thompson nicola regional district - tnrd

VAVENBY WATER MASTER PLAN THOMPSON NICOLA REGIONAL DISTRICT – MAY 2018

Distribution List

# of Hard Copies PDF Required Association / Company Name 1 1 TNRD

Revision Log

Revision # Revised by Date Issue / Revision Description 1 R Wall Feb 19, 2018 2 R Wall Apr 20, 2018 3 R Wall May 17, 2018 Revised design flows

Report Submission

Report Prepared By:

Report Reviewed By:

Rob Wall, P. Eng. Project Engineer

Dave Underwood, P. Eng. Project Engineer

R:\Clients\300-399\379\379-491\05 Reports\379-491-TNRD-Vavenby Water Master Plan-May 2018.docx

VAVENBY WATER MASTER PLAN i THOMPSON NICOLA REGIONAL DISTRICT – MAY 2018

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................. vi 1.0 Background .................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Water Demands ........................................................................................................... 3

1.1.1 20 Year Design Flow .............................................................................................. 4

1.2 Water Quality Analysis ................................................................................................. 5

1.2.1 Source Water ......................................................................................................... 5

1.2.2 Comprehensive Water Testing ............................................................................... 5

1.2.3 Turbidity ................................................................................................................. 5

1.2.4 Bacteriological Testing ........................................................................................... 7

1.3 Regulatory Agency Certificates and Approvals ............................................................ 9

1.3.1 Interior Health ........................................................................................................ 9

1.3.2 Water License ........................................................................................................ 9

2.0 Capacity and Condition of Water Intake ..................................................................... 10

2.1 North Thompson River Intake .....................................................................................10

2.2 Existing Test Well .......................................................................................................15

3.0 Treatment / Disinfection ............................................................................................... 17

3.1 Disinfection System ....................................................................................................17

4.0 Controls and Electrical ................................................................................................ 20

5.0 Water Storage Reservoir .............................................................................................. 21

6.0 Water Distribution System ........................................................................................... 25

7.0 Rights of Way ............................................................................................................... 33

8.0 Improvement Plan ........................................................................................................ 35

8.1 General .......................................................................................................................35

8.2 Water Source ..............................................................................................................35

8.2.1 Intake Upgrade .................................................................................................... 35

8.2.2 Option for Aquifer Water Source .......................................................................... 35

8.3 Treatment System.......................................................................................................38

8.3.1 Treatment of Water from the North Thompson River ............................................ 38

8.3.2 Treatment of Well Water ...................................................................................... 43

VAVENBY WATER MASTER PLAN ii THOMPSON NICOLA REGIONAL DISTRICT – MAY 2018

8.4 Reservoir ....................................................................................................................44

8.5 Water Distribution System ...........................................................................................46

8.5.1 Water System Modelling ...................................................................................... 46

8.5.2 Distribution System Improvements ....................................................................... 46

8.5.3 Hydrant Installation .............................................................................................. 48

8.5.4 Water Meters ....................................................................................................... 50

8.5.5 Casing Under Trans Mountain Pipeline ................................................................ 51

9.0 Cost Summary .............................................................................................................. 52

Appendix A – Comprehensive Water Analysis Appendix B – Permit to Operate Appendix C – Summary of Local Geology

VAVENBY WATER MASTER PLAN iii THOMPSON NICOLA REGIONAL DISTRICT – MAY 2018

List of Tables

Table 1-1: Summary of Bacteriological Tests By Interior Health ................................................. 7 Table 2-1: High Lift Pump Details ..............................................................................................10 Table 2-2: Well Details ..............................................................................................................15 Table 5-1: Reservoir Details ......................................................................................................21 Table 6-1: Existing Watermains ................................................................................................25 Table 6-2: Existing Watermain Appurtenances..........................................................................26 Table 8-1: Estimated Exploration Costs ....................................................................................36 Table 8-2: Estimated Production Well Costs .............................................................................36 Table 8-3: Estimated Exploration Costs – Canfor Site ...............................................................37 Table 8-4: Estimated Production Well Costs – Canfor Site ........................................................37 Table 8-5: Rapid Gravity Filters – Clarifier / Filter Package Systems .........................................38 Table 8-6: Membrane Filters .....................................................................................................39 Table 8-7: Estimated Treatment Costs – River Source ..............................................................42 Table 8-8: Estimated Treatment Costs – Well Source ...............................................................43 Table 8-9: Estimated Reservoir Costs .......................................................................................44 Table 8-10: General Reservoir Improvements ...........................................................................45 Table 8-11: Estimated Watermain Upgrade Costs. ...................................................................47 Table 8-12: Estimated Hydrant Upgrade Costs .........................................................................48 Table 8-13: Estimated Water Meter Costs .................................................................................51 Table 8-14: Estimated Cased Watermain Cost ..........................................................................51 Table 9-1: Recommended Upgrades and Estimated Costs .......................................................52

VAVENBY WATER MASTER PLAN iv THOMPSON NICOLA REGIONAL DISTRICT – MAY 2018

List of Figures

Figure 1-1: Location Plan ........................................................................................................... 2 Figure 1-2: Flow Trend - Vavenby Community Water System .................................................... 3 Figure 1-3: Pumphouse Turbidity Trend ..................................................................................... 6 Figure 1-4: Distribution System Turbidity Trend ......................................................................... 6 Figure 2-1: Junction between intakes under construction (April 2002) .......................................11 Figure 2-2: Intake pipeline located beside infiltration gallery during construction (April 2002)....11 Figure 2-3: Intake Pump Well ....................................................................................................12 Figure 2-4: Intake Pump Well ....................................................................................................12 Figure 2-5: Pump House, 3070 Dohms Rd ................................................................................13 Figure 2-6: Test Well Completed at Pump House, 3070 Dohms Rd ..........................................16 Figure 3-1: Disinfection System, Control Panel and Pipework Inside Pump House ...................18 Figure 5-1: Treated Water Reservoir .........................................................................................21 Figure 6-1: Pipe Crossing to South Side of River ......................................................................27 Figure 6-2 Watermains by Material ..........................................................................................28 Figure 6-3: Watermains By Size ................................................................................................29 Figure 6-4: Watermain Criticality ...............................................................................................30 Figure 7-1: Intake Easements ...................................................................................................33 Figure 7-2: Reservoir Easements ..............................................................................................34 Figure 8-1: Conceptual Design for Water Treatment Building ....................................................41 Figure 8-2: Proposed Watermain Improvements and Associated Fire Flow ..............................49

VAVENBY WATER MASTER PLAN v THOMPSON NICOLA REGIONAL DISTRICT – MAY 2018

List of Acronyms

BCGW BC Groundwater Ltd ERT Electrical Resistance Tomography GARP Ground Water at Risk of Containing Pathogens GSC Geodetic Survey of Canada GUDI Groundwater Under the Direct Influence of Surface Water IHA Interior Health Authority TNRD Thompson Nicola Regional District TRUE TRUE Consulting

Units of Measure

ft feet Igpm Imperial gallons per minute km kilometre L/d Litres per day L/m Litres per minute L/s Litres per second lpcd Litres per capita per day m metre mg/L milligrams per Litre mm millimetre NTU Nephelometric Turbidity Units psi pounds per square inch USgpm US gallons per minute

Referenced Reports

1 Phase 1 - Groundwater Potential Evaluation Report of Findings prepared for TNRD by Kala Groundwater Consulting Ltd. Aug 5, 2005.

2 Groundwater Supply Investigation prepared for Stantec Consulting Ltd. by P. Blackett, ASc.T of Kala Groundwater Consulting Ltd. Dec 12, 2005.

VAVENBY WATER MASTER PLAN vi THOMPSON NICOLA REGIONAL DISTRICT – MAY 2018

Executive Summary

The Thompson Nicola Regional District has commissioned a master plan assessment of its water and sewer infrastructure. The master plans will enable better planning for the future of the communities and set out priorities for improvements to the systems to ensure safe, clean, reliable and affordable water and wastewater services.

The master plans list recommended upgrades with estimated costs to enable the TNRD to prepare a financial plan with the general objective of compliance with regulatory requirements and capacity for future growth.

The analysis of the Vavenby community water system has identified a need for the following key improvements;

A hydrogeologic study including exploratory drilling to determine if the proposed groundwater supply will be sustainable.

Construction of a new production well, pumphouse and disinfection system. Improvements to the reservoir and right of way / access Water metering as an incentive for the community to limit summer water consumption.

The TNRD may also wish to consider distribution system improvements to improve the ability to provide fire flow and extend service to more of the community.

VAVENBY WATER MASTER PLAN 1 THOMPSON NICOLA REGIONAL DISTRICT – MAY 2018

1.0 Background

Constructed 1970 Connections 114 (approximately) Population 252 (2016 Census) Location 150km North of Kamloops Water Source North Thompson River Treatment Process Disinfection by sodium hypochlorite

The Vavenby Community Water System is located approximately 150km north of Kamloops, next to the North Thompson River (See Figure 1-1). The system was constructed in 1972 by the Vavenby Improvement District. The Vavenby Improvement District operated the water system on the north shore of the North Thompson River and a small; community water system was operated by local residents on the south shore.

The transfer of the Vavenby water system to the TNRD occurred in 2004. In 2005 the distribution system was extended across the river. The work included approximately 1000 metres of 150mm diameter watermain, 125 metres of insulated pipe on the Vavenby Road Bridge crossing the North Thompson River and the installation of 17 water services. A new 300m3 bolted steel insulated reservoir was also constructed as part of this project to replace a pair of small wood stave tanks.

The system currently services 139 connections. The community includes a school, some commercial buildings and the Canfor Lumber Mill. The Canfor property has a potable water connection but take their process water and fire fighting supply directly from an onsite well constructed in 2012 by BCGW. The original Canfor river intake has been abandoned.

20,0001:

WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere

1.0

Kilometers

0 1.00.51

Projection: October 12, 2017

THIS IS NOT A LEGAL SURVEY PLAN. This map is a user generated static output from theThompson-Nicola Regional District Internet Mapping site and is provided on an “as is” and “as

available” basis, without warranties of any kind, either expressed or implied. The information wasgenerated from Geographic Information System (GIS) data maintained by different source agencies.Information contained in the map may be approximate, and is not necessarily complete, accurate or

current. While all reasonable efforts have been made to ensure the accuracy of the data, reliance onthis information without verification from original records is done at the user's own risk. Figure 1-1: Location Plan

Legend

Vavenby Community WaterSystem

TNRD Water System

Emergency Services

Police Station

Ambulance Station

Fire Station

Hospital

Local Authority Office

Parcel

TNRD Boundary (Outline)

Administrative Boundary (Outline)

First Nations Reserve (Outline)

Provincial Parks & Protected Areas


1.1 Water Demands The population of Vavenby was 251 in 2011 and 252 in 2016. Historically, the water demands have been dominated by leakage from the distribution system. The TNRD have undertaken an ongoing leakage control program which has achieved good results in recent years. Flows in Vavenby are now moderately seasonal, with the peak flows occurring in the summer.

FIGURE 1-2: FLOW TREND - VAVENBY COMMUNITY WATER SYSTEM

Based on a population of 252, the Vavenby (2016/17) flows translate to per capita demand as follows;

Flow (m3/d) Per Capita Flow (L/cap/d)

20th Percentile 131 519 Median 238 944 Average 298 1183 90th Percentile 520 2064 Max 975 3869


1.1.1 20 Year Design Flow

A maximum day demand of 800m3/d has been assumed as the 20-year design flow. This figure is taken from recent flows based on the following assumptions;

Flows prior to 2016 included many significant leaks, which have now been repaired. The TNRD plans to implement volume-based charges for water consumption, it is

common for the ADD and MDD to fall 20 – 30% when meters are installed. Population growth in Vavenby is expected to be limited. The Census reported a population

of 251 in 2011, and 252 in 2016. It has been assumed that the population increase will be less than the consumption savings due to metering over the next 20 years. This outcome will depend on the status of mining development proposed in the area.


1.2 Water Quality Analysis 1.2.1 Source Water

The North Thompson River is approximately 300 km in length, originating southwest of Valemount and flowing south to join the South Thompson River at Kamloops. Water quality is affected by agriculture and forestry. There are no significant industrial or municipal discharges into the river upstream of Vavenby. Nevertheless, as there are no lakes in the river system to moderate changes in water quality, the quality tends to be relatively turbid in comparison to the other TNRD systems.

In 2017, Interior Health Authority applied a “do not use” order on the community’s drinking water system following the release of about 800 litres of diesel fuel when a semi-trailer unit ended up in the North Thompson River.

1.2.2 Comprehensive Water Testing

The TNRD comprehensive water analysis results were reviewed to determine specific treatment requirements for the source water.

The general water quality deteriorates during spring freshet with elevated levels for many parameters including colour, iron and manganese. Metals exceeding Canadian Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality at times during spring freshet were total aluminum, iron and manganese occurring in conjunction with high levels of non-filterable residue and turbidity. Soluble metals levels were also low. This suggests that the metals are in particulate form and will be effectively removed by drinking water filtration to remove turbidity.

1.2.3 Turbidity

The main water quality parameter of concern is turbidity. Turbidity commonly exceeds 5 NTU, particularly during spring freshet. Treated water turbidity levels are recorded by an online analyser at the pumphouse building and by hand in the distribution system. Turbidity levels are similar in both locations, which is expected as there is not a dedicated watermain feeding the reservoir.

It should be noted that the pumphouse turbidity record was cropped at 5 NTU in 2014.

The Interior Health 4-3-2-1-0 treatment objectives calls for treated water turbidity less than 1.0 NTU. It is TNRD policy and an Interior Health requirement to issue a Water Quality Advisory when turbidity is in the range 1 - 5 NTU. A Boil Water Notice is issued when turbidity exceeds 5 NTU. Based on the distribution system monitoring the turbidity is typically be characterised as ‘fair’ (1 - 5 NTU) on the TNRD public notification webpage. Instances of ‘poor’ water quality (>5 NTU) are common at Vavenby for extended periods of time.


FIGURE 1-3: PUMPHOUSE TURBIDITY TREND

FIGURE 1-4: DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM TURBIDITY TREND


1.2.4 Bacteriological Testing

Table 2 summarizes Interior Health bacteriological results for the Vavenby Water System for the period August 2017 to May 2018.

TABLE 1-1: SUMMARY OF BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTS BY INTERIOR HEALTH

Date Site Total Chlorine

Free Chlorine

Total Coliform

E. coli Turbidity pH

08-Aug-17 Firehall 2.32 2.01 <1 <1 1.02 7.97 16-Aug-17 Fire Hall 1.97 1.93 <1 <1 4.38 - 22-Aug-17 Firehall 1.90 1.76 <1 <1 7.71 8.07 29-Aug-17 Firehall 2.13 2.12 <1 <1 7.19 7.92 05-Sep-17 Firehall 2.22 1.99 <1 <1 6.60 7.91 12-Sep-17 Firehall 1.77 1.55 <1 <1 7.52 8.19 19-Sep-17 Firehall 1.74 1.55 <1 <1 3.84 8.14 26-Sep-17 Firehall 1.63 1.29 <1 <1 1.80 7.91 03-Oct-17 Firehall 2.63 2.05 <1 <1 24.7 8.83 10-Oct-17 Firehall 2.02 2.05 <1 <1 5.05 8.60 17-Oct-17 Firehall 2.50 2.28 <1 <1 2.72 8.65 31-Oct-17 Firehall 2.31 2.03 <1 <1 1.69 8.04 07-Nov-17 Firehall 1.77 1.55 <1 <1 2.20 8.23 14-Nov-17 Firehall 1.68 1.62 <1 <1 1.49 - 21-Nov-17 Firehall 1.33 1.24 <1 <1 1.92 - 29-Nov-17 Firehall 1.23 1.16 <1 <1 3.01 8.10 05-Dec-17 3/37 Vavenby Br Rd 1.65 1.31 1 <1 1.28 - 12-Dec-17 Firehall 1.62 1.44 <1 <1 0.75 - 19-Dec-17 Firehall 1.61 1.50 <1 <1 1.09 - 02-Jan-18 Firehall 1.82 1.46 <1 <1 1.79 8.57 10-Jan-18 Firehall 1.99 1.66 <1 <1 2.83 - 23-Jan-18 Firehall 1.83 1.60 <1 <1 2.16 8.36 30-Jan-18 Firehall 1.89 1.58 <1 <1 2.22 - 06-Feb-18 Firehall 1.54 1.29 <1 <1 0.88 - 13-Feb-18 Firehall 2.03 1.82 <1 <1 2.23 - 20-Feb-18 Firehall 1.44 1.11 <1 <1 1.05 - 27-Feb-18 Firehall 1.92 1.11 <1 <1 0.98 - 06-Mar-18 Firehall 1.39 1.24 <1 <1 0.01 - 13-Mar-18 Firehall 1.63 1.56 <1 <1 0.01 20-Mar-18 Firehall - - <1 <1 - - 27-Mar-18 Firehall 1.19 0.91 <1 <1 5.15 03-Apr-18 Firehall 1.39 1.22 <1 <1 2.01 10-Apr-18 Firehall 2.14 1.99 <1 <1 2.76 17-Apr-18 Firehall 1.72 1.52 <1 <1 1.72 24-Apr-18 Firehall 1.57 1.33 <1 <1 2.97

01-May-18 Firehall 2.40 2.18 <1 <1 3.29 8.29 08-May-18 Firehall 1.14 0.90 <1 <1 1.14


The Interior Health bacteriological standard for drinking water is 0 for total and fecal coliforms. The bacteriological results for the period comply with the standard. Turbidity should be less than 1. This level is routinely exceeded. The free chlorine level should be between 0.2 and 3 mg/L which appears to be complied with.


1.3 Regulatory Agency Certificates and Approvals The principal regulatory agency certificates, licenses and approvals which combine to provide approval for the construction and operation of the water system are summarized following.

1.3.1 Interior Health

Section 8 of the Health Act prohibits a person from operating a water supply system unless the water supplier holds a valid operating permit. The water supplier must also comply with all terms and conditions of the permit. The Vavenby Community Water System holds a valid operating permit. Conditions were added in 2007, summarized as follows;

Provide an engineering study of the system with an expected completion date of 2007. Develop a written Water Quality Monitoring and Sampling Program including Continuous

Chlorination Disinfection Monitoring, Continuous Turbidity Monitoring and Bacteriological monitoring four times per month.

Develop a Cross-Connection Control Program Provide a certified operator. Provide an Operation & Maintenance Schedule Provide an Emergency Response Plan. Provide an Annual Report including the results of monitoring and a copy of the emergency

response plan and operation and maintenance report.

1.3.2 Water License

The water license issued to the Vavenby Improvement District (License#C046138) allocates a quantity of 105,500 imperial gallons per day diverted from the North Thompson River. This equates to 480m3/d. Summer flows commonly exceed this value, so an amendment to the license is needed.


2.0 Capacity and Condition of Water Intake

2.1 North Thompson River Intake Description

The Vavenby water source is the North Thompson River. The system can draw water from either of two alternative points of diversion. Water is drawn from a pipe in the main river channel near the east bank during periods of lower turbidity, or under low river level conditions. When river levels are higher, water can be taken from an infiltration gallery near the west back. The infiltration gallery partially filters the water entering the system, which improves turbidity. The general characteristics of the intake are as follows;

Infiltration Gallery: The infiltration gallery consists of a 450mm perforated schedule 40 steel pipe enveloped in filter stone and a non-woven geo-textile and is located near the western bank of the river. The gallery can achieve limited reduction in source water turbidity.

Screened Intake: The intake located in the Thalweg area on the eastern side of the river was added in 2002. It consists of a 300mm diameter schedule 40 steel pipe with a 0.15m2 screen welded to an elliptical end detail. This intake was constructed on an emergency basis.

