov

ery

Dat

aTh

eis

Rec

over

y1.

11 ×

10-5

9.33

× 10

-8--

-24

-Hou

r Pum

p Te

stO

bser

vatio

n W

ell T

H2

Thei

s1.

68 ×

10-4

1.41

× 10

-60.

0017

924

-Hou

r Pum

p Te

stO

bser

vatio

n W

ell T

H2

Coo

per-

Jaco

b Ti

me

Dra

wdo

wn

1.71

× 10

-41.

44×

10-6

---

TH4

Ste

p Te

stD

raw

dow

n D

ata

Coo

per-

Jaco

b S

tep

Test

1.51

× 1

0-61.

38×

10-8

---

TH5

Ste

p Te

stD

raw

dow

n D

ata

Coo

per-

Jaco

b S

tep

Test

9.05

× 10

-78.

45×

10-9

---

Notes:

1. T

he C

oope

r-Ja

cob

Ste

p Te

st m

etho

d is

bas

ed o

n B

irsoy

and

Sum

mer

s, 1

980.

TH3

Type

of T

est

Wel

l ID

Dat

a Se

t Use

dM

etho

dTr

ansm

issi

vity

Hyd

raul

icC

ondu

ctiv

itySt

orat

ivity

Tabl

e 8

Ran

ge o

f pot

entia

lly s

usta

inab

le w

ell y

ield

s ba

sed

on th

e Q

safe

and

Q20

met

hods

.

(m2 /m

in)

(m2 /s

)(m

)(L

pm)

(Lpm

)TH

1S

tep

Test

Dra

wdo

wn

Dat

aC

oope

r-Ja

cob

Ste

p Te

st5.

24×

10-4

2.15

× 10

-660

313.

7TH

2S

tep

Test

Dra

wdo

wn

Dat

aC

oope

r-Ja

cob

Ste

p Te

st1.

15×

10-3

5.43

× 10

-660

699.

3S

tep

Test

Dra

wdo

wn

Dat

aC

oope

r-Ja

cob

Ste

p Te

st1.

93 ×

10-3

5.09

× 10

-660

116

8.8

24-H

our P

ump

Test

Dra

wdo

wn

Dat

aC

oope

r-Ja

cob

Tim

e D

raw

dow

n--

-8.

05 ×

10-6

60--

-13

.924

-Hou

r Pum

p Te

stD

raw

dow

n D

ata

Thei

s--

-3.

77 ×

10-6

60--

-6.

524

-Hou

r Pum

p Te

stR

ecov

ery

Dat

aTh

eis

Rec

over

y--

-1.

11 ×

10-5

60--

-19

.124

-Hou

r Pum

p Te

stO

bser

vatio

n W

ell T

H2

Thei

s--

-1.

68 ×

10-4

60--

-28

924

-Hou

r Pum

p Te

stO

bser

vatio

n W

ell T

H2

Coo

per-

Jaco

b Ti

me

Dra

wdo

wn

---

1.71

× 10

-460

---

294

TH4

Ste

p Te

stD

raw

dow

n D

ata

Coo

per-

Jaco

b S

tep

Test

2.25

× 1

0-41.

51×

10-6

6014

2.6

TH5

Ste

p Te

stD

raw

dow

n D

ata

Coo

per-

Jaco

b S

tep

Test

1.79

× 10

-49.

05×

10-7

6011

1.6

Notes:

1. T

he C

oope

r-Ja

cob

Ste

p Te

st m

etho

d is

bas

ed o

n B

irsoy

and

Sum

mer

s, 1

980.

3. T

he a

vaila

ble

draw

dow

n is

a re

com

men

ded

valu

e by

Fra

cflo

w.

QSa

feQ

20

TH3

Spec

ific

Cap

acity

2. B

ulk

aver

age

valu

es o

f spe

cific

cap

acity

sho

wn

abov

e w

ere

calc

ulat

ed u

sing

the

Spe

cific

Cap

acity

Met

hod

in th

e A

quife

rTes

t sof

twar

e. T

hat m

etho

d us

es th

e av

erag

e ra

te o

f dis

char

ge

from

from

all

ste p

s du

ring

the

step

dra

wdo

wn

test

.

Ava

ilabl

eD

raw

dow

nW

ell I

DTy

pe o

f Tes

tD

ata

Set U

sed

Met

hod

Tran

smis

sivi

ty

APPENDIX 2

Borehole and Well Construction Logs

��

��

��

��

��

��

� ��!�

! ��

� ��

� ��

" �� "

��

��

� ��

��

�! ��

�� !

#� ��#

�! �� "

�"! ��

�� !

## ��

��# ��"�

� ��

� ��!"

# ��"�

��

!� ��#�

$��%

&��'��'��!� ��#"

��'��(��)�')��

"�� "

!�� **��+��,�

-��)��+� "��

""��.��/

"

�"

��',��)

��'��(�'��(��)

��-��

�01�213��-��4�**�"

5��,,%�6�7'��

8%��2��,��'

�� '%

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��

��

8�'��'��,��"��

��

�"

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

&��+��%

&��'��'��

'�+��

'��

'�+��

'��

'�+�,��,

'��

"

�� **��+��-��)�

��+,��(��)��'��+

��'�� "��

��

��5��17��!��

-��,�+-��9

�"��

��

� ��

��

� �� !��

"��

��#�

��

$ ��

��%

��

��

��

��

5��,,%�6�7'��

8%��2��,��'

�� '%

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

!� ��#

� ��

� ��"�

!� ��#

� ��!

!# ��

# ��"�

! ��

! ��

! ��!�

!� ��#"

!" ��""

� ��

!� ��#

� ��!

!� ��#

! ��

! ��

� ��"�

� ��"�

!� ��!

" �� "

! ��

� ��

�� !

�"

!�� **��+��,�

-��)��+� "��

""��.��/

�"

#"

!"

'�+��

'��

$��%

&��'��'��

&��+��%

&��'��'��

�""

��

� ��

��

� �� !��

"��

��#�

��

$ ��

��%

��

��

��

��

5��,,%�6�7'��

8%��2��,��'

�� '%

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

&��+��%

&��'��'��# ��

� ��

� ��"�

!! ��

� ��

# ��"�

!" ��""

# ��"�

!# ��

� ��

�# ��

!# ��

! ��

� ��!"

!� ��#

� ��"�

!� ��#

!� ��#"

��

#� ��

!� ��#

$��%�� !

!� ��#"��1,+�'��+��%��

� ��

!! ��

!� ��#�

!�� **��+��,�

-��)��+� "��

""��.��/

��"

� "

� "

��"

$��%

&��'��'��

&��+��%

&��'��'��

��"

��

� ��

��

� �� !��

"��

��#�

��

$ ��

&��%

��

��

��

��

5��,,%�6�7'��

8%��2��,��'

�� '%

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

!! ��

! ��

!" ��""

�� !#

" ��""

� ��

!� ��#

!" ��""

!! ��

!� ��#�

!� ��#"

� ��"�

!" ��""

� ��!�

!� ��#

��

� ��!"

� ��!"

�� !�

!� ��#

�� !

# ��"�

!# ��

!" ��""

!� ��#

&��+��%

&��'��'��

$��%

&��'��'��

�!"

��"

:�7�+��(

��1,+��""��

,��#�"�

�8��!��;�4�+

��#�<8

'�+�'��

$��%

&��'��'��

'�+�=��>

!�� **��+��,�

-��)��+� "��

""��.��/

��"

�#"

�""

��

� ��

��

� �� !��

"��

��#�

��

$ ��

'��%

��

��

��

��

5��,,%�6�7'��

8%��2��,��'

�� '%

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

!� ��!

!� ��#

# ��"�

�� !�

� ��

�� !#

!� ��#"

�� !#

!! ��

��

�� !

!! ��

�! �� "

�� !#

�# ��

�� !

!� ��#

�� !

�# ��

!� ��#'��+��%��1,+

�� " ��

�# ��

�� !

��

�� !�

� ��

!�� **��+��,�

-��)��+� "��

""��.��/

&��+��%

&��'��'��

$��%

&��'��'��

(��)�'��

��=��>

��"

� "

��"

��"

� "

��

� ��

��

� �� !��

"��

��#�

��

$ ��

*��%

��

��

��

��

5��,,%�6�7'��

8%��2��,��'

�� '%

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

�� !

�� !#

!! ��

�� !

!� ��#"

��

!! ��

�! �� "

��

�� !#

� ��!�

� ��

�# ��

!# ��

��

�"! ��

!� ��#

�� !�

! ��

(��)�'�� !�

!� ��#�

� ��

! ��

!! ��

� �� "

!�� **��+��,�

-��)��+� "��

""��.��/

'�+�=��>

'�+�=��>

$��%

&��'��'��

$��%��

&��+��%��

&��+��%

&��'��'��

��"

�#"

'�+�=��>

��"

�""

�!"

'��+��%�� 1,+

��"��

,��!

�8��! �;�4�+��

�� <8

��

� ��

��

� �� !��

"��

��#�

��

$ ��

+��%

��

��

��

��

5��,,%�6�7'��

8%��2��,��'

�� '%

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

�"� ��

!� ��#"

!� ��!

��

�� !#

� ��!�

!� ��!

�" �� "

��

� ��'��+��%��#��

��" ��

�"� ��

�� !#

!# ��

� ��

# ��

!# ��

�� !�

� ��

�! ��

�! ��

��

�� !

� ��

�� !

$��%

&��'��'��

��"

&��+��%

&��'��'��

��"

��"

!�� **��+��,�

-��)��+� "��

""��.��/

� "

� "

'�+�=��>

��

� ��

��

� �� !��

"��

��#�

��

$ ��

,��%

��

��

��

��

5��,,%�6�7'��

8%��2��,��'

�� '%

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

� ��

� ��

��

�� !#

#� ��"'��+��%�� 1,+

�� !" ��

�� "

� ��!"

!! ��

��

�� !#

��

� ��!"

�� !

�� !

� ��

# ��!

! ��

�" �� "

�"� ��

�� "�

�� !�

#� ��

#! ��

! ��

��

(��)�'��

��'�+

��

,%��

(��)��

��%

+��'��

'��

&��+��%

&��'��'��

&��+��%��

�!"

$��%

&��'��'��

$��%��

� �+��(

��#�1,+�� ""��,��

��!#��8

��;�4�+

�� <8

""

!�� **��+��,�

-��)��+� "��

""��.��/

��"

��"'�+�'��

'�+�=��>

��'�+

,%��

'�+�=��>

��'�+

,%��&��+��%

&��'��'��

�#"

��

� ��

��

� �� !��

"��

��#�

��

$ ��

%��%

��

��

��

��

��

��

#� ��#

�� "

�� "�#�

!� ��#

��# "��!

�� "�#�

� ��

=��> �� "�#

�! �� "

#� ��"

�! �� "

#! ��

�! "��

��" "� �

� �

� �

� �

� �

#" ��

!# ��

!� ��#

��

! ��

�� **��+��-��)�

��+,��(��)��'��+

��'�� "��

��

��',��)

��'��(�'��(��)

��-��

�01�213��-��4�**

��'��(��)�')��

"��

!�� **��+��,�

-��)��+� "��

""��.��/

&��+��%

&��'��'��

$��%

&��'��'��

$��%��

$��%

&��'��'��

&��+��%

&��'��'��

"

"

5��,,%�6�7'��

8%��2��,��'

�� '%

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��

��

8�'��'��,��

��

�"

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

�"

�"

"

��5��17� �!��

-��,�+-��9

�"��

��

� ��

��

� �� !��

"��

��#�

��

$ ��

��%

��

��

��

��

5��,,%�6�7'��

8%��2��,��'

�� '%

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

� ��

� �� "

�" ��

� ��

��

�! ��

! ��

'�+�=��>

��'�+ � ��

!# ��

$��%

&��'��'��!� ��!

�� !�

'�+

'��'�� !�

�� !

!! ��

� ��"�

!! ��

!� ��#�

! ��

�" ��

'�+�'�� !! ��

� ��!"

�� !�

!! ��

��

$��%��

'�+�=��>

��'��'

&��+��%

&��'��'��

&��+��%

&��'��'��

&��+��%��

&��+��%

&��'��'��

&��+��%��

�"

!�� **��+��,�

-��)��+� "��

""��.��/

�"

#"

!"

�""

��

� ��

��

� �� !��

"��

��#�

��

$ ��

��%

��

��

��

��

5��,,%�6�7'��

8%��2��,��'

�� '%

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

$��%�� !# ��

&��+��%��'�+

'��'��" ��

� ��

!! ��

&��+��%

&��'��'��!� ��#�

!� ��!

'��)��-�

�� !�

� ��!

!� ��#�

� ��

!� ��#

$��%

&��'��'��!� ��#

� ��"�

! ��

&��+��%

&��'��'��

�! ��

�� !�

��

!" ��""

$��%

&��'��'�� ! ��

#� ��"

�" �� "

� ��

�� !

&��+��%

&��'��'��" �� "

��"

��"

!�� **��+��,�

-��)��+� "��

""��.��/

��"

� "

� "

��

� ��

��

� �� !��

"��

��#�

��

$ ��

&��%

��

��

��

��

5��,,%�6�7'��

8%��2��,��'

�� '%

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

&��+��%

&��'��'��!! ��

�" ��

" "�""

" "�""

# ��

!� ��#�

!� ��#"

!� ��#"

!� ��!

! ��

!� ��#"

�# ��

�# ��

�! ��

!! ��

#! ��

�" �� "

��

��

�# ��

��

��

�! �� "

� ��

&��+��%

&��'��'�� !

��1,+�'��+��%��

�"" ��

:�7�+��

��(�� !�1,+��!"��

,��#

�8��;�4�+

�� <8

&��+��%

&��'��'��

!�� **��+��,�

-��)��+� "��

""��.��/

��"

�#"

�""

��"

$��%

&��'��'��

$��%

&��'��'��

$��%��

$��%

&��'��'��

'�+

'��'

'�+

'��'

�!"

��

� ��

��

� �� !��

"��

��#�

��

$ ��

'��%

��

��

��

��

5��,,%�6�7'��

8%��2��,��'

�� '%

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

&��+��%

&��'��'��#� ��"

$��%

&��'��'��! ��

��

# ��

$��%�� ! "�#

�� !

&��+��%

&��'��'��

��

!# ��

$��%�� '�+�=��> � ��

�# ��

'�+

'��'��

!# ��

� ��"�

$��%

&��'��'��

�� !

'�+�'�� !! ��

�" ��

��

�" ��'��+��%�� 1,+

�� " ��

#� ��#

�� !

��

��

�� !

!�� **��+��,�

-��)��+� "��

""��.��/

��"

� "

� "

��"

��"

��

� ��

��

� �� !��

"��

��#�

��

$ ��

*��%

��

��

��

��

5��,,%�6�7'��

8%��2��,��'

�� '%

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

��

�" ��

�" �� "

�� !

!# ��

# ��!

!� ��#�

!� ��!

�" �� "

!� ��#

�� !

!! ��

�� !

�� !�

'�+�'�� " �� "

#� ��

�� !

�# ��

�� !

� ��!�

��

��

��

�! �� "

� ��

&��+��%

&��'��'��

$��%

&��'��'��

$��%��

$��%

&��'��'��

'�+

'��'

'�+

'��'

'��+��%�� 1,+

��"��

,��

�8�� ;�4�+

�� <8

'�+

'��'

!�� **��+��,�

-��)��+� "��

""��.��/

��"

�#"

��"

�""

�!"

��

� ��

��

� �� !��

"��

��#�

��

$ ��

+��%

��

��

��

��

5��,,%�6�7'��

8%��2��,��'

�� '%

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

�"# ��"

�" �� "

�" �� "

'�+

'��'! ��

�� !

��

�� !�

!� ��!

�� !

'�+�'�� !� ��!

� ��

�� !

�� !�

'�+

'��'�� !�

�# ��

#" ��

�# ��

�� !

�� !#

��

�� "�#�

!� ��#

�� !

�# ��

$��%��'�+

'��'�" ��

��"

!�� **��+��,�

-��)��+� "��

""��.��/

� "

� "

��"

��"

&��+��%

&��'��'��

$��%

&��'��'��

$��%��

$��%

&��'��'��'��+��%��1,+

��"��

,��

�8��!�;�4�+��

��!�<8

��

� ��

��

� �� !��

"��

��#�

��

$ ��

,��%

��

��

��

��

5��,,%�6�7'��

8%��2��,��'

�� '%

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

$��%

&��'��'��

�# ��

�" �� "

#� ��"

�" �� "

�" ��

��

�� !

� ��

#� ��

&��+��%

&��'��'��#� ��

�� !

� ��

$��%

&��'��'�� !

�# ��

&��+��%

&��'��'��" "�""

" "�""

�"" ��"

$��%

&��'��'��#� ��

#� ��"

��

#� ��"

�# ��

# ��!

�" ��

�!"

