Subsurface Neotectonic Investigation of the Eastern Part of the Coega Fault Corridor, Eastern Cape, South Africa

V.R. Mitha, K.L. Hanson, and D.L. Roberts

Council for Geoscience Report Number 2012-0029 Rev. 0

Confidential

DOCUMENT APPROVAL SHEET

REFERENCE: CGS REPORT 2012-0029

REVISION ESKOM 0

COPY No. Subsurface Neotectonic Investigation of the DATE OF Eastern Part of the Coega Fault Corridor, Easteern RELEASE: Cape, South Africa. 03 May 2013

CONFIDENTIAL

AUTHORS

COMPILED BY: COMPILED BY: COMPILED BY: ACCEPTED BY:

V.R. Mitha K.L. Hanson D.L. Roberts N. Keyser

REVIEWED BY: ACCEPTED BY: AUTHORISED BY:

G. Graham

REVISION DESCRIPTION OF REVISION DATE MINOR REVISIONS APPROVAL

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This investigation utilizes borehole and ttrial pit data collected in the vicinity of Port Ngqura near Port Elizabeth to assess the neotectonic behavior of the Coega Fault, at the mouth of the Coega River, in support of the SSHAC Level 3 PSHA study for the Thyspunt nuclear siting project..

The Eastern Coega Geodatabase was compiled from subsurface dataa and was used to identify and evaluate the continuity of fluvial and marine terrace surfaces and related sedimentary cover across the Eastern CCoega fault. These data were used to assess the location and activity of the Eastern Coega fault zone and assess regional ppatterns of uplift as discussed in greater detail in the related Thyspunt Geological Invesstigations— Marine Terrace studies (Hanson et al. 2012).

The Coega fault is a bounding fault of the Algoa Basin half-graben. Offfshore, the marine extension of the Coega fault is the St. Croix fault, which is composed of segmented bounding faults forming a series of en-echelon annd successive fault planes. The Eastern Coega fault zone comprises the segment of the fault south of Uitenhage to the Ngqqura Harbour at the mouth of the Coega River. In contrast to the Western Coega fault zone, which is geomorphically well expressed as an escarpment, where the more competent Ordovician Sardinia Bay Formation is juxtaposed against the less resistive Kirrkwood and Enon Formations, the Eastern Coega fault generally lies within the Uitenhage GGroup (Cretaceous Kirkwood and Sundays River formations). Locally the fault juxtaposes quartzite of the Peninsula Formation (Table Mountain Group) against softer sedimentatry rocks of the Uitenhage Group. The Eastern Coega fault zone, however, is buried under younger Tertiary to Recent sediments and is not exposed or geomorphically well expressed at the surface.

The buried nature of the Coega fault prohibits the use of conventional mapping techniques to locate the fault; and as such, the precise location of the surface trace((s) and subsurface nature of the Coega fault are poorly-defined. Recent groundwater invesstigations show that the Coega fault, southeast of Uitenhage, is probably more complex than previously thought and consists of a zone of elongated and sub-parallel horst-and-graben sttructures. The fault corridor defined for this study encompassses the general location of the main traces of the Eastern Coega fault zone as inferred from previous studies. Secondary faulting associated with the Coega fault was previously identiffiied in the vicinity of Coega Kop, where northeasterly-trending splay faults, in the shape of a horse-tail, are presentt. A previously unmapped zone of faulting in the Ngqura (Coega) Harbour is

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version ii interpreted in this study from subsurface data. The fault zone is characterissed by horst blocks of Table Mountain Group quartzite that trend subperpendicular to the coastline and subparallel to the Coega fault zone; at an angle of between 50º and 60º; projecting towards Jahleel Island. Although the available subsurface data do not clearly show the relationship of this fault to the main Eastern Coega fault, the horst blocks are interpreted to represent transfer faults or a larger network of splay faults connected to the Coega fault zone.

Deformation features such as fracturing, microshattering, microfracturing,, slickensiding, and breccia were identified in the subsurface data collected for this study. Some of these features may be of tectonic origin and do appear to be associated with the Coega fault zone; however, a number of features of probaable non-tectonic origin were identified outside the Coega fault zone corridor.

Marine terraces identified in this study at elevations of approximately 6–7 m, 10 –12.5m, and 52–60 m amsl are estimated to be approximately 125 ka (MIS 5e), 400 ka (MIS 11), and 4 Ma (middle Pliocene).

The chronology and altitude of the marine deposits described in this sttudy are tentatively correlatted with other marine deposits along the southern African coast. Information on the top of bedrock surface and overlying lithhologies indicates that one or more marine platforms occur at elevations ranging from 40—60 m amsl and that these surfaces are correlated across the Coega fault zone with little or no vertical displacement. The Pliocene age previously proposed for these terraces is supported by the cosmogenic burial-age data obtained from the Algoa Brick Quarry and suggests that the broad marine platforms across the Coega fault zone at ~50 m to 60 m amsl elevations have not undergone deformation since the earlier Pliocene (~4.0 Ma).

Borehole data in the vicinity of the Aldo Scribante Race Track and the N2/Neptune Interchange best document the apparennt lack of vertical deformation of the leading edge (~40 ± 3 m amsl) of the broad high platform. Although data are not currenttly available to map and moore definitively show the absence of vertical or horizontal deformatioon of the strandline of this marine terrace, the available data do suggest that, within a resolutiion of about 2±1 m, there is no vertical displacement of the seaward portion of this platform across the Eastern Coega fault zone in the vicinity of the N2. The age of this marine tterrace platform is estimated to be Late Pliocene (~ 3.6– 2.6 Ma).

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version iii

A probable marine-terrace abrasion-platform that does have a reasonably well-constrained erosional shoreline angle, at an elevation of –8±1 m amsl, is identified west of the present river mouth in the vicinity of the Harbour Keywall. This marine platform eextends across the Coega ffault zone with no apparent verticcal offset. This marine-terrace plaatform is estimated to be no younger than MIS 9, (approximately 330 ka, Compton 2011), and may be significantly older. This observation is consistent with the evidence for no apparent deformation of the older Pliocene platform(s).

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... II 1. INTRODUCTION AND TERMS OF REFERENCE ...... 1 2. GEOLOGY AND TOPOGRAPHY ...... 2

2.1. THE ALGOA BASIN ...... 2 2.1.1. Depositional and Structural Setting of the Algoa Sub-Basini ...... 2 2.1.2. Geological Setting of Algoa Bay ...... 3 2.2. THE COEGA FAULT: A BASIN-BOUNDING FAULT OF THE ALGOA SUB-BASIN ...... 4 2.3. POST-CONTINENTAL BREAK-UP HISTORY...... 6 2.4. PALAEOZOIC BASEMENT ...... 8 2.5. MESOZOIC DEPOSITS ...... 8 2.5.1. Kirkwood Formation ...... 8 2.5.2. Sundays River Formation ...... 9 2.6. POST-CRETACEOUS SEDIMENTATION: CENOZOIC DEPOSITS ...... 9 2.7. GEOMORPHIC HISTORY AND SEA LEVEL CHANGES ...... 10 3. NEAR-SUBSURFACE EASTERN COEGA GEODATABASE ...... 11

3.1. GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION ...... 11 3.2. DRILLING AND LOGGING INFORMATION ...... 12 3.3. LITHOLOGICAL INFORMATION ...... 12 3.3.1. Primary Lithological Information ...... 12 3.3.2. Secondary Lithological Informattion ...... 12 3.4. BEDROCK TOPOGRAPHY MAPS ...... 12 3.5. CROSS SECTIONS ...... 13 4. DATA UNCERTAINTIES AND LIMITATIONS IN THE COEGA GEODDATABASE ...... 14

4.1. UNCERTAINTIES IN GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION ...... 14 4.2. REFERENCE DATUMS ...... 15 4.3. DRILLING, LOGGING AND STANDARDISATION OF THE SOURCE DATA ...... 16 4.4. LIMITATIONS IN THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GEOLOGICAL DATA ...... 17 4.5. UNCERTAINTIES IN DEPTH TO BEDROCK ...... 18 4.6. UNCERTAINTIES RELATED TO THE IDENTIFICATION OF TECTONIC DEFORMATIION FEATURES AND THE LOCATION OF MAJOR TRACES OF THE COEGA FAULT ZONE ...... 21 5. GENERAL PALAEOGEOMORPOLOGY OF THE BEDROCK SURFACE ...... 24

5.1 FLUVIAL GEOMORPHOLOGY ...... 24 5.1.1. Palaeochannel Incision and Morphology of the Coega River ...... 25 5.1.2. Fluvial Strath Terraces in the Coega River Valley ...... 26 5.1.3. Palaeotributaries in the Coega RRiver Valley...... 27 5.2 PALAEO-ISLANDS ...... 28 5.3 COASTAL PALAEOGEOMORPHOLOGY ...... 29 6. NATURE AND VARIABILITY OF THE POST-CRETACEOUS DEPOSITS ...... 31

6.1. DEPOSITIONAL FACIES ...... 32 6.2. LATERAL CORRELATION ...... 38 6.3. APPARENT SHALLOW SUBSURFACE DEFORMATION FEATURES WITHIN COVER SEDIMENTS IN THE EASTERN COEGA STUDY AREA ...... 44 6.3.1. Definitions of Shallow Subsurface Deformation Characteriistics ...... 44 6.3.2. Descriptions of Shallow Subsurface Deformation Characteristics in the Eastern Coega Study Area ...... 44 7. MARINE TERRACES AND HIGHSTAND PALAEOSEA-LEVEL INDICATORS ...... 49

7.1 CRITERIA TO IDENTIFY EROSIONAL AND DEPOSITIONAL MARINE TERRACES ...... 49 7.2 PREVIOUS MAPPING INTERPRETATIONS ...... 51 7.3 MARINE PALAEOSHORELINE INDICATOORS IN THE COEGA STUDY AREA ...... 52 7.3.1. Marine platforms at 33.9 – 60 m amsl ...... 53

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version v

7.3.2. Possible Marine Sediments at ~12.5 m amsls ...... 56 7.3.3. Marine platform at ~ 7m amsl ...... 57 7.3.4. Evidence for Palaeosea-level at ~0 m amsl ...... 57 7.3.5. Marine platforms at -8 m ...... 57 8. ESTIMATED AGES OF THE MARINE TERRACES ...... 59 9. THE COEGA FAULT ZONE — EVIDENCE FOR LOCATION AND MINOR NEOTECTONIC DEFORMATION ...... 64

9.1. APPARENT SHALLOW SUBSURFACE DEFORMATION FEATURES WITHIN COVER SEEDIMENTS IN THE EASTERN COEGA STUDY AREA ...... 66 9.2. SUBSURFACE BEDROCK DEFORMATION FEATURES IDENFIED IN THIS STUDY ...... 67 9.3. CONSTRAINTS ON VERTICAL DEFORMATION OF THE COEGA FAULT ZONE PROVIDED BY EROSIONAL MARINE TERRACES ...... 68 9.3.1. Broad High-Level Bedrock Platforms Between Coega KoK p and the Ngqura Harbour: 40 ± 3 m Wave-Cut Platform ...... 69 9.3.2 –8±1 m Marine Terrace ...... 70 10. CONCLUSIONS ...... 71 11. REFERENCES ...... 73 12. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... 90 APPENDIX A: GLOBAL PALAEOSEA-LEVEEL RECORD AND SOUTH AFRICAAN PALAEOSEA- LEVEL DATA ...... 145 APPENDIX B1: GIS DATABASE ...... 146 APPENDIX B2: LITHOLOGICAL DATABASE ...... 147 APPENDIX B3: SOURCE DATA REFERENCES ...... 148 APPENDIX C: BEDROCK UNCERTAINTY – BEDROCK UNCERTAINTY DESCRIPTIONS FOR PROFILES A TO AJ ...... 149 APPENDIX D: REVIEWER COMMENTS ...... 150

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version vi

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Levels of confidence in borehole position (by class). Table 2 Levels of confidence in borehole elevation (by class). Table 3 Criteria used to assess the elevation of the top of bedrock. Table 4 Facies descriptions and interpretations. Table 5 Marker horizons employed in the Eastern Coega study area. Table 6 Shelly marker horizons in the Coega Geodatabase. Table 7 Marine Terrace Platforms: Their Elevations, Characteristicss and Descriptions. Table 8 Geochronology Results for the TSP-03 series which comprises four samples collected from the Algoa Brick Quarry 10 metres below the surface at an elevation of 51.6 m amsl.

LIST OF FIGURES: CONTENT CONTAINED IN VOLUME 2 Figure 1 Maps showing the location of study area. a: Context map showing the investigation area relative to the Coega and St Croix faultts in addition to the main fault corridors investigated in the broader study. b: Inset map showing the main locations referred to in this text. Figure 2 Geology map showing the distribution of lithostratigraphic units. Figure 3 Relative stratigraphy and short description of the Algoa Group. Figure 4 Geomorphology and palaeogeomorphological framework in the Algoa sub- Basin. Figure 5 Overview map showing borehole distribution and location. a: Borehole location: Inset maps A and B. b: Borehole location: Inset map C. c: Borehole location: Inset map D. d: Borehole location: Inset map E. Figure 6 TDEM Profiles Southwest of the Coega Kop Quarry Showing Southward- Stepping Splays of the Coega Fault as Derived From Zaadorozhnaya et al. (2012) Figure 7 Summary map of cross section profiles including inset map of profiles in the Ngqura Harbour. Figure 8 Legends for lithology and depositional environments in tthe Eastern Coega Geodatabase. Figure 9 Confidence in borehole position. Figure 10 Confidence in borehole elevation. Figure 11 Bedrock elevation: Summary map. a: Bedrock elevation: Inset map B. b: Bedrock elevation: Inset map C. c: Bedrock elevation: Insett map D. d: Bedrock elevation: Inset map E.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version vii

Figure 12 Longitudinal along-channel Profile A. Figure 13 Longitudinal along-channel Profile B. Figure 14 Longitudinal along-channel Profile C and across-channel Prrofiles D, E and F. Figure 15 Longitudinal along-channel Profile G and across-channel Profile H. Figure 16 Longitudinal along-channel Profiles I and J; and across-channel Profile K. Figure 17 Longitudinal along-channel Profile L. Figure 18 Longitudinal along-channel Profile M and across-channel Profile N. Figure 19 Across-channel Profile O. Figure 20 Longitudinal along-channel Profile P. Figure 21 Across-channel Profile Q. Figure 22 Across-channel Profile R. Figure 23 Residual bedrock: Profile aand Definitions. Figure 24 a: Marine terrace abrasion platforms and shoreline angles in Sector B. b: Marine terrace abrasion platforms and shoreline angles in SSector D. c: Marine terrace abrasion platforms and shoreline angles in Sector E. Figure 25 Schematic Profile S showing boreholes that intersect oyster beds. Figure 26 Schematic Profiles T—XX showing boreholes that intersect bivalve marker beds. Figure 27 Geochronology sample TSP-03: Location and age. Figure 28 Schematic Profiles Y, Z and AA trend along the Coega fauult zone and show a broad bedrock platform. Figure 29 a:12.5 m to 12.8 m palaeoshoreline angle and associateed marine-terrestrial transition. b: 6—7 m palaeoshoreline angle and associated marine-terrestrial transition. Figure 30 Middle Pleistocene-aged Stone Artefacts identified in the Ngqura Harbour area. Figure 31 Graphical summary of erosional and depositional palaeoshorelines in the Eastern Coega Study area. Figure 32 a: Distribution of boreholes with hard-rock tectonic indicattors in Sector B. b: TDEM stations of Zadorozhnaya et al. (2012) showing approximate position of splay faults southwest of Coega Kop Quarry. c: Distribution of boreholes with hard-rock tectonic indicators in Sector D. d: Distribution of boreholes with hard-rock tectonic indicators in Sector E. Figure 33 Neogene Reverse Faulting in a trench near Motherwell. Figure 34 Medium to highly expansive soil conditions producing heave at Despatch, west-northwest of the Ngqura Harbouru . Figure 35 Expressions of Gilgai in Undisturbed Land Northeast of the Ngqura Harbour.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version viii

Figure 36 a: Schematic Profiles AB and AC intersect Peninsula Formation quartzite in the Ngqura Harbour. b: Schematic profiles AD, AE and AF intersect Peninsula Formation quartzite in the Ngqura Harbour. Figure 37 Hard-Rock Surface Deformation in the Coega Kop Quarry. Figure 38 Schematic Profile AG east of the Coega fault zone. Figure 39 Schematic Profiles AH, AI and AJ within the Coega fault zone.

APPENDICES Appendix A Global Palaeosea-Level Record and South African Palaeosea-Level Data. Appendix B Eastern Coega Geodatabase (B1: GIS, B2: Lithological Databases and B3: Source data bibliography). Appendix C Bedrock Uncertainty – Bedrock Uncertainty Descriptions for Profiles A to AJ. Appendix D Reviewer comments.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version ix

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS amsl above mean sea level BH Borehole CGS Council for Geoscience CN cosmogenic nuclide EOH end of hole GIS geographical information system Jkk Kirkwood Formation of the Uitenhage Group ka thousand years ago (also thousand years old) Ks Sundays River Formation of the Uitenhage Group LiDAR light detection and ranging m metres Ma million years ago (also milllion years old) msl mean sea level m amsl metres above mean sea level MIS marine isotope stage NCR no core recovered / core loss Op Peninsula Formation of the Table Mountain Group OSL optically stimulated luminescence PSHA Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis PSL Palaeosea-level SACS South African Committee for Stratigraphy SSHAC Senior Seismic Hazard Analysis Committee SPT Standard Penetration Test SSR Site Safety Report TMG Table Mountain Group WCP wave-cut platform WGS World Geodetic System XYZ coordinate positions giving Cartesian coordinates in metres and elevation in metres above sea level

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version x

DEFINITIONS

Term Definition Amsterdamhoek The modern-day geomorphic expression of the marine deposits Plateau that overlie the Amsterdamhoek Platform. The plateau borders the coastline, seawards of the Coega Plateau. See Figure 4 for a graphical representattion. Amsterdamhoek A broad wave-cut platform carved into bedrock between the Platform Swartkops River in the west and the Coega River in the east. The platform bordeers the coastline, seawards of the Coega Platform. See Figuree 4 for a graphical representation. Coega Plateau The modern-day geomorphic expression of the marine deposits that overlie the Coega Platform. It is bordered by the Grassridge Plateau on the landward side to the north and is separated from the Grassridge Plateau by the Salt Pan Escarpment. See Figure 4 for a graphical representation. Coega Platform A sub-Tertiary unconformity comprising a broad wave-cut platform carved into bedrock between the Swartkops River in the west and the Coega River in the east. See Figure 4 for a graphical representattion. Colchester The modern-day geomorphic expression of the marine deposits Plateau that overlie the Colchester Platform. It is bordered by the Grassridge Dune Cordons on the northern landward side and is separated from southern seaward Amsterdamhoek Plateau by the Swartkops lineament. See Figure 4 for a graphical representation. Colchester A broad wave-cut platform carved into bedrock, developed best Platform east of the Sundays River, but extending west between the Coega and Sundays Rivers. See Figure 4 for a graphical representation. Core drilling A core drill is a drill specifically designed to remove a cylinder of subsurface material. The material left inside the drill bit is referred to as the core. Core drills are used for many applications, either wwhere the core needs to be preserved or where drilling can bee done more rapidly. Core drilling uses hardened steel or tungsten blades to bore a hole into unconsolidated ground. This method is used to drill the weathered regolith, as the drill rig and steel or tungsten blades cannot penetrate fresh rock. The drill bit has three blades arranged around the bit head, which cut into unconsolidatted ground. The drill rods have a hollow inner tube. Drill cuttings are removed by injection of compressed air into the hole via the annular area between the innertube and the drill rod. Diamond Diamond drilling differs from other geological drilling iin that solid Drilling core is extracted from depth. The difference is that the drill bit is composed of actuall industrial diamonds set in a soft metallic matrix. During drilling, the matrix wears slowly which exposes

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version xi

Term Definition diamonds. The drill bit is mounted onto a drill stem, which is connected to a rotary drill. Water is injected into the drill pipe, so as to wash out the rock cuttings produced by the bit. Gilgai The term is an Australian English word referring to small microtopographic expressions of surface relief commonly developed in Vertisols. These small ephemeral lakes form in depressions in the soil surface. Gilgai’s are generrally a few metres across and less than 30 cm deep; but can develop to several metres deep by up to 100 metres across. Gilgais form on certain types of clay soils due to swelling during wet conditions and shrinkage during drier periods. This causes cracks in the dry soil in which loose material accumulates. During subsequent re-wettinng, the soils swell and is over-pressured reslting in a sideways force. The horizontal forces cause a mound to form between the cracks resulting in a depreession to at the location of the crack itself. Water-filled cracks and depressions further compunds these conditions both on surface and in the subsurface. Over time, wetting-drying cycles are exaggerated resulting in a landscape covered by a pattern characterised by repetition of mounds and depressions. Grassridge Semi-unconsolidated palaeodunes in elongate belts that trend Dune Cordons subparallel to the present shoreline. The cordons are located northeast of the Sundays River and are arranged in belts associated with an overall regressive sea level during the Cenozoic. See Figure 4 for a graphical representation. Grassridge The modern-day geomorphic expression of the marine deposits Plateau that overlie the Grassridge Platform. The plateau lies landwards and northwards of the Salt Pan Escarpment. See Figure 4 for a graphical representattion. Grassridge A sub-Tertiary unconformity comprising a broad wave-cut Platform platform carved into bedrock between the Coega River in the west and the Sundays River in the east. See Figure 4 for a graphical representattion. Marine terrace A narrow constructional coastal strip sloping gently seaward, veneered by a marinne deposit (typically silt, sand, ffine gravel). The margins have been strongly cliffed by marine erosion and the elevation thereof has been exposed by uplift along a sea coast or by the lowering of the sea level. Mud-rotary A drilling method that uses mud to circulate the drilling fluid drilling during the drilling process. The cuttings are retrived from the borehole by the drilling fluid. Neotectonics The study of post-Miocene structures and structural geology of the earth’s crust. Palaeo (prefix) A combining form denoting the attribute of great age or remoteness with respect to time, or involving ancient conditions. Palaeo- A branch of geomorrphology concerned with the recognition of ancient erosion surfaces and with the study of ancient

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version xii

Term Definition geomorphology topographies and toopographic features that are now concealed beneath the surface or have been removed by erosion. Palaeoshoreline A preserved remnant of an ancient shoreline. In the study area, these are discontinuous features related to sea-level highstands onshore and high- and lowstands offshore. Palaeoshorelines are typically associated with wave-cut platforms and palaaeosea-cliffs and or palaeobeaches. Pedotubules A soil feature consisting of skeleton grains, or skeleeton grains plus plasma, and having a tubular external form (eeither single tubes or branching systems of tubes) characterised by relatively sharp boundaries and relatively uniform cross-sectional size and shape (circular or elliptical). Recife-Bird A discontinuous subdued ridge between Cape Reciffe and Bird Ridge Island that forms the division between Algoa Bay and the continental shelf. The east-northeasterly-trending ridgge consists of rough topography, in places comprised of a steep seaward- dipping scarp. See Figure 4 for a graphical representation. Bird Island occurs off the diagram to the east. Riy Bank An area along the northernmost edge of the Algoa Bay Canyon within the offshore northwest-southeast trending Recife-Bird ridge. The Riy Bank is located east of Cape Recife, south- southwestward of Jahleel Island and is comprised of rugged bathymetry interpreted to be underlain by Cape Supergroup. It is flanked along the east by a rhomboid-shaped arrea, where bedding dips increase from 2º to over 13º. See Figure 4 for a graphical representattion. Rotary core Rotary drilling is generally carried out using rigs moounted on a boreholes four wheel drive truck or on a trailer. The rig comprises a high mast which supports drill rods. The drill rods are rotated by hydraulics and are driven by a diesel-powered engine. The drill bits are lubricated by compressed air or water or a mixture of both. Slightly bigger pieces compared to schramm. The drilling is performed using a double-tube core bbarrel fitted with a tungsten or diamond core bit. Under ideal circumstances the drilling method should produce continuous rock core which allows for detailed logging and laboratory testing to characterise the rock for engineering purposes. Saltpan A step-like interrupption in the continuity of the sub-Tertiary Escarpment planation surface that forms a break in slope between the Grassridge and Coeega plateaux. The coast-parallel Escarpment is situated 12 to 13 km inland and separates the ollder, higher and landward Grassridge Platform from the lower, younger and seaward Coega Plattfform underlain by Palaeozoic quartzites and Cretaceous sediment, respectively. See Figure 4 for a graphical representation.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version xiii

Term Definition Sea clifff A cliff or slope produced by wave erosion, situated at the seaward edge of the coast or the landward side of the wave-cut platform, and marking the inner limit of erosion. It maay vary from an inconspicuous slope to a high, steep escarpment. Schramm The Schramm drilling rig uses a percussion hammer for down drilling rig the hole hammer ddrilling. In unconsolidated sediments, the drilling rig provides sediment and in hard rock, chips are retrieved. To retrieeve samples, compressed air or reverse circulation methods are used. The latter is usually used for geological survey. In mud and clay-rich environments, a mist of water water combined with a foaming agent is injectted into the hole to assist recovery. Shoreline The location where sea surface meets the land and ccan include an entire tidal range. Shoreline angle A shoreline angle is the point (typically in profile) where a wave- cut platform meets a sea-cliff. Because of natural variation in wave-cut platform surfaces, shoreline angles can be fformed at a variety of elevations with respect to the tidal range, ranging from as low as mean sea level (approximate elevation of zero to a few metres above mean sea level. Modern shoreline angles are typically cut during a combination of high tide and sttorm surge, so they typically form 1 to 3 m above mean sea level. An ancient shoreline provides an approximate record of the relative sea level at the time when the palaeoshoreline formed. Strath An extensive undissected terrace-like remnant of a broad, flat valley bottom formed in bedrock, resulting from degradation; represents a local bbase level; and has undergone dissection following uplift. Standard The SPT drilling method uses a thick-walled sample ttube, with a Penetration larger outside diameter compared to the inside diameter with a Test, SPT length of ~650 mm. The tube is driven into the ground at the base of a borehole by blows from a slide hammer. The number of blows required foor the tube to penetrate a predeterimend distance is recorded. The blow count provides an indication of the density of the ground. Strath terrace An extensive remnant of a strath that belonged to a former erosion cycle and that has undergone disseccttion by a rejuvenated stream following uplift. Swartkoops A topographic low that trends parallel to the modern coastline Lineament between the Swartkops and Sundays Rivers that separates the seaward edge of the Coega Plateau from the landward edge of the Amsterdamhoek Plateau. See Figure 4 for a graphical representation. Subsurface The zone below the surface whose geologicaal features, principally stratigraphic and structural, are interpretted on the basis of drill records and various kinds of geophysical evidence.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version xiv

Term Definition Terrace A long narrow, relatively level or gently inclined surface, generally less broad than a plain, bounded along one edge by a steeper descending slope and along the other byy a steeper ascending slope. Trial pit A trial pit is a ground excavation used to study or sample the composition and structure of the subsurface. Trial pits are usually between 1—4 m in depth; being excavated either bby hand or using mechanical means. Vertisol A soil type in which there is a high content of the expansive clay, montmorillonite. Due to wetting-drying cycles over seasons and years, alternate shrinking and swelling causes nattural mixing resulting in an extremely deep A horizon and the absence of a B horizon. These processes also form deep cracks in the drier periods. Vibracore, The technology and technique of vibracoring is used to collect vibracoring samples of unconsolidated sediments and soils. The vibrating mechanism oscillates at an amplitude of a few millimetres and is called the "vibraheadd" which is operated by an external power source. This drives the core tube into unconsolidated sediment. The tube is withdraawn and provides a reltively undisturbed sample in the core of the core tube. Note that vibration causes a thin layer of material to mobilize only along the inneer and outer tube wall which ensures a relatively undisturbed sample. The method works best on unconsolidated and/or waterlogged sediments and soils.. Silty sediments of mixed grain size are the easiest to core and the method is less effective in relatively dry clays, packed sand or any consolidated or cemented material. Washboring Washboring is a drilling system by which material loosened by the drill bit is brought to the surface in the annular space between the bit annd casing by water which is forced down through the pipe bearing the bit. This is a popular method that is used to drill larger diameter holes in soft formations. The casing is attached to a cassing crown which is rotated into tthe ground. Water is used to flush out the drilled formation. Wave-cut A broad bedrock platform that slopes gently seawards from a platform (WCP) sea-cliff. The term wave-cut platform is used in this report because wave erosion is the dominant erosional process for platform development although there are other erosive processes that may act on these platforms. Examples of wave- cut platforms are the Coega, Colchester and Grassridge Platforms as shown in Figure 4.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version xv

1. INTRODUCTION AND TERMS OF REFERENCE

The Council for Geoscience ( CGS) was tasked to undertake a neotectonic investigation of the Coega fault in support of a Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA) for the proposed nuclear power station at Thyspunt, south of Humansdorp. Precceding Site Safety Report (SSR) site investigations at Thyspunt were undertaken during the first half of 2008. In early 2009 and again in 2010, the CGS was tasked with conducting additional geologic investigations to evaluate pootential seismic sources for the Thyspunt site, as part of the broader Senior Seismic Hazard Analysis Committee (SSHAC) Level 3 assesssment process. A task team was formed to investigate selected fault corridors along the Ceres-Kango-Baviaanskloof-Coega fault system in the Eastern Cape. The Coega fault was subdivided intto western and eastern fault sectors based on host-rock characteristics. This puublication only adddresses studies conducted along the eastern sector of the Coega ffault. The focus of the study was to compile a subsurface geologic database that coould be used to identify and map geomorphic surfaces and deposits that in turn couuld be used to asseess the location and activity of the eastern Coega fault zone. Mapping of marine terraces in the Coega River study area also provides information that can be used to asseess regional patterns of uplift.

Subsurface information derived from the Coega geodatabase was ussed to develop cross-sections and profiles that aided in the interpretation of the following:  depth to and morphology of the buried bedrock palaeosurface;  location, position and morphology of marine and fluvial terraces;  subsurface location of tectonically-induced features (faultting, fracturing, microshattering, microfracturinng, slickensiding, breccia); and  nature, and lithological to spaatial variability of the post-Cretaceous sediments.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 1

2. GEOLOGY AND TOPOGRAPHY

The Eastern Coega fault study area extends from the mouth of thhe Coega River northwestwards towards Uitenhage (Figures 1a and 1b). The Coega River flows in the Algoa Basin in a northwest too southeast direction and has incised into the Mesozoic bedrock of the Uitenhage Group. Today the Coega River occupies a drowned river valley that is infilled by aeolian and fluvio-marine sediments of post- Mesozoic age. The region surroundding the Coega River valley compprises elevated andd marine-bevelled terraces on which coastal dunefields and other sediments of marginal marine environments are deposited. Figure 2 depicts the spatial distribution of thhe local geology; Figure 3 showws a summary of the Algoa Group and Figure 4 shows the geomorphological and paalaeogeomorphological frameworrk of the study area.

2.1. The Algoa Basin

2.1..1. Depositional and Structural Setting of the Algoa Sub-Basin

The depositional setting of the investigation area forms part of a complex asseemblage of en-echelon onshore and offshore basins (Figure 1a) that coalesce further offshore to form the Outeniqua Basin (Dingle et al. 1983). The latter comprises a series of rift-bounded sub-basins, of which the easternmost Algoa sub- basin measures ~8,200 km2 and extends about 200 km offshore (Bate & Malan 1992; Figure 1a).

Three half-graben, that comprise the Algoa sub-basin, include thee predominantly onshore Sundays River Trough to the north, a central Uitenhage Trough; and the southwestern offshore Port Elizabeth Trough (Broad et al. 2006, their Figure 5). The Sundays River Trough roughly coincides with the Algoa Basin as referred to by researchers working on onshore deposits (Shone 2006). It displays more structural complexity than other southern Cape half-grabens due to several diagonal faults that dissect the horst blocks (Shone 2006).

The basement is formed by highly ffolded Cape Supergroup quartzitte of the Table Mountain Group (TMG) that extends into the Algoa Basin. One of thee best examples of the TMG quartzite in the Algoa Baasin is the Coega Ridge, which is bbounded by the Coega fault to the south (Goedhart et al. 2004). The ridge iss formed by a northeasterly up-faulted limb of a half-graben expressed by several exposures of

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 2

TMG that form the Algoa Bay islands and Coega Kop located north of the Coega fault (e.g., Illenberger 1978; Ingram 1998) (Figure 4). The St Croix / Coega Ridge is a distinguishing feature of Algoa Bay (Winter 1973). It protrudes betweeen 2 and 7 m above the surrounding sediment and extends 3.5 km southwest of St Croix Island.

2.1..2. Geological Setting of Algoa Bay

Algoa Bay is classified as a log-spiraal, heart-shaped headland bay with a few islands, namely St Croix, Bretton, Bird, and Jahleel (Glass & Du Plessis 1980; Bremner 1979). The islands are composed of TMG quartzite and quartzitic sandstone; and these comprise part of the roughest bathymetry in Algoa Bay (e.g., Brremner 1991b). Bremner (1991b) has compiled bathymetry maps for Algoa Bay using South African Navy fair charts; and Bremner & Day (1991) have estimated thhe thickness of Quaternary sediment from seismiic data and subtracting the tthickness from bathymetric data. Together, these results show that the rest of the bay is characterised by smooth to gently undulating topography formed on the Kirkwood andd Sundays River Formations. A few metres of younger overlying sediment of the Algoa Group (Glass & Du Plessis 19980) form an upper surface that diips at 0.15º in a south-southwestward direction (Bremner 1979).

Bremner and Day (1991) also published shoreline bathymetry for Algoa Bay as compiled from seismic records collected during an intensive multi-disciplinary geophysical investigation which useed continuous seismic-reflection profiling. The profiles spaced ~1.8 km apart provided 70 good quality bottom profiles oriented perpendicular to the shore from Cape Reciefe (west of Port Elizaabeth to Cape Padrone (East of Port Elizabeth). The 82 cm3 Bolt air gun/hydrophone array system provided substate penetration to deepths of 30—40 m with a resoluttion of 1—2 m. Return signals from the air gun and 24-unit hydrophone array were band filtered through a Krohn-Hite filter and amplified with the Keithley 103 A nannovolt amplifier before the record was set on heat-sensitive paper. To provide the optimum compromise between penetration and resolution, filtering was set to cut-off frequencies above 1,500 Hz and between 200—400 Hz. The results ffrom the survey show that sea-floor gradient in the study area markedly decreases att depths deeper than –11m (Glass and Du Plessis 19880).

The bathymetry between Jahleel Island and the Coega River is comprised of a regular, gently seaward-sloping surface with a local high at the −12 m isobath (Glass & Du Plessis 1980). Low-relief exposures ~5 m high are also present offshore (Du

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 3

Plessis & Glass 1981). The bathyymetry of Algoa Bay is also coonducive to the preservation of remnant palaeoshorelines and palaeodune cordons (Bremmer & Day, 1991; Du Plessis & Glass, 1991). Nickall (2005) analysed sediment from several locations in Algoa Bay and suggested that concentrations of heavy miinerals near the mouth of the Coega River may represent palaeobeachs formeed in the Late Quaternary (-20 m isobath) and during the Flandrian transgression (-15 m to 0 iosbath range) as previously described by Du Plessis & Glass (1981).

2.2. The Coega Fault: A Basin-Bounding Fault of the Algoa Sub-Basin

The Coega fault (Figure 1a) forms part of the larger Ceres-Kango--Baviaanskloof- Coega fault system that formedd in response to northerly-directed tectonic compression during the Permo-Triassic Cape Orogeny (Hälbich 1983; Hill 1988; Toerien & Hill 1989). Subsequent tectonic extension associated with tthe break-up of Gondwana in the Middle to Late Jurassic (Bate & Malan 1992; Dingle et al. 1983) resulted in an inversion of many thrusts, forming easterly-trending, southerly-dipping normal faults (Lock 1980; Newton 1973). In the eastern part of the Cape Fold Belt some researchers speculate that many of the east-west-striking fauults have been rotated clockwise (as is evident on the eastern part of the Coega fault) in response to movement along the Aguhlas Fracture Zone (e.g., Newton et al. 2006). The rotation of the regional system resulted in change in the fault orientation to more northerly trends along the southern extremityy of the Algoa Basin as the faults approach the offshore Agulhas-Falkland Fracture zone (Bate & Malan 1992; Figure 1a).

The Coega fault (Figures 1a and 5) is a bounding fault of the Algoa Basin half-graben (Bate & Malan 1992). Offf shore, the marine extension of the Coega fault is the St. Croix fault, which is composed of seggmented bounding faults forming a series of en- echelon and successive fault planes (Bate & Malan 1992). The fault segments are of elliptical shape, oriented with the long axes parallel to its dip direction.

Surface expression of the Coega fault is observed northwest of Uitenhage, where it forms the boundary between the more competent Ordovician Sardinia Bay Formation; and the Kirkwood and Enon Formations. There the Coega fault can be detected via remote sensing and traditional mapping (e.g., CGS 2000; Ingram 1998). Further westward, where the Coega fault is contained entirely within quartzite of the Palaeozoic TMG, it comprises two subparallel northwest-striking fault traces that have been mapped using more traditional field-reconnaissancce techniques (Reddering et al. 2012).

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 4

The transition zone between the Western and Eastern Coega fault segments is situaated northwest of Uitenhage (Reddering et al. 2012) and marks a change in strike-orientation for the Coega fault (J.S.V. Reddering pers. comm. 2011). Here, the Coega fault juxtaposes more competent Cape Supergroup rocks to the north against softer Cretaceous sediment south of the fault; which results in an escarpment with a relative relief of 200 m (Ingram 1998). Within the transition zone, the two traces comprising the Coega fault are locally connected by northeast-striking en-echelon cross-faults (Reddering et al. 2012).

South of the transition zone and closer to the coastline, the Coega fault between Uitenhage to the Ngqura Harbour, is buried under younger Terttiary to Recent sediments. The fault zone is not exposed or geomorphically well expressed at the surface; this prohibits the use of connventional mapping techniques to locate the fault (e.g., Du Toit 1955; Goedhart 2004, 2005; Goedhart et al. 2004; Goedhart & Hattingh 1997; Ingram 1998; Le Roux 1987; W.C. le Roux 2000; McStay & Dooel 1998; Shone 1976, 1978). As such, the precise location of the fault trace and the character of local faulting is not well defined (Zadorozhnaya et al. 2010). The fault, as mapped by the CGS and verified through geophysical data collected by private companies (W.C. le Roux pers. comm. 2000 cited by Goedhart et al. 2004), is traced ~300 m south of Coega Kop. Here it seems probable that the zone of faulting is ovver 300 m wide (W.C. le Roux 2000; Goedhart et al. 2004) and this zone is thought to originate from conjugate or splay faulting off the main fault (W.C. le Roux 2000; J. McStay pers. comm. cited by Goedhart et al. 2004; Zadorozhnaya et al. 2010).

Approximate average displacement along the Coega fault is considerably greater than 500 m and is estimated from seismic two-way time data at a little over 2,000 m (Goedhart et al. 2004). Whereas subsurface evidence supports thee existence and continued activity of the Coega fault during deposition, the absence of coarse sediment adjacent and proximal to thhe fault makes it unlikely that a ffault scarp was ever exposed at the surface (Goedhart et al. 2004; Shone 2006). Furthermore, it is likely that drainage reversal would have buried any surface fault traces with sediment of a similar composition, thereby removing any evidence of fault scaarps. This is not an uncommon occurrence in the Algoa Basin and supported by Shone (1976) who observed that exposed fault traces are generally small with observed throws of a few metres at maximum.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 5

Along the buried segment of the Coega fault, Hattingh & Goedhart (1997) reported two incidences of reverse faulting, with displacement of 0.5 m and 1 m respectively, from a trench dug at the Motherwell township This trench (which haas subsequently been back-filled) was inferred to overly the Coega fault and was interpreted interpreted to be possible evidence for Neogene compressive reactivation of the fault. The trench observations support Fouché et al. (1992), who suggest that subsidence of the Algoa Basin did not terminate after Gondwana rifting and that recent Cenozoic activity could be related to thermal subsidence and localised compaction faulting (Bate & Malan 1992). Similarly, Doherty (1993) has identified evidence for episodic offshore tectonism associated with both splays and the main trace of the St. Croix fault.

In the offshore environment, the St. Croix fault is thought to have unndergone strike- slip movement (Doherty 1993) and shallow-cover faults splay upwards from the main St Croix fault plane which gives rise to a segmented fault pattern comprised of minor faults (Bate & Malan 1992). The likelihood that the onshore segment of the Coega fault shows a similar pattern is very high (e.g., F.G. le Roux, 2000;; Toerien & Hill 1989) and is evident across the southern flank of the southernmost Cooega Kop (e.g., Kijko et al. 2006). The displacement on the fault is on the orderr of 2 km and, accoording to Kijko et al. (2006), the fault probably steps southward over a short distaance. These investigations are confirmed by Zadorozhnaya et al. (2010) who interpreted similar down-stepping southwest of the Coega Kop Quarrry (Figure 6g). These studies suggest that the onshhore segment of the Coega faultt may not be a uniform, steeply-dipping and inclined fault plane, as suggested by W.C. le Roux (2000), but rather is a fault zone comprising blocks of faults with a number of subfaults and connecting transfer faults.

2.3. Post-continental Break-Up History

After continental separation the thenn elevated southern African landmass underwent considerable fluvial erosion (Maud 2008; Partridge et al. 2006). Parts of the initial erosional products are preserved as continental piedmont valley scaarp deposits of the Enon Formation (Shone 2006). Later, as the sea flooded the newly-formed continental margin; fluvio-marine sedimentary rocks of the Kirkwwood (Jkk) and Sundays River (Ks) Formations (Uitenhage Group) were deposited atop the basement quartzite (Shone 2006) (Figure 2). The thickest accummulations of the Uitenhage Group are adjacent to the block-bounding faults that give rise to the basement palaeogeomorphology. Seismic surveys show that thick Cretaceous

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 6 sediment wedges thin with distance away from bounding faults like tthe Coega fault andd that the proximal piedmont deposits contain little coarse-grained material (Shone 2006). This is evidence that contemporaneous fault-related subsiddence prevailed (Shoone 2006) although fault-controlled subsidence diminished towards the end of the period of sedimentation (Shone 1976).

The present-day topography of southern Africa was influenced in parrtt by continental break-up and also by later concentric flexural uplift axes that correspond to episodes of plate-boundary re-organisation and episodic alkaline volcanism (Moore et al. 2009 andd references therein). The sediments eroded from the elevated southern African landmass after continental break-up were carried offshore resultiing in offshore loading and further uplift in the hinterrland (Partridge 2007). The resulttant denudation of the subcontinent led to the present-day landscape morphology (e.g., Partridge & Maud 1987, 1988, 2000). As detaileed in Appendix A, two periods of denudation are identified from apatite-fission-track thermochronology: one at the break-up of Gondwana during the Early Cretaceous; and another in the Late Cretaceous (e.g., Brown et al. 2002; Cockburn et al. 2000; Gilchrist et al. 1994; Partridge 1990, 1998; Tinker et al. 2008a, 2008b). As the escarpment evolved and coontributed less sediment to the offshore record, escarpment stability is envisaged and suggests stable-state existence since the end of the Cretaceous (Brown et al. 1990).

By the end of the Cretaceous, a first cycle of erosion formed an exttensive old, low andd flat land surface - defined by Partridge & Maud (1987) - as the Miocene-aged African Erosion Surface - which was truncated upstream by the remnant break-up escaarpment (Great Escarpment). Younger semiconsolidated to unconsolidated Tertiary marine and marine-related deposits of the basal Algoa Group were deposited on this unconformity (Shone 2006) (Figures 2 through 4).

Partridge & Maud (1987) and Partridge et al. (2006) invoke Early Miocene uplift to explain interruption of the first peneplanation event, which in their model caused renewed fluvial rejuvenation throughh substantial deepening and valleey widening into the old land surface as addressed further in Appendix A. Early MMiocene fluvial deposits, along with those eroded during subsequent sea-level transsgressions and regressions, are preserved on terraces in the Coega River and the adjjacent Sundays River valleys (Hattingh 2001, 2008).

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 7

Appendix A summarises South African palaeosea-level data within a global and local context.

2.4. Palaeozoic Basement

The Ordovician to Early Devonian Peninsula Formation (Figure 2) is a prominent formation of the TMG and consists of shallow, marine to fluvial, massive to bedded, light grey, and medium- to coarse-grained, supermature sandstoone (Thamm & Johnson 2006). There are local scatterings of well-rounded pebbles of vein quartz andd localised conglomerate lenses. The Peninsula Formation is expposed at Coega Kop and on the St. Croix Island trio (FFigures 3 and 4). Further offshore, the Peninsula Formation is exposed along the Riiy Bank, which forms a part of the northeast- southwest-striking ridge between Cape Recife and Bird Island off the eastern margin of Figure 4 (Recife-Bird Ridge). The quartzitic sandstone has also beeen intersected in boreholes in the Ngqura Harbour area, where it is interpreted to be tectonically deformed (e.g., Oates & McStay 19998). South of Coega Kop there are subordinate lenticular shale horizons less than a metre thick (CGS 2004). At Jahleel Island, the well-bedded TMG is jointed in two or more orientations and dips northeast at 40 degrees as investigated by Glass & Du Plessis (1980) during a marine geological investigation involving the utilisation of side-scan sonar and seiismic reflection profiling and is corroborated by the onshore mapping of Illenberger (1978).

2.5. Mesozoic Deposits

2.5..1. Kirkwood Formation

The Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous (±145–135 Ma) Kirkwood Forrmation (Figure 2) comprises clastic sediments depoosited in a valley-flat environmennt in the upper reaches and marine sediments deposited contemporaneously in the down-current direction (McMillan 2003). These continental fluvial to upper estuarine sedimentary rocks unconformably overlie conglomerates of the Enon Formation (Shone 1976). The Kirkwood Formation consists of reddish-brown, greenish-grey to grey, and yellow-white to buff-coloured shales, siltstones, silty mudstones, silty sands, sandstones and coarse sandstones (Winter 1973; McLachlan & McMillan 1979). Pebble washes, clay pellets and fossilised wood fragments are alsso present. The depositional environment is fluvial continental (McLachlan & McMillan 1976) and the formation attains thicknesses of up to 2,000 m (Shone 1976).

