vol 1 section 9 environmental management · telephone lake project volume 1 – project description...

Cenovus TL ULC Telephone Lake Project Volume 1 – Project Description December 2011

Table of Contents

SECTION 9.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ............................................................................. 9-1 9.1 Environment, Health and Safety Management ................................................... 9-1 9.2 Emergency Management ................................................................................... 9-2

9.2.1 Emergency Preparedness and Response Processes and Plans ...... 9-2 9.2.2 Emergency Response Plan ............................................................... 9-2 9.2.3 Training .............................................................................................. 9-2

9.3 Wildfire Risk Assessment ................................................................................... 9-2 9.3.1 Wildfire History ................................................................................... 9-3 9.3.2 Fuel Description ................................................................................. 9-3 9.3.3 Wildfire Threat Analysis ..................................................................... 9-5 9.3.4 Ignition Risk Potential ........................................................................ 9-5 9.3.5 Wildfire Detection and Suppression Capability .................................. 9-5 9.3.6 Values at Risk .................................................................................... 9-9

9.4 Greenhouse Gas Management .......................................................................... 9-9 9.5 Waste Management ......................................................................................... 9-11

9.5.1 Objectives ........................................................................................ 9-11 9.5.2 Regulations ...................................................................................... 9-11 9.5.3 Training ............................................................................................ 9-12 9.5.4 Potential Sources and Waste Types ................................................ 9-12 9.5.5 Waste Segregation and Storage ...................................................... 9-13 9.5.6 Waste Disposal ................................................................................ 9-17 9.5.7 Waste Transportation ....................................................................... 9-17

9.6 Literature Cited ................................................................................................. 9-17

LIST OF TABLES

Table 9.5-1: Estimated Waste Types and Expected Quantities ......................................... 9-14

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 9.3-1: Telephone Lake Fire Behaviour Fuel Type Map .............................................. 9-4 Figure 9.3-2: Telephone Lake Wildfire Threat Spring ............................................................ 9-6 Figure 9.3-3: Telephone Lake Wildfire Threat Summer ........................................................ 9-7 Figure 9.3-4: Telephone Lake 90th Percentile Ignition Potential Summer ............................. 9-8 Figure 9.3-5: Telephone Lake Values at Risk Summary ..................................................... 9-10


Page 9-1

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

9.1 Environment, Health and Safety Management

Cenovus TL ULC (Cenovus) is in the process of implementing its Cenovus Operational Management System (COMS). COMS represents a broad, enterprise-wide approach, incorporating and integrating all relevant organizational business activities. The goal of COMS is to provide Cenovus with the management system design, content and continuous improvement activities needed to achieve strategic business objectives, including environment, health and safety management. COMS is a system of standards, controls and procedures that is being implemented to establish methods for consistently applying current best practices and incorporating new thinking to achieve the highest safety, environmental and operating performance. Management system objectives that support, and are driven by, COMS include:

• assessment and mitigation of business operations risk;

• implementation of a consistent framework for managing business processes;

• clear definition of responsibilities and verification of safety, environmental, financial and operating performance; and

• establishing continuous improvement as a fundamental aspect of Cenovus’s business culture.

The COMS framework is made up of the following six elements that reflect areas of business focus to ensure operations management is optimized and Corporate Responsibility Policy commitments are met:

• leadership;

• risk management;

• people;

• operations and maintenance;

• assets; and

• operating responsibly. Each element of the framework functions interdependently and is defined by a set of requirement statements. For each requirement, specific supporting expectations have been established. The expectations are the processes and programs that are expected to be in place to meet COMS requirements. The foundation of the COMS framework is based on a continuous improvement process defined as Plan, Execute, Review and Improve.


Page 9-2

9.2 Emergency Management

Cenovus has in place emergency preparedness and response processes and plans and environment, health and safety best practices as required by relevant federal and provincial regulations which govern their operations.