� �+��

��(��1,+�� ""��

,�� "

�8��;�4�+

�� <8

""

!�� **��+��,�

-��)��+� "��

""��.��/

��"

�#"

'��+��%��1,+

��!"��

,��

�8��#��;�4�+

�� #�<8

��"

��

� ��

��

� �� !��

"��

��#�

��

$ ��

%��%

��

��

��

��

��

#� ��

�"� ��

�� "�#�

�"� ��

�!� "��

�"� ��

�� "�

�� "�#�

� "��

� "�##

�� !

�� #

�"� ��"

#� ��!

# ��!

# �� "

�! ��

�"� ��

�# ��

!" ��""

� ��

# ��"�

� �

� �

!�� **��

�� "��

"�� .��/

��

"�� "

�"

��

��

��

�� 4�**�"

�� !

"��

"

��!��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

"

��

��

#��

� �

�"

�� **��

��

�� "��

� �

"� ��

��$��%��"� ��

��9

�"��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

$��!�&�%��

#!��

�� !

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��& ��

�� -��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

��

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

$��!�&�%��

#!��

�� !

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

�"! ��

��

� ��!

!# ��

��

!� ��#�

!� ��#�

� ��!�

!� ��!

!� ��#�

!� ��#"

" �� "

��

� ��"�

!� ��# � ��!��

�" ��

�� !#

! ��

!� ��#�

� ��"�

! ��

�� !

!� ��#"

�� !#

�� !#

! �� !��

�"" ��

�� !

"��

�"

�""

!"

�"

!�� **��

�� "��

"�� .��/

��

'��(

)�� !��

#"

��& ��

�� -��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

��

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

$��!�&�%��

#!��

�� !

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

�� !

�� !

�# ��

�" ��

�� !#

!� ��#

�" ��

� �

� �

!" ��""� ��!��

��" ��

�� !�

!! ��

!# ��

!� ��#

!� ��#"

! ��

!� ��#

!� ��!

� ��!"

!� ��# � ��!��

� " ��

� �

� �

!� ��#

!! ��

��

��"

��"

!�� **��

�� "��

"�� .��/

��"

� "

� "

�� !

"��

��& ��

�� -��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

&��

��

��

��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

��

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

$��!�&�%��

#!��

�� !

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

� ��

�! ��

� ��"�

��

# ��"�� !��

�!" ��

!� ��!

! ��

!� ��#�

! ��

!" ��""

� ��

� ��

!" ��""

!� ��#

� ��!� ��!��

��" ��

�! �� "

! ��

��

! ��

�� !� ��#"

! ��

!� ��#�

)�� !�� "�

��

!� ��!�� !��

�"" ��

�� !

"��

)�� !��

��

��

��

)�� !

"��

�� !

"��

�!"

��"

�� !

"��

��"

�#"

�""

!�� **��

�� "��

"�� .��/

��& ��

�� -��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

'��

��

��

��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

��

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

$��!�&�%��

#!��

�� !

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

� ��

� ��!"

�" �� "

�� !

�! ��

�� !

�" ��

�� !

! ��

��"��!��

��" ��

� ��

��

� ��

)�� !�� !

!# ��

!" ��""

!� ��#�

!! ��

� ��

!� ��#

�" ��

�" ��

�� !#

� ��!"

� �� "

��"

��"

�"��!��

� "��

)�� !��

�� !

"��

��!

"��

��"

!�� **��

�� "��

"�� .��/

�� !

"�� "

��& ��

�� -��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

*��

��

��

��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

��

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

$��!�&�%��

#!��

�� !

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

�# ��

�# ��

!" ��""

��

! �� !��

�!" ��

## ��

�� !

�� !

�� !

�" ��

# ��"�

�# ��

� ��

�� !

� ��!�� !��

��" ��

#� ��

��

�! ��

!� ��#

)�� !�� !#

!" ��""

�" �� "

��

�� !

!� ��!��!��

�"" ��

��"

�#"

��"

�""

�!"

!�� **��

�� "��

"�� .��/

�� !

"��

�� !

"��

��& ��

�� -��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

+��

��

��

��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

��

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

$��!�&�%��

#!��

�� !

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

#� ��

�# ��

�" �� "

� ��

�� !#

�" ��

��

� ��!�

��

�! �� !��!��

��" ��

�� "�#

�# ��

�# ��

!� ��!

��

� ��!

!� ��#

��

�� !

�" �� "��!��

� " ��

�"! ��

�� !

��

�" ��

!� ��#

�� !

"��

!�� **��

�� "��

"�� .��/

� "

��"

��"

� "

��"

��& ��

�� -��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

,��

��

��

��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

��

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

$��!�&�%��

#!��

�� !

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

� ��!�

� ��!"

! ��

�� !

!� ��#�

�" �� "��!��

�!" ��

!# ��

!� ��#

�" ��

!� ��#"

�" ��

�� !�

� ��

!" ��""

# ��"�� !��

��" ��

�� !

��

!" ��""

" �� "

� ��"�

� ��#

��!�

" �� "

!� ��#�

� ��#

�#"

��"

�� !

"��

�!"

�"�� ""��

��*��

��!"��

�"��

� ��

�"�� ""

!�� **��

�� "��

"�� .��/

��"

��& ��

�� -��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

%��

��

��

��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

��

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

$��!�&�%��

#!��

�� !

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

�� "

� " "��"

� ��!

! ��

!" ��""

� ��

!� ��#

" �� "

!" ��""

!" ��""

" "�""

" "�""

" "�""

" "�""

" "�""

" "�""

" "�""

" "�""

" "�""

" "�"" "

�"

�� !

"��

�"

�"

��+��!�

�#�+��?�4��

��+��,#

� �� "��

��*��

��

��!��

�"��!��

#��9

%��9��

��9��!��

�"�� "��

��*��

��

� ��!��

�#��!��

��+�� !��#

+��" �?�4��+

��,#

��& ��

�� -��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�! �!�

��

��#�� !�

�� "�#

�! ��

�"� ��

��" ��""

#! ��

#� ��

�" �� "

��" "�#�

�� "�##

#� ��

#� ��#

## ��

�� "

� ��

!� ��#

!! ��

�" ��

��

! ��

�� **��

��(��'��

��'�� "��

��

��'��

��'��(�'��(��

��

�01�21 ��4�**

��'��(��'��

"��

!�� **��

�� "��

""��.��/

"

"

$��%�6�7�'��

8%��2��'

�� '�%

��

&��'��

��'��%

&��'��'��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��

��

8�'��'��

��

�"

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

�"

�"

"

��$��1�7��!��

��"9

�"��

��' ��

� ��

��

� �� !��

"��

��#�

��

$ ��

��%

��

��

��

��

$��%�6�7�'��

8%��2��'

�� '�%

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

!! ��

� �� "

� ��

��

� ��#�

!� ��#

� ��

� ��"�

� ��!�

!# ��

��

� ��!�

!" ��""

!� ��#�

� ��

!� ��#

# ��"�

� ��

�" ��

�� !

!! ��

! ��

�� !

� ��

��1��'��%��

�"" ��

!�� **��

�� "��

""��.��/

�"

#"

!"

��'��%

&��'��'��

$��%��

��'��%

&��'��'��

��%

&��'��'��

��'��%

&��'��'��

�"

�""

$��%��

��' ��

� ��

��

� �� !��

"��

��#�

��

$ ��

��%

��

��

��

��

$��%�6�7�'��

8%��2��'

�� '�%

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

�� !�

� ��"�

# ��"�

! ��

!� ��!

��

��

� ��!�

� ��

!� ��#"��1��'��%��

��" ��

��

�� !

�" ��

! ��

!� ��!

!� ��#"

!" ��""

� ��!�

!� ��!

!� ��#��1��'��%��

� " ��

!! ��

!� ��#"

! ��

! ��

��

!�� **��

�� "��

""��.��/

��"

��'��%

&��'��'��

��"

��"

� "

� "

$��%��

��'��%

&��'��'��

��%

&��'��'��

��' ��

� ��

��

� �� !��

"��

��#�

��

$ ��

&��%

��

��

��

��

$��%�6�7�'��

8%��2��'

�� '�%

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

! ��

� ��

" �� "

� ��"�

" �� "��1��'��%��

�!" ��

�" ��

# ��

! ��

! ��

� ��!"

!# ��

��

!� ��#

!# ��

!� ��#"��1��'��%��

��" ��

#� ��

� ��!"

�# ��

�� !

�� !#

!� ��#�

�" ��

��

!# ��

� �� 1��'��%��

�"" ��

!�� **��

�� "��

""��.��/

��"

�#"

�""

��"

�!"

��'��%

&��'��'��

$��%��

��'��%

&��'��'��

��%

&��'��'��

��'��%

&��'��'��

��' ��

� ��

��

� �� !��

"��

��#�

��

$ ��

'��%

��

��

��

��

$��%�6�7�'��

8%��2��'

�� '�%

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

�"� ��

�� !

�� !#

� ��

!� ��#

�" ��

� ��!�

! ��

��

! �� 1��'��%��

��" ��

#! ��

� ��!�

� ��

��

��

��

�� !

� ��!�

!! ��

�� 1��'��%��

� " ��

#� ��#

!� ��#"

# ��

�" ��

��%

&��'��'��!! ��

!�� **��

�� "��

""��.��/

��"

� "

� "

��"

��"

��'��%

&��'��'��

��%

&��'��'��

$��%��

��' ��

� ��

��

� �� !��

"��

��#�

��

$ ��

*��%

��

��

��

��

$��%�6�7�'��

8%��2��'

�� '�%

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

� ��

!! ��

� ��!

!� ��#

! �� 1��'��%��

�!" ��

�� "

!# ��

!# ��

�� !#

�� !

�" �� "

�# ��

�� !

�� 1��'��%��

��" ��

�! �� "

#� ��

�" ��

! ��

! ��

! ��

� ��

�! �� "

��

�! �� "

�� 1��'��%��

�"" ��

!�� **��

�� "��

""��.��/

��"

�#"

��"

�""

�!"

��%

&��'��'��

��' ��

� ��

��

� �� !��

"��

��#�

��

$ ��

+��%

��

��

��

��

$��%�6�7�'��

8%��2��'

�� '�%

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

#" ��

��

� ��#�

�" ��

! ��

� ��

��

�# ��

�� !

�" �� 1��'��%��

��" ��

�� "

!� ��#"

!# ��

� ��

! ��

� ��

�� !

��

� ��!"

�� 1��'��%��

� " ��

��

� ��!

��%

'��# ��

! ��

! ��

��"

��"

!�� **��

�� "��

""��.��/

� "

� "

��"

��%

&��'��'��

$��%��

��%

&��'��'��

$��%��

��%

&��'��'��

��' ��

� ��

��

� �� !��

"��

��#�

��

$ ��

,��%

��

��

��

��

$��%�6�7�'��

8%��2��'

�� '�%

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

� ��

�� !�

!! ��

� ��

��

#� ��#�"�1��'��%��

�!" ��

�� !

� ��!"

�! �� "

!� ��#

��

� ��"�

��

# ��"�

�� !�� 1��'��%��

��" ��

#� ��"

!# ��

� ��!�

��

� ��

#� ��

!# ��

!� ��!

#� ��

�# ��

�!"

""

!�� **��

�� "��

""��.��/

��"

�#"

��"

"�� ""��

��:�(

"��'��!�1��

� ��'��!�1��

�"��'�� 1��

"��'�� 1��

$��%

�� '�� "

��'��

��

�8�.��4 �/��

��%

&��'��'��

��%

&��'��'��

$��%��

��' ��

� ��

��

� �� !��

"��

��#�

��

$ ��

%��%

��

��

��

��

��

� ��

� ��""

� ��

�! �� "

�� "!

��

�! �!�

�� !

� ��

�" �""

� �

�� #�

��

��!�

�� !

�# ��"�

�! ��

�" �""

� ��

� ��!

� ��

� ��

� �� "

� ��!

��4��

��

��

��

��9��"��

�"

�"

"

"

��

��

�"

!��#

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

�� **��

��

��"��

� �

��

��

��

��!�" ��4�**

#��$��

�

��%��

#��!��

��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

"

��

��4

��

��* ��

�� -��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��%��

#��!��

��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

�# "�!�

!# ��

��$�� !�� ! ��

� �

� �

#" ��

��

&�� !

'��$� �� !� ��#

��

� ��

# ��

" �� "

� ��

� ��"�

��" ��"#

!� ��#

! ��!�

��

� �� "

" �� "

# ��

� ��

! ��

� ��

! ��!� (��

��

&��)��@

��

&��

�"

��4

��

'��$� ��

#"

��

�"��

!�� **��

��"��

�"�� .��/

'��$� ��

!"��

��

��

�"

�""

��* ��

�� -��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��%��

#��!��

��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

��!�

# ��

�" �� "

!� ��!

!� ��#

!! ��

! ��

!! ��

� ��

!� ��#

!" ��""

" �� "

" �� "

! ��

" �� "

��

!� ��!

! ��

!" ��""

!� ��#" (��

��

# ��"�

!# ��

!# ��

!� ��#"� "

��"

� "

'��$� ��

*��@��

��

'��$� ��

��

&��

'��$� ��

��

&��

��)��@

!�� **��

��"��

�"�� .��/

��"

��"

��* ��

�� -��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

&��

��

��

��

��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��%��

#��!��

��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

�# ��

!� ��#�

# ��"�

��

!! �� (��

#! ��

�� !#

� ��!�

�� !�

!� ��!

��

��

�� !�

��

!� ��# ��

��" ��

��

!� ��#

� ��!"

��

��

!# ��

�� !

� ��

! ��

��$

�� !

��

�"" ��

�!"

'��$� ��

�#"

��

&��

�""

��" ��

&��

'��$� ��

!�� **��

��"��

�"�� .��/

��"

��* ��

�� -��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

'��

��

��

��

��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��%��

#��!��

��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

## ��

�! ��

!� ��#"

� ��"�

! ��

!� ��#

! ��

!" ��""

�" ��

�# �� "��

�� !

!� ��#

!# ��

� ��

!� ��!

�" ��

!� ��#"

�� !�

�# ��

!! ��

� ��

�� !#

!" ��""

!� ��#

!" ��""

��"

� "

� "

��"

��"

!�� **��

��"��

�"�� .��/

��

� "��

��

�#��! ��A�4��

��"��B#

��$

��

��

&��

'��$� ��

��

&��

'��$� ��

��

��

��

)��@

��* ��

�� -��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

*��

��

��

��

��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��%��

#��!��

��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

� ��!"

! ��

� ��

�� !

��

�" ��

�! ��

� ��!"

�� !

�� !

� ��

!# ��

# ��"�

�� !#

��

## ��

! ��

�! ��

�� !

�� !

� ��

��

# ��

! ��

!# ��

��"

�#"

��"

�""

�!"

!�� **��

��"��

�"�� .��/

� ��

�!"��

��!

�#�� A�4��

��"��B#

��

��"��

��#

�#��"��A�4��

��"�#�B#

!��

�""��

��

�#�� ! ��A�4��

��B#

'��$� ��

��

&��

'��$� ��

��

&��

'��$� ��

&��

��

&��

��* ��

�� -��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

+��

��

��

��

��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��%��

#��!��

��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

�"" ��"

� ��

� ��

��

��

#� ��#

�� !

��

�� !�

! ��

�"� ��

�� !

� ��

!! ��

��

� �� "

��

!� ��#

!� ��#"

!! ��

#� ��

� ��!"

�! �� "

�! ��

� ��

��"

!��

��"��

��

�#�� #��A�4��

�� B#

��

� "��

��

�#�� #��A�4��

��"�B#

!�� **��

��"��

�"�� .��/

� "

� "

��$

��

��"

��"'��$� ��

&��

'��$� ��

��

&��

��

&��

��* ��

�� -��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

,��

��

��

��

��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��%��

#��!��

��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

�� !

��

��

��

� ��!"

#� ��

�� !�

!# ��

�� !�

�� !

� ��

��

�� !

� ��!

�� !�

#� ��

�# ��

��

�� !

� ��!�

�� !

�! ��

! ��

!# ��

'��$� �� !� ��#"

�#"

��"

��

&��

�!"

� ��

��#�!�� ""��

��"

�#��#"��A�4��

��B#

""

��

�!"��

��#

�#��! ��A�4��

��"�B#

�"�#��

��"��

��"

�#��"��A�4��

��B#

!�� **��

��"��

�"�� .��/

��"

��

&��

'��$� ��

��

&��

'��$� ��

��* ��

�� -��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

%��

��

��

��

��

��

��

'��(�!

��

)�*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��

� !"��

#��

��

$��

��%

��%

��

&��

��%��

#��!��

��

��

��0��

)�*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

'��(�!

��

2�/*+�,�!!��

��-.��/� ��

��

��0��

2�/*+�,�!!��

�� 1!

��

! ��

�"� ��

� ��!�

��

��

��

#� ��

�� !

�" �� "

� ��!"