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 8

The base of the Kirkwood Formation is considered to be the point at which massive conglomerates are not recognised in the stratigraphy. The upper contact with the Sundays River Formation is also gradational (Shone 1976, 1978), inttertonguing and possibly erosive (Winter 1973) and is defined as the top of the uppermost red-brown mudstone. Exposures of the Kirkwood Formation are present along the southwestern slopes of the Coega River valley (Figure 2).

2.5..2. Sundays River Formation

The Early Cretaceous (±135 Ma) Sundays River Formation (Figure 2) accumulated in a shallow marine setting (Shone 1976) with estuarine, lagoonal, annd shallow-shelf faciees (McLachlan & McMillan 1976, 1979). The sedimentary rocks are composed of compacted grey to greenish-grey fossiliferous siltstone, mudrock, and sandstone with secoondary limestone and gypsum (Shone 2006). Exposures of the Sundays River Formation are present along the northeastern slopes of the Coega River valley (Figure 2).

Erosion during the Post-African I and II cycles of erosion (Maud 1996, 2008; Partridge & Maud 1987) planed the landscape to produce a well-developed marine- cut surface. It is on this surface that the post-Cretaceous sedimentts of the Algoa Group were deposited.

2.6. Post-Cretaceous Sedimentation: Cenozoic Deposits

The post-Cretaceous sediments (Figures 2 through 4) comprise parttly consolidated to unconsolidated marine and terrestrial sedimentary deposits of the Algoa Group. Three broader depositional cycles have been recognised in this unit, each consisting of marine and aeolian components deposited during sea level transgressions and regressions across a tectonically rising coastal platform (e.g., F.G. Le Roux 1987– 1991; Marker & Holmes 1999, 2010; Partridge et al. 2010; Ramsay & Cooper 2002; Reddering 2012; Ruddock 1968; Stear 1987). Research conducted along southern Coastal region of South Africa extending from the West Coast to east of the Coega River suggest that the uplift is broad and epeiric in nature (e.g., Erlanger 2010; Pether 1986, 1994; Roberts 2006) and that depositional cycles are reelated to climate cycles (e.g., Bateman et al 2004; Baxter & Meadows 1999; Carrr et al. 2010; Compton 2001, 2006; Craig 1997; Hendey 1981; Miller et al. 1995; Pether et al. 2000; Roberts & Berger 1997; Roberts et al. 2008; Van Zyl 1997).

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 9

In the study area, some of the oldest marine and aeolian components of the Algoa Group comprise the Alexandria and NNanaga Formations, which lie uncconformably on a series of marine-bevelled surfaces (Figures 2 through 4). Based on macro- and microfossil data it has been shown that exposures of the Algoa GGroup become progressively younger (from Miocene to Pliocene) towards the present-day coast (e.g., Le Roux 1987–1991).

For this investigation, the Cenozoic to Recent deposits have not been differentiated andd classified, although a brief descrription of the lithostratigraphic units of the South African Committee for Strt atigraphy (SACS) is given here (Figure 3), and a more detailed description is given in Goedhart (2004), Le Roux (1987–1991), Roberts et al. (2006), SACS (1980); and references therein. Further detail is allso provided in Appendix A.

2.7. Geomorphic History and Sea Level Changes

The geomorphic history and sea levvel changes affecting Southern Affrica have been summarised by Hanson et al. (2012) in the broader Marine Terrace Frraamework of the Thyspunt Nuclear Site. Since both this study and that of Hanson et aal. (2012) were conducted as part of the geological investigations for the Thyspunt Siite, Appendices A-1 through A-3 from Hanson et al. (2012) have been duplicated in Appendix A of this report. Further discussions relevant to the Coega study area are presented in Section 8.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 10

3. NEAR-SUBSURFACE EASTERN COEGA GEODATABASE

The Coega Geodatabase was compiled from reports collected from engineering and geology consultants, which provided shallow- to deep-subsurface information in the form of maps, cross sections, borehole logs, trial pits, and trenches. TThe database, which is provided in Appendices B1 and B2, consists of information from more than 500 boreholes and test pits as shown in Figure 5. Figures 5a through 5d show detail in the borehole distribution and profile locations and Figure 7 summariises the profile locations, the legend for which is provided in Figure 8. A data reference list is provided in Appendix B3. Maps showing uncertainties in the location and elevation of individual data points are shown on Figures 9 and 10, resppectively (see discussion in Section 4.1).

Geographic and lithological information are interlinked within the Coega Geodatabase as described in the folloowing sections.

3.1. Geographic Information

Primary locational and source information is used to identify a borehole and comprises several geodatabase fields such as:

 Borehole (BH) number  Coordinates (XYZ)  Data source  Report number and title  Report date

Some data differed with respect to tthe projection and the datum in which they are presented. For example, reports compiled in the pre-1999 era were compiled in the Cape Datum georeferencing system, which used the Modified Clarke 1880 reference ellipsoid (NGI 2012; Wonnacott 2012). These datums and projections were standardised to conform to current acceptable norms in geograpphic information system (GIS) studies. The GIS data have been standardised to Transverse Mercator with a Central Meridian of 25ºE (bettween longitudes of 25º [near Cape St Francis] andd 27ºE [Port Alfred]); using Hartebeeshoek 1994 as a reference datum and WGS84 as the reference ellipsoid. All figures contained in the reports have been produced to these GIS standards

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 11

Reports from the pre-1999 era were georeferenced as having been compiled using the Cape Datum and converted to Hartebeeshoek to ensure compatiibility within the WGS84 reference ellipsoid.

3.2. Drilling and Logging Information

Drilling information was referred to for purposes of assessing the quality of drill core or sediment and by association, the completeness of the geologicall record. These information serves as an indirect record of the logging standard. Together these data provide indirect information on the quality of logging and sediment retrrieval.

3.3. Lithological Information

3.3..1. Primary Lithological Information

Basic sedimentary grain size divisions of clay, silt, sand and gravel were extracted from the source data and comprise primary lithological information (Figure 8a). The relevant lithological characteristics and the appropriate depth infformation were extracted and form the primary basis on which the Coega Geodatabasse is structured as detailed in Section 6.

3.3..2. Secondary Lithological Information

Secondary lithological information comprises lithological informatiion that better describes and defines the variability in the primary lithology of the post-Cretaceous sediments. These secondary characteristics comprise descriptive innformation such as shelly material and type thereof; roots or pedotubules, gravelss, calcrete, and development thereof (Figure 8b) as discussed in Section 6.

3.4. Bedrock Topography Maps

The elevation of the top of bedrock was extracted to construct a bedrock structure contour map, which approximates the morphology of the buried bedrock (pallaeotopographic) surface in the study area (Figures 11 and 11a through 11e). The map was contoured from point-elevaation data, which varied in densityy throughout the study area. Contours were not extended into areas where the density of data points was not sufficient to provide a meaningful representation of the undeerlying bedrock surface.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 12

3.5. Cross Sections

Several cross sections (Profiles A through AJ) were compiled from the Coega Geodatabase and were used to identify and evaluate the continuity and nature of subsurface stratigraphic units and surfaces (Figures 12–22 and 25—26, 28, 36 and 38—39).

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 13

4. DATA UNCERTAINTIES AND LIMITATIONS IN THE COEGA GEODATABASE

The quality of any scientific interpretation is dependant on the quality of the undderlying data. Data quality and prrecision of measurement are therrefore important considerations during data collection and compilation. Perfect data are not always necessary or possible to collect, but data quality must be sufficiennt to satisfy the objectives of an investigation.

Where uncertainty exists in a datasset, approximations or proxies miight be used in case no direct data can be obtained (Creech et al. 2008). In the case tthat uncertainty exists, the levels thereof can be statistically quantified through the application of uncertainty factors (e.g., Gadagbuii et al. 2005) as a means of calculating the absolute uncertainty. Relative levels of uncertainty within a dataset can also be quantified by comparing the uncertainty of data within the dataset and this method is employed in this investigation.

The Coega Geodatabase was compiled from a variety of data sourcces. These data were standardised to a single format by V.R.Mitha and entered into an easily acceessible databank store, which allows for these data to be organised for future use. All ssourced data were compiled in the Coega Geodatabase, includiing high-quality data, consisting of descriptive information and data of poorer quality with less detail. The final compilation comprises a merged geodatabase in which enttries are ranked accoording to data quality, data comparison and validation of these data (OGDC 2012).

4.1. Uncertainties in Geographic Information

For many boreholes in the source data, the reporting and/or recording of primary XYZ (location and elevation) data was poor or incomplete. For exammple, for many boreholes the locality data are given on maps or plans without any tabulated XYZ coordinate data. It is unknown whether surveyors were originally employed to accurately locate the boreholes as this information were not available in the source data. The reports could also be dated and this could account for the dearth of tabulated XYZ data. This can introduce a small element of uncertainty in the XY position, because the borehole position on the original map might have been represented with a large symbol. Criteria were developed to assess location uncertainty qualitatively. Maps illustrating the confidence assessmennts in borehole

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 14 position and borehole elevation were generated (Figures 9 and 10, respectively) accoording to the error classes established in Tables 1 and 2, respectively.

Table 1: Levels of Confidence in Borehole Position (By Class)

Erroor Error or Class Uncertainty Criteria 1 Little Little to no error in position, as tabulated. Captured accordingly. Little to no error in position is indicated by the close match of the comparisons of XYZ coordinnate data input via tabulation to georeferenced image containing the point data. 2 Low Position derived from georeferenced image containing XY coordinates or grid. 3 Low to Position derived from digitizing georeferenced immages moderately low containing no XY reference coordinates. Visual matching of features on plan and digital aerial photography. 4 Moderately low to Little additional information relating to landscape or other moderately high features in the surrounding area. As for Error Class 3.

Notee: The spatial distribution of boreholes in each class is shown in Figure 9.

In some datasets, source elevation information was incomplete. A triangulation approach was used to calculate the elevation of these data points:

 Contour lines were derived from 1 m light detection and ranging (LiDAR) data.

 A manual (back to basics) estimation of a borehole elevation between adjacent contour lines was done on GIS using this dataset. The data are shown in Figure 10 to be comprised of two classes as sshown in Table 2.

Table 2: Levels of Confidence in Borehole Elevation (By Class)

Error Error or Class Uncertainty Criteria 1 No Error Elevation was provided in source data. 2 1 m Elevation derived from triangulation of points between two contour lines.

Notee: The spatial distribution of boreholes in each class is shown on Figure 10.

4.2. Reference Datums

In the Ngqura Harbour, borehole colllar elevation in the source data is referenced to metres above mean sea level. Transsnet engineers and draughtsmen confirmed the use of mean sea level (msl) as the datum for harbour construction and it was noted

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 15 that the difference in msl over many years varies within a few ccentimetres (G Macfarlane, pers.comm. to V. Mitha, 2011). Elevations in the Coega Geodatabase are therefore referenced to metres above mean sea level (m amsl), as are the source data.

Only one set of boreholes was referenced to Chart Datum in the original source data. Boreehole elevations referenced to Chart Datum were converted to m amsl though the application of a 1.026 m difference in elevation between Chart Datum and msl. This conversion factor was obtained from Transnet (G. Macfarlane pers. comm. to V. Mitha, 2011) and for the purposes of this investigation, was rounded off to 1.03 m. This conforms to Transnet’s usage of the conversion factor.

4.3. Drilling, logging and standardisation of the source data

The data collected and collated during this study was compiled from existing borehole data in the Coega area. The information contained herein and as used for interpretation is based solely on the borehole logs included within the reports. The CGS did not have access to the core itself, which was neither re-assembled during this study nor sampled during this investigation.

The reports source data collected from reports range in age from 1972—2009 with the majority of reports being compiled from the 1990’s to present. Where noted in the source data, drilling methods comprised mud-rotary drilling using 311 mm diameter cone bits, percussion drilling using Scramm drilling rigs, rotary core boreholes in adddition to washboring, diamond- and core drilling supplemented by Standard Penetration Tests (SPT). In a few instances, the use of a vibracore was also employed to retrieve undisturbed samples; however due to the clay-rich environment, the latter method was unsuccessful in producing the estimated volume of undisturbed sediment. Trial pits were general logged from excavations and exposuures in rail cuts andd road cuts or were dug with Poclain excavators, Liebherr 902 excavators, digger loaders or augers. The majority of trial pits were dug/excavated by geo-consultants external to Transnet and were either excavated for geotechnical engineering purposes outside of the Transnet boundary or were excavated to explain the subsurface conditions of any possible structures that might be builtt in future (e.g. Gibb et al. 1997a, 1997b, 1997c).

Where noted in the source data, it is apparent and standard practice that a large proportion of the core was logged by engineering geologists (G. Macfarlane, pers.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 16 comm. to V. Mitha 2013; cf. Price & Hack 2009, pg. 84). The lack of information in the source data makes it uncertain what time frame preceeded core logging activities; with only one report specifically stating that the core was logged onsite (presumably after retrieval). It is also unknown where or how the coore was stored since the report was archived.

After the borehole logs were retrived from the archives of Transnet and other geoconsultants, the data were entered into a database. The database was standardised by V.R. Mitha so as to create the least number of overlapping definitions.

4.4. Limitations in the Characteristics of the Geological Data

A large part of the Coega Geodatabase consists of data sets of borehholes that were drilleed and logged for purposes other than stratigraphic correlation and interpretation. The boreholes were generally loggged by geotechnical engineers from different organisations and with varied training. Hence, the reporting method; and the interpretation of geological data and characteristics differed from professional to professional, both within and amongst organisations. As a result the Coega Geodatabase is generally devoid of geologically descriptive data pertaining to characteristics of depositional environment such as bedding, structure, sorting, fabric, matrix of gravel deposits, proportion of shell or gravel to sand, textural maturity, etc. that lead to better data resolution and improved stratigraphic interpretation.

The limitations of the data with regard to geological interpretations relate to one or more of the following:

1. the purpose of the original drilling investigation (e.g., geotechnical characterisation rather than geological studies with an intent to perform detailed basin analysis); 2. use of professionals untrained in geological (sensu stricto) core-logging methods; 3. lack of a common standard inn core logging; 4. differing resolutions of geological description and geological intterpretation; 5. primary focus on bedrock and secondary focus on sedimentary overburden; and 6. presumably little to no intensive thin-section follow-up to verify lithological characteristics and depositional environment interpretation as required for a

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 17

sound lithofacies correlation investigation (J.S.V. Reddering, pers. comm. to V. Mitha 2011).

Herein lies an inherent standardisation challenge that needs to be considered during lithological correlation and may be one of the factors that severely llimit the overall resolution of this data set.

Where detailed sedimentological characteristics (such as gravel shape and rock- type) were recorded in the source data, these were included in the Geodatabase; andd shown in across (parallel to the shoreline) and longitudinal (perpendicular to the shoreline) profiles.

Standardizing descriptions of the source data was important for reecording all key information consistently and to ensure that descriptive information was retained in the Geodatabase without creating extraneous categories of information. This cross- referencing of similar packages of sediment was done with the utmmost care. For example, lithologically-similar sediment packages of “shelly saand” “coquina”, “coquinite”; and “sand” or “gravelly sand” “with gravel comprising coarse shell fragments” were standardised and included in a single data category termed “shelly sand”. The data standardisation by V.R. Mitha during data capture allowed information to be integrated into a single category already in the databbase.

Direct observations of the core would have allowed for verification of liithological data; improvement in the interpretation; or perhaps reinterpretation of core where borehole log information was insufficient to resolve stratigraphic contacts or typpe of sediments. It is suspected, however, that the majority of this core would have deteriorated significantly since the core were acquired and stored, thereby reducinng their utility.It is also expected that much of the core has since been destroyed. The logistical challenges and lengthy process in reviewing core from more than 500 boreholes, which, if still in storage, are housed in various corporate archives, was beyond the scope of this project.

4.5. Uncertainties in Depth to Bedrock

Depth to bedrock is important in identifying marine shore platforms, their back edges; andd, therefore, palaeoshorelines. Ultimately these data are important in the identification of any neotectonic warping or faulting. Accurate surface aand subsurface

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 18 elevations are therefore of extreme importance and any uncertainties in determining the elevation of the bedrock surface must be documented.

Table 3 outlines the criteria used to assess the level of unceertainty in the identification of the top of bedrock surface. Descriptions of deptths to bedrock organised by cross-section profiles are included in Appendix C. The following information for each borehole is included: the elevation of the ttop of bedrock referenced to msl; the uncertainty in the elevation of the bedrock/sediiment interface; andd a summary of the bedrock compoosition.

Another issue that leads to uncertainty when determining the depth to bedrock is the accurate identification of residual bedrock material in cases where original rock fabric is completely destroyed, discolouration is present and there is a large change in volume (CEMI, 2011; Huat et al. 2001; Price & Hack, 2009; Venter et al. 2002). It is apparent from a world-wide comparison of 18 cases that materials categorised as residual soil are subject to large variation in definition (Huat et al. 2001). Venter et al. (2002) and Huat et al. (2001) descrribe a residual soil as where soiil transport has been minimal to non-existent either during or after formation and where the defining factor is that the soil has developed in situ. Venter et al. (2002) diviide the residual profile into an upper and lower horizon and is reflected in Huat et al. (2001) as depicted in (Figure 23f).  The lower, semi-residual zone is distinguished by inherited structural features such as joint patterns and mineral boundaries from the parent.. The horizon is generally comprised of clayey or sandy silt that grades with depth into a sand or gravel and then into weathered rock (as defined by Huat ett al. [2001] and as depicted in Figure 23f).  The upper, residual horizon is devoid of inherited structures. It generally contains a higher clay content and is commonly expansive (as defined by Huat et al. [2001] and as depiicted in Figure 23f).

The majority of work done by Transnet adopted a definition of residdual bedrock as material that has been weathered, but that has characteristics of the bedrock and not the overlying Cenozoic cover (G. Macfarlane pers. comm. to V. Mitha 2011). According to the definitions providedd in Figure 23f, residual bedrock is defined by its in situ formation and comprises all Grades from I—VI (Huat et al. 20011; Price & Hack 2009; Venter et al. 2002). However,, it is likely that the bedrock in this environment has been stripped of the upper, more weathered horizons, leaving behind the lower

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 19 semi-residual zone of Huat et al. (2001), Price & Hack (2009) and Venter et al. (2002) which Transnet have classsified as residual bedrock. In this part of the database, residual bedrock is considered as in situ rock that has not been affected by any subsequent sedimentary reworking, although it may display a high degree of weathering. It is uncertain whether all loggers, employed by various consultancies, reported the residual material as bedrock or whether some residual material was incorporated into the overlying sediment units.

Based on the drilling methods that employed mud-rotary drillinng, rotary core boreholes, washboring methods and diamond drilling; it is generally impractical to distinguish between residual soil andd transported soil. This uncertainty is quantified in metres by providing a relative uncertaainty bracket in Appendix C. Conffidence Class 2 describing moderate uncertainty therefore relate to instances where ffine-grained silt to ssand with similar parent characteristics overlies bedrock, and where it is recognised that there is some degree of uncertainty in that some residual bedrock may have been incorrectly misinterprreted as sediment. These cases aare identified in the descriptive tables provided in Appendix C and the relative uncertainty is noted. Further discussion is also provided in Table 6 (Section 6.2).

Table 3: Criteria Used to Assess the Elevation of the Top of Bedrock Confidence Uncertainty Class Level Description 1 Low Bedrock was readily distinguishable from the overlying sediments, which were composed of fine-grained sediment or basal bedload conglomerate deposits. 2 Moderate Some uncertainty was evident when the database was being developed. Uncertainty stemmed from the following situatioons:  Core loss when no core was recoverred (NCR) at or above the bedrock surface (core loss eithher from residual bedrock sediment or from the overrlying sediment). During discussion with one of the Senior Transnet engiineers, it was noted that it is not possible to determine exactly where core loss had occurred (G. Macfarlane pers. comm. to V. Mitha 2011).  Where basal depths of overlying sedimentary horizons were given as approximate figures.  Where colour and general sediment composition might be common to both bedrock and cover sediment.

Approximate uncertainty is characterised in metres and the range of elevation relating to the uncertain horizon is tabulated in Appendix C. 3 High Boreholes were not drilled deep enough to intersect bedrockk. Therefore, the interpretation of the bedrock surface is unknown at that location and can only be inferred with

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 20

high uncertainty in some cases based on adjacent borehole data.

Boreholes that do not intersect the bedrrock surface are clearly designated in the cross sections by “whited-out” stratigraphy. In the profiles the stratigraphy below the end of hole (EEOH) is shown as a white column which indicates that no further stratigraphical information exists. Furthermore, a gradational overlay from visible cross section (at the base of the borehole) to white background (at the base of the cross section) indicates that the uncertainty of the stratigraphy increases with depth.

Notee: The levels of uncertainty are used to define the accuracy and confidence of the elevation of the bedrock surface as tabulated in Appendix C.

Along much of the Coega fault zone there was only limited information on the elevation and type of bedrock beneath the cover sediments. A large ppart of the data northwest of the Ngqura Harbour Keywall and along the elevated marrine plateaux in the vicinity of the Coega fault zone is derived from trial pits. The trial pits were excaavated only a few metres into the subsurface. Many of these did not encounter beddrock and were therefore assigned a category 3 Confidence (Table 3, Appendix C). This posed some challenge during the cross-section connstruction and interpretation phase, especially because a major focus of this investigation was to establish the elevation of geomorphic surfaces and marine abrasion surfaces across the Coega fault zone.

4.6. Uncertainties Related to the Identification of Tectonicc Deformation Features and the Location of Major Traces of the Coega Fault Zone

Possible tectonic indicators (such as faulting, fracturing, shattering,, breccias, and slickensiding) that could originate from deformation caused by moovement along traces of the Coega fault zone (or other related faults), were noted in several boreholes. Although shattering and fracturing are commonly indicaative of tectonic activity, there are alternative explanaations, given the geologic setting and nature of the bedrock in the study area. It is possible that that the Mesozoiic strata of the Kirkwood and Sundays River Formations are semiconsolidated; and that the shattering and fracturing could originate from depressurisation of semiconsolidated strata or horizons (G.A. Botha pers. comm. to V. Mitha 2011). Further discussion is contained in Section 9.

Another factor to consider is whether the core was logged at the time at which it was drilleed or if there was a time delay between drilling and logging in which weathering

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 21 andd core decompression may have resulted in shattering and formation of minor deformational features (G.A. Botha pers. comm. to V. Mitha 2011). The assumption made here is that the core was logged soon after it was brought from depth.

On consultation with the principle Transnet engineer, Mr. Grant Macfarlane (pers. comm. to V.R. Mitha 2013), it waas determined that the boreholes logged by Macfarlane (2007) which includes the CD-series of boreholes, the core was sealed in plastic sleeves until the logging occurred, which was delayed by between 1 day to ~4 weeks after the drilling activities. During the fieldwork, the core was stored in a container. It is however uncertain whether the same principles and time-frames were applied for the remainder of the booreholes (e.g. those drilled by Arcus Gibb for Transnet).

The consultation with Mr Macfarlane (pers. comm. to V.R. Mitha, 2013) also revealed that it was either a geotechnical engineer or an engineering geollogist that was responsible for both supervision of the drilling and logging and that none of the investigations were “of a nature to investigate the sites from a geological perspective” andd that “engineering considerations [were] always dictated” (Mr, G. Macfarlane, pers. comm. to V.R. Mitha, 2013). Interpretation and analysis of results would also be a combination of combination of the engineering geologist/ geotechnical engineer andd structural engineer and that there was little opportunity to enhance the undderstanding of the geology through the drilling of additional boreholes or via sampling and testing avenues. Furthermore, engineering geologists and geotechnical engineers play a larger role in the organisation (G. Macfarlane, pers. comm. to V.R. Mitha, 2013).

On the 1:50,000 Port Elizabeth map set produced by the Council for Geoscience in 2000, the main trace of the Coega fault zone is commonly inferred, based on the juxtaaposition of the Sundays River and Kirkwood Formations (CGS 2000; Goedhart 2005). The correct identification of these two formations in borehole logs by the original logger is therefore extremely important for the correct positioning of the Coega fault zone. For example, in some boreholes, the older Kirkwood Formation is reported as overlying the younger Sundays River Formation. In these boreholes, a complete reversal of stratigraphy is attributed to “human error duriing logging” as there is no tectonic evidence (faulting, thrusting, fracturing, shattering, brecciation, etc.) to corroborate a stratigraphic reversal; either in the borehole ittself or in other nearby boreholes. There are several examples where bedrock aappears to be

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 22 erroneously interpreted as Kirkwood Formation, whereas the bedrock in surrounding boreholes are Sundays River Formation, or vice versa. For this reason, bedrock interpretations are indicated at the base of boreholes using standardised lithostratigraphic abbreviations (Jkk,, Ks, Op). Poor field exposures (Shone 1976), coupled with the similarity in appearance of weathered and unweathered Kirkwood andd Sundays River Formations (Section 2.5) could be the cause of bedrock miscclassification.

Due to the fact that the core was not assembled to corroborate the source data interpretation, it is acknowledged thhat there is uncertainty associateed with bedrock classification and therefore in all cross sections, the bedrock classification is provided.With respect to the core itself, macfarlane (pers. comm. to V.R. Mitha, 2013) states that for the Coega area, the majority has probably been lost or destroyed and what may remain might be located either at the Port or at the Johannesburg Head Office.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 23

5. GENERAL PALAEOGEOMOORPOLOGY OF THE BEDROCK SURFACE

The Coega River valley is characterised as a deeply-incised drowned river valley (Cooper 2001). Such valleys are common to the southeastern Cape coastline (Cooper 2001) and have been subjected to several alternating cycles of progradation andd retrogradation in Late Tertiary and Quaternary times. These cycles have imprinted a number of fluvial and marine platforms on the basementt rocks that are preserved in river valleys and adjacent highlands in this area.

The geomorphic history of channel responses, incision, and aggradattion is recorded as fluvial strath terraces and associated deposits (e.g., Pazzaglia 1999). Terraces are best preserved in river valleys that have undergone protracted perriods of incision. Studies of the nearby Sundays River (Hattingh 1996, 2001) identifiedd a sequence of High- and Low-level abandoned river terrace features ranging in age from Late Miocene to present. Hattingh (20001) discusses the developmennt of Low-level terraces in the lower Sundays River Valley with respect to Quaternary sea level fluctuations, with regressive episodes during the Quaternary being rellated to periods of deep incision and steepening of river gradients. The fine-grained sediments of the Low-level terraces in the Sundays River are assumed to have accuumulated during interglacial periods, when rising sea levels choked the river with sediment due to a reduction of the channel gradient.

The distinction between marine and fluvial influences on terrace generation is important. Whereas the orientation of marine terraces is generally parallel to present coastline trends; fluvial terraces are characterised by sub-perpendicular orientations to the marine terraces (Bianca & Caputo 2003). Fluvial and marine terraces represent time-parallel surfaces and can therefore be used to record tectonic uplift (Briddgland & Westaway 2008; Muhs et al. 2004).

Bedrock elevation maps are shown in Figures 11a through 11d with a summary provided in Figure 11. Fluvial strath terraces have been identified and marked on Profiles A through R (Figures 12 throough 22).

5.1 Fluvial Geomorphology

It is beyond the scope of this projeect to fully describe or attempt to unravel the complex interactions between passive margin eustatic, climatic and isostatic processes that have led to the formation of fluvial terraces and deposits in the lower

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 24

Coega River valley. This is particularly difficult to do, given the limited information on the sedimentary textures, structures and fossils available in the Coega Geodatabase andd lack of age-control for any of the deposits. Some observations, hoowever, can be made, based on the subsurface information and cross sections developed from these data.

5.1..1. Palaeochannel Incision and Morphology of the Coega River

As noted by Anderson et al. (1999), the long profiles of the largest ffluvial channels that drain a rising massif, retain for some time the signature of the complex fluctuations in base level that the stream has encountered through many glacial cycles. The width of the shelf, across which the base-level effects must propagate, the duration of the lowstand, and the efficiency of channel inciision (which is dependent upon basin characteristics and precipitation) all influence tthe migration of knickpoints from sea-level lowstands.

Bremner and Day (1991) published shoreline bathymetry for Algoa Bay as compiled from seismic records collected during an intensive multi-disciplinary geophysical investigation and which show that sea-floor gradient in the study area markedly decreases at depths deeper than ––11m (Glass and Du Plessis 1980). Previous studies of the Algoa Basin mapped incised palaeochannels of the Coega River both onshore and offshore onto the continental shelf (Bremner 1991a, 1991b; Du Plessis & Glass 1981, 1991). These findings are supported by the seismic investigations of Bremner & Day (1991) which identified palaeochannels from profiles northwest of the Riy Bank; however due to the poor quality of the source data, it is not included in Figure 4.

Onshore at the northern end of the Eastern Coega fault study area near the junction between the Swartkops Lineament annd the Cerebos Saltworks, the bedrock elevation maps show that the Coega palaeochannel is incised to a depth off approximately seveen metres below sea level (Figure 22). To the south, in the SSaltworks area (Figures 1 and 11d), the palaeo-Coega River eroded down to –20 m amsl. In the Ngqura Harbour area, the palaeobedrock channel occurs at a minnimum depth of approximately –27 m amsl. Here the deepest part of the palaeochannel lies to the east of the Harbour Keywall, within the confines of the Ngqura Harrbour (BH 227, located at the end of the Ngqura Harrbour retaining wall, Figures 11d and 17). Further offshore the channel morphology remains asymmetrical with more appparent terrace straths or wave-cut platforms preserved on the western side of the valley as shown in

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 25

Profiles H, I, and K (Figures 15 and 16). Although available borehole data do not provide information to assess the maximum depth of the palaeochannel south of Profile J (Figure 16), Bremner & Day (1991, their Figure 7.4) show thee continuation of the channel across the shelf from this area to the shelf break as included in Figure 4.

In the western part of Algoa Bay, Bremner & Day (1991) identiffied two major palaeoriver channels in seismic records, where they incise into Cretaceous and Palaeogene strata. The channels trraverse from north to south acrooss the western part of the Algoa Bay to a present depth of around 85 m. The landwward extents are traced back to the Coega and Sundays Rivers. The channels on the upper part of the shelf may to 2–3 km wide, due perrhaps to meandering or flood-plain erosion, and appear to be less than 5 m deep along most of their length. On a mapp showing depth to bedrock in Algoa Bay, possible knickpoints in offshore channels of the Coega and Sundays Rivers are observed at depths of ~70 m below sea level, rroughly 20—27 km offshore to the west and east of Riy Bank (Figure 4), respectively (Bremner & Day 1991). During the Last Glacial Maximum, during marine isotope staage (MIS) 2 the shoreline was just beyond (south) of the -110 m palaeoshoreline as shown on Figure 4.

5.1..2. Fluvial Strath Terraces inn the Coega River Valley

Fluvial terraces and channels are best preserved within the central portions of the Coega River valley and offshore of the present shoreline. Profile R (Figgure 22) shows that there are terraces preserved on the eastern margin of the Coega River valley adjacent to the eastern portion of the Coega Plateau in the N2 area,, but not on the western margin, which suggests asymmetric development (Gibling 2006). Towards the coast in Profiles O, N, I, H, and K (Figures 19, 18, 16 and 15), channels are cut into bedrock platforms occurring below sea level along the western margin of the Coega river valley, adjacent to the Coega and Amsterdamhoek Plateaux. These lower channels occur between –15 and –18 m below sea level. (Figures 12 through 22) and are backed by palaeocliffs that follow a northwest-southeast trend.

The overall change in the position off the deepest palaeochannels of the Coega River suggests a progressive change fromm westerly migration of the river channel near the N2 to a more easterly migration of the channel towards the coast; the latter showing similarity to terraces in the Sundays River (Hattingh 2001). Towards the landward extent of the Amsterdamhoek Plateau and the Swartkops lineamentt (in the middle reaches of the Saltworks), the Coega River palaeochannel appears to occupy the

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 26 central part of the valley, suggesting a symmetric form (Gibling 2006). The bedrock terraces near the coast, however, suggest easterly migratiion that was contemporaneous with incision.

Both low- and high-relief terraces arre identified in the Uitenhage Group basement. On a global scale, whereas the former are inferred to have formed from gradual sea- level changes or stillstands for considerable time; the latter are characterised by poor to very poor expression (cf. Alvarez-Marron et al. 2008; Anderson et al. 1999; Hearty et al. 2007) and it is inferred that similar time frames and sea-levell changes have occurred and which have produced similar terraces in the Coega study area. In the palaeo-environment in the Coega study area, the high landward terraces are well- developed low-relief features; whereaas fluvial dissection is more charraacteristic of the southern seaward components.

5.1..3. Palaeotributaries in the Coega River Valley

The palaeotopography of the bedrock surface mimics the present-day topography in that there is similarity between the fluvial bedrock cliffs and the palaeofluvial bedrock cliffs along both the western and easttern banks.

Evidence for the presence of small side-tributary channels to the Coega River was identified onshore. The middle segment in Profile A (Figure 12) shows palaeotributary morphology along the western Coega River valley eedge. Between Boreeholes N4 and R15, there are two U-shaped tributaries incised intto bedrock. The northernmost palaeochannel shows 13 m of incision to a depth of –12 m amsl (in Boreehole N36), whereas the southerly channel is incised to ~6.5 m aamsl (Borehole R10). Both the channels are asymmetric with a gently sloping northerrly lee bank and a steep southerly cut bank. The channel bottoms form erosional lows.

Steep palaeofluvial cliffs (Figures 11, 11b and 11d) are dissected in places by steeper and younger fluvial channels as headward erosion does not extend far into the terraces. The fact that several of the sea-cliffs and river cliffs preserve a steep gradient, in some cases with a minimum elevation difference of 10 m, suggests that mass wasting did not play a big role in the morphological devellopment of the landscape (cf. Anderson et al. 1999; Pazzaglia in press), especiallly in the older terraces.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 27

The absence of significant palaeochannels incised into the marine terrace plateaux, east and west of the Coega River valley, suggest that the Coega River has been confined to the same general valley at least since development of the higher surfaces andd deposition of the Alexandria Formation in the Miocene (e.g., LLe Roux 1987, 1989a, 1990a).

5.2 Palaeo-islands

Five high points or islands are recognised in the bedrock surface contour maps:

1. Palaeo-island A is a coast-paarallel feature at an elevation of 43 m amsl that is located to the east of the Coega River and Harbour Keywall on the Amsterdamhoek Plateau (Figure 11d). 2. Palaeo-island B is a rounded island top at 50 m amsl elevation (north of both the N2 and Saltworks (Figure 11a) in the eastern sector of the Coega Plateau. The island lies to the east of the Coega palaeochannel and at the edge of the palaeocliffs bordering the present river valley. The island has been modified by recent stream incision. 3. Palaeoisland C (Figure 11c) is an elongate, coast-parallel feaature that rises above the general topography at elevations of over 50 m amsl southeast of the Coega Kop Quarry. This rridge occurs on the Coega Plateau, bordered by the quarry, Neptune Interchaange and Saltworks. The island appears to be a northeast-southwest-trending palaeodune cordon comprised off the Alexandria Formation (Figures 2 and 3). 4. Palaeo-island D (Figure 110c) occurs on the Amsterdamhoek Plateau east of the Aldo Scribante Race Track and is an elongate feature perpendicular to the coastline. The island rises above the general topography aat elevations of over 40 m amsl. The eastern border is constrained as a linear feature by bedrock morphology. The southern border is in a coast-parallel orientation and therefore is likely marine bevelled. 5. Palaeo-island E is an east-west elongate feature located at Coega Kop (Figure 110b).

The linearity in the headland and other landform expressions (Figures 11d and 11e) could be explained by changes in wind direction and wave refraction along and around the headland (e.g., Bird 2008). The underlying geology, jointts and/or faults are also probable influences in the formation of linear landform features. The

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 28 generally steep marine palaeocliffs range in height from 10—50 m (FFigure 11c and 11dd) which suggests that the landscape formed largely devoid of mass wasting.

Two palaeo-islands at Coega Kop and the palaeoheadland (Section 5.3) likely emerged following retreat of the coastline during the Late Pliocene/Early Pleistocene (Goedhart & Hattingh 1997).

5.3 Coastal Palaeogeomorphology

Marine cliffs border the coastline in the Ngqura Harbour area. Along the western sector of the Amsterdamhoek Platform west of the Harbour Keywall (Figures 11c and 11dd), a square-shaped headland is developed in bedrock of the Kirkwood Formation. The surface elevation of the palaeoheadland, identified from this investigation, drops from 30+ m amsl to an elevation of –10 m amsl. The headland appears to be steeper along the eastern and southern eddges relative to its southeastern margin. The eastern margin is far more irregular in topography compared to the southeastern and southern margins, and this may be ddue to channel-incision processes as described by Anderson et al. (1999) in their analysis of the erosion and degraddation of marine terraces. Furthermore, because the headland area is underlain by thhe lithologically weak Kirkwood Formation, it is surmised that enhanced cliff erosion via palaeofluvial andd marine erosional processes conntributed to its formation, as would be suggested by numerical simulations of marine terrace formation presented in Anderson et al. (1999).

Generalised contours of the top of bedrock show two broad flats betwween a) 0 m and 10 m amsl; and b) 10 m and 20 m amsl are ascribed to formation during multiple extended sea-level stillstands. Both these platforms are visible wesst of the Coega River valley in the vicinity of the Harbour keywall.

The palaeoheadland forms a palaeosea-cliff ~50 m in height, with evidence of a submerged marine terrace shoreline angle at approximately –8±1 m amsl, at its base (as addressed in Section 7 and Table 8). It is postulated that the headland should be bordered by a flight of closely-spaced terraces on the southwestern,, seaward side, although there is at present insuffficient data available to determine the precise locations or elevations thereof. These data are conformable with the field reconnaissance investigations of Goedhart (2005) who identified an anomalously high hill or palaeoheadland in the appproximate vicinity of Borehole N15 (Figure 19) along the northern edge of the palaeoheadland. The palaeoheadland consists of

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 29

Kirkwood Formation mudrock and is surrounded and covered by onlapping marine gravels and aeolian sediment of the Salnova and Nahoon Formattions (Goedhart 2005).

Abandoned, coast-parallel, low-relieef and marine-bevelled plateaux increase in elevation in a stepwise fashion in a landward progression (Figures 11 and 24). A primary example of this feature is the Coega Plateau that is separated from the seaward Amsterdamhoek Plateau by the Swartkops Lineament. The northern bouundary of the Coega Plateau is bordered by the Saltpan Escarpment at the junction with the higher Grassridge Plateau. Both are present north and west of the study area. The Coega Plateau is covered by palaeobeach ridges and swales assoociated with episodic stillstands of sea level during subsequent marine regressions (Goedhart & Hattingh 1997; Le Roux 1989a; Stear 1987). Landscape morphology suggests that marine bevelling was moderated by the dissipation of wave energy caused by the existence of sandy beaches (cf. Anderson et al. 1999).

Some palaeocliffs north of the junction between the N2 and Cega River valley are in the region of 30 m-high which suggests stable palaeosea levels over extended time periods. This and the fact that the terraces are generally of low-relief and are well- developed, perpetuates the interpretation that sea level remained at constant elevations over time (cf., Alvarez-Maarron et al. 2008; Anderson et al. 11999; Hearty et al. 2007). Erosional palaeoshorelines of marine derivation are addressed in detail in Section 7.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 30

6. NATURE AND VARIABILITY OF THE POST-CRETACEOUS DEPOSITS

Depositional facies and their contextual associations may impart infformation about the interaction of fluvio-marine and terrestrial dynamics. These concepts are used in stratigraphical classification, correlaation and interpretation (e.g., Catuneanu 2010; Murphy & Salvador 1998) and are widely applied to determine depositional history andd to interpret sea level changes (e..g., Carr et al. 2010; Dashtgard & Gingras 2007).

Fluvio-marine sediments of Tertiary to Quaternary age bury the palaaeotopographic surface in the Ngqura Harbour area. The cover sediments are mainly sandy and are interspersed with gravels and minor hhorizons of silt and clay. The sand horizons may contain shell fragments and calcareous nodules. The sedimennts are largely unconsolidated, except for sporadic and laterally-limited calcrettised horizons. Moderate to high lithological variatiion occurs in across-channel proofiles, whereas moderate variation is observed in channel-parallel profiles. The borehole logs in the source data describe similar lithological variation to that observed in ttwo- and three- dimensional outcrops in excavations and other exposures.

Several cross sections (Profiles A through R) were constructed using the Coega Geodatabase (Figures 12 through 22). The cross sections show lithology and contain, where available, descriptive information relating to depositional environments. The legends for the cross sections follow Figures 8a and 8b and are based on Witt (1995).

The Cenozoic sediments were depoosited on pre-Cenozoic strata, which comprise both softer and harder lithologies, the latter having formed rocky inter-tidal platforms within the Coega River palaeochannel. The cross sections (Figures 12–22) show a complex history of infill and erosion in the coastal region of the Coega River valley. Sediments, in analogous settings elsewhere, generally were depositted during sea- level highstands in interglacial periods (correlative with odd-numbered marine isotope stages) (Pedoja et al. 2011).

A widespread conglomerate overlies the Uitenhage Group basement or Peninsula Formation quartzite.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 31

6.1. Depositional Facies

Based primarily on lithology, the sediments overlying the Mesozoic basement are subdivided according to depositional facies (Figure 8b). Several depositional facies were identified in the dataset, represented schematically in Figure 8. Table 4 provides a summary of the facies that were differentiated and the interpretation of the depositional environment of these facies.

The borehole logs, compiled from the source data, commonly show facies as a primary log section with the corresponding symbol(s) (within or to tthe side of the borehole representation) that indicate the type and degree of calcareous sediment or calcretisation inferred from the original log description.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 32

Table 4: Facies descriptions and interpretations Facies Description Interpretation A Conglomerate Deposition in a high-energy fluvial or marine environment, more likely o Overwhelmingly monomictic (quartzite)(including very the latter if associated with bioclasts. Possible interpretations and range minor proportions of mudstone/siltstone and coquinite) of marine depositional environments: o well-rounded to subrounded  Well-rounded clast-supported gravels with sandy matrix suggests o clasts of variable size, generally between 10 and 160 gravel beach deposits (Carr et aal. 2010; Smuts 1987) mm in diameter (where noted in the source data).  Calcarenite/conglomerate intercalations interpreted to represent  Thickness: 0.2—8.4 m fairweather/stormweather intercalations (Smuts 1987)  Matrix:  Possibly storm berm or upper shoreface storm deposits (Smuts o predominantly unknown (due to poor recovery) but 1987) where present is a mixture of sand, silt, and clay  Pebble-sized clasts in abundant coarse-grained sandstone matrix  In places, interbedded with ~0.5 m to 1.5 m thick sand, clay suggests transgressive lag deposits (Zecchin et al. 2004) and shelly gravel horizons (e.g., BH T2 in Figure 15, BH  Tidal control on the deposition of conglomerate (Dashtgard & BKS2 in Figure 13 and BH Q9 in Figure 16, respectively). Gingras 2007):  Can be associated with laterally-restricted mud and silt o anomalously thick gravel sequences, particularly in horizons transgressive settings  Can be associated with shelly gravel of Facies C in a lateral o association of gravel beaches and deltas with salt-marsh or vertical direction (e.g., BH 160 in Figure 13, BH 141 in deposits Figures 14 and 19, BH 105 in Figure 1e2, BH Q9 in Figure o increase in the amount and extent of mud deposition 16, BH Q1 in Figure 20, BH 310 in Figure 22). o deep channel incision at the landward end of the beach  Basal contact always sharp o suggesting probable marginal-marine origin, likely representing  Stratigraphic position: overlie the Uitenhage Group ancient shorelines, more specifically, transgressive lags that basement, generally in a continuous blanket. mark significant erosion surfaces

The basal gravel lag is evident in Profiles A through R (Figures Fluvial gravels can also be as rounded as marine gravels (Miall 1996). 12 through 22). However, without any indication of imbrication, it is difficult to distinguish between the two depositional environments. B Gravels not associated with the basal erosion surface Channel gravel facies: Products of channel deposition  Lithology similar to Facies A  Remnant bars within a channel or channel scour deposits o Overwhelmingly monomictic (quartzite)(including very (Chakraborty 2006) due to chance abandonment and burial (Miall minor proportions of mudstone/siltstone and coquinite): 1996) o well-rounded to subround habit o clasts of variable size, generally between 10 and 160

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 33

Facies Description Interpretation mm in diameter (where noted in the source data).  Matrix: o predominantly unknown (due to poor recovery) but where present is a mixture of sand, silt, and clay  Display limited lateral extent (e.g., BH P2 in Figurre 12, BH 138 in Figure 13)  Generally mantled by sand and finer-grained silt and clay horizons  Occur higher-up in the stratigraphy  Overlie both sand and finer-grained silt and clay horizons  Can be associated with shelly gravel horizons (e.g. BH P2 in Figure 12, BH 132 in Figure 20)

The Facies B gravel is represented in Profiles G (Figure 15) I (Figure 16) M, N (Figure 18), O (Figure 19) and P (Figure 20). C Shelly sandy gravel grading to coquina  Shelly gravel facies: Deposition in high-energy environment  Inferred to consist of a higher proportion of comminuted such as storm beach or upper shoreface environments (Smuts shells compared to quartz. 1987)  Generally, shell type is not detailed in the source data but  Bivalves, gastropods and echinoids may have diagnostic where given it is known to consist of bivalves (including significance (Zecchin et al. 2004). oysters), gastropods, and echinoids.

Note that sand with “abundant shell fragments” was not included in Facies B because it appeared as though the shell content was too low.