9.2.1 Emergency Preparedness and Response Processes and Plans

Emergency preparedness and response processes and plans reflect the scope of business, and at a minimum, outline the following:

• chain of command;

• roles, responsibilities and individual competencies;

• risk assessment;

• response escalation;

• corporate support and executive level activation procedures and processes;

• response activation contacts, including internal and external stakeholder consultation and communications;

• public and environmental protection;

• support mechanisms, resources and regulations;

• training and exercises;

• tools and documentation; and

• change management.

9.2.2 Emergency Response Plan

An emergency response plan (ERP) is developed to a level of detail commensurate with risk. An area ERP is in place and the Project and associated response requirements will be incorporated into this ERP. Cenovus is a member in good standing with Western Canadian Spill Services, and area engagement information is incorporated in the ERP.

9.2.3 Training

Cenovus trains emergency responders in their functional role(s) and responsibilities within an Incident Command System structure. System enhancements identified through training exercises are incorporated through a change management and continuous improvement process.

9.3 Wildfire Risk Assessment

Fire seasons throughout North America have been increasing in duration and severity over the past 25 years, while at the same time, development projects in fire prone forests have increased dramatically. Alberta experiences an average of 1,000 wildfires per year, and the resulting


Page 9-3

burned area averages 100,000 ha, most of which is located in the boreal forest region north of Edmonton. Alberta has an aggressive initial attack objective for all wildfires in the provincial Forest Protection Area (FPA). The priority for resource allocation and deployment in the FPA at all levels is based on the following criteria:

• human life;

• communities;

• watersheds and soils;

• natural resources; and

• infrastructure.

9.3.1 Wildfire History

The general area of the proposed project area (PPA) has been very susceptible to wildfires over time. The historical wildfire occurrence summary for the PPA is rated as moderate for spring and low for the summer and fall. The combinations of highly flammable fuel types and lightning have contributed to several large wildfires in the PPA and surrounding area. From 2001 to 2011, there were 116 wildfires within a 40 km² radius of the PPA and 11 wildfires within a 10 km² radius of the PPA. Human activity was responsible for only two of these wildfires. Prior to the 700,000 ha Richardson wildfire during 2011 in the Fort McMurray area, the largest fires within a 40 km² radius of the PPA were 3,405 ha (2002), 2,485 ha (2008), 10,790 ha (2009), 939 ha (2010), 1,451 ha (2010), 657 ha (2011) and 2,044 ha (2011). Many of these wildfires caused evacuations of camps, reduced production activities for the oil and gas and forest industries, and impacted power distribution in the Fort McMurray region. There is evidence of other wildfires over the decades in the area, suggesting that the Project is located in a very wildfire prone ecosystem.

9.3.2 Fuel Description

The PPA is composed mainly of boreal black spruce (C-2), jackpine (C-3) and black spruce-jackpine mixed (C-2) fuel types which create high intensity wildfires (Figure 9.3-1). These fuel types occur in configurations throughout the PPA that create the potential for large wildfires under high-to-extreme burning conditions. The northern portion of the area had a burn in 2002 resulting in heavy windfall and grass, shown on Figure 9.3-1 as non-fuel. The characteristics of the boreal black spruce (C-2) fuel type are:

• trees are very dense;

• boughs reach to the ground, creating very good ladder fuels; and

• surface fuels are mainly Labrador tea, caribou moss and dead-downed woody debris.

Source: Cenovus, Government of Alberta.

S:\G

is\P

roje

cts

\CE

\Cenovus\C

E0339901_Tele

phoneLake_E

IA\C

ore

lDra

w\A

pplic

ationR

eport

Fig

ure

s\V

olu

me 0

1 S

ection 0

9 -

Environm

enta

l M

anagem

ent\F

ig09.0

3-0

1\F

ig09.0

3-0

1 F

ire F

uel.cdr

Telephone Lake Fire BehaviourFuel Type Map NA

PROJECTION/DATUM:

CenovusPROVIDED BY: FINAL MAPPING BY:

AMECEHEH

DATE: Fig09.03-01 Fire Fuel

11-11-28

KW

Figure9.3-1

ANALYST:

PROJECT:

CE0339901

December 2011

KWQA/QC:Cenovus TL ULC

Telephone Lake Project

Kilometres

1:300,000

Display may contain: Base data providedby Spatial Data Warehouse Ltd.Communication Towers provided by NAVCANADA. Wellsite and raw pipeline dataprovided by IHS Energy (Canada) Ltd.©GeoEye, all rights reserved. ©IunctusGeomatics Corp.