The river intake pipe can be isolated from the wet well using a valve. The infiltration gallery cannot be isolated. The wet well is a 1.2m diameter concrete caisson. It appears to be a relatively recent replacement of the original CSP culvert. This wet well houses a pair of 15 hp submersible pumps which deliver water to the system via the pump house.

TABLE 2-1: HIGH LIFT PUMP DETAILS

High Lift Pump 1 Pump Goulds 6" Model VIS-BAT, 6CLC-5V5 Motor Franklin Model S13971SF, 150mm, 15hp (230V/3Ø) Pumped Flowrate 9 L/s @ 96m High Lift Pump 2 Pump Goulds 6" Model VIS-BAT, 6CLC-5V5 Motor Franklin Model S13971SF, 150mm, 15hp (230V/3Ø) Pumped Flowrate 9 L/s @ 96m

The pumphouse is a basic concrete block and wood building. It contains power supply, metering and control equipment and the sodium hypochlorite dosing system.


FIGURE 2-1: JUNCTION BETWEEN INTAKES UNDER CONSTRUCTION (APRIL 2002)

FIGURE 2-2: INTAKE PIPELINE LOCATED BESIDE INFILTRATION GALLERY DURING CONSTRUCTION (APRIL 2002)


FIGURE 2-3: INTAKE PUMP WELL

FIGURE 2-4: INTAKE PUMP WELL


FIGURE 2-5: PUMP HOUSE, 3070 DOHMS RD

Assessment

The low level intake located in the Thalweg area appears to have sufficient capacity for the current level of peak demand. While the existing intake is thought to be functional, the screen has not been inspected to confirm its condition. The screen area results in an approach velocity of 0.098m/s at a flow of 9 l/s, which is compliant with Department of Fisheries and Oceans criteria based on Subcarangiform groups.

The infiltration gallery system can only be used when the river rises sufficiently to supply it. While there is no clear evidence of imminent failure due to siltation, the extent that this process has affected the gallery cannot easily be checked. Improved water quality could be enjoyed for a greater part of the year if a deeper infiltration gallery were to be successfully installed. The success of the installation depends on factors including the particular characteristics of the river bed and fine particle accumulation in the river gravels after installation.

The wet well chamber is prone to freezing and requires better insulation, and possibly heating.

The pump house building is functional but is not built to a high standard of quality. The TNRD plans to insulate and clad the building with after the power pole is removed from the building inset.


The pump house site lies at an elevation of approximately 455m. The area is subject to inundation during high river levels. Information on the design 200-year flood level for the site is not available. The nearest hydrometric metering station is at Birch Island. The flood risk would need to be studied if this site were to be considered for a filtration plant. Based on reports of historical flooding, it appears likely that raising the ground level by approximately 1m would give adequate protection to new water treatment buildings.


2.2 Existing Test Well Description

Very soon after taking over the system, the TNRD commissioned Kala Groundwater Consulting to investigate groundwater sources in Vavenby. It is believed that Kala’s approach was to target the North Thompson River alluvium adjacent to the North Thompson River with the expectation of achieving good yield with improved water quality. In 2005 they completed a 200mm vertical water well at a location near the existing pump house to a depth of 79m, without meeting bedrock. The test well failed to find a formation capable of delivering the required flow. Kala’s findings are described in their report Phase 1 - Groundwater Potential Evaluation (GPE) Report of Findings, 2005 attached to the BCGW report in Appendix C.

TABLE 2-2: WELL DETAILS

Well # : TW1 Well ID 11925 Constructed 2005 Well Casing 200mm dia steel casing Ground Level EL 455m Bottom of Well EL 376m, 79m bgs Well Yield 3-4 L/s (Kala Groundwater Consulting Ltd estimate)

Assessment

The test well should be retained for monitoring purposes as it would be useful if the TNRD chooses to pursue a groundwater source for the supply of Vavenby. The conversion should be completed in accordance with the provincial Ground Water Protection Regulation. BCGW has estimated the cost of completing the well with a nest piezometer system at about $20,000.

BCGW has considerable drilling experience in the North Thompson Valley. T. Carriou, P.Eng. has commented that the conditions encountered at the proposed test well site are not surprising given that the majority of the sediments directly adjoining the river are colluvial or erosional in nature. In other words, the sediments which have been eroded by the river are usually quite fine, as are the resulting slumped deposits. Although there can be some success targeting these shallow deposits (maximum 15m) BCGW suggests the probability of developing a reliable water source is low at this location. There is also the attendant risk of Groundwater Under the Direct Influence of Surface Water and pathogens in the shallow deposits.


FIGURE 2-6: TEST WELL COMPLETED AT PUMP HOUSE, 3070 DOHMS RD


3.0 Treatment / Disinfection

3.1 Disinfection System Description

The original sodium hypochlorite system was installed in 2008. The current chlorination system is as follows;

One 100 L sodium hypochlorite solution tank. One Pulsafeeder Pulsatron 1.9 L/h dosing pump, with start control connected to the plant

flow meter. The chemical feed pump operates when flow is detected. PVC solution tubing leading to a diffuser positioned in the chlorination building outlet pipe.

Assessment

Disinfection

The disinfection system is operating satisfactorily. There have been issues with dosing lines breaking as a result of abrasion and high water pressure at the pump house. Installing the dosing line inside a containment tube would help to prevent abrasion and would control where the sodium hypochlorite goes in the event of a leak. The simplest/lowest cost approach would be to use a larger diameter hose, rather than a proprietary dual containment pipe system.

The only contact time is provided by an approximately 150m long section of 150mm supply main from the pump house to the distribution system on Capostinsky Road. At 9 L/s this gives a chlorine contact time of approximately 5 minutes.

Chlorine contact time is typically calculated according to the USEPA Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (LT1ESWTR). Previously the Ministry of Health design standards required a minimum chlorine contact time of 20 minutes measured from the point of chlorine addition to the first service connection. This remains a useful benchmark.

At a pH between 6 and 9 and a temperature of 5 degrees C, the required C-T value is 8 mg.min/L (From LT1ESWTR Disinfection Profiling and Benchmarking). The chlorine concentration is generally above 2 mg/L.

It is accepted design practice to provide the required chlorine contact time in a baffled chamber or in a pipeline to minimize short circuiting. Based on a peak hourly flow of 9L/s, which is the assumed capacity of each high lift pump, the effective contact time is as follows.


FIGURE 3-1: DISINFECTION SYSTEM, CONTROL PANEL AND PIPEWORK INSIDE PUMP HOUSE


Tank Volume Baffle Factor

Effective Contact Time (min)

Dedicated Watermain (WTP to first connection) 3.3 1.0 6.1

At 2 mg/L, the required contact time is 4 minutes. It appears that the contact time is adequate based on these assumptions.

Treatment

The Interior Health 4-3-2-1-0 for treatment objective for surface water and groundwater at risk of containing pathogens are as follows;

4 log (99.99%) removal or inactivation of viruses 3 log (99.9%) removal or inactivation of Giardia Lamblia and Cryptosporidium 2 refers to two treatment processes for all surface drinking water systems 1 for less than 1 NTU of turbidity with a target of 0.1 NTU 0 E. Coli

Filtration is required effective protection against chlorine resistant pathogens (ie. protozoa) and to achieve turbidity less than 1 NTU of turbidity, with a target of 0.1 NTU.


4.0 Controls and Electrical

Description

The control system comprises:

Pump control panels at the pumphouse with elapsed time meters for the pumps, reservoir level indicator and alarm condition indicator lights.

Ultrasonic level transmitter at the reservoir with floats for high and low level alarms. A wireless communications link between the reservoir and pumphouse. Reservoir power is provided by 12V car batteries that must be carried up to the site on

foot as there is no right of way for vehicle access. There is no solar charging system.

Dialer and modem for transmission by telephone of alarm conditions to the water system operator. Alarm conditions that can be forwarded to the operator by telephone include low chlorine solution tank level, low/high reservoir level, wet well low level and low temperature in the pumphouse.

Power consists of a 200A, 230 V three phase power supply from two pole mounted transformers rated at 37 kVA. The BC Hydro transformers have previously been reported to use an obsolete ‘Open Delta’ system.

There is a SCADA control system linked to turbidity, pH and chlorine analyzer which was installed under a grant in 2011.

Assessment

The reservoir/pump control system and alarm condition system is consistent with current accepted standards for small municipal water supply systems.

The radio link at the Reservoir is affected by tall trees. Electrical power is provided from heavy 12V car batteries which need to be carried to the site. This arrangement would be more acceptable if there was vehicle access to the site. Removing trees around the reservoir would help to protect it from the summer fire hazard and improve the radio link and permit a solar panel to operate effectively on the reservoir roof. The trees immediately to the south of the reservoir cannot be removed because they are on private land, but the trees on the neighbouring lot could be removed with Crown permission. A tower, base and panels have been purchased for the site to support a radio link and solar panel near the top of the surrounding trees.


5.0 Water Storage Reservoir

Description

The existing 300m3 insulated bolted epoxy coated steel reservoir was constructed in August 2005. There are not thought to be cathodic protection anodes in the tank. The tank inlet and outlet are connected to the same pipe, but at different elevations. The inlet is at the top of the tank and the outlet is at the bottom. This arrangement improves tank mixing. There is also an overflow and a drain which feed a common pipe which discharges towards the highway. A temperature gauge is mounted to the side of the tank in a recession in the cladding. There is no power at this site.

The tank is insulated and ice formation has not been reported.

FIGURE 5-1: TREATED WATER RESERVOIR

TABLE 5-1: RESERVOIR DETAILS

Full Water Level EL 534.86m Depth 5.95m Inside Diameter 7.97m Volume 300m3


Assessment

Structural

The reservoir is relatively new and appears to be structurally sound. Draining of the reservoir for inspection of the structure was not undertaken with this study. There was no evidence of leakage or seepage next to the structure to indicate a significant structural defect. The condition of the internal steelwork should be checked at 3 – 5 year intervals. This could be combined with sediment removal, which will need to occur regularly due to the source water quality.

While they are cheaper to build, steel reservoirs have a significantly shorter lifespan than concrete reservoirs. The actual life can depend on many factors including water aggressiveness and the quality of installation. The numerous bolts and joints make bolted steel tanks difficult to recoat.

AWWA D-100 Welded Steel Tanks with 2-part epoxies applied in accordance with AWWA D-102 specifications should be sandblasted and recoated every 10-15 years depending on the composition of the coating. This can extend the life to as much as 80 years.

Budgetary cost for an inspection by the manufacturer would be $5,000. The budgetary cost for inspection, cleaning and repair would be $25,000. The work would include installing protection caps on floor bolts, replacing pipe couplers, re-coating damaged coating on tank and steel pipe stubs. Bolted patches would be installed if any coating areas are beyond repair.

Mixing

The Interior Health Authority calls for some form of active tank mixing in new reservoirs. This can be achieved by configuring inflows as jets, or by installing mechanical mixers. The mixing of the Vavenby reservoir contents is better than many TNRD systems as a result of the high level inlet, which is separated from the outlet. A directed duck bill inlet would be an improvement on this. There is no power supply at the Vavenby reservoir to drive a mechanical mixer.

Access

Vehicle access to the reservoir is a concern as permission for access through private property to the east of the Reservoir has been cancelled. New road access from the west is urgently required. The lot over which the new access road would pass is Crown land. The TNRD has applied to the Province for a license for Crown land tenure for the access road. MOTI permission has been granted for access south of the bend.

As an alternative, there is an existing exit onto a rough BC hydro track 600m to the west of the reservoir. The BC Hydro access would need to be extended approximately 250m to the Reservoir.

The TNRD have priced the supply and installation of a handrail as fall protection when accessing the hatch on the reservoir roof. This will be installed once road access is secured.


Reservoir Size

The storage required was calculated according to the requirements set out in the MMCD Design Guideline Manual and Fire Underwriters Survey Guideline (Water Supply for Public Fire Protection, 1999).

A nominal single family residential building has been used to calculate a maximum fire flow requirement. MMCD recommend a fire flow of 60 L/s to a single family residential building. The FUS short method requirements were also calculated. This calls for 4000 L/min (67 L/s) for a structure with a 3 – 10m exposure distance. The required duration at 4000 L/min is 1.5h.

Balancing storage for reservoirs is commonly calculated on the basis of 25% of maximum daily demand. The design MDD is 800 m3/d (Figure 1-2) which would result in a balancing volume of 200m3 plus another 25% for emergency storage (50m3). This method is overly simplistic for communities where most demand during the MDD period occurs at night, which spreads the flows relatively evenly across the day. Based on the SCADA reservoir level records, the required storage for flow equalization is calculated at around 70m3 (excluding emergency storage). This is equivalent to 9% of MDD. The lesser allowance has been used, rounded up to 100m3.

The required storage, based on MMCD design criteria, is as follows;

Item Description Residential Commercial /Institutional

A Calculated fire flow storage requirement Residential Fire (67 L/s for 1.5 hours) Commercial or Institutional Fire (150 L/s for 2.0 hours)

360 m3

1080 m3

B Balancing Storage Requirement (25% of MDD) 100 m3 100 m3 C Optional Emergency Storage (25% of A+B) 115 m3 295 m3 D Total Storage Required (A+B+C) 575 m3 1,475 m3

The reservoir storage capacity is currently 300m3. This leaves a shortfall of 275m3 when storage is based on fighting a residential fire.

If the fire flow is based upon fighting a commercial or institutional fire at 150 L/s for 2.0 hours then the required fire flow storage (A) increases to 1475m3. The available water storage is clearly not sufficient for a commercial or institutional fire.

Dedicated Line to Reservoir

There is no dedicated line to the reservoir in Vavenby. This results in more pressure fluctuation in the network as the pumps cycle and means that water quality is not stabilised by the reservoir prior to distribution. In addition, there is less turnover in the reservoir which also affects the stability of the chlorine residual. Installation of a dedicated line to the reservoir is a significant


project given the distance from the pump house to the reservoir. This work is not proposed at this stage.

Drainage

The reservoir drainage path takes the released water onto the highway if the drain or overflow operates. The TNRD would typically allow the reservoir to drain down via the outlet when draining the reservoir but avoiding overflows relies on the accuracy and reliability of level controls. These are not working reliably at present.


6.0 Water Distribution System

Description

The Vavenby distribution system currently services approximately 142 properties. The distribution system was installed in 1973 with system improvements occurring in 2006. This pipe system contains asbestos concrete (AC), PVC, and HDPE pipe with diameters ranging from 50mm to 150mm. This distribution system contains 5.1km of pipe.

There is a 50mm potable water service to the Canfor Mill. The Mill has a separate water supply from a drilled well for the industrial processes and fire protection. The Mill previously relied on a river intake, which is now decommissioned.

The original AC pipe network has a history of leaks and breaks. The original services were installed using low grade pipe material which has been failing at regular intervals. The TNRD have been replacing these services on a scheduled basis to avoid unplanned repairs which can occur at any time of year.

The newer system on the south side of the river is constructed in PVC and there is no history of watermain breaks in that area at this stage. The HDPE watermain strung under the bridge failed in late 2009 after the heat tracing system failed, causing the main to freeze and break. A system failure remote alarm should be installed if it is not already in place.

Table 6-1 summarises the existing watermains. The table is generally based on the TNRD asset database with some corrections.

TABLE 6-1: EXISTING WATERMAINS

Item No. Material Diameter (mm) Total Length (m)

1 AC 100 2222 2 AC 150 1232

AC Subtotal 3454 1 HDPE 150 173

HDPE Subtotal 173 1 PVC 50 60 2 PVC 100 340 3 PVC 150 1111

PVC Subtotal 1511 Distribution System Total 5140


Table 6-2 summarises the existing appurtenances in the water system. The table is generally based on the TNRD asset database with corrections. Improvements to the TNRD database are needed to more accurately represent the network.

TABLE 6-2: EXISTING WATERMAIN APPURTENANCES

Hydrants Item No. Description Total No. in System

1 Standpipe 19 Total 19

Water System Valves Item No. Description Total No. in System

1 Blowoff Valve 1 2 Isolation Valves 41 3 Curb Stop 123 4 Valve - Unknown Type 3 Total 168

Water Structures Item No. Description Total No. in System

1 Pump Station 1 2 Reservoir 1 Total 2


FIGURE 6-1: PIPE CROSSING TO SOUTH SIDE OF RIVER

0

#

#

#

#

#

#0

00

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

00

$

%,

Ste

el

AC

HD

PE

PV

C

PVC

AC

PVC

PV

C

AC

PVC

AC

AC

HDPE

AC

AC

AC

PVC

AC AC

HD

PE

AC

AC

AC

AC

PVC

¯1:5,000

VAVENBY COMMUNITY WATER SYSTEM FIGURE 6-2 WATERMAINS BY MATERIAL

Legend

Water Main

Material

AC

HDPE

PVC

STEEL

CSP

Yello

whe

ad

Highw

ay 5

Vaven

by B

rid

ge R

oad

Dra

win

g:

37

9-4

91-F

ig-V

Y-W

ate

r-M

ate

ria

l

Capostinsky Road

Nort

h T

hom

pso

n R

iver

Pump House

CN Railway

24m long 400mm dia. EncasementCrossing Highway

Trans MountainOil Pipeline

Reservoir

Steel Intake

0 Blow Off

# Stand Pipe

%, Pump House

$ Reservoir

0

#

#

#

#

#

#

0

00

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

00

$

%,

300

450

150

100

50

100

150

100

100

15

0

100

100

100

100

150

150150

100

150

150

100

100

100 150

15

0

100

¯1:5,000

VAVENBY COMMUNITY WATER SYSTEM FIGURE 6-3 WATERMAINS BY SIZE

Legend

Water Main

Size (mm)

50

100

150

300

450

Dra

win

g:

37

9-4

91-F

ig-V

Y-W

ate

r-S

ize

sCapostinsky Road

Nort

h T

hom

pso

n R

iver

Pump House

Yello

whe

ad

Highw

ay 5

Vaven

by B

rid

ge R

oad

CN Railway



Reservoir

Steel Intake

Structure

%, Pump House

$ Reservoir

0 Blow Off

# Stand Pipe

0

#

#

#

#

#

#

0

00

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

00

$

%,

150

100

50

100

15

0

150

150

150

15

0

100

100

15

0

100

150

100

100

150

100

150

150

100

15

0

15

0

150

150

100

100

300

450

¯1:5,000

VAVENBY COMMUNITY WATER SYSTEM FIGURE 6-4 WATERMAIN CRITICALITY

Legend

Criticality

Very Low

Low

Medium

High

Very High

Dra

win

g:

37

9-4

91-F

ig-V

Y-W

ate

r-C

ritica

lity

Capostinsky Road

Nort

h T

hom

pso

n R

iver

Pump House

Yello

whe

ad

Highw

ay 5

Vaven

by B

rid

ge R

oad

CN Railway



Reservoir

Steel Intake

Structure

%, Pump House

$ Reservoir

0 Blow Off

# Stand Pipe


Assessment

Distribution system waterline sizes, fire hydrant coverage, mainline valve locations and blow-off locations are consistent with the Design Guidelines for Rural Residential Community Water Systems (2012) and the MMCD Design Guideline Manual (2014).

Trans Mountain Pipeline

The transmission main to the Reservoir is installed under the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain Pipeline, which was originally installed in the 1950s. The pipe under the main is an uncased asbestos cement pipe. Interior Health require dual containment for similar newly installed water mains as protection against oil contamination.

Given that Kinder Morgan plans to twin the Trans Mountain in this area, it is strongly recommended that the pipe be replaced and cased. The existing asbestos cement water main is brittle and is highly likely to fail during the oil pipeline construction. Power and signal cables could be installed at the same time and extended across the Highway to the Reservoir.