The shelly gravel deposits are evident in Profiles A through R (Figures 12 through 2e2). D Greenish grey to black sand silt and clay Deposition in a restricted environment such as lagoon or estuary  Grey, khaki, olive, green and/or black fine grained  Clay and silt laid down during fair-weather conditions and sand sediments during storm washover events (cf. Zecchin et al. 2004).  May contain shell fragments (although it is uncertain  Silty/muddy and sandy intercalations may represent times at which whether the presence or absence of the shell fragments the estuary was cut off by storm washover lobes resulting in an

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 34

Facies Description Interpretation were consistently reported in the original data set and enclosed lagoon (Smuts 1987); also see Facies E, F and G. separate facies were therefore not distinguished based on  Variable colour gradations (Potter et al. 2005): their presence or absence) Sediment may have sulphurous o green to olive drab, dark greenish grey with silty to sandy odours and organic material. with roots, coarse to fine organic matter is suggestive of flood plain or lower shoreface environment Facies D sediment is prevalent throughout the Coega River o black to dark grey silty to sandy sediment with palaeochannel as is evident in Profiles A through R (Figures 12 disseminated fine organic debris is suggestive of lagoonal through 22). or muddy estuary environment o highly pyritic black sediment is suggestive of a poorly- ventilated setting Like other South African estuaries (Cooper 2001), the Coega palaeo- estuary deposits could be classified as microtidal; at least in the distal sector and was to some extent affected by inlet, wave and tidal currents. E Shelly Sand  Sand facies: Variable depositional environment – fluvial,  Predominantly fine-grained but medium and coarse grain tidal, estuary sizes are present.  Due to the fact that the sediments are largely unconsolidated,,  Coarser grain sizes generally but not always associated there is a lack of information on primary sedimentary structures with Facies C shelly gravel. which limits interpretation  Generally characterised by variable but unspecified  Presence of shelly material and association with gravels and proportions of shell fragments. fines suggests a suggests a lower to upper shorface setting in  In places, gravel lags comprising gravel clasts and/or shell some instances fragments may be present.  Thicker accumulations of finer and evenly grained sand may be  Silt- and clay-rich gradations also present. Note: Although aeolian in origin the variations in sand are schematically included in Figure 8a, these divisions are not explored further. Range from well-indurated to unconsolidated and may contain secondary carbonate accumulation in the form of pedotubules, pipes, nodules, veins and veinlets. Sand horizons are common in all Profiles (Figures 12 through 22). F Silt, clayey silt and sandy silt Deposition from suspension load in fluvial, lagoonal or marine  May contain shell fragments (e.g., BH N36 in Figure 12) or environments whole shells of unspecified type (e.g., BH R17 in Appendix In a terrestrial environment (fluvial):

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 35

Facies Description Interpretation B)  In fluvial settings deposition occurs in abandoned channels, and in  Association of silt horizons with sulphurous odours, roots; overbank areas Miall (1996) and secondary calcareous nodules and fragments  During low-flow stage, similar processes operate within channels  Dominant colour is brown to grey and green (Miall 1996)  Gleyed horizons present  Presence of roots indicates a terrestrial setting  Pale varieties also reported  Streaks and lenses within sand or clay horizons In a marine environment:  Component in gravel matrix  The association of whole shells within clay/silt deposits is taken to represent deposition in a lagoon, estuarine or coastal mudflat environment. G Clay including sandy clay and silty clay  Pervasive clay and silt drapes/deposits interpreted to indicate basin  Pale and light colours present – cream to buff, pale grey deepening or large variations in relative sea level rise (Potter et al. and pale green, etc. 2005).  Variable colour especially when combined with fine grained  The depositional environment is thought to be of coastal mud flat, sand – yellow brown, brown, green, green-grey, etc. lagoon, or deposition relating to abandoned channels (Potter et al.  Thickness: <0.5 m to 8 m (e.g. Boreholes R11 and 1 in 2005). Figure 12)  The presence of pyrite in BH 10 (Appendix B) suggests that some  Streaks and lenses in sand-rich horizons; can also be accumulation occurred within a marine environment (c.f. Potter et fissured al. 2005).  May include shell fragments  Pyrite was noted in silty- and sandy clay in BH 10 (Appendix B)  Component in gravel matrix

H Calcrete (sensu stricto or sensu lato) Calcrete: Lithified or predominantly lithified sedimentary assemblage  Secondary carbonate accumulation as nodules, powdery due to subaerial exposure material or hard pan  Not a primary depositional feature, but rather secondary in nature,  Can include indurated to semi-indurated horizons of all other imprinted onto the sediment after aerial exposure either through Facies weathering of the calcareous components after the sediments are abandoned by a retreating shoreline or through groundwater Four basic calcrete types were identified from the source data in the processes. Coastal calcretes are typically pedogenic which occurs Coega Geodatabase that correspond to four of the pedocrete stages when solution of detrital carbonate by meteoric waters cause

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 36

Facies Description Interpretation described by Netterberg (1969), Gießleer (2012) and the SABS subsurface reprecipitation. This forms a leached upper horion (2012). These are nodular calcrete, calcified gravel and sand, characterised by quartz and a lower underlying calcrete horizon. hardpan calcrete and boulder calcrete. Calcrete of groundwater origin may be deposited as thin laminar Calcified gravel consists of massive and well-cemented gravel. calcretes without typically pedogenic features. Both may occur in the same profile (cf. Knox 1977).  Nodular calcrete consists of silcrete soft to very hard, silt to  Sub-aerially exposed marine or aeolian sediments that lithified after gravel-size concretions, normally in a matrix of calcareous formation during a sea level regression (cf. Glass & Du Plessis soil. The overall consistency of the horizon might be loose 1980; Galili et al. 2007; Netterberg 1969) forming calcrete although the nodules can be firm to very hard rock.  Secondary Carbonate accumulation can be attributed to  In hardpan calcrete the nodules amalgamated to form an groundwater processes (leaching from the upper profile and impermeable sheet-like horizon. It has a complex internal deposition in the lower part of the soil profile). fabric and normally a sharp upper and gradational lower  Nodular calcrete: early likely active stage of development contact. (Netterberg 1969).  Boulder calcrete represents the weathered fragments of  Calcified gravel and sand in a fluvial environment: thick, massive hardpan calcrete and consists of boulder and cobble-sized and well-cemented – calcified after formation due to lowering of calcrete fragments contained in weakly mineralised soil water table or intense evaporation conditions (Netterberg 1969)  Hardpan calcrete exposed along watercourses and pans: final stage of development due to coalescing of nodular calcrete and/or Calcrete of partial and well-indurated nature is prevalent in all decrease in leaching depth (Netterberg 1969) Profiles especially those towards the coast (Figures 12 through  Boulder calcrete: weathered hardpan calcrete, often within non- 22). calcareous sediments (Netterberg 1969)

Without reference to the core, it is uncertain to which formative process the carbonate accumulation can be attributed, as also described by Nash & McLaren (2003).

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 37

As interpreted in the Coega Geodatabase, Cenozoic sediments werre deposited in marine and non-marine environments. The non-marine deposition comprises aeolian, lacustrine, alluvial and fluvial settings. The marine depositionall environments comprise shallow-water settings and transitional environments such as lagoons, beaches, deltas and tidally influenced environments.

Generally, terrestrial environments display an absence of shelly material, whereas the marine environment is usually characterised by shell-beariing sediments. However, not all marine deposits contain shell, due either to the abssence from the setting concerned or their subsequent removal by leaching.

6.2. Lateral Correlation

One of the objectives of this study was to identify laterally extensive chronostratigraphic horizons and to then evaluate whether these horizons or geomorphic features show any vertical displacement that can be attributed to neotectonic processes. For this reason, attempts were made to evaluate whether broad erosion surfaces or depositionaal packages can be correlated accross the Coega River valley and also along the broad elevated marine terraces to the east and west. Such endeavours link the Coega study site to the main Marine Terrace Investigations further west at Thyspunt and more regionally as undertaken by Hanson et al. (2012).

A dearth of detailed sedimentological data in the data set means that the recognition of specific depositional environments is not always possible. In addittion, the drilling methods employed (i.e. washboring, core drilling, percussion drilling and SPT) are not conducive to the preservation of detailed sedimentological data annd sedimentary struuctures. Instead, the primary distiinguishing characteristics used to identify broad chronostratigraphic horizons in the study area and tend to be based on grain size, colour and presence or absence of calcareous material (such as shells, carbonate noddules and indurated carbonate horizons). The most useful marker horizons consisted of Facies B gravels (Table 4), Facies C shelly gravel/coquina (Table 4) and Facies C shelly gravels, in which diistinct shell types were noted (Table 6). Marker horizons were in general either limited in lateral or vertical extent, or occurred in clusters and this hindered the subddivision of the Cenozoic cover sediments into depositional packages.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 38

Colour variation was homogeneous and considered an unreliable characteristic to derive any useful indication in subdividing the cover sediments. Taable 5 gives a description of the various marker horrizons investigated during stratigraphic analysis.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 39

Table 5: Marker horizons in the Eastern Coega study area Type Description Lateral variability and correlation

Marker Basal gravel consisting of quartzite clasts with Basal gravel horizons are recognized in several boreholes at varying elevations. This horizon A: minor mudstone/siltstone and coquiinite. horizon largely occurs as a persistent gravel overlying bedrock, although it is not Gravel present everywhere (as detailed in Table 4). Note that higher-up in the sequence, laterally restricted horizons of gravel may occur within the sandy sequence (cf. Table 4). Marker Horizons: Shelly gravel Marker Shelly gravel was used as one of the primary Shelly gravel horizons were only extensive enough to correlate across a few adjacent horizon A: marker horizons as it occurrs on more than one boreholes. Lateral and up-dip extension is limited by lateral variability as described in Shelly gravel stratigraphic horizon as noted in several boreholes Section 6. in Profiles A through R (Figures 12 through 22).

Marker Four distinct types of possible shell markers The shell beds are generally laterally restricted thereby restricting use as a horizon B: comprising bivalves, echinoids, oysters, and stratigraphic marker. Shelly gravel gastropods are reported in the Coega with distinct Geodatabase. In most cases theese are reported shell types differently in different data sets that make up the Coega Geodatabase. Although oysters are a type of bivalve, the distinction between oyster- and bivalve beds in the original data set is retained, because of the geographic and elevation differences. Table 6 gives a description of the horizons, their elevations and thicknesses.

Marker Oyster beds between 1.6 and 0.3 m thick are These beds occur as single horizons in each of three boreholes spaced ~100 m horizon B1: reeported from three boreholes west of the Harbour apart. Oyster Beds Keywall (Figure 25; see Table 6 for a description of the pertinent characteristics. Marker Gravels with a high proportion of comminuted The bivalve marker beds occur at elevations between +1.6 and –9.0 m amsl in horizon B2: bivalve shells were documented from boreholes in elevation. Profile X (Figure 26) shows three boreholes that encountered bivalve Bivalve Beds the harbour area (Figures 26 and Figure 7 for horizons. The top of the bivalve marker horizon varies in elevation between –3.1 and profile location). They vary in thickness from 0.1— –6.5 m. Profiles T to W (Figure 26; and Figures 11d and 7 for profile location) suggest

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 40

Type Description Lateral variability and correlation 7.4 m and are commonly associated with green, that the top of the bivalve marker horizon dips gently seawards. grey, or black (estuarine) sediments of Facies D. Marker Horizons: Palaeosols Marker Palaeosols and old land surfaces: No thorough Palaeosols and old land surfaces: horizon C1: description of palaeosols exist in the data base, but Gleyed horizons: Gleyed horizons are common along the elevated marine-bevelled Palaeosols several references were noted that suggests the plateaux east and west of the Coega River valley. They are commonly associated presence of pedogenic horizons. Major keywords with organic matter and in places with ferruginised material lower down in the profile. that could be related to the identification of a palaeosol in the Coega Geodatabase are: “roots”, Roots: Reference to roots, rootlets (see definition in New Zealand Geotechnical “palaeosols”, “pedogenic”, “lumpps”, “old land Society 2005) and other forms of roots is present in the source data and have been surface”, “wasp borings”, “gleyed” and “runnels”. included in the Coega Geodatabase and Profiles (Figures 12 through 22). Other possible keywords identified are “fissured”, “ccleaved”, “polished surfaces”, “shattered”, Slickensiding: Slickensiding in the Cenozoic sedimentary succession has been “shattered soil”, “shattered soil”, “slickensided” and recorded in several trial pits and boreholes that intersect the high-level terraces and in “microshattered”. one borehole that occurs along a slightly elevated palaeospur of the Coega River valley (Borehole A3, Figure 21). Slickensiding was overwhelmingly absent in the bulk Although a few boreholes may have characteristics of the boreholes within the Coega River valley. of palaeosols at similar heights, the palaeosols are generally laterally restricted. The thickest of palaeosols are within the Ngqura Harbour area (up to ~10 m in thickness) whereas the thinnest are along the elevated marine-bevelled plateaux to the west and east of the Coega River valley. Although a few boreholes may have characteristics of palaeosols at similar heights, the palaeosols are generally laterally restricted.

The majority of palaeosols identified in the Coega Geodatabase are situated close to the bedrock surface. Along the elevated plateaux, topsoil dominates. Marker Four basic calcrete types were identified from the Carbonate palaeosol horizons are significant and pervasive; however despite the horizon C2: source data in the Coega Geodatabase. These are apparent lateral continuity as shown in constructed cross sections, the correlations Carbonate nodular calcrete, calcified gravel and sand, hardpan may not be real. It is difficult to separate one depositional package from the next and calcrete and boulder calcrete and where the the apparent correlations may be an artefact of the level of detail in the source data. carbonate consolidated possible palaeoshoreline deposits.

In some instances, descriptions from the source

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 41

Type Description Lateral variability and correlation data implied that the logger used “ccalcareous” as a synonym for shell-bearing; whereas in other instances it was evident that “calcareous” was used to describe some type of calcretisation. In the case of the former instance, there is some uncertainty in the degree of weathering.

Interpreted Profiles A through R therefore show (wherever possible) the primary depositional facies with overprints of calcrete/calcretised sediment. Marker Horizon: Chert/silcrete duricrusts and erosion thereof Marker Silcrete horizons are included here as four Chert/silcrete was encountered in Boreholes 126 and 10 in the Coega River valley as Horizon D: occurrences of hardpan silcrete, five of silcrete calcretised chert cappings on sediment horizons or as gravel fragments of Chert/silcrete gravel and three instances of silcrete nodules were undetermined rounding. and reecorded in the database. chert/silcrete Silcrete was present in Boreholes 122 and TH 7; and in Trial Pits TH33, B4, PB5 and pebbles TP13. The four occurrences of silcrete are in sediment packages as silcrete gravels which are generally found to overlie bedrock terraces in the Coega River valley at elevations just above sea level, at ~50 m and above 100 m amsl.

Chert/silcrete horizons and the erosional remnants and gravel products are laterally restricted and do not form a viable stratigraphic marker. Sediment packages identified on the basis of colour variations Sediment Colour is a descriptive characteristic included in the The Coega Geodatabase consists of an overwhelming proportion of green-grey to packages source data. Once the data were compiled into black coloured sediment that is punctuated by pink, orange, brown to red-brown identified on cross sections, it was evident that there were few sediment. The differences in sediment colour, whether combined in small variations or the basis of laterally extensive horizons which could have acted large colour variations, did not offer a suitable method whereby the cover sediments large colour as markers. Colour variation in the sediment was overlying the palaeobedrock surface could be subdivided. The graphical logs showing variations used to determine whether this could aid in the variation in sediment (Profiles A through AN) are however shown with large colour subdividing the sediments into broad packages of variations as defined in Figure 8. sediment possibly representative of depositional packages.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 42

As can be seen in Figures 12—22, a persistent gravel lag overlies the bedrock– sediment interface. This facies is not omnipresent, with a silty clay (Borehole 7, Figure 12), a shelly gravel in Borehole 105 (Profile G, Figure 15) and a calcareous sand in Borehole 151 (Profile H, Figure 15) overlying the bedrock contact. The basal lag is generally overlain by a sand sequence (especially in the Coegga River valley), interspersed with laterally restricted horizons of gravel, shelly gravel, silt and clay.

Some general observations can be made from Profiles A through R (Figures 12 through 22). In the Coega River valley, Facies A (quartzite pebble-cobble conglomerate) is present in the overwhelming majority of boreholes tthat intersected the bedrock. Examples of boreholes based by other lithologies are giveen in Table 4.

In some boreholes, horizons of Facies C shelly gravel blanketeed the bedrock palaeosurface. In Borehole 105 (Profile G in Figure 15) bedrock was encountered at ~-15 m amsl and is overlain by a 3..0 m thick shelly gravel horizon. In Borehole C3 represented in Profile K (Figure 16), the sediments are also underlain by a basal 3.2 m thick shelly gravel horizon. The borehole is possibly represented by a bedrock crenulation at ~-11 m amsl, but there is currently insufficient evidence to determine whether an extensive terrace exists at this elevation. Similar conditions exist in Boreehole 218 in Profile M (Figure 18) in which bedrock was encounttered at ~-14 m amsl and is overlain by 3.0 m of shellly gravel.

Boreehole 310 is located approximmately 2.8 kilometres inland and contains the northernmost occurrence of shelly gravel (Figure 13) at an elevation oof between sea level and -1 m below sea level. There are a number of singular (e.gg., BH 105) and stacked (Boreholes 302, 304, 113, 123) shelly sand shoreline deposits on land, whereas isolated upper-shoreface gravelly deposits become more prevalent towards the coast (specifically, Borehole 131).

Despite the wealth of data contained in the Coega Geodatabase, it proved impossible to consistently distinguish between marine and terrestriall environments, as data resolution was frequently insuufficient to make undertake interppretations.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 43

6.3. Apparent Shallow Subsurrfface Deformation Features Within Cover Sediments in the Eastern Coega Study Area

Slickensiding, and associated structuures within palaeosols was brieflly addressed in Table 5. And although the keywords in Table 5 can be characteristic of palaeosols; these characteristics can also refer to processes other than soil formation and slickensiding generally refers to earrtth movement in relation to expansive soils and negates a tectonic origin.

6.3..1. Definitions of Shallow Subsurface Deformation Characteristics

The following definitions of the keywords listed above and in Table 5 have been compiled from a SABS draft (2012), Venter et al. (2002) and Vermaak (2000).  Fissured: Soil contains discontinuities that can be open or closed, stained or unstained and of variable origin. In residual soils, fissures may represent relict joints or planes along which tension or shear has taken place.  Microshattered: Small-scale shattering. Very closely to exttremely closely spaced discontinuities. Microshattering is often associated wwith expansive soils.  Shattered: Very closely to extremely closely-spaced discontinuities. Fissures may represent opened joints. Shattering is often associated with expansive soils, shrinkage or heaving conditions.  Slickensided: Polished planar surfaces representing surfaces of discontinuity. The surfaces are smooth, glossy or glassy and poossibly striated. Slickensides might be a signn of fairly recent shearing movements in the soil probably due to heaving conditions although similar shiny surfaces can also be developed on joint planes along which there has been no displacement. Striation directions record major indicators/warnings of ground movement.

6.3..2. Descriptions of Shallow Subsurface Deformation Characteristics in the Eastern Coega Study Areea

Four types of deformation are recognised in the shallow subsurface – microshattering, slickensiding, fissuring, shattering and cleaving. The distribution is apparently haphazard, but there are seemingly two trends in the vicinity of the Ngqura Harbour Keywall in orientations both parallel and perpendicular to the coastline. There are hence insufficient data to identify possible trends or alignments of these features, few of which interseect the Coega fault zone.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 44

The clay horizons are red, may occur above a carbonate horizon and may (but not always) have evidence of distinct pedogenic structures in the bloccky to prismatic habit. Other red, clay-rich horizons have vertic features such as sub-horizontal, slickensided fractures, accompanied by vertical sand-filled fractures accompanied by variable carbonate accumulation. These shallow subsurface feattures are also identified by Reid (1996a, 1996b) in trial pit profiles that havve very similar characteristics to the profiles in the Coega study area.

Venter et al. (2002) note that in high-lying, better drained areas, reworked residual horizons are generally reddish- or yellowish-brown and can tend towards shattered andd slickensided structures, whereas in low-lying areas reworked horizons, although the colour may tend towards alluvium in darks and greys, the structure may also be microshattered and slickensided.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 45

Table 6: Shelly Marker Horizons in the Coega Geodatabase Marker Elevation Thickness BH Characteristics of the Host Sediment Horizon (m amsl) (m) 152 Gastropod Between 1.5 m The gastropod shells are contained within a shelly gravel horizon that is comprised of pale grey shells –2.3 and rounded 10—50 mm diameter quartzite and calcrete pebbles of undetermined rounding contained within a white clayey sand matrix. The gastropod shells are ~30 mm in diameter. –3.8 m The shelly gravel is underlain by a light brown calcareous fine- to medium-grained sand and silty fine sand horizon that contains scattered <10 mm diameter shell fragments. The gastropod-bearing horizon is overlain by light brown calcareous fine- to medium-grained sand with many <10 mm diameter shell fragments. 9 Bivalve and Between 3 m The bivalve and echinoid shell fragments form part of a dark grey fine sandy shelly gravel with shell echinoid –6.5 and fragments increasing in diameter from 5 to 20 mm towards the base. The shelly gravel horizon in shells which the shell fragments are specified forms part of a dark grey shelly gravel/coquina horizon. –8.5 m The shelly gravel is underlain by a dark grey speckled black fine-grained sand horizon that contains very fine shell fragments. The shelly gravel is overlain by dark grey speckled black slightly clayey fine sand with many shell fragments. 111 Bivalve Between 1 m The bivalve shell fragments are contained within a grey medium- to coarse-grained sand horizon that contains coarse-grained calcareous shell fragments (mainly bivalves). shells –3.1 and –4.1 m The horizon is underlain by dark grey slightly clayey silty fine sand with fine grained calcareous shell fragments and is overlain by a grey slightly silty fine sand horizon that contains calcareous shell fragments. 121 Bivalve Between 7.4 m The bivalve shells are contained within grey medium- to coarse-grained sand with coarse calcareous shells 1.6 and shell fragments (mainly bivalves) or within grey slightly silty medium- to fine-grained sand with fine –9.0 m calcareous shell fragments (mainly bivalves). The horizon is underlain by cream partly clayey fine sand with cemented calcareous shell fragments and is overlain by brown fine- to medium-grained sand with calcareous shell fragments. 127 Bivalve Between 1 m The horizon containing coarse calcareous shell fragments of mainly bivalves is described as consisting shells –7.1 and of grey and medium- to fine-grained sand.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 46

Marker Elevation Thickness BH Characteristics of the Host Sediment Horizon (m amsl) (m) –8.1 m The horizon forms the uppermost package of a sand horizon and is underlain by a gravel horizon comprised of grey fine pebbly gravel with rounded quartzite pebbles (maximum 40 mm diameter). The sand horizon is overlain by grey and silty fine- to medium-grained sand containing calcareous shell fragments. 129 Bivalve Between 0.1 m The horizon containing coarse calcareous shell fragments of mainly bivalves is described as grey fine- shells –2.1 and grained sand. –2.2 m The horizon is underlain by grey silty fine sand with fine-grained calcareous shell fragments and is overlain by pale brown fine- to medium-grained sand with calcareous shell fragments at the top of the borehole. 144 Bivalve Between 3 m The horizon containing coarse calcareous shell fragments of mainly bivalves is described as dark grey shells –4.1 and fine- to medium-grained sand. –7.1 m The horizon is underlain by olive brown silty fine sand and overlain by silty fine sand with calcareous shell fragments. 149 Bivalve Between 1 m The bivalve shells are contained within a dark grey fine- to coarse-grained sand horizon that is shells 0.1 m and characterized by coarse-grained calcareous shell fragments, mainly of bivalves. –1.1 m The horizon is underlain by grey silty fine sand with fine-grained calcareous shell fragments and is overlain by yellow-brown fine- to medium-grained sand with calcareous shell fragments. 320 Bivalve Between 2.6 m The bivalve shell layer is contained within a greenish-grey to brown slightly clayey sand with cemented shells –2.3 and zones. –4.9 m The horizon forms part of a 7.6 m thick clayey sand horizon that is underlain by a quartzite conglomerate and overlain by a horizon comprised of brown and grey silty sand. TPC2 Oyster Between 0.3 m The oyster shells occur within a closely packed gravel horizon consisting of subrounded but shells 47.6 and predominantly quartzite gravel up to 50 mm diameter. The gravel also contains occasional subangular 47.3 m calcrete gravels and fragments of oyster shells in a well-cemented matrix of off-white and orange- brown calcareous shelly sand.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 47

Marker Elevation Thickness BH Characteristics of the Host Sediment Horizon (m amsl) (m)

The oyster-shell horizon is underlain by off-white to pale brown and well-cemented calcareous fine sand. Isolated runnels containing gravel from the horizon above. Pale brown mottled off-white and orange very thinly bedded well-cemented coquinite occurs to EOH. The oyster horizon is overlain by off-white occasionally mottled brown well-cemented and calcareous fine sand that has occasional pockets of uncemented light orange-brown material. TPC6 Oyster Between 0.6 m The oyster shells occur at the base of a sediment horizon that consists of light greyish brown/olive shells 40.5 and brown clayey sandy silt. The upper surface of the horizon is characterized by a gravel lag consisting of 39.9 m relatively closely-packed subrounded gravel with the clayey sandy silt matrix. The lower surface of the horizon is marked by scattered oyster shells. An additional 0.4 m of shelly gravel was encountered before drilling was curtailed at an elevation of 39.5 m amsl.

The horizon is overlain by red-brown to light yellow/olive-brown sandy silt with scattered subrounded fine quartzite gravel in a discontinuous horizon.

The source data suggest that the oyster shells occur within a slumped horizon; however, a reasonable basis for slumping is not indicated. There are also no indications of oyster shells at a higher elevation in this borehole. Therefore, the shell bed is probably likely in situ. TPC9 Oyster Between 1.6 m The oyster shells are contained within a sediment horizon characterized by bands of light olive-brown shells 44.6 and very lightly cemented sand interbedded with bands of light yellow/orange brown sandy and calcified 43.0 m coquinite. The horizon contains isolated subangular and subrounded gravels and oyster shells. The horizon was encountered at the EOH.

The oyster horizon is overlain by orange-brown mottled off-white partially- to well-cemented and calcified beach rock.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 48

7. MARINE TERRACES AND HIGHSTAND PALAEOSEA-LEVEL INDICATORS

Marine terraces are the remnants of abandoned wave-cut (abrasion) platforms that were formed during periods of transgression and sea-level highstands. They are oriented parallel to the present coastline (Bianca & Caputo 2003) and represent time- parallel surfaces that can be used to evaluate rates and patterns of tectonic uplift (Bridgland & Westaway 2008; Muhs et al. 2004). Marine terraces are preserved in step-like sequences along uplifted coastlines, but may also be present along relatively stable coastlines. In relatively stable tectonic regions, such as South Africa, emergent terraces of Quaternary age are generally limited to those features that formed during periods of high sea level that were close to or exceeded the present level.

7.1 Criteria to Identify Erosional and Depositional Marine Terraces

Hanson et al. (2012) provide a discussion of criteria used to map and characterize both erosional (wave-cut bedrock platforms) and depositional marine terraces; and how to use these observations to infer palaeosea level. Erosional indicators of paleosea level include abraded marine terraces, benches, bedrock notches, and sea caves (Bowen 2010; Galili et al. 2007; Pedoja et al. 2011; Roberts et al. 2012). Marine-terrace mapping programmes attempt to map the location and elevation of the intersection of the wave-cut platform with the palaeosea cliff (the so-called shoreline angle or backedge) and trace it laterally to define a palaeoshoreline (or palaeostrandline). The back edges are markers of the maximum highstands reached by palaeoshorelines during an interglacial stage (Anderson et al. 1999; Bianca & Caputo 2003). Modern shoreline angles are typically cut during a combination of high tide and storm surge, and therefore form at 1 to 3 m above mean sea level. Commonly, the marine-terrace platform and deposits are buried by thick colluvium or, in the case of many areas along the coast of South Africa, thick aeolian deposits.

Depositional environments found in sheltered bays and estuaries tend to provide more complete records of sea levels and are sensitive to small fluctuations of sea- level change (Roberts 2006). Sea-level indicators include the shoreward extent of tidal mud flats, salt marshes, barrier berms, beach and dune complexes, and the intertidal zone of delta fronts. Pether (1994) regards the depositional record to be a more reliable record of palaeodepths than the erosional record.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 49

Pether’s (1994) detailed study of coastal sediments, associated with the late Tertiary 30 m and 50 m marine terraces near Hondeklip Bay in Namaqualand and their use as sea-level indicators, provides a description of the facies within transgressive and regressive sequences that can be used to identify sea-level maxima. Marine sediments deposited during progradation (seaward propagation of the coast from the transgressive maxima) may include the following facies (Pether 1994; Clifton et al. 1971):  The lower shoreface lies seaward of the breaker zone. During periods of fair weather, the sediments are subject to oscillatory wave currents and become colonised by benthic organisms. Erosion and deposition in the lower shoreface takes place during and immediately after storms, resulting in an erosive base overlain by parallel-laminated sand passing upwards into a bioturbated top (Pether 1994). The lower shoreface occurs in palaeodepths between –5 and –10 m (Pether 1986). Pether (1994) demonstrated that the basal gravels should not always be interpreted as transgressive lags, but can also be interpreted as reworked storm deposits.  The upper shoreface consists of a shelly, cross-stratified coarse and fine sand, and low-angle, cross-laminated fine sand facies.  The foreshore is the intertidal slope (beach) where swash and backwash are the dominant processes. The diagnostic structures of the foreshore include seaward-dipping lamination with low-angle truncations (Pether 1994). These deposits can occur in palaeodepths of +1.5 to –1.5 m (Pether 1986). Foreshore deposits are extensively eroded and reworked by aeolian processes and are not preserved as a marine deposit in his study area site. The massive sand with pedogenic hardpan facies represents this stratigraphic unit (Pether 1994; Galili et al., 2007).  Aeolian sand sheet and dune deposits consist of a massive, muddy, brown medium-grained sand facies (Pether 1994) derived from sedimentation in interdune playa lakes. The stratigraphic relationship between calcareous and shell-rich marine sediment and sediment devoid of calcareous and marine indicators (derived from aeolian, fluvial or estuarine environments) may give insights into changes and approximate positions of palaeoshorelines (Calderoni et al. 2010). However, accurate determination of palaeosea level first requires observations of sea-level index points of known age, elevation, and sea level tendency (i.e., sea level rising, falling, or static). The indicative meaning of an index point is then interpreted from the vertical

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 50

relationship between the depositional environment of the index point and the contemporaneous MSL (Carr et al. 2010). This interpretation is often specific to a depositional environment and relies on observations from modern analogues (Roberts 2006). The foreshore/shoreface contact is the preferred sea-level indicator, because it can be unambiguously correlated with the tidal zone range, thereby reducing uncertainties (Roberts et al. 2012). Index points based only on beach and foreshore deposits are typically associated with relatively wide indicative ranges (Carr et al. 2010).

The estuarine and tidal-flat environment of the lower Coega River, prior to construction of the present Ngqura Harbour, would have been a suitable geological environment to preserve a depositional record of mid- to late Quaternary sea-level highstands. The data resolution available in the Coega Geodatabase, however, is in most instances insufficient to identify depositional palaesea-level indicators. This is to a large extent the result of the fact that sedimentary structures, which represent an important source of information used in depositional interpretation, is seldom reported in the original dataset. Identifying the foreshore/shoreface contact is a difficult endeavour in soft sediment borehole data due to the incomplete and fragmented nature of recovered core from such sediment which itself is part function of the drilling methods such as washboring, percussion drilling, mud-rotray drilling and SPT employed. The lack of geochronological control also makes it difficult to differentiate transgressive/regressive sequences.

7.2 Previous Mapping Interpretations

The Grassridge Plateau is considered to represent a maximum relative sea-level of 280 m above present day, achieved during the early to mid Miocene (F.G. Le Roux 1989a; Hattingh & Goedhart 1997; Erlanger 2010). Two prominent marine terraces can be distinguished at 210 m and 170 m on the Grassridge Plateau between the Coega and Sundays Rivers (Goedhart & Hattingh 1987; Hattingh 2001). The Grassridge Plateau is separated from the lower and younger Coega Platform by the Saltpan Escarpment (Figure 4). It borders the Coega Plateau to the north and is probably representative of an Early Pliocene palaeoshoreline, as inferred from river terrace studies in the region (Erlanger 2010) and marine terrace data from the west coast (Roberts et al. 2011).

An Early Pliocene sea level in the Algoa Basin was considered by F. G. Le Roux (1989a) to have reached a maximum relative elevation of 120 m amsl, as is

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 51

evidenced by bedrock elevations of ~120 m amsl and ~100 m amsl identified on the Coega Plateau, in the vicinity of Coega Kop. Ruddock (1968), Marker (1987) and F.G. Le Roux (1989a) also refer to marine benches at 106 m amsl, 90 to 100 m amsl, and 84 m amsl. F.G. Le Roux (1989a) interpreted these as having developed during relatively long stillstands during the Late Pliocene regression (from the transgressive maximum of c. 120 m). Palaeobeach ridges on the Coega Platform were deposited during this regression (cf. Figure 4).

A similar separation between 45 and 60 m amsl by the Swartkops Lineament (which represents a late Pliocene palaeoshoreline) subdivides the latter plateau into a younger, lower, and more seaward Amsterdamhoek Plateau (Stear 1987; Goedhart & Hattingh 1997). Hattingh (2001) also discusses evidence for palaeoshorelines at 60 m amsl to less than 83 and 52 m amsl that are thought to have formed during a transgressive maximum and subsequent regressive stillstand during the Late Pliocene.

7.3 Marine Palaeoshoreline Indicators in the Coega Study Area

The criteria outlined above in Section 7.1 are used to evaluate marine terrace and possible highstand palaeosea-level indicators in the Coega study area based on available subsurface information.

The majority of data available for this study originate from the vicinity of the Coega harbour and river where steep river cliffs are bordered by gently-undulating, elevated plateaux that increase in elevation away from the Coega River (Figures 11c and 11d). These older marine surfaces exhibit coast-parallel orientations, are characterised by low relief and shallow gradients and have been identified in bedrock contour maps (Figures 11 and 11a through 11d). It is important to consider that the resolution of available data in this study may not always be sufficient to identify the precise position and elevation of any backedges, which are used as markers of the maximum highstands.

The elevations of possible palaeoshoreline erosional (Table 7) or depositional features inferred from the interpretation of the subsurface data in the Coega geodatabase as shown on various cross sections (profiles) are summarized in Table 7 and described in the following sections.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 52

7.3.1. Marine platforms at 33.9 – 60 m amsl

Information on the top of bedrock surface overlying the bedrock platforms (Table 7) suggests that Pliocene-aged broad marine platform(s) at elevations between 40 m amsl to 60 m amsl are present in the Coega study area and that these surfaces may extend across the Coega fault zone. There is however insufficient subsurface data to demonstrate whether there are multiple palaeoshorelines in the region between the Ngqura Harbour and Coega Kop (Figures 24a through 24c).

High terrace platforms, underlying the Coega Plateau, are identified in boreholes and trial pits on opposite sides of the Coega River valley in Profile Q (Figure 21). Only one of the trial pits (B14) shown in Profile Q (Figure 21) to occur west of the river valley, and none of the test pits west of the fault zone, intersect bedrock. In Trial Pit B14, as well as the neighbouring Trial Pit B10, stripped residual bedrock at elevations of 58.7 m amsl and 55.2 m amsl respectively, are overlain by organic silty clay, soil and calcrete. Bedrock contours suggest that there may be a palaeoshoreline angle at ~60 m amsl just to the north of this profile and southeast of Coega Kop (Figures 11c, 11d).

This is broadly correlateable with the bedrock occurring at an elevation between 55 – 56m amsl in Trial Pits THI and A8 (Figure11c) near the Algoa Brick Quarry on the opposite side of the river valley (Figure 21). Here bedrock is overlain by pale, calcretised sand containing shell fragments (interpreted to be of marine origin), with pebbles and boulders occurring at the base.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 53

Table 7: Potential Marine Terrace Platforms and Shoreline Angles

Bedrock Terrace Elevation (m) Profile Figure Comment 58.4 m amsl Q 21 Wave-cut platform (WCP) 55.0 m amsl to 56.0 m amsl Q 21 WCP WCP ?; Possible shoreline angle 42.8 m amsl Q 21 (SL:A) is between 42.8 –47.8 m amsl 39.2 m amsl to 40.8 m amsl R 22 WCP 43.0 m amsl R 22 WCP ? ±40.0 m amsl R 22 WCP ? 39.9 m amsl - 25b WCP SLA (defined by drop in top of bedrock between BH1A and 33.9 - 11c BH1B near Aldo Scribante Race Track WCP 15.3 m amsl O 19 Based on a single data point. 7.0 m amsl I 16 WCP WCP 4.3 m amsl L 17 Based on a single data point. WCP ? 2.0 m amsl to 4.0 m amsl J 16 Based on a single data point. WCP 1.2 m amsl H,L 15, 17 Based on a single data point. −6.6 msl P 20 WCP ? −7.8 msl to −9.2 msl M 18 WCP −7.9 msl to −9.8 msl O 19 WCP −8 msl H 15 WCP ? −8.6 msl to −10.5 msl K 16 WCP WCP: SLA is between -9.0 m to ~-8 m (preferred) ; higher −9.0 msl to −9.6 msl N 18 value of -6.5 or -5.3 cannot be precluded. WCP; SLA is between -9.1 −9.1 msl J , L 16, 17 m to ~ -8 m (based on slope gradient of 0.01) WCP: SLA is between -9.8 m −9.8 msl to −9.6 msl P 20 to -7.4 m

On the eastern margin of the Coega River, boring data and field observations in the vicinity of the Algoa Brick Quarry, directly south of Profile Q (Figure 7, Figure 21, Figure 24a; Figure 27) indicate that a marine platform at 55–56 m is overlain by a thick (~12 m) sequence of marine deposits. Cobbles from the basal marine lag (Alexandria Formation) close to the top of Sundays River Formation, at an elevation of 51.6 m amsl, were collected for cosmogenic nuclide burial dating analysis (Sample

TSP-03, Section 9, also see Bierman [2012] and Hanson et al. [2012]). The elevation

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 54

of the back edge of this platform is uncertain. The sampling site could be close to the back edge of a terrace inset just below a slightly higher, older 55–56 m platform. Alternatively, the dated sample may be part of the same marine terrace as the slightly hjgher 55–56 m platform: the shoreline angle of this terrace could extend to elevations of between 60 m and 70 m.

The bedrock platform encountered between 55—56 m amsl in Trial Pit THI, near the NE end of Profile Q (Figure 21) is capped by 2.9 m thick deposits that consist of a thin horizon of calcrete that preserves a pale creamy white and calcretised silty fine sand and quartzite pebbles with scattered shell fragments towards the top and is interpreted to have a marine origin. The basal portion of this horizon contains boulders in a calcretised fine sand matrix. Note that the nature of rounding was not recorded in these boreholes. The elevation of the marine deposits is 59.3 m amsl. In Trial Pit A8 at the eastern end of Profile Q (Figure 21) a 5.4 m thick horizon of calcrete and siliceous limestone overlies the bedrock intersected at 55.4 m amsl.

Possible lower-elevation components associated with this terrace might be represented in Trial Pits A9 and THH where the bedrock was intersected at 52.1 m and 53.2 m amsl, respectively (Table 6, Appendix B, Figures 11a and 24a). In Trial Pit A9 the bedrock is overlain by a 6.4 m thick sequence of greenish loose shelly gravel and sand, pebbly clay, clayey gravel and hardpan calcrete close to the surface.

Trial pits A5 and A7 on the eastern margin of the Coega River valley may have encountered marine deposits on a lower platform, but the limited exposures in these trial pits do not provide strong evidence to confirm the marine origin of the sediments or evaluate the elevation of the underlying wave-cut platform or shoreline angle. The narrow bedrock notch, overlain by shelly gravel, sand and a calcrete cap totalling 1.5 m in thickness, that is evident at an elevation of 42.8 m amsl along the steep eastern slope of the Coega River valley in Profile Q (Trial Pit A5 in Figure 21) can, however, be broadly correlated with bedrock platforms at the same height in Profile R. Several test pits intersect bedrock between elevations of 39.2 m amsl and 43m amsl west of the Coega River valley in Profile R (Figure 22). Bedrock in Trial Pits C15, C14 and B25, located to the west of the fault zone, are overlain by shelly gravel, sand, and coquinite that are interpreted to have a marine origin. No noticeable displacement in bedrock elevation was observed when compared to the bedrock elevation in Trial Pits TP26 and A25, on the opposite side of the Coega Fault Zone. Bedrock elevation

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 55

also remains consistent at ~41 m in the four tests pits spanning the Coega East Fault Zone in Profile AC (Figure 28).

Borehole data, further to the southeast, suggests that the edge of this platform is located south of the Aldo Scribante Race Track. Here boreholes BH1A and BH1B, which are only ~130 m apart, intersect bedrock at elevations of 40.8 m amsl and 33.9 m amsl, respectively (Figure 24b, Appendix B). A seven metre change in topography over this short distance, along with an abrupt thickening of Cenozoic deposits from 3.5 m in the north to 7 m in the south, suggests the presence of shoreline angle between these two boreholes (Table 7, Figures 11 and 24b). The presence of a lower marine platform at the southern edge of the 40 m terrace is generally consistent with the location of the Swartkops lineament, although this postulated palaeoshoreline lies slightly to the south of the published location of the lineament. Given the proximity of Boreholes 1A and 1B, the shoreline angle at 33.9 m amsl is one of the few localities where a well-constrained shoreline angle of a higher marine terrace is identified in the study area.

The perpendicular orientation of the palaeo-island D in the vicinity of the Aldo Scibante Race Track is currently poorly constrained. This palaeohill’s apparent elongate eastern margin either rises above the general landscape or forms the leading edge of a platform along where there is inferred a greater amount of marine and fluvial erosion during subsequent regression.

7.3.2. Possible Marine Sediments at ~12.5 m amsl

Calcretised sediments at ~12.5—12.8 m amsl, if marine, would suggest that a palaeoshoreline (Figure 29) may be preserved at that level along the Coega River valley. A persistent pale- to brown- to orange-coloured sand that is locally calcretised or includes calcrete, overlain by sand, may in the Harbour Keywall area extending as far north as the southern extension of the Saltworks in Boreholes N9, N26, N28 (Profile P [Figure 20]), N29 (Appendix B), and N20 (Profile M [Figure 18]), be interpreted as the shoreface-foreshore contact, although a pedogenic aeolianite interpretation cannot be discounted and may be a more viable interpretation. This may be correlateable with a <0.5 m thick, partially calcretised sand with marine shell fragments, recorded at ~12.5 m in Trial Pit TH8 (Profile R, Figure 22), approximately 2.5 km inland of the present-day coastline.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 56

7.3.3. Marine platform at ~ 7m amsl

Bedrock is intersected at an elevation of 7 m amsl in a single borehole (BH P1) in Profile I (Figure 16), which is orientated perpendicular to the coast. However, boreholes immediately to the east and northeast (Boreholes 317, 319, 321) intersect a shelly gravel at 6 m amsl to 7 m amsl, overlain by a silty sand which may be representative of the foreshore-shoreface contact (Figures 18 and 20).

7.3.4. Evidence for Palaeosea-level at ~0 m amsl

There is possible evidence to support a 1 m amsl palaeosea level (e.g., BH 134, Profile L [Figure 17]). Possible equivalents for this sea level are also represented by the deposits a metre below sea level in Boreholes 109, 9, and BKS B (Profile O [Figure 19]) and Borehole 132 (Profile P [Figure 20]).

7.3.5. Marine platforms at -8 m

A likely marine terrace abrasion platform that does have a reasonably well- constrained erosional shoreline angle at an elevation of approximately –8±1 m was documented southwest of the present river mouth in the vicinity of the Harbour Keywall (Figure 24c). This is perhaps most evident in the profiles orientated perpendicular to the coast (Profiles L, M, and P). In Profile L, the westernmost of these, bedrock is intersected at -9.1 m in Borehole 221 (Figure 17) and a moderately well-constrained shoreline angle appears to be present between Boreholes 220 and 221 (~115 m apart). In Profile M (Figure 18) Boreholes 318, T2 and T4 intersect bedrock at -7.8 m amsl to -9.2 m. This irregular bedrock surface is interpreted to represent the remnant of a marine abrasion platform, dissected by fluvial channels. A similar broad platform can be observed in the immediately adjacent Profile P (Figure 19) where bedrock is intersected between -9.6 m to -9.8 m in Boreholes 319, 320 and 313. Bedrock intersected in Borehole Q2 may represent a distal remnant of the same surface. A shoreline angle is interpolated between Boreholes N40 and 319 (separated by a distance of ~160 m). Depending on the position of the backedge and assumed slope gradient of 0.015, the shoreline angle could be as much as 2.4 m or higher than top of bedrock in Borehole 319.

From profiles orientated parallel to the coast, it appears as if this platform is restricted to the western side of the Coega River valley. In Profile O (Figure 20), the probable marine abrasion platform is encountered at the bedrock intersection at −7.9 m to −9.8 m below sea level in Boreholes 318 and 319 respectively. If a slope gradient of 0.017

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 57

is assumed, both boreholes may be intersecting the same terrace platform. However, bedrock data, derived from nearby boreholes, suggests that the slope gradient for bedrock topography at −8 to −9 m below sea level is generally less than 0.004, which suggests that these two boreholes may intersect two different platforms. In both boreholes the bedrock surface is overlain by cemented to partially cemented conglomerate deposits.

A wider terrace is evident in Profile N (Figure 18) where Boreholes T1 and 313 intersect bedrock at -9.0 m and −9.6 m below sea level, respectively. A back edge is postulated to exist between Boreholes T1 and T6, which lie ~250 m apart. Depending on the gradient assumed for this surface, the backedge shoreline elevation may be anything from 1 m (assumed gradient of 0.003) to 3.7 m (assumed slope gradient of 0.015) higher than the top of bedrock in Borehole T1. Bedrock is intersected at slightly higher elevations, at −7.8 m below sea level in Borehole T2 and −7.9 m below sea level and in Borehole 201, on both sides of the Coega channel in Profile H (Figure 15). This may reflect insufficient data resolution or closer proximity to the backedge. A shoreline backedge is postulated to be present between Boreholes T2 and T7. A wider marine abrasion platform is again evident in Profile K (Figure 16), where bedrock is intersected between -8.6 m amsl to −10.5 m below sea level in Boreholes T9, T4 and CD 09.

Seaward of the –8±1 m terrace, there appear to be several lower terrace surfaces (Figure 24c) that follow a northwest-southeast trend. It is possible that some of these terraces may be marine or partially marine in origin, but there is insufficient information to differentiate these surfaces as either marine or fluvial in origin. Within the central part of the Coega River valley at and just offshore of the present shoreline, there appear to be several fluvial channels incised into the top of bedrock.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 58

8. ESTIMATED AGES OF THE MARINE TERRACES

The marine terraces and deposits that occur at various elevations along the entire southern African coastal belt are the result of geological processes active at different times. Their present elevation represents the sum of eustatic sea level at the time of terrace genesis, and subsequent vertical crustal movements. Determining the eustatic sea level, usually by reference to global sea-level curves, allows the tectonic component to be inferred. Accurate dating provides a reliable parameter whereby marine terraces can be correlated.