Information as depicted is subject tochange, therefore the Government ofAlberta assumes no responsibility fordiscrepancies at time of use.

© 2011 Government of Alberta

Legend

FBP Fuel Type

Spruce - Lichen Woodland (C1)

Boreal Spruce (C2)

Mature Jack or Lodgepole Pine (C3)

Immature Jack or Lodgepole Pine (C4)

Conifer Plantation (C6)

Ponderosa Pine/Douglas Fir (C7)

Leafless Aspen (D1)

Boreal Mixedwood - Leafless (M1)

Jack or Lodgepole Pine Slash (S1)

Matted Grass (O1)

Non-Fuel

Water

0 9 18 27


Page 9-5

These fuels, together with a high-to-extreme fire hazard, create a very volatile wildfire environment requiring extreme caution.

9.3.3 Wildfire Threat Analysis

The PPA has a high wildfire threat for the spring (Figure 9.3-2) and moderate-to-high wildfire threats for the summer and fall periods (Figure 9.3-3), owing to the black spruce (C-2), jackpine (C-3) and black spruce-jackpine (C-2) fuel types which comprise over 60% of the area. The 2002 burn area (shown on Figure 9.3-1 as non-fuel) will have a high wildfire threat for the spring period and during extensive drought periods in the summer and fall. In a boreal black spruce (C-2) fuel type, the crown fraction burn (percentage of tree crowns consumed by a wildfire) is expected to be between 50 to 90 % for all three seasons. This extreme wildfire behavior would have a significant impact on personnel safety and infrastructure without mitigative measures being undertaken. The wetland larch areas create some landscape fuel breaks and have a low rating for all three seasons. Long range spotting under extreme hazard conditions is always a risk to personnel and infrastructure and would have to be monitored during a wildfire event. The highest wildfire threat for the Project will be to human life, and this threat is addressed in the ERP for the operating area and in the development of FireSmart plans for camps and other facilities.

9.3.4 Ignition Risk Potential

The ignition risk in the PPA is very high-to-extreme for the spring, very high for the summer (Figure 9.3-4) and high for the fall, owing to the risk of lightning in the boreal spruce (C-2) fuel types. Ignition risk for all fuel types from human activity is low to moderate.

9.3.5 Wildfire Detection and Suppression Capability

The Project is located in the FPA, where wildfire detection and suppression is the responsibility of Alberta Sustainable Resource Development (ASRD). The wildfire detection system utilized by ASRD involves full-time lookout towers from mid-April to September and aerial patrols using spotter planes and helicopters during high and extreme hazard periods. The lookout visibility is rated from no visibility to limited visibility from the Muskeg Mountain, Johnson Lake and Birch Mountain lookouts. There are air tanker bases located in Fort McMurray (approximately 90 km southwest of the PPA), Lac La Biche (approximately 283 km south of the PPA), Slave Lake (approximately 341 km southwest of the PPA), and Loon Base (approximately 283 km west of the PPA).


S:\G

is\P

roje

cts

\CE

\Cenovus\C

E0339901_Tele

phoneLake_E

IA\C

ore

lDra

w\A

pplic

ationR

eport

Fig

ure

s\V

olu

me 0

1 S

ection 0

9 -

Environm

enta

l M

anagem

ent\F

ig09.0

3-0

2\F

ig09.0

3-0

2 W

ildfire

Spring.c

dr

Telephone LakeWildfire Threat Spring NA

PROJECTION/DATUM:


AMECEHEH

DATE: Fig09.03-02 Wildfire Spring

11-11-28

KW

Figure9.3-2

ANALYST:

PROJECT:

CE0339901

December 2011



0 9 18 27

Kilometres

1:300,000




Legend

Wildfire Threat Potential Spring

Non-Fuel

Low Wildlife Threat Potential

Moderate Wildfire Threat Potential

High Wildfire Threat Potential

Very High Wildfire Threat Potential

Extreme Wildfire Threat Potential


S:\G

is\P

roje

cts

\CE

\Cenovus\C

E0339901_Tele

phoneLake_E

IA\C

ore

lDra

w\A

pplic

ationR

eport

Fig

ure

s\V

olu

me 0

1 S

ection 0

9 -

Environm

enta

l M

anagem

ent\F

ig09.0

3-0

3\F

ig09.0

3-0

3 W

ildfire

Sum

mer.

cdr

Telephone LakeWildfire Threat Summer NA

PROJECTION/DATUM:


AMECEHEH

DATE: Fig09.03-03 Wildfire Summer

11-11-28

KW

Figure9.3-3

ANALYST:

PROJECT:

CE0339901

December 2011



Legend

Wildfire Threat Potential Summer

Non-Fuel

Low Wildlife Threat Potential

Moderate Wildfire Threat Potential

High Wildfire Threat Potential

Very High Wildfire Threat Potential

Extreme Wildfire Threat Potential

0 9 18 27

Kilometres1:300,000




Source: Cenovus.

S:\G

is\P

roje

cts

\CE

\Cenovus\C

E0339901_Tele

phoneLake_E

IA\C

ore

lDra

w\A

pplic

ationR

eport

Fig

ure

s\V

olu

me 0

1 S

ection 0

9 -

Environm

enta

l M

anagem

ent\F

ig09.0

3-0

4\F

ig09.0

3-0

4 Ignitio

n S

um

mer.

cdr

Telephone Lake90 Percentile Ignition Potential Summerth NA

PROJECTION/DATUM:


AMECEHEH

DATE: Fig09.03-04 Ignition Summer

11-11-28

KW

Figure9.3-4

ANALYST:

PROJECT:

CE0339901

December 2011



0 9 18 27

1:300,000



© 2011 Government of AlbertaKilometres

Legend

90th Percentile Ignition Potential - Summer

Non-Fuel

0 - 20%

21 - 40%

41 - 50%

51 - 60%

61 - 70%

71 - 80%

81 - 100%


Page 9-9

The combined wildfire suppression capability rating is from less capability to moderate capability, based on ground air tankers being able to access the area from Fort McMurray in approximately 16 to 30 minutes. There is a wildfire base at Grayling Creek where helicopter supported crews are located. These crews are moved daily throughout the Waterways/Lac La Biche Area according to wildfire hazard and risk. As per the Forest and Prairie Protection Act, Cenovus will maintain wildfire equipment at the Project and will have access to other heavy equipment and water trucks associated with Project operations. The ability of ASRD to respond to a wildfire impacting the Project will be determined by wildfire priorities at the time of the wildfire.

9.3.6 Values at Risk

The values at risk from a wildfire were evaluated for the PPA using ASRD’s Fireweb tool (Figure 9.3-5). The assessment determined that the highest value at risk at this time is to watershed, soils and wildlife, and this risk is rated as moderate. The values at risk will increase with Project development as camps and other infrastructure are established. The development of a project-specific ERP and a FireSmart plan will be a high priority for the protection of human life and infrastructure.

9.4 Greenhouse Gas Management

Cenovus’s corporate strategy for greenhouse gas (GHG) management is to continuously reduce GHG emissions from its operating facilities through:

• long-range planning and forecasting;

• minimizing steam-to-oil-ratio (SOR) in design – A lower SOR means lower fuel consumption, which results in lower GHG emissions, in addition to lower water use and reduced infrastructure. Cenovus leads the industry in minimizing SOR in its existing operations;

• continuous energy efficiency improvements in operations – Cenovus continuously seeks to fine tune its operations to increase energy efficiency and lower the amount of resources consumed and reduce GHG and air emissions; and

• technology development – activities through the Energy Efficiency Fund and the Environment Opportunities Fund explore and pilot technology that can demonstrate significant environmental improvements, including GHG emissions reductions.