The TNRD could consider calling for Kinder Morgan to install an encased watermain under the full width of the pipe corridor when the Trans Mountain pipeline is duplicated. A casing would also enable a rapid repair to the watermain in the event this was needed.

Because the trans mountain pipeline is likely to be cathodically protected there is a risk of accelerated corrosion in underground metal structures (stray current corrosion) where the metal structure shortens the electrical current return path. This could affect a casing installed under the trans mountain pipeline if there is a difference in electrical potential between the two TMP pipelines. Therefore, an HDPE or PVC casing would be recommended.

Services

The polyethylene pipe used to construct services in Vavenby was of poor quality and failures occur regularly. The TNRD has an ongoing program of service replacement to resolve the issue. This has been very successful in reducing water demand. The TNRD are also progressively locating and in many cases raising or replacing curb stops.

Hydrants

Fire fighting in Vavenby is by connection to a 50mm diameter self draining standpipe. The older standpipes, installed on the north side of the river in 1973, are connected by a galvanised iron service line. These hydrants have low capacity and the galvanised iron services are expected to be ready for replacement. Replacement of the standpipes with standard fire hydrants is recommended in areas where watermain capacity can support fire flows.

The school has a fire sprinkler system, but only has a 50mm service off a 100mm main.


Water Metering

In order to address leakage and to fairly recover the costs for excessive use of water, the TNRD has been awarded a $3M grant for the installation of water meters at all properties on water service. The meters will be installed over the next two to three years. Generally, the meters will be installed in pits at the property boundary. While this is more expensive than installation in a basement, there are many advantages to this configuration;

The dwellings on many properties do not have basements. Many services are poorly constructed and prone to leakage, making these an important

cause of unaccounted for water, which would not be found by a basement meter. There is no need to get the cooperation of the property owner to install a pit meter. Construction will be standardized across the community. Remaining services that have not been upgraded to address service failure issues can be

replaced when the meters are installed.

Sample Ports

The TNRD have a program in place for installing sample ports where the main leaving the reservoir meets the network and at the ends of the networks.

Sample ports are to be installed or replaced in many locations. The TNRD preference is to use self draining yard hydrants or blow offs for this function. The Interior Health approved design for sample ports includes no drain, which means a tube must be inserted into the valve in order to pump out the water to prevent freezing in winter. Verbal approval of the use of self draining fittings has been received from Interior Health.


7.0 Rights of Way

In accordance with the terms of reference for this study, the status of rights of way covering components of the water system not located in public road rights of way has been reviewed.

Intake

The intake pump house and wet well are located at the rear of a private lot located at the end of Dolms Road. There is a 6m wide road right of way to the site. There is also a 4.5 and 6m right of way over the treated water pipeline up to Capostinsky Road. The easement includes a broader area near the pumphouse including where the HDPE pipeline loops around. It is assumed that this loop was added to increase retention time in the pipeline for chlorine contact.

Legal survey is needed at the site to establish the boundaries and to facilitate the establishment of a fenced storage area.

FIGURE 7-1: INTAKE EASEMENTS


Reservoir, Water Supply Main and Related Appurtenances

The reservoir is in right of way A10890 over Lot 1 Plan KAP68131. The right of way is a 15m by 23m area with a 6m wide right of way extending to Harmon Road.

Unfortunately, the pipe and reservoir easement is not viable as an access road route and there is no separate easement. In the past, road access crossed private property. The property owner is no longer accepting TNRD vehicles onto their property.

New access from the west is proposed using a new highway entrance and access road.

FIGURE 7-2: RESERVOIR EASEMENTS

Distribution System

The distribution system is primarily located in MOTI street rights of way.

The distribution system crosses the Canadian National Railway inside 24m of 400mm diameter encasement pipe spanning two sets of railway tracks. The carrier pipe is 27m of 150mm diameter ductile iron water main.

The watermain feeding the reservoir is installed under the 600mm Ø Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain Pipeline, which was originally installed in the 1950s. The TMP has an 18m wide easement, which will soon include a second oil pipeline. The Yellowhead highway crossing to the reservoir is a 150mm Ø asbestos cement carrier pipe installed inside 24m of 400mm diameter 14 gauge CSP encasement pipe.


8.0 Improvement Plan

8.1 General In Section 8 of this report, improvements to the water system are described based on an assessment of regulatory standards and operating condition. Aside from infrastructure improvements the TNRD are working on the development of a variety of other tasks that will enhance the management of the water supplies. These include;

GIS data collection (completed) Asset management plan (completed) Long term life cycle financial planning (in progress) Source water protection plans (in planning stage) A formal water conservation strategy (in progress)

8.2 Water Source 8.2.1 Intake Upgrade

The existing intake system is working effectively, and no changes are recommended. While better water quality is achieved from the infiltration gallery, an upgrade designed to increase the availability of this intake will not advance the ultimate objective of installing a full treatment system.

Minor work recommended for the intake includes improving the insulation / heating of the existing wet well and an inspection of the intake screen. If sand is permitted to accumulate in the wet well it can cause pump / motor failure. A pump motor heat sensor is to be connected to the PLC to activate an alarm if the motor over heats.

8.2.2 Option for Aquifer Water Source

The BCGW review of area geology and hydrogeology is attached in Appendix C. The area is comprised of glacial till sheets with permeable sediments between them. BCGW has drilled two aquifers at the location of the Canfor Sawmill. The first is a sand and gravel aquifer located below the upper-most till sheet which rests directly on the second till sheet. The second is a sand aquifer located beneath the second till sheet resting on what is interpreted to be another till sheet. The well developed for Canfor has nominal capacity of 9 L/s (150 USgpm).

The profile of the Kala test well (located a few metres north of the pump house) suggests the same sand aquifer was encountered at the test well drilled in 2005. BCGW is unsure why an attempt was not made to set a fine aperture screen into the aquifer, similar to the approach used successfully by Canfor.


The water-bearing system underlying the community is interpreted as a feasible groundwater exploration target. The quality of groundwater taken from the Canfor test well in 2013 appears to be relatively good.

An overburden geophysical survey (referred to as Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT) should be conducted given that geology can change quite quickly in the North Thompson valley. BCGW recommends drilling two or three exploratory boreholes (nominal 150mm diameter) within the service area. Geologic interpretation and a review of local well records suggests that aquifer yields have a reasonable probability of meeting the current and future needs of the community. Water sampling as part of exploratory drilling will inform the TNRD of potential treatment requirements.

The estimated cost of undertaking this exploration program is as follows:

TABLE 8-1: ESTIMATED EXPLORATION COSTS

Description Subtotal Drilling Contractor (Explore overburden, 300m total drilling) $75,000 Pumping Test (Test one of the three wells) $40,000 Geophysical Contractor (6 km of ERT, sections to be determined) $50,000 Direct costs (Incl. mileage, labs, LOA, dataloggers, etc) $15,000 Hydrogeotechnical Consultant $25,000 Contingency (30%) $62,000

TOTAL $265,000

The estimated cost of constructing a production well for long-term use and converting one of the test wells for mechanical backup is as follows:

TABLE 8-2: ESTIMATED PRODUCTION WELL COSTS

Description Subtotal Drilling Contractor (Two production wells, nominal 200 mm) $120,000 Pumping Test (Production wells) $40,000 Direct costs (Incl. mileage, labs, LOA, dataloggers, etc) $15,000 Hydrogeotechnical Consultant $35,000 Contingency (30%) $63,000

TOTAL $270,000

Alternatively, the TNRD may wish to approach Canfor for authorization to drill a production well on their property in proximity to the production well drilled by BCGW. If the geology of the site is similar, this process will be similar to the above, without the need for ERT for multiple test wells.


Estimated costs of confirming similar geology and yield are shown below:

TABLE 8-3: ESTIMATED EXPLORATION COSTS – CANFOR SITE

Description Subtotal Drilling Contractor (One 150 mm exploratory borehole) $25,000 Pumping Test (Test one well, discharge on Canfor land) $40,000 Geophysical Contractor $0 Direct costs (Incl. mileage, labs, LOA, dataloggers, etc) $10,000 Hydrogeotechnical Consultant $15,000 Contingency (30%) $23,000

TOTAL $100,000

The estimated cost of constructing a production well for long-term use and converting the test wells for mechanical backup is as follows:

TABLE 8-4: ESTIMATED PRODUCTION WELL COSTS – CANFOR SITE

Description Subtotal Drilling Contractor (Two production wells, nominal 200 mm) $120,000 Pumping Test (Production wells) $40,000 Direct costs (Incl. mileage, labs, LOA, dataloggers, etc) $15,000 Hydrogeotechnical Consultant $35,000 Contingency (30%) $63,000

TOTAL $270,000

An allowance of around $500,000 would be required for a pipeline connecting the wells to the network, making this option less favourable than a well in the Vavenby community.


8.3 Treatment System 8.3.1 Treatment of Water from the North Thompson River

The Vavenby system lacks water treatment apart from chlorination. The raw water quality is relatively good but for peaks in turbidity. In order to comply with Interior Heath and Health Canada requirements, upgrades are required to meet the following criteria;

3 log (99.9%) removal or inactivation of Giardia Lamblia and Cryptosporidium Two treatment processes Turbidity less than 1 NTU, with a target of 0.1 NTU

It is left to chlorine dosing to achieve 4 log inactivation of viruses and 0 total and fecal coliforms and E. coli.

There are various forms that filtration can take. Generally, rapid gravity filtration or membrane filtration would be recommended for this application.

Rapid gravity filtration with sedimentation could be used at Vavenby. This system is described in Table 8-5. Membrane filtration is described for comparison in Table 8-6.

TABLE 8-5: RAPID GRAVITY FILTERS – CLARIFIER / FILTER PACKAGE SYSTEMS

Description: The system comprises a clarifier and a filter bed enclosed in a tank. The clarifier settles out the coarse solids prior to filtration. The filter bed is typically comprised of a sand or sand / anthracite media. The raw water chemistry is adjusted with coagulants and other chemicals to form particles which are large enough to be filtered out. Once the filters become dirty they are backwashed with clean water. This backwash water is typically 3 – 5% of the total flow and must be disposed of to the environment. Rapid gravity filtration has traditionally been the most common form of municipal drinking water filtration. Advantages Disadvantages 3.0 log protozoa inactivation credits for

chemically assisted rapid sand filtration with sedimentation

Compact size Cost effective Package filtration plants can handle

water with high turbidity >50 NTU.

When the raw water quality varies a great deal, rapid gravity filter plants require a high level of operator attention and skill. (systems tend to be EOCP level 3).

UV disinfection may be required as post treatment due to concerns over operational failure.


TABLE 8-6: MEMBRANE FILTERS

Description: Water is pumped through a synthetic membrane with pores designed to exclude particles above the design size. Coagulants can be dosed to allow the filter to remove dissolved materials such as organics. Flow is reversed to flush the waste. The proportion of this backwash water increases as the pore size reduces. Regular chemical cleaning is also required. The membranes are housed in cartridges or may be immersed directly in tanks. Typically microfiltration or ultrafiltration would be used where the primary objective is turbidity / protozoa removal. Advantages Disadvantages System can achieve 99.9% protozoa

removal. Protozoa removal is not dependant on optimal raw chemistry.

More compact size than rapid gravity filtration.

Relative ease of operation (systems tend to be EOCP level 2)

Often fully automated for unattended operation.

Membrane integrity can be tested automatically.

Depending on water quality, membrane filters can often be operated without coagulant addition

UV disinfection post treatment is not normally required by IHA with membrane systems.

Membrane integrity is checked automatically by the system.

Membrane filtration plants can handle water with moderate turbidity (>20 NTU) without pre-treatment.

Membrane systems can have a higher construction cost, including the costs to eventually replace the membrane cartridges.

The membrane systems can lock the owner into the one supplier for replacement parts (although systems with interchangeability are now available).

Various chemicals are required for adequate backwash effectiveness.

A relatively small quantity of chemical clean waste water will need to be neutralised and trucked to a suitable disposal facility. The nearest location is expected to be Kamloops.

Membrane filters have some key advantages over rapid gravity filters for Vavenby;

The time required to maintain optimal performance is expected to be less than for rapid gravity filtration (1-2 hours per day for membrane filters, vs 2-4 hours for. rapid gravity filtration).

Operator certification will be to level 2 rather than level 3 with a membrane system. The system is currently classified as a small water system under EOCP. The operator is certified for small water systems.

Protozoa are effectively removed at all times, even if coagulation fails. For a remote and small-scale system such as this, it is best to minimise dependency on

accurate adjustments to water chemistry, such as coagulation, which favours the membrane filtration option.

Membrane filtration is expected to be the preferred treatment option for Vavenby when this project reaches the detailed design phase. Pilot testing is commonly conducted in advance of design


and construction to confirm details such as flux rates (for system size) and the chemical dosing requirements.

Backwash Disposal

Rapid gravity filtration and membrane filtration (microfiltration) will produce a waste stream of approximately 3 - 5% of the forward flow. Backwash water commonly undergoes further treatment to minimise the waste volume, particularly at larger facilities.

The Vavenby system is not served by a municipal sewer and the waste must be disposed of on-site to septic systems, infiltration basins or rock pits, or off site via a holding tank.

Disinfection

Chlorination will be required for primary disinfection, targeting bacteria, viruses. The chlorine will also provide a residual in the distribution system to preserve the quality of water and protect against contamination.

Primary disinfection by ultraviolet disinfection would also be necessary to comply with Interior Health Authority requirements if a system other than membrane filtration is used.

Treatment Plant Building and Site

Most components of the water treatment plant would need to be located indoors. The treatment building would house tanks, pumps, chemical storage and other systems. A general representation of the building is presented as Figure 8-1.

The most likely location is at the site of the intake. There is not sufficient space for on-site waste water disposal and the site is relatively low lying and is likely to be below the 200 year flood elevation. As a result, the treatment plant site would need to be raised and a viable option selected for wastewater disposal, such as a pipeline to another site or backwash concentration to a volume that can be trucked to disposal. The cost estimate assumes secondary filtration and a holding tank. BC Hydro would require the power supply to the site to be upgraded.

The filtration plant could also be located near the reservoir in order to find a location with sufficient space available for a disposal lagoon. This option would require a long dedicated raw water pipeline from the intake. The raw water pipeline would start at the end of the dedicated HDPE pipeline above the pump house.


Costs

The estimated costs for the treatment upgrade are shown below. The treatment cost is based on the existing summer flows.

TABLE 8-7: ESTIMATED TREATMENT COSTS – RIVER SOURCE

ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT ESTIMATE 1.0 General Insurance, Bonding, Mobilization, Demobilization, Commissioning allow $65,000 2.0 Water Treatment Plant - Membrane Filtration Supply Only Filtration Equipment and Services, including secondary filter allow $775,000 3.0 Water Treatment Plant Foundation Excavation, Backfill, Foundation, Under Slab Piping, etc… allow $190,800 4.0 Water Treatment Plant Building Pre-Engineered Metal Steel Type Building, etc… allow $235,000 5.0 Water Treatment Plant Process Piping Process Piping, Valves, Flowmeter, Supports, etc… allow $115,000 6.0 Coagulation Equipment Chemical Pumps, Transfer Pumps, Storage Tanks, Mixer, etc… allow $85,000 7.0 Chlorination Equipment Chemical Pumps, Storage Tank, Instrumentation, Piping, etc… allow $40,000 8.0 Distribution Pumps Distribution Pumps, Valves, Flowmeter, Piping, Analyzer, etc… allow $55,000 9.0 Electrical, SCADA and Controls Electrical, SCADA, Controls, Instrumentation, etc… allow $240,000 10.0 Wastewater Disposal System Holding Tank, Piping, etc… allow $30,000 Cost Estimate Summary Subtotal $1,831,000 Engineering - Allow (20%) $366,200 Contingencies - Allow (30%) $549,000 TOTAL PROJECT $2,746,000


8.3.2 Treatment of Well Water

The North Thompson is a reliable source of water with water that is relatively easy to treat. However, groundwater sources are far more stable than river sources and commonly require no treatment, apart from chlorination. This makes them far more suitable for small communities where simplicity and low cost is a high priority and the quantity of water required is relatively low.

As described in Section 8.2.2, it is possible that a well source could be developed to supply the community. A potential well location has been identified on the Canfor site, but exploratory drilling may identify sites within the community.

Until specific treatment requirements are established, a simple pump house and disinfection facility similar to the existing pump house has been assumed. This would be located near the well site.

The estimated costs for the pumphouse are shown below. It should be noted that no allowance has been included for land purchase, long raw / treated water pipelines, or a treatment plant.

TABLE 8-8: ESTIMATED TREATMENT COSTS – WELL SOURCE

ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT ESTIMATE 1.0 General Insurance, Bonding, Mobilization, Demobilization, Commissioning allow $65,000 2.0 Well Pumps and Completion Pumps, Riser Pipe, Pitless Adapter, Valves, etc… allow $56,605 3.0 Water Treatment Plant Foundation Excavation, Backfill, Foundation, Under Slab Piping, etc… allow $106,912 4.0 Water Treatment Plant Building Pre-Engineered Metal Steel Type Building, etc… allow $45,000 5.0 Water Treatment Plant and Process Piping Piping, Valves, Flowmeter, Supports, etc… allow $28,000 6.0 Chlorination Equipment Chemical Pumps, Storage Tank, Instrumentation, Piping, etc… allow $124,000 7.0 Electrical, SCADA and Controls Electrical, SCADA, Controls, Instrumentation, etc… allow $180,000 Cost Estimate Summary Subtotal $605,517 Engineering - Allow (20%) $121,103 Contingencies - Allow (30%) $181,655 TOTAL PROJECT $908,276


8.4 Reservoir It is recommended that the reservoir storage capacity be increased from 300m3 to 600m3 in order to meet storage requirements for fighting a residential fire. While there are commercial / institutional buildings in Vavenby, due to the cost, it has been assumed that the TNRD does not wish to target storage requirements for a commercial or institutional fire. The largest community building (Vavenby Elementary School) is equipped with a fire suppression sprinkler system. A steel reservoir has been assumed in order to more practically allow for the same top water levels within the same site.

TABLE 8-9: ESTIMATED RESERVOIR COSTS

Description Unit Price Number Subtotal

New 300m3 Steel Reservoir $650,000 1 $650,000

New 250m access road over Crown land $775 250m $195,000

TOTAL $850,000

Costs include Contingency and Engineering.

The nearest existing power line is located on the south (opposite) side of the highway. While replacing the watermain, telemetry and mains or low voltage power cables could also be laid in the same trench to the site from the opposite side of the highway. The Yellowhead highway crossing to the reservoir is installed inside a 400mm diameter CSP encasement pipe. The TNRD could consider installing power and signal cables alongside the carrier pipe in order to bring these across the highway to service the reservoir. A new telemetry tower has been purchased and is awaiting installation. A solar cell could be fitted near the top of the tower to reduce shading effects.


Minor improvements that are recommended for the reservoir include;

• An instrument power supply, either solar power or from mains power. • Security fencing to prevent vandalism and unauthorized entry to the reservoir area.

TABLE 8-10: GENERAL RESERVOIR IMPROVEMENTS


Inspection, Cleaning and Repair of Existing Reservoir

$25,000 1 $25,000

Security Fencing $120 80m $9,600

Solar panel power supply $5,000 1 $5,000

TOTAL $40,000

It is assumed that this work would be completed by the TNRD as maintenance.


8.5 Water Distribution System 8.5.1 Water System Modelling

The Vavenby water system consists of 100mm and 150mm diameter watermains which are generally un-looped. The smaller diameter 100mm mains limit the fire flow capability of the system in those areas. In addition, the system relies on 50mm Ø blow-off and standpipe connections in place of standard fire hydrants. These severely limit the available flows.