Two geochronologic methods were used to estimate the ages of marine terraces in the study region: the cosmogenic nuclide (CN) method and optically stimulated luminescence (OSL); the two methods are complementary in that cosmogenic nuclides have a greater age range (a few hundred to several million years, depending on the method), but OSL may provide greater precision over a shorter time span (100–350 kyr). These methods were selected for their applicability to dating observed deposits in the age range of interest (late Pliocene to Quaternary, <3.6 Ma). The two methods and the sampling programme for this study are described briefly below. Table 3 provides a list of the locations, elevations, and ages for geochronology samples collected and analysed as part of this study. More detailed reports describing the methodology and results for the CN analyses (prepared by Prof. Paul Bierman) and for the OSL analyses (prepared by Dr Steve Forman) conducted for this study are provided in Appendices E.1 and E.2, respectively of the Marine Terrace Report of Hanson et al. (2012).

Historically, fossil-, microfossil- and palaeontological-age correlations of the Algoa Group sediments in the Eastern Cape are beset by the overall recycling associated with repeated sea-level transgressions and regressions, which have reworked the cover sediments since the Cenozoic (cf. Le Roux 1987, 1991). The bedrock platforms are generally buried by the overlying sedimentary cover and few ages exist for either erosional or depositional palaeoshorelines in the Coega study area.

This study builds on earlier studies that presented preliminary correlations of Quaternary and higher Late Tertiary terraces between the Orange River and East London (Roberts 2005, 2006).

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 59

The highest bedrock wave-cut platforms, that occur at 130 m amsl in the vicinity of Coega Kop, are interpreted to have formed during an Early Pliocene transgression, that reached a general maximum elevation of ~120 m amsl in the study region. (Goedhart & Hattingh 1997). In the Coega study area, the Coega and Amsterdamhoek Plateaux and palaeoshorelines at 60 m and 52 m amsl were possibly developed during subsequent (middle Pliocene) regression from the peak Pliocene highstand. In the Sundays River valley, high-level fluvial terraces were formed at this time, whose chronologies (Erlanger 2010) support the age inferences outlined above.

Bierman (2012) collected four replicate cobble samples (Sample TSP-03) within a decimetre of each other, close to the contact of the Cenozoic Alexandria Formation and the Mesozoic Sundays River Formation at an elevation of 51.6 m, in the Algoa Brick Quarry (Figure 27). The samples were collected from a facies comprising interfingering coarse shelly sands and gravels typical of the upper shoreface (Roberts et al. 2012). The cobbles have relatively low 10Be, 26Al and cosmogenic nuclide concentrations. The samples are overlain by ~10 m of sand and gravel of the Alexandria Formation. Minimum burial times are attributed to post‐depositional nuclide production and range from 1.1—2.5 Myr, but are considered by Bierman (2012) to have experienced the same burial history and are thus are amenable to using the isochron method of burial dating (Table 8).

In two isotope diagrams the exposure ages the exposure histories define a banana- shaped window into which samples will plot if they have been continuosly exposed at the Earth’s surface. Samples that have been shielded will plot in the gray shaded area below the line representing steady-state erosion (the lower line in the diagram). All four of the Algoa quarry samples plot below and to the left of the enclosed region and thus are indicative of sustained burial after exposure. When the clasts were deposited they contained different concentrations of 10Be and 26Al but a ratio of 26Al/10Be similar to the production rate.. Although the duration and depth of burial is unknown, the 10 m-depth below the surface allows for continued post-burial production (by deeply penetrating muons). The ages of individual clasts are minima because of post-deposition production, but yield an isochron plot consistent with an isochron age of 3.98 Ma for the deposit. For more information see Bierman (2012).

The dating method is considered to be acceptable to define an isochron from the four cobbles which provide an age estimate for burial independent of nuclide production

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 60

after deposition (Bierman 2012). Although the duration and depth of burial is unknown, the 10 m-depth below the surface allows for post-burial production. The TSP-03 series of samples plot well below the envelope of continuous surface exposure on the two-isotope diagram (Figure 27) and is consistent with the environmental setting.

Table 8: Geochronology Results for the TSP-03 series which comprises four samples collected from the Algoa Brick Quarry 10 metres below the surface at an elevation of 51.6 m amsl

Lab & Elevation Type CN Minimum Total History Age1 Field ID (m amsl) (kyr) TSP-03A4 51.6 cobble 1,088 Isochron age clast 3,980 kyr TSP-03A5 51.6 cobble 2,588 clast TSP-03A6 51.6 cobble 1,894 clast TSP-03A7 51.6 cobble 2,639 clast Source: Bierman (2012).

Very few geochronological data are available for the presumably younger terrace platforms and deposits observed at lower elevations in the Coega River valley study, and thus some of the ages described below are speculative.

The palaeoshorelines at 10 m and 12.5—12.8 m inferred from interpretation of the Coega Geodatabase may correlate with marine terraces at similar elevations observed elsewhere along the southern coast of South Africa as discussed by Roberts et al. (2012) and summarised in Hanson et al. (2012). These marine deposits and platforms may correlate with Middle Pleistocene marine deposits, identified in the Mossel Bay vicinity by Roberts et al. (2009, 2012) at elevations up to 15 m amsl that yielded TT-OSL ages compatible with sea-level highstands during MIS 11 (Jacobs et al. 2011).

Within the study area, Roberts (2006) previously dated silty estuarine channel sands of the Salnova Formation using the OSL methodology. Two samples were collected, at elevations of 8.3 m amsl and 9.1m amsl respectively, from a site that is located

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 61

west of the Ngqura Harbour Key Wall, as shown in Figures 5d and 30a. The lower sample was collected from weakly cemented silty sands with shelly gravel interbeds for which a Middle Pleistocene age was inferred, based on stone artefacts. contained in the gravel near the top. This was supported by the age of >175.4 ka obtained from OSL dating. The younger overlying deposits also did not yield a finite age (>128. 7 ka), since the dose rate was high (Jacobs 2006). Roberts (2006) considered these deposits to be placed in either to the Middle or Late Pleistocene and their elevation falls within the range for MIS 11.

The 6—7 m palaeoshoreline, which is recorded by both erosional wave-cut platforms and depositional units in the Ngqura Harbour area, may have formed during the MIS 5e highstand, which is well-represented along the South African coastline by dated deposits between 6 m amsl and 8 m amsl, as summarised in Appendix A and Hanson et al. (2012). One Borehole (BH P1 in Profile I [Figure 16]) shows a possible bedrock platform at an elevation of 7 m, but available subsurface data do not clearly define an erosional shoreline angle or palaeosea-cliff for this palaeoshoreline.

Relative ages can be assumed in boreholes where marine deposits are buried and overlain by marine deposits at higher elevations. For example, in Boreholes 317 and 321 (Profile I [Figure 16] and Profile M [Figure 18], respectively) a calcrete, formed in gravels at an elevation of 0 to –1 m, is overlain by fine-grained sediments and shelly material associated with the 6—7 m palaeosea level and must therefore be older. These relationships suggest that sea level may have risen to about the present level, then dropped allowing for formation of the calcrete horizon, and subsequently risen to the 6—7 m highstand. These elevations correspond well with the findings of Roberts et al. (2009), who find evidence for palaeoshorelines at the 1 m elevation during the early stages of MIS 5e and MIS 11 (Roberts et al. 2012), which were both followed by later highstands of 6—7 m and ~13 m, respectively. Palaeosea-levels, close to present sea level, are also recorded along the South African coastline during the MIS 7 stage (Roberts et al. 2009).

The age of the –8±1 m terrace is not known, but based on the stratigraphy encountered in Boreholes 317 in Profile M and 313 in Profile N (Figure 18), the terrace is older than the highstand that deposited marine sediments at elevations of +6 to +7 m amsl (Figure 24c). Assuming that the 6—7 m amsl deposits are correlative with MIS 5e (~125 ka), the –8±1 m amsl terrace would be older, possibly correlative with or older than the MIS 9 (~330 ka) highstand. The development of a

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 62

relatively broad (~500 m) platform, associated with this shoreline angle, suggests that this terrace was not cut during a brief stillstand, but rather was associated with a highstand of some duration. In the Western Cape, the MIS 7 highstand appears to have been at or slightly below the present level (Roberts et al. 2009). This would suggest that the –8 m terrace would correlate with an older highstand (MIS 9 or older than MIS 11 [400 ka], which has been estimated to have had a palaeosea level of +13 ± 2 m, [Roberts et al. 2012]).

Although there are indications of the presence of multiple packages of transgressive/regressive sediments in the Coega River valley above the bedload conglomerate, the lack of age-control for sediments within these packages make it difficult to decipher the record. It is assumed that these sediments may be related to fluctuations in sea level that post-dated the sea-level lowstand during MIS 6 (pre-135 ka), including the MIS 5e—a fluctuations and the most recent transgression from the Last Glacial Maximum during MIS 2.

The ensuing and most recent MIS 1 interglacial is known as the Flandrian Transgression, which is characterised by slightly erratic, but generally rapid, sea- level rise attributed to staggered melting of the main ice sheets. Sea-level rise from its regressive maximum of –125 m to near present sea level (Murray-Wallace 2007), led to aggradation in the deep river gorges of the Coega and Sundays River valleys and formation of low-level terraces in the Sundays River valley. Sea-level rose to an elevation of 2—3 m amsl during the Early to Middle Holocene, but has since fallen to present-day levels (Roberts 2006). Figure 31 summarises the erosional and depositional palaeoshorelines in the Eastern Coega study area.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 63

9. THE COEGA FAULT ZONE — EVIDENCE FOR LOCATION AND MINOR NEOTECTONIC DEFORMATION

The eastern part of the onshore Coega fault zone is located to the west of the Coega River (Figures 7, 10 and 11). The fault, which trends subparallel to the modern-day Coega River valley east of the Aldo Scribante Race Track, is predominately a subsurface feature, and is buried by Cenozoic sediments (Du Toit 1955; Goedhart 2004, Goedhart et al. 2004; Goedhart & Hattingh 1997; Ingram 1998; F.G. Le Roux 1987; W.C. le Roux 2000; McStay & Doel 1998; Shone 1976, 1978; Zadorozhnaya et al. 2010).

The location of the Coega fault trace used in this investigation is derived from the 1:10,000 field sheets of Goedhart & Hattingh (1997) and also from projected SOEKOR data used by Goedhart (2005). Geological fieldwork and independent near- surface geophysical traverses have also contributed to the delineation of the Coega fault zone (Goedhart et al. 2004). Although the general trend of the Coega fault zone is well-defined (e.g., Goedhart 2005; Goedhart & Hattingh 1997), a broader zone is defined in this study to embrace uncertainties in the complexities of probable multiple fault strands, based on published information (Figures 7, 10 and 11). Onshore, the Coega fault zone comprises three parallel fault traces corresponding to: the subsurface Cretaceous/Palaeozoic contact in the fault plane at a depth of 2 km (western edge); the inferred surface trace of the Coega fault (eastern edge); and the Cretaceous/Palaeozoic contact in the fault plane between the two extremities. Together these faults form the onshore representation of the Coega fault zone.

Offshore, the continuous subsurface Cretaceous/Palaeozoic contact of the Coega Fault - as determined by SOEKOR (1976) from two-way seismic reflection time - represents the southern boundary. The fault traces inferred at surface and the the fault plane between the surface and Cretaceous/Palaeozoic contact were not extended offshore. The images in this report show the pontential northeastern boundary of the Coega Fault Zone represented by SOEKOR’s (1976) location of the Coega Fault Plane in the mid-Sundays River Unconformity as determined from two- way seismic reflection time. There is therefore a discontinuity between the offshore and onshore locations of the Coega Fault Zone.

Zadorozhnaya et al. (2010), in a geophysical investigation that formed part of a groundwater investigation southwest of the Coega Kop Quarry, proposed that the

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 64

Coega fault represents a more complex structure, probably consisting of a zone of elongated and sub-parallel horst-and-graben structures, which step lower in elevation towards the south. Time Domain Electro-Magnetic profiles southwest of the Coega Kop Quarry from this study (as shown in Figure 32b and reproduced in Figure 6), show four fault-bounded graben blocks, separated by at least 3 sub-faults, which are typically spaced 250 m to 280 m apart and have a displacement between 50 m and 60 m (Zadorozhnaya et al. 2010). These authors also identified a small down-faulted graben directly southwest of the Coega Kop Quarry. Furthermore, it is believed that the fault trace is fragmented towards the east, with the hanging wall coastal sector being fragmented by northeasterly-trending splay faults in the shape of a horse-tail (Zadorozhnaya et al. 2010). The near-surface trace therefore appears to be a fragmented zone of normal faulting rather than a simple southward-dipping fault plane (Zadorozhnaya et al. 2010).

A previously unmapped zone of faulting, characterised by horst blocks of TMG quartzite, is recognised from analysis of the subsurface data in the Ngqura Harbour (Figure 32d, Profiles B, C, and I in Figures 13, 14 and 16, respectively). The horst blocks, which trend subperpendicular to the coastline, are subparallel to the Coega fault zone and align with Jahleel Island northeast of the projected trend.

The data interpreted as evidence for Neogene reverse faulting in the study area (Hattingh & Goedhart 1997; F.G. Le Roux 2000) remain enigmatic. Since the site shown in Figure 33 has subsequently been backfilled, it was not possible to confirm the cause of the displacement at this site. While a tectonic origin cannot be discounted, the data evaluated in this investigation do not provide any evidence for noticeable displacement across the Coega Fault zone which argues against any sustained tectonic activity.

The medium to very high expansiveness values of weathered, clay-rich sediments, derived from the Uitenhage Group, have been demonstrated (Reid 1996a, 1996b) to cause heave in sediments both in the near- and deep-subsurface and may provide a alternative, non-tectonic mechanism to explain the origin of these small displacements as will be discussed in Section 9.1.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 65

9.1. Apparent Shallow Subsurface Deformation Features Within Cover Sediments in the Eastern Coega Study Area

Structures such as slickensiding and associated structures, discussed in Section 6.3, may be attributed to tectonic movements, but we propose that it has a pedogenic origin. Demko et al. (2004) in a study of floodplain and lake-margin settings have described similar features in palaeosols that are characterised by some degree of surface clay accumulation.

There is little to no mention of slickensiding in the Cenozoic sediments drilled in other boreholes; however, a number of factors may contribute to the lack of observations of deformation features. The drilling method determines whether such features can ultimately be seen in the sediments recovered in the core. In the case of the Coega boreholes, mud-rotary-, rotary core-, percussion-, and diamond drilling are not conducive to the preservation of intact sediment that could have allowed for the identification of slickensiding in the Cenozoic sediments. In addition, erroneous interpretations, non-recognition by the logger; or a preferred interest in the hard-rock properties of bedrock may be contributing factors in the paucity of observations of such features as discussed in Section 4.3.

In the Coega Study area, the majority of apparent disturbance at a shallow levels were generally encountered in trial pits. These trial pits were generally dug by excavating machinery such as back actors and is consistent with the observations of Reid (1996a, 1996b) working in similar geological and excavation conditions 15 km west to west-southwest of the Coega study area. This could account for the fact that many of the borehole sediments do not show any evidence for apparent disturbance at shallow levels.

Other alternative interpretations are that the slickensiding could be a function of decompression, resulting from overconsolidation (shrinkage) and subsequent decompression (swelling) of the Cenozoic sediments (Pusch 2006). The Uitenhage Group sediments have medium to very high expansiveness values between 4 and 48 mm likely derived from the values of medium to very high plasticity indices falling between 10 and >40 (Reid 1996a). Although Reid (1996a) provides the proportion of clay, the author does not provide XRD analyses for the clay types. According to Venter et al. (2002), development of soil profiles with expected differential movements of >30 mm requires development to take precautions against differential

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 66

and total movement. In the Coega study area, Reid (1996a, 1996b) attributes these features of apparent tectonic origin to surface heave caused by active Kirkwood Formation clays below 2 m depth, which has left unsightly and irreparable cracks in almost all houses in the Despatch area, ~15 km north to west-northwest of the study site (Reid 1996a, 1996b) as presented in Figure 34. Reid (1996b) also suggests that it is not inconceivable that the Kirkwood Formation might also contribute deep-seated heave and that the latter might induce increased heave with depth since the magnitudes of heave do not correspond with surface damage in built structures as shown in Figure 34. It is unfortunate that Reid (1996a, 1996b) does not provide the value for maximum heave at depth.

Henriet et al. (1991) suggest that fracture networks in clays could also be formed from overpressuring of pore fluids at relatively shallow depths in an early stage of diagenesis; whereas Williams et al. (2012) suggest that the slickensides may also be related to the formation of surface microtopographic expressions of gilgai, which are formed atop the Coega Plateau (Figure 35).

9.2. Subsurface Bedrock Deformation Features Idenfied in this Study

The complex tectonic history of the area is reflected by the graben and horst topography and structural features recorded in the bedrock. This can be seen in a number of schematic profiles, where a horst block of Peninsula Formation quartzite (Op, blue) juxtaposed against the Cretaceous units (Jkk/Ks, pink), as depicted in Profiles B (Figure 13), AB (Figure 36a), and AD (Figure 36b). The occurrence of Peninsula Formation in Profiles C (Figure 11), I (Figure 16), AD (Figure 36b) and AE (Figure 36b) may also be the result of graben and horst structures, although adjacent boreholes are not of sufficient depth to confirm this suspicion. In all cases, except for Borehole 115 (Profiles B and AB), the quartzite is overlain by the Kirkwood Formation, but the upper bedrock-Algoa Group contact does not mimic the topography of the underlying Peninsula-Kirkwood contact. Highly fractured and shattered quartzite fault breccia were documented in Borehole 115. In most cases, there is very little apparent displacement of the top of bedrock, although in Profiles AD and AE (Figure 36b), which are in the Coega River Valley, the quartzite-based boreholes form the deepest bedrock surface in each profile, which suggests that the palaeochannel of the Coega River may have eroded along a localised zone of weakness in the underlying bedrock.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 67

Data coverage is likely the causative factor of the short fault segments. Should the boreholes be drilled to depth; this might provide the location of extended fault segments in the Harbour. The absence of the quartzite in adjacent boreholes could be because either the adjacent boreholes were not drilled deep enough to intersect the TMG, or the horsts are as narrow as data coverage suggests. Together, the horst blocks are apparently unconnected but may join at depth. These are inferred to be potential artefacts of the data coverage.

Deformation features such as fracturing, microshattering, microfracturing, slickensiding, and breccia were identified in the subsurface data collected for this study (Figure 32a—d). Some of these features may be of tectonic origin and do appear to be associated with the Coega fault zone; however, a number of features were identified outside the Coega fault zone corridor. Coega Kop Quarry is known to have undergone concentrated deformation (Figure 37). Fracturing, brecciation and fault gouge in boreholes in the vicinity of this quarry support these established observationsBedrock in the Ngqura (Coega) Harbour area also exhibits subsurface deformation features that appear to be aligned along structural trends at the projected end of the onshore Coega fault zone near the coast, an apparent trend is inferred from features suggestive of tectonic deformation i.e. fracturing, microshattering and brecciation identified in eight boreholes. The linear alignment of the boreholes showing evidence of tectonic deformation suggests a possible structure oriented between 80º and 90º (perpendicular) to the Coega fault zone. The deformation features in these boreholes are probably structurally associated with the Coega fault zone (i.e., splay- or secondary faults), but available data preclude detailed analysis of the orientation and nature of the possibly faults. There was no indication that the core was oriented prior to extraction; therefore a structural analysis was not undertaken. In addition, given the distance of the Coega study area to the Thyspunt site, extensive drilling studies to characterise the possible fault was not warranted.

9.3. Constraints on Vertical Deformation of the Coega Fault Zone Provided by Erosional Marine Terraces

Sufficient subsurface data are available in two areas to identify marine terrace platforms that appear to be relatively continuous across the Coega fault zone. These data are discussed in the following section.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 68

9.3.1. Broad High-Level Bedrock Platforms Between Coega Kop and the Ngqura Harbour: 40 ± 3 m Wave-Cut Platform

Data delineating the position of marine terraces in the area between Coega Kop and the Ngqura Harbour were discussed briefly in Chapter 8. Profiles Y through AE (Figures 28, 36, 39 and 38) were constructed to evaluate the continuity and elevation of the bedrock surface and also the overlying sediments.

Numerous boreholes that intersect bedrock define a broad bedrock platform that crosses the fault zone. The bedrock platform shows an apparent gentle seaward dip (gradient of ~ 0.01) from an elevation of at least 41—43 m amsl northwest of the N2 highway (Profiles R [Figure 22], AH [Figure 39], Y and Z [Figure 28]) to elevations of 37—38 m amsl near the N2/Neptune Interchange (Profile AA in Figure 28; see Figure 7 for locations of profiles). The thickness of cover deposits overlying the platform appears to increase to the south from 2—3 m (Profiles AH, R, and Y in Figures 32, 22 and 28, respectively) to approximately 10 m (Profile AE in Figure 36b). The largest apparent vertical difference in elevation of the top of bedrock surface across the fault zone in this area is about 2.5 m (based on Trial Pits TP26 and B25 as shown in Profile R [Figure 22]).

Profiles perpendicular to, and partly crossing the Coega fault zone (Profiles Y and AA in Figure 28), show 1 m or less of variation in the elevation of the top of bedrock across the central part of the Coega fault zone, and the lithofacies overlying the erosional platform do not appear to vary significantly. There does appear to be, however, a high degree of lateral and vertical variability in the continuity and thickness of calcrete layers within the cover sediments, as illustrated in Profile AA (Figure 28). This variability, in light of the evidence for no vertical offset of the underlying bedrock platform, suggests that the calcrete layers may be of limited use as distinct stratigraphic horizons to assess tectonic deformation. More distant trial pits (C14 and C15 in Profile R, Figure 22) appear to have intersected the same platform.

There is insufficient subsurface data, at this time, to define the elevation of the shoreline angle (back edge) of this marine terrace. Although data are not currently available to map and more definitively show the absence of vertical or horizontal deformation of the strandline of this marine terrace, the available data do suggest that, within a resolution of about 2±1 m, there is no vertical displacement of the

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 69

seaward portion of this platform across the Eastern Coega fault zone in the vicinity of the N2. The age of this marine terrace platform is estimated to be middle Pliocene.

9.3.2 –8±1 m Marine Terrace

Based on subsurface data, collected in the Keywall area of the Ngqura Harbour area, a relatively continuous bedrock platform is mapped across the projected trend of the Coega fault zone (Figure 24c). The best constraints on the estimated elevation of the shoreline angle of this terrace are provided by the data shown in Profiles J, L, N, and P (Figures 16, 17, 18 and 20, respectively) as summarised in Table 7. This platform is estimated to be middle Pleistocene (~330 ka or older than 400 ka).

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 70

10. CONCLUSIONS

The Coega subsurface geodatabase, which is based on data from over 500 boreholes and trial pits, is used to identify erosional and depositional marine terraces that can be used to constrain the timing of most recent deformation on the Eastern Coega fault zone. Marine terraces identified in this study at elevations of approximately 52–60 m, 10–12.5 m, and 6–7 m amsl are estimated to be approximately 4 Ma (middle Pliocene), 400 ka (MIS 11), and 125 ka (MIS 5e)

The chronology and altitude of the marine deposits described in this study are tentatively correlated with other marine deposits along the southern African coast. Information on the top of bedrock surface and overlying lithologies indicates that one or more marine platforms occur at elevations ranging from 40—60 m amsl and that these surfaces are correlated across the Coega fault zone with little or no vertical displacement. The Pliocene age previously proposed for these terraces (Goedhart & Hattingh 1997; Roberts et al. 2011) is supported by the cosmogenic burial-age data obtained from the Algoa Brick Quarry and suggests that the broad marine platforms across the Coega fault zone at ~50 m to 60 m amsl elevations have not undergone deformation since the earlier Pliocene (~4.0 Ma).

Borehole data in the vicinity of the Aldo Scribante Race Track and the N2/Neptune Interchange best document the apparent lack of vertical deformation of the leading edge (~40±3 m amsl) of the broad high platform. Although data are not currently available to map and more definitively show the absence of vertical or horizontal deformation of the strandline of this marine terrace, the available data do suggest that, within a resolution of about 2±1 m, there is no vertical displacement of the seaward portion of this platform across the Eastern Coega fault zone in the vicinity of the N2. The age of this marine terrace platform is estimated to be Late Pliocene (~ 3.6–2.6 Ma).

A probable marine-terrace abrasion–platform, that does have a reasonably well- constrained erosional shoreline angle at an elevation of –8±1 m amsl, is identified west of the present river mouth in the vicinity of the Harbour Keywall (Figure 24c). This marine platform extends across the Coega fault zone with no apparent vertical offset. This marine terrace platform is estimated to be no younger than MIS 9, (approximately 330 ka [Compton 2011]), and may be significantly older. This

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 71

observation is consistent with the evidence for no apparent deformation of the older Pliocene platform(s).

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 72

11. REFERENCES

Alvarez-Marron, J. Hetzel, R., Niedermann, S., Menéndez, R. & Marquínez, J., 2008. Origin, structure and exposure of a wave cut platform more than 1 Ma in age at the coast of Northern Spain: a multiple cosmogenic nuclide approach, Geomorphology 93 (3–4), 316–334.

Anderson, R.S., Densmore, A.L. & Ellis, M.A., 1999. The generation and degradation of marine terraces, Basin Research 11 (1), 7–19.

Bate, K.J. & Malan, J.A., 1992. Tectonostratigraphic evolution of the Algoa, Gamtoos and Pletmos Basins, offshore South Africa, in M.J. De Wit, & I.G.D. Ransome (eds.), Inversion Tectonics of the Cape Fold Belt, Karoo and Cretaceous Basins of South Africa, pp. 61–73, Balkema, Rotterdam.

Bateman, M.D., Holmes, P.J., Carr, A.S., Horton, B.P. & Jaiswal, M.K., 2004. Aeolianite and barrier dune construction spanning the last two glacial-interglacial cycles from the southern Cape coast, South Africa, Quaternary Science Reviews 23 (14–15), 1681–1698.

Baxter, A.J. & Meadows, M.E., 1999. Evidence for Holocene sea-level change at Verlorenvlei, Western Cape, South Africa, Quaternary International 56 (1), 65–79.

Bianca, M. & Caputo, R., 2003. Integrated study of Quaternary marine and fluvial terraces and morphotectonic analysis: The example of the low Agri Valley (Southern Italy) [abstract], Coastal Environmental Change During Sea-Level Highstands: A Global Synthesis with Implications for Management of Future Coastal Change, Puglia 2003 Final Conference Project IGCP 437, Otranto/Taranto, Puglia, Italy, September, pp. 45–47.

Bierman, P.R. 2012. Report 2. Cosmogenic Geochronology, Southern Africa Southern Coast. Marine Terraces, in Hanson, K.H., Glaser, L., Coppersmith, R., Roberts, D.L., Claassen, D. & Black, D.E., 2012. Thyspunt Geological Investigation— Marine Terrace Studies, Council for Geoscience, Report no. 2012-0034, NISP, Appendix E.1,,47 pp.

Bird, E., 2008. Coastal Geomorphology: An Introduction, John Wiley & Sons Ltd., Chichester, England, 411 pp.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 73

Bowen, D.Q., 2010. Sea-level ~400 000 years ago (MIS 11): Analogue for present and future sea-level? Climate of the Past 6, 19–29.

Bremner, J.M., 1979. The Bathymetry of Algoa Bay, Council for Geoscience, Report no. 1980-0007, 13 pp.

Bremner, J.M., 1991a. Bedrock morphology and Quaternary sediment in the vicinity of Port Elizabeth Harbour, in J.M. Bremner, A. du Plessis, J.G.K. Glass & R.W. Day (eds.), Algoa Bay—Marine Geoscientific Investigations, Bulletin of the Geological Survey of South Africa 100, 75–94.

Bremner, J.M., 1991b. The bathymetry of Algoa Bay, in J.M. Bremner, A. du Plessis, J.G.K. Glass & R.W. Day (eds.), Algoa Bay—Marine Geoscientific Investigations, Bulletin of the Geological Survey of South Africa 100, 3–18.

Bremner, J.M. & Day, R.W., 1991. Acoustic stratigraphy and Late Cenozoic sediments in Algoa Bay, in J.M. Bremner, A. du Plessis, J.G.K. Glass & R.W. Day (eds.), Algoa Bay—Marine Geoscientific Investigations, Bulletin of the Geological Survey of South Africa 100, 123–146.

Bridgland, D. & Westaway, R., 2008. Climatically controlled river terrace staircases: A worldwide Quaternary phenomenon, Geomorphology 98 (3–4), 285–315.

Broad, D.S., Jungslager, E.H.A., McLachlan, I.R. & Roux, J., 2006, Offshore Mesozoic basins, in M.R. Johnson, C.R. Anhaeusser & R.J. Thomas (eds.), The Geology of South Africa, pp. 553–571, Geological Society of South Africa, Johannesburg, Council for Geoscience, Pretoria, South Africa.

Brown, R.W., Rust, D.J., Summerfield, M.A., Gleadow, A.J.W. and de Wit, M.C.J., 1990. Early Cretaceous erosion in the south-western margin of Africa: Evidence from apatite fission track analysis and the offshore sedimentary record, Nuclear Tracks and Radiation Measurements 17 (3), 339–350.

Brown, R.W., Summerfield, M.A. & Gleadow, A.J.W., 2002. Denudation history along a transect of the Drakensberg Escarpment of southern Africa derived from apatite fission track thermochronology, Journal of Geophysical Research 107, 18 pp.,doi:10.1029/2001JB000745.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 74

Calderoni, G., Seta, M.D., Fredi, P., Palmieri, E.L., Nesci, O., Savelli, D. & Troiani, F., 2010. Geology of the Adriatic Area: Late Quaternary Geomorphological Evolution of the Adriatic Coast Reach Encompassing the Metauro, Cesano and Misa River Mouths (Northern Marche, Italy), GeoActa Special Publication 3, 109–124.

Carr, A.S., Bateman, M.D., Roberts, D.L., Murray-Wallace, C., Jacobs, Z. & Holmes, P.J., 2010. The last interglacial sea-level high stand on the southern Cape coastline of South Africa, Quaternary Research 73 (2), 351–363.

Centre for Excellence in Mining Innovation (CEMI), 2011. Geotechnical logging techniques, https://www.minewiki.org/index.php/Discontinuity_characterization, accessed April 11, 2012.

Chakraborty, P.P., 2006. Outcrop signatures of relative sea-level fall on a siliciclastic shelf: Examples from the Rewa Group of Proterozoic Vindhyan Basin. Journal of Earth System Science 115 (1), 23–26.

Clifton, H.E., Hunter, R.E. & Phillips, R.L., 1971. Depositional structures and processes in the non-barred high-energy nearshore, Journal of Sedimentary Petrology 41, 651—670.

Cockburn, H.A.P., Brown, R.W., Summerfield, M.A. & Seidl, M.A., 2000. Quantifying passive margin denudation and landscape development using a combined fission- track thermochronology and cosmogenic isotope analysis approach, Earth and Planetary Science Letters 179, 429–435.

Compton, J.S., 2001. Holocene sea-level fluctuations inferred from the evolution of depositional environments of the southern Langebaan Lagoon salt marsh, South Africa, The Holocene 11 (4), 395–405.

Compton, J.S., 2006. The mid-Holocene sea-level highstand at Bogenfels Pan on the southwest coast of Namibia, Quaternary Research 66 (2), 303–310.

Compton, J.S., 2011. Pleistocene sea-level fluctuations and human evolution on the southern coastal plain of South Africa, Quaternary Science Reviews 30, 506-527.

Cooper, J.A.G., 2001. Geomorphological variability among microtidal estuaries from the wave-dominated South African coast, Geomorphology 40 (1–2), 99–122.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 75

Council for Geoscience (CGS), 2000. The Port Elizabeth 1:50,000 scale geological map set: sheets 3325DC & DD, 3425BA Port Elizabeth, 3325CD & 3425AB Uitenhage, 3325CB Uitenhage North and 3325DA Addo, Pretoria, South Africa.

Council for Geoscience (CGS), 2004. 3325DC3 Coega, 1:10,000 scale geological map, Pretoria, South Africa.

Craig, A., 1997. The landscape evolution of the Garden Route between Bloukrans River and Alexandria Coastal Dunefied, unpublished thesis, University of Port Elizabeth, 50 pp.

Creech, H., Jaeger, J., Wasstol, M. & Chenje, J., 2008. Developing an Impact Strategy for Your IEA. Module 3 in IEA Training Manual—A Training Manual on Integrated Environmental Assessment and Reporting, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), United Nations Environment Programme and the International Institute for Sustainable Development, Canada, 70 pp, http://www.unep.org/ieach/iea/training/ manual/module4/1088.aspx, accessed online on April 11, 2012.

Dashtgard, S.E. & Gingras, M.K., 2007. Tidal controls on the morphology and sedimentology of gravel-dominated deltas and beaches: Examples from the megatidal Bay of Fundy, Canada, Journal of Sedimentary Research 77 (12), 1063– 1077.

Demko, T.M., Currie, B.S. & Nicoll, K.A., 2004. Regional palaeoclimatic and stratigraphic implications of paleosols and fluvial/overbank architecture in the Morrison Formation (Upper Jurassic), Western Interior, USA, Sedimentary Geology 167, 115–135.

Dingle, R.V., Seisser, W.G. & Newton, A.R., 1983. Mesozoic and Tertiary Geology of Southern Africa, A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 375 pp.

Doherty, S., 1993. The seismic expression of the St. Croix fault plane, offshore Algoa Basin, showing a history of extension, inversion, compression and strike-slip, South African Geophysical Association 3rd technical meeting, 71–74.

Du Plessis, A. & Glass, J.G.K., 1981. Geology of the Sea Floor in the Vicinity of Jahleel and St Croix Islands, Algoa Bay, Council for Geoscience, Report no. 1981- 0069, 20 pp.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 76

Du Plessis, A. & Glass, J.G.K., 1991. Geology of the sea floor in the vicinity of Jahleel and St Croix Islands, Algoa Bay, Bulletin of the Geological Survey of South Africa 100, 95–122.

Du Toit, A.L., 1955. The Uitenhage artesian basin, South African Journal of Science 52, 66–72.

Erlanger, E.D., 2010. Rock uplift, erosion and tectonic uplift of South Africa determined with cosmogenic 26Al and 10Be, unpublished MSc thesis, Purdue University, 183 pp.

Fouché, J., Bate, KJ. & Van der Merwe R. 1992. Plate tectonic setting of the Mesozoic Basins, southern offshore, South Africa: a review. , in M.J. De Wit, & I.G.D. Ransome (eds.), Inversion Tectonics of the Cape Fold Belt, Karoo and Cretaceous Basins of South Africa, Balkema, Rotterdam, 33—45.

Gadagbui, B., Zhao, J., Maier, A. & Dourson, M., 2005. The Scientific Rationale for Deriving Database and Toxicodynamic Uncertainty Factors for Reproductive or Developmental Toxicants, Toxicology Excellence for Risk Assessment (TERA). http://www.tera.org/Peer/UFD/PC2%20UFD%20Final%208-24-05.pdf, 89 pp., accessed April 11, 2012.

Galili, E., Zviely, D., Ronen, A. & Mienis, H.K., 2007. Beach deposits of MIS 5e high sea stand as indicators for tectonic stability of the Carmel coastal plain, Israel, Quaternary Science Reviews 26 (19–21), 2544–2557.

Gibling, M.R., 2006. Width and thickness of fluvial channel bodies and valley fills in the geological record: A literature compilation and classification, Journal of Sedimentary Research 76 (5), 731–770.

Gießler, V. no date. Classification and geochemistry of arid and semi-arid paleosols, http://www.geo.tu-freiberg.de/oberseminar/os06_07/geissler.pdf 89 pp., accessed August 13, 2012.

Gilchrist, A.R., Kooi, H. & Beaumont, C., 1994. Post-Gondwana geomorphic evolution of southwestern Africa: Implications for the controls on landscape development from observations and numerical experiments, Journal of Geophysical Research 96 (B6), 12,211–12,228.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 77

Glass, J.G.M. & Du Plessis, A., 1980. Geological and Geophysical Investigation of the Area Between Jahleel Island and the Mainland, Council for Geoscience, Report no. 1980-0211, 25 pp.

Goedhart, M.L.G., 2004. A Geological Investigation of Neotectonic Reactivation Along the Ceres-Kango-Baviaanskloof-Coega fault System in the Southern and Eastern Cape, South Africa, Council for Geoscience, Report no. 2004-0189, NISP- SHA-013582#, 153 pp.

Goedhart, M.L.G., 2005. A Geological Investigation of Neotectonic Reactivation Along the Ceres-Kango-Baviaanskloof-Coega fault System in the Southern and Eastern Cape, South Africa: Field Reconnaissance Report, Council for Geoscience, Report no. 2005-0084, NISP-SHA-015892#, 133 pp.

Goedhart, M.L. & Hattingh, J., 1997. The Geology of the Coega River Mouth and Proposed Industrial Development zone, Eastern Cape, Council for Geoscience, Report no. 1997-0008, 106 pp.

Goedhart, M.L., Small, G.W. & Hulley, V., 2004. Groundwater Targeting in the Algoa Bay Region, from Humansdorp to Alexandria, Eastern Cape, South Africa, Council for Geoscience, Report no. 2004-1061, 261 pp.

Hälbich, I.W., 1983. A tectogenesis of the Cape Fold Belt, Special Publication of the Geological Society of South Africa 12, 165–175.

Hanson, K.H., Glaser, L., Coppersmith, R., Roberts, D.L., Claassen, D. & Black, D.E., 2012. Thyspunt Geological Investigation—Marine Terrace Studies, Council for Geoscience, Report no. 2012-0034, NISP, 112 pp., Appendices A–G, 3 plates.

Hattingh, J., 1996. Fluvial response to allocyclic influences during the development of the lower Sundays River, Eastern Cape, South Africa, Quaternary International 33, 3–10.

Hattingh, J., 2001. Late Cenozoic Drainage Evolution in the Algoa Basin with Special Preference to the Sundays River Valley, Council for Geoscience, Bulletin of the Council for Geoscience 128, 141 pp.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 78

Hattingh, J., 2008. Fluvial systems and landscape evolution, in C.A. Lewis (ed.), Geomorphology of the Eastern Cape South Africa, pp. 21–42, National Inquiry Services Centre, Grahamstown, South Africa.

Hattingh, J. & Goedhart, M.L., 1997. Neotectonic control on drainage evolution in the Algoa basin, Eastern Cape, South African Journal of Geology 100 (1), 43–52.

Hearty, P.J., Hollin, J.T., Neumann, A.C., O’Leary, M.J. & McCulloch, M., 2007. Global sea-level fluctuations during the Last Interglaciation (MIS 5e), Quaternary Science Reviews 26 (17–18), 2090–2112.

Hendey, Q.B., 1981. Geological succession at Langebaanweg, Cape Province, and global events of the Late Tertiary, South African Journal of Science 77 (1–2), 33–38.

Henriet, J.P., De Batist, D. & Verschuren, M., 1991. Early fracturing of Palaeogene clays, southernmost North Sea: Relevance to mechanisms of primary hydrocarbon migration, in A.M. Spencer (ed.), Generation, Accumulation and Production of Europe’s Hydrocarbons, Special Publication of the European Association of Petroleum Geoscientists 1, pp. 217–227, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Hill, R.S., 1988. Quaternary faulting in the south-eastern Cape Province, South African Journal of Geology 91 (3), 399–403.

Huat, B.B.K., Toll, G.D. & Prasad, A. 2012. Residual soils, in Huat, B.B.K., Toll, G.D. & Prasad, A. (eds.). Handbook of tropical residual soils engineering, CRC Press/Balkema, Leiden, The Netherlands, 23—64.

Illenberger, W.K., 1978. The geology of Saint Croix Island including a plane table map and structural geology of Port Elizabeth, unpublished Honours thesis, University of Port Elizabeth, 17 pp.

Ingram, B.A., 1998. The Coega fault and Table Mountain Group rocks, northwest of Uitenhage, unpublished MSc thesis, University of Port Elizabeth, 152 pp.

Jacobs, Z. 2006. Optically stimulated dating of Quaternary deposits along the western and southern South African coast. CSIR Report No. CSIR/NRE/PW/ER/2006/0033/C, 140pp.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 79

Jacobs, Z., Roberts, R.G., Lachlan, T.J., Karkanas, P., Marean, C.W. & Roberts, D.L., 2011. Development of the SAR TT-OSL procedure for dating Middle Pleistocene dune and shallow marine deposits along the southern Cape coast of South Africa, Quaternary Geochronology 6 (5), 491–513.

Kijko, A., Bejaichund, M., Goedhart, M., Saunders, I. & Pule, T., 2006. Phase 1: Preliminary Statement of Seismic Hazard for Port of Ngqura, Port Elizabeth, Council for Geoscience, Report no. 2006-0345, 38 pp.

Knox, G.J., 1977. Caliche profile formation, Saldanha Bay (South Africa), Sedimentology 24, 657–674.

Le Roux, F.G., 1987. Lithostratigraphy of the Alexandria Formation, South African Committee for Stratigraphy, Lithostratigraphic Series 1, Council for Geoscience, Pretoria, 18 pp.

Le Roux, F.G., 1989a. The lithostratigraphy of Cenozoic deposits along the south- east Cape coast as related to sea-level changes, unpublished MSc thesis, University of Stellenbosch, 247 pp.

Le Roux, F.G., 1989b. The Lithostratigraphy of the Bluewater Bay Formation, South African Committee for Stratigraphy, Lithostratigraphic Series 1, Council for Geoscience, Pretoria, 9 pp.

Le Roux, F.G., 1990a. Algoa Group, Catalogue of South African Committee for Stratigraphy, Catalogue of Lithostratigraphic Units, Council for Geoscience, Pretoria, 2 pp.

Le Roux, F.G., 1990b. Palaeontological correlation of Cenozoic marine deposits along the southern and western coasts, Cape Province, South African Journal of Geology 93 (3), 514–518.

Le Roux, F.G., 1991. Lithostratigraphy of the Salnova Formation, South African Committee for Stratigraphy, Lithostratigraphic Series 11, Council for Geoscience, Pretoria, 21 pp.

Le Roux, F.G., 2000. Explanation of sheets 3325DC & DD, 3425BA Port Elizabeth, 3325CD & 3425AB Uitenhage, 3325CB Uitenhage Noord, and 3325DA Addo, Council for Geoscience, Pretoria, 55 pp.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 80

Le Roux, W.C., 2000. Geology of the Area Immediately Adjacent to the Coega fault in the Uitenhage Vicinity, Eastern Cape, Council for Geoscience, Report no. 2000- 0017, 41 pp.

Lock, B.E., 1980. Flat plate subduction and the Cape Fold Belt of South Africa, Geology 8, 35–39.

Marker, M.E., 1987. A note on marine benches of the southern Cape, South African Journal of Geology 90, 120—124.

Marker, M.E. & Holmes, P.J., 1999. Lateritisation on limestones of the Tertiary Wankoe Formation and its relationship to the African Surface, southern Cape, South Africa, Catena 38, 1–21.

Marker, M.E. & Holmes, P.J., 2010. The geomorphology of the Coastal Platform in the southern Cape, South African Geographic Journal 92 (2), 105–116.

Maud, R.R., 1996. The macro-geomorphology of the Eastern Cape, in C.A. Lewis (ed.), The Geomorphology of the Eastern Cape South Africa, pp. 1–18, Grocott and Sherry Publishers, Grahamstown, South Africa.

Maud, R.R., 2008. The macro-geomorphology of the Eastern Cape, in C.A. Lewis (ed.), Geomorphology of the Eastern Cape South Africa, 2nd edition, pp. 1–20, National Inquiry Services Centre, Grahamstown, South Africa.

McLachlan, I.R. & McMillan, I.K., 1976. Review and stratigraphic significance of southern Cape Mesozoic palaeontology, Transactions of the Geological Society of South Africa 79 (2), 197–212.

McLachlan, I.R. & McMillan, I.K., 1979. Microfaunal biostratigraphy, chronostratigraphy and history of Mesozoic and Cenozoic deposits on the coastal margin of South Africa, in A.M. Anderson & W.J. Van Biljon (eds.), Some Sedimentary Basins and Associated Ore Deposits of South Africa, Special publication of the Geological Society of South Africa 6, pp. 161–181, Council for Geoscience, Pretoria, South Africa.

McMillan, I.K., 2003. The foraminifera of the late Valanginian to Hauterivian (Early Cretaceous) Sundays River Formation of the Algoa Basin, Eastern Cape Province, South Africa, Annals of the South African Museum 106, 274 pp.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 81

McStay, J., & Doel, S., 1998. Coegakop Portnet Quarry: Geotechnical investigation, Gibb Africa, Report no. J200 00B, 144 pp.

Miall, A.D. 1996. The Geology of Fluvial deposits: Sedimentary facies, basin analysis and petroleum geology, Springer Verlag, Berlin, 582 pp.

Miller, D.E., Yates, R.J. & Parkington, J.E., 1995. Late Holocene coastal change in the Southwestern Cape, South Africa, Quaternary International 29/30, 3–10.

Moore, A., Blenkinsop, T. & Cotterill, F., 2009. Southern African topography and erosion history: Plumes or plate tectonics? Terra Nova 21, 310–315, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3121.2009.00887.x.

Muhs, D.R., Wehmiller, J.F., Simmons, K.R. & York, L.L., 2004. Quaternary sea-level histories of the United States, Developments in Quaternary Science 1, 147–183.

Murphy, M.A. & Salvador, A., 1998. Stratigraphic Guide—An abridged version, Episodes 22 (4), 255–272.

Murray-Wallace, C.V., 2007. Eustatic sea-level changes since the last glaciation, in S.A. Elias (ed.), Encyclopedia of Quaternary Science, vol. 4 of four-volume set, pp. 3034-3043, Elsevier.

Nash, D.J. & McLaren, S.J., 2003. Kalahari valley calcretes: Their nature, origins, and environmental significance, Quaternary International 111, 3—22.

National Geo-Spatial Information (NGI), 2012. Datums and coordinate systems, http://www.ngi.gov.za/index.php/Geodesy-GPS/datums-and-coordinate-systems .html, accessed April 11, 2012.

Netterberg, F., 1969. The interpretation of some basic calcrete types, South African Archaeological Bulletin 24, 117—122.

Newton, A.R. 1973. A gravity folding model for the Cape Fold Belt, Transactions of the Geological Society of South Africa 76, 145–152.