#��+��

��,�

'��$� �� "

�"

��-��

�#�-��!"��A�4��

��-�� B#

""�� "��

��,��

�"��#��

��#��

� ��#��

"��

��* ��

�� -��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

��

APPENDIX 3

Analytical Reports

CLIENT NAME: FRACFLOW CONSULTANTS INCSUITE D, 2 FIELDING AVENUEDARTMOUTH, NS B3B1E1(902) 468-1317

11 Morris Drive, Unit 122Dartmouth, Nova Scotia

CANADA B3B 1M2TEL (902)468-8718FAX (902)468-8924

http://www.agatlabs.com

Jason Coughtrey, Inorganics SupervisorMICROBIOLOGY ANALYSIS REVIEWED BY:

Josette Landry, Organics SupervisorTRACE ORGANICS REVIEWED BY:

Jason Coughtrey, Inorganics SupervisorWATER ANALYSIS REVIEWED BY:

DATE REPORTED:

PAGES (INCLUDING COVER): 19

Oct 09, 2013

VERSION*: 1

Should you require any information regarding this analysis please contact your client services representative at (902) 468-8718

13X764820AGAT WORK ORDER:

ATTENTION TO: GLENN BURSEY

PROJECT NO: 775

Laboratories (V1) Page 1 of 19

All samples will be disposed of within 30 days following analysis. Please contact the lab if you require additional sample storage time.

AGAT Laboratories is accredited to ISO/IEC 17025 by the Canadian Association for Laboratory Accreditation Inc. (CALA) and/or Standards Council of Canada (SCC) for specific tests listed on the scope of accreditation. AGAT Laboratories (Mississauga) is also accredited by the Canadian Association for Laboratory Accreditation Inc. (CALA) for specific drinking water tests. Accreditations are location and parameter specific. A complete listing of parameters for each location is available from www.cala.ca and/or www.scc.ca. The tests in this report may not necessarily be included in the scope of accreditation.

Association of Professional Engineers, Geologists and Geophysicists of Alberta (APEGGA)Western Enviro-Agricultural Laboratory Association (WEALA)Environmental Services Association of Alberta (ESAA)

Member of:

*NOTES

Results relate only to the items tested and to all the items tested

775-TH1SAMPLE DESCRIPTION:WaterSAMPLE TYPE:

9/30/2013DATE SAMPLED:4791347G / S RDLUnitParameter

<1Fecal Coliform 1MPN/0.1 L

RDL - Reported Detection Limit; G / S - Guideline / StandardComments:


DATE RECEIVED: 2013-10-01

Certificate of Analysis

ATTENTION TO: GLENN BURSEYCLIENT NAME: FRACFLOW CONSULTANTS INC

AGAT WORK ORDER: 13X764820

DATE REPORTED: 2013-10-09

PROJECT NO: 775

Fecal Coliforms by Colilert




CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS (V1)

Certified By:Page 2 of 19

Original signed

campbeh

Original signed



4E. Coli (MPN) 1MPN/100 mL131Total Coliforms (MPN) 1MPN/100 mL








PROJECT NO: 775

Total Coliforms and E.coli (MPN)






Original signed



<1Chloromethane 1ug/L<0.5Vinyl Chloride 0.52ug/L<3Bromomethane 3ug/L<5Chloroethane 5ug/L<5Trichlorofluoromethane (FREON 11) 5ug/L<10Acetone 10ug/L<0.61,1-Dichloroethylene 0.614ug/L

<2Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane) 250ug/L

<11,1-Dichloroethane 1ug/L<1.6cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene 1.6ug/L70Chloroform 1ug/L<21,2-Dichloroethane 25ug/L<11,1,1-Trichloroethane 1ug/L

<0.79Carbon Tetrachloride 0.792ug/L<1Benzene 15ug/L<11,2-Dichloropropane 1ug/L<1Trichloroethylene 15ug/L<1Bromodichloromethane 1ug/L<2cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 2ug/L

<1.6trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene 1.6ug/L<11,1,2-Trichloroethane 1ug/L8Toluene 2ug/L

<102-Hexanone 10ug/L<1trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 1ug/L<1Dibromochloromethane 1ug/L

<0.251,2-Dibromoethane 0.25ug/L<1.6Tetrachloroethylene 1.630ug/L<1Chlorobenzene 180, 30 AOug/L<2Ethylbenzene 22.4 AOug/L<4m,p-Xylene 4ug/L







PROJECT NO: 775

Volatile Organic Compounds in Water






Original signed



<1Bromoform 1ug/L<1Styrene 1ug/L

<0.51,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.5µg/L<11,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 1ug/L<1o-Xylene 1ug/L<11,3-Dichlorobenzene 1ug/L<11,4-Dichlorobenzene 15, 1 AOug/L

<0.71,2-Dichlorobenzene 0.7200, 3 AOug/LAcceptable LimitsUnitSurrogate

88Toluene-d8 % 60-140954-Bromofluorobenzene % 60-140

RDL - Reported Detection Limit; G / S - Guideline / Standard: Refers to NS-CDWQ incl [AO]Comments:







PROJECT NO: 775







Original signed



0.9Dissolved Organic Carbon 0.5mg/L








PROJECT NO: 775

DOC






Original signed



70Dissolved Aluminum 5100 OG AOug/L11Dissolved Antimony 26ug/L27Dissolved Arsenic 210ug/L26Dissolved Barium 51000ug/L<2Dissolved Beryllium 2ug/L<2Dissolved Bismuth 2ug/L11Dissolved Boron 55000ug/L

<0.017Dissolved Cadmium 0.0175000ug/L<1Dissolved Chromium 150ug/L<1Dissolved Cobalt 1ug/L<2Dissolved Copper 21000 AOug/L74Dissolved Iron 50300 AOug/L

<0.5Dissolved Lead 0.510ug/L79Dissolved Manganese 250 AOug/L3Dissolved Molybdenum 2ug/L

<2Dissolved Nickel 2ug/L<1Dissolved Selenium 110ug/L

<0.1Dissolved Silver 0.1ug/L94Dissolved Strontium 5ug/L

<0.1Dissolved Thallium 0.1ug/L<2Dissolved Tin 2ug/L<2Dissolved Titanium 2ug/L2.9Dissolved Uranium 0.120ug/L<2Dissolved Vanadium 2ug/L<5Dissolved Zinc 55000 AOug/L

RDL - Reported Detection Limit; G / S - Guideline / Standard: Refers to NS-CDWQ incl [AO]Comments:4791347 Analysis completed on a filtered sample.







PROJECT NO: 775

Dissolved Metals (FWAL)






Original signed



7.80pH 6.5-8.5 AO7.3Reactive Silica as SiO2 0.5mg/L7Chloride 1250 AOmg/L

<0.1Fluoride 0.11.5mg/L8Sulphate 2500 AOmg/L57Alkalinity 5mg/L<5True Color 515 AOTCU

45.2Turbidity 0.10.1NTU164Electrical Conductivity 1umho/cm

<0.05Nitrate + Nitrite as N 0.05mg/L<0.05Nitrate as N 0.0510mg/L<0.05Nitrite as N 0.051.0mg/L<0.03Ammonia as N 0.03mg/L

0.6Total Organic Carbon 0.5mg/L0.01Ortho-Phosphate as P 0.01mg/L9.6Total Sodium 0.1200 AOmg/L1.7Total Potassium 0.1mg/L18.6Total Calcium 0.1mg/L2.1Total Magnesium 0.1mg/L0.03Total Phosphorous 0.02mg/L57Bicarb. Alkalinity (as CaCO3) 5mg/L

<10Carb. Alkalinity (as CaCO3) 10mg/L<5Hydroxide 5mg/L91Calculated TDS 1500 AOmg/L

55.1Hardness mg/L-0.76Langelier Index (@20C) NA-1.08Langelier Index (@ 4C) NA8.56Saturation pH (@ 20C) NA8.88Saturation pH (@ 4C) NA1.50Anion Sum me/L2.15Cation sum me/L







PROJECT NO: 775

Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) + Fluoride






Original signed



17.7% Difference/ Ion Balance (NS) %2880Total Aluminum 5100 OG AOug/L

10Total Antimony 26ug/L31Total Arsenic 210ug/L55Total Barium 51000ug/L<2Total Beryllium 2ug/L<2Total Bismuth 2ug/L12Total Boron 55000ug/L

<0.017Total Cadmium 0.0175ug/L6Total Chromium 150ug/L3Total Cobalt 1ug/L3Total Copper 11000 AOug/L

7080Total Iron 50300 AOug/L7.9Total Lead 0.510ug/L320Total Manganese 250 AOug/L

3Total Molybdenum 2ug/L3Total Nickel 2ug/L<1Total Selenium 110ug/L

<0.1Total Silver 0.1ug/L91Total Strontium 5ug/L

<0.1Total Thallium 0.1ug/L<2Total Tin 2ug/L92Total Titanium 2ug/L4.4Total Uranium 0.120ug/L4Total Vanadium 2ug/L12Total Zinc 55000 AOug/L








PROJECT NO: 775

Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) + Fluoride






Original signed

4791347 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Dissolved Metals (FWAL) Dissolved Antimony 6 11775-TH14791347 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Dissolved Metals (FWAL) Dissolved Arsenic 10 27775-TH14791347 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Dissolved Metals (FWAL) Dissolved Manganese 50 AO 79775-TH14791347 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) + Fluoride Total Aluminum 100 OG AO 2880775-TH14791347 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) + Fluoride Total Antimony 6 10775-TH14791347 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) + Fluoride Total Arsenic 10 31775-TH14791347 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) + Fluoride Total Iron 300 AO 7080775-TH14791347 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) + Fluoride Total Manganese 50 AO 320775-TH14791347 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) + Fluoride Turbidity 0.1 45.2775-TH1


Guideline Violation


AGAT WORK ORDER: 13X764820PROJECT NO: 775

SAMPLEID GUIDELINE ANALYSIS PACKAGE PARAMETER GUIDEVALUE RESULTSAMPLE TITLE




GUIDELINE VIOLATION (V1) Page 10 of 19

Volatile Organic Compounds in WaterChloromethane 1 4795819 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 123% 60% 140% 112% 60% 140% 88% 60% 140%Vinyl Chloride 1 4795819 < 0.5 < 0.5 0.0% < 0.5 120% 60% 140% 112% 60% 140% 90% 60% 140%Bromomethane 1 4795819 < 3 < 3 0.0% < 3 128% 60% 140% 90% 60% 140% 87% 60% 140%Chloroethane 1 4795819 < 5 < 5 0.0% < 5 76% 60% 140% 104% 60% 140% 107% 60% 140%Trichlorofluoromethane (FREON 11)

1 4795819 < 5 < 5 0.0% < 5 132% 60% 140% 123% 60% 140% 125% 60% 140%

Acetone 1 4795819 < 10 < 10 0.0% < 10 95% 60% 140% 101% 60% 140% 91% 60% 140%1,1-Dichloroethylene 1 4795819 < 0.6 < 0.6 0.0% < 0.6 139% 60% 140% 134% 60% 140% 107% 60% 140%Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane)

1 4795819 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 125% 60% 140% 129% 60% 140% 80% 60% 140%

1,1-Dichloroethane 1 4795819 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 99% 60% 140% 106% 60% 140% 87% 60% 140%cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene 1 4795819 < 1.6 < 1.6 0.0% < 1.6 100% 60% 140% 98% 60% 140% 79% 60% 140%

Chloroform 1 4795819 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 102% 60% 140% 108% 60% 140% 102% 60% 140%1,2-Dichloroethane 1 4795819 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 96% 60% 140% 107% 60% 140% 92% 60% 140%1,1,1-Trichloroethane 1 4795819 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 94% 60% 140% 103% 60% 140% 85% 60% 140%Carbon Tetrachloride 1 4795819 < 0.79 < 0.79 0.0% < 0.79 94% 60% 140% 105% 60% 140% 86% 60% 140%Benzene 1 4795819 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 102% 60% 140% 109% 60% 140% 89% 60% 140%

1,2-Dichloropropane 1 4795819 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 91% 60% 140% 103% 60% 140% 85% 60% 140%Trichloroethylene 1 4795819 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 91% 60% 140% 102% 60% 140% 86% 60% 140%Bromodichloromethane 1 4795819 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 91% 60% 140% 100% 60% 140% 86% 60% 140%cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 1 4795819 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 77% 60% 140% 95% 60% 140% 102% 60% 140%trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene 1 4795819 < 1.6 < 1.6 0.0% < 1.6 102% 60% 140% 108% 60% 140% 88% 60% 140%

1,1,2-Trichloroethane 1 4795819 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 91% 60% 140% 105% 60% 140% 90% 60% 140%Toluene 1 4795819 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 95% 60% 140% 112% 60% 140% 92% 60% 140%2-Hexanone 1 4795819 < 10 < 10 0.0% < 10 87% 60% 140% 98% 60% 140% 90% 60% 140%trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 1 4795819 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 74% 60% 140% 96% 60% 140% 102% 60% 140%Dibromochloromethane 1 4795819 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 85% 60% 140% 99% 60% 140% 89% 60% 140%

1,2-Dibromoethane 1 4795819 < 0.25 < 0.25 0.0% < 0.25 86% 60% 140% 101% 60% 140% 86% 60% 140%Tetrachloroethylene 1 4795819 < 1.6 < 1.6 0.0% < 1.6 118% 60% 140% 105% 60% 140% 84% 60% 140%Chlorobenzene 1 4795819 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 91% 60% 140% 108% 60% 140% 89% 60% 140%Ethylbenzene 1 4795819 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 92% 60% 140% 110% 60% 140% 88% 60% 140%m,p-Xylene 1 4795819 < 4 < 4 0.0% < 4 106% 60% 140% 126% 60% 140% 103% 60% 140%

Bromoform 1 4795819 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 79% 60% 140% 94% 60% 140% 82% 60% 140%Styrene 1 4795819 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 96% 60% 140% 113% 60% 140% 93% 60% 140%1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 1 4795819 < 0.5 < 0.5 0.0% < 0.5 90% 60% 140% 102% 60% 140% 86% 60% 140%1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 1 4795819 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 93% 60% 140% 97% 60% 140% 81% 60% 140%o-Xylene 1 4795819 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 92% 60% 140% 110% 60% 140% 89% 60% 140%

1,3-Dichlorobenzene 1 4795819 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 89% 60% 140% 94% 60% 140% 75% 60% 140%1,4-Dichlorobenzene 1 4795819 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 88% 60% 140% 98% 60% 140% 80% 60% 140%1,2-Dichlorobenzene 1 4795819 < 0.7 < 0.7 0.0% < 0.7 91% 60% 140% 95% 60% 140% 78% 60% 140%



Dup #1 RPD MeasuredValue Recovery Recovery

Quality AssuranceATTENTION TO: GLENN BURSEY

CLIENT NAME: FRACFLOW CONSULTANTS INCPROJECT NO: 775

Trace Organics Analysis

UpperLower

AcceptableLimitsBatchPARAMETER Sample

Id Dup #2UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

MATRIX SPIKEMETHOD BLANK SPIKEDUPLICATERPT Date: Oct 09, 2013 REFERENCE MATERIAL

MethodBlank




QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT (V1) Page 11 of 19


Certified By:






Trace Organics Analysis (Continued)

UpperLower


Id Dup #2UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

UpperLower

AcceptableLimits


MethodBlank






Original signed

Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) + FluoridepH 4795086 6.86 6.73 1.9% < NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120%Reactive Silica as SiO2 1 4783995 7.8 7.9 1.3% < 0.5 104% 80% 120% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120%Chloride 1 4793994 13 11 16.7% < 1 95% 80% 120% 80% 120% 120% 80% 120%Fluoride 1 4793994 0.1 0.1 0.0% < 0.1 99% 80% 120% 80% 120% 91% 80% 120%Sulphate 1 4793994 101 101 0.0% < 2 106% 80% 120% 80% 120% 101% 80% 120%

Alkalinity 4795086 6 <5 0.0% < 5 NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120%True Color 1 4793524 <5 <5 0.0% < 5 105% 80% 120% 80% 120% 80% 120%Turbidity 1 4794142 20.9 19.8 5.4% < 0.1 88% 80% 120% 80% 120% 80% 120%Electrical Conductivity 4795086 40 39 3.0% < 1 NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120%Nitrate as N 1 4793994 < 0.05 < 0.05 0.0% < 0.05 103% 80% 120% 80% 120% 116% 80% 120%

Nitrite as N 1 4793994 <0.05 <0.05 0.0% < 0.05 97% 80% 120% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120%Ammonia as N 1 4794142 <0.03 <0.03 0.0% < 0.03 111% 80% 120% 80% 120% 102% 80% 120%Total Organic Carbon 1 4792070 5.8 5.7 1.7% < 0.5 97% 80% 120% 80% 120% 90% 80% 120%Ortho-Phosphate as P 1 4783995 0.01 0.01 0.0% < 0.01 114% 80% 120% 80% 120% 96% 80% 120%Total Sodium 1004201 38.0 35.3 7.4% < 0.1 120% 80% 120% 120% 80% 120% 91% 70% 130%

Total Potassium 1004201 1.8 1.7 5.7% < 0.1 115% 80% 120% 116% 80% 120% 93% 70% 130%Total Calcium 1004201 218 226 3.6% < 0.1 98% 80% 120% 93% 80% 120% 98% 70% 130%Total Magnesium 1004201 9.0 8.6 4.5% < 0.1 103% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 94% 80% 120%Total Phosphorous 1004201 < 0.02 < 0.02 0.0% < 0.02 99% 80% 120% 98% 80% 120% 88% 70% 130%Bicarb. Alkalinity (as CaCO3) 4795086 6 <5 0.0% < 5 NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120%