Volume 1, Section 10.9 includes Cenovus’s long-term considerations for carbon capture and storage.

Source: Cenovus.

S:\G

is\P

roje

cts

\CE

\Cenovus\C

E0339901_Tele

phoneLake_E

IA\C

ore

lDra

w\A

pplic

ationR

eport

Fig

ure

s\V

olu

me 0

1 S

ection 0

9 -

Environm

enta

l M

anagem

ent\F

ig09.0

3-0

5\F

ig09.0

3-0

5 R

isk S

um

mary

.cdr

Telephone LakeValues at Risk Summary NA

PROJECTION/DATUM:


AMECEHEH

DATE: Fig09.03-05 Risk Summary

11-11-28

KW

Figure9.3-5

ANALYST:

PROJECT:

CE0339901

December 2011





© 2011 Government of Alberta0 9 18 27

Kilometres1:300,000

Legend

Value At Risk

Low Impact to Values

Moderate

High

Impact to Values

Impact to Values

Very Impact to Values

Extreme Impact to Values

Legend

Value At Risk

Low Impact to Values

Moderate

High

Impact to Values

Impact to Values

Very Impact to Values

Extreme Impact to Values


Page 9-11

9.5 Waste Management

9.5.1 Objectives

Cenovus’s objectives are to reduce waste, prevent soil and groundwater contamination, and mitigate future environmental liabilities. Waste minimization is encouraged in all operations as a means to achieve efficient business practices, and is based on the following principles:

• reduce – eliminate waste types and reduce waste volumes;

• reuse – reuse waste materials where possible;

• recycle – recycle where possible; and

• recover – recover valuable materials from waste streams. Activities are closely monitored to ensure compliance with environmental regulations and to encourage the most effective and efficient use of resources. Cenovus’s waste management objectives include:

• comply with industry guidelines and best management practices;

• minimize the amount of waste generated when possible by using a waste management hierarchy based on reduce, reuse, recycle and recover;

• accurately characterize and classify all hazardous wastes;

• properly store, track, transport and dispose of wastes;

• ensure contractors operate according to Cenovus standards;

• ensure the integrity of primary containment devices for waste, including all associated equipment such as valves, fittings, piping or pumps;

• provide adequate secondary containment, leak detection and weather protection for waste storage facilities; and

• apply operating procedures, maintenance practices and inspection programs to all waste handling and storage facilities.

9.5.2 Regulations

All federal, provincial and municipal regulatory requirements regarding waste and wastewater management are adhered to and, in part, form the basis of Cenovus’s waste management strategy. For projects in Alberta, provincial regulations, guidelines and standards provide the most extensive requirements, criteria and recommendations. The main regulatory agencies involved with administering the provincial regulations are the Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB) and Alberta Environment and Water (AENV).


Page 9-12

In alphabetical order, the key provincial regulatory documents that will apply to the Project include:

• Alberta User Guide for Waste Managers (AEP 1996a);

• Directive 047: Waste Reporting Requirements for Oilfield Waste Management Facilities (ERCB 2009);

• Directive 050: Drilling Waste Management (ERCB 1996a);

• Directive 051: Injection and Disposal Wells (ERCB 1994);

• Directive 055: Storage Requirements for the Upstream Petroleum Industry (ERCB 2001);

• Directive 058: Oilfield Waste Management Requirements for the Upstream Petroleum Industry (ERCB 2008; ERCB 1996b);

• Hazardous Waste Storage Guidelines (AENV 1988);

• Interim Directive 099-4: Deposition of Oilfield Waste into Landfills (ERCB 1999);

• Standards for Landfills in Alberta (AENV 2010);

• Transportation of Dangerous Goods Regulations (Transport Canada 2008, internet site); and

• Waste Control Regulation (AEP 1996b). The National Fire Code (Canadian Commission on Building and Fire Codes, Institute for Research in Construction 2005a) and National Building Code of Canada (Canadian Commission on Building and Fire Codes, Institute for Research in Construction 2005b) will be applicable if any buildings are needed for a waste management and/or recycling facility.