Newton, A.R., Shone, R.W. & Booth, P.W.K., 2006. The Cape Fold Belt, in M.R. Johnson, C.R. Anhaeusser & R.J. Thomas (eds.), The Geology of South Africa, pp.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 82

521–530, Geological Society of South Africa, Johannesburg, Council for Geoscience, Pretoria, South Africa.

New Zealand Geotechnical Society (NZGS). 2005. Field description of soil and rock. Guideline for the field classification and description of soil and rock for engineering purposes, in Burns, D., Farqhuar, G., Mills, M. & Williams, A. (Eds.), New Zealand Geotechnical Society Incorporated, New Zealand, 38 pp.

Nickall, E.S.L., 2005. Sediment dynamics and compositional changes related to the construction of the Port of Ngqura, Algoa Bay, South Africa, unpublished Honours thesis, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, 95 pp.

Oates, R. & McStay, J., 1998. Coega Industrial Harbour: Geotechnical Site Investigation Report, Gibb Africa, Report no. J80 405G, 283 pp.

Oregon Geologic Data Compilation (OGDC), no date. Background and data limitations, Cooperative project with the Portland State University and the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, http://www.oregongeology.org/sub/ogdc/background.htm, 17 pp, accessed April 11, 2012.

Partridge, T.C., 1990. Cainozoic environmental changes in Southern Africa, South African Journal of Science 86, 315–317.

Partridge, T.C. 1998. Of diamonds, dinosaurs and diastrophism: 150 million years of landscape evolution in southern Africa. South African Journal of Geology, 101, 165- 184.

Partridge, T.C., 2007. The tectonics and geomorphology of Africa: An overview [abstract], in J. Braun, O. Dauteuil, K. Gallagher, F. Guillocheau, C. Robin, D. Rouby, M. Simoes & J.J. Tiercelin (eds.), Program for international workshop TopoAfrica: Evolution of the African Topography over the Last 250 My: From the Sedimentary Record to Mantle Dynamics, University of Rennes, France, November 13–17, 3 pp.

Partridge, T.C., Botha, G.A. & Haddon, I.G., 2006. Cenozoic deposits of the interior, in M.R. Johnson, C.R. Anhaeusser & R.J. Thomas (eds.), The Geology of South Africa, pp. 585–604, Geological Society of South Africa, Johannesburg, Council for Geoscience, Pretoria, South Africa.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 83

Partridge, T.C., Dollar, E.S.J., Moolman, J. & Dollar, L.H., 2010. The geomorphic provinces of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland: A physiographic subdivision for earth and environmental scientists, Transactions of the Royal Society of South Africa 65, 1–47.

Partridge, T.C. & Maud, R.R., 1987. Geomorphic evolution of southern Africa since the Mesozoic, South African Journal of Geology 90 (2), 179–208.

Partridge, T.C. & Maud, R.R., 1988. The geomorphic evolution of Southern Africa: A comparative review, in G.F. Dardis & B.P. Moon (eds.), Geomorphological Studies in Southern Africa, pp. 5–15, Balkema, Rotterdam.

Partridge T.C. & Maud, R.R., 2000. Macro-scale geomorphic evolution of southern Africa, in T.C. Partridge & R.R. Maud (eds.), The Cainozoic of Southern Africa— Oxford Monographs on Geology and Geophysics 40, pp. 3–18, Oxford University Press, Inc., Oxford, England.

Pazzaglia, F.J., 1999. Active tectonics in passive margin settings, in K.L. Hanson, K.I. Kelson, M.A. Angell & W.R. Lettis (eds.), Techniques for Identifying Faults and Determining Their Origins, pp. A-143–A-183, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG/CR-5503.

Pazzaglia, F.J., in press. Fluvial terraces, in E. Wohl (ed.), Treatise in Geomorphology, Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, http://www.ees.lehigh.edu/ ftp/retreat/outgoing/preprints_and_reprints/pazzaglia_submitted_terraces.pdf, 78 pp, accessed April 11, 2012.

Pedoja, K., Husson, L., Regard, V., Cobbold, P.R., Ostanciaux, E., Johnson, M.E., Kershaw, S., Saillard, M., Martinod, J., Furgerot, L., Weil, P. & Delcaillau, B., 2011. Relative sea-level fall since the last interglacial stage: Are coasts uplifting worldwide? Earth-Science Reviews 108 (1–2), 1–15.

Pether, J., 1986. Late Tertiary and early Quaternary marine deposits of the Namaqualand coast, Cape Province: New perspectives, South African Journal of Science 82, 464–470.

Pether, J., 1994. The sedimentology, palaeontology and stratigraphy of coastal-plain deposits at Hondeklip Bay, Namaqualand, South Africa, unpublished MSc thesis, University of Cape Town, 313 pp.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 84

Pether, J., Roberts, D.L. & Ward, J.D., 2000. Deposits of the West Coast, in T.C. Partridge & R.R. Maud (eds.), The Cainozoic of Southern Africa—Oxford Monographs on Geology and Geophysics 40, pp. 33–54, Oxford University Press, Inc., Oxford, England.

Potter, P.E., Maynard, J.B. & Depetris, P.J. 2005. Mud and Mudstones, Springer- Verlag, Heidelberg, Berlin, 297 pp.

Price, D.G., & Hack, H.R.G.K., 2009. Geological Masses, in D.G. Price & M.H. Freitas (ed.), Engineering Geology: Principles and Practices, pp. 63—90, Springer- Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg.

Pusch, R., 2006, Mechanical properties of clays and clay minerals in F. Bergaya, B.K.G. Theng & G. Lagaly (eds.), Handbook of clay science - Developments in clay science 1, pp. 247–260.

Ramsay, P.J. & Cooper, J.A.G., 2002. Late Quaternary sea-level change in South Africa, Quaternary Research 57 (1), 82–90.

Reddering, J.S.V., 2012. Memorandum: Contribution of the African surfaces to the South African Landscape, Council for Geoscience, Report no. 2012-012, 11 pp.

Reddering, J.S.V., Claassen, D. and & Coppersmith, R., 2012. An Investigation into the Western Coega fault for Seismic Source Characterisation of the Proposed Thyspunt Nuclear Site, Eastern Cape, South Africa, Council for Geoscience, Report no. 2012-0030, 83 pp.

Reid, J.A.F., 1996a. An Engineering Geological Investigation for Low Cost Housing Development at Despatch, Eastern Cape, Council for Geoscience, Report no. 1996- 0200, 71 pp.

Reid, J.A.F., 1996b. Report on Founding Conditions for Houses Bonded by the First National and Standard Banks at Reservoir Hills Township, Despatch, Council for Geoscience, Report no. 1996-0256, 116 pp.

Roberts, D.L., 2005. Dating and Preliminary Correlation of Raised Marine and Estuarine Terraces on the Western and Southern Coasts of South Africa, Revision 1, Council for Geoscience, Report no. 2005-0183, NISP-SHA-016344#P1-141, 126 pp.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 85

Roberts, D.L., 2006. Dating and Preliminary Correlation of Raised Marine and Estuarine Terraces on the Western and Southern Coasts of South Africa, Final Report, Council for Geoscience, Report no. 2006-0186, NISP-SHA-018230#P1-206, 111 pp.

Roberts, D.L., Bateman, M.D., Murray-Wallace, C.V., Carr, A.S. & Holmes, P.J., 2008. Last Interglacial fossil elephant trackways dated by OSL/AAR in coastal aeolianites, Still Bay, South Africa, Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 257 (3), 261–279.

Roberts, D.L., Bateman, M.D., Murray-Wallace, C.V., Carr, A.S. & Holmes, P.J., 2009. West coast dune plumes: Climate driven contrasts in dunefield morphogenesis along the western and southern South African coasts, Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 271 (1–2), 24–38.

Roberts, D.L. & Berger, L.R., 1997. Last Interglacial (c. 117 kyr) human footprints from South Africa, South African Journal of Science 93, 349–350.

Roberts, D.L., Botha, G.A., Maud, R.R. & Pether, J., 2006. Coastal Cenozoic Deposits, in M.R. Johnson, C.R. Anhaeusser & R.J. Thomas (eds.), The Geology of South Africa, pp. 605–628, Geological Society of South Africa, Johannesburg; Council for Geoscience, Pretoria, South Africa.

Roberts, D.L., Karkanas, P., Jacobs, Z., Marean, C.W. & Roberts, R.G., 2012. Melting ice sheets 400,000 years ago raised sea-level by 13 m: Past analogue for future trends, Earth and Planetary Science Letters 357—358, 226—237.

Roberts, D.L., Matthews, T., Herries, A.I.R., Boulter, C., Scott, L., Dondo, C., Mtembi, P., Browning, C., Smith, R.M.H., Haarhof, P. & Bateman, D., 2011. Regional and global context of the Late Cenozoic Langebaanweg (LBW) palaeontological site: West Coast of South Africa, Earth-Science Reviews 166, 191–214.

Ruddock, A., 1968. Cainozoic sea-level and diastrophism in a region bordering Algoa Bay, Transactions of the Geological Society of South Africa 71, 209–233.

Shone, R.W., 1976. The sedimentology of the Mesozoic Algoa Basin. Unpublished MSc thesis, University of Port Elizabeth, 48 pp.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 86

Shone, R., 1978. A case for lateral gradation between the Kirkwood and Sundays River Formations, Algoa Basin, Transactions of the Geological Society of South Africa 81, 319–326.

Shone, R.W., 2006. Onshore Post-Karoo Mesozoic deposits, in M.R. Johnson, C.R. Anhaeusser & R.J. Thomas (eds.), The Geology of South Africa, 2nd Edition, pp. 541–552, Geological Society of South Africa, Johannesburg; Council for Geoscience, Pretoria, South Africa.

Smuts, W.J., 1987. The sedimentology of the Alexandria Formation, unpublished MSc thesis, University of Port Elizabeth, 225 pp.

SOEKOR, 1976. Structure of the Mesozoic succession of the Agulhas Bank, Report Compiled by the Technical Department of the Southern Oil Exploration Corporation (Pty.) Ltd., 13 pp.

South African Bureau of Standards (SABS), 2012. South African National Standard: Soil profiling and rotary percussion borehole logging on dolomite land in Southern Africa for engineering purposes, SANS 633: Geotechnical investigations for township development, Draft copy, http://www.geotechnicaldivision.co.za/AZ%2096- 10%20_DSS_%20633.pdf, accessed August 3, 2012, 35 pp.

South African Committee for Stratigraphy (SACS), 1980. Stratigraphy of South Africa. Part 1. Lithostratigraphy of the Republic of South Africa, South West Africa/Namibia and the Republics of Bophuthatswana, Transkei and Venda, in L.E. Kent (compiler), Handbook of the Geological Survey of South Africa 8, 690 pp., Geological Survey of South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa.

Stear, D.A., 1987. The topographic evolution of the Cenozoic landsurface between Port Elizabeth and Alexandria, unpublished MSc thesis, University of Port Elizabeth, 215 pp.

Thamm, A.G. & Johnson, M.R., 2006. The Cape Supergroup, in M.R. Johnson, C.R. Anhaeusser & R.J. Thomas (eds.), The Geology of South Africa, pp. 443–460, Geological Society of South Africa, Johannesburg; Council for Geoscience, Pretoria, South Africa.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 87

Tinker, J., de Wit, M. & Brown, R., 2008a. Linking source and sink: Evaluating the balance between onshore erosion and offshore sediment accumulation since Gondwana break-up, South Africa, Tectonophysics 455, 94–103.

Tinker, J., de Wit, M. & Brown, R., 2008b. Mesozoic exhumation of the southern Cape, South Africa, quantified using apatite fission track thermochronology, Tectonophysics 455, 77–93.

Toerien, D.K., & Hill, R.S., 1989. The geology of the Port Elizabeth area— Explanation of Sheet 3324 (1:250,000), Geological Survey of South Africa, Pretoria, 35 pp.

Van Zyl, M., 1997. The landscape evolution of the Garden Route between the Bloukrans River and Mossel Bay, unpublished MSc thesis, University of Port Elizabeth, 135 pp.

Venter, I.S., Du Preez, R.W., A’Bear, A.G. & Erasmus, D.S., 2002. Report on the geotechnical investigation for township estate of Zambezi Country Estate in Pretoria (Montana Tuine Extension 34, 36 and 38), Africon Engineering International, report no. 508 58/G1, 33pp.

Vermaak, J.J.G., 2000. Geotechnical and hydrogeological characterization of residual soils in the vadose zone, unpublished Philosophiae Doctor, University of Pretoria, 210 pp.

Williams, D., Wilding, L., Lynn, W., Kovda, I. & Chervenka, G., n.d. Slickenside arrangement in Burleson clay—A udic haplustert, Soil Congress, Symposium 4, poster presentation, http://www.natres.psu.ac.th/Link?SoilCongress/bdd/sump4/122- t.pdf, accessed April 11, 2012.

Winter, H. de la R., 1973. Geology of the Algoa Basin, South Africa, in G. Blant (ed.), Sedimentary Basins of the African Coast—Part 2. South and East Coast, pp. 17–48, Association of African Geological Surveys, Paris.

Witt, W.G., 1995. The Shell Exploration and Production Standard Legend, Shell International Exploration and Production B.V., The Hague, The Netherlands, 212 pp.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 88

Wonnacott, R., 2012. The Implementation of the Hartebeesthoek 94 Co-ordinate System in South Africa, http://www.fig.net/commission5/reports/wonnacott.pdf, accessed April 11, 2012, 8 pp.

Zadorozhnaya, D., Goedhart, M.L. & Claassen, D., 2010. Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality emergency water augmentation: Time domain electro-magnetic profiles across the Coega fault groundwater target, Council for Geoscience, Report no. 2010- 0185, 27 pp.

Zecchin, M., Nalin, R. & Roda, C., 2004. Raised Pleistocene marine terraces of the Crotone Peninsula (Calabria, southern Italy): Facies analysis and organisation of their deposits, Sedimentary Geology 172 (1–2), 165–185.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 89

12. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The subsurface neotectonic evaluation of the Eastern Coega fault corridor were conducted as a collaborative effort by individuals from the Council for Geoscience and AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.. The participants and their roles are listed below.

We also acknowledge Arcus Gibb Port Elizabeth, Arcus Gibb Cape Town, Goba Pty Ltd and Transnet for participation in data sharing.

Council for Geoscience

Dr. Johann Neveling Internal review, oversight and scientific editing

Dr. Koos Reddering Discussions and guidance

Additional Participants

Dr. Paul Bieman (University of Vermont) conducted cosmogenic nuclide geochronologic studies in support of the project, participated in the collection of field samples, and attended several working meetings to discuss and evaluate interpretations of the ages of palaeoshoreline features.

Ms. Nancy Sutherland was responsible for some technical editing.

Recognition is also due to the Eastern Cape Unit staff and administrative components and Eskom management and administrative team who supported various aspects of the project.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 90

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 91

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 92

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 93

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 94

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 95

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 96

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 97

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 98

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 99

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 100

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 101

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 102

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 103

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 104

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 105

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 106

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 107

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 108

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 109

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 110

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 111

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 112

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 113

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 114

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 115

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 116

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 117

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 118

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 119

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 120

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 121

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 122

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 123

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 124

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 125

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 126

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 127

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 128

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 129

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 130

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 131

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 132

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 133

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 134

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 135

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 136

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 137

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 138

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 139

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 140

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 141

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 142

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 143

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; thereefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 144

APPENDIX A: GLOBAL PALAEOSEA-LEVEL RECORD AND SOUTH AFRICAN PALAEOSEA-LEVEL DATA

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 145

A.1. GLOBAL SEA-LEVEL RECORD

Changes in relative sea level (RSL) result from the interplay of several processes operating at different rates and over contrasting spatial and temporal scales. RSL is defined as the height of the ocean surface relative to the solid earth (Milne & Shennan 2007). Changes in RSL are driven, therefore, by processes that produce a height shift in either of these two bounding surfaces.

In general, global sea level was high from the Mesozoic through the Eocene and has since slowly fallen with some variation due to orbital forcing of polar ice accumulation (Zachos et al. 2001; Lisiecki & Raymo 2005; Jouzel et al. 2007; Miller et al. 2011; Figure A-1). Sea-level curves that cover the Mesozoic to Recent sediments can be based on several different indicators of sea level and climate, including sequence stratigraphy (e.g., Vail et al. 1977; Haq et al. 1987), and δ18O (e.g., Miller et al. 2005; Lisiecki & Raymo 2005), and often include modelling to account for compaction and changes in sedimentation rates. During the Cenozoic, sea level peaked at more than 100 m above modern sea level in the Eocene (Zachos et al. 2001; Miller et al. 2005). An increase in polar ice caps during the Oligocene, and the related fall in sea level, was followed by warming in the Late Oligocene and Early Miocene (Zachos et al. 2001). In the late Middle Miocene (13.6–11.4 Ma), a sharp decline in sea level of 45–68 m amplitude (John et al. 2004) was associated with the permanent establishment of the East Antarctic Ice Sheet (Zachos et al. 2001). The general trend in the Pliocene and Pleistocene was cooling, an expansion of polar ice caps, and a fall in sea level (Lisiecki & Raymo 2005; Bintanja & van de Wal 2008; Figure A-2).

From the Late Miocene, sea level fell from a mean at approximately modern sea level to approximately 10 m below modern sea level at the end of the Pliocene (2.6 Ma) (Miller et al. 2011; Figure A-2). Within this time frame, sea level varied about the mean during periods of polar ice accumulation and melting. During the mid-Pliocene warm period (~3.3–3.0 Ma), sea level rose from approximately 65 m below to between 5 and 40 m above modern sea level (Dwyer & Chandler 2009; Raymo et al. 2009). Miller et al. (2012) calculate that sea level in the Pliocene was 22 ± 10 m higher (95% confidence) or 22 ± 5 m higher (68% confidence) than modern sea level. Large variations in estimates of sea-level maximum during this time period are due to the use of different sea-level proxies, study locations, and uncertainties regarding the sensitivity of polar ice sheets (Raymo et al. 2009, 2011). Through the mid-Pliocene warm period, sea level fell to 40 m or more below modern sea level three times and rose more than 10 m above modern sea level four times (Dwyer & Chandler 2009). Between the mid-Pliocene warm period and the Pleistocene MIS 11 (~420 ka), sea level did not approach modern sea level. The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 1

Over the last 3 Myr, the climate cooled, ice sheets grew, and the contrast between glacial and interglacial periods increased in benthic δ18O isotope records (Lisiecki & Raymo 2005; Bintanja & van de Wal 2008; Figure A-2). At approximately 1 Ma, during MIS 25 and 31, global sea level rose to approximately 10 m below modern sea level (Bintanja & van de Wal 2008). This time period, known as the mid-Pleistocene transition, is also when glacial cycles were shifting from 41 kyr to 100 kyr (Bintanja & van de Wal 2008).

During the Quaternary, the dominant mechanism responsible for sea level changes has been the progressive buildup and decay of continental-scale ice sheets in response to Milankovitch forcing insolation changes. Although global changes in eustatic sea level are related to changing ice volumes, locally, tectonic factors such as glacio- and hydro-isostasy influence the RSL curve and expression or development of site-specific geomorphic features. The timing and magnitude of these eustatic changes have tended to conform to a consistent pattern, as indirectly indicated by the marine oxygen isotope record and corroborated by geomorphologic and stratigraphic evidence from tectonically uplifted and more stable coastal areas (Murray-Wallace 2007b). However, as noted below, there is still a significant amount of uncertainty in deciphering a global sea-level curve that can be used for site-specific studies in regions where sequences of terraces or palaeoshoreline features are not well dated.

Oxygen isotopic variations of δ18O in foraminifera preserved in deep ocean sediments are a commonly cited proxy for developing continuous reconstructions of ice volume and sea level over late Quaternary time (Shackleton & Opdyke 1973; Chappell & Shackleton 1986; Labeyrie et al. 1987; Shackleton 1987, 2000; Chappell et al. 1996). Interglacial and interstadial periods correspond to odd-numbered marine oxygen isotope stages (MIS; also referred to in the literature as oxygen isotope stages, or OIS; Tables A-1 and A-2), and glacial periods correspond to even-numbered MIS stages. Some stages are divided into substages, such as MIS 5, with 5a, 5c, and 5e being warm periods and 5b and 5d being cold periods. Figure A-3 presents two recent interpretations of Quaternary global sea-level history for the past 450 kyr derived from such studies (Waelbroeck et al. 2002; Siddall et al. 2003). Both of these curves are based on oxygen isotope ratios scaled to match magnitudes of sea- level fluctuations documented by fossil data. It is important to note that oxygen isotope curves may not correlate directly with palaeosea levels because oxygen isotope curves interpreted from deep-sea cores are dependent not only on the ratio of the volume of water in the sea to the volume stored in glaciers on land, but also on other factors, such as salinity, water temperature, diagenesis, and analytical error (Olson & Hearty 2009). Invariably, many

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 2

assumptions are necessary to ‘filter out’ the effects of other factors. Both of these curves represent significant improvements over earlier curves because of increased resolution of the data, better timing constraints, and more explicit treatment of extraneous effects that are not caused by relative water volume.

Local observations of changes in RSL around the world, derived from interpretation of geomorphic and stratigraphic relationships and dating of features formed at or near sea level, provide constraints to test sea level curves inferred from models based on δ18O and quantitative geophysical models for global meltwater discharge (eustatic sea-level change). Far-field locations, those distant from the late Quaternary ice sheets, most closely resemble the eustatic component but still reflect local effects. Attempts to fit RSL observations from far-field locations with numerical models of glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) and models of global ice distributions reveal significant misfits (see references cited in Shennan 2007). These differences arise from the number of unknown parameters, including those for earth models and ice models and uncertainties in RSL observations.

The major differences in RSL changes predicted by the GIA models are generally summarised by different curves for six characteristic zones (e.g., Clark et al. 1978). The existence of the zones and the position of the boundaries between them, however, are a strong function of both the earth and the deglaciation models adopted (Shennan 2007). Peltier (2004) presents a refined model, ICE-5G (VM2), of the global process of GIA that incorporates data available from the Bonaparte Gulf and Sunda Shelf and various other lines of evidence that point to a larger, multi-domed Laurentide ice sheet. The Waelbroeck et al. (2002) curve attempts to carefully account for variation of the temperature of the abyssal ocean that otherwise would contaminate the δ18O proxy for variation of land ice and associated sea level over time. Peltier & Fairbanks (2006) note that this characteristic of the Waelbroeck et al. (2002) curve agrees in general with sea-level data from Barbados and the Sunda Shelf over the last glacial-interglacial cycle from 120 ka to the present, particularly with regard to the rise in sea level from the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM; Figure A-3).

The main far-field records used to calibrate sea level curves come from studies of uplifted and submerged terraces in Barbados (Bard et al. 1990; Peltier & Fairbanks 2006); Tahiti (Bard et al. 1996); the Huon Peninsula in New Guinea (Lambeck & Chappell 2001; Cutler et al. 2003); Bonaparte Gulf (Yokoyama et al. 2000, 2001); and the Sunda Shelf (Peltier & Fairbanks 2006). Marine terraces are stepped geomorphic features, common along actively uplifting continental margins that form through interaction of rock uplift and rapid, large-scale sea-level oscillations. The data from Barbados, Tahiti, and the Huon Peninsula require a

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 3

correction for long-term tectonic movement, usually assuming a uniform tectonic uplift of 0.25 mm/yr, –0.1 mm/yr, and 1.76 mm/yr, respectively (Shennan 2007).

A.2. PALAEOSEA-LEVEL RECORD OF SOUTH AFRICA

A compilation of palaeosea-level data and observations for South Africa is presented in Table A-3; the locations of the various data points are shown on Figure A-4. The elevations of these points are also presented in a shore-parallel profile (Plate A-1). Tables A-1 and A-2 present a compilation of global sea levels in the last 1.1 Myr and 0.5 Myr, respectively, for comparison with the South African sea-level data. The following sections present a discussion of observations and information cited in the literature reviewed for this study that bear more directly on assessments of the ages and palaeosea levels for emergent and submerged terraces in the Thyspunt study region.

A.2.1. Miocene and Pliocene Terraces

Several terrace sequences of inferred Miocene and Pliocene age have been observed along the South African coast and have largely been interpreted as lithostratigraphic units, although recent attempts have framed these formations in terms of eustatic sea-level fluctuations since the Miocene (Table A-4) (Pether et al. 2000; Maud & Botha 2000; Roberts 2006; Roberts et al. 2006). Onshore Cenozoic deposits of South Africa have been divided into five groups (Figure A-5; Table A-4) by geographical section of the coast. Correlations between these sections of coast present some challenges for marine terrace records from the Pliocene and Miocene, as discussed in the following sections.

A.2.1.1. Western Coast Interpretation of Mio-Pliocene sea-level history in the west coast is best studied at excavations associated with mining, such as the Avontuur diamond mine in Namaqualand (Pether 1986, 1994) and the Langebaanweg fossil site in the southwestern cape (Hendey 1981; Roberts et al. 2011). The ages are supported by fossil evidence and correlated with global sea-level records for the Neogene. Hendey’s (1981) initial interpretation focused on correlating the Langebaanweg succession to global sea-level events postdating the Messinian event, a period of drying of the Mediterranean associated with expansion of the Antarctic ice cap during the terminal Miocene. Hendey (1981) correlated marine and terrestrial deposits of the Elandsfontein Formation to an Early to Middle Miocene transgression. The lowermost gravel member of the Varswater Formation was laid down as a regressive deposit emplaced during the pre-terminal Miocene, immediately before the early Pliocene regression. Overlying members of the Varswater Formation that extend up to elevations of 80 m were thought to have been deposited during an early Pliocene

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 4

transgression. Subsequent work by Pether (1986) in Namaqualand recognised marine terrace successions as a seaward-thickening suite of shallow marine deposits laid down during regression from a transgressive maximum.

Recent work at Langebaanweg (Figure A-4; Roberts et al. 2011) refined the chronology of the Langebaanweg site as follows:

 Deposition of the Elandsfontein Formation was initiated in the Oligo-Miocene by the meandering palaeo-Berg River at a sea level well below the present datum. Inundation of the fluvial system is recorded as upward-fining successions as sea level rose.  Continued marine transgression caused a general rise in the water table; the landscape was dominated by wetlands, and later by estuarine conditions, as recorded by the Langeenheid Clayey Sand Member of the Varswater Formation. Marine regression resulted in subaerial weathering of this member, which was later truncated by the Middle to Late Miocene Konings Vlei Gravel Member that was extensively weathered during the Late Miocene lowstands.  Sea level rose during the early Pliocene. The initial part of the transgression initiated a return to fluvio-estuarine conditions as deposition of the Langeberg Quartz Sand and the Muishond Fontein Pelletal Phosphorite Members (MPPM). The best estimate for the age of the MPPM is approximately 5.1 Ma, based on fossil assemblages and the normal polarity determined from palaeomagnetic samples.  The Varswater Formation was truncated by a subsequent middle Pliocene highstand of 50 m in the Papkuils and Duynefontein embayments to the north and south of Langebaanweg. Based on correlation with global sea-level curves, the age of the 50 m highstand is approximately 4.5 Ma.

A third Pliocene highstand recorded at +30 m is correlated with a late Pliocene highstand at 3.3 to 3 Ma (Roberts et al. 2011). However, Hendey (1981) interpreted river channel deposits exposed at Baard’s Quarry as having formed during the +20 m terminal Pliocene transgression at 1.9 Ma, based on presence of Equus in the fossil assemblage.

Roberts & Brink (2002) obtained an age of approximately 2 Ma for a fossil dune system that rests conformably on shelly upper shoreface to foreshore marine sediments, documenting Plio-Pleistocene transgression to approximately 30 m.

At Hondeklip Bay (Figure A-4), Pether (1986) recognised two sequences of seaward- thickening shallow marine deposits laid down during regression from a transgressive

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 5

maximum near 30 and 50 m above sea level, and correlated these two sequences to early Pleistocene and late Pliocene, respectively. Remnants of a 90 m terrace contain a shelf fossil lag accumulated on bedrock during more than one sea-level fluctuation. Fossils identified in this lag deposit predate or are contemporaneous with the enclosing deposit. Therefore, Pether (1986) assigned a Mio-Pliocene age to the 90 m terrace remnant and interpreted fossils of the 50 m terrace to be Pliocene in age, with the 30 m terrace being Pliocene or younger. Pether (1994) assigned an age of 4–2.5 Ma to the 50 m terrace and 2– 0.6 Ma to the 30 m terrace.

A.2.1.2. Southern Coast The southern coast displays a well-developed coastal platform with an elevation of 200 m between Knysna and Cape St. Francis (Butzer & Helgren 1972; Marker 1987). This inland marine platform passes into the sub-aerially planed ‘African’ surface of Partridge & Maud (1987) and Le Roux (1987). The cover units overlying this platform consist of deposits of the Bredasdorp Group and the Algoa Group (Maud & Botha 2000; Roberts 2006; Roberts et al. 2006; Table A-3; Figure A-6). Similar to the Western Cape coast, highstands are observed at 30 and 50 m; however, the 90 m surface observed on the west coast occurs at 120 m on the south coast (Malan 1990; Figure A-6).

The Algoa Group represents a longer record of Cenozoic marine deposition than the Bredasdorp Group. The oldest marine unit is a calcareous sandstone, conglomerate, and limestone of the Eocene Bathurst Formation deposited on a marine planation surface up to 360 m in elevation (Le Roux 1989). The Alexandria Formation consists of alternating layers of calcareous sandstone, conglomerate, and coquinite deposited on well-planed seaward- sloping platforms of Miocene to Pliocene age. Depositional environments range from shoreface and foreshore to lagoonal and/or estuarine. According to Le Roux (1989), the northern limit of the Alexandria Formation roughly coincides with the 300 m contour in the area west of the Kowie River. Hattingh (2001) questions this observation and attributes the planation of this platform to the African erosion cycle, given that the Mio-Pliocene regression would not have had sufficient time to cut this platform. High Miocene terraces are observed at the Suurkop stratotype at Addo Park (290 m), the Blaawbaadjiesvlei stratotype (240 m), and the Aluimkrantz stratotype (220 m) (Le Roux 1989). This Middle Miocene to early Pliocene transgressive stage was interrupted by regressions near the Mio-Pliocene boundary (Le Roux 1989).

A broad 120–140 m bench is observed along the southern coast in the George-Knysna area, Natures Valley, Cape St. Francis, and between Humansdorp and the Gamtoos River (Malan

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 6

1990; Butzer & Helgren 1972; Marker 1987). Although Malan (1990) suggested that this terrace corresponds to the Middle Miocene transgression and the related post-African I erosion cycle, he concludes that deposition of the De Hoopvlei Formation on this platform took place during the Pliocene regressive phase from a transgressive maximum of 120 m. The basal De Hoopvlei Formation of the Bredasdorp Group is correlated with the Alexandria Formation of the Algoa Group based on mollusc content and height above sea level (Malan 1990). The early Pliocene transgression reached a maximum elevation of 120 m and experienced several relatively long still stands during the late Pliocene regression forming shorelines at 106 m, 90 to 100 m, and 84 m (Le Roux 1989).

Although originally interpreted as alluvial sheetflood deposits overlying the Alexandria Formation laid down during the late Pliocene regressions during low sea level, the Bluewater Bay Formation is shown to be the weathered remnant and residual soil of the Alexandria Formation and has since been removed from the Lithostratigraphic Subdivision of South African Stratigraphy (Goedhart & Hattingh 1997).

Hattingh (2001) observes marine platforms between the Sundays River and the Coega River, at elevations of 240 m, 210 m, 170 m, 120 m, 105 m, 90 m, 75 m, 45 m, and 40 m. Mapped alluvial terraces of the Sundays River are correlated to these observed elevations of Alexandria Formation. Terraces T1, T2, and T3 occur at elevations of 270, 210, and 170 m, respectively, and correlate to the Mio-Pliocene regression. Terrace T4 occurs at an elevation of 120 m and is associated with the Late Miocene/early Pliocene regression. Lower shorelines with elevations of 60 and 52 m are also thought to represent a late Pliocene transgressive maximum and stillstand, respectively (Hattingh 2001).

Deep incision of the coastal platform was inferred to have resulted from a late Pliocene uplift that introduced the post-African II cycle of erosion (Malan 1990). Alluvial terraces occur at an elevation of 45 m above present river level along the Gourits and Breede Rivers and are thought to predate the late Pliocene regression responsible for the last major phase of river incision. Malan (1990) also suggests that the 50 m terrace observed around Mossel Bay and a 30 m shoreline at Hermanus and Kleinmond may be early Pleistocene in age. The De Hoopvlei and Wankoe Formations are eroded up to a high of 35 m (Malan 1990). Evidence for erosive platforms at 30 m occurs at Robberg Peninsula and between the Kromme and Seekoei Rivers near Cape St. Francis (Butzer & Helgren 1972). An estuarine terrace is preserved at the Bitou Estuary at this elevation (Butzer & Helgren 1972).

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 7

A.2.2. Quaternary

The Salnova Formation, which is situated on wave-cut surfaces thought to represent highstands of sea level during one or more Quaternary interglacials, was deposited in an intertidal zone ranging from the sandy beach environment to a rocky shore environment (Le Roux 1989). The formation reflects higher stands of sea level during Quaternary eustatic movements up to 30 m in elevation (Le Roux 1989). Outcrops of marine material are observed below 20 m along the rocky coast at Keurbooms, Knysna, Sedgefield, Klein Brak, and Hartenbos (Le Roux 1989). Wave-cut notches and wave-eroded caves occur at elevations of 23 and 24 m, respectively, at the Klasies River mouth (Butzer 1978). A 30 m shoreline and the 20–30 m shorelines observed by others have fluvial counterparts in the Sundays River. The 18 m shoreline of Ruddock (1968) represents a transgressive maximum and not a stillstand in a regression from higher levels. Marker (1987) observes a series of marine benches in the George-Knysna area at 12–15, 6–8, and 2–3 m. These observations support the definition of the Salnova Formation to include deposits from multiple sea-level incursions (Roberts 2006). Roberts (2006) notes that the records for the western and southern coasts of South Africa are consistent during the Pleistocene (Figure A-6), implying tectonic stability in the recent geologic past.

Constraints on the ages of Quaternary marine terraces in South Africa are limited to MIS 11 and younger terraces. Information regarding the palaeosea-level data and ages of these terraces are described below.

A.2.2.1. MIS 11 Characterising palaeosea level during MIS 11 has also been the focus of much recent work. Although not as many records exist from the Stage 11 highstand as at later highstands, several recent articles suggest that sea level may have been higher and of longer duration than that of the MIS 5e highstand. Waelbroeck et al. (2002) indicate that during MIS 11, sea level was higher than the present sea level for a period of about 25,000 years. Records from both Alaska and Bermuda suggest that during MIS 11, sea level peaked close to 22 m above the present sea level (Hearty et al. 1999; Muhs et al. 2004; Olson & Hearty 2009). The stratigraphy of Bermuda and the Bahamas islands reveals multiple MIS 11 stillstands generally of short duration at approximately +2–3, a more prolonged event at +7–8, and a final peak at +20 m (Hearty 2010). The suggestion that MIS 11 is characterised by a sea level approximately 20 m higher than present remains controversial because few coastlines have been found to preserve anomalously high coastal facies of this age, and not all oxygen isotope records show evidence for an inferred sea level higher than the last interglacial maximum for MIS 11 (Murray-Wallace 2007b). Modelling of postglacial crustal subsidence

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 8

over the course of this anomalously long interglacial reduces the eustatic sea level for MIS 11 to 6–13 m (Raymo & Mitrovica 2012).

Roberts (2006) and Roberts et al. (2012) describe dated marine sedimentary deposits on the western and southern coasts of South Africa that are interpreted to be correlated to MIS 11 (Figure A-4; Table A-3). On the west coast, shelly and shallow marine calcarenites interbedded with storm beach gravels are observed near the Brazil site on the coast of Namaqualand. Sample BZ3, which was collected from the lower foreshore facies at an elevation of 11.1 m, yielded a saturated OSL date, suggesting a Middle Pleistocene age, possibly MIS 11. An MIS 11 age is also inferred for a saturated measurement from tidal deposits observed at the Berg River Estuary at an elevation of 3.2 m (Sample BR1; see Table A-3). Bioturbated silty sands interpreted as estuarine floodplain deposits were observed in an excavation at the Coega Harbour (Coega2 and Coega4). These locations have elevations of 8.3 and 9.1 m and indicative meanings (corrected elevations based on the relationship between a given indicator and the local to regional palaeoenvironment in which it is formed) of 7.3 and 8.1 m, respectively. The presence of artifacts and a saturated OSL age (>175 ka) suggest an MIS 11 age for these deposits.

Clearer evidence for MIS 11 highstands is observed at Mossel Bay. Roberts et al. (2012) used TT-OSL dating to correlate evidence for marine highstands near Mossel Bay. At the Klein Brak River, a seaward-dipping platform was bevelled into Mesozoic conglomerates. This platform is overlain by a transgressive lag, marine sandstones, and conglomerates, and is capped by calcareous aeolian deposits (Roberts et al. 2012). Ages from the marine and aeolian deposits range from 466 ± 36 ka to 366 ± 3 ka (Jacobs et al. 2011). Outcrops along the Hartenbos River consist of calcareous conglomerate and sandstone facies similar to those along the Klein Brak River. TT-OSL ages from the marine facies range from 375 ± 36 ka to 369 ± 28 ka (Jacobs et al. 2011; Roberts et al. 2012).

To the west of Mossel Bay, at Dana Bay, marine and aeolian facies are correlated with Klein Brak and Hartenbos River outcrops. The stratigraphy at Dana Bay is laterally more complex than at the Mossel Bay sites, containing a basal and upper erosional surface and transgressive lag. Marine and aeolian deposits associated with the two transgressions range in age from 414 ± 27 ka to 371 ± 32 ka (Jacobs et al. 2011; Roberts et al. 2012). The two transgressive sequences indicate that MIS 11 had at least two highstands separated by lower sea level. At Dana Bay, the MIS 11 deposits are eroded and overlain by sediments deposited during MIS 5e (Roberts et al. 2012). Jacobs et al. (2011) and Roberts et al. (2012) report weighted mean average ages of 391 ± 16 ka for deposits in the Klein Brak Estuary,

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 9

388 ± 14 ka for deposits at the Dana Bay site, and 370 ± 18 ka for deposits at the Hartenbos site. When corrected for GIA and uplift, these deposits indicate that MIS 11 was no more than 13 m above modern sea level (Roberts et al. 2012).

A.2.2.2. MIS 7 MIS 5 regressive dune deposits overlie inferred MIS 7 marginal marine lagoonal/estuarine sandy clays and peats and shelly deposits in boreholes at elevations just below sea level at False Bay in the Western Cape (Roberts et al. 2009). Ramsay & Cooper (2002) note the presence of 182 ± 18 ka aeolianite at Isipingo, south of Durban, which was traced to beachrock at –3 m. Porat & Botha (2007) dated the aeolianite near present intertidal level at Reunion Rocks south of Durban at 203 ± 13 ka (MP-33), close to the site where the calcitic cement yielded a uranium series age of 182 ± 18 ka (Pta-U430; Ramsay & Cooper 2002).

A.2.2.3. MIS 5 The last interglacial is represented by MIS 5, which is divided into five substages; MIS 5a, 5c, and 5e represent warm periods associated with highstands, and MIS 5b and 5d represent colder periods associated with lower sea levels. The elevation of the last interglacial MIS 5e sea level has generally been accepted as 6 m amsl; however, observations of sea level in different locations (e.g., South Australia) suggest that sea level could have been lower (e.g., approximately 2–3 m during this time; Bowen 2010, citing Murray-Wallace & Belperio [1991]; Stirling et al. 1998).

Palaeosea-level estimates for MIS 5a and 5c are less well known. Whereas most eustatic sea-level curves place the MIS 5a sea-level elevation well below present (–20 m or deeper), many records from sites in the United States show it at or above present. Uranium-series coral ages from the U.S. Atlantic Coastal Plain (Wehmiller et al. 2004) and several localities along the Pacific Coast from Oregon to Baja California (Hanson et al. 1994; Hanson & Lettis 2000; Muhs et al. 2004) suggest sea level near (within 6 m) or above present levels at the end of MIS 5, contradicting age-elevation relations based on marine isotopic or coral reef models of ice-equivalent sea level. Emergent approximately 80 kyr BP deposits are also found in Bermuda at elevations virtually identical to those for approximately 125 kyr BP deposits (Muhs et al. 2002). Wehmiller et al. (2004) speculate that the apparent occurrence of early- and late-stage MIS 5 units and/or landforms at nearly identical emergent elevations requires some mechanism (such as hydro-isostatic subsidence) by which the approximately 45 kyr of flooding of the continental margin during MIS 5, coupled with forebulge collapse following MIS 6 glaciation, generated this record of coastal evolution. Coral ages from the

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 10

U.S. Atlantic Coastal Plain from MIS 5a are far more abundant than those from MIS 5e (Wehmiller et al. 2004).

Muhs et al. (2002) note that uranium-series ages of last interglacial corals from the Pacific Coast overlap with, but are on average younger than, corals from Barbados, the Bahamas, and Hawaii. This age difference is explained by the nature of the geomorphic response to sea level change. Fringing or barrier reefs on low-latitude coastlines have ‘keep-up’ corals with accretionary growth that can keep pace with rising sea level, whether on a tectonically rising or stable coastline. In contrast, mid-latitude, high-energy coastlines undergo platform cutting during the early part of a sea-level highstand. Sediment and fossil deposition in this type of setting take place as sea level starts to fall. Muhs et al. (2002) note also that the youngest corals from Pacific Coast sites (San Clemente Island and Punta Banda) overlap with intermediate-aged and younger corals in Hawaii and the Bahamas, suggesting that sea levels were still relatively high at approximately 116 ka. This finding conflicts with estimates of a relatively large global ice volume during MIS 5d, a time of low summer insolation at high latitudes in the Northern Hemisphere.

Roberts (2006), in a previous ESKOM compilation report, describes marine sedimentary deposits on the western and southern coasts of South Africa (Figure A-4; Table A-3) with their associated age dates, as follows:

 Calcified shallow marine and storm beach sediments are well exposed in diamond- prospecting excavations at sites BZ1 and BZ2 (Brazil site, Namaqualand). Sample BZ1 was collected from the upper shoreface to foreshore facies at an elevation of 6.4 m and has an OSL age of approximately 104 ka. Sample BZ2 was collected from calcarenite interpreted as the foreshore facies at an elevation of 14.2 m with an indicative meaning of 10.8 m and has an OSL age of 124 ka. Roberts (2006) favours the MIS 5e age for Sample BZ2 from this location, suggesting that the age for BZ1 is probably a result of analytical or interpretive error.

 Another diamond-prospecting trench was sampled for storm beach ridge deposits interpreted as the foreshore environment) at Skulpfontein, Namaqualand. A sample (SKU12) that was collected at an elevation of 5.6 m yielded an age of approximately 91 ka, consistent with the MIS 5c substage. This age may be affected by uranium disequilibrium due to high levels of uranium in the basement rock.

 Farther south at Churchhaven, along the shores of Langebaan Lagoon, well- cemented, bioturbated coarse sands are overlain by fine- to medium-grained

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 11

laminated sands. Sample CH3 collected from the lower foreshore at 4.1 m yielded an OSL age of approximately 205 ka, whereas Sample CH4 collected from the upper foreshore at 9.7 m yielded an OSL age of approximately 130 ka. The apparent MIS 7 age for Sample CH3 may be the result of incomplete bleaching of quartz grains, resulting in an erroneously old age (Roberts 2006). The overlying upper foreshore corresponds to an MIS 5e approximately 7.7 m highstand at approximately 130 ka.

 Two marine highstands are observed at Arniston, east of Cape Agulhas. A conglomerate interpreted as having been deposited in the storm beach/upper shoreface area was sampled at 0.9 m (Sample ARM3) and is overlain by regressive aeolian deposits. Above this sequence, calcarenite interpreted as the foreshore/upper shoreface facies was sampled at 6.1 m (Sample ARM2) and is overlain by a second regressive aeolian sequence. OSL ages for these two samples confirm 5c and 5e highstands with ages of approximately 104 ka for Sample ARM3 and approximately 125 ka for Sample ARM2.

 Nearby, foreshore deposits observed at Cape Agulhas at an elevation of 5.6 m yielded a similar age of 118 ± 7.2 ka (Carr et al. 2010). This site also shows evidence for two distinct sea-level phases. The dated foreshore deposit overlies a gravel beach deposit at 3.0–3.8 m. This sequence is interpreted as two phases of high sea level during MIS 5e.

 At Dana Bay, MIS 5e tidal inlet and beach berm deposits are draped over eroded MIS 11 deposits. Samples from this section range in age from 125 ± 9 ka to 116 ± 9 ka and, when corrected for GIA and uplift, indicate a maximum sea level of 6.2 m for MIS 5e (Roberts et al. 2012). Tidal inlet and beach berm facies overlain by aeolian deposits are observed at the Groot Brak River. The contact between the marine deposits (Sample GBR2) and aeolian deposits (Sample GBR3) is observed at an elevation of 9.9 m, which corresponds to an indicative meaning of 6.9 m, given that beach berm lamination may occur above mean sea level as a result of storms and spring high tides. These two samples yielded OSL ages of 112 and 124 ka, respectively (Roberts 2006). Subsequent work by Carr et al. (2010) constrains this age at 125 ± 6.7 ka using OSL methods.

 The marine succession at Sedgefield provides evidence for earlier and later MIS 5e highstands (Roberts 2006). A clear unconformity at 0.5 m contains rip-up clasts of calcrete and calcarenite and is overlain by estuarine tidal deposits. Sample SW1 has an age of 127 ka and was collected at the top of a marine unit at an elevation of 6.3

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 12

m. The overlying aeolianites yielded ages of 118 and 119 ka. This interpretation was later refined by Carr et al. (2010). An age of 127 ± 5.7 was assigned to the tidal inlet deposits having an indicative point of 5.6 m with an indicative range of 8.5 m. Carr et al. (2010) also describe a second section with tidal inlet deposits dated at 130 ± 8.2 ka at an elevation of 4.5 m (indicative range 7.5 m).

 Undated estuarine deposits at the mouth of the Gamtoos River, in the valley east of the Thyspunt site, have an elevation of 4.2 m. An OSL sample collected from these deposits had an anomalously high dose rate and yielded no age (Roberts 2006).