Carb. Alkalinity (as CaCO3) 4795086 <10 <10 0.0% < 10 NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120%Hydroxide 4795086 <5 <5 0.0% < 5 NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120%Total Aluminum 1004201 < 5 < 5 0.0% < 5 100% 80% 120% 98% 80% 120% 92% 70% 130%Total Antimony 1004201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 100% 80% 120% 94% 80% 120% 94% 70% 130%Total Arsenic 1004201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 100% 80% 120% 86% 80% 120% 94% 70% 130%

Total Barium 1004201 8 7 13.3% < 5 107% 80% 120% 98% 80% 120% 85% 70% 130%Total Beryllium 1004201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 106% 80% 120% 93% 80% 120% 106% 70% 130%Total Bismuth 1004201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 104% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120% 97% 70% 130%Total Boron 1004201 68 64 6.1% < 5 110% 80% 120% 98% 80% 120% 100% 70% 130%Total Cadmium 1004201 < 0.017 < 0.017 0.0% < 0.017 102% 80% 120% 95% 80% 120% 97% 70% 130%

Total Chromium 1004201 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 99% 80% 120% 102% 80% 120% 87% 70% 130%Total Cobalt 1004201 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 107% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 85% 70% 130%Total Copper 1004201 2 2 0.0% < 1 108% 80% 120% 102% 80% 120% 82% 70% 130%Total Iron 1004201 < 50 < 50 0.0% < 50 100% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 88% 70% 130%Total Lead 1004201 < 0.5 < 0.5 0.0% < 0.5 102% 80% 120% 97% 80% 120% 95% 70% 130%

Total Manganese 1004201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 106% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 84% 70% 130%Total Molybdenum 1004201 3 3 0.0% < 2 99% 80% 120% 89% 80% 120% 104% 70% 130%Total Nickel 1004201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 104% 80% 120% 105% 80% 120% 74% 70% 130%Total Selenium 1004201 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 90% 80% 120% 111% 80% 120% 72% 70% 130%






Water Analysis

UpperLower


Id Dup #2UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

UpperLower

AcceptableLimits


MethodBlank






Total Silver 1004201 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.0% < 0.1 100% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120% 95% 70% 130%

Total Strontium 1004201 1453 1340 8.1% < 5 98% 80% 120% 95% 80% 120% 95% 70% 130%Total Thallium 1004201 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.0% < 0.1 103% 80% 120% 98% 80% 120% 93% 70% 130%Total Tin 1004201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 101% 80% 120% 105% 80% 120% 101% 70% 130%Total Titanium 1004201 12 12 0.0% < 2 112% 80% 120% 112% 80% 120% 97% 70% 130%Total Uranium 1004201 9.0 8.2 9.3% < 0.1 104% 80% 120% 96% 80% 120% 94% 70% 130%

Total Vanadium 1004201 3 3 0.0% < 2 98% 80% 120% 107% 80% 120% 91% 70% 130%Total Zinc 1004201 < 5 < 5 0.0% < 5 107% 80% 120% 109% 80% 120% 81% 70% 130%

Dissolved Metals (FWAL)Dissolved Aluminum 1004201 4791347 70 72 2.8% < 5 100% 80% 120% 98% 80% 120% 109% 70% 130%Dissolved Antimony 1004201 4791347 11 11 0.0% < 2 100% 80% 120% 94% 80% 120% 102% 70% 130%Dissolved Arsenic 1004201 4791347 27 27 0.0% < 2 100% 80% 120% 86% 80% 120% 70% 70% 130%Dissolved Barium 1004201 4791347 26 27 3.8% < 5 107% 80% 120% 98% 80% 120% 105% 70% 130%Dissolved Beryllium 1004201 4791347 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 106% 80% 120% 96% 80% 120% 106% 70% 130%

Dissolved Bismuth 1004201 4791347 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 104% 80% 120% 97% 80% 120% 97% 70% 130%Dissolved Boron 1004201 4791347 11 10 9.5% < 5 110% 80% 120% 98% 80% 120% 109% 70% 130%Dissolved Cadmium 1004201 4791347 < 0.017 < 0.017 0.0% < 0.017 102% 80% 120% 95% 80% 120% 102% 70% 130%Dissolved Chromium 1004201 4791347 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 99% 80% 120% 102% 80% 120% 100% 70% 130%Dissolved Cobalt 1004201 4791347 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 107% 80% 120% 105% 80% 120% 102% 70% 130%

Dissolved Copper 1004201 4791347 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 108% 80% 120% 102% 80% 120% 99% 70% 130%Dissolved Iron 1004201 4791347 74 70 5.6% < 50 100% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 110% 70% 130%Dissolved Lead 1004201 4791347 < 0.5 < 0.5 0.0% < 0.5 102% 80% 120% 97% 80% 120% 106% 70% 130%Dissolved Manganese 1004201 4791347 79 84 6.1% < 2 106% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 101% 70% 130%Dissolved Molybdenum 1004201 4791347 3 3 0.0% < 2 99% 80% 120% 88% 80% 120% 102% 70% 130%

Dissolved Nickel 1004201 4791347 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 107% 80% 120% 103% 80% 120% 101% 70% 130%Dissolved Selenium 1004201 4791347 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 90% 80% 120% 111% 80% 120% 105% 70% 130%Dissolved Silver 1004201 4791347 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.0% < 0.1 97% 80% 120% 93% 80% 120% 104% 70% 130%Dissolved Strontium 1004201 4791347 94 97 3.1% < 5 99% 80% 120% 95% 80% 120% 99% 70% 130%Dissolved Thallium 1004201 4791347 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.0% < 0.1 99% 80% 120% 103% 80% 120% 103% 70% 130%

Dissolved Tin 1004201 4791347 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 103% 80% 120% 95% 80% 120% 107% 70% 130%Dissolved Titanium 1004201 4791347 2 2 0.0% < 2 108% 80% 120% 98% 80% 120% 90% 70% 130%Dissolved Uranium 1004201 4791347 2.9 2.9 0.0% < 0.1 104% 80% 120% 96% 80% 120% 105% 70% 130%Dissolved Vanadium 1004201 4791347 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 105% 80% 120% 102% 80% 120% 98% 70% 130%Dissolved Zinc 1004201 4791347 < 5 < 5 0.0% < 5 107% 80% 120% 106% 80% 120% 108% 70% 130%

DOCDissolved Organic Carbon 1 4791875 2.1 2.3 9.1% < 0.5 98% 80% 120% 80% 120% 95% 80% 120%






Water Analysis (Continued)

UpperLower


Id Dup #2UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

UpperLower

AcceptableLimits


MethodBlank












UpperLower


Id Dup #2UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

UpperLower

AcceptableLimits


MethodBlank




Certified By:QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT (V1) Page 15 of 19


Original signed

Microbiology AnalysisFecal Coliform MIC-121-7001 modified from SM 9222 D - Colilert INCUBATORE. Coli (MPN) MIC-121-7000 Based on SM 9223B INCUBATORTotal Coliforms (MPN) MIC-121-7000 Based on SM 9223B INCUBATORTrace Organics AnalysisChloromethane VOL-120-5001 EPA SW-846 5030B/8260B GC/MSVinyl Chloride VOL-120-5001 EPA SW846 5230B/8260 GC/MSBromomethane VOL-120-5001 EPA SW846 5230B/8260 GC/MSChloroethane VOL-120-5001 EPA SW-846 5030B/8260B GC/MSTrichlorofluoromethane (FREON 11) VOL-120-5001 EPA SW-846 5030B/8260B GC/MSAcetone VOL-120-5001 EPA SW-846 5030B/8260B GC/MS1,1-Dichloroethylene VOL-120-5001 EPA SW-846 5030B/8260B GC/MSMethylene Chloride (Dichloromethane) VOL-120-5001 EPA SW-846 5030B/8260B GC/MS1,1-Dichloroethane VOL-120-5001 EPA SW-846 5030B/8260B GC/MScis-1,2-Dichloroethylene VOL-120-5001 EPA SW-846 5030B/8260B GC/MSChloroform VOL-120-5001 EPA SW-846 5030B/8260B GC/MS1,2-Dichloroethane VOL-120-5001 EPA SW846 5230B/8260 GC/MS1,1,1-Trichloroethane VOL-120-5001 EPA SW-846 5030B/8260B GC/MSCarbon Tetrachloride VOL-120-5001 EPA SW846 5230B/8260 GC/MSBenzene VOL-120-5001 EPA SW-846 5030B/8260 GC/MS1,2-Dichloropropane VOL-120-5001 EPA SW-846 5030B/8260B GC/MSTrichloroethylene VOL-120-5001 EPA SW846 5230B/8260 GC/MSBromodichloromethane VOL-120-5001 EPA SW846 5230B/8260 GC/MScis-1,3-Dichloropropene VOL-120-5001 EPA SW-846 5030B/8260B GC/MStrans-1,2-Dichloroethylene VOL-120-5001 EPA SW846 5230B/8260 GC/MS1,1,2-Trichloroethane VOL-120-5001 EPA SW-846 5030B/8260B GC/MSToluene VOL-120-5001 EPA SW-846 5030B/8260 GC/MS2-Hexanone VOL-120-5001 EPA SW846 5230B/8260 GC/MStrans-1,3-Dichloropropene VOL-120-5001 EPA SW-846 5030B/8260B GC/MSDibromochloromethane VOL-120-5001 EPA SW846 5230B/8260 GC/MS1,2-Dibromoethane VOL-120-5001 EPA SW-846 5030B/8260B GC/MSTetrachloroethylene VOL-120-5001 EPA SW846 5230B/8260 GC/MSChlorobenzene VOL-120-5001 EPA SW846 5230B/8260 GC/MSEthylbenzene VOL-120-5001 EPA SW-846 5030B/8260 GC/MSm,p-Xylene VOL-120-5001 EPA SW846 5230B/8260 GC/MSBromoform VOL-120-5001 EPA SW846 5230B/8260 GC/MSStyrene VOL-120-5001 EPA SW846 5230B/8260 GC/MS1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane VOL-120-5001 EPA SW846 5035/8260B GC/MS1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane VOL-120-5001 EPA SW-846 5030B/8260B GC/MSo-Xylene VOL-120-5001 EPA SW846 5230B/8260 GC/MS1,3-Dichlorobenzene VOL-120-5001 EPA SW-846 5030B/8260B GC/MS1,4-Dichlorobenzene VOL-120-5001 EPA SW846 5230B/8260 GC/MS1,2-Dichlorobenzene VOL-120-5001 EPA SW-846 5030B/8260B GC/MSToluene-d8 GC/MS4-Bromofluorobenzene GC/MS



Method SummaryATTENTION TO: GLENN BURSEY


AGAT S.O.P ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUELITERATURE REFERENCEPARAMETER




METHOD SUMMARY (V1) Page 16 of 19

Water AnalysisDissolved Organic Carbon INORG-121-6026 SM 5310 B TOC ANALYZER

Dissolved Aluminum MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Dissolved Antimony MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Dissolved Arsenic MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Dissolved Barium MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Dissolved Beryllium MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Dissolved Bismuth MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Dissolved Boron MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Dissolved Cadmium MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Dissolved Chromium MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Dissolved Cobalt MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Dissolved Copper MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Dissolved Iron MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Dissolved Lead MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Dissolved Manganese MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Dissolved Molybdenum MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Dissolved Nickel MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Dissolved Selenium MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Dissolved Silver MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Dissolved Strontium MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Dissolved Thallium MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Dissolved Tin MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Dissolved Titanium MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Dissolved Uranium MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Dissolved Vanadium MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Dissolved Zinc MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

pH INOR-121-6001 SM 4500 H+B PC-TITRATEReactive Silica as SiO2 INORG-121-6028 SM 4110 B COLORIMETERChloride INORG-121-6005 SM 4110 B ICFluoride INORG-121-6005 SM 4110 B IC










Sulphate INORG-121-6005 SM 4110 B ICAlkalinity INORG-121-6001 SM 2320 B PC-TITRATETrue Color INORG-121-6014 EPA 110.2 NEPHELOMETERTurbidity INORG-121-6022 SM 2130 B NEPHELOMETERElectrical Conductivity INOR-121-6001 SM 2510 B PC-TITRATENitrate + Nitrite as N INORG-121-6005 SM 4110 B CALCULATIONNitrate as N INORG-121-6005 SM 4110 B ICNitrite as N INORG-121-6005 SM 4110 B ICAmmonia as N INORG-121-6003 SM 4500-NH3 G COLORIMETERTotal Organic Carbon INORG-121-6026 SM 5310 B TOC ANALYZEROrtho-Phosphate as P INORG-121-6005 SM 4110 B COLORIMETER

Total Sodium MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Potassium MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Calcium MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Magnesium MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Phosphorous MET-121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Bicarb. Alkalinity (as CaCO3) INORG-121-6001 SM 2320 B PC-TITRATECarb. Alkalinity (as CaCO3) INORG-121-6001 SM 2320 B PC-TITRATEHydroxide INORG-121-6001 SM 2320 B PC-TITRATECalculated TDS SM 1030E CALCULATIONHardness CALCULATION SM 2340B CALCULATIONLangelier Index (@20C) CALCULATION CALCULATION CALCULATIONLangelier Index (@ 4C) CALCULATION CALCULATION CALCULATIONSaturation pH (@ 20C) CALCULATION CALCULATION CALCULATIONSaturation pH (@ 4C) CALCULATION CALCULATION CALCULATIONAnion Sum CALCULATION SM 1030E CALCULATIONCation sum CALCULATION SM 1030E CALCULATION% Difference/ Ion Balance (NS) CALCULATION SM 1030E CALCULATION

Total Aluminum MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Antimony MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Arsenic MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Barium MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Beryllium MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Bismuth MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Boron MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Cadmium MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Chromium MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Cobalt MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS










Total Copper MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Iron MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Lead MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Manganese MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Molybdenum MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Nickel MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Selenium MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Silver MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Strontium MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Thallium MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Tin MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Titanium MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Uranium MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Vanadium MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS

Total Zinc MET121-6104 & MET-121-6105 SM 3125 ICP/MS










Original signed

Original signed

Original signed

Original signed





Laura Baker, Inorganics Data ReporterMICROBIOLOGY ANALYSIS REVIEWED BY:


Laura Baker, Inorganics Data ReporterWATER ANALYSIS REVIEWED BY:

DATE REPORTED:


Oct 10, 2013

VERSION*: 1




PROJECT NO: 775





Member of:

*NOTES




2Fecal Coliform 1MPN/0.1 L








PROJECT NO: 775







Original signed











PROJECT NO: 775







Original signed





<11,1-Dichloroethane 1ug/L<1.6cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene 1.6ug/L48Chloroform 1ug/L<21,2-Dichloroethane 25ug/L<11,1,1-Trichloroethane 1ug/L











PROJECT NO: 775







Original signed














PROJECT NO: 775







Original signed











PROJECT NO: 775

DOC






Original signed




0.033Dissolved Cadmium 0.0175000ug/L<1Dissolved Chromium 150ug/L<1Dissolved Cobalt 1ug/L<2Dissolved Copper 21000 AOug/L124Dissolved Iron 50300 AOug/L<0.5Dissolved Lead 0.510ug/L35Dissolved Manganese 250 AOug/L<2Dissolved Molybdenum 2ug/L<2Dissolved Nickel 2ug/L<1Dissolved Selenium 110ug/L

<0.1Dissolved Silver 0.1ug/L151Dissolved Strontium 5ug/L<0.1Dissolved Thallium 0.1ug/L<2Dissolved Tin 2ug/L<2Dissolved Titanium 2ug/L1.3Dissolved Uranium 0.120ug/L<2Dissolved Vanadium 2ug/L<5Dissolved Zinc 55000 AOug/L








PROJECT NO: 775







Original signed



7.91pH 6.5-8.5 AO7.4Reactive Silica as SiO2 0.5mg/L17Chloride 1250 AOmg/L0.6Fluoride 0.11.5mg/L12Sulphate 2500 AOmg/L70Alkalinity 5mg/L12True Color 515 AOTCU

10.6Turbidity 0.10.1NTU190Electrical Conductivity 1umho/cm0.31Nitrate + Nitrite as N 0.05mg/L0.31Nitrate as N 0.0510mg/L

<0.05Nitrite as N 0.051.0mg/L<0.03Ammonia as N 0.03mg/L

5.2Total Organic Carbon 0.5mg/L0.02Ortho-Phosphate as P 0.01mg/L5.9Total Sodium 0.1200 AOmg/L1.5Total Potassium 0.1mg/L28.2Total Calcium 0.1mg/L1.6Total Magnesium 0.1mg/L

<0.02Total Phosphorous 0.02mg/L70Bicarb. Alkalinity (as CaCO3) 5mg/L

<10Carb. Alkalinity (as CaCO3) 10mg/L<5Hydroxide 5mg/L111Calculated TDS 1500 AOmg/L77.0Hardness mg/L-0.39Langelier Index (@20C) NA-0.71Langelier Index (@ 4C) NA8.30Saturation pH (@ 20C) NA8.62Saturation pH (@ 4C) NA2.15Anion Sum me/L1.92Cation sum me/L