A water system model has been developed to assess potential water system improvements. At present the available fire flow in the Vavenby system ranges from 14 to 34 L/s. The proposed fire flow target for Vavenby is 60 L/s based on MMCD criteria for a single family residential building.

Please refer to Figure 8-2, which illustrates existing fire flows along with fire flows after proposed upgrades.

8.5.2 Distribution System Improvements

The water distribution system in Vavenby essentially consists of north-south trunk main with several branches extending to the east and the west from this trunk. All of the watermains in Vavenby are either 150mm or 100mm in diameter. Given these water system characteristics and constraints, it is extremely difficult to achieve the target fire flow of 60 L/S in all areas within this community.

As discussed in Section 8.3, the first priority in Vavenby in terms of water distribution system improvements, includes replacement of 320m of critical 150mm AC watermain with 250mm PVC (Improvement ‘A’). This improvement would reduce the criticality rating for this length of pipe and would improve available fire flows. Please refer to the Water Improvement Plan (Figure 8-2) for information related to fire flow availability. As shown on the improvement plan, Improvement ‘A’ would not provide 60 L/S fire flow availability at all hydrants.

Proposed Loop 1 would involve the completion of two system loops. The first would be the connection of the 150mm watermain on McCorvie Road to the 150mm main on Capostinksy Road. The second would consist of creating a loop between Hundsbedt Road to Guru Nanak Place. The completion of these projects (Loop 1A and 1B) would eliminate several water system dead-ends and would increase the available fire flow within the community. Project Loop 1B would require the acquisition of a Right of Way in favour of the TNRD.

A second looping project has been considered (Loop 2) which would create a system link between Harmon Road and McCorvie Road. This loop would reduce the criticality of the existing main on Vavenby Bridge Road and would increase the fire flow availability within the community. This loop would require the acquisition of a Right of Way in favour of the TNRD.

Following completion of the system improvements described above, all hydrants within the community would have sufficient fire flow potential with the exception of those hydrants located


on the south side of the North Thompson River. Given the long length of the 150mm main that services the south side of the river, the only way to improve the fire flow potential in this area would be to increase the supply main to be a larger diameter, or by creating a system loop across the river up to the elementary school. Given the topographical challenges, the completion of this loop is not considered to be feasible.

Although a dedicated main to the reservoir is not proposed at this stage, there is scope for laying a second main in the trenches constructed as part of the looping improvements proposed in this section. Alternatively, the second main could form part of a dedicated main to a water treatment plant location or a sludge disposal location. This second main should be considered as part of the planning for pipe loop construction. There would be additional costs for construction of casings through the railway, trans-mountain pipeline and highway sections.

The TNRD has also identified that a 280m pipe section of 150mm AC pipe in Vavenby Bridge Road that is in need of replacement. The pipe crosses the rail line in a 24m long 600mm diameter steel casing.

TABLE 8-11: ESTIMATED WATERMAIN UPGRADE COSTS.

Description Unit Price Number Subtotal Improvement A. Replace 150mm AC Supply Pipeline from Harmon Road to Reservoir

$675 320m $216,000

Loop 1A Connect McCorvie Rd to Capostinsky Rd $560 350m $198,000

Loop 1B Connect Hundsbedt Rd to Guru Nanak Pl $1680 140m $235,000

Loop 2 Connect Harmon Rd to McCorvie Rd $835 360m $300,000

Additional cost for 150mm dia dedicated main to reservoir in common trench with Improvement A, Loop 1A, Loop 2.

$200 1030m $210,000

Casing construction for dedicated main to reservoir. $1,500 70m $105,000

Vavenby Bridge Road pipeline replacement $650 280m $182,000

TOTAL $1,286,000



8.5.3 Hydrant Installation

The town of Vavenby is served by the Vavenby Volunteer Fire Department. However, there are no standard fire hydrants in Vavenby. Instead the fire crew must rely on blow offs and standpipes as their water source. It is proposed that most blow offs and standpipes will be replaced with hydrants.

TABLE 8-12: ESTIMATED HYDRANT UPGRADE COSTS


Replace Existing Blow-Off / Standpipe with Hydrant

$12,000 9 $108,000

Install Hydrant where there is no Existing Blow-Off / Standpipe

$12,000 3 $36,000

TOTAL $144,000

It is assumed that this work would be completed by the TNRD as maintenance.

0

#

#

#

#

#

#0

00

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

00

$

%,

!.

!.

(S-03

(S-04

(S-07

(S-08

(S-09

(S-10

(S-13

(S-15

(S-16

(S-18

!(S-01

!(S-02

!(S-05

!(S-06

!(S-11

!(S-12

!(S-14

!(S-17

!(S-19

300

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

150

150

150

15

0

15

0

150

150

150

15

0

150

¯1:5,000

VAVENBY COMMUNITY WATER SYSTEM FIGURE 8-2 PROPOSED WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS AND ASSOCIATED FIRE FLOW

Legend

Water Main

Size (mm)

100

150

300

450

Hundsbedt Rd

Dra

win

g:

37

9-4

91

-Fig

-VY

-Wa

ter-

Imp

rove

me

nts

Capostinsky Road

Nor

th T

hom

pso

n R

iver

Pump House

Yello

whe

ad

Hig

hway

5

Va

ven

by B

rid

ge R

oa

d

CN Railway

24m long 400mm dia. CSP EncasementCrossing Highway

Trans MountainOil Pipeline Right Of Way

Reservoir

Steel Intake

Structure

%, Pump House

$ Reservoir

0 Blow Off

# Stand Pipe

!(

Proposed Casing and PipeReplacement Across Trans Mountain

Pipeline Right of Way

Proposed Additional300 m3 Reservoir

Replace or Duplicate

High Criticality AC Pipe Section(Improvement A)

Proposed Looping ForRedundancy of Route

Proposed Water Treatment Plant (Where Continue To Use

Surface Water Source)

24m long 400mm dia.Encasement

Crossing Railway

Proposed New Road Access To Reservoir

Upgrade Existing Gate and road

Replace or Duplicate High Criticality AC Pipe with 250 dia PVC Section(Improvement A)

Replace or Duplicate High Criticality AC Pipe Section

(Improvement A)

Proposed Looping ForRedundancy (Loop 2)

Harmon Rd to McCorvie RdProposed Looping ForRedundancy (Loop 1B)Hundsbedt Rd to Guru Nanak Pl

Blowoff / Standpipe To Be ConvertedTo Hydrant

Guru N

anak Pl

Galiano RdHarman Rd

McCorvie Rd

Vavenby Community

Fire Flow Availability (After Conversion To Hydrant)

FH Improvement Scenario

Location Existing A A+Loop 1A & 1B A+Loops 1A,1B & 2

1 57 >200 >200 >200

2 47 85 85 114

5 35 44 51 145

6 39 47 53 95

11 28 31 52 104

12 33 41 48 82

14 25 29 32 38

17 24 27 30 34

19 30 36 41 58

ProposedHydrant

ProposedHydrant

Pipe ReplacementShould Be Scheduled Due To Poor Condition

to Reservoir from WTP (Loop 1A) McCorvie Rd

To Capotinsky Rd

Second pipe could be laid in looping trenches

to build dedicated main to reservoir

rwall

Line

rwall

Line

rwall

Line

rwall

Line

rwall

Line

rwall

Line

rwall

Line

rwall

Line

rwall

Line

rwall

Line

rwall

Line

rwall

Line

rwall

Line

rwall

Line

rwall

Line

rwall

Line

rwall

Line

rwall

Line

rwall

Line

rwall

Line


8.5.4 Water Meters

Water meters are proposed for Vavenby in order to manage water demand and fairly apportion costs. The meters would use Radio Frequency (RF) technology to enable the meters to be read from the street in front of the property. This RF technology greatly reduces the amount of staff time needed to collect the data as reading the meters is essentially done as a "drive by".

Also, in addition to measuring water consumption, the RF water meters that would be installed include advanced features that will flag the following possible issues with each meter read as follows:

a) Continuous flow indication for leakage,

b) Reverse flow indicating a system problem and possible risk to the public water supply, and

c) Tampering indicator to help prevent water theft.

The TNRD’s consideration for determining where to locate water meters included the following considerations;

Identifying system leaks: In reviewing minimum daily consumption data (particularly in winter months), it is evident that there are system leaks. As the TNRD has already completed a comprehensive leak detection and repair program for the distribution lines we can conclude that leaks also exist on private water lines. Water metering data will identify high consumption connections. New metering technologies can also identify and flag leaks.

Capturing all consumption: Rural lots are typically larger than those in urban centres, and homes are often set well back within the property. Sprinkler systems, both underground and surface can tie into the water service lines between the property line and the home. Placing meters within the dwelling will not capture water consumption related to tie-ins between the property line connection and the water meter located inside the house. Installing water meters inside the home will not capture any consumption related to leaks located between the property line and the home connection. Pit meters at the property line will capture all consumption and assist in identifying leaks on private property.

Ease of meter reading: Some homes are set well back on the property. Automated radio read equipment has a limited range, which may require entering private property to obtain a reading. In addition, many rural properties have locked gates or guard animals. Less time will be required to read meters at the property line as opposed to having to travel up long driveways.

Meter repair or replacement: Pit meters will always be accessible for service or replacement. Ease of access, employee safety and lower future operating costs were considerations in selecting this option.

As a result, the cost estimate below is based upon RF water meters located in metering pits.


TABLE 8-13: ESTIMATED WATER METER COSTS


Meter Pit with 3/4" or 1" Meter $3,500 135 $472,500

Industrial Meter & Manhole $6,000 4 $24,000

TOTAL $496,500


8.5.5 Casing Under Trans Mountain Pipeline

Asbestos cement watermains are brittle and there is a high probability of damage to the watermain when the Trans Mountain Pipeline duplication is being installed. Therefore, it is highly recommended that this casing be installed at, or before, the time Kinder Morgan are on-site installing their pipeline.

The cost allowance for the casing under the Trans Mountain pipeline is for 20m of 400mm diameter steel casing pipe laid by trenching through the existing 18m easement.

TABLE 8-14: ESTIMATED CASED WATERMAIN COST


Supply and install watermain, signal cable, power cable.

$500 20m $10,000

Supply and install 400mm casing (by excavation and backfill)

$1000 20m $20,000

Contingency and Engineering $20,000

TOTAL $50,000


9.0 Cost Summary

Table 9-1 shows the major water treatment and system upgrades described in this master plan along with expected costs for the work. The costs include design and construction costs in 2018 dollars.

TABLE 9-1: RECOMMENDED UPGRADES AND ESTIMATED COSTS

Schedule Description Estimated Cost Water Source and Treatment 2025 Option 1 – North Thompson River $2,746,000 • Water treatment plant (membrane filtration) 2025 Option 2 – New Well Source $1,443,000 • Well planning and construction ($535,000) • Pump house (chlorine disinfection) ($908,000) • Filtration (excluded pending water quality) Water Distribution 2019 Casing under Trans Mountain Pipeline $50,000 2019 Water Metering $496,500 2019 Reservoir access road $195,000 2019 General reservoir improvements $40,000 2025 Watermain Improvement A $216,000 2030 Watermain Loop 1A $198,000 2030 Watermain Loop 1B $235,000 2030 Watermain Loop 2 $300,000 2025 - 2030 Dedicated main to reservoir in common trench with

looping improvements. $315,000

2030 New 300m3 Reservoir $650,000 2030 Replace blow-offs / standpipes with hydrants $144,000 2030 Vavenby Bridge Road pipeline replacement $182,000

Cost estimates are developed to the Class ‘C’ level, per Engineers and Geoscientists British Columbia (EGBC) Budget Guidelines for Consulting Engineering Services, Class ‘C’ estimates are defined as follows:

Class C estimate (±25-40%): An estimate prepared with limited site information and based on probable conditions affecting the project. It represents the summation of all identifiable project elemental costs and is used for program planning, to establish a more specific definition of client needs and to obtain preliminary project approval.

APPENDIX A

Comprehensive Water Analysis

379-491 Water Analysis 2018 01 31.xlsx Vavenby 17/04/2018

Vavenby CWSComprehensive Analysis Date 12-Apr-97 24-Sep-07 8-Apr-08 3-Nov-08 30-Mar-09 27-Oct-09 29-Nov-11 23-May-12 4-Jun-13 22-Sep-15 17-Nov-16 29-Aug-17 5-Dec-17 5-Dec-17Sample ID 971102-001 E07-2106 EO5-0700 E05-2538 E09-0518 E09-2199 K1K1163-01 2051243-01 3060201-01 5091918-01 6111441-01 7090042-01 7120454-01 7120454-02

AnionsChloride mg/L 250 20 6.1 14.4 4.8 17.1 10.1 34.8 5.87 0.46 16.3 18.7 17.2 34.8 14%Fluoride mg/L 1.5 0.11 0.1 <0.1 0.09 0.13 0.12 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 0.11 0.14 0.14 9%Nitrogen, Nitrate as N mg/L 10 1.27 0.44 1.32 0.336 1.22 0.491 1.62 0.427 0.145 0.271 0.406 0.413 1.62 16%Nitrogen, Nitrite as N mg/L 1 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.002 0.005 < 0.010 < 0.010 < 0.010 < 0.010 < 0.010 <0.010 0.005 1%Sulfate mg/L 500 20 10 22 8 20 18 28.4 6.9 4.6 16.6 16 17.5 28.4 6%General Parameters 0Alkalinity, Total as CaCO3 mg/L 110 182 43 23 95 114 85.8 182Alkalinity, Phenolphthalein as CaCO3 mg/L < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 <1.0 0Alkalinity, Carbonate as CaCO3 mg/L < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 114 85.8 114Alkalinity, Bicarbonate as CaCO3 mg/L 53 87 39 85.7 61.3 182 43 23 95 < 1 <1.0 182Alkalinity, Hydroxide as CaCO3 mg/L < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 <1.0 0pH 7.55 7.18 7.83 7.35 7.22 7.44Turbidity mg/L 0.09 1.4 0.6 1.6 1 1.3Colour, True CU 15 <5 <5 14 7 <5 5 < 5 < 5 12 < 5 < 5 <5.0 14 93%Conductivity (EC) µS/cm 323 153 257 118 279 200 518 125 50 265 316 265 518Nitrogen, Ammonia as N, Total mg/L <0.005 0.013 0.01 <0.2 0.04 0.01 < 0.020 < 0.020 < 0.020 0.034 <0.020 0.04Solids, Total Dissolved mg/L 500 123 208 90 204 97 287 73 51 138 192 141 287 57%Carbon, Total Organic mg/L 1.24UV Transmittance @ 254nm % 90.9 89.2 84 85.1 93.9 94.1 95.1 95.1Calculated Parameters 0Hardness, Total (Total as CaCO3) mg/L 135 64 100 44 115 240 48.6 21.5 89.3 127 108 36.8 84.1 240Hardness, Total (Diss. as CaCO3) mg/L 223 46.7 21.8 102 223Nitrogen, Nitrate+Nitrite as N mg/L 0.44 1.32 0.336 1.22 1.62 0.427 0.145 0.271 0.406 0.413 1.62Dissolved Metals 0Aluminum, dissolved mg/L 0.007 0.008 0.1 0.009 0.003 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.05 0.007 <0.0050 0.1Antimony, dissolved mg/L <0.001 <0.001 0.006 <0.001 <0.001 < 0.02 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.0001 <0.00020 0.006Arsenic, dissolved mg/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.0005 <0.00050 0Barium, dissolved mg/L 0.01 0.02 <0.01 0.02 <0.01 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 0.023 0.0223 0.023Beryllium, dissolved mg/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.0001 <0.00010 0Bismuth, dissolved mg/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.0001 <0.00010 0Boron, dissolved mg/L 0.006 0.011 <0.001 0.016 <0.001 < 0.04 < 0.04 < 0.04 < 0.04 0.017 0.0284 0.0284Cadmium, dissolved mg/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0.00005 <0.000010 0.00005Calcium, dissolved mg/L 18.56 28.5 12.87 33.52 11.39 58.2 13 7 23.7 35.1 29.1 58.2Chromium, dissolved mg/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.0005 <0.00050 0Cobalt, dissolved mg/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 < 0.0005 0.00005 <0.00010 0.00005Copper, dissolved mg/L 0.009 0.005 0.007 0.008 <0.001 0.0182 0.005 <0.002 0.049 0.0103 0.0923 0.0923Iron, dissolved mg/L 0.026 0.057 0.022 0.05 <0.005 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.10 < 0.010 <0.010 0.057Lead, dissolved mg/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.0001 <0.00020 0Lithium, dissolved mg/L < 0.001 0.002 < 0.001 0.005 0.0046 0.0111 0.0111Magnesium, dissolved mg/L 3.8 6.8 2.9 7.5 1.6 18.8 3.4 0.9 7.3 9.43 8.53 18.8Manganese, dissolved mg/L 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 <0.001 < 0.002 < 0.002 0.003 < 0.002 < 0.0002 <0.00020 0.003Mercury, dissolved mg/L < 0.0002 < 0.0002 < 0.0002 < 0.0002 <0.000010 0Molybdenum, dissolved mg/L <0.001 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 0.0007 0.00056 0.001Nickel, dissolved mg/L 0.002 0.001 <0.001 0.001 <0.001 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 0.0007 0.00103 0.002Phosphorus, dissolved mg/L <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.02 <0.050 0Potassium, dissolved mg/L 1.79 2.32 1.18 2.2 0.88 4.1 1.6 1 2.2 2.47 2.6 4.1Selenium, dissolved mg/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.0005 <0.00050 0Silicon, dissolved mg/L 2.81 5.57 3.91 4.56 2.99 <5 <5 <5 < 5 4.9 4.3 5.57Silver, dissolved mg/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.00005 <0.000050 0Sodium, dissolved mg/L 5.2 9.1 4.1 9.4 2.9 22.3 5.7 1 14.3 14.7 12.6 22.3Strontium, dissolved mg/L 0.424 0.09 0.04 0.19 0.254 0.209 0.424Sulfur, dissolved mg/L <10 29 < 10 4 6.6 29Tellurium, dissolved mg/L < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.0002 <0.00050 0Thallium, dissolved mg/L < 0.0002 < 0.0002 < 0.0002 < 0.0002 < 0.00002 <0.000020 0Thorium, dissolved mg/L < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.0001 <0.00010 0Tin, dissolved mg/L <0.01 <'O o <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.0002 0.00041 0.00041Titanium, dissolved mg/L <0.007 <0.007 <0.007 <0.007 <0.007 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.005 <0.0050 0Uranium, dissolved mg/L 0.001 0.003 <0.001 0.003 <0.001 0.00681 0.0009 < 0.0002 0.0024 0.00352 0.00288 0.00681Vanadium, dissolved mg/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.001 <0.0010 0Yttrium, dissolved mg/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Zinc, dissolved mg/L 0.005 0.006 0.002 <0.005 <0.005 < 0.04 < 0.04 < 0.04 < 0.04 0.061 0.026 0.061Zirconium, dissolved mg/L < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.0001 <0.00010 0Total Metals 0Aluminum, total mg/L 0.1 <0.05 0.089 0.034 0.023 0.033 0.021 < 0.05 < 0.05 0.18 0.46 0.137 0.268 0.163 0.059 0.46 460%Antimony, total mg/L 0.006 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 < 0.02 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.0001 <0.00020 < 0.00020 < 0.00020 0 0%Arsenic, total mg/L 0.01 <0.0005 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.0005 <0.00050 < 0.00050 < 0.00050 0 0%Barium, total mg/L 1 0.024 0.01 0.02 <0.01 0.02 <0.01 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 0.027 0.0261 0.008 0.015 0.027 3%Beryllium, total mg/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.0001 <0.00010 < 0.00010 < 0.00010 0Bismuth, total mg/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.0001 <0.00010 < 0.00010 < 0.00010 0Boron, total mg/L 5 0.01 0.006 0.011 <0.001 0.018 <0.001 < 0.04 < 0.04 < 0.04 < 0.04 0.025 0.0311 < 0.0050 0.0068 0.0311 1%Cadmium, total mg/L 0.005 <0.002 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0.00004 0.000015 0.000011 < 0.000010 0.00004 1%Calcium, total mg/L 34.7 19.29 29 12.92 34.14 12.28 63.2 14 7 27.6 35.9 27.8 11.8 23.4 63.2Chromium, total mg/L 0.05 <0.005 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.003 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.0008 0.00081 0.00087 0.00052 0.003 6%Cobalt, total mg/L <0.005 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 0.0005 0.00024 0.00049 0.0003 0.00017 0.0005Copper, total mg/L 1 1.34 0.011 0.006 0.009 0.009 0.006 0.0176 0.005 0.004 0.056 0.0089 0.162 0.00115 0.00282 1.34 134%Iron, total mg/L 0.3 0.022 0.151 0.13 0.219 0.046 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.2 0.72 0.32 0.439 0.386 0.194 0.72 240%Lead, total mg/L 0.01 0.0128 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 0.002 0.0009 0.0317 < 0.00020 < 0.00020 0.0317 317%Lithium, total mg/L 0.0077 0.002 < 0.001 0.005 0.0052 0.0105 0.00135 0.00234 0.0105Magnesium, total mg/L 11 4 6.89 2.9 7.5 1.6 19.8 3.5 0.9 8.1 10.1 9.07 1.8 6.24 19.8Manganese, total mg/L 0.05 <0.001 0.004 0.003 0.005 0.003 0.004 < 0.002 < 0.002 0.007 0.012 0.0107 0.0423 0.00925 0.00646 0.0423 85%Mercury, total mg/L 0.001 < 0.0002 < 0.0002 < 0.0002 < 0.00002 <0.000010 0 0%Molybdenum, total mg/L <0.01 0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.001 <0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 0.002 < 0.001 0.0007 0.00053 0.0005 0.00055 0.002Nickel, total mg/L <0.02 0.002 0.011 0.002 0.001 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 0.003 0.0009 0.0016 0.00245 0.00189 0.011Phosphorus, total mg/L <0.1 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.02 <0.050 < 0.050 < 0.050 0Potassium, total mg/L 2.8 1.92 2.32 1.4 2.21 0.9 4.25 1.7 1 2.4 2.69 2.65 1.39 2.06 4.25Selenium, total mg/L 0.05 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.0005 <0.00050 < 0.00050 < 0.00050 0 0%Silicon, total mg/L 4.89 2.97 5.61 4.04 4.65 3.02 <5 <5 <5 <5 5.5 4.5 3.5 4.3 5.61Silver, total mg/L <0.01 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.00005 <0.000050 < 0.000050 < 0.000050 0Sodium, total mg/L 200 12.6 5.4 9.2 4.3 9.4 3 26.4 5.8 0.9 14.5 15.2 13.5 1.59 7.43 26.4 13%Strontium, total mg/L 0.288 0.427 0.09 0.04 0.22 0.274 0.21 0.0597 0.156 0.427Sulfur, total mg/L 6.7 <10 28 <10 5 6 4.3 5.6 28Tellurium, total mg/L < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.0002 <0.00050 < 0.00050 < 0.00050 0Thallium, total mg/L < 0.0002 < 0.0002 < 0.0002 < 0.0002 < 0.00002 0.000026 < 0.000020 < 0.000020 0.000026Thorium, total mg/L < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.0001 <0.00010 < 0.00010 < 0.00010 0Tin, total mg/L <0.05 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 0.0004 <0.00020 < 0.00020 < 0.00020 0.0004Titanium, total mg/L <0.002 0.009 <0.007 0.013 <0.007 <0.007 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 0.013 0.0274 0.0151 < 0.0050 0.0274Uranium, total mg/L 0.02 0.0058 0.001 0.003 <0.001 0.003 <0.001 0.00671 0.001 0.0002 0.0029 0.00376 0.003 < 0.0010 < 0.0010 0.00671 34%Vanadium, total mg/L <0.01 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 < 0.01 < 0.0002 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.001 <0.0010 0.000355 0.00204 0.00204Yttrium, total mg/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 < 0.0010 < 0.0010Zinc, total mg/L 5 0.166 0.008 0.006 0.008 <0.005 <0.005 < 0.04 < 0.04 < 0.04 < 0.04 0.058 0.0359 < 0.0040 0.0105 0.166 3%Zirconium, total mg/L < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.0001 <0.00010 < 0.00010 < 0.00010 0Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) 0Total Haloacetic Acids (HAA5) mg/L 0.08 0.00601 0.00601 8%Monochloroacetic Acid mg/L <0.0020Monobromoacetic Acid mg/L <0.0020Dichloroacetic Acid mg/L 0.0028Trichloroacetic Acid mg/L 0.0033Dibromoacetic Acid mg/L <0.0020Total Trihalomethanes mg/L 0.1 0.035 0.039 0.031 0.01 0.038 0.060 < 0.004 0.043 0.013 0.06 60%Total Trihalomethanes (as CHCl3) mg/L 0.038 0.058 0.058Bromodichloromethane mg/L 0.0025 0.0007 0.0028 0.004 < 0.001 0.005 < 0.001 0.005 0.0026 0.005Bromoform mg/L < 0.0006 <0.002 <0.002 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 <0.0010 0Chloroform mg/L 0.032 0.038 0.028 0.005 0.038 0.054 0.002 0.038 0.0105 0.054Dibromochloromethane mg/L < 0.0003 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 <0.0010 0.001