 At Blind River, near East London, a human femur was collected from a succession of estuarine calcarenite and storm beach gravels interpreted as the Salnova Formation overlain by aeolian deposits (Wang et al. 2008). Two samples collected from the estuarine calcarenite yielded ages of 118 and 119 ka, corresponding to MIS 5e. This sequence corresponds to a transgressive maximum of 10 m.

 At Nahoon Point, East London, the sedimentary succession consists of a basal conglomerate storm beach deposit, overlain by regressive aeolian deposits, foreshore/upper shoreface calcarenites and a second regressive aeolian deposit (Roberts 2006). Sample NN1 was collected at 2.8 m in the lower regressive aeolian deposits and yielded an age of 126 ka. Sample NHN1 has an age of 116 ka and was collected from foreshore deposits at an elevation of 6.2 m. The overlying aeolianite (NHN2) has an age of 127 ka. These samples indicate an MIS 5e age for the formation of the underlying bedrock platform at +1 m (Roberts 2006). Subsequent work by Jacobs & Roberts (2009) refined this age to 124 ± 4 ka.

Roberts (2006) compiled the 10 most reliable ages for MIS 5e and determined an average age of 121.09 ka with an average elevation of 6 m (Figure A-7). When corrected for GIA and uplift, the maxiumum elevation of MIS 5e along the southern coast was calculated to be 6.2 m (Roberts et al. 2012). Pronounced unconformities occur in the lower part of the MIS 5 successions at Arniston, Sedgefield, and Buffalo City (East London) and probably record a regression within the MIS 5e as observed in dips in the sea-level curves for the Huon Peninsula. This earlier MIS 5e highstand has an elevation lower than the later MIS 5e highstand (Figure A-8; Roberts 2006).

A.2.2.4. MIS 2 (Last Glacial Maximum) The position of sea level during the LGM is relatively well defined from several independent lines of evidence, including direct stratigraphic evidence from sediment cores from

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 13

continental shelves, inferences drawn from modelling the areal extent and thickness of ice sheets at the time of maximum ice-sheet development, and inferred ice volumes derived from oxygen isotopes in foraminifera from deep-sea cores. Recent estimates for full glacial sea-level lowering are less than originally predicted from model calculations of ocean volume accommodation space and estimates of water locked up in continental ice. The original estimates had placed LGM ice-equivalent sea level at approximately –154 m (Williams et al. 1998, chap. 4) or between the ‘minimum’ and ‘maximum’ models of eustatic change at 127 m and 163 m, respectively (CLIMAP 1981).

Areas regarded as tectonically stable have been favoured in studies attempting to define the position of sea level during glacial maxima, particularly for regions in the far field of former ice sheets, such as Australia. In such regions, the effects of the glacio-isostatic adjustment process are minimised and the RSL is overwhelmingly eustatic in nature (ice-equivalent sea level; Murray-Wallace 2007a). Studies of sedimentary successions on continental shelves and shallow marine platforms such as southeastern Australia (New South Wales), Bonaparte Gulf in northwestern Australia, South Africa, and Barbados have indicated a maximum sea- level lowering of between <130 and 121 m during the LGM 20–22 ka (Bard et al. 1990; Ferland et al. 1995; Yokoyama et al. 2001; Ramsay & Cooper 2002). Results from the Bonaparte Gulf in northwestern Australia indicate a eustatic sea level of 125 ± 4 m below present (Murray-Wallace 2007b).

The lowest submerged and undated terrace features reported in the study region include knickpoints and terrace platforms on the shelf at water depths of 105–100 m on the Agulhas Bank (Martin & Flemming 1986); at depths of 106, 124, and 130 m in Sodwana Bay (Green & Uken 2005); at a depth of 108 m on the east coast near Durban (Martin & Flemming 1987); and at depths of approximately 116 and 135 m in Algoa Bay (Bremner & Day 1991). Though not associated with a specific shoreline feature, algal nodules indicating lower sea levels were dredged from 115 and 120 m depth from south of Cape St. Francis (Siesser 1972). The nodules were dated to 13,670 ± 120 yr BP and 12,990 ± 100 yr BP, respectively.

A.2.2.5. Postglacial Sea-Level Changes

The period from the peak of the LGM (ca. 22–20 ka) to the present, the Holocene interglacial represents the extreme endpoints of eustatic sea level in glacial cycles. Recent assessments give an uncertainty of eustatic sea level during the LGM that ranges from approximately 114 to 135 m (Shennan 2007). Murray-Wallace (2007b) summarises literature that suggests that during this time interval, sea level rose worldwide from approximately 120 to 125 m below the present level and almost attained (or in some locations, such as in South Africa,

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 14

exceeded) present levels by 7 ka. The rate and general pattern of RSL change during this period was spatially variable and differed according to geographic regions in response to glacio-hydro-isostatic adjustment processes, tectonism, and localised climatic changes (i.e., steric changes accompanying changes in localised sea-surface temperatures and salinity) (Murray-Wallace 2007b).

Since the LGM, one of the major issues regarding RSL has been the general nature of the change: Was the pattern of sea-level rise a smooth function over time or was it characterised by a series of well-defined oscillations superimposed on a broader pattern of changes (Murray-Wallace 2007b, p. 3035)? High-quality RSL data from the mid-latitudes reveal spatial and temporal variations among eustatic, isostatic (glacio- and hydro-), and local factors since the LGM. Errors that are commonly ignored in sea-level analyses include (1) the uncertainty in the relationship between a given indicator and the local to regional palaeoenvironment in which it is formed (known as the ‘indicative meaning’); (2) sediment compaction and tidal range variations; (3) calibration of radiocarbon dates; and (4) the application of the marine reservoir effect (Horton 2007), if appropriate.

Despite these uncertainties, the general pattern of eustatic (ice-equivalent) sea-level rise since the LGM, based on the study of far-field settings, is a slow initial rise in sea level with the onset of deglaciation, a phase of relatively rapid sea-level rise with the possibility of short-term meltwater pulses characterised by even more rapid sea-level rise, and finally, the attainment of an early Holocene highstand. Many far-field sites also record a fall in RSL following the attainment of the early Holocene highstand due to hydro-isostatic adjustments, the magnitude of which is related to the width of continental shelves. Hydro-isostasy involves the subsidence of continental shelves due to the geologically ‘instantaneous’ loading effects of water that has returned to the continental shelves from the decay of ice sheets. This is accompanied by the landward migration of viscous mantle material and results in the formation of emergent shoreline deposits but no reduction in the water volume of the ocean basins.

In South Africa, a middle Holocene highstand is observed in a few locations at an elevation of approximately 3.5 m (Compton 2001; Roberts 2006) (Figure A-4 and Table A-3). Roberts (2006) reports the following observations. Storm beach deposits observed at 6.3 m at Yzerfontein occur in a narrow gully eroded along a shear zone; this narrow gully likely focussed wave energy, resulting in this anomalously high elevation. A middle Holocene (~4,500 yr BP) beach gravel at Noordhoek, on the exposed Atlantic coast of the Cape Peninsula, occurs at an elevation of 6.4 m, with recent storm deposits up to 4 m, indicating

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 15

strong storm surges at this site. In the Bitou River Valley, beside Plettenberg Bay, palaeo- estuarine deposits having a middle Holocene age (~2,800 yr BP) are observed at an elevation of 2.3 m. Storm beach deposits at an elevation of 5.8 m at the mouth of the Maitland River, west of Port Elizabeth, are inferred to correspond to a mean sea level of approximately 1.7 m, based on calibration from the modern storm beach. The age of shells in this deposit confirm a middle Holocene age of 6,383 yr BP.

A.3. Implications for Uplift Interpretation of eustatic sea level requires some assessment of the regional uplift history. Although South Africa is regarded as a stable continental region (Johnston et al. 1994), the classic work of Partridge & Maud (1987) suggests episodic uplift in the Miocene and Pliocene. This interpretation of uplift is derived from correlation of erosional surfaces interpreted within a peneplanation landscape evolution and comparison with the offshore sediment record and patterns of drainages. These surfaces are widespread across southern Africa. Partridge & Maud (1987) present topographic profiles that correlate erosional landforms and silcretes that are in some cases preserved as planed areas without pedimentation or as dissected remnants on interfluves. Deep valleys incised into these surfaces are interpreted as evidence for a lowering of base level (i.e., uplift of the land surface). From these observations, Partridge & Maud (1987) developed the following chronology:

1. Erosion of the African surface following continental breakup in the Mesozoic to the Miocene. 2. Uplift of 150–300 m during the Miocene with tilting to the west. 3. Erosion of the post-African I surface and the associated raised beaches. 4. Uplift during the Pliocene ranging from 600 to 900 m in the Ciskei to 200 m in Oudtshoorn and less than 100 m in the west coast. 5. Dissection of the coastal hinterland during erosion of the post-African II surface.

Several researchers have disputed the foundations of the work of Partridge & Maud (1987) based on more recent studies and quantification of uplift rates (Table A-5). The peneplanation model of Partridge & Maud (1987) builds on the work of King (1953, 1962, 1967). In the pediplanation model of King (1967), erosion surfaces were originally graded to sea level. Subsequent uplift initiated new denudational cycles and downcutting that propagated inland by knickpoint retreat along rivers. Brown et al. (2000) point out that the following axioms of these landscape models are not valid under current geomorphological theory:

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 16

 Continents are subject to widespread episodic uplift; all slopes experience parallel retreat for long distances.  River knickpoints retreat inland over long distances.  Extensive, low-relief surfaces can only be formed in relation to a base level represented by sea level.

Two lines of evidence, correspondence of onshore and offshore records and the response of the lithosphere to denudation, contradict the peneplanation model of King (1962) and Partridge & Maud (1987). Summerfield (1985) notes that the four major unconformities identified in the offshore record by Dingle (1982) have a poor correspondence with the chronology of uplift and planation of King (1962). Most important, however, is the observation by Gilchrist & Summerfield (1991) that the concept of episodic uplift in response to long-term denudational unloading is based on a misunderstanding of how the lithosphere responds to applied loads at the temporal and spatial scales relevant to landscape evolution. Gilchrist et al. (1994) cast doubt on the assumption of an isostatic threshold of escarpment retreat as an important factor in initiating new landscape cycles, and view this as a misinterpretation of the flexural response.

Flexural isostacy, therefore, provides an alternative model of uplift for southern Africa. By assessing lithosphere-asthenosphere interaction, Gilchrist & Summerfield (1991) show that isostatic compensation is only episodic on the time scale of small, individual crustal displacements along faults in response to progressive loading, and exhibits lags in response to applied loads only on the time scale of sublithospheric mantle flow (10–100 kyr). On the time scale of landscape evolution, isostatic compensation occurs continuously, but in a manner dependent on the relationship between flexural rigidity and the wavelength of the applied loads. The continuous flexure of passive margins in response to progressive denudational unloading during their post-rifting evolution has produced a short-wavelength denudational negative load sufficient to generate a significant marginal upwarp with amplitude of several hundred metres. The resulting marginal upwarp is thought to develop progressively from the time of continental margin formation, reaching its maximum amplitude 100 Myr after rifting (Gilchrist & Summerfield 1991). Based on the work of Gilchrist & Summerfield (1991), episodic uplift and erosion in South Africa due to denudation would not be expected.

Numerical modelling of escarpment retreat and persistence demonstrates that retreat varies with lithology and setting and is not as uniform as postulated by the model of Partridge & Maud (1987). Numerical modelling indicates that erosionally resistant layers or caprocks

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 17

slow denudation rates and hence inhibit escarpment retreat (Gilchrist et al. 1994), invalidating the assumption of Partridge & Maud (1987) that the escarpments were once located at the continental margin. Other numerical experiments of the flexural response of landscapes illustrate that escarpments persist at drainage divides, and in arid climates may be associated with differences in bedrock terrains (Kooi & Beaumont 1994) as well, or in high-elevation areas with low sediment production and headward propagation of bedrock channels through incision (Tucker & Slingerland 1994).

This model of flexural isostatic uplift is ultimately based on the idea that the passive margin has not been modified by other tectonic processes since rifting associated with the breakup of Gondwana. More recent work suggests that a buoyant mantle plume, termed the ‘African superplume’, could be the source of the high topography of southern Africa and could cause uplift of the continent (Lithgow-Bertelloni & Silver 1998).

Since the African superplume is inferred from waveforms, there are many interpretations of its size and geometry in the literature. Ni et al. (1999) imaged the African superplume as a lower-mantle low-velocity anomaly extending upward from the core-mantle boundary in a complex tabular structure based on shear-wave inversions. Debayle et al. (2001) report that the data resolution are not sufficient to reconcile a single narrow plume conduit, and they associate the low-velocity anomaly with several close, narrow plume tails or a broad region of upwelling. Subsequent work by Ni et al. (2002) confirmed the sharp sides to the superplume and determined that the plume is 1,200 km long, extending 1,500 km obliquely from the core-mantle boundary, and is less than 50 km wide. The anomaly has about a 3 percent drop in S-velocity, and if this structure is stabilized by a localized viscosity condition, it may be isolated from mantle stirring (Ni & Helmberger 2003). Wang & Wen (2007) imaged the African superplume as a bell-shaped structure 4,000 km wide when they combined P- and S-wave inversions. More recent waveform tomography (Sun et al. 2010) images a 100 km high narrow plume emitting from the top of the large African low-velocity structure in the lower mantle.

There is also some debate as to what this low-velocity layer represents. Forte et al. (2002) modelled mantle flow and showed that the high-viscosity peak associated with the African superplume creates mantle heterogeneity. Subsequent geodynamical modelling of the African superplume by Simmons et al. (2007) provides evidence of chemically induced density perturbations indicating that chemically dense material is entrained within the plume, suggesting that the thermochemical plume has risen from a compositionally distinct pile at the core-mantle boundary. These model observations suggest that the plume is still a

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 18

positively buoyant structure, with less ability for dynamic support since the heavier material is drawn down. Geodynamic modelling of mantle flow above the African ‘Superswell’, the region of high topography within the southern half of the continent, shows the strongest mantle upwelling below the Kalahari craton instead of the East Africa rift as a result of the tilt of the plume and compositional bouyancy of the mantle (Forte et al. 2010).

The effect of the African superplume on surface uplift rates has been explored in models by a few authors. Gurnis et al. (2000) performed numerical models of southern Africa that combined dynamic topography and surface uplift rates and determined that surface uplift rates must be on the order of 6 m/Myr. Conrad & Gurnis (2003) performed backward modelling of mantle flow indicating 500–700 m of dynamic topography during the Cenozoic. Since ~30 Ma, model results indicate that uplift has moved from eastern to southern Africa with uplift rates of ~10 m/Myr. The model of Moucha et al. (2008) explores dynamic topography of ocean basins that surrounded Africa since the Cenozoic and present time– dependent results for West Africa and New Jersey. The Moucha et al. model maps indicate a decrease in dynamic topography for southern Africa.

Burke (1996) and Burke & Gunnell (2008) build on the concepts of the evolution of the African surface of King (1953, 1962, 1967) and Partridge & Maud (1987) and synthesize these concepts with plate reconstructions and geodynamic models as support for a phase of uplift at 30 Ma. The tectonic model of Burke & Gunnell (2008) relies on the assumption that the large, low shear-wave velocity province beneath Africa has been stable for the last 300 Ma and is a structure of the deep mantle, not a buoyant superplume (Garnero et al. 2007). Burke & Gunnell (2008) attribute upwelling on the margins of this low-velocity province to creation of basins and swells within the continent of Africa. Torsvik et al. (2006) observe that large igneous provinces are generated from the margins of the large low-velocity provinces in the deep mantle around the world. Since Africa has experienced relatively slow plate motions in the last 200 Ma, the continent has rotated little with respect to this anomaly (Burke & Gunnell 2008). The tectonic drivers of Burke & Gunnell’s model are plume-induced plate-pinning episodes created by shallow convection: the 133 Ma Karoo plume and the 30 Ma Afar plume. The African land surface was then warped during these two events, resulting in escarpments that mimic rift flank escarpments but have a pattern consistent with the basin and swell mechanism.

A.3.1. Denudation To evaluate these alternative hypotheses for uplift mechanisms and rates, recent studies have attempted to apply a chronology to patterns of uplift in southern Africa using

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 19

quantitiative methods such as apatite fission-track (AFT) thermochronology and cosmogenic nuclides. AFT thermochronology is sensitive to temperatures below 130°C on time scales less than 100 Myr (Brown et al. 2000). The thermal history can provide quantitative point estimates of the depth of rock removal over time, with some constraint on the palaeogeotherm (palaeo–temperature gradient) (Brown et al. 2000). Cosmogenic nuclides provide direct estimates of exposure history and erosion rate or burial ages and provide estimates of denudation and shorter timescales than the thermochronology methods. The following section summarises results for southern Africa.

A.3.1.1. Namibia Ward & Corbett (1990) developed a five-stage post-Gondwana history of the Namib Desert: 1. 120–65 Ma post-Gondwana period of erosion that led to the formation of the Great Escarpment and the Namib Unconformity surface. 2. 55–20 Ma proto-Namib Desert phase. 3. 22–14 Ma pluvial phase with the transition from arid to semi-arid conditions. 4. 14–11 Ma pedogenic phase that included the return of arid conditions. 5. 10–7 Ma to present Namib Desert phase, in which cold upwelling associated with the Benguela Current resulted in a progressively arid climatic trend. Deep incision of westward-directed drainages occurred during this time.

Studies since Ward & Corbett (1990) have in general supported the five-stage approach with better temporal constraints. In contrast, some studies found evidence for relatively little variation in erosion rates from the Oligocene, or earlier, to the present (Cockburn et al. 2000; Luft et al. 2005).

The denudational history of Namibia has received much attention by both the thermochronology and cosmogenic communities. Brown et al. (2000) first showed the range in AFT ages for Namibia (449 ± 20 to 59 ± 3 Ma). The bulk of the data suggest an Early Cretaceous phase of denudation, with ages older than approximately 150 Ma restricted to the Pan-African Damara metamorphic belt (Brown et al. 2000). A later, more variable phase of denudation is exhibited by the youngest ages of 70 Ma obtained from reactivated shear zones of the western margin of the Kaapvaal craton at Karasburg (Brown et al. 2000). The denudation depths are greater along the coast than in the continental interior, implying a flexural isostatic response that would tend to maintain an upwarped topography parallel to the margin (Brown et al. 2000).

Cockburn et al. (2000) subsequently assessed denudation based on modelling thermal histories from 20 samples collected along a transect from the Atlantic Ocean to east of the

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 20

Great Escarpment. These analyses indicate that between the breakup of Gondwana (130 Ma) and the end of the Eocene (36 Ma) mean denudation rates for the coastal plain average approximately 40 m/Myr but fell to approximately 5 m/Myr from the Oligocene to the present. Inland of the escarpment, rates of denudation since breakup have remained relatively constant at around 10 m/Myr (Cockburn et al. 2000). Raab et al. (2005) performed AFT studies of detailed transects along the Brandberg and Okenyenya inselbergs, which provided data for modelling the paleogeothermal gradient. These results provide evidence for rapid exhumation between 80 and 60 Ma (0.2 and 0.125 km/Myr) and 5 km of denudation since the Late Cretaceous with denudation rates of 0.023–0.15 km/Myr in the early Tertiary (Raab et al. 2005). Luft et al. (2005) sampled the Kaoko Belt of northwest Namibia and inferred accelerated uplift and/or upwarping of the local crust at 130 Ma followed by a gradual and continuous cooling history. Apatite (U-Th)/He and fission-track ages for the same samples provide evidence for accelerated denudation in the Cretaceous, approximately 70 Ma (Luft et al. 2006).

Several studies have inferred denudation rates on time scales of 10–100 kyr from cosmogenic nuclides sampled from bedrock, stream sediment, and pediment gravels. Cockburn et al. (1999) obtained denudation rates from cosmogenic 10Be and 26Al for granite inselbergs in the central Namib Desert. These denudation rates vary between 2.7 and 8 m/Myr and correspond to 50 m of erosion over the past 10 Myr, and probably more than 300 m during the Cenozoic. The denudation rates indicate that the majority of the 3–5 km of post-breakup denudation, as estimated by AFT dating (Brown et al. 2000), occurred by the end of the Cretaceous. Mean summit lowering rate of 5.07 ± 1.1 m/Myr indicates slow rates of erosion in the last 10,000 years compared to estimates of denudation from AFT dating by Brown et al. (2000).

Subsequent work by Cockburn et al. (2000) includes a transect of 10Be and 26Al samples collected at Gamsberg. These analyses yield an escarpment retreat rate of 10 m/Myr and summit downwearing rate of 0.4 m/Myr. The mean denudation rate for coastal plain inselbergs is 5.1 ± 1.1 m/Myr. The combination of the AFT and cosmogenic data support the interpretation that these rates have persisted since the late Cenozoic with a mean rate of denudation across the coastal plain of approximately 5 m/Myr. These data are consistent with a model of landscape evolution in which any initial escarpment that formed near the coast at the time of breakup was degraded by river systems flowing from an inland drainage divide and adjusting to the new base level at the coast. The initial location of the escarpment may have been only a few kilometres oceanwards of its present location, and its subsequent low rate of retreat has been controlled by pinning at the drainage divide, possibly enhanced

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 21

by flexural isostatic rebound. These denudation rate data refute conventional escarpment retreat models of a major escarpment initiated along the coast at the time of breakup, requiring a mean escarpment retreat rate of >1 km/Myr (Cockburn et al. 2000).

Bierman & Caffee (2001) analysed cosmogenic 10Be and 26Al from samples of bedrock, stream sediment, and clasts of desert pavement. Average bedrock erosion rates inland and seawards of the escarpment are indistinguishable (3.2 ± 1.5 m/Myr and 3.6 ± 1.9 m/Myr, respectively). Erosion rates based on stream sediments are higher than erosion rates based on bedrock, ranging from 5 to 16 m/Myr. This result indicates that the landscape is eroding faster than bedrock. Clasts of desert pavement have individual exposure ages up to 2.7 Ma (Bierman & Caffee 2001).

Van der Wateren & Dunai (2001) sampled cosmogenic 21Ne from pediment surfaces, inselbergs, and sediment from Namibia. 21Ne ages from quartz veins on pediment surfaces show a steady younging trend from SW to NE with increasing elevation. The central Namib pediment has a minimum age of 5.18 ± 0.18 to 3.97 ± 0.25 Ma, based on the two oldest ages obtained for quartz vein samples. Alternatively, these samples indicate denudation rates of 0.11 and 0.15 m/Myr. Quartz veins are the most resistant landforms on the plains, and the oldest veins project 5–10 m above the regional pediment, implying 5–10 m of total surface lowering. Assuming this has occurred in the past 10–15 Ma, the regional rate of surface lowering is on the order of 0.3–1 m/Myr.

Major late Neogene incision occurred at approximately 2.8 Ma in the central Namib west of the escarpment, slowing down or stopping in the early to mid-Pleistocene approximately 1.3 Ma, at a distance of approximately 100 km from the river mouth and approximately 0.4 Ma at 200 km from the coast (Van der Wateren & Dunai 2001). Pebble samples from Carp Cliff and Kamberg Cliff provide an age of abandonment of the highest river terrace of 2.81 ± 0.11 Ma. The Kuiseb River has an incision rate of 40–160 m/Myr during the early to mid- Pleistocene. These pebbles were emplaced shortly before a period of early Pliocene incision (Ward 1987) linked to local increased precipitation and global cooling (Van der Wateren & Dunai 2001). Denudation rates in the Kuiseb headwaters were very low during the period prior to conglomerate deposition (0.3–0.7 m/Myr) and are the same order of magnitude as the long-term denudation rate, based on samples from the pediment and from the summit of Gamsberg reported by Cockburn et al. (2000). Downcutting of the Kuiseb and Swakop Rivers occurred synchronously in both basins, and development of calcretes at this time reflects regional climactic influences. Steady-state denudation rates of inselbergs derived from 10Be and 26Al (Cockburn et al. 2000) are an order of magnitude higher than those on

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 22

the Kuiseb and Gaub river-cut surfaces (Van der Wateren & Dunai 2001). Drainage around the Mirabib inselberg was most likely influenced by base-level lowering following incision of the Kuiseb canyon after approximately 2.8 Ma.

Central Namib inselbergs were excavated relatively recently or have experienced accelerated denudation as a result of regional river downcutting that led to removal of thick sediment cover. Consistent with complex burial history observed in the work of Cockburn et al. (1999, 2000), inselbergs may have been excavated recently from a deep weathering regolith in response to local base-level lowering due to river incision. Denudation rates from pediment surfaces (≤1 m/Myr) are representative of the late Neogene landscape evolution of the central Namib since the onset of the Benguela upwelling system. After the initial phase of substantiation post-breakup denudation, the passive margin is characterised by long-term slow denudation punctuated by periods of accelerated denudation starting at 2.8 Ma and terminating between 1.3 and 0.4 Ma. Areas that are representative of long-term denudation have to be looked for on interfluves as far away as possible from areas undergoing local rapid surface drawdown (Van der Wateren & Dunai 2001).

Codilean et al. (2008) assessed the variability in erosion rate of the Gaub River catchment by sampling for 10Be in sediment and for 21Ne in fluvial pebbles. The frequency distribution of these isotopes was then modelled in a DEM-based analysis to predict 21Ne concentrations in sediment leaving the catchment. Sediment samples collected by Codilean et al. (2008) that drain the upland plateau yielded 10Be erosion rates of 7.9 ± 0.5 and 5.4 ± 0.3 m/Myr. Catchments below the escarpment exhibit rates of 14.1 ± 0.9 and 12.5 ± 0.8 m/Myr. When the previous results of Bierman & Caffee (2001) were recalculated by Codilean et al. (2008), 10Be rates based on small-catchment sediment samples confirmed the strong relationship between erosion rates and mean catchment slope. Erosion rates were found to be highest at the escarpment and at similar rates above and below the escarpment, with bedrock eroding at a slower rate than sediment. Above the escarpment, the bedrock erosion rate is 3.2 m/Myr, falling to as low as 0.5 m/Myr locally. Bedrock erosion rates are 10 m/Myr at the escarpment and 3.6 m/Myr below it. Similarly, stream catchment erosion rates above the escarpment average 5 m/Myr, increase to 16 m/Myr at the escarpment, and fall to 8 m/Myr below the escarpment.

Fluvial quartz pebbles collected at the outlet of the Gaub River have 21Ne concentrations that span two orders of magnitude. These concentrations require erosion rates that are lower than those obtained using 10Be in the amalgamated sediment samples. The range of published 10Be erosion rates for bedrock in the catchment is 0.5 to 11.7 m/Myr. Comparison

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 23

of these data with a DEM analysis confirms that the 21Ne distribution is a signature of slope dependence and spatial variation in erosion rates. Therefore, the landscape is not in steady state, with steeper areas eroding more rapidly (Codilean et al. 2008).

A.3.1.2. Western Cape Fission-track ages for the west coast of South Africa range between 166 ± 6 and 70 ± 5 Ma, with ages predating breakup obtained from the interior regions of the continent, consistent with other results from Namibia (Brown et al. 2000). Younger estimates of denudation include 3He and 21Ne from dolerite and quartzite samples collected from the escarpment at Vanrhynspass, Hantam Mountain, and Williston of the Western Cape (Kounov et al. 2007), and 10Be in quartz from river sediment and bedrock samples collected from the Langeberg and Swartberg ranges of the Cape Fold Belt (CFB) in the Western Cape (Scharf et al. 2011). Analysis of samples from Vanrhynspass was used to estimate minimum exposure ages at the edge of the escarpment between 0.30 and 0.65 Ma, with corresponding maximum denudation rates between 1 and 2 m/Myr (Kounov et al. 2007). Mean vertical denudation rates of dolerite samples range between approximately 1.5 and 3 m/Myr (Kounov et al. 2007). 10Be based denudation rates of the CFB fall between 2.3 ± 0.4 and 8.8 ± 0.2 m/Ma (Scharf et al. 2011). The similarity between catchment-averaged denudation rates (determined from river sediment samples) and denudation rates on interfluves (determined from bedrock samples) indicates a topography in approximate steady state, neither increasing nor decreasing in relief. These results indicate very low erosion rates within deeply incised canyons, suggesting that the present-day landscape of the CFB is not likely the result of neotectonic uplift in the region (Scharf et al. 2011).

A.3.1.3. Southern Cape Tinker et al. (2008b) quantified the timing and extent of exhumation across the southern Cape escarpment from AFT analysis of outcrop and borehole samples crossing the late Neoproterozoic Kango inlier, the CFB, the Jurassic-Cretaceous Oudtshoorn Basin, the Great Escarpment, the Karoo Basin to near the edge of the Archean craton. AFT ages for outcrop samples indicate that significant cooling occurred in the Cretaceous, with major cooling over by approximately 65 Ma. These ages are consistent with denudation postdating thermal Cape Orogeny. Uplift ages for all outcrop samples are younger than the Cape Orogeny (~250 Ma), and only a few ages are older than the Karoo igneous event (183 Ma). The data indicate that 2.5–3.5 km denudation occurred during the Mid- to Late Cretaceous at a rate of 175–125 m/Myr. Since the Cretaceous, 1 km of denudation has occurred (Tinker et al. 2008b).

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 24

Tinker et al. (2008a) subsequently compared these denudation rates with the calculated volume of sediment from wells and seismic reflection profiles. Since approximately 136 Ma, sediment volume of 268,500 km3 has accumulated offshore in the Outeniqua and Southern Outeniqua Basins. Accumulation volumes and rates were highest in the Early Cretaceous and Mid- to Late Cretaceous, and lowest in the Early to Mid-Cretaceous and the Cenozoic. These accumulated volumes do not match the calculated volume of onshore erosion, as quantified through AFT thermochronology from Tinker et al. (2008b). Since the mid-Late Cretaceous, based on denudation studies, an estimated 2.5–3.5 km of material has been eroded, in contrast to 0.27 km of erosion based on studies of sediment accumulation in offshore basins. Although the volumes do not match, the timing of increased sediment accumulation closely matches the timing of increased onshore denudation (Tinker et al. 2008a).

At Williston, in the Karoo, denudation rates derived for 3He and 21Ne from dolerite and quartzite samples range from 1.5 to 2.2 m/Myr (Kounov et al. 2007). Decker et al. (2011) estimated cosmogenic 3He maximum denudation rates for 22 Karoo dolerite bedrock surfaces. The mean maximum denudation rate for the Karoo dolerite surfaces sampled is 3.2 m/Myr, although the probable mean rate of dolerite weathering is 1.9 m/Myr when excluding 3 samples from sloped surfaces (Decker et al. 2011). Erlanger (2010) and Erlanger et al. (2012) dated terraces of the Sundays River with cosmogenic burial dating methods and determined an overall incision rate of 16.9 m/Myr (Erlanger 2010) and 16.1 ± 1.3 m/Myr (Erlanger et al. 2012).

A.3.1.4. Drakensberg Brown et al. (2002) sampled an approximately 500 km long transect of AFT ages along the Drakensberg Escarpment from 15 boreholes. The coastal zone experienced a minimum of 4.5 km of denudation in the last 130 Myr. Borehole SW 1/67, located approximately 30 km seawards of the escarpment, indicates a total denudation of 3.1 ± 1.2 km since approximately 91 Ma, with an accelerated rate of erosion between approximately 91 and 68 Myr of 2.1 ± 0.9 km and a mean rate of 95 ± 43 m/Myr. Borehole LA 1/68 west of the Lesotho Highlands indicates 1.7 ± 0.5 km of denudation since approximately 78 Ma, with accelerated denudation at 82 ± 43 m/Myr from 78 to 64 Myr (Brown et al. 2002). Apatite (U- Th)/He analysis of a deep borehole (CB-1) inland of the escarpment indicates a cooling of approximately 50° at 90 ± 10 Ma, implying denudation of approximately 2 km during the Mid- Cretaceous (Dimas & Brown 2003).

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 25

Fleming et al. (1999) inferred denudation rates of the Drakensberg Escarpment from concentrations of cosmogenic 36Cl in free face and summit outcrops of basalt. Summit denudation rates range from 1.4 to 10 m/Myr, with a mean rate of 6 m/Myr. Denudation rates from free-face outcrops imply escarpment backweathering rates of 49 and 63 m/Myr, assuming denudation occurs as spalling of fragments thinner than the attenuation length of 36Cl production. If escarpment retreat occurs as removal of blocks larger than the attenuation length, backweathering rates could be as high as 83 and 95 m/Myr. Therefore, estimates of escarpment retreat range between 50 and 95 m/Myr.

The mean rate of Drakensberg Escarpment retreat of 70 m/Myr implies that total escarpment retreat to less than 10 km has occurred since the breakup along the southeast margin at 135 Ma. This is more than an order of magnitude less than the mean rate of retreat that would have been required for the escarpment to move to its present position from an original location at or near the present-day coastline, as suggested by Partridge & Maud (1987). Fleming et al (1999) suggest that the present escarpment would have originally grown vertically through differential denudation as a feature pinned at the seaward flank of the drainage divide. Mean summit denudation rates of 6 m/Myr and calculated escarpment retreat rates of 50–95 m/Myr over the last 104 to 106 time span prevent intact survival of Mesozoic erosion cycle surfaces (Fleming et al. 1999).

A.3.1.5. Northeastern South Africa The cratonic regions of northeastern South Africa display lower total denudation than other regions. (U-Th)/He thermochronology for the Barberton Greenstone Belt indicates less than approximately 850 m of Cenozoic unroofing, with negligible erosion since the Cretaceous (Flowers & Schoene 2010). However, evidence for younger denudation occurs farther to the north. Kilometre-scale exhumation occurred over extensive regions of the Limpopo Province as two discrete events during the Cretaceous, one around 130 Ma and the other around 90 Ma (Belton & Raab 2010). Between 1.3 and 2 km of crust eroded over the 40 Myr interval. Belton & Raab suggest that the processes of valley incision and modest scarp retreat may be evidence for Paleogene cooling. This younger denudation is associated with river rejuvenation in the Miocene that significantly altered South Africa’s major drainage systems (Belton & Raab 2010).

Bauer et al. (2010) present AFT and (U-Th)/He thermochronologies for the Rwenzori Mountains that indicate accelerated cooling in Permo-Triassic and Jurassic times, followed by a long period of constant, slow cooling, and then a renewed accelerated cooling in the Neogene. During the past 10 Myr, differential erosion and surface uplift affected the

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 26

Rwenzori Mountains, with more pronounced uplift along the western flank. The final rock uplift of the Rwenzori Mountains that partly led to the formation of the recent topography must have been fast and in the near past (Pliocene to Pleistocene). Erosion could not compensate for the latest rock uplift, resulting in the recent high topography and Oligocene to Miocene (U-Th)/He ages (Bauer et al. 2010).

A.3.2. Constraints on Tectonic Uplift Erlanger (2010) and Erlanger et al. (2012) performed isostatic modelling using uplift rates inferred from burial ages and erosion rates. Erlanger characterised physiographic regions with a given erosion rate: 6 m/Myr for the Cape Fold Belt, 14 m/Myr for the Coastal Plain in the vicinity of Drakensberg and Durban, 80 m/Ma for the Great Escarpment, 30 m/Myr for the Lesotho Highlands, and 5 m/Ma for the Interior Plateau. Modelling was performed along three transects at the Sundays River and Durban with alternative effective elastic thicknesses of 60 and 80 km. The flexural isostatic rebound at the Sundays River is 9 m/Myr regardless of the effective elastic thickness. At Durban, isostatic rebound is 8 m/Myr for an effective elastic thickness is 60 km, and 9 m/Myr for an effective elastic thickness is 80 km.

Assuming that the long-term incision rate of 16.9 ± 1.2 m/Myr is a proxy for rock uplift rate, the Sundays River experiences 8 ± 5 m/Myr of tectonic uplift related to dynamic topography processes. The marine terrace at Durban yielded a rock uplift rate of 10 ± 3 Ma when corrected for Pliocene eustatic sea level. This yields rock uplift rates of 2 ± 5 m/Myr (60 km elastic thickness) and 1 ± 5 m/Myr (80 km effective elastic thickness) attributable to dynamic topography. These results are consistent with the magnitude of surface uplift (6 m/Myr) predicted by Gurnis et al. (2000), or potentially a decrease in dynamic topography and surface elevation through time (Moucha et al. 2008), but are incompatible with rapid Pliocene uplift predicted by Partridge & Maud (1987).

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 27

REFERENCES

Bard, E., Hamelin, B., Fairbanks, R.G. & Zindler, A., 1990. Calibration of the 14C timescale over the past 30,000 years using mass spectrometric U-Th ages from Barbados corals, Nature 345, 405-410.

Bauer, F.U., Glasmacher, U.A., Ring, U., Schumann, A. & Nagudi, B., 2010. Thermal and exhumation history of the central Rwenzori Mountains, western rift of the East African rift system, Uganda, International Journal of Earth Sciences 99 (7), 1575-1597.

Belton, D.X. & Raab, M.J., 2010. Cretaceous reactivation and intensified erosion in the Archean-Proterozoic Limpopo Belt, demonstrated by apatite fission track thermochronology, Tectonophysics 480 (1-4), 99-108.

Bierman, P.R. & Caffee, M.W., 2001. Slow rates of rock surface erosion and sediment production across the Namib Desert and escarpment, Southern Africa, American Journal of Science 301 (4-5), 326-358.

Bintanja, R. & van de Wal, R.S.W., 2008. North American ice-sheet dynamics and the onset of 100,000-year glacial cycles, Nature 454, August, doi:10.1038/nature07158.

Bowen, D.Q., 2010. Sea level ~400,000 years ago (MIS 11): Analogue for present and future sea-level? Climate of the Past 6, 19-29.

Bremner, J.M. & Day, R.W., 1991. Acoustic stratigraphy and late Cenozoic sediments in Algoa Bay, in Algoa Bay—Marine Geoscientific Investigations, Geological Survey Bulletin 100, pp. 123-163.

Brown, R.W., Gallagher, K., Gleadow, A.J.W. & Summerfield, M.A., 2000. Morphotectonic evolution of the South Atlantic margins of Africa and South America, in M.A. Summerfield (ed.), Geomorphology and Global Tectonics, pp. 255-280, John Wiley, New York.

Brown, R.W., Summerfield, M.A. & Gleadow, A.J.W., 2002. Denudational history along a transect across the Drakensberg Escarpment of Southern Africa derived from apatite fission track thermochronology, Journal of Geophysical Research 107 (B12), 2350, doi:10.1029/2001JB000745, 18 pp.

Burke, K., 1996. The African Plate, South African Journal of Geology 99 (4), 341-409.

Burke, K. & Gunnell, Y., 2008. The African Erosion Surface: A Continental-Scale Synthesis of Geomorphology, Tectonics, and Environmental Change over the Past 180 Million Years, The Geological Society of America, Memoir 201, 73 pp.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 28

Butzer, K.W., 1978. Stratigraphy of the Middle Stone Age sequence at Klasies River mouth, Tsitsikama Coast, South Africa, The South African Archaeological Bulletin 33 (128), 141-151.

Butzer, K.W. & Helgren, D.M., 1972. Late Cenozoic evolution of the Cape Coast between Knysna and Cape St. Francis, South Africa, Quaternary Research 2, 143-169.

Carr, A.S., Bateman, M.D., Roberts, D.L., Murray-Wallace, C.V., Jacobs, Z. & Holmes, P.J., 2010. The last interglacial sea-level high stand on the southern Cape coastline of South Africa, Quaternary Research 73, 351-363.

Chappell, J., Omura, A., Esat, T., McCulloch, M., Pandolfi, J., Ota, Y. & Pillans, B., 1996. Reconciliation of late Quaternary sea levels derived from coral terraces at Huon Peninsula with deep sea oxygen isotope records, Earth and Planetary Science Letters 141, 227-236.

Chappell, J. & Shackleton, N.J., 1986. Oxygen isotopes and sea level, Nature 324, 137-140.

Clark, J.A., Farrell, W.E. & Peltier, W.R., 1978. Global changes in postglacial sea level a numerical calculation, Quaternary Research 9, 265-287.

CLIMAP, 1981. Seasonal Reconstructions of the Earth’s Surface at the Last Glacial Maximum in Map Series, Geological Society of America, Boulder, Colo., Technical Report MC-36.

Cockburn, H.A.P., Brown, R.W., Summerfield, M.A. & Seidl, M.A., 2000. Quantifying passive margin denudation and landscape development using a combined fission-track thermochronology and cosmogenic isotope analysis approach, Earth and Planetary Science Letters 179 (3-4), 429-435.

Cockburn, H.A.P., Seidl, M.A. & Summerfield, M.A., 1999. Quantifying denudation rates on inselbergs in the central Namib Desert using in situ–produced cosmogenic 10Be and 26Al, Geology Boulder 27 (5), 399-402.

Codilean, A.T., Bishop, P., Stuart, F.M., Hoey, T.B., Fabel, D. & Freeman S.P.H.T., 2008. Single-grain cosmogenic (super 21) Ne concentrations in fluvial sediments reveal spatially variable erosion rates, Geology Boulder 36 (2), 159-162.

Compton, J.S., 2001. Holocene sea-level fluctuations inferred from the evolution of depositional environments of the southern Langebaan Lagoon salt marsh, South Africa, The Holocene 11 (4), 395-405.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 29

Conrad, C.P. & Gurnis, M., 2003. Seismic tomography, surface uplift, and the breakup of Gondwanaland: Integrating mantle convection backwards in time, Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems 4 (3), doi:10.1029/2001GC000299.

Cutler, K.B., Edwards, R.L., Taylor, F.W., Cheng, H., Adkins, J., Gallup, C.D., Cutler, P.M., Burr, G.S. & Bloom, A.L., 2003. Rapid sea-level fall and deep-ocean temperature change since the last interglacial period, Earth and Planetary Science Letters 206, 253-271.

Davies, O., 1970. Pleistocene beaches of Natal, Annals of the Natal Museum 20 (2), 403- 442.

Davies, O., 1971. Pleistocene shorelines in the southern and south-eastern Cape Province (Part 1), Annals of the Natal Museum 21 (1), 183-223.

Davies, O., 1972. Pleistocene shorelines in the southern and south-eastern Cape Province (Part 2), Annals of the Natal Museum 21 (2), 225-279.

Davies, O., 1973. Pleistocene shorelines in the western Cape and South-West Africa, Annals of the Natal Museum 21 (3), 719-765.

Debayle, E., Lévêque, J.-J. & Cara, M., 2001. Seismic evidence for a depply rooted low- velocity anomaly in the upper mantle beneath the northeastern Afro/Arabian continent, Earth and Planetary Science Letters 193, 423-436.

Decker, J.E., Niedermann, S. & de Wit, M.J., 2011. Soil erosion rates in South Africa compared with cosmogenic 3He-based rates of soil production, South African Journal of Geology 114 (3-4), 475-488.

Dimas, V.-A. & Brown, R.W., 2003. Evolution of the South African Drakensberg high- elevation passive margin: New insights from low-temperature thermochronologic data from deep boreholes, Abstract Series 70 from 17th Victorian Universities Earth Sciences Conference, September 5, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.

Dingle, R.V., 1982. Continental margin subsidence: A comparison between the east and west coasts of Africa, in R.A. Scrutton (ed.), Dynamics of Passive Margins, pp. 59- 71, American Geophysical Union, Boulder, Colo., Geodynamic Series, vol. 6.

Dwyer, G.S. & Chandler, M.A., 2009. Mid-Pliocene sea level and continental ice volume based on coupled benthic Mg/Ca palaeotemperatures and oxygen isotopes, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society 367, 157-168.

Erlanger, E.D., 2010. Rock uplift, erosion, and tectonic uplift of South Africa determined with cosmogenic Aluminum-26 and Beryllium-10, MS thesis, Purdue University, 198 pp.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 30

Erlanger, E.D., Granger, D.E. & Gibbon, R.J., 2012. Rock uplift rates in South Africa from isochron burial dating of fluvial and marine terraces, Geology 40, 1019-1022.

Ferland, M.A., Roy, P.S. & Murray-Wallace, C.V., 1995. Glacial lowstand deposits on the outer continental shelf of southeastern Australia, Quaternary Research 44, 294-299.

Fisher, E.C., Bar-Matthews, M., Jerardino, A. & Marean, C.W., 2010. Middle and Late Pleistocene paleoscape modeling along the southern coast of South Africa, Quaternary Science Reviews 29, 1382-1398.

Fleming, A., Summerfield, M.A., Stone, J.O., Fifield, L.K. & Cresswell, R.G., 1999. Denudation rates for the southern Drakensberg Escarpment, SE Africa, derived from in-situ–produced cosmogenic (super 36) Cl: Initial results, Journal of the Geological Society of London 156, 209-212.

Flowers, R.M. & Schoene, B., 2010. (U-Th)/He thermochronometry constraints on unroofing of the eastern Kaapvaal Craton and significance for uplift of the Southern African Plateau, Geology Boulder 38 (9), 827-830.

Forte, A.M., Mitrovica, J.X. & Espesset, A., 2002. Geodynamic and seismic constraints on the thermochemical structure and dynamics of convection in the deep mantle, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series A 360, 2521– 2543.

Forte, A.M., Quéré, S., Moucha, R., Simmons, N.A., Grand, S.P., Mitrovica, J.X. & Rowley, D.B., 2010. Joint seismic-geodynamic-mineral physical modeling of African geodynamics: A reconciliation of deep-mantle convection with surface geophysical constraints, Earth and Planetary Science Letters 295, 329-341.

Franceschini, G. & Compton, J.S., 2004. Aeolian and marine deposits of the Tabakbaai Quarry area, western Cape, South Africa, South African Journal of Geology 107, 619- 632.

Garnero, E.J., Lay, T. & McNamara, A., 2007. Implications of lower-mantle structural heterogeneity for existence and nature of whole-mantle plumes, in G.R. Foulger & D.M. Jurdy (eds.), Plates, Plumes, and Planetary Processes, The Geological Society of America, Special Paper 430, pp. 79-101.

Gibb Africa, SRK Consulting Engineers & Scientists & Council for Geoscience, 1997a. Coega IDZ Initiative: Feasibility Study—Geotechnical Appendix Book 3, Report no. C195 24/3 DRAFT, 11 pp.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 31

Gibb Africa, SRK Consulting Engineers and Scientists & Council for Geoscience, 1997b. Coega IDZ Initiative: Feasibility Study—Geotechnical Appendix Book 2, Report no. C195 24/3 DRAFT, 206 pp.

Gibb Africa, SRK Consulting Engineers and Scientists & Council for Geoscience, 1997c. Coega IDZ Initiative: Feasibility Study—Geotechnical Report, Report no. C195 24/3 FINAL DRAFT, 16 pp.