9.5.3 Training

All personnel involved with waste management will be adequately trained in the areas of health and safety, in addition to waste-specific practices and procedures. Certified operators may be required to learn waste treatment technologies.

9.5.4 Potential Sources and Waste Types

Waste will be generated during all stages of the Project. Both the quantities and types of waste will vary during pre-construction, construction, operations, decommissioning and reclamation. All waste will be classified as hazardous or non-hazardous based on the source of generation and its specific waste characteristics. The estimated quantity of each anticipated waste type for the Project is based on the in situ extraction processes used, the number of occupants/employees at the site, and available data from similar steam assisted gravity drainage operations. Engineering and waste management decisions made will also influence the amount and type of waste generated. The waste


Page 9-13

quantities in Table 9.5-1 are estimated based on 2010 Foster Creek Thermal Project and area generated waste streams and quantity totals and related yearly production. Waste streams and volumes may require updating as detailed engineering information becomes available.

9.5.5 Waste Segregation and Storage

Segregation and interim storage are key elements to Cenovus’s waste management strategy. By properly segregating and storing waste, the possibilities for waste reuse and recycling are maximized, while the possibility of cross-contamination is minimized. Waste segregation also allows for reduction of waste handling, treatment and disposal costs. The Project will have infrastructure in place for waste collection and storage before transportation, treatment and recycling/disposal. Temporary waste and recyclables storage sites and containers may be required during construction of the Project. These will be provided at all points of waste generation. Separate and appropriate containers will be located for immediate sorting of waste types at these sites. Waste types will be sorted according to their:

• waste classification (i.e., storing hazardous and non-hazardous waste separately), as above;

• compatibility characteristics (chemical, biological and physical); and

• final destination (i.e., recyclable materials will be stored separately from waste intended for disposal).

The three key containment methods employed by the Project and their associated requirements include the following:

• primary containment – ensure the integrity of all primary containment devices for waste, including all associated equipment such as valves, fittings, piping and pumps;

• secondary containment – use waste storage and transportation containers that prevent leaks. Containment could include leak detection and weather protection for storage facilities. Secondary containment will be provided for all oilfield wastes, excluding domestic garbage and debris; and

• pond – The Project will have an industrial runoff/surface water runoff pond situated on the facility lease site. Integrity of the pond will be maintained through the development of procedures, maintenance practices, inspection programs and regulatory reporting.


Page 9-14

Table 9.5-1: Estimated Waste Types and Expected Quantities

Waste Type Description Classification Storage Location/Method Disposal Location/ Method

Estimated Annual

Quantity Liquids .

Caustic Solutions

Unneutralized, spent Hazardous

Store in corrosion resistant (plastic or lined) containers, separate from acids

Off-site disposal 20 m3

Crude Oil or Condensate Emulsion

Process “Slop Oil” – oily water with entrained solids

Hazardous (if high oil content, testing required)

Store in production tanks Off-site disposal 138,161 m3

Glycol

Glycol solution, may or may not contain heavy metals

Hazardous (if containing heavy metals, testing required)

Store in steel drums on barrel dock or in steel tanks

Recycle/disposal off-site 33 m3

Chemicals –organic

Miscellaneous organic chemicals Hazardous Dependent upon specific

chemical Recycle/disposal off-site 29 m3

Lubricating oil Hydrocarbon lubricants and grease

Hazardous Sealed metal or plastic drums Recycle off-site 12 m3

Sweetening agents

Gas sweetening – liquid and/or sludge

Hazardous Store in tanks or steel drums Off-site disposal 4,686 m3

Water treatment regeneration wastewater

From the treatment of source water and produced water

Non-Hazardous (typically but depends on analytics)

On-site storage tank Disposal well 146,000 m3

Wash fluids - Organic

Water/solvents used for equipment washing

Hazardous Store in tanks or sealed drums, closed and away from sources of heat or ignition