%AOUnit MAC AO Max %MAC

379-491 Water Analysis 2018 01 31.xlsx Canfor Well (Vvby) 16/04/2018

Canfor Vavenby - Test Pumping of TW2012-1Comprehensive AnalysisDate 13-Sep-12 13-Sep-12 13-Sep-12Sample ID 2090877-01 2090877-02 2090877-03

AnionsChloride mg/L 250 2.57 1.35 2.69 2.69 1%Fluoride mg/L 1.5 0.11 0.22 < 0.10 0.22 15%Nitrogen, Nitrate as N mg/L 10 0.149 0.049 < 0.010 0.149 1%Nitrogen, Nitrite as N mg/L 1 < 0.010 < 0.010 < 0.010 0 0%Sulfate mg/L 500 36 21.6 51.3 51.3 10%General Parameters 0Alkalinity, Total as CaCO3 mg/L 187 152 301 301Alkalinity, Phenolphthalein as CaCO3 mg/L < 1 < 1 < 1 0Alkalinity, Carbonate as CaCO3 mg/L < 1 < 1 < 1 0Alkalinity, Bicarbonate as CaCO3 mg/L 187 152 301 301Alkalinity, Hydroxide as CaCO3 mg/L < 1 < 1 < 1 0pH 8.16 8.16 8.17Turbidity NTU 352 68.7 144 Water taken during test pumping

Colour, True CU 15 < 5 < 5 < 5 0 0%Conductivity (EC) µS/cm 417 335 642 642Nitrogen, Ammonia as N, Total mg/L 0.224 0.145 0.212 0.224 Expect some Cl demand from ammonia

Solids, Total Dissolved mg/L 500 253 184 375 375 75%Carbon, Total Organic mg/LUV Transmittance @ 254nm % 0Calculated Parameters 0Hardness, Total (Total as CaCO3) mg/L 1000 207 346 1000 Moderate hardness (ignoring first value)

Hardness, Total (Diss. as CaCO3) mg/L 191 142 315 315Dissolved MetalsAluminum, dissolved mg/L 0.1 < 0.05 1.32 < 0.05 1.32 1320% Only relevant after alum dosing

Antimony, dissolved mg/L 0.006 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 0 0%Arsenic, dissolved mg/L 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0 0%Barium, dissolved mg/L 1 < 0.05 < 0.05 0.06 0.06 6%Beryllium, dissolved mg/L < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 0Bismuth, dissolved mg/L < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 0Boron, dissolved mg/L 5 < 0.04 < 0.04 < 0.04 0 0%Cadmium, dissolved mg/L 0.005 < 0.0001 0.0002 < 0.0001 0.0002 4%Calcium, dissolved mg/L 45 37 63 63Chromium, dissolved mg/L 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0 0%Cobalt, dissolved mg/L 0.0006 0.0019 0.0014 0.0019Copper, dissolved mg/L 1 < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 0 0%Iron, dissolved mg/L 0.3 < 0.1 1.4 < 0.1 1.4 467% May just be a sampling/well artifact

Lead, dissolved mg/L 0.01 < 0.001 0.001 < 0.001 0.001 10%Lithium, dissolved mg/L 0.005 0.014 0.022 0.022Magnesium, dissolved mg/L 18.9 11.7 38 38Manganese, dissolved mg/L 0.05 0.082 0.139 0.218 0.218 436% Potential issue with Manganese

Mercury, dissolved mg/L 0.001 < 0.0002 < 0.0002 < 0.0002 0 0%Molybdenum, dissolved mg/L 0.005 0.006 0.009 0.009Nickel, dissolved mg/L < 0.002 0.005 0.009 0.009Phosphorus, dissolved mg/L < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 0Potassium, dissolved mg/L 2.7 8.7 8.9 8.9Selenium, dissolved mg/L 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0 0%Silicon, dissolved mg/L < 5 < 5 < 5 0Silver, dissolved mg/L < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 0Sodium, dissolved mg/L 200 10.6 9 15.6 15.6 8%Strontium, dissolved mg/L 0.37 0.26 0.44 0.44Sulfur, dissolved mg/L < 10 < 10 < 10 0Tellurium, dissolved mg/L < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 0Thallium, dissolved mg/L < 0.0002 < 0.0002 < 0.0002 0Thorium, dissolved mg/L < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 0Tin, dissolved mg/L < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 0Titanium, dissolved mg/L < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 0Uranium, dissolved mg/L 0.02 0.0077 0.0024 0.0041 0.0077 39%Vanadium, dissolved mg/L < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 0Zinc, dissolved mg/L 5 < 0.04 0.09 < 0.04 0.09 2%Zirconium, dissolved mg/L < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 0Total Metals 0Aluminum, total mg/L 0.1 118 23.3 16.6 118 118000% Probably from the turbidity in the sample

Antimony, total mg/L 0.006 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 0 0%Arsenic, total mg/L 0.01 0.024 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.024 240% Probably from the turbidity in the sample

Barium, total mg/L 1 1.91 0.24 0.22 1.91 191% Probably from the turbidity in the sample

Beryllium, total mg/L 0.005 < 0.001 < 0.001 0.005Bismuth, total mg/L 0.006 0.001 0.001 0.006Boron, total mg/L 5 < 0.04 < 0.04 < 0.04 0 0%Cadmium, total mg/L 0.005 0.0036 0.0005 0.0003 0.0036 72%Calcium, total mg/L 264 46 66 264Chromium, total mg/L 0.05 0.221 0.038 0.028 0.221 442% Probably from the turbidity in the sample

Cobalt, total mg/L 0.235 0.0239 0.015 0.235Copper, total mg/L 1 0.417 0.08 0.06 0.417 42%Iron, total mg/L 0.3 219 41.7 32.5 219 73000% Probably from the turbidity in the sample

Lead, total mg/L 0.01 0.257 0.018 0.022 0.257 2570% Probably from the turbidity in the sample

Lithium, total mg/L 0.145 0.049 0.041 0.145Magnesium, total mg/L 83.1 22.3 44.3 83.1Manganese, total mg/L 0.05 12.8 1.06 0.637 12.8 25600% Probably from the turbidity in the sample

Mercury, total mg/L 0.001 < 0.0002 < 0.0002 < 0.0002 0 0%Molybdenum, total mg/L 0.003 0.004 0.01 0.01Nickel, total mg/L 0.381 0.05 0.036 0.381Phosphorus, total mg/L 14 0.7 0.2 14Potassium, total mg/L 28.8 15.6 13 28.8Selenium, total mg/L 0.05 0.025 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.025 50%Silicon, total mg/L 120 36 30 120Silver, total mg/L 0.0096 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 0.0096Sodium, total mg/L 200 12.4 10.9 18.6 18.6 9%Strontium, total mg/L 1.75 0.31 0.46 1.75Sulfur, total mg/L 24 15 21 24Tellurium, total mg/L < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 0Thallium, total mg/L 0.0008 < 0.0002 < 0.0002 0.0008Thorium, total mg/L 0.062 0.013 0.01 0.062Tin, total mg/L < 0.002 < 0.002 < 0.002 0Titanium, total mg/L 2.1 1.32 0.76 2.1Uranium, total mg/L 0.02 0.0242 0.004 0.0052 0.0242 121% Probably from the turbidity in the sample

Vanadium, total mg/L 0.19 0.05 0.04 0.19Zinc, total mg/L 5 0.67 0.1 0.4 0.67 13%Zirconium, total mg/L 0.002 < 0.001 < 0.001 0.002

Unit MAC AO Max %MAC %AO

APPENDIX B

Permit to Operate

"Y) Interior Health Health Protection

Permit To Operate

Facility Number:

Name of Facility:

Address:

Primary owner

Conditions:

Apri l 01 , 2017

Effective Date

June 02, 2017

Issue Date

Drinking Water System 15 - 300 Connections

0660254

Vavenby Community Water System

3070 Dahms Rd Vavenby BC VOE 3AO Canada Thompson-Nicola Regional District - Kamloops

See Conditions on Permit

Environmental Health Officer

This permit is nontransferable and must be displayed in a conspicuous place

80761S June 04

Interior Health

February 20, 2007

Thompson-Nicola Regional District #300 - 465 Victoria Street Kamloops, BC V2C 2A9

Attention: Jennifer Chambers, Utilities Manager

Dear Ms. Chambers:

Re: Vavenby Community Water System

Subsequent to our October 2006 meeting, I am providing a list of proposed Conditions of Permit for the Vavenby Community Water System. You will note that a number of the proposed conditions are already in effect or in development, while others would be newly implemented.

We recognize several improvements over the past year to infrastructure and the operational aspects of the system, an of which help to reduce the risks of waterborne disease in the community. Even with these recent improvements, further advancements will still be necessary, particularly in the area of water treatment.

Prior to placing conditions on the Operating Permit. we wish to provide you the opportunity to review and provide further comment on any of the noted items. Your feedback is valued as part of our collaborative effort in formalizing a comprehensive program intended on safeguarding drinking water supplies for the community.

1. Provide long-term plans for treatment, source; and distribution system Improvements:

• Commission an engineering study to provide recommendations for a establishing a system capable of providing water quality meeting the 4-3-2-1-0 Drinking Water Objectives.

As you are aware, water suppliers will be required to provide long term plans to reach the goals of:

o 4 log inactivation of viruses D 3 log removal or inactivation of Giardia Lamblia and Cryptosporidium o 2 refers to two treatment processes for all surface drinking water systems CJ 1 for less than 1 NTU of turbidity with a target of 0.1 NTU CJ O total and fecal coliforms and E. Coli

The target completion date for the aforementioned study would be May 1, 2007.

. .. /2

Bus: (250) 851-7340 Fax: (250) 851-7341 Email: [email protected] Web: interiorhealth.ca

HEAL TH PROTECTION "Less Risk, Better Healih ~.

519 Columbia Street, Kamloops, BC, V2C 2T8

Vavenby Community Water System ·3- February 20, 2007

2. Develop a written sampling and monitoring program which will Include:

• Bacteriological monitoring - water samples are to be tested for specified microbiologic parameters at least 4 times per month on a weekly sample collection frequency. You may submit samples for mlcroblology testing to a laboratory which is accredited by the Ministry of Health and provide copies of the results in monthly reports to our office. We will take periodic audit samples, which are over and above the 4 samples you are responsible for testing each month. DWP Act Section 1, DWP Regulation Section 8 and Schedule B.

• Turbidity/ Water Disinfection Monitoring -Written procedures should be developed for a system of real·time monitoring for turbidity and the disinfection process.

• A sample monitoring program outline has been attached for your consideration. DWP Act Section 11.

3. Develop a cross.connection control program:

• A cross.connection control program is to be developed, with implementation dates, indicating when various objectives in the program can be achieved. Enclosed is a copy of the BCWWA cross-connection control Best Management Practices guide. Submit a proposed cross connection control program by May 1, 2007. DWP Act Regulation Section 15.

4. Provide a certified operator to operate the system:

• Provide a current Environmental Operators Certification Program (EOCP) classification for the water system.

• Provide Environmental Operators Certification (EOCP) certification documents for each new operator or re.certified operator, by December 31 st annually. It is recommended that that the purveyor develops a staff training plan which permits for continuous education and upgrading of staff capabilities. DWP Act Regu/aUon Section 12.

5. Provide a maintenance schedule for the system:

• The schedule must include the yearly maintenance plan, which will include but not be limited to: main flushing, hydrant maintenance, as well as planned replacement and/or improvements for the next 5 years. Submit a proposed maintenance program by May 1, 2007 DWP Act Section 18.

6. Submission of reports: • Monthly - Reports are to be submitted to the Health Unit on the monitoring/sampling

results as outlined in your monitoring plan.

• Yearly -An annual report is to be made available to the public and submitted to the Health Unit by no later than June 30th of the following year. The report is to include but not be limited to: the results of monitoring, current Emergency Response Plan and a copy of the maintenance schedule. DWP Act Section 15 ... /3

Vavenby Community Water System -3- February 20, 2007

7. Emergency Response Plan:

• The Emergency Response Plan must be reviewed/updated and submitted to our office on an annual basis. DWP Act Section 10, "DWP Regulation Section 13.

Please feel free to contact me at (250) 851-7334 to further discuss the proposed Conditions of Permit.

Sincerely: __

/ -~//7l BrenfZ ~haria, CPHI (C) Drinking Water Officer Interior Health - Kamloops

BZ/jah

Cc - Robert Rippen, Senior Drinking Water Officer Joyce Christianson, Senior Public Health Inspector Scott Mason, Public Health Engineer

F IPHIHea:1hProl\PubljclTCSIDrinkin9 Water\Water System lnlo\15 - 300\Vavenby\Vavenby Community Water System COP Feb~ 2c107.doc

APPENDIX C

Summary of Local Geology

MEMORANDUM TO: Rob Wall, P.Eng., Project Engineer (TRUE Consulting Ltd.) CC: Dave Underwood, P.Eng., Project Director (TRUE Consulting Ltd.) Jake Devlin, P.Eng., Manager Public Works (Thompson Nicola Regional District) DATE: April 17, 2018 FROM: Thierry M. Carriou, M.Sc., P.Eng, Hydrogeologist Perry B. Grunenberg, P.Geo., Geologist PROJECT: 17010.1 TNRD Community Water Master Planning (TRUE Project No. 379-491 ) SUBJECT: VAVENBY COMMUNITY WATER SYSTEM: GEOLOGIC OVERVIEW Rob, 1.0 INTRODUCTION TRUE Consulting Ltd. (“TRUE”) is currently preparing Water System Master Plans for several communities located within the Thomson Nicola Regional District (“TNRD”). TRUE has retained BC Groundwater Consulting Services Ltd. (“BCGW”) to provide a brief overview of area geology and hydrogeology for incorporation into these plans. Please refer to Figure 1 (below) for an overview of the current water system. 2.0 SCOPE BCGW has reviewed available information from several sources and consulted our well / groundwater quality archives to develop an overall understanding of the local groundwater resources. We have reviewed the two background reports by TNRD:

Aug 5, 2005 Phase 1 - Groundwater Potential Evaluation Report of Findings prepared for TNRD by Kala Groundwater Consulting Ltd.