Gilchrist, A.R., Kooi, H. & Beaumont, C., 1994. Post-Gondwana geomorphic evolution of southwestern Africa: Implications for the controls on landscape development from observations and numerical experiments, Journal of Geophysical Research 99 (B6), 12,211-12,228.

Gilchrist, A.R. & Summerfield, M.A., 1991. Denudation, isostasy and landscape evolution, Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 16 (6), 555-562.

Goedhart, M.L. & Hattingh, J., 1997. The Geology of the Coega River Mouth and Proposed Industrial Development Zone, Eastern Cape, Council for Geoscience Report No. 1997-0008, 106 pp.

Green, A.N. & Uken, R., 2005. First observations of sea-level indicators related to glacial maxima, Sodwana Bay, northern KwaZulu-Natal, South African Journal of Science 101, 236-238.

Gurnis, M., Mitrovica, J.X., Ritsema, J. & van Heijst, H.-J., 2000. Constraining mantle density structure using geological evidence of surface uplift rates: The case of the African Superplume, Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems 1, Paper No. 1999GC000035.

Hanson, K.L. & Lettis, W.R., 2000. Application of multiple geochronologic methods to the dating of marine terraces in south-central California, in J.S. Noller, J.M. Sowers & W.R. Lettis (eds.), Quaternary Geochronology: Methods and Applications, AGU Reference Shelf 4, pp. 527-535, American Geophysical Union, Washington, D.C.

Hanson, K.L., Wesling, J.R., Lettis, W.R., Kelson, K.I. & Mezger, L., 1994. Correlation, ages, and uplift rates of Quaternary marine terraces, south-central California, in I.B. Alterman, R.B. McMullen, L.S. Cluff & D.B. Slemmons (eds.), Seismotectonics of the Central California Coast Range, pp. 45-72, Geological Society of America Special Paper 292.

Haq, B.U., Hardenbol, J. & Vail, P.P., 1987. Chronology of fluctuating sea levels since the Triassic (250 million years ago to present), Science 235, 1156-1167.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 32

Hattingh, J., 2001. Late Cenozoic Drainage Evolution in the Algoa Basin with Special Reference to the Sundays River Valley, Council for Geoscience Bulletin 128, 103 pp.

Hearty, P.J., 2010. Comment on “Sea level ~400,00 years ago (MIS 11): Analogue for present and future sea-level?” by D.Q. Bowen (2010)—Can the extrapolation of uplift rates from MIS 5e shorelines to MIS 11 replace direct and tangible evidence of the latter’s sea-level history? Climate of the Past (Discussions) 6, 295-305.

Hearty, P.J., Kindler, P., Cheng, H. & Edwards, R.L., 1999. A +20 m middle Pleistocene sea- level highstand (Bermuda and the Bahamas) due to partial collapse of Antarctic ice, Geology 27 (4), 375-378.

Hendey, Q.B., 1981. Geological succession at Langebaanweg, Cape Province, and global events of the Late Tertiary, South African Journal of Geology 77, 33-38.

Horton, B.P., 2007. Mid-latitudes, in S.A. Elias (ed.), Encyclopedia of Quaternary Science, vol. 4 of four-volume set, pp. 3064-3072, Elsevier.

Illenberger, W. & Burkinshaw, J., 2007. The Cape St. Francis headland bypass dune system and beach erosion at St. Francis Bay, and sediment accumulation in the Kromme Estuary, description for Heritage Center, December 2001 (update of December 2001 report), 6 pp., unpublished report.

Jacobs, Z. & Roberts, D.L., 2009. Last Interglacial Age for aeolian and marine deposits and the Nahoon fossil human footprints, Southeast Coast of South Africa, Quaternary Geochronology 4, 160-169.

Jacobs, Z., Roberts, R.G., Lachlan, T.J., Karkanas, P., Marean, C.W. & Roberts, D.L., 2011. Development of the SAR TT-OSL procedure for dating Middle Pleistocene dune and shallow marine deposits along the southern Cape coast of South Africa, Quaternary Geochronology 6, 491-513.

John, C.M., Karner, G.D. & Mutti, M., 2004. 18O and Marion Plateau backstripping: Combining two approaches to constrain late middle Miocene eustatic amplitude, Geology 32, 829-832.

Johnston, A.C., Coppersmith, K.J., Kanter, L.R., & Cornell, C.A., 1994. The Earthquakes of Stable Continental Regions: Final Report Submitted to Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), 5-volume proprietary report prepared for Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, Calif., TR-102261.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 33

Jouzel, J., Masson-Delmotte, V., Cattani, O., Dreyfus, G., Falourd, S., Hoffmann, G., Minster, B. & 25 others, 2007. Orbital and millennial Antarctic climate variability over the past 800,000 years, Science 317, 793-796.

King, L.C., 1953. Canons of landscape evolution, Geological Society of America Bulletin 64, 721-752.

King, L.C., 1962. The Morphology of the Earth: A Study and Synthesis of World Scenery, 699 pp., Oliver & Boyd, Edinburgh.

King, L.C., 1967. The Morphology of the Earth, 2nd ed., 726 pp., Oliver & Boyd, Edinburgh.

Kooi, H. & Beaumont, C., 1994. Escarpment evolution on high-elevation rifted margins: Insights derived from a surface processes model that combines diffusion, advection, and reaction, Journal of Geophysical Research 99 (B6) 12,191-12,209.

Kounov, A., Niedermann, S., de Wit, M.J., Viola, G., Andreoli, M. & Erzinger, J., 2007. Present denudation rates at selected sections of the South African escarpment and the elevated continental interior based on cosmogenic (super 3) He and (super 21) Ne, South African Journal of Geology 110 (2-3), 235-248.

Kounov, A., Viola, G., de Wit, M. & Andreoli, M.A.G., 2009. Denudation along the Atlantic passive margin: New insights from apatite fission-track analysis on the western coast of South Africa, Geological Society, London, Special Publications 324 (1), 287-306.

Labeyrie, L., Duplessy, J.-C. & Blanc, P.L., 1987. Variations in mode of formation and temperature of oceanic deep waters over the past 125,000 years, Nature 327, 477- 482.

Lambeck, K. & Chappell, J., 2001. Sea-level change through the last glacial cycle, Science 292, 679-686.

Le Roux, F.G., 1987. Lithostratigraphy of the Alexandria Formation, South African Committee for Stratigraphy (SACS), Lithostratigraphic Series 1, 18 pp.

Le Roux, F.G., 1989. The lithostratigraphy of Cenozoic deposits along the south-east Cape coast as related to sea-level changes, unpublished MSc thesis, University of Stellenbosch.

Le Roux, F.G., 1991. Lithostratigraphy of the Salnova Formation, South African Committee for Stratigraphy (SACS), Lithostratigraphic Series 9, 14 pp.

Lisiecki, L.E. & Raymo, M.E., 2005. A Pliocene-Pleistocene stack of 57 globally distributed benthic δ18O records, Paleoceanography 20, doi:10.1029/2004PA001071.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 34

Lithgow-Bertelloni, C. & Silver, P.G., 1998. Dynamic topography, plate driving forces and the African superswell, Nature 395, 269-272.

Luft, F.F., Luft, J.L., Jr., Chemale, F., Jr., Lelarge, M.L.M.V. & Avila, J.N., 2005. Post- Gondwana Break-up record constraints from apatite fission track thermochronology in NW Namibia, Radiation Measurements 39, 675-679.

Luft, F.F., Raab, M.J., Brown, R.W., Kohn, B.P. & Gleadow, A.J.W., 2006. Tectono-thermal history of the Kaoko Belt, Namibia: An integrated low temperature thermochronology study, Goldschmidt Conference Abstracts, p. A374.

Malan, J.A., 1990. The stratigraphy and sedimentology of the Bredasdorp Group, southern Cape Province, South Africa, unpublished MSc thesis, University of Cape Town, 197 pp.

Marker, M.E., 1987. A note on marine benches of the southern Cape, South African Journal of Geology 90, 120-123.

Martin, A.K. & Flemming, B.W., 1986. The Holocene shelf sediment wedge off the south and east coast of South Africa, in R.J. Knight & J.R. McLean (eds.), Shelf Sands and Sandstones, Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists Memoir 11, pp. 27-44.

Martin, A.K. & Flemming, B.W., 1987. Aeolianites of the South African coastal zone and continental shelf as sea-level indicators, South African Journal of Science 83, 507- 508.

Martin, A.K. & Flemming, B.W., 1988. Physiography, structure and geological evolution of the Natal continental shelf, in E.H. Schumann (ed.), Coastal Ocean Studies off Natal, South Africa: Lecture Notes on Coastal and Estuarine Studies, chap. 2, pp. 11-46, Springer-Verlag, New York.

Maud, R.R. & Botha, G.A., 2000. Deposits of the South Eastern and Southern Coasts, in T.C. Partridge & R.R. Maud (eds.), The Cenozoic of Southern Africa, chap. 2, pp. 19- 32, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Miller, K.G., Kominz, M.A., Browning, J.V., Wright, J.D., Mountain, G.S., Katz, M.E., Sugarman, P.J., Cramer, B.S., Christie-Blick, N. & Pekar, S.F., 2005. The Phanerozoic record of global sea-level change, Science 310, 1293-1298, doi:10.1126/science.1116412.

Miller, K.G., Mountain, G.S., Wright, J.D. & Browning. J.V., 2011. A 180-million-year record of sea level and ice volume variations from continental margin and deep-sea isotopic records, Oceanography 24 (2), 40-53, doi:10.5670/oceanog.2011.26.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 35

Miller, K.G., Wright, J.D., Browning, J.V., Kulpecz, A., Kominz, M., Naish, T.R., Cramer, B.S., Rosenthal, Y., Peltier, W.R. & Sosdian, S., 2012. High tide of the warm Pliocene: Implications of global sea level for Antarctic deglaciation, Geology 40, 407-410.

Milne, G. & Shennan, I., 2007. Isostasy, in S.A. Elias (ed.), Encyclopedia of Quaternary Science, vol. 4 of four-volume set, pp. 3043-3051, Elsevier.

Moucha, R., Forte, A.M., Mitrovica, J.X., Rowley, D.B., Quéré, S., Simmons, N.A. & Grand, S.P., 2008. Dynamic topography and long-term sea-level variations: There is no such thing as a stable continental platform, Earth and Planetary Science Letters 271, 101- 108.

Muhs, D.R., Simmons, K.R. & Steinke, B., 2002. Timing and warmth of the Last Interglacial period: New U-series evidence from Hawaii and Bermuda and a new fossil compilation for North America, Quaternary Science Reviews 21, 1355-1383.

Muhs, D.R., Wehmiller, J.F., Simmons, K.R. & York, L.L., 2004. Quaternary sea-level history of the United States, in A.R. Gillespie, S.C. Porter & B.F. Atwater (eds.), The Quaternary Period in the United States, pp. 147-183, Elsevier, Amsterdam.

Murray-Wallace, C.V., 2007a. Eustatic sea-level changes, glacial-interglacial cycles, in S.A. Elias (ed.), Encyclopedia of Quaternary Science, vol. 4 of four-volume set, pp. 3024- 3034, Elsevier.

Murray-Wallace, C.V., 2007b. Eustatic sea-level changes since the last glaciation, in S.A. Elias (ed.), Encyclopedia of Quaternary Science, vol. 4 of four-volume set, pp. 3034- 3043, Elsevier.

Murray-Wallace, C.V. & Belperio, A.P., 1991. The last interglacial shoreline in Australia—A review, Quaternary Science Reviews 10, 441-461.

Naish, T.R. & Wilson, G.S., 2009. Constraints on the amplitude of Mid-Pliocene (3.6– 2.4?Ma) eustatic sea-level fluctuations from the New Zealand shallow-marine sediment record, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series A 367, 169-187.

Ni, S., Ding, X., Helmberger, D.V. & Gurnis, M., 1999. Low-velocity structure beneath Africa from forward modeling, Earth and Planetary Science Letters 170, 497-507.

Ni, S. & Helmberger, D.V., 2003. Seismological constraints on the South African superplume; could be the oldest distinct structure on earth, Earth and Planetary Science Letters 206, 119-131.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 36

Ni, S.D., Tan, E., Gurnis, M. & Helmberger, D.V., 2002. Sharp sides to the African superplume. Science 296, 1850-1852.

Olson, S.L. & Hearty, P.J., 2009. A sustained +21 m sea-level highstand during MIS 11 (400 ka): Direct fossil and sedimentary evidence from Bermuda, Quaternary Science Reviews 28, 271-285.

Partridge, T.C. & Maud, R.R., 1987. Geomorphic evolution of southern Africa since the Mesozoic, South African Journal of Geology 90 (2), 179-208.

Peltier, W.R., 2004. Global glacial isostasy and the surface of the ice-age earth: The ICE-5G (VM2) Model and GRACE, Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Science 32, 111- 149, doi:10.1146/annurev.earth.32.082503.144359.

Peltier, W.R. & Fairbanks, R.G., 2006. Global glacial ice volume and Last Glacial Maximum duration from an extended Barbados sea-level record, Quaternary Science Reviews 25, 3322-3337.

Pether, J., 1986. Late Tertiary and early Quaternary marine deposits of the Namaqualand coast, Cape Province: New perspectives, South African Journal of Science 82, 464- 470.

Pether, J., 1994. The sedimentology, palaeontology and stratigraphy of coastal-plain deposits at Hondeklip Bay, Namaqualand, South Africa, MSc thesis, University of Cape Town, 313 pp.

Pether, J., Roberts, D.L. & Ward, J.D., 2000. Deposits of the West Coast, in T.C. Partridge & R.R. Maud (eds.), The Cenozoic of Southern Africa, pp. 33-54, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Pickford, M., 1998. Onland Tertiary marine strata in southwestern Africa: Eustasy, local tectonics and epeirogenesis in a passive continental margin setting, South African Journal of Science 94, 5-8.

Raab, M.J., Brown, R.W., Gallagher, K., Weber, K. & Gleadow, A.J.W., 2005. Denudational and thermal history of the Early Cretaceous Brandberg and Okenyenya igneous complexes on Namibia's Atlantic passive margin, Tectonics 24, doi:10.1029/2004TC001688.

Ramsay, P.J. & Cooper, J.A.G., 2002. Late Quaternary sea-level change in South Africa, Quaternary Research 57, 82-90.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 37

Raymo, M.E., Hearty, P., DeConto, R., O’Leary, M., Dowsett, H.J., Robinson, M. & Mitrovica, J.X., 2009. PLIOMAX: Pliocene maximum sea level project, PAGES News 17 (1), 58- 59.

Raymo, M.E. & Mitrovica, J.X., 2012. Collapse of polar ice sheets during the stage 11 Interglacial, Nature 483, 453-456.

Raymo, M.E., Mitrovica, J.X., O’Leary, M.J., DeConto, R.M. & Hearty, P.J., 2011. Departures from eustasy in Pliocene sea-level records, Nature Geoscience 4, 328-332.

Roberts, D.L., 2006. Dating and Preliminary Correlation of Raised Marine and Estuarine Terraces on the Western and Southern Coast of South Africa: Final Report, CGS Report No. 2006-0186, Eskom NSIP-SHA-018230#P1-206, 197 pp.

Roberts, D.L. & Brink, J.S., 2002. Dating and correlation of Neogene coastal deposits in the Western Cape (South Africa): Implications for neotectonism, Journal of Geology 105, 337-352.

Roberts, D.L., Botha, G.A., Maud, R.R. & Pether, J. 2006. Coastal Cenozoic Deposits, in M.R. Johnson, C.R. Anhaeusser & R.J. Thomas (eds.) ,The Geology of South Africa, pp. 605-628, Geological Society of South Africa and the Council for Geoscience.

Roberts, D.L., Bateman, M.D., Murray-Wallace, C.V., Carr, A.S, &, Holmes, P.J., 2009. West coast dune plumes: Climate driven contrasts in dunefield morphogenesis along the western and southern South African coasts, Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 271, 24–38.

Roberts, D.L., Matthews, T., Herries, A.I.R., Boulter, C., Scott, L., Dondo, C., Mtembi, P., Browning, C., Smith, R.M.H., Haarhoff, P. & Bateman, M.D., 2011. Regional and global context of the Late Cenozoic Langebaanweg (LBW) paleontological site: West Coast of South Africa, Earth-Science Reviews 106, 191-214.

Ruddock, A., 1968. Cainozoic sea-levels and diastrophism in a region bordering Algoa Bay, Transactions of the Geological Society of South Africa 71 (3), 209-233.

Scharf, T., Codilean, A.T., de Wit, M.J. & Kubik, P.W., 2011. Denudation rates and geomorphic evolution of the Cape Fold Belt determined through the use of in-situ produced cosmogenic 10Be, poster presentation given at Geosynthesis 2011, Integrating the Earth Sciences, 8th Annual Inkaba Workshop, August 28– September 2, Cape Town, South Africa.

Shackleton, N.J., 1987. Oxygen isotopes, ice volume and sea level, Quaternary Science Reviews 6, 183-190.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 38

Shackleton, N., 2000. The 100,000-year ice-age cycle identified and found to lag temperature, carbon dioxide, and orbital eccentricity, Science 289, 1897-1902.

Shackleton, N.J. & Opdyke, N.D., 1973. Oxygen isotope and paleomagnetic stratigraphy of equatorial Pacific core V28-238: Oxygen isotope temperatures and ice volumes on a 105 and 106 year scale, Quaternary Research 3, 39-55.

Shennan, I., 2007. Sea-level studies: Overview, in S.A. Elias (ed.), Encyclopedia of Quaternary Science, vol. 4 of four-volume set, pp. 2967-2974, Elsevier.

Siddall, M., Rohling, E.J., Almogi-Labin, A., Hemleben, C., Meischner, D., Schmelzer, I. & Smeed, D.A., 2003. Sea-level fluctuations during the last glacial cycle, Nature 423, 853-858.

Simmons, N.A., Forte, A.M. & Grand, S.P., 2007. Thermochemical structure and dynamics of the Africa superplume, Geophysical Research Letters 34, doi:10.1029/2006GL028009.

Stirling, C.H., Esat, T.M, Lambeck, K. & McCulloch, M.T., 1998. Timing and duration of the last interglacial: Evidence for a restricted interval of widespread coral reef growth, Earth Planetary Science 160, 745-762.

Summerfield, M.A., 1985. Plate tectonics and landscape development on the African continent, in M. Morisawa & J.T. Hack (eds.), Tectonic Geomorphology: Proceedings of the 15th Annual Binghamton Geomorphology Symposium, September 1984, chap. 2, pp. 27-51, Allen & Unwin, Boston.

Sun, D., Helmberger, D. & Gurnis, M., 2010. A narrow, mid-mantle plume below southern Africa, Geophysical Research Letters 37, doi:10.1029/2009GL042339.

Tinker, J., de Wit, M. & Brown, R., 2008a. Linking source and sink: Evaluating the balance between onshore erosion and offshore sediment accumulation since Gondwana break-up, South Africa, Tectonophysics 455 (1-4), 94-103.

Tinker, J., de Wit, M. & Brown, R., 2008b. Mesozoic exhumation of the southern Cape, South Africa, quantified using apatite fission-track thermochronology, Tectonophysics 455 (1-4), 77-93.

Torsvik, T.H., Smethurst, M.A., Burke, K. & Steinberger, B., 2006. Large igneous provinces generated from the margins of the large low-velocity provinces in the deep mantle, Geophysical Journal International 167, 1447-1460.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 39

Tucker, G.E. & Slingerland, R.L., 1994. Erosional dynamics, flexural isostasy, and long-lived escarpments: A numerical modeling study, Journal of Geophysical Research 99 (B6), 12,229-12,243.

Vail, P.R., Mitchum, R.M., Jr., Todd, R.G., Widmier, J.M., Thompson, S., III, Sangree, J.B., Bubb, J.N. & Hatlelid, W.G., 1977. Seismic stratigraphy and global changes of sea level, in Payton, C.E. (ed.), Seismic Stratigraphy—Applications to Hydrocarbon Exploration, pp. 49-212, American Association of Petroleum Geologists Memoir 26.

Van der Wateren, F.M. & Dunai, T.J., 2001. Late Neogene passive margin denudation history: Cosmogenic isotope measurements from the central Namib Desert, Global and Planetary Change 30 (3-4), 271-307.

Waelbroeck, C., Labeyrie, L., Michel, E., Duplessy, J.C., McManus J.F., Lambeck, K., Balbon, E. & Labracherie, M., 2002. Sea-level and deep water temperature changes derived from benthic foraminifera isotopic records, Quaternary Science Reviews 21, 295-305.

Wang, Y. & Wen, L., 2007. Geometry and P and S velocity structure of the “African Anomaly,” Journal of Geophysical Research 112, doi:10.1029/2006JB004483.

Wang, Y., Wen, L. & Weidner, D., 2008. Upper mantle SH- and P-velocity structures and compositional models beneath southern Africa, Earth and Planetary Science Letters 267, 596-608.

Ward, J.D., 1987. The Cenozoic Succession in the Kuiseb Valley, Central Namib Desert, Memoir 9, Geological Survey of South West Africa/Namibia, 124 pp.

Wehmiller, J.F., Simmons, K.R., Cheng, H., Edwards, R.L., Martin-McNaughton, J., York, L.L, Krantz, D.E. & Shen, C.C., 2004. Uranium-series coral ages from the US Atlantic Coastal Plain—The “80 ka problem” revisited, Quaternary International 120, 3-14.

Williams, M., Dunkerley, D., De Decker, P., Kershaw, P. & Chappell, J., 1998. Quaternary Environments, 2nd ed., Arnold, London, 352 pp.

Yokoyama, Y., Lambeck, K., De Deckker, P., Johnston, P. & Fifield, L.K., 2000. Timing of Last Glacial Maximum from observed sea level minima, Nature 406, 713-716.

Yokoyama, Y., Lambeck, K., De Deckker, P., Johnston, P. & Fifield, L.K., 2001. Correction to Yokoyama et al. (2000), Nature 412, 99.

Zachos, J.C., Pagani, M., Sloan, L., Thomas, E. & Billups, K., 2001. Trends, rhythms, and aberrations in global climate 65 Ma to present, Science 292, 686-693.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 40

Zhang, P., 1995. The evolution of the Gamtoos River floodplain, South Africa, unpublished MSc thesis, University of Port Elizabeth, 94 pp.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 41

Table A-1. Marine Isotope Stage Sea Levels and Durations

Begin End Duration Sea Level MIS (ka) (ka) (kyr) (m) 1 11.1 (12–10.6) 0 11.1 –45 to 0/3 2 to 1 13.8 (14.2–13.6) 11.1 (12–10.6) 2.7 –75 to –45 2 36.5 (37–35.3) 13.8 (14.2–13.6) 22.7 –75 to –130 3 50 (52–48) 36.5 (37–35.3) 13.5 –60 to –110 3 60.6 (63.5–56.4) 50 (52–48) 10.6 –45 to –80 4 69.7 (71.5–67.5) 60.6 (63.5–56.4) 9.1 –75 to –103 5a to 75.1 (77–72) 69.7 (71.5–67.5) 5.4 –45 to –75 5a 84.5 (86–83) 75.1 (77–72) 9.4 –45 to 1.5 5b 96.5 (99–94) 84.5 (86–83) 12 –45 to –75 5c 106.5 (107–106) 96.5 (99–94) 10 –45 to –17 5d 113 (116–110) 106.5 (107–106) 6.5 –30 to –70 5e 131.4 (132.5–129.6) 113 (116–110) 18.4 –45 to 10 6 to 5e 134.2 (137–132) 131.4 (132.5–129.6) 2.8 –75 to –45 6 160.4 (165–153) 134.2 (137–132) 26.2 –75 to –130 6 176 (179–171) 160.4 (165–153) 15.6 –40 to –75 6 183 (186–181) 176 (179–171) 7 –45 to (?)<–75 7a to 6 191 (193–189.7) 183 (186–181) 8 –5 to –75 7a-b-c 219.7 (225–215.8) 191 (193–189.7) 28.7 –45 to 10 7d 231.9 (232.4–231.2) 219.7 (225–215.8) 12.2 –45 to –80 7e 242.5 (243–241.8) 231.9 (232.4–231.2) 10.6 –45 to 0 8 to 7e 246 (250–243.5) 242.5 (243–241.8) 3.5 –75 to –45 8 276.7 (280–272.9) 246 (250–243.5) 30.7 –70 to –108 9 307 (316–302) 276.7 (280–272.9) 30.3 –25 to –75 9 335.4 (336–335) 307 (316–302) 28.4 –45 to 0 10 to 9 338 (341–336) 335.4 (336–335) 2.6 –75 to –45 10 359.4 (364–354) 338 (341–336) 21.4 –75 to –120 11 to 10 377 (389–365) 359.4 (364–354) 17.6 –45 to –75 11 421 (422–420) 377 (389–365) 44 –45 to 10 12 to 11 426.5 (428–424.3) 421 (422–420) 5.5 –75 to –45 12 470 (476–464) 426.5 (428–424.3) 43.5 –75 to –120 13 to 12 481 (482–479.5) 470 (476–464) 11 –45 to –75 13 534 (536.3–532.6) 481 (482–479.5) 53 –30 to –75

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 42

Begin End Duration Sea Level MIS (ka) (ka) (kyr) (m) 14 555.4 (559.2–550.8) 534 (536.3–532.6) 21.4 –75 to –92 15 621.2 (622.2–620.3) 555.5 (559.2–550.8) 65.7 –75 to –10 16 678.2 (680.1–673.8) 621.3 (622.2–620.3) 56.9 –75 to –128 17 to 16 685.1 (686.3–684) 678.3 (680.1–673.8) 6.8 –45 to –75 17 703.8 (709.8–700) 685.2 (686.3–684) 18.6 –45 to –22 18 to 17 713 (714–712) 703.9 (709.8–700) 9.1 –75 to –45 18 725.6 (727.6–724) 713.1 (714–712) 12.5 –75 to –105 18 742.1 (743.5–739.5) 725.6 (727.6–724) 16.5 –75 to –45 18 758.3 (760.6–755.2) 742.1 (743.5–739.5) 16.2 –75 to –90 19 to 18 766.3 (769–763.7) 758.4 (760.6–755.2) 7.9 –45 to –75 19 788.1 (789–787.3) 766.3 (769–763.7) 21.8 –45 to –20 20 to 19 790.8 (792–790.1) 788.2 (789–787.3) 2.6 –75 to –45 20 809 (811.1–806.2) 790.9 (792–790.1) 18.1 –75 to –104 21 to 20 816.4 809.1 (811.1–806.2) 7.3 –45 to –75 21 865.1 816.5 48.6 –45 to –16 22 to 21 867.2 (868.3–866.5) 865.2 2 –75 to –5 22 896.8 (898.9–891) 867.3 (868.3–866.5) 29.5 –75 to –106 23 917.3 (918.4–916.4) 896.9 (898.9–891) 20.4 –75 to –49 24 925.6 (927.1–923.2) 917.4 (918.4–916.4) 8.2 –75 to –87 25 to 24 931.2 (932.7–929.9) 925.7 (927.1–923.2) 5.5 –45 to –75 25 958.2 (958.7–957.8) 931.3 (932.7–929.9) 26.9 –45 to –6 26 to 25 960.3 (961.2–959.8) 958.3 (958.7–957.8) 2 –75 to –45 26 966.7 (968.2–965.3) 960.4 (961.2–959.8) 6.3 –75 to –93 30 to 26 1,033.2 (1,034.7–1,032) 966.8 (968.2–965.3) 66.4 –75 to –30 30 1,043.7 (1,046.6–1,039.8) 1,033.3 (1,034.7–1,032) 10.4 –75 to –89 34 to 30 1,120.8 1,043.8 (1,046.6–1,039.8) 77 –75 to 0 34 1,129 1,120.8 8.2 –75 to –83

Modified from Compton (2011).

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 43

Table A-2. Compilation of 500 kyr of Global Sea-Level Highstands

Continuous Sea-Level Record After Age Coral and Speleothem Data Adjustment

Narrowly Broadly Narrowly Broadly Defined Marine Narrowly Defined Broadly Defined Defined Uncertainty Range Isotope Defined Uncertainty Defined Age Uncertainty Uncertainty (incl. Early and Late Stage Age (yr) Range (yr) (yr) Range (yr) Age (yr) Range (yr) Spikes; yr) 1 3,500 ±3,500 3,500 ±3,500 3,550 ±3,550 −4,350/+4,350 5e 120,000 ±4,000 124,500 ±7,500 123,250 ±4,550 −6,750/+5,550 7a 197,000 ±3,000 195,500 ±7,500 196,600 ±2,000 −2,000/+2,000

7e 237,000 ±1,000 239,400 ±11,400 237,300 ±600 −600/+600 9c 321,000 ±8,000 321,000 ±8,000 325,950 ±1,450 −1,450/+1,450 11 404,000 ±6,000 404,000 ±6,000 402,050 ±2,700 −2,700/+4,650

13 480,000 ±7,000 480,000 ±7,000 484,300 ±700 −700/+700

Source: Table 1 in Rohling et al. (2010). Notes: U/Th-based ages of coral and speleothem samples of past interglacials. The ‘narrow’ definition is as compiled in Siddall et al. (2009). The ‘broad’ definition is as compiled in Siddall et al. (2006) and Rohling et al. (2009). These values are compared with sea-level data used here after a chronological adjustment. Interglacials in the continuous record of Rohling et al. (2009) are measured on the basis of upcrossings through −10 m.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 44

Table A-3. South Africa Palaeosea-Level Data (Note: this table contains both laboratory ages and corrected ages based on the data reported in publications.)

Sample Elevation ID1 Location Number Index Point Elevation (m) Uncertainty (m) Age Source 1 Orange River to Walvis Bay Rock bench with rock cliff 25.0 Davies (1973) 2 Orange River to Walvis Bay Barnacles 6.0 >28000 C14 yr BP Davies (1973) 2a Orange River to Wreck Point Terrace (1 km wide) -42.5 2.5 De Decker (1986) 2b Orange River to Wreck Point Terrace -30 De Decker (1986) 2c Orange River to Wreck Point Terrace -22 De Decker (1986) 2d Orange River to Wreck Point Base of cliff above terrace -22 2 De Decker (1986) 2e Orange River to Wreck Point Terrace -19 1 De Decker (1986) 2f Orange River to Wreck Point Terrace -15 1 De Decker (1986) 2g Orange River to Wreck Point Terrace -10 De Decker (1986) 3 Orange River Pta-1104 Calcareous algae –46.0 5.0 27,400 ± 440 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 4 Orange River Pta-1105 Calcareous algae –87.2 5.0 15,700 ± 160 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 5 Orange River Pta-955 Calcareous algae –75.5 5.0 13,300 ± 100 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 6 Orange River to Walvis Bay Beach 3.5 0.5 Davies (1973) 7 Gorab W86 Storm ridge 2.0 Davies (1973) 8 Gorab W87 Storm ridge 5.0 Davies (1973) 9 Gorab W88 Storm ridge 12.0 Davies (1973) 10 Buffels River W92 Terrace with marine gravel 48.0 Davies (1973) 10a Buffels River Wave-abraded terrace -16 2 Woodborne (1987) 10b Buffels River Wave-abraded terrace -25 3 Woodborne (1987) 10c Buffels River Wave-abraded terrace -36.5 3.5 Woodborne (1987) 10d Buffels River Waveabraded terrace -48.5 4.5 Woodborne (1987) 11 Kleinzee W90 Terrace with cliff 60.0 Davies (1973) 12 Kleinzee W97 Beach 90.0 Davies (1973) 13 Brazil BZ2 Storm beach ridge 10.8 3.0 124.3 ± 7.7 ka Roberts (2006) 14 Brazil BZ1 Foreshore/storm/beach ridge 6.4 2.0 104.5 ± 5.7 ka Roberts (2006) 15 Brazil BZ3 Foreshore 8.0 3.0 No date Roberts (2006) 16 Skulpfontein SKU12 Foreshore 5.6 2.0 90.7 ± 3.7 ka Roberts (2006) 17 Koingnaas W76 Beach 1.5 Davies (1973) 18 Koingnaas W77 Beach 3.5 Davies (1973) 19 Swartlintjes River W73 Shelly estuarine deposits 3.0 Davies (1973) 20 Hondeklip Bay W68 Storm ridge 5.5 0.5 Davies (1973) 21 Hondeklip Bay 30 m package 30.0 2–1.6 Ma Pether (1994) 22 Hondeklip Bay 50 m package 50.0 4–2.5 Ma Pether (1994) 23 Ryskop 90.0 Miocene Pickford (1998) 24 Klipvley W48 Beach deposits 18.0 Davies (1973)

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 45

Sample Elevation ID1 Location Number Index Point Elevation (m) Uncertainty (m) Age Source 25 Klipvley W49 Beach deposits 6.6 Davies (1973) 26 Graauw Duinen W50 Beach deposits 18.0 Davies (1973) 27 Graauw Duinen W51 Beach deposits 6.6 Davies (1973) 28 Sout River Estuary W53 Calcified marine sand 4.8 Davies (1973) 29 North of Toring W38 Lagoonal and deltaic sediments 27.0 Davies (1973) 30 The Point W39 Beach 27.0 Davies (1973) 31 Strandfontein W35 Storm ridge 4.2 Davies (1973) 32 Strandfontein W37 Marine deposits 30.0 Davies (1973) 33 Bamboes Bay W31 Storm beach 4.5 Davies (1973) 34 Rooiduin W47 Marine sand and pebbles 15.0 Davies (1973) 35 Lambert’s Bay Marine deposits 6.6 Davies (1973) 36 Malkoppan W17 Marine deposits 6.0 Davies (1973) 37 Steenbokfontein W16 Beach 0.0 39,300 ± 1,600 Davies (1973) 38 Verlorenvlei Pta-4311 Shell 1.5 1.0 1,450 ± 50 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 39 Verlorenvlei W14 Beach 6.0 Davies (1973) 40 Verlorenvlei W116 Sand with unarticulated shells 6.0 Davies (1973) 41 Verlorenvlei W14 Beach 6.0 Davies (1973) 42 Tierheuwel W7 Beach 6.0 Davies (1973) 43 Dwarskersbos-Soverby W5 Marine deposits 6.0 Davies (1973) 44 Laaiplek W3 Marine deposits 6.2 0.2 Davies (1973) 45 Berg River BR1 Estuarine floodplain 6.2 2.0 No date Roberts (2006) 46 Velddrif W2 Marine beds 6.6 Davies (1973) 47 Laaiplek VD1 Foreshore 5.4 2.0 No date Roberts (2006) 48 Berg River C149 Terrace with shells 18.0 Davies (1973) 49 Berg River Marine deposits 6.6 Davies (1973) 50 Brittannia Point C162 Beach ridge 6.0 Davies (1973) 51 Cape Columbine C158 Beach ridge 4.8 Davies (1973) 52 Duminypunt C157 Beach ridge 4.5 Davies (1973) 53 North Head Lighthouse C190 Storm ridge 12.0 Davies (1973) 54 North Head Lighthouse C190 Storm ridge 7.0 Davies (1973) 55 Jutten Point C175 Storm ridge 6.9 Davies (1973) 56 Jutten Point C176 Storm ridge 6.0 2,070 ± 50 Davies (1973) 57 Jutten Point C177 Storm ridge 11.5 Davies (1973) 58 Jutten Point C178 Storm ridge 9.0 Davies (1973) 59 Jutten Point C179 Terrace with shells 11.0 Davies (1973) 60 Jutten Point C180 Beach on rock-cut platform 9.0 Davies (1973) 61 Hugos Pos C143 Terrace with shells 7.5 Davies (1973)

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 46

Sample Elevation ID1 Location Number Index Point Elevation (m) Uncertainty (m) Age Source 62 Hugos Pos C144 Terrace and cliff 3.5 Davies (1973) 63 Nordsbaaipunt C188 Platform with beachrock 6.0 Davies (1973) 64 Nordsbaaipunt C189 Terrace with shells 3.6 Davies (1973) 65 Tabakbaai 25.0 Early Pleistocene Franceschini & Compton (2004) 66 Hoetjespunt C156 Beach 6.5 Davies (1973) 67 Hoetjespunt C156 Marine deposit, top 4.2 Davies (1973) 68 Sea Harvest Factory SH1 Foreshore 8.2 2.0 No date Roberts (2006) 69 Saldanha Bay BWBI Foreshore 5.2 2.0 90.1 ± 5 ka Roberts (2006) 70 Riet Valley 264 Pebbles and water-laid sand 158.0 Davies (1971) 71 Rietbaai C147 Terrace and cliff 3.5 Davies (1973) 72 Langebaanweg 90.0 5.15 Ma Roberts et al. (2011) 73 Varswater Quarry Varswater Formation 30.0 Late Miocene Pether et al. (2000) 74 Langebaanweg 30.0 3.3 Ma Roberts et al. (2011) 75 Langebaan C191 Uncemented beach deposits 4.5 Davies (1973) 76 Langebaan C152 Marine deposits 9.5 Davies (1973) 77 Langebaan C152 Shelly limestone 9.5 Davies (1973) 78 Saldanha C140 Marine deposits 4.2 Davies (1973) 79 Churchhaven CH3 Lower foreshore 5.1 2.0 205.7 ± 15.5 ka Roberts (2006) 80 Churchhaven CH4 Upper foreshore 7.7 3.0 129.8 ± 7.8 ka Roberts (2006) 81 Varswater 50.0 0.0 4.5 Ma Roberts et al. (2011) 82 Hopefield Varswater Formation 90.0 Middle Miocene Pether et al. (2000) 83 Langebaan C187 Marine deposits 5.0 Davies (1973) 84 Langebaan Lagoon C138 Calcareous sandstone 4.5 Davies (1973) 85 Saldanha Bay C139 Marine deposits 2.0 6,410 ± 45 Davies (1973) 86 Langebaan C183 Marine deposits 2.1 Davies (1973) 87 Yzerfontein YZ2 Foreshore 2.2 2.0 1,664 ± 45 BC Roberts (2006) 88 Yzerfontein YZ3 Foreshore 2.7 2.0 +74 (1196) –86 BC Roberts (2006) 89 Yzerfontein YZIC Foreshore 2.2 2.0 1678 ± 61 BC Roberts (2006) 90 Yzerfontein YZIA Foreshore 0.4 2.0 +91 (3602) –219 BC Roberts (2006) 91 Kasteelpoort C135 Beach ridge 4.2 Davies (1973) 92 Bokbaai C128 Sand with pebbles 8.5 0.5 Davies (1973) 93 Bokbaai C131 Terrace with cliff 3.9 Davies (1973) 94 Skulpbaai C125 Shell ridge 7.8 Davies (1973) 97 Melkbosstrand Beach 7.5 Davies (1973) 98 Kreeftebaai C125 Shell ridge 7.0 Davies (1973) 99 Robben Island RI1 Foreshore 1.9 2.0 +43 (87) –20 BC Roberts (2006)

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 47

Sample Elevation ID1 Location Number Index Point Elevation (m) Uncertainty (m) Age Source 100 Milnerton MIL1 Foreshore 5.0 3.0 110.4 ± 6.3 ka Roberts (2006) 101 Maitland C83 Beach 7.5 Davies (1973) 102 Hottentotshuisiebaai C118 Boulder beach 19.5 1.5 Davies (1972) 103 Sandy Bay SB2 Backshore 20.0 3.0 AD 460 ± 35 Roberts (2006) 104 Sandy Bay SB3 Backshore 20.0 3.0 10,807 ± 146 BC Roberts (2006) 105 Noordhoek NH6 Foreshore 2.4 3.0 +131 B102:B107 (2550) Roberts (2006) –122 BC 106 Kommetjie C112 Storm ridge crest 7.5 Davies (1972) 107 Kommetjie C113 Storm ridge crest 4.5 Davies (1972) 108 Cape Maclear C104 Pebbles and possible beach sand 67.0 3.0 Davies (1972) 109 Miller's Point C94 Terrace, cliff masked 9.6 Davies (1972) 110 Miller's Point C95 Terrace with cliff 6.0 Davies (1972) 111 Spaniard Rock C93 Boulder beach 16.8 Davies (1972) 112 Froggy Pond C91 Terrace with cliff 6.0 Davies (1972) 113 Glencairn C87 Rounded boulders 18.0 Davies (1972) 114 Sandvlei C181 Estuarine and marine deposits 2.3 Davies (1972) 117 False Bay 0.0 MIS 7 Roberts et al. (2009) 119 False Bay C75 Terrace with cliff 18.0 Davies (1972) 120 False Bay C70 Beach 60.0 Davies (1972) 121 Cape Hangklip C65 Storm ridge crest 3.3 Davies (1972) 122 Cape Hangklip C65 Storm ridge crest 5.4 Davies (1972) 123 Vredendal C52 Beach on rock-cut platform 61.0 Davies (1972) 124 Mudge Point C47 Terrace with cliff 9.0 Davies (1972) 125 Mudge Point C48 Terrace with cliff 6.0 Davies (1972) 126 Sandbaai C41 Storm ridge crest 5.7 2,300 ± 50 Davies (1972) 127 Hermanus C37 Terrace with cliff 10.5 Davies (1972) 128 Hermanus C38 Terrace with cliff 6.0 Davies (1972) 129 Wortelgat C24 Beach 1.5 Davies (1972) 130 Wortelgat C24 Beach 6.0 Davies (1972) 131 Kouevlakte C22 Beach sand over pebbles 94.0 Davies (1972) 132 Die Kelders Fisher et al. (2010) 133 Die Kelders C13 Terrace, cave, and stacks, no certain cliff 9.0 Davies (1972) 134 Die Kelders C14 Caves 6.0 Davies (1972) 135 Stanford Bay C12 Terrace with beachrock 1.5 Davies (1972) 136 Stanford Bay C09 Terrace with cliff 9.0 Davies (1972) 137 Stanford Bay C10 Terrace with cliff 6.0 Davies (1972) 138 Danger Point C05 Storm ridge crest 6.0 Davies (1972)

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 48

Sample Elevation ID1 Location Number Index Point Elevation (m) Uncertainty (m) Age Source 139 Danger Point C01 Terrace, pebbles at base, no cliff 9.0 Davies (1972) 140 Danger Point C02 Terrace with cliff 6.0 Davies (1972) 141 Vandyksbaai 915 Terrace with cliff 6.0 Davies (1972) 142 Franskraal Strand 913 Storm ridge crest 6.0 Davies (1972) 143 Franskraal Strand 913 Storm ridge crest 3.3 Davies (1972) 144 Franskraal Strand 913 Storm ridge crest 1.8 Davies (1972) 145 Uilkraal 910 Pebbles on terrace 5.0 Davies (1972) 146 Quoin Point Klein Brak Formation Pleistocene Malan (1990) 147 Cape Agulhas Foreshore 5.6 3.0 118 ± 7.2 ka Carr et al. (2010) 148 Cape Algulhas 38 Terrace with pebbles 6.0 Davies (1972) 149 Bredasdorp De Hoopvlei Formation Pliocene Malan (1990) 150 Bredasdorp De Hoopvlei Formation Pliocene Malan (1990) 151 Struys Point 34 Cave 6.6 Davies (1972) 152 Struys Point 35 Cave 3.0 Davies (1972) 153 Struys Point 35 Storm ridge 5.1 Davies (1972) 154 Arniston Point 28 Cave 6.0 Davies (1972) 155 Arniston Point 29 Notch 9.0 Davies (1972) 156 Arniston Point 30 Cave 3.6 Davies (1972) 157 Arniston Point 33 Cave 1.5 Davies (1972) 158 Arniston ARM2 Foreshore 1.5 2.0 125.8 ± 9.2 ka Roberts (2006) 159 Arniston ARM3 Foreshore 6.5 2.0 104.9 ± 6.6 ka Roberts (2006) 160 Skipskop Notch in dune rock 1.8 Davies (1972) 161 Kathoek/Sout River De Hoopvlei Formation Pliocene Malan (1990) 162 Kathoek/Sout River De Hoopvlei Formation Pliocene Malan (1990) 163 Kathoek/Sout River De Hoopvlei Formation Pliocene Malan (1990) 164 Kathoek/Sout River De Hoopvlei Formation Pliocene Malan (1990) 165 De Hoopvlei De Hoopvlei Formation Pliocene Malan (1990) 166 De Hoopvlei De Hoopvlei Formation Pliocene Malan (1990) 167 De Hoopvlei De Hoopvlei Formation Pliocene Malan (1990) 168 De Hoopvlei De Hoopvlei Formation Pliocene Malan (1990) 169 Kathoek/Sout River De Hoopvlei Formation Pliocene Malan (1990) 170 De Hoopvlei De Hoopvlei Formation Pliocene Malan (1990) 171 De Hoopvlei De Hoopvlei Formation Pliocene Malan (1990) 172 De Hoopvlei De Hoopvlei Formation Pliocene Malan (1990) 173 Noetzie 25 Cave 15.0 Davies (1972) 174 Noetzie 26 Platform and cliff 6.0 Davies (1972) 175 Noetzie 27 Cliffbase notch and caves 3.6 Davies (1972)