Off-site disposal 1,072 m3

Water

Produced/brine solutions Non-Hazardous

Handle within a closed system at facility or store in production or water tanks


Contaminated leachate, collected surface waters

Non-Hazardous Tank storage or surface storage in dyked areas Off-site disposal 136 m3

Wash water (floor wash, equipment wash)

Non-Hazardous (unless High Organic, low flash Point or PH issue)

Usually handled in a closed system Off-site disposal 2 m3

Miscellaneous Hazardous Liquids

Flammable liquids, oxidizing liquids, corrosive liquids

Hazardous Store as per supplier instructions

Recycle/disposal off-site 40 m3

Sludges

Hydrocarbon sludge

From production vessels, tank bottoms, slop oil

Hazardous Store in designated tanks Off-site disposal 4,480 m3

Lime sludge warm lime softener spent sludge

Non-Hazardous Store in designated tanks Off-site disposal 26,773 m3

Solids Construction and demolition material

Debris, solid – wood, insulation, scrap metal

Non-Hazardous Segregate material types, use scrap metal and domestic waste bins



Page 9-15


Estimated Annual

Quantity

Empty containers

Metal or plastic, drums, barrels, pails, gas cylinders and aerosols

Non-Hazardous (empty) Hazardous (not empty)

Store according to suppliers instructions

Send back to supplier; recycle off-site. Place in designated waste bin for pick-up by Waste Management Contractor.

630 m3

Bin Wastes

Absorbents

Hazardous (mixed waste bins are shipped as hazardous waste)

Place in designated waste bin for pick-up by Waste Management Contractor

Recycle/disposal off-site

35 m3 Rags 55 m3 Filters 51 m3 Thread protectors 6 m3 Domestic waste/debris 578 m3

Filter media Water treatment filter media

Non-Hazardous (unless BTEX or leachate)

Store in waste filter bin Off-site disposal 220 m3

Sand Produced sand Non-Hazardous (unless low flashpoint or high BTEX)

Store in lined ponds or tanks/drums Off-site disposal 2,012 m3

Contaminated soil and debris

Soil, spill material contaminated with condensate, oil, emulsion, hydrocarbons

Non-Hazardous (unless analytics show low flash point, high BTEX or heavy metals)

Store in sealed drums (if saturated). Store small volumes in contaminated soils bin. Store larger volumes in a secure area with secondary containment and protection from precipitation.

Off-site disposal 1,069 m3

Soil, spill material contaminated with salt water /produced water

Non-Hazardous

Store small volumes in contaminated soils bin. Store larger volumes in a secure area with secondary containment and protection from precipitation.


Soil, spill material contaminated with refined fuels or oils

Non-Hazardous (unless low flashpoint or high BTEX or heavy metals)

Store in sealed drums (if saturated). Store small volumes in contaminated soils bin. Store larger volumes in a secure area with secondary containment and protection from precipitation.


Soil, spill material contaminated with pesticides

Hazardous

Store in sealed drums or bins. Store larger volumes in a secure area with secondary containment and protection from precipitation.


Soil, spill material contaminated with chemical/solvent

Hazardous

Store in sealed drums or bins. Store larger volumes in a secure area with secondary containment and protection from precipitation.



Page 9-16


Estimated Annual

Quantity Other

Drilling waste

Drilling sump waste Non-Hazardous Store drilling waste

tank/sump Off-site disposal 15,243 m3

Well workover fluids Hazardous Store in production/slop tanks

or drums Off-site disposal 20 m3

Cement Non-Hazardous Store at low traffic area on subsoil horizon or in sump Off-site disposal 36 m3

Frac sand (non-radioactive)

Non-Hazardous (unless low flash point or leachate characteristics)

Store in steel drums or reinforced plastic bags. Prevent rainwater from entering containers.