Dec 12, 2005 Groundwater Supply Investigation prepared for Stantec Consulting Ltd. by P. Blackett, ASc.T of Kala Groundwater Consulting Ltd.

In 2012 - 2013 BCGW conducted a detailed groundwater investigation for the Canadian Forest Products sawmill which led to the successful completion of a new high-capacity well. References are listed below.

Sept 6, 2012 Well Drilling Locations and Recommended Approach prepared for Canfor Forest Products (Vavenby Sawmill) by T. Carriou, P.Eng. of BC Groundwater Consulting Services Ltd.

Sept 22, 2012 Progress Update: Field Program No. 1 (Drilling prepared for Canfor Forest Products (Vavenby Sawmill) by T. Carriou, P.Eng. of BC Groundwater Consulting Services Ltd.

Oct 16, 2012 Progress Update: Production Well Screen Designs prepared for Canfor Forest Products (Vavenby Sawmill) by T. Carriou, P.Eng. of BC Groundwater Consulting Services Ltd.

July 13, 2013 Review of Well Monitoring Record prepared for Canfor Forest Products (Vavenby Sawmill) by T. Carriou, P.Eng. of BC Groundwater Consulting Services Ltd.

The BCGW geologist P. Grunenberg, P.Geo. reviewed original orthophotographs of the area and conducted a one-day site visit for the purpose of amending current publicly available information. We interviewed local drilling contractors who regularly work in this area to support and augment our interpretations.

Figure 1 – TNRD Vavenby Community Water System area

3.0 REGIONAL MAPPING INFORMATION (Province of BC)

The Data BC terrain mapping (Figure 2) indicates that the community lies within polygons mapped as glaciofluvial terrace deposits, (AGt), fluvial fan deposits (Af) mixed with silty lacustrine sediments ($L). Above the community along Highway 5 polygons are mapped as fluvial fan with colluvial fan (Cf) mixed with silty lacustrine sediments. Higher elevations are mapped as colluvium blanket and veneer (Cb, Cv) with glacial till (M) and rock (R).

4.0 AQUIFER MAPPING INFORMATION (Province of BC)

The community is underlain by Aquifer No. 807 as proposed by the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations (FLNRO). It is currently mapped as a 16.6 km2 glaciofluvial sand and gravel aquifer. FLNRO suggests that it is moderately developed with moderate vulnerability. The aquifer location is provided on Figure 3.

Figure 2 - Vavenby Community BC Data Terrain Map

Figure 3 – Aquifer Location

Figure 4 – Vavenby Orthophoto with Water Well and Waypoint Locations

5.0 WATER WELLS (Registered, BCGW Archives and Mapped)

The Vavenby Water System utilizes a shallow well located adjacent to the Thompson River (location shown on Figures 2 and 3). The well is located upon the sand and gravel river floodplain, 2 to 3 metres above the current river level (Figure 4).

Figure 5 – Vavenby community well

Several wells recorded in the BC Database occur within the Vavenby community area (Figure 5). Well lithologies are provided on Table 1.

The general sequence of well lithology includes a dry bouldery brown sand and gravel overlying till. Wells were completed within sand and gravel layers beneath the glacial till, although some wells might be completed in water bearing sediments above the till layer (WTN 28240).

The higher yield wells are both located in the lower Thompson River Valley. WTN 95394 is located on the south side of the river, completed to a depth of 590 feet, with a reported yield of 3.2 L/s (50 USgpm). WTN 107073 is located within the Canfor lands adjacent to the community, completed to a depth of 35 m (115 ft) and has a reported yield of 6.3 Ls/ (100 USgpm). The lenses of clayey till may provide confinement of the underlying aquifer, with static water level in the well indicating confined conditions. Please note that BCGW directed and supervised the construction of WTN 107073.

Table 1 - BCData Water Well Database Output

* BCData output is presented in practical groundwater units measured as water level depths in feet below ground and well yield as USgpm.

6.0 SITE RECONNAISSANCE RESULTS

A site reconnaissance was conducted on November 29, 2017 by BCGW. Waypoints (WPs) were collected using a hand-held GPS recorded in UTM NAD83.

The terrain within which most of the community is located forms a series of fluvial or glaciofluvial terraces. The terraces are comprised of brown sand with gravel. On the east side of the community pockets of glaciolacustrine silt were noted immediately above the upper terrace.

Figure 6 – Glaciolacustrine Silt at WP 251

Figure 7 - Brown Sand and Gravel Terrace, WP 257

The community well currently utilized (Figure 5) is located adjacent to the Thompson River. Exposures of materials along the road cut down to the river level expose sand and gravel underlain by clayey till. Water seepage was noted from within or above the till layer.

Figure 8 - Slope Failure Exposing Fluvial Terrace Sand and Gravel Overlying Clayey Glacial Till, WP 263

Sand and gravel, Ft

Clay and gravel, till

A similar assemblage of sand and gravel overlying clay till was observed across the river from the community well location.

Figure 9 – fluvial sand and gravel overlying till, north side of river at WP 261

On the west margin of the community, east of the Canfor Mill, exposures of clayey till (hoodoos) overlie brown sand and gravel. Topography of the area includes elongate glacial drumlins.

Figure 10 - Till Overlying Fluvial Sand and Gravel, WP267

Brown layered sand and gravel

Grey clay and gravel till

Clayey till “hoodoos”

Fluvial sand and gravel

Figure 11 – Drumlinized landscape northwest of the community, upper terrace surface

7.0 GEOLOGIC SUMMARY

The general geologic interpretation for the area of the community is glacial till in the upper elevations, above sand and gravel fluvial terraces. The sand and gravel terraces are deposited upon lower glacial till. Well drilling indicates that another sand and gravel layer underlies the lower till layer, below or at the Thompson River elevation.

Pockets of glaciolacustrine silts remain as remnants immediately above or within the fluvial terraces. Upper terraces, further from the current Thompson River, may be glaciofluvial in origin.

Well lithologic records indicate bedrock was intersected at 111 m (364 ft) in WTN 84964. The unconsolidated materials may be over 150 m (500 ft) thick in the lower valley floor, as indicated by WTN 95394 that bottomed in silt and sand with gravel at 180 m (590 ft).

Water seepage noted at the contact of fluvial sediments with the lower till layer suggests potential aquifer development at or above this contact. Deeper well drilling beneath the lower till intersected sand and gravel that has characteristics of a confined aquifer.

drumlins

Figure 12 - North South Cross Section Through Vavenby Community, Vertical Exaggeration x 3.5 (section line indicated on Figure 2)

7.0 CLOSURE

BCGW appreciates the opportunity to prepare this geologic summary. Sincerely, BC Groundwater Consulting Services Ltd. Thierry M. Carriou, M.Sc., P.Eng. Hydrogeologist (1993)

TERRAIN CLASSIFICATION AND GEOLOGIC LEGEND

SURFICAL MATERIAL TERMS AND SYMBOLS

SUBSURFACE EXPRESSION TERMS AND SYMBOLS

GEOLOGIC PROCESS TERMS AND SYMBOLS

ATTACHMENTS

Date: Our Ref.:

August 5, 2005 R04627

Stantec Consulting Ltd. 305-153 Seymour Street Kamloops, BC V2C2C7

Attn: Peter Shand, P.Eng. Senior Engineer

Re: THOMPSON NICOLA REGIONAL DISTRICT (TNRD) VAVENBY,BC PHASE 1 - GROUNDWATER POTENTIAL EVALUATION (GPE) REPORT OF FINDINGS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Kala Groundwater Consulting Ltd. (Kala) was retained by Stantec Consulting Ltd. (SCL) of Kami oops,

BC, on behalf of the Thompson Nicola Regional District (TNRD) to undertake a Groundwater Potential

Evaluation (GPE) of the Vavenby area north of Kamloops, BC (herein referred to as the site) for the

purpose of developing a new community supply well.

The area is located in the TNRD Electoral Area "A" approximately 30 km east of Clearwater, BC.

Access to the area occurs via Highway 5.

The project objective was to determine the availability of groundwater and potential groundwater supply

locations at the site to support requirements for a groundwater supply well. This report sununarizes the

results of a groundwater potential evaluation for the site undertaken in March to June 2005. For the

purposes of this GPE Kala considered a five kilometre radius around Vavenby.

The client authorized this program via Kala authorization to proceed document COA04627 dated April

13, 2005. Sections 1.0 to 4.0 of this report provide background information; Section 5.0 provides a

discussion of the findings of the desktop and field reviews; Section 6.0 provides conclusions and

recommendations. Figures follow the text.

2,0 BACKGROUND

R04627 - Thompson Nicola Regional District Vavenby, BC - GPE

8/05/2005 Page 2

The Vavenby rural development area obtains potable, process and irrigation water from a surface water

intake into the North Thompson River proximate to the community. The operators of the intake, on behalf of the TNRD, report seasonal siltation and plugging problems. The TNRD is interested in

determining the viability of constructing community supply wells in the area.

The site lies at approximate coordinates 51° 35'06"N, 119° 43' 06"W at an elevation of approximately

455 m (at pump house) above mean sea level (AMSL). Figure I provides a site location diagram. The

town site occurs mainly across a raised fluvial bench at an elevation of 474 m. The difference in

elevation between the river side and the town site is approximately 19 m. The client desires to construct a

new potable groundwater supply well capable of approximately 12 Lis. Vavenby is a small rural

community of approximately 700 residents. Access to the community is from Highway 5 to Birch Island

Road and an access trail to the intake site.

The surface water intake comprises a 203 mm diameter line into the river thalwag. The water line is

enveloped in filter stone and a non-woven geo-textile. Fouling of the selected filter cloth has caused

turbidity and reduced water quantity problems. The surface water decants to a wet well and pump out.

The surface water receives liquid chlorination for residual prior to consumption.

2.1 Scope of Services

This GPE has involved an investigation of the site and immediate adjacent areas. The objective of the

investigation was to determine the availability of groundwater and the potential for completing water

wells at selected locations. As future considerations, the long-term sustainability of the groundwater

supply should also be determined. The scope of services was outlined during discussions with the client

in March, 2005.

KALA GROUNDWATER CONSULTING LTD.


8/05/2005 Page 3

In summary, the scope of services was to include but not be limited to the following tasks and/or items:

a) Desk top review ofhydrogeological and bedrock/surficial geological reports and mapping;

b) Site reconnaissance; c) Recommendations for areas of potential groundwater development; and

d) Preliminary wellhead protection considerations.

Kala visited the site on April 15 and May 16, 2005 to determine general site characteristics and observe the hydrogeologic setting.

2.2 Method of Investigation

The purpose of this GPE program was to determine the likely occurrence and distribution of groundwater

at the site. Potential groundwater resources are not amenable to direct observation. Kala applies conventional hydrogeologic practices to provide a professional opinion of the presence or absence of

groundwater resources within a specific area based on a thorough review of existing site conditions and available information. The review included the collection and analysis of the following documents:

a) Hydrogeological and bedrock/surficial geological reports and mapping;

b) Aerial photographs;

c) Soils and biogeoclimatic mapping; d) Topographic and survey information; e) Previous consultant reports and the BC contaminated site registry system;

t) All water wells within the site and within a five km radius of the site; g) Ministry of Water Land Air Protection (MoWLAP) aquifer classification mapping; and

h) In-house Kala files.

2.3 Climate and Physiography

The site is located within the Interior Cedar-Hemlock Zone at an elevation of 455 m AMSL. The site occurs within a large down cut east-west to north-south tending erosional valley which stretches from the

Albreda area in the North Thompson River area and southwards to the junction of the Kamloops area. Formation of the valley began in the late Miocene period. Vavenby is located within the Clearwater

Highlands; a midland physiographic sub-region, an area of moderate relief and constitutes the deeply

incised North Thompson valley. It is a broad sloping valley which is likely an artifact of a larger earlier

more mature drainage basin.

KALA GROUNDWATER CONSUL TING LTD.


8/05/2005 Page4

The climate is generally warm and dry in summer and cool and wet in winter (interior wet belt). This

climate is a function of the cascade/coastal rain shadow effect. Precipitation averages approximately 630mm/year with a potential evapotranspiration of 480 mm/year yielding a moisture surplus for the area.

2.4 Geology

The dominant surficial feature of the site is the large Vavenby thrust fault which underlies the town site.

The map area covers a belt of structurally complex low-grade metamorphic rocks that lies along the

western margin of the Omineca Belt. It is flanked by high-grade metamorphic rocks of the Shuswap

Complex to the east and by rocks of the Intermontane Belt to the west. The area is underlain mainly by Paleozoic metasedimentary and metavolcanic rocks of the Eagle Bay Assemblage and the Fennel

Formation. Late Devonian granitic orthogneiss locally intrudes Eagle Bay rocks. The Paleozoic rocks are cut by mid Cretaceous granodiorite and quartz monzonite of the Raft and Baldy batholiths, and by

Early Tertiary quartz feldspar porphyry, basalt and larnprophyre dykes. They are locally overlain by Eocene sedimentary and volcanic rocks of the Karnloops Group and by Miocene plateau lavas.

The Paleozoic rocks occur in four structural slices separated by southwesterly-directed thrust faults. The

upper three fault slices contain only Eagle Bay rocks, while the lowest slice comprises Eagle Bay strata

structurally overlain by the Fennell Formation. Bedrock geology is provided in Figure 2.

The surficial geology of the site comprises modem thick fluvial deposits and hillside till like materials.

The town site lies upon a bench of alluvial sediments ranging from fine sand to gravel sized particles. The till sediments range in grainsize distribution from clay to boulder size.

The unconsolidated till veneer tends to be less than 30 m thick across the study area and only within the

upper hillsides. Bedrock may be encountered within 60 m of surface adjacent to the existing water intake

area.

3.0 HYDROGEOLOGIC SETTING AND WATER WELLS

The following discussion regarding the occurrence and distribution of groundwater throughout the site is based on an assessment of prevailing geological conditions, a site reconnaissance and an evaluation of published information. The general hydrogeologic setting of the site is defined by the surficial and bedrock geology of the site and the climate.

Surface waters drain the site west towards the confluence of the North and South Thompson River. Smaller tributaries drain the hillsides throughout the basin around Vavenby. Groundwater recharge occurs from the north and south hillsides discharging into the river.

KALA GROUNDWATER CONSUL TING LTD.


8/0512005 Page 5

There are no water wells listed within the provincial Mo WLAP groundwater Information database for the site nor is aquifer mapping completed, The submission of water well logs to the Groundwater Section of the Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection (MoWLAP) is currently voluntary (although becoming

mandatory), and therefore not all water well records are available.

Adjacent to the site at a neighboring northerly home the residents have a shallow excavated well which is

0.9 min diameter by approximately 8 min depth. During the recent site visit the turbidity of the river

water as measured by Kala was 180 NTU while the well water was 7 NTU suggesting excellent filtration

from a well supply undoubtedly under the influence of surface water.

The fluvial sediments beneath the pump house area may extend to 60 m or deeper. This lower bench area

is an erosional remnant of former river sediments, as evident by the upper bench level and the upper

bench created via historic river flooding. The subsurface stratigraphy at depth may comprise layers of

sand and gravel with interbedded finer grained deposits.

The higher elevation town site river terrace is chiefly composed of river sediments comprising silt to

cobble sized particles. In general groundwater will likely be encountered at drilling depths greater than

the river elevation. Both the town site terrace and the lower river side pump house appear suitable for

drilling exploration. Kala recommends one 203 diameter by 46 m deep testwell to be located 6 m north of

the existing pump house. If the testwell is not successful additional drilling at a later date would focus on

the town site area, however Kala is fairly confident of obtaining high quality groundwater at flows

between 3-20 Lis near the pump house location. This assertion requires that a testwell drilling and

evaluation program be conducted to verify.

4.0 WELLHEAD PROTECTION CONSIDERATIONS

Kala conducted a database enquiry of the BC Site Registry System (BCSRS). The BCSRS is a database

of the location, extent and status of contaminated sites in BC. This system is administered by the BC

MoWLAP. Kala reviewed a periphery of5.0 km around the site and found no registered site. A copy of

the search results is included in the Appendix.

Of concern at the site would be former fuel handling facilities, septic disposal fields, maintenance yards,

and logging operations.

5.0 DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

Groundwater potential areas are based on the interpretation of surface topography, accessibility, surficial

geology, bedrock geology and existing well log data.



8/05/2005 Page 6

Geologic review and reconnaissance of the site suggests that it is underlain with permeable

unconsolidated sediments proximate to the town site and the lower bench area next to the North

Thompson River. Groundwater potential within the bedrock aquifer is considered by Kala as good to

excellent for community production wells yielding in the range of 3-20 Lis. The following parameters

must be considered when siting a production well:

• TNRD accessible property and proximity to any existing water distribution system;

• Setbacks from potential septic fields and local stream courses;

• Setback from contaminated sites;

• Likelihood of intercepting bedrock at higher elevations prior to encountering a useable aquifer;

• Groundwater geochemistry implications; and

• Groundwater under the direct influence of surface water.

Wells shallower than 15 m may be under the direct influence of surface water and under the Drinking

Water Protection Act would be treated the same as surface water from a treatment standpoint.

6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the Kala site review, conducted in accordance with generally accepted hydrogeologic practices

and the scope of services detailed herein, Kala provides the following conclusions and recommendations

for consideration:

a) The site is located outside ofKamloops, BC within TNRD Electoral Area A.

b) The project objective is to determine potential groundwater supply locations on the site to support

requirements for community applications (approximately 12 Lis).

c) The site is underlain by medium to coarse textured unconsolidated river borne sediments which are

considered by Kala to be moderately to highly productive.

d) Based on the site review there is no evidence of surface borne contamination occurrences that would

discount the chosen testwell location.

e) Kala recommends the construction of one testwell. If that well is not successful, re-examination of

the area based on the learned stratigraphy would be required.


6.1 Testwell Costing


8/05/2005 Page 7

Kala feels reasonably confident that a suitable aquifer may be intercepted at the pump house location and

as such recommends the construction of one 203 mm diameter by 46 m deep testwell. The larger testwell

diameter will permit the well to be commissioned as a production well should it intercept a suitable

aquifer. Kala telephone tendered unit rate drilling costs to three certified interior drilling firms. Table I

summarizes the charges:

Table 1 - Comparison of Drilling Charges

Description Fields Drilling Bud's Water Wells JR Drilling Ltd.

Contractors Ltd.

Mobilization $2,000 $500 $250

Surface casing and 6m of surface $2,500 $1,500 $1,500

seal

Drive shoe $250 $220 $255

46 m of drill & case 203 mm $9,809 $9,055 $8,280

diameter

Well screens $2,500 $1,800 $1,550

Hourly for development and $3,000 $2,500 $3,000

screen setting 10 hours

Total $20,059 $15,575 $14,835

Kala recommends using JR Drilling Ltd. of Kamloops, BC. Based on June 2005 contractor rates Kala

anticipates the following (pre-tender) costs to complete a test/production well drilling program adjacent to

the Vavenby pump house next to the North Thompson River:

• Well drilling one 203 mm diameter by 46 m deep well

• Pumping test

• Laboratory

• Supervision and reporting

Total Estimate

$14,835

$7,500

$900

$6,500

$29,735

While there are no guarantees regarding the interception of a suitable aquifer capable of supplying the

client desired yield the area does look favorable for the completion of a water well yielding 12 Lis. The

completion of a 203 mm diameter well will negate the requirement for a second well at this time. Kala

recommends the construction of the well prior to the enforcement of the upcoming BC Drinking Water

Protection Guidelines for water well construction in BC. Because of the aforementioned, estimated

costing will increase, and as such all pricing is only valid until the end of December 2005.