PROJECT NO: 775

Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total)






Original signed





0.037Total Cadmium 0.0175ug/L1Total Chromium 150ug/L2Total Cobalt 1ug/L3Total Copper 11000 AOug/L


2Total Molybdenum 2ug/L3Total Nickel 2ug/L1Total Selenium 110ug/L

<0.1Total Silver 0.1ug/L147Total Strontium 5ug/L<0.1Total Thallium 0.1ug/L<2Total Tin 2ug/L7Total Titanium 2ug/L

1.6Total Uranium 0.120ug/L<2Total Vanadium 2ug/L10Total Zinc 55000 AOug/L








PROJECT NO: 775







Original signed

4796172 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Dissolved Metals (FWAL) Dissolved Antimony 6 10775-TH24796172 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) Total Aluminum 100 OG AO 233775-TH24796172 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) Total Antimony 6 9775-TH24796172 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) Total Arsenic 10 14775-TH24796172 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) Total Iron 300 AO 1420775-TH24796172 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) Total Manganese 50 AO 178775-TH24796172 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) Turbidity 0.1 10.6775-TH2


Guideline Violation









1 4795819 < 5 < 5 0.0% < 5 132% 60% 140% 123% 60% 140% 125% 60% 140%


1 4795819 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 125% 60% 140% 129% 60% 140% 80% 60% 140%











Quality Assurance

ATTENTION TO: GLENN BURSEYCLIENT NAME: FRACFLOW CONSULTANTS INCPROJECT NO: 775


UpperLower


Id Dup #2UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

UpperLower

AcceptableLimits


MethodBlank






Certified By:




Quality Assurance



UpperLower


Id Dup #2UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

UpperLower

AcceptableLimits


MethodBlank






Original signed

Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total)pH 4796630 7.33 7.36 0.4% < 104% 80% 120% NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120%Reactive Silica as SiO2 1 4783995 7.8 7.9 1.3% < 0.5 104% 80% 120% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120%Chloride 1 4780797 117 128 9.0% < 1 119% 80% 120% 80% 120% 106% 80% 120%Fluoride 1 0.6 0.7 15.4% < 0.1 88% 80% 120% 80% 120% 106% 80% 120%Sulphate 1 75 89 17.1% < 2 119% 80% 120% 80% 120% 111% 80% 120%

True Color 1 4795117 <5 6 < 5 95% 80% 120% 80% 120% 80% 120%Turbidity 1 4795117 0.4 0.4 0.0% < 0.1 87% 80% 120% 80% 120% 80% 120%Electrical Conductivity 4796630 69 68 0.3% < 1 98% 80% 120% NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120%Nitrate as N 1 0.48 0.51 6.1% < 0.05 115% 80% 120% 80% 120% 114% 80% 120%Nitrite as N 1 <0.05 <0.05 0.0% < 0.05 103% 80% 120% 80% 120% 87% 80% 120%

Ammonia as N 1 4795962 <0.03 <0.03 0.0% < 0.03 110% 80% 120% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120%Total Organic Carbon 1 <0.5 <0.5 0.0% < 0.5 95% 80% 120% 80% 120% 86% 80% 120%Ortho-Phosphate as P 1 4783995 0.01 0.01 0.0% < 0.01 114% 80% 120% 80% 120% 96% 80% 120%Total Sodium 1005201 58.5 61.3 4.7% < 0.1 120% 80% 120% 120% 80% 120% 95% 70% 130%Total Potassium 1005201 57.4 59.4 3.4% < 0.1 120% 80% 120% 116% 80% 120% 97% 70% 130%

Total Calcium 1005201 1450 1560 7.3% < 0.1 108% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120% 94% 70% 130%Total Magnesium 1005201 487 511 4.8% < 0.1 103% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120% 93% 80% 120%Total Phosphorous 1005201 0.138 0.114 19.0% < 0.02 102% 80% 120% 107% 80% 120% 98% 70% 130%Bicarb. Alkalinity (as CaCO3) 4796630 26 26 0.0% < 5 NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120%Carb. Alkalinity (as CaCO3) 4796630 <10 <10 0.0% < 10 NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120%

Hydroxide 4796630 <5 <5 0.0% < 5 NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120%Total Aluminum 1005201 7190 7760 7.6% < 5 104% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120% 95% 70% 130%Total Antimony 1005201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 97% 80% 120% 102% 80% 120% 95% 70% 130%Total Arsenic 1005201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 96% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120% 92% 70% 130%Total Barium 1005201 521 532 2.1% < 5 100% 80% 120% 98% 80% 120% 80% 70% 130%

Total Beryllium 1005201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 110% 80% 120% 109% 80% 120% 96% 70% 130%Total Bismuth 1005201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 101% 80% 120% 101% 80% 120% 89% 70% 130%Total Boron 1005201 324 323 0.3% < 5 106% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 91% 70% 130%Total Cadmium 1005201 20.1 21.0 4.4% < 0.017 98% 80% 120% 102% 80% 120% 98% 70% 130%Total Chromium 1005201 <1 1 NA < 1 105% 80% 120% 101% 80% 120% 87% 70% 130%

Total Cobalt 1005201 129 137 6.0% < 1 106% 80% 120% 98% 80% 120% 81% 70% 130%Total Copper 1005201 9 10 10.5% < 1 108% 80% 120% 103% 80% 120% 85% 70% 130%Total Iron 1005201 178000 191000 7.0% < 50 100% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 96% 70% 130%Total Lead 1005201 <0.5 < 0.5 0.0% < 0.5 103% 80% 120% 102% 80% 120% 89% 70% 130%Total Manganese 1005201 59100 63100 6.5% < 2 105% 80% 120% 102% 80% 120% 93% 70% 130%

Total Molybdenum 1005201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 100% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120% 97% 70% 130%Total Nickel 1005201 620 644 3.8% < 2 101% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 93% 70% 130%Total Selenium 1005201 <1 <1 0.0% < 1 96% 80% 120% 94% 80% 120% 99% 70% 130%Total Silver 1005201 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.0% < 0.1 100% 80% 120% 103% 80% 120% 97% 70% 130%




Quality Assurance


Water Analysis

UpperLower


Id Dup #2UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

UpperLower

AcceptableLimits


MethodBlank






Total Strontium 1005201 3140 3380 7.4% < 5 99% 80% 120% 98% 80% 120% 99% 70% 130%

Total Thallium 1005201 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.0% < 0.1 101% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120% 91% 70% 130%Total Tin 1005201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 99% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 93% 70% 130%Total Titanium 1005201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 99% 80% 120% 101% 80% 120% 86% 70% 130%Total Uranium 1005201 2.1 1.8 15.4% < 0.1 102% 80% 120% 101% 80% 120% 86% 70% 130%Total Vanadium 1005201 4 4 0.0% < 2 104% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120% 86% 70% 130%

Total Zinc 1005201 57400 60800 5.8% < 5 102% 80% 120% 103% 80% 120% 98% 70% 130%

Dissolved Metals (FWAL)Dissolved Aluminum 1005201 4796172 25 26 3.9% < 5 104% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 95% 70% 130%Dissolved Antimony 1005201 4796172 10 10 0.0% < 2 96% 80% 120% 93% 80% 120% 99% 70% 130%Dissolved Arsenic 1005201 4796172 9 9 0.0% < 2 90% 80% 120% 94% 80% 120% 106% 70% 130%Dissolved Barium 1005201 4796172 44 45 2.2% < 5 90% 80% 120% 90% 80% 120% 100% 70% 130%Dissolved Beryllium 1005201 4796172 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 101% 80% 120% 105% 80% 120% 104% 70% 130%

Dissolved Bismuth 1005201 4796172 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 93% 80% 120% 91% 80% 120% 91% 70% 130%Dissolved Boron 1005201 4796172 11 11 0.0% < 5 102% 80% 120% 102% 80% 120% 99% 70% 130%Dissolved Cadmium 1005201 4796172 0.016 0.017 6.1% < 0.017 98% 80% 120% 96% 80% 120% 100% 70% 130%Dissolved Chromium 1005201 4796172 < 1 1 NA < 1 108% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 100% 70% 130%Dissolved Cobalt 1005201 4796172 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 104% 80% 120% 102% 80% 120% 95% 70% 130%

Dissolved Copper 1005201 4796172 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 104% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120% 98% 70% 130%Dissolved Iron 1005201 4796172 1500 1460 2.7% < 50 100% 80% 120% 109% 80% 120% 71% 70% 130%Dissolved Lead 1005201 4796172 < 0.5 < 0.5 0.0% < 0.5 103% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120% 93% 70% 130%Dissolved Manganese 1005201 4796172 35 35 0.0% < 2 102% 80% 120% 102% 80% 120% 93% 70% 130%Dissolved Molybdenum 1005201 4796172 2 2 0.0% < 2 98% 80% 120% 98% 80% 120% 101% 70% 130%


Dissolved Tin 1005201 4796172 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 92% 80% 120% 92% 80% 120% 100% 70% 130%Dissolved Titanium 1005201 4796172 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 104% 80% 120% 101% 80% 120% 102% 70% 130%Dissolved Uranium 1005201 4796172 1.3 1.3 0.0% < 0.1 84% 80% 120% 87% 80% 120% 89% 70% 130%Dissolved Vanadium 1005201 4796172 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 109% 80% 120% 102% 80% 120% 91% 70% 130%Dissolved Zinc 1005201 4796172 < 5 < 5 0.0% < 5 102% 80% 120% 103% 80% 120% 98% 70% 130%

DOCDissolved Organic Carbon 1 .28 .3.3 6.9% < 0.5 95% 80% 120% 80% 120% 83% 80% 120%




Quality Assurance



UpperLower


Id Dup #2UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

UpperLower

AcceptableLimits


MethodBlank









Quality Assurance



UpperLower


Id Dup #2UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

UpperLower

AcceptableLimits


MethodBlank




Certified By:QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT (V1) Page 15 of 19


Original signed




Method Summary







Original signed Original signed








Jason Coughtrey, Inorganics SupervisorWATER ANALYSIS REVIEWED BY:

DATE REPORTED:


Oct 16, 2013

VERSION*: 1




PROJECT NO: 775





Member of:

*NOTES


775-TH3 Oct 7SAMPLE DESCRIPTION:WaterSAMPLE TYPE:


<1Fecal Coliform 1MPN/0.1 L








PROJECT NO: 775







Original signed



<1E. Coli (MPN) 1MPN/100 mL52Total Coliforms (MPN) 1MPN/100 mL








PROJECT NO: 775







Original signed





<11,1-Dichloroethane 1ug/L<1.6cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene 1.6ug/L<1Chloroform 1ug/L<21,2-Dichloroethane 25ug/L<11,1,1-Trichloroethane 1ug/L


<1.6trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene 1.6ug/L<11,1,2-Trichloroethane 1ug/L<2Toluene 2ug/L<102-Hexanone 10ug/L<1trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 1ug/L<1Dibromochloromethane 1ug/L








PROJECT NO: 775







Original signed














PROJECT NO: 775







Original signed



<0.5Dissolved Organic Carbon 0.5mg/L








PROJECT NO: 775

DOC






Original signed



14Dissolved Aluminum 5100 OG AOug/L<2Dissolved Antimony 26ug/L8Dissolved Arsenic 210ug/L54Dissolved Barium 51000ug/L<2Dissolved Beryllium 2ug/L<2Dissolved Bismuth 2ug/L43Dissolved Boron 55000ug/L

<0.017Dissolved Cadmium 0.0175000ug/L<1Dissolved Chromium 150ug/L<1Dissolved Cobalt 1ug/L<2Dissolved Copper 21000 AOug/L<50Dissolved Iron 50300 AOug/L<0.5Dissolved Lead 0.510ug/L81Dissolved Manganese 250 AOug/L<2Dissolved Molybdenum 2ug/L<2Dissolved Nickel 2ug/L<1Dissolved Selenium 110ug/L

<0.1Dissolved Silver 0.1ug/L306Dissolved Strontium 5ug/L<0.1Dissolved Thallium 0.1ug/L<2Dissolved Tin 2ug/L<2Dissolved Titanium 2ug/L2.5Dissolved Uranium 0.120ug/L<2Dissolved Vanadium 2ug/L<5Dissolved Zinc 55000 AOug/L








PROJECT NO: 775







Original signed



7.99pH 6.5-8.5 AO13.0Reactive Silica as SiO2 0.5mg/L

3Chloride 1250 AOmg/L<0.1Fluoride 0.11.5mg/L17Sulphate 2500 AOmg/L

109Alkalinity 5mg/L62True Color 515 AOTCU


<0.05Nitrate + Nitrite as N 0.05mg/L<0.05Nitrate as N 0.0510mg/L<0.05Nitrite as N 0.051.0mg/L<0.03Ammonia as N 0.03mg/L<0.5Total Organic Carbon 0.5mg/L0.01Ortho-Phosphate as P 0.01mg/L18.2Total Sodium 0.1200 AOmg/L1.6Total Potassium 0.1mg/L35.7Total Calcium 0.1mg/L2.7Total Magnesium 0.1mg/L0.06Total Phosphorous 0.02mg/L109Bicarb. Alkalinity (as CaCO3) 5mg/L<10Carb. Alkalinity (as CaCO3) 10mg/L<5Hydroxide 5mg/L145Calculated TDS 1500 AOmg/L100Hardness mg/L

-0.02Langelier Index (@20C) NA-0.34Langelier Index (@ 4C) NA8.01Saturation pH (@ 20C) NA8.33Saturation pH (@ 4C) NA2.62Anion Sum me/L2.97Cation sum me/L







PROJECT NO: 775

Standard Water Analysis (Total)






Original signed



6.3% Difference/ Ion Balance (NS) %7Total Copper 11000 AOug/L

731Total Iron 50300 AOug/L181Total Manganese 250 AOug/L21Total Zinc 55000 AOug/L








PROJECT NO: 775

Standard Water Analysis (Total)






Original signed



8.04pH 6.5-8.5 AO13.8Reactive Silica as SiO2 0.5mg/L

7Chloride 1250 AOmg/L0.5Fluoride 0.11.5mg/L20Sulphate 2500 AOmg/L

117Alkalinity 5mg/L6True Color 515 AOTCU


<0.05Nitrate + Nitrite as N 0.05mg/L<0.05Nitrate as N 0.0510mg/L<0.05Nitrite as N 0.051.0mg/L<0.03Ammonia as N 0.03mg/L<0.5Total Organic Carbon 0.5mg/L<0.01Ortho-Phosphate as P 0.01mg/L19.5Total Sodium 0.1200 AOmg/L1.6Total Potassium 0.1mg/L40.5Total Calcium 0.1mg/L3.1Total Magnesium 0.1mg/L

<0.02Total Phosphorous 0.02mg/L117Bicarb. Alkalinity (as CaCO3) 5mg/L<10Carb. Alkalinity (as CaCO3) 10mg/L<5Hydroxide 5mg/L162Calculated TDS 1500 AOmg/L114Hardness mg/L0.11Langelier Index (@20C) NA-0.21Langelier Index (@ 4C) NA7.93Saturation pH (@ 20C) NA8.25Saturation pH (@ 4C) NA2.95Anion Sum me/L3.18Cation sum me/L







PROJECT NO: 775







Original signed



3.7% Difference/ Ion Balance (NS) %49Total Aluminum 5100 OG AOug/L<2Total Antimony 26ug/L8Total Arsenic 210ug/L51Total Barium 51000ug/L<2Total Beryllium 2ug/L<2Total Bismuth 2ug/L43Total Boron 55000ug/L

<0.017Total Cadmium 0.0175ug/L1Total Chromium 150ug/L<1Total Cobalt 1ug/L1Total Copper 11000 AOug/L99Total Iron 50300 AOug/L7.1Total Lead 0.510ug/L78Total Manganese 250 AOug/L2Total Molybdenum 2ug/L

<2Total Nickel 2ug/L1Total Selenium 110ug/L

<0.1Total Silver 0.1ug/L288Total Strontium 5ug/L<0.1Total Thallium 0.1ug/L<2Total Tin 2ug/L<2Total Titanium 2ug/L2.6Total Uranium 0.120ug/L<2Total Vanadium 2ug/L22Total Zinc 55000 AOug/L








PROJECT NO: 775







Original signed

4810397 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Dissolved Metals (FWAL) Dissolved Manganese 50 AO 81775-TH3 Oct 54810397 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) Total Manganese 50 AO 78775-TH3 Oct 54810397 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) Turbidity 0.1 0.8775-TH3 Oct 54810412 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis (Total) Total Aluminum 100 OG AO 897775-TH3 Oct 74810412 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis (Total) Total Iron 300 AO 731775-TH3 Oct 74810412 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis (Total) Total Manganese 50 AO 181775-TH3 Oct 74810412 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis (Total) True Color 15 AO 62775-TH3 Oct 74810412 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis (Total) Turbidity 0.1 28.1775-TH3 Oct 7