First-aid waste

Waste generated from first-aid/medical treatment (i.e., biomedical waste)

Hazardous: infectious or potentially infectious substances (i.e., gloves, masks) and waste sharps

Place in specified bins or containers

Off-site incineration or disposal

low expected volumes

Non-Hazardous: waste that is not infectious or potentially infectious

Place in specified bins or containers Off-site disposal low expected

volumes


Page 9-17

9.5.6 Waste Disposal

All off-site waste disposal and recycling will be completed at an approved facility for the designated waste types. Table 9.5-1 describes the off-site destination of each waste type. Most of the solid waste streams generated by the Project will be transported off-site to an approved third-party landfill or approved waste management facility. Disposal wells are planned for the Project as described in Volume 1, Sections 7.5 and 10.5. These wells will be used for the disposal of excess top water and wastewater, provided appropriate criteria are met. The Project facility will use once through steam generators (OTSGs), grouped such that a fourth OTSG will use boiler blowdown from a group of three OTSGs and one heat recovery steam generator for its feed water, greatly reducing blowdown disposal volumes. Opportunities will be explored to develop a regional oil field waste management facility with other area operators.

9.5.7 Waste Transportation

Transportation is required to move wastes and recyclables from temporary storage sites to on-site storage/staging areas and off-site for recycling, further treatment and/or disposal. All transportation activities, both on-site and off-site, will follow current regulations to ensure adequate safety for the carriers and to minimize impacts to the environment. This includes adhering to the most recent amendments of the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, Transportation of Dangerous Goods Regulations (Transport Canada 2008) and Directive 058 (ERCB 1996b). Transportation plans include emergency response and reporting procedures. Procedures are in place for waste transportation, manifesting, waste tracking and documentation. Where required, waste characterization will be completed prior to transportation. Waste will not be accepted for transport without proper identification, classification, documentation and labelling. Waste will be transported by an approved third-party carrier. The carrier must have all requisite licences, training, safety programs and vehicle maintenance details. All vehicles used to transport Project-generated waste and recyclables will have proper labels and placards.

9.6 Literature Cited

Alberta Environment (AENV). 1988. Hazardous Waste Storage Guidelines. Alberta Environment. Edmonton, Alberta.

Alberta Environment (AENV). 2010. Standards for Landfills in Alberta. Edmonton, Alberta.


Page 9-18

Alberta Environmental Protection (AEP). 1996a. Alberta User Guide for Waste Managers. Alberta Environmental Protection, Edmonton, Alberta.

Alberta Environmental Protection (AEP). 1996b. Waste Control Regulations. Alberta Environmental Protection, Edmonton, Alberta.

Canadian Commission on Building and Fire Codes, Institute for Research in Construction. 2005a. National Fire Code. National Research Council Canada. Ottawa, Ontario.

Canadian Commission on Building and Fire Codes, Institute for Research in Construction. 2005b. National Building Code of Canada. National Research Council Canada. Ottawa, Ontario.

Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB). 1994. Directive 051: Injection and Disposal Wells. Energy Resources Conservation Board. Calgary, Alberta.

Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB). 1996a. Directive 050: Drilling Waste Management. Energy Resources Conservation Board. Calgary, Alberta.

Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB). 1996b. Directive 058: Oilfield Waste Management Requirements for the Upstream Petroleum Industry. Energy Resources Conservation Board. Calgary, Alberta.

Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB). 1999. Interim Directive 099-4: Deposition of Oilfield Waste into Landfills. Energy Resources Conservation Board. Calgary, Alberta.

Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB). 2001. Directive 055: Storage Requirements for the Upstream Petroleum Industry. Energy Resources Conservation Board. Calgary, Alberta.

Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB). 2008 Directive 058 Addendum: Oilfield Waste Management Requirements for the Upstream Petroleum Industry. Energy Resources Conservation Board. Calgary, Alberta.

Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB). 2009. Directive 047: Waste Reporting Requirements for Oilfield Waste Management Facilities. Energy Resources Conservation Board. Calgary, Alberta.

Transport Canada. 2008. Transportation of Dangerous Goods Regulations. Available at: http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/tdg/clear-tofc-211.htm. Transport Canada. Ottawa, Ontario.

vol 1 section 9 environmental management · telephone lake project volume 1 – project description...

Documents