7.0 CLOSURE


8/05/2005 Page 8

Please find attached a detailed description of the terms, limitations and constraints applicable to Kala

involvement within this project and the uses of this report.

Sincerely; Kala Groundwater Consulting Ltd.


1314 McGill Road Kamloops, BC V2C 6N6

Date: Our Ref.:

December 12, 2005 L04627-100

Stantec Consulting Ltd. 305-153 Seymour Street Kamloops, BC V2C2C7

Attn: David Ball, P .Eng. Project Manager

Tel (250) 372-9194 Fax (250) 3 72-9398 [email protected]

Re: THOMPSON NICOLA REGIONAL DISTRICT (TNRD) VAVENBY,BC GROUNDWATER SUPPLY INVESTIGATION

Kala Groundwater Consulting Ltd. (Kala) was retained by Stantec Consulting Ltd. (SCL) of Kami oops, BC

on behalf of the Thompson Nicola Regional District to undertake a testwell drilling program. The objective was to determine the presence or absence of an aquifer capable of approximately 12 Lis for increased potable

supply for the Village ofVavenby, BC.

Kala completed a Task I - Groundwater Potential Evaluation In June, 2005 which recommended the

construction of a 203 mm diameter by 50 m deep ( estimated) exploratory testwell.

In summary, during the period of November 21 to November 28, 2005, one 8-inch (203 cm) exploratory

testhole was completed approximately 10 m (33 feet) north of the existing pump house facility. The testhole was drilled to a total depth of78.6 m (258 feet) and was terminated in unconsolidated material comprised of grey silty fine sand to silt with minor clay (sometimes referred to as the "Blue Silt Lacustrine" formation).

In general terms, materials encountered below the zone of saturation, throughout the course of test drilling

were very fine grained (grey silt, silty fine sand and fine brown sand) and without a considerable cost effort,

generally not suitable for the construction of medium to high capacity water wells. A more detailed

description of the exploration program is provided in the following paragraphs.

On November 22, 2005, Mr. Larry Topp and Don Bombardier of JR Drilling Ltd. met with Jack Wilson and Bob Roxin of Vavenby, to indicate proposed drilling site, outline drilling procedure and arrange to have

sumps constructed adjacent to drilling site. The sumps were required for environmental considerations and

designed to contain drill cuttings and water discharged from the test hole. Notification was relayed to Kelly Austin of Fisheries, Scott Mason of Interior Health and David Ball of SCL. The sumps were dug on

November 22, 2005, by Ario Construction Ltd. (Dave Hrabchuk).

L04627-100-TNRD, Vavenby, BC December 12, 2005

Page 2

After receiving the go-ahead from Paul Blackett (the drilling permit was not yet received from Interior

Health), the drilling firm (JR Drilling Ltd. ofKamloops) was mobilized to the site on November 23, 2005.

On day one, the crew set 5.5 m {18 feet) of I 0-inch surface casing and started drilling with 8-inch main string

casing to a depth of I 1.0 m (36 feet) below surface. During the second day (November 24, 2005) 8-inch

drilling was carried on to 47.5 m (156 feet) below surface. At this depth, the only two prospects for

groundwater development included a fine brown sand formation encountered between 22.2 and 33.5 m (73

and 110 feet) and a less extensive fine sand zone encountered between 39.6 and 43.6 m {130 and 143 feet)

below surface. Samples have been taken to Kala office.

At this stage in the program, the drilling costs were approximately $11,500.00 (the total budget was

$14,800.00). With budget considerations in view, Mr. Topp notified Paul Blackett of Kala and David Ball of

SCL. It was decided to drill 40 more feet to keep within budget while at the same time determining

conditions at greater depth. The crew drilled from 47.5 to 53.6 m {156 to 176 feet) on November 25, 2005

but at this stage had problems with the 10 and 8-inch casing sand-locking. Later the same day, Paul Blackett

received approval to drill an additional 24.4 m (80 feet).

On November 27, 2005, the drilling crew and Mr. Topp returned to Vavenby and completed drilling to 78.6

m (258 feet). As previously noted in this memo, the hole was terminated in fine grey silty material, not

suitable for water well construction.

At this stage, Larry Topp recommended that the testhole be capped, the drilling firm released and some

further thought be given to the next phase of groundwater development at Vavenby. Some of the options for

consideration at this stage are as follows:

• Drill deeper with the objective of encountering a gravel formation at depth. Because 8-inch casing has been used thus far, 6-inch casing could be inserted if the test hole goes beyond 500 feet for example,

• Set some well screen opposite one of the fine brown sand zones to determine groundwater potential.

• Consider a different drilling location.

In a telephone conversation with Don Bombardier of JR Drilling Ltd., the drilling costs following the

additional 100 feet of drilling are approximately $18,500.00 not including GST.


L04627-100-TNRD, Vavenby, BC December 12, 2005

Page 3

The fine sand aquifer located at 39-44 m below surface appeared visually capable of yields in the order of 3-

4 Lis. At 50 m below surface, a suitable aquifer was not intercepted and SCL was contacted for directions.

It was decided that drilling would continue to 79.2 m below surface. A suitable aquifer was not intercepted

to 79.2 m below surface.

As bedrock was not encountered, Kala recommends that the exploratory testwell be continued to the bedrock

surface or 152 m below surface, simply to verify the presence or absence of a suitable aquifer. Additional

drilling will necessitate down sizing the casing diameter from 203 mm to 152 mm diameter to ensure driving

the casing further and providing a proper seal against potential flowing artesian conditions. Estimated

additional costing would be as follows for the extra exploratory drilling:

• Mobilization: $1,000

• Overlap 152 mm diameter casing $2,000

• Drill 79-159 m $8,500

• Kala $2,500

Total $14,000

If it is the intention to pursue a different direction and no longer use the testwell, the casing must be removed and the hole pressure grouted in accordance with the regulations of the BC Drinking Water Protection Act.

If there are any questions or concerns regarding the enclosed, please contact our Kamloops office at your

convenience.

Sincerely;

Kala Groundwater Consulting Ltd.

Per:

/-i:~~ Paul J Blackett AScT. Senior Technologist

PJB/lh/fr/04627-100/L04627-100-1212


Depth Interval In feet

0 - 1.5 ft 1.5- 3 3-23 23-39 39-73 73 - 110

110-130

130- 143 143 - 180 180-189 189-203 203 -258

Community of Vavenby Groundwater Exploration Program

Driller's Litholog

Lithologic Description

Sandy loam topsoil, with pebbles, black Brown sand with pebbles Sand and gravel with cobbles, grey-brown Sandy clay with pebbles, grey-brown Sandy to silty clay with pebbles (till-like), grey Brown fine sand, clean, making some water Brown sand, becoming finer grained, higher silt content, not as

clean As previous interval but slightly coarser grained Silt to silty fine sand, grey Silty fine sand, grey Silty to fine sandy clay, grey Silty to silty fine sand, grey, with minor clay stringers

• 10-inch casing pulled and annulus grouted • Hole capped with aluminum lock cap • TH# 1 drilled IO metres north of existing pump house

MEMORANDUM

TO: Blaine Matuga, President (Central Interior Pumps Ltd.) CC: Peter Metcalf, Maintenance Superintendant (Canadian Forest Products Ltd.) Dwayne Thiessen, Plant Manager (Canadian Forest Products Ltd.) DATE: September 22, 2012 FROM: Thierry Carriou, P.Eng. (Hydrogeologist) PROJECT: 11005.3 Canadian Forest Products Ltd. (Vavenby Sawmill):

Groundwater Supply Development Program

SUBJECT: PROGRESS UPDATE: FIELD PROGRAM NO. 1 (DRILLING)

Blaine,

1.0 BACKGROUND

Canadian Forest Products Ltd. (“Canfor”) is currently developing a supply well to meet fire protection demands. Central Interior Pumps Ltd. (“CIP”) is the prime contractor supported by BC Groundwater Consulting Services Ltd. (“BC Groundwater”). Please refer to our September 6, 2012 memo Well Drilling Locations and Recommended Approach for background information, a project description and drilling location recommendations.

A kick-off meeting was held with Canfor on September 12, 2012 to confirm the project scope, test well budget and drilling locations. BC Groundwater recommended that test drilling continue until at least 6.1 m (20 feet) of water-bearing sediments were intercepted providing 6.3 L/s (100 USgpm) of air-lift discharge from the drilling rig. This will increase the likelihood of achieving the desired yield from the production well.

11005.1 CENTRAL INTERIOR PUMPS (CANFOR VAVENBY SAWMILL) GROUNDWATER SUPPLY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

Progress Update: Field Program No. 1 (Drilling) September 22, 2012 (Page 2 of 8)

2.0 RESULTS OF TEST WELL DRILLING

Test Well No. 1 (“TW2012-1”) was advanced by JR Drilling Central Limited Partnership (“JR Drilling”) on September 13, 2012 at the location shown in Figure 1. The well was advanced through two aquifers to a total depth of 59.5 m (195 feet) and was instrumented with a datalogger to monitor water levels. A second test well was not drilled due to the success of TW2012-1.

Drill cuttings were collected and logged by BC Groundwater at regular intervals. Water samples were also collected from each water-bearing zone (i.e. “aquifer”). Details of test well lithology and field observations are attached to this memo. Select drill cuttings and water samples are currently being tested1.

A summary of drilling results are presented below:

0.0 - 4.9 m 0 - 16 feet Dry surficial sediments (sand and gravel)

4.9 - 25.9 m 16 - 85 feet Aquitard No. 1 (silt and clay “confining” layer)

25.9 - 31.4 m 85 - 103 feet Aquifer No. 1: Upper Zone

Water-bearing clean sand and gravel Thickness 5.5 m (17 feet) Maximum air-lift discharge 3.8 L/s (60 USgpm)

31.4 - 43.6 m 103 - 143 feet Aquifer No. 1: Lower Zone

Water-bearing fine sand and silt Thickness 12.2 m (40 feet) Maximum air-lift discharge 0.3 L/s (5 USgpm)

43.6 - 58.8 m 143 - 193 feet Aquifer No. 2

Water-bearing clean coarse sand Thickness 15.2 m (50 feet) Maximum air-lift discharge 1.3 L/s (20 USgpm)

CIP and Canfor are extremely fortunate to have encountered two productive aquifers at the location of TW2012-1 as drilling in this area can be challenging. Air-lift discharge from the drilling

1 Grain-size analysis of the drill cuttings will provide information required to design a high-efficiency well screen for installation into the production well. Water analysis provides information required to confirm continuity of the aquifer and the recharge source.



rig did not achieve the desired 6.3 L/s (100 USgpm) but this is offset by considerable aquifer thickness. Drilling results suggest several production well options, each with a high probability of successful construction and development to a sand-free condition.

3.0 PRODUCTION WELL DESIGNS (PRELIMINARY)

Further to our follow-up meeting of September 14, 2012 we have developed preliminary designs for two production wells. Laboratory grain-size analysis information will be used to confirm specifics of the designs, but it is useful for CIP and Canfor to understand their options at this time.

A summary of the designs are presented below (key points shown in red):

Production Well No. 1 (Shallow)

Design A: High-efficiency 200 mm (8 inch) wire-wound screen in Aquifer No. 1 (Upper) Design B: High-efficiency 250 mm (10 inch) wire-wound screen in Aquifer No. 1 (Upper) Screen slot size controlled by grain-size of the sand and gravel (analysis in progress) Well yield controlled mainly by well diameter and screen slot size Shallow well depth controls construction costs Seasonal well yield fluctuations are expected (recharge from the river) Scope of currently proposed CIP pumping test is adequate to confirm well yield Consider completion of TW2012-1 as a permanent monitoring well (see below)

Production Well No. 2 (Deep)

Design A: High-efficiency wire-wound screen installed into Aquifer No. 2 Design B: Sand-packed screen installed into Aquifer No. 2 Screen slot size controlled by silt content of the sand (analysis in progress) Well yield controlled mainly by well diameter Deeper screen reduces seasonal well yield fluctuations Scope of currently proposed CIP pumping test is adequate to confirm well yield Consider completion of TW2012-1 as a permanent monitoring well (see below)

BC Groundwater will provide a follow-up memo to CIP recommending specific production well designs after we receive grain-size testing results from the laboratory. We expect to have final designs available by Monday October 1, 2012 as per our commitment made during the kick-off meeting. We have forwarded a memo to JR Drilling requesting production well cost estimates on your behalf.



4.0 CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS BC Groundwater recommends that CIP and Canfor proceed as follows:

Priority 1. Confirm the proposed well discharge location.

Priority 2. Proceed with construction of Production Well No. 1 as soon as practical.

It is strongly recommend that CIP secure a return date with JR Drilling by September 29, 2012 if Canfor agrees with these construction recommendations. Production well materials can be ordered immediately upon Canfor confirmation of the screen design and budget estimate.

Priority 3. Complete TW2012-1 as a permanent monitoring well to confirm adequate well recharge and monitor well / aquifer performance over the long-term.

Monitoring of this well during testing will confirm that Canfor has

developed a sustainable groundwater supply that can be depended on during fire emergencies.

Monitoring results will be reported to Canfor insurance providers

confirming that fire insurance requirements have been met. Additional discussion is presented below.

Priority 4. Construct Production Well No. 2 to supplement pumping rates (if required).

Drilling and screen installation / development can be completed this year.

Testing would likely be deferred to next year depending upon weather conditions.

5.0 COMPLETION OF TW2012-1 AS A MONITORING WELL Review of initial drilling results suggests that Aquifer No. 1 (priority target) is recharged by the river via seepage through the underlying silt and clay. Initial water level measurements and water quality testing results suggest that Aquifer No. 2 may be a deep “regional” aquifer that underlies part of the Vavenby valley.



We are unsure at this time if the deeper regional aquifer provides upward recharge to Aquifer No. 1 when river levels are low. Two sources of recharge to Production Well No. 1 (i.e. the river and regional aquifer) will provide greater resiliency to low-flow and drought conditions. BC Groundwater recommends that CIP and Canfor agree to complete TW2012-1 as a permanent monitoring well. This will provide the information necessary to confirm the sustainability and drought resiliency of Production Well No. 1. It will also confirm if Production Well No. 2 can be operated independently of the main production well (if additional flow is required). Please note that completion of TW2012-1 as a permanent monitoring well fully satisfies closure requirements of the BC Ground Water Protection regulations.

6.0 CONFIRMATION OF FIRE INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

The Canfor Vavenby sawmill is required to meet fire insurance underwriter requirements. BC Groundwater will prepare a summary report and Letter of Certification at the end of this project confirming the well(s) meet peak design requirements of 9.5 L/s (150 USgpm). It is very important for Canfor to confirm their insurance providers will accept this certification.

The following presents a technical summary for review by their insurance provider. It outlines how well pumping rates will be established and adequate recharge confirmed. They are welcome to contact BC Groundwater directly to discuss this further and fine-tune certification requirements.

1. Pumping rate forecasts will be calculated using the specific-capacity method. This is the approach required for approval of a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (“CPCN”) in British Columbia.

a. The peak discharge rate of the well will be established using the following:

Maximum 14-day drawdown forecast Maximum 70 % water column drawdown

b. The average discharge rate will be established using the following:

Maximum 100-day drawdown forecast (unconfined aquifer) Maximum 20-year drawdown forecast (confined aquifer) Maximum 70 % water column drawdown



2. Adequate well recharge will be confirmed by measuring groundwater levels in the Canfor well(s). This approach is standard engineering practice and is also required for CPCN authorizations in BC.

a. Water levels will be monitored at the following two locations:

Monitoring well (Aquifers No. 1 and No. 2) Production well (Aquifer No. 1)

b. Adequate recharge to the well over the short-term will be confirmed when water

levels recover to static levels after completion of the pumping test as follows:

90% water level recovery within 24 hours (Aquifer No. 1) 100% water level recovery within 72 hours (Aquifers No. 1 and 2)

c. Adequate recharge over the long-term will be confirmed when water levels return to

original static levels following spring runoff each year. Lang-term monitoring has already commenced with the datalogger currently installed in TW2012-1.

7.0 WELL DISCHARGE AND ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING

Well screen development and pumping tests will result in discharge from the well site. CIP and BC Groundwater discussed this briefly with Canfor during our September 14, 2012 follow-up meeting and we completed a preliminary reconnaissance of a potential discharge area on the same day (see Figure 1).

Discussion and recommendations are presented below:

1. Discharge at the rate of 3.1 - 12.6 L/s (50 - 200 USgpm) is expected when compressed air is used to develop the well screen. A total discharge volume of 500 - 3,000 m3 is expected, which represents a maximum 0.10 - 0.70 m water cover on the 15 x 150 m proposed discharge area assuming 50% infiltration.

2. Discharge at the rate of 6.3 - 12.6 L/s (100 - 200 USgpm) is expected during the pumping

test. The upper range represents a design flow rate of 9.5 L/s (150 USgpm) plus a safety factor to account for long-term yield reduction due to natural well fouling. The estimated total discharge volume is 2,000 - 4,000 m3 which represents a 0.40 - 1.1 m water cover on



the 15 x 150 m discharge area assuming 20% infiltration. Infiltration during pumping tests is typically less than screen development due to continuous 24-hour discharge.

3. CIP has confirmed that they will spearhead a survey of the proposed discharge area.

BC Groundwater will assist CIP with storage volume calculations and establishing safe discharge procedures on this moderately-sloping hillside above the North Thompson River. The safe disposal of turbid discharge during screen development can be encouraged as follows:

Survey the down-slope edge of the proposed discharge area to confirm

impoundment volumes and identify / flag likely discharge points. Regularly check these areas during active discharge.

Install lay-flat pipe to the extreme western edge of the proposed impoundment area.

Breaking sections of pipe when standing water exceeds a depth of 0.50 m in any specific area will encourage infiltration.

Regularly inspect the hillside below the discharge area for seepage. Discharge

must immediately cease if specific break-out points develop as this may represent localized bank instability. We have no reason to be concerned about hillside stability at this time, however, it is prudent to follow this approach. Please ask Canfor if they have any knowledge of unstable conditions along this hillside.

Consider the following alternatives for the disposal of clean pumping test discharge:

o Direct discharge to the river via a lay-flat pipeline and diffuser. CIP and BC Groundwater have extensive experience with this style of discharge but we must work under the supervision2 of a Registered Professional Biologist (R.P.Bio.). Preparing notifications for direct discharge is considered top priority if Canfor wishes to proceed in this manner.

2 We have confirmed the availability of Rick Howie, R.P.Bio. (Aspen Park Consulting) to prepare discharge notices to Fisheries and Oceans Canada and BC Ministry of Environment should Canfor wish to proceed in this manner.



o Discharge into the existing Canfor transmission pipeline that reports to the irrigation pond. One benefit of this approach is that line losses and pond infiltration can be directly measured. This will provide the information required for BC Groundwater to confirm that 9.5 L/s (150 USgpm) produced at the well will report to the irrigation pond during a fire emergency. Results will be reported to the insurance providers in our Letter of Certification.

8.0 CLOSURE

We look forward to successful production well construction and testing. A follow-up memo will be forwarded to CIP recommending specific screen design options and cost estimates from JR Drilling.

Sincerely,

ORIGINAL SIGNED

BC Groundwater Consulting Services Ltd.

Thierry M. Carriou, M.Sc., P.Eng. Hydrogeologist (1993)

NN.T.S.

PRODUCTION WELL NO. 2

PRODUCTION WELL NO. 1

TEST WELL TW2012-1

T?