Guideline Violation








Volatile Organic Compounds in WaterChloromethane 1 4798286 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 117% 60% 140% 107% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%Vinyl Chloride 1 4798286 < 0.5 < 0.5 0.0% < 0.5 126% 60% 140% 107% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%Bromomethane 1 4798286 < 3 < 3 0.0% < 3 127% 60% 140% 96% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%Chloroethane 1 4798286 < 5 < 5 0.0% < 5 72% 60% 140% 100% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%Trichlorofluoromethane (FREON 11)

1 4798286 < 5 < 5 0.0% < 5 126% 60% 140% 130% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%

Acetone 1 4798286 < 10 < 10 0.0% < 10 110% 60% 140% 113% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%1,1-Dichloroethylene 1 4798286 < 0.6 < 0.6 0.0% < 0.6 123% 60% 140% 111% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane)

1 4798286 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 93% 60% 140% 104% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%

1,1-Dichloroethane 1 4798286 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 97% 60% 140% 109% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene 1 4798286 < 1.6 < 1.6 0.0% < 1.6 97% 60% 140% 98% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%

Chloroform 1 4798286 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 100% 60% 140% 112% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%1,2-Dichloroethane 1 4798286 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 95% 60% 140% 113% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%1,1,1-Trichloroethane 1 4798286 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 91% 60% 140% 105% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%Carbon Tetrachloride 1 4798286 < 0.79 < 0.79 0.0% < 0.79 92% 60% 140% 106% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%Benzene 1 4798286 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 99% 60% 140% 111% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%

1,2-Dichloropropane 1 4798286 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 89% 60% 140% 107% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%Trichloroethylene 1 4798286 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 88% 60% 140% 104% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%Bromodichloromethane 1 4798286 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 90% 60% 140% 105% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 1 4798286 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 75% 60% 140% 99% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene 1 4798286 < 1.6 < 1.6 0.0% < 1.6 96% 60% 140% 109% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%

1,1,2-Trichloroethane 1 4798286 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 89% 60% 140% 106% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%Toluene 1 4798286 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 91% 60% 140% 111% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%2-Hexanone 1 4798286 < 10 < 10 0.0% < 10 105% 60% 140% 122% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 1 4798286 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 71% 60% 140% 96% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%Dibromochloromethane 1 4798286 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 84% 60% 140% 101% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%

1,2-Dibromoethane 1 4798286 < 0.25 < 0.25 0.0% < 0.25 85% 60% 140% 102% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%Tetrachloroethylene 1 4798286 < 1.6 < 1.6 0.0% < 1.6 111% 60% 140% 103% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%Chlorobenzene 1 4798286 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 87% 60% 140% 106% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%Ethylbenzene 1 4798286 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 87% 60% 140% 107% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%m,p-Xylene 1 4798286 < 4 < 4 0.0% < 4 100% 60% 140% 123% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%

Bromoform 1 4798286 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 77% 60% 140% 96% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%Styrene 1 4798286 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 92% 60% 140% 112% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 1 4798286 < 0.5 < 0.5 0.0% < 0.5 87% 60% 140% 102% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 1 4798286 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 92% 60% 140% 98% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%o-Xylene 1 4798286 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 88% 60% 140% 107% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%

1,3-Dichlorobenzene 1 4798286 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 85% 60% 140% 93% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%1,4-Dichlorobenzene 1 4798286 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 84% 60% 140% 96% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%1,2-Dichlorobenzene 1 4798286 < 0.7 < 0.7 0.0% < 0.7 87% 60% 140% 94% 60% 140% NA 60% 140%




Quality Assurance



UpperLower


Id Dup #2UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

UpperLower

AcceptableLimits


MethodBlank






Comments: Matrix spike not available (NA); results based on blank spike recovery.

Certified By:




Quality Assurance



UpperLower


Id Dup #2UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

UpperLower

AcceptableLimits


MethodBlank






Original signed

Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total)pH 1 4804612 7.45 7.15 4.1% < 101% 80% 120% 80% 120% 80% 120%Reactive Silica as SiO2 1 4811281 8.9 9.0 1.1% < 0.5 101% 80% 120% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120%Chloride 1 4813361 4 4 0.0% < 1 98% 80% 120% 80% 120% 98% 80% 120%Fluoride 1 4813361 <0.1 <0.1 0.0% < 0.1 109% 80% 120% 80% 120% 107% 80% 120%Sulphate 1 4813361 17 15 12.5% < 2 111% 80% 120% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120%

Alkalinity 1 4804612 8 6 28.6% < 5 89% 80% 120% 80% 120% 80% 120%True Color 1 4810412 62 68 9.2% < 5 100% 80% 120% 80% 120% 80% 120%Turbidity 1 4810412 28.1 29.5 4.9% < 0.1 88% 80% 120% 80% 120% 80% 120%Electrical Conductivity 1 4804612 26 24 8.0% < 1 101% 80% 120% 80% 120% 80% 120%Nitrate as N 1 4813361 < 0.05 < 0.05 0.0% < 0.05 97% 80% 120% 80% 120% 97% 80% 120%

Nitrite as N 1 4813361 < 0.05 < 0.05 0.0% < 0.05 92% 80% 120% 80% 120% 94% 80% 120%Ammonia as N 1 480342 <0.03 <0.03 0.0% < 0.03 113% 80% 120% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120%Total Organic Carbon 1 18.4 18.8 2.2% < 0.5 93% 80% 120% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120%Ortho-Phosphate as P 1 4811281 <0.01 <0.01 0.0% < 0.01 104% 80% 120% 80% 120% 105% 80% 120%Total Sodium 1009201 99.3 99.7 0.4% < 0.1 107% 80% 120% 101% 80% 120% 96% 70% 130%

Total Potassium 1009201 0.1 0.1 0.0% < 0.1 109% 80% 120% 103% 80% 120% 94% 70% 130%Total Calcium 1009201 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.0% < 0.1 105% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120% 87% 70% 130%Total Magnesium 1009201 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.0% < 0.1 108% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 108% 80% 120%Total Phosphorous 1009201 0.02 0.02 0.0% < 0.02 103% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 88% 70% 130%Total Aluminum 1009201 7 5 NA < 5 120% 80% 120% 120% 80% 120% 113% 70% 130%

Total Antimony 1009201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 96% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 89% 70% 130%Total Arsenic 1009201 38 38 0.0% < 2 96% 80% 120% 97% 80% 120% 93% 70% 130%Total Barium 1009201 < 5 < 5 0.0% < 5 96% 80% 120% 98% 80% 120% 94% 70% 130%Total Beryllium 1009201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 108% 80% 120% 98% 80% 120% 104% 70% 130%Total Bismuth 1009201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 101% 80% 120% 98% 80% 120% 97% 70% 130%

Total Boron 1009201 15 16 6.5% < 5 107% 80% 120% 98% 80% 120% 102% 70% 130%Total Cadmium 1009201 < 0.017 < 0.017 0.0% < 0.017 97% 80% 120% 101% 80% 120% 88% 70% 130%Total Chromium 1009201 1 < 1 NA < 1 109% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120% 83% 70% 130%Total Cobalt 1009201 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 111% 80% 120% 101% 80% 120% 89% 70% 130%Total Copper 1009201 13 7 NA < 1 112% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 92% 70% 130%

Total Iron 1009201 88 < 50 NA < 50 110% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 80% 70% 130%Total Lead 1009201 4.4 3.0 NA < 0.5 101% 80% 120% 95% 80% 120% 87% 70% 130%Total Manganese 1009201 3 2 NA < 2 109% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 80% 70% 130%Total Molybdenum 1009201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 96% 80% 120% 98% 80% 120% 100% 70% 130%Total Nickel 1009201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 103% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120% 87% 70% 130%

Total Selenium 1009201 < 1 1 NA < 1 104% 80% 120% 103% 80% 120% 86% 70% 130%Total Silver 1009201 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.0% < 0.1 102% 80% 120% 96% 80% 120% 95% 70% 130%Total Strontium 1009201 < 5 < 5 0.0% < 5 97% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120% 91% 70% 130%Total Thallium 1009201 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.0% < 0.1 102% 80% 120% 101% 80% 120% 102% 70% 130%




Quality Assurance


Water Analysis

UpperLower


Id Dup #2UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

UpperLower

AcceptableLimits


MethodBlank






Total Tin 1009201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 96% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 94% 70% 130%

Total Titanium 1009201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 108% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 93% 70% 130%Total Uranium 1009201 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.0% < 0.1 95% 80% 120% 96% 80% 120% 110% 70% 130%Total Vanadium 1009201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 106% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 91% 70% 130%Total Zinc 1009201 11 10 9.5% < 5 111% 80% 120% 109% 80% 120% 78% 70% 130%

Dissolved Metals (FWAL)Dissolved Aluminum 1010201 4810397 14 15 6.9% < 5 104% 80% 120% 102% 80% 120% 81% 70% 130%Dissolved Antimony 1010201 4810397 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 108% 80% 120% 101% 80% 120% 94% 70% 130%Dissolved Arsenic 1010201 4810397 8 8 0.0% < 2 103% 80% 120% 96% 80% 120% 86% 70% 130%Dissolved Barium 1010201 4810397 54 57 5.4% < 5 108% 80% 120% 103% 80% 120% 98% 70% 130%Dissolved Beryllium 1010201 4810397 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 112% 80% 120% 103% 80% 120% 108% 70% 130%

Dissolved Bismuth 1010201 4810397 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 108% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 95% 70% 130%Dissolved Boron 1010201 4810397 43 43 0.0% < 5 111% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 108% 70% 130%Dissolved Cadmium 1010201 4810397 < 0.017 < 0.017 0.0% < 0.017 103% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 103% 70% 130%Dissolved Chromium 1010201 4810397 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 107% 80% 120% 103% 80% 120% 88% 70% 130%Dissolved Cobalt 1010201 4810397 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 109% 80% 120% 108% 80% 120% 84% 70% 130%

Dissolved Copper 1010201 4810397 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 110% 80% 120% 106% 80% 120% 88% 70% 130%Dissolved Iron 1010201 4810397 < 50 < 50 0.0% < 50 111% 80% 120% 105% 80% 120% 87% 70% 130%Dissolved Lead 1010201 4810397 < 0.5 < 0.5 0.0% < 0.5 107% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 96% 70% 130%Dissolved Manganese 1010201 4810397 81 84 3.6% < 2 108% 80% 120% 107% 80% 120% 91% 70% 130%Dissolved Molybdenum 1010201 4810397 2 2 0.0% < 2 101% 80% 120% 101% 80% 120% 98% 70% 130%


Dissolved Tin 1010201 4810397 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 103% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 101% 70% 130%Dissolved Titanium 1010201 4810397 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 107% 80% 120% 105% 80% 120% 83% 70% 130%Dissolved Uranium 1010201 4810397 2.5 2.5 0.0% < 0.1 109% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 92% 70% 130%Dissolved Vanadium 1010201 4810397 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 106% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 80% 70% 130%Dissolved Zinc 1010201 4810397 < 5 6 < 5 109% 80% 120% 108% 80% 120% 90% 70% 130%

DOCDissolved Organic Carbon 1 .28 .3.3 6.9% < 0.5 95% 80% 120% 80% 120% 83% 80% 120%

Standard Water Analysis (Total)Total Sodium 1009201 99.3 99.7 0.4% < 0.1 107% 80% 120% 101% 80% 120% 96% 70% 130%Total Potassium 1009201 0.1 0.1 0.0% < 0.1 109% 80% 120% 103% 80% 120% 94% 70% 130%Total Calcium 1009201 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.0% < 0.1 105% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120% 87% 70% 130%Total Magnesium 1009201 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.0% < 0.1 108% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 108% 70% 130%




Quality Assurance



UpperLower


Id Dup #2UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

UpperLower

AcceptableLimits


MethodBlank






Total Phosphorous 1009201 0.02 0.02 0.0% < 0.02 103% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 88% 70% 130%

Total Copper 1009201 13 7 NA < 1 112% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 92% 70% 130%Total Iron 1009201 88 < 50 NA < 50 110% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 80% 70% 130%Total Manganese 1009201 3 2 NA < 2 109% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 80% 70% 130%Total Zinc 1009201 11 10 9.5% < 5 111% 80% 120% 109% 80% 120% 78% 70% 130%

Certified By:




Quality Assurance



UpperLower


Id Dup #2UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

UpperLower

AcceptableLimits


MethodBlank






Original signed




Method Summary







Sulphate INORG-121-6005 SM 4110 B ICAlkalinity INORG-121-6001 SM 2320 B PC-TITRATETrue Color INORG-121-6014 EPA 110.2 NEPHELOMETERTurbidity INORG-121-6022 SM 2130 B NEPHELOMETERElectrical Conductivity INOR-121-6001 SM 2510 B PC-TITRATENitrate + Nitrite as N INORG-121-6005 SM 4110 B ICNitrate as N INORG-121-6005 SM 4110 B ICNitrite as N INORG-121-6005 SM 4110 B ICAmmonia as N INORG-121-6003 SM 4500-NH3 G COLORIMETERTotal Organic Carbon INORG-121-6026 SM 5310 B TOC ANALYZEROrtho-Phosphate as P INORG-121-6005 SM 4110 B COLORIMETER






Bicarb. Alkalinity (as CaCO3) INORG-121-6001 SM 2320 B PC-TITRATECarb. Alkalinity (as CaCO3) INORG-121-6001 SM 2320 B PC-TITRATEHydroxide INORG-121-6001 SM 2320 B PC-TITRATECalculated TDS SM 1030E CALCULATIONHardness SM 2340B CALCULATIONLangelier Index (@20C) CALCULATIONLangelier Index (@ 4C) CALCULATIONSaturation pH (@ 20C) CALCULATIONSaturation pH (@ 4C) CALCULATIONAnion Sum SM 1030E CALCULATIONCation sum SM 1030E CALCULATION% Difference/ Ion Balance (NS) SM 1030E CALCULATION





pH INOR-121-6001 SM 4500 H+B PC-TITRATEReactive Silica as SiO2 INORG-121-6028 SM 4110 B COLORIMETERChloride INORG-121-6005 SM 4110 B ICFluoride INORG-121-6005 SM 4110 B ICSulphate INORG-121-6005 SM 4110 B ICAlkalinity INORG-121-6001 SM 2320 B PC-TITRATETrue Color INORG-121-6014 EPA 110.2 NEPHELOMETERTurbidity INORG-121-6022 SM 2130 B NEPHELOMETERElectrical Conductivity INOR-121-6001 SM 2510 B PC-TITRATENitrate + Nitrite as N INORG-121-6005 SM 4110 B CALCULATIONNitrate as N INORG-121-6005 SM 4110 B IC



Method Summary







Nitrite as N INORG-121-6005 SM 4110 B ICAmmonia as N INORG-121-6003 SM 4500-NH3 G COLORIMETERTotal Organic Carbon INORG-121-6026 SM 5310 B TOC ANALYZEROrtho-Phosphate as P INORG-121-6005 SM 4110 B COLORIMETER























Method Summary




















Method Summary







Original signed


Original signed








DATE REPORTED:


Oct 18, 2013

VERSION*: 1




PROJECT NO: 775





Member of:

*NOTES












PROJECT NO: 775







Original signed



<1E. Coli (MPN) 1MPN/100 mL1300Total Coliforms (MPN) 1MPN/100 mL








PROJECT NO: 775







Original signed
















PROJECT NO: 775







Original signed



<0.5Dissolved Organic Carbon 0.5mg/L








PROJECT NO: 775

DOC






Original signed



<5Dissolved Aluminum 5100 OG AOug/L5Dissolved Antimony 26ug/L7Dissolved Arsenic 210ug/L25Dissolved Barium 51000ug/L<2Dissolved Beryllium 2ug/L<2Dissolved Bismuth 2ug/L95Dissolved Boron 55000ug/L

<0.017Dissolved Cadmium 0.0175000ug/L<1Dissolved Chromium 150ug/L<1Dissolved Cobalt 1ug/L<2Dissolved Copper 21000 AOug/L<50Dissolved Iron 50300 AOug/L<0.5Dissolved Lead 0.510ug/L87Dissolved Manganese 250 AOug/L7Dissolved Molybdenum 2ug/L

<2Dissolved Nickel 2ug/L1Dissolved Selenium 110ug/L

<0.1Dissolved Silver 0.1ug/L1900Dissolved Strontium 5ug/L<0.1Dissolved Thallium 0.1ug/L<2Dissolved Tin 2ug/L7Dissolved Titanium 2ug/L

4.0Dissolved Uranium 0.120ug/L<2Dissolved Vanadium 2ug/L<5Dissolved Zinc 55000 AOug/L








PROJECT NO: 775







Original signed



8.02pH 6.5-8.5 AO9.8Reactive Silica as SiO2 0.5mg/L18Chloride 1250 AOmg/L0.1Fluoride 0.11.5mg/L492Sulphate 2500 AOmg/L106Alkalinity 5mg/L<5True Color 515 AOTCU