COMPLETED SEPTEMBER 2012

PHPDISCHARGE AREATO BE APPROVED

BY C.I.P. AND CANFOR

DESCRIPTION PROPOSED WELL AND DISCHARGE LOCATIONS

September 2012REFERENCE: BC WATER RESOURCES ATLAS

FILE NO. 11005.3 CLIENT CENTRAL INTERIOR PUMPS:CANFOR VAVENBY SAWMILL

GROUNDWATER SOURCE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMPROJECT

FIG. 1

0.0 m GROUND SURFACE

SURFACE CASINGDry loose brown f-m SAND and f-m GRAVEL 250 mm (10 inch) DIAMETER (sub-angular) with silt * Temporarily left in ground

2.5 mPRODUCTION CASING150 mm (6 inch) DIAMETER

5.0 m 4.9 m 4.9 m

Moist grey - green SILT and CLAY AQUITARD

7.5 mAQUITARD NO. 1

10.0 m

TEST WELL TW2012-1LITHOLOGY AND FIELD NOTES PLATE NO. 34534

NOTES

NEXT PAGE

TEMPO

RAR

Y SUR

FACE SEAL

TEMPO

RAR

Y SUR

FACE SEAL

LOCKING CAP

DEPTH LITHOLOGY COMPLETION

STATICWATERLEVEL

SHOWN

... Cont'd

12.5 m

AQUITARD NO. 115.0 m Silt % analysis in progress

Clay % analysis in progress

... Cont'd17.5 m

20.0 m Cont'd

CLIENT: CENTRAL INTERIOR PUMPS NORTHINGPROJECT: CANFOR VAVENBY SAWMILL EASTING

TOP OF CASING ELEVATIONFILE NO. SURFACE CASING STICK-UP

PRODUCTION CASING STICK-UPDRILLED: SEPTEMBER 13 - 14, 2012 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER (m-btoc) 30.19 September 14 2012SCREENED:TESTED: NOT PLANNED

NOT PLANNED

PAGE 1 OF 3

11005.3

COMPLETION SUMMARY TW2012-1

ZONE 10 5 717 745 mN ± 8 m GPS309 904 mE ± 8 m GPS

Cont'd

0.91 m (3.0 ft) above ground

* Casing at base of Aquifer No. 2

0.30 m (1.0 ft) above ground460 m ± 8 m GPS


AQUITARD CONT'D... cont'd

Silt % analysis in progress

22.5 m Clay % analysis in progress

AQUITARD NO. 1

25.0 m25.3 m 25.3 m

25.3 m

Saturated loose brown-orange m-c SAND and AIR-LIFT OBSERVEDf-c GRAVEL (highly angular to sub-rounded) 20 USgpm (Continuous)

27.5 m pH 8.3 EC 376 µS

* Water Sampled (25.9 m)

AQUIFER NO. 1 (UPPER)60 USgpm (Continuous)

pH 8.2 EC 345 µS

30.0 m ... transition to silty sand and gravel 30.19 m-btoc


DEPTH LITHOLOGY COMPLETION NOTES

STATIC

Dec 16 2011

31.4 m 31.4 m

31.4 m

Saturated loose brown-orange f-m SAND some silt32.5 m (free draining)

AQUIFER NO. 1 (LOWER) 5 USgpm (Continuous)

pH 9.2 EC 315 µS


35.0 m ... cont'd

... cont'd

37.5 m

5 USgpm (Continuous)

... cont'd pH 9.2 EC 340 µS

40.0 m Cont'd




WATERLEVEL

AQUIFER NO. 2

Cont'd

COMPLETION SUMMARY


NOT PLANNED * Casing at base of Aquifer No. 2

PAGE 2 OF 3

TW2012-1


460 m ± 8 m GPS11005.3 0.30 m (1.0 ft) above ground


... transition to f-c SAND (fining) trace silt

continued free-draining

42.5 m

43.6 m 43.6 m

Saturated loose tan f-c SAND (very clean)45.0 m

AQUIFER NO. 2 AIR-LIFT OBSERVED20 + USgpm (Continuous)

pH 9.6 EC 580 µS

47.5 m ... transition to m-c SAND (clean) * Water Sampled (45.7 m)

50.0 m ... cont'd

INTERPRETED TRANSITION

TO DEEP AQUIFER SYSTEM



20 + USgpm (Continuous)

52.5 m pH 9.3 EC 645 µS

... cont'd

55.0 m

56.4 m

... cont'd

57.5 m

58.8 m 58.8 m

Saturated loose blue CLAY (smell organics) 58.8 m AQUITARDAQUITARD NO. 2 59.5 m

60.0 m



PRODUCTION CASING STICK-UPDRILLED: SEPTEMBER 13 - 14, 2012 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER (m-btoc) 30.19 September 14 2012SCREENED:TESTED: NOT PLANNED PAGE 3 OF 3

END OF DRILLING

CASINGWITHDRAWN






MEMORANDUM

TO: Blaine Matuga, President (Central Interior Pumps Ltd.) CC: Peter Metcalf, Maintenance Superintendant (Canadian Forest Products Ltd.) Dwayne Thiessen, Plant Manager (Canadian Forest Products Ltd.) DATE: October 16, 2012 FROM: Thierry Carriou, P.Eng. (Hydrogeologist) PROJECT: 11005.3 Central Interior Pumps: Canadian Forest Products Ltd.

Vavenby Sawmill Groundwater Supply Development Program

SUBJECT: PROGRESS UPDATE: PRODUCTION WELL SCREEN DESIGNS

Blaine,

1.0 BACKGROUND

Canadian Forest Products Ltd. (“Canfor”) is currently developing a supply well to meet fire protection demands. Central Interior Pumps Ltd. (“CIP”) is the prime contractor supported by BC Groundwater Consulting Services Ltd. (“BC Groundwater”). Please refer to our previous memos dated September 6 and 28, 2012 for background information and the results of test well drilling.

2.0 PRODUCTION WELL DESIGNS (FINAL)

Our September 28, 2012 memo presented preliminary well designs for two production wells. We are now in receipt of all laboratory testing results (i.e. grain-size, hydrometer and water quality). This information has been used to finalize the proposed well screen designs and estimate potential yields. A lithologic log of the recently drilled test well TW2012-1 is attached for reference.


Progress Update: Production Well Screen Designs October 16, 2012 (Page 2 of 5)

2.1 Production Well No. 1 (Shallow Option)

Production Well No. 1 will utilize the upper portion of Aquifer No. 1 present at 25.9 - 31.4 m (85 - 103 feet) below ground surface. Grain size analysis of the drill cutttings confirms the screen slot opening will be controlled by sand and gravel size. BC Groundwater recommends the installation of a screen assembly with 60 slot (0.060 inch) openings in this formation. Please see the attached well design for additional information.

This sand and gravel aquifer presents a silt / clay fraction greater than 10% which is expected to yield 3.2 - 6.4 L/s (50 - 100 USgpm) when pumped. The proposed well screen design will limit the maximum well yield to 10.4 L/s (170 USgpm). Yield will be confirmed by baseline monitoring and the pumping test. As recommended in our previous memo, conversion of the existing test well to a monitoring well is recommended to track well performance and confirm aquifer recharge over the long-term.

Estimates received from JR Drilling (attached) suggest the cost of 200 to 250 mm (8 to 10 inch) well construction will be $ 35,000 - $ 45,000 plus contingency and taxes. Their estimate includes 40 hours of screen development (i.e. 2.8 hours per foot of screen) which is reasonable for this formation. Our experience has been that 2 - 4 hours of development are required per foot of screen to achieve sand and turbidity guidelines specified by the American Water Works Association (Standard A100). This is important to ensure that the well and submersible pump do not fail prematurely and emergency fire protection is available at all times.

BC Groundwater recommends that CIP and Canfor pursue the 250 mm (10 inch) diameter

option due to the shallow depth of this well. The larger diameter will maximize well yield. The

well should be developed until such time as raw discharge meets A100 specifications.

Please refer to attached JR Drilling estimate # 776 for additional information.

2.2 Production Well No. 2 (Deep Option)

Production Well No. 2 will draw groundwater from Aquifer No. 2 present at 43.6 - 53.8 m (143 - 193 feet) below ground surface. Grain size analysis of the drill cuttings confirms field interpretations that the screen slot opening will be controlled by sand size. BC Groundwater recommends the installation of a telescopic screen with 8 and 10 slot (0.008 and 0.010 inch) openings in this formation. Please see the attached well design for additional information.

The aquifer is clean with a low silt content (about 5 %). The 15.2 m (50 ft) aquifer thickness will allow the installation of a long high-efficiency telescopic screen. This well is different than



Production Well No.1 in that yield will be controlled by the transmitting capacity of the screen rather than the aquifer. Estimates suggest a maximum well yield of 7.6 L/s (120 USgpm).

Estimates received from JR Drilling suggest the cost of 200 mm (8 inch) high-efficiency well construction will be in the order of $ 45,000 plus contingency and taxes. Their estimates include 60 hours of screen development (i.e. 3.0 hours per foot of screen) which is reasonable for this formation. Our experience has been that 3 - 4 hours of development are typically required per foot of screen to achieve A100 sand and turbidity guidelines.

In our last memo, we suggested that a sand-pack screen design might be feasible for this well. Review of grain size information confirms this interpretation. This memo does not provide further details of this design because it will not be as efficient as the telescopic screen design discussed above. A sand-pack design will be provided upon request.

BC Groundwater recommends that CIP and Canfor pursue a 200 mm (8 inch) diameter

telescopic screen completion for this well. Please note that this design will require water-jetting

using re-circulation tanks and a high-capacity pump. The well should be developed until such

time as raw discharge meets A100 specifications. The JR Drilling Central estimate for this well

is not included in this memo but can be provided upon request.

2.3 Well Interference

Grain size analysis of the silty fine sand separating Production Wells No. 1 and 2 suggests that it will moderate interference between the two wells (if both are constructed). Canfor is extremely fortunate that geology supports the development of side-by-side production wells if required to meet supply requirements. This is a rare opportunity in the North Thompson region.

3.0 EXISTING TEST WELL 3.1 Permanent Monitoring Well The cost of completing test well TW2012-1 as a permanent monitoring well is estimated at $ 8,000 plus taxes. Dataloggers will be installed into the well upon completion to continue baseline monitoring and record drawdown during production well construction and testing. As discussed in our previous memo, this information will form part of the Letter of Certification prepared for Canfor insurance providers confirming the sustainable yield of the production well(s).



3.2 Production Well No. 3 (Deep Option) BC Groundwater has prepared a production screen design for the existing test well upon request from CIP and Canfor. The proposed 150 mm (6 inch) diameter production well will draw groundwater from Aquifer No. 2. As presented in Section 2.2, the screen slot opening will be controlled by the sand size. BC Groundwater recommends the installation of telescopic screen using an aggressive 10 slot (0.010 inch) opening to maximize yield. Please see the attached well design for additional information. Design estimates suggest a maximum well yield of 1.8 L/s (30 USgpm). However, effective development of small diameter well screens can prove challenging due to limited surface area. CIP and Canfor should expect a moderate yield of around 0.9 L/s (15 USgpm) from this well when it is fully developed to meet the A100 standard. The estimate received from JR Drilling to install and develop the production screen (attached) is approximately $ 22,000 plus contingency and taxes. We have specified they allow 40 hours for initial screen development using compressed air only (i.e. 2.0 hours per foot of screen). CIP will perform a brief step-test of the well after the completion of initial screen development and BC Groundwater will determine if the A100 standard has (or can) be met. We will also provide a well yield estimate using this information. BC Groundwater recommends that CIP and Canfor consider connection of this well to the water system only if the step-test yield estimate is 0.9 L/s (15 USgpm) or greater. This makes the capital cost of connection worthwhile. If suitable, the well will likely require an additional 2 - 3 hours of air development per foot of screen to reach the A100 standard. This will bring the total cost of well installation and development to about $ 33,000 - $ 40,000 which is very close to the cost of Production Well No. 2 (described above). The difference is that the larger diameter of Production Well No. 2 has the potential to exceed the yield of Production Well No. 3 by three to five times making it much more cost effective. 4.0 CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS (UPDATED) The recommendations presented in our last memo remain unchanged. We have updated the priority of action items (below) to successfully complete production well construction and testing before winter.



Priority 1. Confirm proposed well discharge locations.

CIP has recently completed elevation surveys of potential discharge areas. BC Groundwater is currently estimating available storage volumes from this information.

Priority 2. Confirm fire insurance requirements.

Priority 3. Complete TW2012-1 as a production well or permanent monitoring well.

Priority 4. Proceed with construction of Production Well No. 1 using a 250 mm (10 inch)

naturally-developed 60-slot (0.060 inch) high-efficiency telescopic screen as soon as practical.

CIP has secured a tentative return date of October 29, 2012 with

JR Drilling. Production well materials will be ordered immediately upon confirmation of the above production well options.

Priority 5. Test Production Well No. 1 prior to winter.

Priority 6. Construct Production Well No. 2 to supplement pumping rates (if required).

5.0 CLOSURE

We look forward to commencing production well construction on October 29, 2012. Please call should you have any questions or wish to discuss this memo further.

Sincerely,

ORIGINAL SIGNED AND SEALED

BC Groundwater Consulting Services Ltd.

Thierry M. Carriou, M.Sc., P.Eng. Hydrogeologist (1993)

TEST WELL TW2012-1

LITHOLOGY AND FIELD NOTES


SURFACE CASINGDry loose brown f-m SAND and f-m GRAVEL 250 mm (10 inch) DIAMETER (sub-angular) with silt * Temporarily left in ground

2.5 mPRODUCTION CASING150 mm (6 inch) DIAMETER

5.0 m 4.9 m 4.9 m

Moist grey - green SILT and CLAY trace fine sand AQUITARD

7.5 mAQUITARD NO. 1

10.0 m

DEPTH LITHOLOGY COMPLETION

STATICWATERLEVEL

SHOWN


NOTES

NEXT PAGE

TEMPO

RAR

Y SUR

FACE SEAL

TEMPO

RAR

Y SUR

FACE SEAL

LOCKING CAP

... Cont'd

12.5 m

AQUITARD NO. 115.0 m 51 % Silt 43% Clay

... Cont'd17.5 m

20.0 m Cont'd





* Casing at base of Aquifer No. 2

0.30 m (1.0 ft) above ground460 m ± 8 m GPS

NOT PLANNED

PAGE 1 OF 3

11005.3



Cont'd


AQUITARD CONT'D... cont'd

22.5 mAQUITARD NO. 1 51 % Silt 43% Clay

25.0 m25.3 m 25.3 m

25.3 m

Saturated loose brown-orange m-c SAND and AIR-LIFT OBSERVEDf-c GRAVEL (highly angular to sub-rounded) 20 USgpm (Continuous)

27.5 m pH 8.3 EC 376 µS


AQUIFER NO. 1 (UPPER)60 USgpm (Continuous)

pH 8.2 EC 345 µS

30.0 m ... transition to silty sand and gravel


STATIC

Sept 14, 201230.19 m-btoc


31.4 m 31.4 m

31.4 m

Saturated loose brown-orange f-m SAND some silt32.5 m (free draining)

AQUIFER NO. 1 (LOWER) 5 USgpm (Continuous)

pH 9.2 EC 315 µS


35.0 m ... cont'd

... cont'd

37.5 m

5 USgpm (Continuous)

... cont'd pH 9.2 EC 340 µS

40.0 m Cont'd






PAGE 2 OF 3

TW2012-1



Cont'd

COMPLETION SUMMARY

WATERLEVEL

AQUIFER NO. 2


... transition to f-c SAND (fining) trace silt

continued free-draining

42.5 m

43.6 m 43.6 m

Saturated loose tan f-c SAND (very clean)45.0 m

AQUIFER NO. 2 AIR-LIFT OBSERVED20 + USgpm (Continuous)

pH 9.6 EC 580 µS

47.5 m ... transition to m-c SAND (clean) * Water Sampled (45.7 m)

50.0 m ... cont'd



INTERPRETED TRANSITION

TO DEEP AQUIFER SYSTEM

20 + USgpm (Continuous)

52.5 m pH 9.3 EC 645 µS

... cont'd

55.0 m

56.4 m

... cont'd

57.5 m

58.8 m 58.8 m

Saturated loose blue CLAY (smell organics) 58.8 m AQUITARDAQUITARD NO. 2 59.5 m

60.0 m





PAGE 3 OF 3

END OF DRILLING

CASINGWITHDRAWN





PRODUCTION WELL DESIGNS

60

65

70

75

80

1 10 100 1000

CALCULATED SCREEN SLOT SIZE

CENTRAL INTERIOR PUMPS: CANFOR VAVENBY SAWMILL

TEST WELL TW2012-1 (WELL PLATE NO. 34534)

PRODUCTION WELL NO. 1NATURALLY-DEVELOPED WELL SCREEN DESIGN

BC GROUNDWATER FILE NO. 11005.3

RECOMMENDEDSCREEN DESIGN

Telescopic Screen87 - 101 ft (14 ft) x 60 slot (0.060 in.)

101 - 111 ft (10 ft) x Sump (Zero Wind)

Maximum Screen Capacity10.4 L/s (170 USgpm)

Safety Factor = 3.0 @ 0.033 ft/s

Screen slot size is expected tofully control turbidity.

25.3 m (84 ft)

PUMP (OPTION 1)

OPERATING WATER LEVELESTIMATE (PEAK DAILY RATE)

84 ft

RISER85

90

95

100

105

110

115

120

DEP

TH [f

t-bgs

]

D40 Formation Grain Size D50 Formation Grain Size D60 Formation Grain Size

Top of Air-Lift Zone25.3 m (84 ft)

Bottom of Air-Lift Zone

31.4 m (104 ft)

SUMP

SCREEN

31.4 m (104 ft)

AQUIFER NO. 1UPPER PORTIONSAND AND GRAVELsome silt and clay

87 ft

111 ft

RISER

101 ft

114 ft

BACKFILL

PLACE AND COMPACT GRAVELPRIOR TO SETTING SCREEN

(SOFT UNDERLYING SEDIMENTS)

PUMP (OPTION 2)

100

105

110

115

120

125

130

135

140

1 10 100 1000







Telescopic Screen150 - 190 ft (40 ft) x 10 slot (0.010 in.)190 - 200 ft (10 ft) x Sump (Zero Wind)



Screen slot size is expected tocontrol turbidity.

PUMP (OPTION 1)

OPERATING WATER LEVELESTIMATE (PEAK DAILY RATE)

145

150

155

160

165

170

175

180

185

190

195

200

205

DEP

TH [f

t-bgs

]


Top of Air-Lift Zone

43.6 m (143 ft)


53.8 m (193 ft)

SUMP

SCREEN

43.6 m (143 ft)

53.8 m (193 ft)

AQUIFER NO. 2fine SANDvery clean

PUMP (OPTION 1)

150 ft

190 ft

146 ftRISER

200 ft

BACKFILL



PUMP (OPTION 2)

WATER‐JETTING REQUIREDTO DEVELOP FINE‐SANDTELESCOPIC SCREEN

100

105

110

115

120

125

130

135

140

1 10 100 1000







ɸ6 inch Telescopic Screen170 - 190 ft (20 ft) x 10 slot (0.010 in.)190 - 200 ft (10 ft) x Sump (Zero Wind)



Screen slot size is expected tocontrol turbidity.

145

150

155

160

165

170

175

180

185

190

195

200

205

DEP

TH [f

t-bgs

]


Top of Air-Lift Zone

43.6 m (143 ft)


53.8 m (193 ft)

SUMP

SCREEN

43.6 m (143 ft)

53.8 m (193 ft)

AQUIFER NO. 2fine SANDvery clean

PUMP

OPERATING WATERLEVEL ESTIMATE

170 ft

190 ft

166 ftRISER

200 ft

BACKFILL



WATER‐JETTING MAY BE REQUIREDTO DEVELOP THIS FINE‐SAND

TELESCOPIC SCREEN

thompson nicola regional district - tnrd

Documents