<0.05Nitrite as N 0.051.0mg/L<0.03Ammonia as N 0.03mg/L

5.6Total Organic Carbon 0.5mg/L<0.01Ortho-Phosphate as P 0.01mg/L78.0Total Sodium 0.1200 AOmg/L3.8Total Potassium 0.1mg/L169Total Calcium 0.1mg/L14.0Total Magnesium 0.1mg/L

<0.02Total Phosphorous 0.02mg/L106Bicarb. Alkalinity (as CaCO3) 5mg/L<10Carb. Alkalinity (as CaCO3) 10mg/L<5Hydroxide 5mg/L843Calculated TDS 1500 AOmg/L480Hardness mg/L0.59Langelier Index (@20C) NA0.27Langelier Index (@ 4C) NA7.43Saturation pH (@ 20C) NA7.75Saturation pH (@ 4C) NA12.9Anion Sum me/L13.2Cation sum me/L







PROJECT NO: 775







Original signed





0.024Total Cadmium 0.0175ug/L3Total Chromium 150ug/L<1Total Cobalt 1ug/L4Total Copper 11000 AOug/L


7Total Molybdenum 2ug/L<2Total Nickel 2ug/L<1Total Selenium 110ug/L

<0.1Total Silver 0.1ug/L1930Total Strontium 5ug/L<0.1Total Thallium 0.1ug/L<2Total Tin 2ug/L15Total Titanium 2ug/L4.4Total Uranium 0.120ug/L<2Total Vanadium 2ug/L13Total Zinc 55000 AOug/L








PROJECT NO: 775







Original signed

4815128 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Dissolved Metals (FWAL) Dissolved Manganese 50 AO 87775-TH44815128 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) Calculated TDS 500 AO 843775-TH44815128 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) Total Aluminum 100 OG AO 196775-TH44815128 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) Total Arsenic 10 15775-TH44815128 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) Total Iron 300 AO 3400775-TH44815128 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) Total Manganese 50 AO 124775-TH44815128 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) Turbidity 0.1 21.3775-TH4


Guideline Violation









1 4814789 < 5 < 5 0.0% < 5 133% 60% 140% 134% 60% 140% 129% 60% 140%


1 4814789 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 116% 60% 140% 114% 60% 140% 112% 60% 140%


Chloroform 1 4814789 45 48 6.5% < 1 119% 60% 140% 118% 60% 140% 112% 60% 140%1,2-Dichloroethane 1 4814789 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 110% 60% 140% 117% 60% 140% 116% 60% 140%1,1,1-Trichloroethane 1 4814789 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 107% 60% 140% 111% 60% 140% 111% 60% 140%Carbon Tetrachloride 1 4814789 < 0.79 < 0.79 0.0% < 0.79 107% 60% 140% 112% 60% 140% 111% 60% 140%Benzene 1 4814789 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 118% 60% 140% 117% 60% 140% 118% 60% 140%

1,2-Dichloropropane 1 4814789 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 103% 60% 140% 109% 60% 140% 111% 60% 140%Trichloroethylene 1 4814789 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 109% 60% 140% 114% 60% 140% 117% 60% 140%Bromodichloromethane 1 4814789 5.7 6.2 8.4% < 1 105% 60% 140% 109% 60% 140% 119% 60% 140%cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 1 4814789 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 86% 60% 140% 101% 60% 140% 120% 60% 140%trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene 1 4814789 < 1.6 < 1.6 0.0% < 1.6 118% 60% 140% 120% 60% 140% 121% 60% 140%








Quality Assurance



UpperLower


Id Dup #2UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

UpperLower

AcceptableLimits


MethodBlank






Certified By:




Quality Assurance



UpperLower


Id Dup #2UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

UpperLower

AcceptableLimits


MethodBlank






Original signed

Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total)pH 4815545 7.46 7.41 0.7% < 100% 80% 120% NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120%Reactive Silica as SiO2 1 4814789 1.0 1.0 0.0% < 0.5 103% 80% 120% 80% 120% 103% 80% 120%Chloride 1 4803454 46 48 4.3% < 1 99% 80% 120% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120%Fluoride 1 4803454 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.0% < 0.1 101% 80% 120% 80% 120% 107% 80% 120%Sulphate 1 4803454 5 5 0.0% < 2 110% 80% 120% 80% 120% 106% 80% 120%

Alkalinity 4815545 15 14 0.0% < 5 89% 80% 120% NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120%True Color 1 4838569 5 6 18.2% < 5 100% 80% 120% 80% 120% 80% 120%Turbidity 1 4815506 49.6 47.6 4.1% < 0.1 87% 80% 120% 80% 120% 80% 120%Electrical Conductivity 4815545 152 153 0.4% < 1 98% 80% 120% NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120%Nitrate as N 1 4803454 0.23 0.24 4.3% < 0.05 102% 80% 120% 80% 120% 103% 80% 120%

Nitrite as N 1 4803454 < 0.05 < 0.05 0.0% < 0.05 101% 80% 120% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120%Ammonia as N 1 4814789 0.03 0.02 40.0% < 0.03 111% 80% 120% 80% 120% 95% 80% 120%Total Organic Carbon 1 2.5 2.4 4.1% < 0.5 92% 80% 120% 80% 120% 89% 80% 120%Ortho-Phosphate as P 1 4814789 0.16 0.17 6.1% < 0.01 103% 80% 120% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120%Total Sodium 1010201 4815128 55.5 55.1 0.7% < 0.1 NA 80% 120% 120% 80% 120% 120% 70% 130%

Total Potassium 1010201 4815128 3.76 3.69 1.9% < 0.1 NA 80% 120% 120% 80% 120% 130% 70% 130%Total Calcium 1010201 4815128 136 134 1.5% < 0.1 109% 80% 120% 105% 80% 120% 102% 70% 130%Total Magnesium 1010201 4815128 10.2 10.0 2.0% < 0.1 105% 80% 120% 103% 80% 120% 108% 80% 120%Total Phosphorous 1010201 4815128 < 0.02 < 0.02 0.0% < 0.02 102% 80% 120% 95% 80% 120% 100% 70% 130%Bicarb. Alkalinity (as CaCO3) 4815545 15 14 0.0% < 5 NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120%

Carb. Alkalinity (as CaCO3) 4815545 <10 <10 0.0% < 10 NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120%Hydroxide 4815545 <5 <5 0.0% < 5 NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120%Total Aluminum 1010201 4815128 196 267 30.7% < 5 104% 80% 120% 102% 80% 120% 110% 70% 130%Total Antimony 1010201 4815128 5 5 0.0% < 2 108% 80% 120% 101% 80% 120% 92% 70% 130%Total Arsenic 1010201 4815128 15 15 0.0% < 2 103% 80% 120% 96% 80% 120% 93% 70% 130%

Total Barium 1010201 4815128 26 24 8.0% < 5 108% 80% 120% 103% 80% 120% 90% 70% 130%Total Beryllium 1010201 4815128 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 112% 80% 120% 103% 80% 120% 108% 70% 130%Total Bismuth 1010201 4815128 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 108% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 98% 70% 130%Total Boron 1010201 4815128 83 83 0.0% < 5 111% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 107% 70% 130%Total Cadmium 1010201 4815128 0.024 < 0.017 NA < 0.017 103% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 90% 70% 130%

Total Chromium 1010201 4815128 3 3 0.0% < 1 107% 80% 120% 103% 80% 120% 102% 70% 130%Total Cobalt 1010201 4815128 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 109% 80% 120% 108% 80% 120% 100% 70% 130%Total Copper 1010201 4815128 4 4 0.0% < 1 110% 80% 120% 106% 80% 120% 103% 70% 130%Total Iron 1010201 4815128 2890 2860 1.0% < 50 111% 80% 120% 105% 80% 120% 103% 70% 130%Total Lead 1010201 4815128 1.50 1.44 4.1% < 0.5 107% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 96% 70% 130%

Total Manganese 1010201 4815128 114 109 4.5% < 2 108% 80% 120% 107% 80% 120% 101% 70% 130%Total Molybdenum 1010201 4815128 7 7 0.0% < 2 101% 80% 120% 101% 80% 120% 101% 70% 130%Total Nickel 1010201 4815128 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 87% 80% 120% 107% 80% 120% 103% 70% 130%Total Selenium 1010201 4815128 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 96% 80% 120% 108% 80% 120% 121% 70% 130%




Quality Assurance


Water Analysis

UpperLower


Id Dup #2UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

UpperLower

AcceptableLimits


MethodBlank






Total Silver 1010201 4815128 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.0% < 0.1 102% 80% 120% 102% 80% 120% 98% 70% 130%

Total Strontium 1010201 4815128 1550 1500 3.3% < 5 104% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120% 95% 70% 130%Total Thallium 1010201 4815128 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.0% < 0.1 104% 80% 120% 106% 80% 120% 99% 70% 130%Total Tin 1010201 4815128 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 103% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 100% 70% 130%Total Titanium 1010201 4815128 15 19 23.5% < 2 107% 80% 120% 105% 80% 120% 99% 70% 130%Total Uranium 1010201 4815128 4.4 4.3 2.3% < 0.1 109% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 95% 70% 130%

Total Vanadium 1010201 4815128 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 106% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 101% 70% 130%Total Zinc 1010201 4815128 13 12 8.0% < 5 109% 80% 120% 106% 80% 120% 82% 70% 130%

Dissolved Metals (FWAL)Dissolved Aluminum 1010201 14 15 6.9% < 5 104% 80% 120% 102% 80% 120% 81% 70% 130%Dissolved Antimony 1010201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 108% 80% 120% 101% 80% 120% 94% 70% 130%Dissolved Arsenic 1010201 8 8 0.0% < 2 103% 80% 120% 96% 80% 120% 86% 70% 130%Dissolved Barium 1010201 54 57 5.4% < 5 108% 80% 120% 103% 80% 120% 98% 70% 130%Dissolved Beryllium 1010201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 112% 80% 120% 103% 80% 120% 108% 70% 130%

Dissolved Bismuth 1010201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 108% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 95% 70% 130%Dissolved Boron 1010201 43 43 0.0% < 5 111% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 108% 70% 130%Dissolved Cadmium 1010201 < 0.017 < 0.017 0.0% < 0.017 103% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 103% 70% 130%Dissolved Chromium 1010201 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 107% 80% 120% 103% 80% 120% 88% 70% 130%Dissolved Cobalt 1010201 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 109% 80% 120% 108% 80% 120% 84% 70% 130%

Dissolved Copper 1010201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 110% 80% 120% 106% 80% 120% 88% 70% 130%Dissolved Iron 1010201 < 50 < 50 0.0% < 50 111% 80% 120% 105% 80% 120% 87% 70% 130%Dissolved Lead 1010201 < 0.5 < 0.5 0.0% < 0.5 107% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 96% 70% 130%Dissolved Manganese 1010201 81 84 3.6% < 2 108% 80% 120% 107% 80% 120% 91% 70% 130%Dissolved Molybdenum 1010201 2 2 0.0% < 2 101% 80% 120% 101% 80% 120% 98% 70% 130%

Dissolved Nickel 1010201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 87% 80% 120% 107% 80% 120% 88% 70% 130%Dissolved Selenium 1010201 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 96% 80% 120% 108% 80% 120% 87% 70% 130%Dissolved Silver 1010201 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.0% < 0.1 102% 80% 120% 102% 80% 120% 83% 70% 130%Dissolved Strontium 1010201 306 308 0.7% < 5 104% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120% 74% 70% 130%Dissolved Thallium 1010201 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.0% < 0.1 104% 80% 120% 106% 80% 120% 100% 70% 130%

Dissolved Tin 1010201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 103% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 101% 70% 130%Dissolved Titanium 1010201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 107% 80% 120% 105% 80% 120% 83% 70% 130%Dissolved Uranium 1010201 2.5 2.5 0.0% < 0.1 109% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 92% 70% 130%Dissolved Vanadium 1010201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 106% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 80% 70% 130%Dissolved Zinc 1010201 < 5 6 < 5 109% 80% 120% 108% 80% 120% 90% 70% 130%

Certified By:




Quality Assurance



UpperLower


Id Dup #2UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

UpperLower

AcceptableLimits


MethodBlank






Original signed




Method Summary







Original signed Original signed Original signed

Original signed








DATE REPORTED:


Oct 18, 2013

VERSION*: 1




PROJECT NO: 775





Member of:

*NOTES












PROJECT NO: 775







Original signed









<0.251,2-Dibromoethane 0.25ug/L<1.6Tetrachloroethylene 1.630ug/L<1Chlorobenzene 180ug/L<2Ethylbenzene 2ug/L<4m,p-Xylene 4ug/L







PROJECT NO: 775







Original signed




<0.51,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.5µg/L<11,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 1ug/L<1o-Xylene 1ug/L<11,3-Dichlorobenzene 1ug/L<11,4-Dichlorobenzene 15ug/L

<0.71,2-Dichlorobenzene 0.7200ug/LAcceptable LimitsUnitSurrogate


RDL - Reported Detection Limit; G / S - Guideline / Standard: Refers to NS-CDWQ excl [AO]Comments:







PROJECT NO: 775







Original signed











PROJECT NO: 775

DOC






Original signed




0.021Dissolved Cadmium 0.0175000ug/L<1Dissolved Chromium 150ug/L2Dissolved Cobalt 1ug/L2Dissolved Copper 21000 AOug/L

142Dissolved Iron 50300 AOug/L<0.5Dissolved Lead 0.510ug/L172Dissolved Manganese 250 AOug/L10Dissolved Molybdenum 2ug/L9Dissolved Nickel 2ug/L<1Dissolved Selenium 110ug/L

<0.1Dissolved Silver 0.1ug/L1990Dissolved Strontium 5ug/L<0.1Dissolved Thallium 0.1ug/L<2Dissolved Tin 2ug/L8Dissolved Titanium 2ug/L

4.5Dissolved Uranium 0.120ug/L<2Dissolved Vanadium 2ug/L16Dissolved Zinc 55000 AOug/L








PROJECT NO: 775







Original signed



7.86pH 6.5-8.5 AO8.6Reactive Silica as SiO2 0.5mg/L18Chloride 1250 AOmg/L0.4Fluoride 0.11.5mg/L493Sulphate 2500 AOmg/L88Alkalinity 5mg/L<5True Color 515 AOTCU


<0.05Nitrite as N 0.051.0mg/L0.07Ammonia as N 0.03mg/L0.7Total Organic Carbon 0.5mg/L

<0.01Ortho-Phosphate as P 0.01mg/L88.8Total Sodium 0.1200 AOmg/L4.1Total Potassium 0.1mg/L177Total Calcium 0.1mg/L13.7Total Magnesium 0.1mg/L

<0.02Total Phosphorous 0.02mg/L88Bicarb. Alkalinity (as CaCO3) 5mg/L

<10Carb. Alkalinity (as CaCO3) 10mg/L<5Hydroxide 5mg/L848Calculated TDS 1500 AOmg/L498Hardness mg/L0.37Langelier Index (@20C) NA0.05Langelier Index (@ 4C) NA7.49Saturation pH (@ 20C) NA7.81Saturation pH (@ 4C) NA12.5Anion Sum me/L14.0Cation sum me/L







PROJECT NO: 775







Original signed



5.4% Difference/ Ion Balance (NS) %9Total Aluminum 5100 OG AOug/L4Total Antimony 26ug/L3Total Arsenic 210ug/L15Total Barium 51000ug/L<2Total Beryllium 2ug/L<2Total Bismuth 2ug/L93Total Boron 55000ug/L

0.021Total Cadmium 0.0175ug/L<1Total Chromium 150ug/L2Total Cobalt 1ug/L2Total Copper 11000 AOug/L

187Total Iron 50300 AOug/L<0.5Total Lead 0.510ug/L166Total Manganese 250 AOug/L10Total Molybdenum 2ug/L9Total Nickel 2ug/L<1Total Selenium 110ug/L

<0.1Total Silver 0.1ug/L1960Total Strontium 5ug/L<0.1Total Thallium 0.1ug/L<2Total Tin 2ug/L8Total Titanium 2ug/L

4.1Total Uranium 0.120ug/L<2Total Vanadium 2ug/L21Total Zinc 55000 AOug/L








PROJECT NO: 775







Original signed

4817275 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Dissolved Metals (FWAL) Dissolved Manganese 50 AO 172775-TH54817275 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) Calculated TDS 500 AO 848775-TH54817275 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) Total Manganese 50 AO 166775-TH54817275 NS-CDWQ incl [AO] Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) Turbidity 0.1 66.9775-TH5


Guideline Violation









1 4824201 < 5 < 5 0.0% < 5 111% 60% 140% 118% 60% 140% 122% 60% 140%


1 4824201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 99% 60% 140% 112% 60% 140% 113% 60% 140%











Quality Assurance



UpperLower


Id Dup #2UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

UpperLower

AcceptableLimits


MethodBlank






Certified By:




Quality Assurance



UpperLower


Id Dup #2UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

UpperLower

AcceptableLimits


MethodBlank






Original signed

Standard Water Analysis + Metals (Total) pH 4819139 7.48 7.16 4.4% < 101% 80% 120% NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120%Reactive Silica as SiO2 1 4815608 9.5 9.6 1.0% < 0.5 103% 80% 120% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120%Chloride 1 4821743 6 6 0.0% < 1 101% 80% 120% 80% 120% 108% 80% 120%Fluoride 1 4821743 0.3 0.3 0.0% < 0.1 108% 80% 120% 80% 120% 90% 80% 120%Sulphate 1 4821743 3 2 40.0% < 2 114% 80% 120% 80% 120% 103% 80% 120%

Alkalinity 4819139 9 9 0.0% < 5 90% 80% 120% NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120%True Color 1 4821730 15 14 6.9% < 5 100% 80% 120% 80% 120% 80% 120%Turbidity 1 4817275 66.9 63.1 5.8% < 0.1 87% 80% 120% 80% 120% 80% 120%Electrical Conductivity 4819139 25 24 5.8% < 1 102% 80% 120% NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120%Nitrate as N 1 4821743 0.14 0.15 6.9% < 0.05 106% 80% 120% 80% 120% 116% 80% 120%

Nitrite as N 1 4821743 < 0.05 < 0.05 0.0% < 0.05 107% 80% 120% 80% 120% 97% 80% 120%Ammonia as N 1 4815608 <0.03 <0.03 0.0% < 0.03 112% 80% 120% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120%Ortho-Phosphate as P 1 4815608 <0.01 <0.01 0.0% < 0.01 104% 80% 120% 80% 120% 103% 80% 120%Total Sodium 1011201 421 427 1.4% < 0.1 120% 80% 120% 116% 80% 120% 100% 70% 130%Total Potassium 1011201 61.1 65.9 7.6% < 0.1 120% 80% 120% 120% 80% 120% 99% 70% 130%

Total Calcium 1011201 38.9 39.9 2.5% < 0.1 99% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 99% 70% 130%Total Magnesium 1011201 19.0 19.8 4.1% < 0.1 103% 80% 120% 98% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120%Total Phosphorous 1011201 29.9 30.7 2.6% < 0.02 101% 80% 120% 97% 80% 120% 99% 70% 130%Bicarb. Alkalinity (as CaCO3) 4819139 9 9 0.0% < 5 NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120%Carb. Alkalinity (as CaCO3) 4819139 <10 <10 0.0% < 10 NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120%

Hydroxide 4819139 <5 <5 0.0% < 5 NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120% NA 80% 120%Total Aluminum 1011201 148 148 0.0% < 5 107% 80% 120% 101% 80% 120% 112% 70% 130%Total Antimony 1011201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 98% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 100% 70% 130%Total Arsenic 1011201 5 5 0.0% < 2 117% 80% 120% 117% 80% 120% 99% 70% 130%Total Barium 1011201 46 42 9.1% < 5 95% 80% 120% 91% 80% 120% 100% 70% 130%

Total Beryllium 1011201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 115% 80% 120% 107% 80% 120% 105% 70% 130%Total Bismuth 1011201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 100% 80% 120% 102% 80% 120% 90% 70% 130%Total Boron 1011201 656 654 0.3% < 5 103% 80% 120% 108% 80% 120% 100% 70% 130%Total Cadmium 1011201 < 0.017 < 0.017 0.0% < 0.017 92% 80% 120% 88% 80% 120% 92% 70% 130%Total Chromium 1011201 8 10 22.2% < 1 104% 80% 120% 107% 80% 120% 96% 70% 130%

Total Cobalt 1011201 3 4 NA < 1 104% 80% 120% 102% 80% 120% 93% 70% 130%Total Copper 1011201 11 11 0.0% < 1 106% 80% 120% 108% 80% 120% 91% 70% 130%Total Iron 1011201 4170 4390 5.1% < 50 101% 80% 120% 102% 80% 120% 99% 70% 130%Total Lead 1011201 1.6 1.6 0.0% < 0.5 98% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120% 91% 70% 130%Total Manganese 1011201 598 624 4.3% < 2 101% 80% 120% 101% 80% 120% 95% 70% 130%

Total Molybdenum 1011201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 91% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 99% 70% 130%Total Nickel 1011201 17 17 0.0% < 2 102% 80% 120% 102% 80% 120% 95% 70% 130%Total Selenium 1011201 2 2 0.0% < 1 87% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 97% 70% 130%Total Silver 1011201 0.1 0.1 0.0% < 0.1 96% 80% 120% 95% 80% 120% 95% 70% 130%




Quality Assurance


Water Analysis

UpperLower


Id Dup #2UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

UpperLower

AcceptableLimits


MethodBlank






Total Strontium 1011201 368 368 0.0% < 5 99% 80% 120% 96% 80% 120% 94% 70% 130%

Total Thallium 1011201 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.0% < 0.1 99% 80% 120% 92% 80% 120% 94% 70% 130%Total Tin 1011201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 99% 80% 120% 95% 80% 120% 92% 70% 130%Total Titanium 1011201 5 5 0.0% < 2 96% 80% 120% 108% 80% 120% 98% 70% 130%Total Uranium 1011201 <0.1 0.1 NA < 0.1 92% 80% 120% 94% 80% 120% 92% 70% 130%Total Vanadium 1011201 3 3 0.0% < 2 103% 80% 120% 106% 80% 120% 92% 70% 130%

Total Zinc 1011201 43 44 2.3% < 5 107% 80% 120% 112% 80% 120% 78% 70% 130%

Dissolved Metals (FWAL)Dissolved Aluminum 1011201 94 95 1.1% < 5 96% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120% 81% 70% 130%Dissolved Antimony 1011201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 98% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120% 101% 70% 130%Dissolved Arsenic 1011201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 92% 80% 120% 94% 80% 120% 101% 70% 130%Dissolved Barium 1011201 26 25 3.9% < 5 99% 80% 120% 95% 80% 120% 88% 70% 130%Dissolved Beryllium 1011201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 98% 80% 120% 104% 80% 120% 98% 70% 130%

Dissolved Bismuth 1011201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 98% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120% 88% 70% 130%Dissolved Boron 1011201 27 28 3.6% < 5 98% 80% 120% 98% 80% 120% 103% 70% 130%Dissolved Cadmium 1011201 11.7 12.0 2.5% < 0.017 94% 80% 120% 98% 80% 120% 82% 70% 130%Dissolved Chromium 1011201 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 99% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120% 81% 70% 130%Dissolved Cobalt 1011201 12 12 0.0% < 1 98% 80% 120% 101% 80% 120% 90% 70% 130%

Dissolved Copper 1011201 5 5 0.0% < 2 99% 80% 120% 97% 80% 120% 74% 70% 130%Dissolved Iron 1011201 < 50 < 50 0.0% < 50 99% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 81% 70% 130%Dissolved Lead 1011201 1.00 0.82 19.8% < 0.5 98% 80% 120% 102% 80% 120% 89% 70% 130%Dissolved Manganese 1011201 225 225 0.0% < 2 97% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 96% 70% 130%Dissolved Molybdenum 1011201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 91% 80% 120% 93% 80% 120% 99% 70% 130%

Dissolved Nickel 1011201 61 63 3.2% < 2 98% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 91% 70% 130%Dissolved Selenium 1011201 < 1 < 1 0.0% < 1 100% 80% 120% 94% 80% 120% 106% 70% 130%Dissolved Silver 1011201 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.0% < 0.1 92% 80% 120% 94% 80% 120% 97% 70% 130%Dissolved Strontium 1011201 167 168 0.6% < 5 99% 80% 120% 98% 80% 120% 73% 70% 130%Dissolved Thallium 1011201 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.0% < 0.1 101% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120% 89% 70% 130%

Dissolved Tin 1011201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 100% 80% 120% 102% 80% 120% 98% 70% 130%Dissolved Titanium 1011201 3 2 NA < 2 106% 80% 120% 94% 80% 120% 78% 70% 130%Dissolved Uranium 1011201 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.0% < 0.1 97% 80% 120% 99% 80% 120% 86% 70% 130%Dissolved Vanadium 1011201 < 2 < 2 0.0% < 2 96% 80% 120% 97% 80% 120% 85% 70% 130%Dissolved Zinc 1011201 621 607 2.3% < 5 96% 80% 120% 100% 80% 120% 94% 70% 130%

Certified By:




Quality Assurance



UpperLower


Id Dup #2UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

UpperLower

AcceptableLimits


MethodBlank






Original signed




Method Summary







Original signed

Original signed

Original signed

Original signed

APPENDIX 4

Output from AquiferTest (V3.0) Analysis


Dartmouth, NS B3B 1E1

Tel: (902) 468-1317; Fax: (902) 468-4704

Project:

No:

Client:

Level II GWA, Enfield, NS

775

Cygnet Properties/Foxwood Developments

Pumping Test Analysis Report

TH1

TH1 Step Test (Specif ic Capacity)

Q [l/s]0.30.240.180.120.060

s [m

]

30

24

18

12

6

0

Spec. Capacity: 5.24E-4 [m²/min]

Comments:

TH1Pumping well:

Discharge rate: 0.13413924 [l/s]

Screen radius: 0.076 [m]

Screen length: 122 [m]

Casing radius: 0.076 [m]

Test parameters:

TH1 Step Test

Analysis method: Specific Capacity

Aquifer thickness: 110 [m]

Analysis results:

Evaluated by:

Date: 11/7/2013

Test name:



Tel: (902) 468-1317; Fax: (902) 468-4704

Project:

No:

Client:


775



TH1

TH1 Step Test (Cooper-Jacob Steptest)

adjusted time [min]1 10 100

s/Q

[min

/m²]

1713.428

1370.742

1028.057

685.371

342.686

Transmissivity: 2.15E-6 [m²/s] Conductivity: 1.95E-8 [m/s]

Comments:

TH1Pumping well:





Test parameters:

TH1 Step Test

Analysis method: Cooper-Jacob Steptest


Analysis results:

Evaluated by:

Date:

Confined aquifer

11/7/2013

Test name:



Tel: (902) 468-1317; Fax: (902) 468-4704

Project:

No:

Client:


775



TH2

TH2 Step-Recovery Test (Specif ic Capacity)

Q [l/s]0.40.320.240.160.08

s [m

]

30

24

18

12

6

0


Comments:

TH2Pumping well:





Test parameters:

TH2 Step Test



Analysis results:

Evaluated by:

Date: 11/7/2013

Test name:



Tel: (902) 468-1317; Fax: (902) 468-4704

Project:

No:

Client:


775



TH2



s/Q

[min

/m²]

851.137

680.91

510.682

340.455

170.227

0


Comments:

TH2Pumping well:





Test parameters:

TH2 Step Test



Analysis results:

Evaluated by:

Date:

Confined aquifer

11/7/2013

Test name:



Tel: (902) 468-1317; Fax: (902) 468-4704

Project:

No:

Client:


775



TH3


Q [l/s]1.51.20.90.60.3

s [m

]

45

36

27

18

9

0


Comments:

TH3Pumping well:





Test parameters:

TH3 Step Test



Analysis results:

Evaluated by:

Date: 11/22/20

Test name:



Tel: (902) 468-1317; Fax: (902) 468-4704

Project:

No:

Client:


775



TH3



s/Q

[min

/m²]

596.152

476.921

357.691

238.461

119.23

0


Comments:

TH3Pumping well:





Test parameters:

TH3 Step Test



Analysis results:

Evaluated by:

Date:

Confined aquifer

11/22/20

Test name:



Tel: (902) 468-1317; Fax: (902) 468-4704

Project:

No:

Client:


775



TH4


Q [l/s]0.30.240.180.120.060

s [m

]

60

48

36

24

12

0


Comments:

TH4Pumping well:





Test parameters:

TH4 Step Test



Analysis results:

Evaluated by:

Date: 11/7/2013

Test name:



Tel: (902) 468-1317; Fax: (902) 468-4704

Project:

No:

Client:


775



TH4



s/Q

[min

/m²]

3810.467

3048.373

2286.28

1524.187

762.093

0


Comments:

TH4Pumping well:





Test parameters:

TH4 Step Test



Analysis results:

Evaluated by:

Date:

Confined aquifer

11/7/2013

Test name:



Tel: (902) 468-1317; Fax: (902) 468-4704

Project:

No:

Client:


775



TH5


Q [l/s]0.20.160.120.080.04

s [m

]

60

48

36

24

12

0


Comments:

TH5Pumping well:





Test parameters:

TH5 Step Test



Analysis results:

Evaluated by:

Date: 11/7/2013

Test name:



Tel: (902) 468-1317; Fax: (902) 468-4704

Project:

No:

Client:


775



TH5



s/Q

[min

/m²]

4706.068

3764.855

2823.641

1882.427

941.214

0


Comments:

TH5Pumping well:





Test parameters:

TH5 Step Test



Analysis results:

Evaluated by:

Date:

Confined aquifer

11/7/2013

Test name:



Tel: (902) 468-1317; Fax: (902) 468-4704

Project:

No:

Client:


775



TH3

24-Hour Constrant Rate Test (Cooper-Jacob Time-Draw dow n)

Time [min]1 10 100 1000

Dra

wdo

wn

[m]

40

32

24

16

8

0


Comments:

TH3Pumping well:

Discharge rate: 0.00068 [m³/s]




Test parameters:

TH3 24-Hour Constant Rate Test

Analysis method: Cooper-Jacob Time-Drawdown


Analysis results:

Evaluated by:

Date:

Confined aquifer

10/28/20

Test name:



Tel: (902) 468-1317; Fax: (902) 468-4704

Project:

No:

Client:


775



TH3

24-Hour Constrant Rate Test (Theis)

t/r² [min/m²]1E+1 1E+2 1E+3 1E+4 1E+5 1E+6 1E+7 1E+8

1/u1E-1 1E+0 1E+1 1E+2 1E+3 1E+4 1E+5 1E+6 1E+7

W(u

)

1E-3

1E-2

1E-1

1E+0

1E+1

1E+2

s [m]

1E-1

1E+0

1E+1

1E+2

1E+3

THEIS


Storativity: 2.66E-2

Comments:

TH3Pumping well:





Test parameters:


Analysis method: Theis


Analysis results:

Evaluated by:

Date:

Confined aquifer

10/28/20

Test name:



Tel: (902) 468-1317; Fax: (902) 468-4704

Project:

No:

Client:


775



TH3

24-Hour Constrant Rate Test (Theis Recovery)

t/t'10 100 1000 10000

s' [m

]

40

32

24

16

8

0


Comments:

TH3Pumping well:





Pump Time 1631 [min]

Test parameters:


Analysis method: Theis Recovery


Analysis results:

Evaluated by:

Date:

Confined aquifer

10/28/20

Test name:



Tel: (902) 468-1317; Fax: (902) 468-4704

Project:

No:

Client:


775



TH2

TH3 24-Hour Constant Rate Test (Cooper-Jacob Time-Draw dow n)

Time [min]100 1000

Dra

wdo

wn

[m]

0.35

0.28

0.21

0.14

0.07


Comments:

TH3Pumping well:





Test parameters:


Analysis method: Cooper-Jacob Time-Drawdown


Analysis results:

Evaluated by:

Date:

Confined aquifer

11/14/20

Test name:



Tel: (902) 468-1317; Fax: (902) 468-4704

Project:

No:

Client:


775



TH2

TH3 24-Hour Constant Rate Test (Theis)

t/r² [min/m²]1E-2 1E-1 1E+0 1E+1 1E+2 1E+3 1E+4 1E+5

1/u1E-1 1E+0 1E+1 1E+2 1E+3 1E+4 1E+5 1E+6 1E+7

W(u

)

1E-3

1E-2

1E-1

1E+0

1E+1

1E+2

s [m]

1E-3

1E-2

1E-1

1E+0

1E+1

THEIS



Comments:

TH3Pumping well:





Test parameters:


Analysis method: Theis


Analysis results:

Evaluated by:

Date:

Confined aquifer

11/14/20

Test name:



Tel: (902) 468-1317; Fax: (902) 468-4704

Project:

No:

Client:


775



20 Years

TH3 24-Hour Constant Rate Test (Theis Prediction)

Distance: [m]5004003002001000

Dra

wdo

wn

[m]

10

8

6

4

2

0

Transmissivity: 1.68E-4 [m²/s]


Comments:

TH3Pumping well:





Number of Data Points: 50

1 [m]

Max. Distance:

Time:

500 [m]

Test parameters:


Analysis method: Theis Prediction


Analysis results:

Evaluated by:

Date:

Min. Distance:

10512000 [min]

Drawdown vs. Distance

11/19/20

Test name:



Tel: (902) 468-1317; Fax: (902) 468-4704

Project:

No:

Client:


775



After 20 Years

TH5 Step Test (Theis Prediction)

Distance: [m]250200150100500

Dra

wdo

wn

[m]

200

160

120

80

40

0

Transmissivity: 1.20E-6 [m²/s]


Comments:

TH5Pumping well:





Number of Data Points: 50

1 [m]

Max. Distance:

Time:

250 [m]

Test parameters:

TH5 Step Test

Analysis method: Theis Prediction


Analysis results:

Evaluated by:

Date:

Min. Distance:

10512000 [min]

Drawdown vs. Distance

11/20/20

Test name:

level ii groundwater assessment eastern portion of pid … · 2017-06-22 · level ii groundwater...

Documents