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 49

Sample Elevation ID1 Location Number Index Point Elevation (m) Uncertainty (m) Age Source 176 Infanta Klein Brak Formation Pleistocene Malan (1990) 177 Buffeljags Bay 907 Storm ridge crest 6.9 Davies (1972) 178 Buffeljags Bay 908 Storm ridge crest 5.1 Davies (1972) 179 Hillsdene 2 Well-rolled pebbles on plateau 209.5 3.5 Davies (1971) 180 Duiwenhoks Estuary 148 Incised terrace with pebbles 8.4 Davies (1972) 181 Duiwenhoks Estuary 149 Incised terrace with pebbles 4.5 Davies (1972) 182 Duiwenhoks De Hoopvlei Formation Pliocene Malan (1990) 183 Duiwenhoks Klein Brak Formation Pleistocene Malan (1990) 184 Blombos Cave Fisher et al. (2010) 185 Grootjongensfonteinstrand 133 Platform with probable cliff 3.5 Davies (1972) 186 Grootjongensfonteinstrand 134 Platform with probable cliff 1.5 Davies (1972) 187 Still Bay De Hoopvlei Formation Pliocene Malan (1990) 188 Piet Rogsbaai 130 Storm ridge 3.6 Davies (1972) 189 Piet Rogsbaai 131 Storm ridge 5.1 Davies (1972) 190 Still Bay De Hoopvlei Formation Pliocene Malan (1990) 191 Still Bay De Hoopvlei Formation Pliocene Malan (1990) 192 Still Bay De Hoopvlei Formation Pliocene Malan (1990) 193 Still Bay De Hoopvlei Formation Pliocene Malan (1990) 194 Still Bay 346 Cave 52.0 Davies (1971) 195 Gouritz River De Hoopvlei Formation Pliocene Malan (1990) 196 Gouritz River 108 Pebbles on terrace 54.0 Davies (1971) 197 Mossel Bay 251 Pebbles on narrow terrace 92.0 Davies (1971) 198 Mossel Bay 255 Cave 30.0 Davies (1971) 199 Gouritz River De Hoopvlei Formation Pliocene Malan (1990) 200 Voelklip 117 Storm ridge 5.5 Davies (1972) 201 Voelklip 118 Storm ridge 7.5 Davies (1972) 202 Dana Bay DANA5 Channel deposit 6.1 2.0 >221.5 ka Roberts (2006) 203 Dana Bay DANA6 Beach berm 4.2 3.0 100.4 ± 8.5 ka Roberts (2006) 204 Dana Bay DANA7 Beach berm 4.2 3.0 131.3 ± 10.6 ka Roberts (2006) 205 Dana Bay DANA1 Channel deposit 5.8 2.0 >365.7 ka Roberts (2006) 206 Dana Bay DANA2 Channel deposit 1.2 2.0 >343.8 ka Roberts (2006) 207 Dana Bay Klein Brak Formation Pleistocene Malan (1990) 207a Dana Bay 46877 Aeolian 3.86 377,000 ± 19,000 Jacobs et al. (2011); Roberts et al. (2012) 207b Dana Bay 46878 Aeolian 3.48 401,000 ± 23,000 Jacobs et al. (2011); Roberts et al. (2012) 207c Dana Bay 46881 Shoreface 5.39 371,000 ± 32,000 Jacobs et al. (2011); Roberts et al. (2012)

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 50

Sample Elevation ID1 Location Number Index Point Elevation (m) Uncertainty (m) Age Source 207d Dana Bay 48885 4.66 382,000 ± 28,000 Jacobs et al. (2011); Roberts et al. (2012) 207e Dana Bay 46888 Shoreface 3.77 414,000 ± 27,000 Jacobs et al. (2011); Roberts et al. (2012) 207f Dana Bay 46886 3.41 122,000 ± 5,000 Jacobs et al. (2011); Roberts et al. (2012) 207g Dana Bay Dana 6 4.20 116,000 ± 9,000 Jacobs et al. (2011); Roberts et al. (2012) 208 Dana Bay Dana 7 7.20 125,000 ± 9,000 Jacobs et al. (2011); Roberts et al. (2012) 209 Rheeboksfontein 236 Wide shelf with pebbles 168.5 8.5 Davies (1971) 209a Hartenbos River 138854 7.89 369,000 ± 28,000 Jacobs et al. (2011); Roberts et al. (2012) 209b Hartenbos River 138855 6.93 375,000 ± 36,000 Jacobs et al. (2011); Roberts et al. (2012) 209c Hartenbos River 128856 9.23 370,000 ± 24,000 Jacobs et al. (2011); Roberts et al. (2012) 210 Mossel Bay 255 Cave 30.0 Davies (1971) 211 Mossel Bay 253 Beach 17.4 Davies (1972) 212 Mossel Bay 256 Cave 18.0 Davies (1972) 213 Mossel Bay 259 Cave with notch 18.0 Davies (1972) 214 Mossel Bay 260 Caves 9.0 Davies (1972) 215 Mossel Bay 261 Cave 6.0 Davies (1972) 216 Mossel Bay 263 Cave 7.5 Davies (1972) 217 Klein Brak River KB1 Channel deposit 7.1 3.0 >232.3 ka Roberts (2006) 218 Klein Brak Klein Brak Formation Pleistocene Malan (1990) 219 Klein Brak Estuary 243 Shelly beds, top 4.5 Davies (1972) 220 Klein Brak Estuary 242 Shelly beds, top 6.6 Davies (1972) 220a Klein Brak River 142854 Foreshore 363,000 ± 27,000 Jacobs et al. (2011) 220b Klein Brak River 142852 Foreshore 390,000 ± 3,100 Jacobs et al. (2011) 220c Klein Brak River 46338 Shoreface 7.22 371,000 ± 27,000 Jacobs et al. (2011); Roberts et al. (2012) 220d Klein Brak River 46340 Foreshore 10.1 366,000 ± 30,000 Jacobs et al. (2011); Roberts et al. (2012) 220e Klein Brak River 46347 Shoreface 9.8 466,000 ± 36,000 Jacobs et al. (2011); Roberts et al. (2012) 220f Klein Brak River 46348 Foreshore 12.67 415,000 ± 37,000 Jacobs et al. (2011); Roberts et al. (2012) 221 Groot Brak Estuary Berm 7.0 3.0 125 ± 6.7 ka Carr et al. (2010) 222 Groot Brak River GBR2 Beach 6.9 2.0 124.2 ± 10 ka Roberts (2006) 223 Groot Brak River GBR3 Aeolianite 6.9 2.0 112.4 ± 8.7 ka Roberts (2006)

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 51

Sample Elevation ID1 Location Number Index Point Elevation (m) Uncertainty (m) Age Source 224 Groot Brak Klein Brak Formation Pleistocene Malan (1990) 225 Brakfontein Coast 225 Pebbles on 50 m wide terrace 145.0 Davies (1971) 226 Pacaltsdorp 222 Cave 9.0 Davies (1972) 227 Pacaltsdorp 229 Cave 9.0 Davies (1972) 228 Pacaltsdorp 230 Cave 6.3 Davies (1972) 229 Pacaltsdorp 231 Notch and cave 3.5 Davies (1972) 230 Pacaltsdorp 232 Ledge with cliff 1.5 Davies (1972) 231 Pacaltsdorp 233 Beach 7.0 Davies (1972) 232 Gwaing River Estuary 220 Platform with pebbles 135.0 Davies (1971) 233 Groothoek 217 Platform with few pebbles, no cliff 135.0 Davies (1971) 234 Groothoek 218 Cave and notched cliff 30.0 Davies (1971) 235 Wilderness 210 Beach 6.0 Davies (1972) 236 Wilderness 212 Terrace cliff 4.5 Davies (1972) 237 Swartvlei Estuary A Tidal Inlet 7.5 2.0 130 ± 8.2 ka Carr et al. (2010) 238 Swartvlei Estuary B Tidal Inlet 8.5 2.0 127 ± 5.7 ka Carr et al. (2010) 239 Gericke Point Platform 8.0 0.0 Marker (1987) 240 Gericke Point Platform 2.0 0.0 Marker (1987) 241 Gericke Point Platform 15.5 2.5 Marker (1987) 242 Wilderness 211 Scarp edge with pebbles 195.0 Davies (1971) 243 Gericke Point 265 Beach over aeolianite, date on Donax serra 3.4 36,000 ± 2,200 Davies (1972) 244 Sedgefield 208 Estuarine beds overlying dune-cut platform 5.0 37,700 ± 2,000 Davies (1972) 245 30 m littoral terrace 30 Butzer & Helgren (1972) 246 30 m littoral terrace 30 Butzer & Helgren (1972) 247 Swartvlei Klein Brak Formation Pleistocene Malan (1990) 248 Sedgefield SW1 Channel deposit 6.1 2.0 127.4 ± 9.7 ka Roberts (2006) 249 Sedgefield SW2 Aeolianite 6.1 2.0 118.0 ± 8.7 ka Roberts (2006) 250 Sedgefield SW3 Aeolianite 6.1 2.0 119.3 ± 9.6 ka Roberts (2006) 251 Buffelsbaai 204 Beach 3.9 Davies (1972) 252 Grootkop Platform 225.0 25.0 Marker (1987) 253 Grootkop Platform 100.0 0.0 Marker (1987) 254 Grootkop Platform 15.0 0.0 Marker (1987) 255 Knysna 363 Notch 3.5 Davies (1972) 256 Knysna Platform 200.0 0.0 Marker (1987) 257 Knysna Platform 115.0 5.0 Marker (1987) 258 Knysna Beach 12.0 0.0 Marker (1987) 259 Knysna Cave 7.0 1.0 Marker (1987) 260 Knysna Platform 3.0 0.0 Marker (1987)

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 52

Sample Elevation ID1 Location Number Index Point Elevation (m) Uncertainty (m) Age Source 261 Knysna 355 Terraces and cliffs 3.5 Davies (1972) 262 Knysna 356 Terraces and cliffs 1.5 Davies (1972) 263 Knysna 353 Cave 18.0 Davies (1972) 264 Knysna 354 Terrace with cliff 6.0 Davies (1972) 265 Knysna 357 Cave floor 9.0 Davies (1972) 266 Knysna 358 Cave floor 6.0 Davies (1972) 267 Knysna 360 Cave floor 6.0 Davies (1972) 268 Knysna 360 Cave floor 10.5 Davies (1972) 269 Knynsa Formation 0.0 Middle Miocene Carr et al. (2010) 270 Spaarbos Bay Platform 200.0 20.0 Marker (1987) 271 Spaarbos Bay Platform 130.0 0.0 Marker (1987) 272 Spaarbos Bay Platform 15.0 0.0 Marker (1987) 273 Spaarbos Bay Platform 6.5 0.5 Marker (1987) 274 Spaarbos Bay Platform 2.5 0.5 Marker (1987) 275 Noetzie 351 Storm ridge 4.5 Davies (1972) 276 Noetzie Platform 225.0 25.0 Marker (1987) 277 Noetzie Platform 120.0 0.0 Marker (1987) 278 Noetzie Platform 10.0 0.0 Marker (1987) 279 Noetzie 352 Cave floor 6.5 Davies (1972) 280 Kranshoek Platform 300.0 0.0 Marker (1987) 281 Kranshoek Platform 225.0 25.0 Marker (1987) 282 Kranshoek Platform 170.0 0.0 Marker (1987) 283 Kranshoek Platform 35.0 5.0 Marker (1987) 284 Kranshoek Platform 9.0 1.0 Marker (1987) 285 Robberg 341 Cave 30.0 Davies (1971) 286 Nelson Bay Cave Fisher et al. (2010) 288 ke kh 03 Wave-cut bedrock 5.3 1.2 This Study 289 ke kh 06 Wave-cut bedrock 12.3 0.7 This Study 291 ke kh 05 7.2 0.6 This Study 293 Bitou River BIT1 Estuary 2.3 2.0 +62 (826) -27 BC Roberts (2006) 294 Keurbooms Pta-4317 Life position bivalve 1.5 0.1 5080 ± 70 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 295 Keurbooms Pta-4462 Life position bivalve 0.0 0.1 3880 ± 60 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 296 Plettenberg Bay 336 Promontory and scarp 16.5 1.5 Davies (1972) 297 Plettenberg Bay 342 Cave floor 8.3 Davies (1972) 298 Plettenberg Bay 343 Cave floor 8.3 Davies (1972) 299 Keurboomstrand 325 Cliff bases and caves 3.5 Davies (1972) 300 Keurboomstrand 326 Cliff bases and caves 1.5 Davies (1972)

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 53

Sample Elevation ID1 Location Number Index Point Elevation (m) Uncertainty (m) Age Source 301 Keurboomstrand 327 Beach with laid pebbles 18.0 Davies (1972) 302 Vondeling 4 Wide terrace with rolled pebbles 77.5 4.5 Davies (1971) 303 keurbooms-01 21.5 1.0 This Study 304 ke lg 02 4.3 0.5 This Study 305 ke kh 01 5.0 0.5 This Study 306 ke kh 02 4.2 0.8 This Study 307 ke lg 01 4.6 1.3 This Study 308 Nature's Valley 320 Rock terrace with cliff 6.0 Davies (1972) 309 60 m littoral terrace 60 Butzer & Helgren (1972) 310 Storms RIver Mouth 302 Cave floor 8.0 Davies (1972) 311 Storms River Mouth 304 Caves and terraces with cliffs 3.5 Davies (1972) 312 Storms River Mouth 305 Caves and terraces with cliffs 1.5 Davies (1972) 313 Storms River Mouth 305 Cave 9.0 Davies (1972) 314 Tzitzikama 309 Terrace cliff, trace 19.0 Davies (1972) 315 Melkhoutkraal 121 Rock-cut terrace with pebbles 61.0 Davies (1971) 316 Tzitzikama Cave 18.0 Davies (1972) 317 Hengelaarskroonstrand 412 Terrace with cliff 3.5 Davies (1972) 318 Hengelaarskroonstrand 413 Terrace with cliff 1.5 Davies (1972) 320 Coastal platform 250 25 Butzer (1978) 321 Intermediate platform 160 10 Butzer (1978) 322 Formosa platform 120 15 Butzer (1978) 323 Intermediate platform 160 10 Butzer (1978) 324 Coastal platform 250 25 Butzer (1978) 325 Intermediate platform 160 10 Butzer (1978) 326 Tsitsikama East 406 Cave floor 7.8 Middle Stone Age artifacts Davies (1972) directly on beach deposits 327 Intermediate platform 160 10 Butzer (1978) 328 KRM1 Sea cave 9 Butzer (1978) 329 KRM2 Sea cave 23 Butzer (1978) 330 Cave 2 Sea cave 11 Butzer (1978) 331 Formosa platform 120 15 Butzer (1978) 332 Coastal platform 250 25 Butzer (1978) 333 Intermediate platform 160 10 Butzer (1978) 334 Klasies River Fisher et al. (2010) 335 Coastal platform 250 25 Butzer (1978) 336 Intermediate platform 160 10 Butzer (1978) 337 Cave 1 Sea cave 24 Butzer (1978)

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 54

Sample Elevation ID1 Location Number Index Point Elevation (m) Uncertainty (m) Age Source 338 Formosa platform 120 15 Butzer (1978) 339 Formosa platform 120 15 Butzer (1978) 340 100–120 m surface 110 10 Butzer (1978) 341 100–120 m surface 110 10 Butzer (1978) 342 Oyster Bay 402 Terrace with cliff, traces 18.0 Davies (1972) 343 100–120 m surface 110 10 Butzer & Helgren (1972) 344 100–120 m surface 110 10 Butzer & Helgren (1972) 345 100–120 m surface 110 10 Butzer & Helgren (1972) 346 100–120 m surface 110 10 Butzer & Helgren (1972) 347 60 m littoral terrace 60 Butzer & Helgren (1972) 348 100–120 m surface 110 10 Butzer & Helgren (1972) 349 60 m littoral terrace 60 Butzer & Helgren (1972) 350 60 m littoral terrace 60 Butzer & Helgren (1972) 351 60 m littoral terrace 60 Butzer & Helgren (1972) 352 Cape St. Francis Pta-182 Calcareous algae –130.0 5.0 16,990 ± 100 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 353 Cape St. Francis Pta-265 Calcareous algae –112.0 5.0 14,510 ± 120 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 354 Cape St. Francis Pta-264 Calcareous algae –115.0 5.0 13,670 ± 120 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 355 Cape St. Francis Pta-185 Calcareous algae –120.0 5.0 12,990 ± 100 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 356 Cape St. Francis CFRI Foreshore 0.5 2.0 AD 1876–1947 Roberts (2006) 357 Seal Point 418 Notched cliff base 18.0 Davies (1972) 358 Seal Point 421 Notched cliff 3.5 Davies (1972) 359 Seal Point 422 Notched cliff 1.5 Davies (1972) 360 Cape St. Francis 426 Cliff and notch 1.2 Davies (1972) 361 Kromme Mouth 412 Estuarine sediments 18.0 Davies (1972) 362 Kromme Mouth 417 Rock-cut terrace 3.6 Davies (1972) 363 60 m littoral terrace 60 Butzer & Helgren (1972) 364 30 m littoral terrace 30 Butzer & Helgren (1972) 365 Seekoi Valley 409 Estuarine terrace 61.0 Davies (1971) 366 30 m littoral terrace 30 Butzer & Helgren (1972) 367 60 m littoral terrace 60 Butzer & Helgren (1972) 368 30 m littoral terrace 30 Butzer & Helgren (1972) 369 Jeffrey’s Bay 429 Beach 10.0 Davies (1972) 370 Jeffrey’s Bay 431 Beach-platform 9.0 Davies (1972) 371 Littoral terrace 60 Butzer & Helgren (1972) 372 Jeffrey’s Bay 432 Platform with beachrock 3.8 0.2 Davies (1972) 373 60 m littoral terrace 60 Butzer & Helgren (1972) 374 60 m littoral terrace 60 Butzer & Helgren (1972)

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 55

Sample Elevation ID1 Location Number Index Point Elevation (m) Uncertainty (m) Age Source 375 60 m littoral terrace 60 Butzer & Helgren (1972) 376 60 m littoral terrace 60 Butzer & Helgren (1972) 377 Gamtoos River Salnova Formation Pleistocene Le Roux (1991) 378 Gamtoos River GTI Estuarine floodplain 4.2 2.0 No date Roberts (2006) 378b Gamtoos River valley Pta-6098 Donax serra shell 7.5 3.0 37,700 ± 1,500 yr BP Zhang (1995) 378c Gamtoos River valley Pta-6069 41,100 yr BP Zhang (1995) 380 Maitland 507 Beach 3.0 Davies (1972) 381 Maitland River Mouth MRM2 Foreshore 1.7 2.0 6,383 yr BP Roberts (2006) 382 Seaview 508 Terrace with fragments of beachrock 4.8 Davies (1972) 383 Cape Recife 510 Terrace and cliff 3.6 Davies (1972) 384 Cape Recife 511 Notched cliff 1.8 Davies (1972) 385 Cape Recife 512 Dune rock and beachrock 3.6 Davies (1972) 386 Cape Recife 513 Beach 18.0 Davies (1972) 387 Cape Recife 514 Beach 15.0 Davies (1972) 388 Cape Recife 516 Terrace with cliff, and shelly beachrock 3.6 Davies (1972) 389 Cape Recife 517 Terrace with cliff, and shelly beachrock 1.5 Davies (1972) 390 Cape Recife 515 Terrace with cliff 6.0 Davies (1972) 391 PE-101 5.0 0.3 This Study 392 PE-100 6.3 0.3 This Study 393 PE-103 4.9 0.3 This Study 394 PE-104 5.1 1.4 This Study 395 PE lg 01 3.4 0.3 This Study 396 PE lg 02 3.4 0.3 This Study 397 Algoa Bay Offshore strandline –71 Bremner & Day (1991) 398 Algoa Bay Offshore strandline –88 Bremner & Day (1991) 399 Cape Recife 536 Cliff and notch 1.5 Davies (1972) 400 Happy Valley/Shark River 524 Beach 5.0 Davies (1972) 401 Cradock 553 Estuarine beds 13.5 Davies (1972) 402 Brighton Beach Salnova Formation Pleistocene Le Roux (1991) 403 Brighton Beach PE1 Estuarine floodplain 5.8 1.0 No date Roberts (2006) 404 Deal Party 557 Crest of relict beach ridge, base not exposed 6.5 Davies (1972) 405 Swarte Koppen 552 Beach 61.0 Davies (1971) 406 Swartkops River 528 Base of beach ridge with shells 6.0 Davies (1972) 407 Bluewater Beach Salnova Formation Pleistocene Le Roux (1991) 408 Redhouse Salnova Formation Pleistocene Le Roux (1991) 409 Redhouse 559 Estuarine deposits 7.2 Davies (1972) 410 Redhouse 558 Estuarine deposits 7.5 Davies (1972)

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 56

Sample Elevation ID1 Location Number Index Point Elevation (m) Uncertainty (m) Age Source 411 Swartkops Alexandria Formation Middle Miocene Le Roux (1987) 412 Swartkops Alexandria Formation Middle Miocene Le Roux (1987) 413 Redhouse Alexandria Formation Middle Miocene Le Roux (1987) 414 Coega River COEGA 2 Estuarine floodplain 7.3 2.0 >175.4 ka Roberts (2006) 415 Coega River COEGA 4 Estuarine floodplain 8.1 2.0 >128.7 ka Roberts (2006) 416 King Neptune 537 Beachrock 6.0 Davies (1972) 417 Sundays River 210.0 Hattingh (2001) 418 Sundays River 240.0 Hattingh (2001) 419 Blaawabaadjiesvlei Alexandria Formation 240.0 Miocene Le Roux (1989) 420 Sundays River 120.0 Hattingh (2001) 421 Coega River 530 Terrace with gravel 17.0 Davies (1972) 422 Coega River 535 Estuarine platform with many pebbles and shell 18.0 Davies (1972) fragments 423 Coega River bank 571 Terrace with estuarine gravel, 1 km wide 16.5 1.5 Davies (1972) 424 Sundays River 170.0 Hattingh (2001) 425 Salnova Salnova Formation Pleistocene Le Roux (1991) 426 Coega Alexandria Formation Middle Miocene Le Roux (1987) 427 Sundays River 90.0 Hattingh (2001) 428 Sundays River 40.0 Hattingh (2001) 429 Hougham Park 539 Beachrock on dune 60.0 Davies (1971) 430 Hougham Park 540 Beach 48.0 Davies (1971) 431 Sundays River 105.0 Hattingh (2001) 432 Sundays River 75.0 Hattingh (2001) 433 Sundays River 45.0 Hattingh (2001) 434 Hougham Park Salnova Formation Pleistocene Le Roux (1991) 435 Suurkop Alexandria Formation 290.0 0.0 Miocene Le Roux (1989) 436 Colchester Alexandria Formation Middle Miocene Le Roux (1987) 437 Petworth Alexandria Formation Middle Miocene Le Roux (1987) 438 Spring Valley Alexandria Formation Middle Miocene Le Roux (1987) 440 Aluinkrantz Alexandria Formation 220.0 Miocene Le Roux (1989) 441 Algoa Bay Offshore strandline –90 Bremner & Day (1991) 442 Algoa Bay Offshore strandline –116 Bremner & Day (1991) 443 Algoa Bay Offshore strandline –135 Bremner & Day (1991) 444 Cannon Rocks 620 Storm ridge and cliff 3.6 Davies (1972) 445 Richmond Strand 601 Platform covered with sand and pebbles and dune sand 9.0 Davies (1972) 446 Kwaaihoek 606 Cliff with marine pebbles 3.6 Davies (1972) 447 Kwaaihoek 607 Cave 1.5 Davies (1972)

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 57

Sample Elevation ID1 Location Number Index Point Elevation (m) Uncertainty (m) Age Source 448 Carriage Rock 613 Cliff and caves 3.6 Davies (1972) 449 Carriage Rock 614 Cave 1.5 Davies (1972) 450 Bushman’s River 612 Cut terrace overlain by 60 cm of pebbles with Ostrea 1.5 Davies (1972) 451 Bushman’s River 609 Rock-cut terrace overlain by large pebbles 18.0 Davies (1972) 452 Bushman’s River 610 Terrace covered by boulders 1.5 Davies (1972) 453 Kariega River 618 Rock platform with beachrock 1.5 Davies (1972) 454 Kasuka River mouth 623 Calcified estuarine sands on rock-cut terraces 6.0 Davies (1972) 455 Kasuka River mouth 624 Calcified estuarine sands on rock-cut terraces 9.0 Davies (1972) 456 Ship Rock 625 Cave 3.6 Davies (1972) 457 Ship Rock 625 Cave 1.5 Davies (1972) 459 Kowie River 632 Platform, shelly sand, and pebbles 18.0 Davies (1972) 460 Port Alfred 631 Cut terrace covered with beach deposits 6.0 Davies (1972) 461 Kowie River 619 Platform overlain with pebbles 18.0 Davies (1972) 463 Kleinemonde 711 Terrace with 2 m of beach above 9.0 Davies (1972) 464 Great Fish River 709 Terrace with estuarine gravel 9.0 Davies (1971) 465 Rocky Point 701 Shelly lagoon 6.5 31,900 ± 800 Davies (1972) 466 Benton Platform 120.0 0.0 Marker (1987) 467 Benton Platform 15.0 0.0 Marker (1987) 468 Benton Platform 2.0 0.0 Marker (1987) 469 Mpekweni River 713 Marine pebbles on rock terrace 73.0 Davies (1971) 470 Kidd's Beach 740 Beach 18.0 Davies (1971) 471 Winterstrand 732 Boulder beach 30.0 Davies (1971) 472 Cove Rock 722 Platform with cliff 73.0 Davies (1971) 473 East London 719 Rounded boulders and rocks 9.0 Davies (1971) 474 East London Beach 6.0 Davies (1971) 475 River Buffalo 714 Cave 6.0 Davies (1971) 476 River Buffalo 714 Cave 6.0 Davies (1971) 477 Blind River BLR1 Estuarine floodplain 10.1 3.0 117.5 ± 7.1 ka Roberts (2006) 478 Nahoon NHN1 Foreshore 6.2 2.0 116.0 ± 7.5 ka Roberts (2006) 479 Nahoon NHN2 Aeolianite 6.2 2.0 126.7 ± 8.9 ka Roberts (2006) 480 Nahoon NN1 Foreshore 2.8 2.0 126.6 ± 8.4 ka Roberts (2006) 482 Bats Cave 107 Beach 1.0 Davies (1971) 483 Nahoon Point 705 Notch 1.5 Davies (1971) 484 Nahoon Point 707 Beach 2.0 Davies (1971) 485 Nahoon Point 707 Dune rock over beach deposits 0.0 29,090 ± 410 Davies (1972) 486 Coffee Bay Pta-U568 Oyster 4.0 0.5 Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 487 Mbotyi X35 Top of estuarine fill 20.0 Davies (1971)

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 58

Sample Elevation ID1 Location Number Index Point Elevation (m) Uncertainty (m) Age Source 488 Lupatana X30 Notched cliff base 58.0 Davies (1971) 489 Msikaba lighthouse X16 Beach gravel 60.0 Davies (1971) 490 Mnyameni River X09 Marine grit 61.0 Davies (1971) 491 MtentwanaRiver X7 Terrace with gravel 18.0 Davies (1971) 492 Mtamvuna River X3 Boulder beach 34.0 Davies (1971) 493 Offshore strandline –13 Martin & Flemming (1988) 494 Offshore strandline –72 to –68 Martin & Flemming (1988) 495 Offshore strandline –68 Martin & Flemming (1988) 496 Offshore strandline –60 Martin & Flemming (1988) 497 Mkomazi Estuary Pta-3597 Wood –48.0 3.0 9,990 ± 30 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 498 Mkomazi Estuary Pta-3570 Wood –28.0 3.0 8,950 ± 30 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 499 Mkomazi Estuary Pta-3622 Attached oyster –18.0 0.5 8,280 ± 80 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 500 Mkomazi Estuary Pta-3573 Attached oyster –18.0 0.5 8,140 ± 70 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 501 Mkomazi Estuary Pta-8070 Attached oyster –18.0 0.5 8,070 ± 80 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 502 Offshore strandline –68 Martin & Flemming (1988) 503 Reunion Pta-U430 Aeolianite –3.0 2.0 182,000 ± 18,000 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 504 Reunion Pta-U415 Elephant tusk in pothole fill 0.0 2.0 112,000 ± 23,000 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 505 Durban Bay GaK-1390 Wetland peat –22.0 5.0 24,950 ± 950 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 506 Offshore strandline –48 Martin & Flemming (1988) 507 Mgeni Estuary GaK-1389 Wood –29.0 3.0 8,420 ± 140 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 508 Offshore strandline –68 Martin & Flemming (1988) 509 Offshore strandline –48 Martin & Flemming (1988) 510 Offshore strandline –15 Martin & Flemming (1988) 511 Offshore strandline –108 Martin & Flemming (1988) 512 Offshore strandline –96 to –90 Martin & Flemming (1988) 513 Offshore strandline –85 to –75 Martin & Flemming (1988) 514 Offshore strandline –75 Martin & Flemming (1988) 515 Offshore strandline –108 Martin & Flemming (1988) 516 Richards Bay Pta-4140 Wetland peat –52.0 5.0 45,200 ± 2,000 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 517 Richards Bay Pta-4142 Wetland peat –46.0 5.0 39,100 ± 1,530 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 518 Offshore strandline –68 Martin & Flemming (1988) 519 Offshore strandline –75 Martin & Flemming (1988) 520 Mfolozi Estuary Pta-4344 Wood –36.0 3.0 9,440 ± 90 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 521 Mfolozi Estuary Pta-4343 Wood –44.0 3.0 9,350 ± 90 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 522 Mfolozi Estuary Pta-4346 Wood –28.0 3.0 8,840 ± 90 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 523 Offshore strandline –70 Martin & Flemming (1988) 524 Phinda Pta-U565 Attached oyster 4.0 0.5 95,700 ± 4,200 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002)

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 59

Sample Elevation ID1 Location Number Index Point Elevation (m) Uncertainty (m) Age Source 525 Sodwana Bay Pta-U487 Beachrock –44.0 1.0 117,000 ± 7,000 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 526 Sodwana Bay Pta-U435 Beachrock –17.0 1.0 84,000 ± 300 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 527 Sodwana Bay Pta-6429 Beachrock 0.0 0.5 3,360 ± 60 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 527a Sodwana Bay Caves –106 Green & Uken (2005) 527b Sodwana Bay Caves and beachrock –124 Green & Uken (2005) 527c Sodwana Bay Caves –130 Green & Uken (2005) 528 Black Rock Pta-6252 Pothole fill 3.5 0.5 4,480 ± 70 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 529 Black Rock Pta-6297 Shell in beachrock 1.6 0.5 4,350 ± 60 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 530 Black Rock Pta-6300 Shell in beachrock 1.5 0.5 3,740 ± 60 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 531 Mabibi Pta-6431 Beachrock –1.0 0.5 7,840 ± 90 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 532 Mabibi Pta-6248 Beachrock 0.0 0.5 6,460 ± 80 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 533 Mabibi Pta-5052 Coral in beachrock 0.0 0.5 3,780 ± 60 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 534 Bhanga Nek Pta-6191 Beachrock 2.8 0.5 4,650 ± 60 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 535 Kosi Bay Pta-U432 Beachrock –16.0 1.0 11,600 ± 300 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 536 Kosi Bay Pta-6190 Beachrock –18.0 0.5 8,950 ± 80 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 537 Kosi Bay Pta-4998 Aeolianite 2.0 1.5 4,660 ± 50 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002) 538 Kosi Bay Pta-4972 Coral in beachrock 1.5 0.5 1,610 ± 70 C14 yr BP Ramsay & Cooper (2002)

These ID labels link the points on Figure 1, Figure A-4, and Plate A-1 to this table.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 60

Table A-4. Summary of the Nomenclature, Lithology and Chronology of the Major Cenozoic Stratigraphic Units Along the Western and Southern Coasts

WEST COAST GROUP SANDVELD GROUP BREDASDORP GROUP ALGOA GROUP AGE AND LITHOLOGY

Witzand Formation Witzand Formation Strandveld Formation Schelm Hoek Formation Holocene unconsolidated. calcareous dunes

Olifants River Formation Langebaan Formation Waenhuiskrans Formation Nahoon Formation Pleistocene calcareous aeolianites

Strandfontein Formation – High- Velddrif Formation – Shelly foreshore Klein Brak Formation – Cemented Salnova Formation – Calcareous Pleistocene estuarine/shallow marine energy beach deposits up to 12 m deposits including MIS 5e deposits at 7 and uncemented sand, gravel, coquina, sand, sandstone, conglomerate, coquinites, calcarenites, sand, and amsl. Most commonly developed raised m amsl at Langebaan Lagoon and 15 and peat deposited on wave-cut coquina, and reworked Alexandria conglomerates shoreline at 5–7 m amsl is tentatively m amsl littoral deposits in the platforms <18 m elevation. Formation deposited on wave-cut correlated with MIS 5e. Saldanha/Langebaan area. platforms <18 m amsl.

Graauwduinen Formation Prospect Hill Formation Wankoe Formation Nanaga Formation Miocene to Pliocene aeolianites

Hondeklip Member – Late Pliocene Varswater Formation De Hoopvlei Formation – Early Alexandria Formation – Basal Miocene to Pliocene littoral and shallow regressional marine sequence up to 30 Langeberg Quartz and Sand Pliocene calcarenite, coquinite, conglomerates or oyster shell beds marine sandstone, coquinite, and m amsl. Muishondfontein Pelletal conglomerate, and sandstone with a overlain by interbedded calcareous conglomerate Avontuur Member – 7–5 Ma Phosphorite Members – Mio-Pliocene maximum elevation of ~120 m amsl. sandstones, coquina, and thin regressive lower shoreface sands age (~5 Ma) from vertebrate fossils. conglomerates up to 300 m in elevation formed in response to Middle Miocene overlying basal gravels up to 50 m Konings Vlei Gravel Member – Middle amsl. to Pliocene marine transgressive/- Miocene (~10 Ma) regressive cycles. Kleinzee Member – Middle Miocene Langeenheid Clayey Sand Member palaeoshoreline 95 m Six well-developed plateaux and marine-cut terraces of Neogene age are preserved in the hinterland of Algoa Bay. Bathurst Formation – Limestone, calcarenites, and conglomerate deposits laid on top of a marine abrasion surface.

Sources: Roberts (2006); Roberts et al. (2006); Pether et al. (2000); Maud & Botha (2000).

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 61

Table A-5. Summary of Uplift and Denudation Rates for Southern Africa

Kaapvaal Craton and Approach Namibia Western Cape Southern Cape Drakensberg Escarpment Limpopo Province East African Rift

Apatite Transect of 20 granite-gneiss Two phases of denudation are A transect of borehole apatite The coastal zone experienced a Kilometre-scale exhumation Apatite fission track and Fission Track bedrock samples from the recorded in apatite fission track fission track data from George minimum of 4.5 km of occurred over extensive regions (U-Th)/He thermochronology Atlantic Ocean to east of the data. The first event, between to Marysdale indicates 2.5–3.5 denudation in the last 130 Myr. of the Limpopo province as two indicate accelerated cooling in Great Escarpment. 160 and 138 Ma, is recorded km of denudation in the Mid- to Borehole SW 1/67 located ~30 discrete events during the Permo-Triassic and Jurassic Samples seawards of the Great only by the rocks above the Late Cretaceous at a rate of km seawards of the escarpment Cretaceous, one around 130 Ma times, followed by a long period Escarpment have mean escarpment in the Karoo area, 175–125 m/Myr. 1 km of indicates a total denudation of and the other around 90 Ma. of constant, slow cooling, and denudation rates of ~40 m/Myr and is tentatively linked to post- denudation has occurred since 3.1 ± 1.2 km since ~91 Myr, with Between 1.3 and 2 km of crust then a renewed accelerated from 130 to 36 Ma and ~5 Karoo magmatism (~180 Ma) then. (Tinker et al. 2008) an accelerated rate of erosion eroded over the 40 Myr interval. cooling in the Neogene. thermal relaxation. between ~91 and 68 Myr of 2.1 m/Myr up to the present. Evidence for Paleogene cooling During the last 10 Myr, The second event, between 115 ± 0.9 km and a mean rate of 95 differentiated erosion and Inland of the escarpment, rates ± 43 m/Myr. Borehole LA 1/68 may be attributed to the of denudation since breakup and 90 Ma, is linked to a processes of valley incision and surface uplift affected the tectonically induced denudation west of the Lesotho highlands Rwenzori Mountains, with more (130 Ma) have remained indicates 1.7 ± 0.5 km of modest scarp retreat. relatively constant at around 10 episode responsible for the pronounced uplift along the removal of up to 2.5 km of crust denudation since ~78 Ma, with River rejuvenation in the western flank. m/Myr. (Cockburn et al. 2000) accelerated denudation at 82 ± Miocene significantly altered across the coastal zone in front The final rock uplift of the AFT transects along Brandberg of the escarpment and less than 43 m/Myr from 78 to 64 Myr. South Africa’s major drainage and Okenyenya inselbergs (Brown et al. 2002) systems. (Belton & Raab 2010) Rwenzori Mountains that partly 1 km on the elevated interior led to the formation of the provide evidence for rapid plateau. (Kounov et al. 2009) exhumation between 80 and 60 recent topography must have Ma (0.2–0.125 km/Myr) and 5 been fast and in the near past km of denudation since the Late (Pliocene to Pleistocene). Cretaceous with denudation Erosion could not compensate rates of 0.023–0.15 km/Myr in for the latest rock uplift, the Early Tertiary. (Raab et al. resulting in Oligocene to 2005) Miocene (U-Th)/He ages. (Bauer et al. 2010)

(U-Th)/He The Kaoko Belt of Namibia Apatite (U-Th)/He analysis of (U-Th)/He thermochronology for experienced accelerated deep borehole (CB-1) inland of the Barberton Greenstone Belt denudation during the the escarpment indicates a indicates less than ~850 m of Cretaceous. (Luft et al. 2006) cooling of ~50º at 90 ± 10 Ma, Cenozoic unroofing with implying denudation of ~2 km negligible erosion since the during the Mid-Cretaceous. Cretaceous. (Flowers & (Dimas & Brown 2003) Schoene 2010)

Cosmogenic Bedrock Outcrops of 10Be denudation rates for river Sundays River Terraces River Sediments 10Be and 26Al Inselbergs/Bornhardts sediment, bedrock outcrops, Unilow (UL) site on terrace T13 Sampled sediment from six Mean summit lower rate of 5.07 and fluvial gravels collected of Hattingh (2001) has an age of rivers: the Tugela, Umgeni, ± 1.1 m/Myr determined from from the Cape Fold Belt in the 0.23 ± 0.15 Ma and an erosion Umzimvubu, Kei, Orange, and three inselbergs (Cockburn et Western Cape are between 2.3 rate of 2.52 ± 0.2 m/Ma. Caledon. Erosion rates for the al. 1999) ± 0.4 m/Myr and 8.8 ± 0.2 southeastern coastal plain m/Myr. (Scharf et al. 2011) Unifrutti (UF) site on terrace T11 A transect at Gamsberg yields of Hattingh (2001) has an age of seawards of the Drakensberg an escarpment retreat rate of 10 0.37 ± 0.19 Ma and an erosion Escarpment range from 9.34 to m/Myr and a summit rate of 3.8 ± 0.4 m/Ma. 22.4 m/Ma (samples Kei, downwearing rate of 0.4 m/Myr. Tugela2, and Umgeni). The Jagvlak (JV) site on terrace T11 Umzimvubu and Tugela1 The mean dendudation rate for of Hattingh (2001) has an age of coastal plain bornhardts is 5.1 ± sampling points represent the 0.256  0.153 Ma and a palaeo- transition from the low 1.1 m/Myr. (Cockburn et al. erosion rate of 18.44 ± 13.0 2000) topography of the coastal m/Ma. erosion to the high topography Average bedrock erosion rates Canal (CL) site on terrace T10 of the Lesotho Highlands and inland and seawards of the of Hattingh (2001) has an age of have variable erosion rates, escarpment are 0.654  0.0596 Ma and a ranging from 11.6 to 37.3 m/Ma. indistinguishable (3.2 ± 1.5 palaeo-erosion rate of 7.53 ± The Orange River sampling m/Myr and 3.6 ± 1.9 m/Myr, 3.0 m/Ma. point captures sediment eroding respectively). (Bierman & from the Lesotho Highlands and Hattingh (2001) mapped the Caffee 2001) has a rate of 33.9 m/Ma. The Lookout terrace as T8 but did When the previous results of Caledon sampling point reflects not map the Lower Lookout (LL) Bierman and Caffee (2001) erosion rates of the inner

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 62

Kaapvaal Craton and Approach Namibia Western Cape Southern Cape Drakensberg Escarpment Limpopo Province East African Rift were recalculated, 10Be rates site, which is lower in elevation. piedmont and has a rate of 20.2 based on small-catchment Based on elevations of the m/Ma. sediment samples confirmed terrace and bedrock, Erlanger The piedmont to the the strong relationship between (2010) and Erlanger et al. Drakensberg Escarpment is erosion rates and mean (2012) assigned the LL terrace eroding at variable rates (11.6 ± catchment slope. Above the to T9 and the Lookout terrace 0.38 m/Ma and 37.3 ± 0.96 escarpment, the bedrock rate is above it to T8. Erlanger m/Ma), and erosion rates from 3.2 m/Myr, with 0.5 m/Myr at assigned the Borrow Pit (BRW) the Drakensberg Escarpment Gamsberg. Bedrock rates at the site to T9. The age of the LL site are at least two times faster (86 escarpment are 10 and 3.5 is 1.14  0.384 Ma, and the ± 0.60 m/Ma). The Lesotho m/Myr below the escarpment. palaeo-erosion rate is 3.31 ± Highlands above the Great (Codilean et al. 2008) 0.54 m/Ma. The age of the Escarpment are eroding twice Borrow Pit 1.36  0.357 Ma, and as fast (33.9 ± 0.82 m/Ma) as the palaeo-erosion rate is 24.0 ± the coast. (Erlanger 2010) Stream Sediment 6.1 m/Ma. Erosion rates based on stream The Railroad Cut (RRC) site sediments are higher than corresponds to terrace T8 of bedrock erosion rates, ranging Hattingh (2001); it has an age of from 5 to 16 m/Myr. (Bierman & 3.20  0.486 Ma and a palaeo- Caffee 2001) erosion rate of 18.1 ± 6.8 m/Ma. Sediment samples that drain the The Uitkyk (UK) site upland plateau have 10Be rates corresponds to terrace T7 of of 7.9 ± 0.5 m/Myr and 5.4 ± 0.3 Hattingh (2001); it has an age of m/Myr, respectively. Catchments below the 4.06  0.624 Ma and a palaeo- escarpment have rates of 14.1 ± erosion rate of 4.74 ± 2.1 m/Ma. 0.9 and 12.5 ± 0.8 m/Myr. The Kirkwood (KCS) site is Recalculation of the previous located on T5, the highest and results of Bieman and Caffee oldest surface sampled in this (2001), 10Be rates based on study. A burial age could not be small-catchment sediment computed for this sample samples confirmed the strong because scatter in the data was relationship between erosion too great to successfully regress rates and mean catchment a line through the data. This slope. Sediment rates average sample is probably older than 5 5 m/Myr above the escarpment, Ma. increase to 16 m/Myr at the Plotting these results against escarpment, and fall to 8 m/Myr terrace elevation above river below the escarpment. height results in an incision rate (Codilean et al. 2008) of 16.9 m/My (Erlanger 2010) and 16.1 ± 1.3 m/Myr for the last 4 Myr (Erlanger et al. 2012). Pediment Surface Gravels The grand mean of palaeo- Clasts of desert pavement have erosion rates for all terraces individual exposure ages up to except Unifrutti and Unilow is 2.7 Ma. (Bierman & Caffee 6.62 ± 1.1 m/Ma. 2001).

Marine Terrace at Durban The outcrop of a marine terrace recently exposed by a construction project near the Greenwood Park Railway Station in Durban was correlated to the ‘70m bench’ of Davies (1970). The elevation was measured by Erlanger (2010) and Erlanger et al. (2012) at 65.1 m asl. Twelve sandstone clasts collected from

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 63

Kaapvaal Craton and Approach Namibia Western Cape Southern Cape Drakensberg Escarpment Limpopo Province East African Rift a gravel layer that lies 4.3 m below the terrace tread yielded a burial age of 4.26 ± 0.68 Ma. Sea-level reconstructions at this time place early to mid-Pliocene sea level at 20–30 m. Correcting for this eustatic sea level results in a rock uplift rate of 10 ± 3 m/Ma (Erlanger 2010) and 9.4 ± 2.2 m/Myr (Erlanger et al. 2012). With no correction, the uplift rate is 16.9 ± 1.2 m/Ma.

Cosmogenic Bedrock Summit Outcrops Cl Average denudation rate of 6 m/Myr based on samples collected at the summit. (Fleming et al. 1999)

Bedrock Free-Face Outcrops Back-weathering rates of escarpment for free-face bedrock 49 and 63 m/Myr. The rate of escarpment retreat was modelled as 50–95 m/Myr. (Fleming et al. 1999)

Cosmogenic Major late Neogene incision Samples from the escarpment Lowest denudation rates of 1.5 3He and 21Ne occurred ~2.8 Ma in the central at Vanrhyns Pass have to 2.2 m/Myr were obtained Namib west of the escarpment, estimated minimum exposure inland at Willston. (Kounov et al. slowing down or stopping in the ages at the edge of the 2007) early to mid-Pleistocene ~1.3 escarpment of between 0.30 Cosmogenic 3He maximum Ma at a distance of ~100 km and 0.65 Ma, with denudation rates of 22 Karoo from the river mouth and ~0.4 corresponding maximum dolerite bedrock surfaces. The Ma at 200 km from the coast. denudation rates between 1 and mean maximum denudation rate The Kuiseb River has an 2 m/Myr. for the Karoo dolerite surfaces incision rate of 40–160 m/Myr Mean vertical denudation rates sampled in this study is 3.2 during the early to mid- of dolerite samples range m/Myr, although the probable Pleistocene. between ~1.5 and 3 m/Myr. mean rate of dolerite weathering Steady-state denudation rates Denudation rates are lower at is 1.9 m/Myr when excluding of inselbergs (Cockburn et al. Vanrhyns Pass than at the three samples from sloped 2000) derived from 10Be and surfaces. (Decker et al. 2011) 26 Hantam Mountain and Beaufort Al are an order of magnitude West sites, suggesting a slower higher than those on the Kuiseb denudation rate of the Table and Gaub river-cut surfaces. Mountain Group than the Central Namib inselbergs were dolerite. excavated relatively recently or experienced accelerated The lowest rate was obtained denudation as a result of inland at Williston, suggesting regional river downcutting and an influence of climactic erosion of thick sediment cover, conditions. (Kounov et al. 2007) consistent with complex burial history observed in Cockburn et al.’s (2000) work. Denudation rates from pediment surfaces (≤1 m/Myr) are representative of the late Neogene landscape evolution of the central Namib

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 64

Kaapvaal Craton and Approach Namibia Western Cape Southern Cape Drakensberg Escarpment Limpopo Province East African Rift since the onset of the Benguela upwelling system. (Van der Wateren & Dunai 2001) Fluvial quartz pebbles collected at the outlet of the Gaub River have 21Ne concentrations that span two orders of magnitude. These concentrations require erosion rates that are lower than those obtained using 10Be in the amalgamated sediment samples. The range of published 10Be rates for bedrock in the catchment varies from 0.5 to 11.7 m/Myr. Comparison of these data with a DEM analysis confirms that the Ne distribution is a signature of slope dependence and spatial variation in erosion rates. Therefore, the landscape is not in steady state, with steeper areas eroding more rapidly. (Codilean et al. 2008)

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 65

List of Figures Figure A-1 65 Ma sea-level curve from deep-sea oxygen and carbon isotope records (Zachos et al. 2001) Figure A-2 Global Pliocene–Pleistocene sea-level curve (Naish & Wilson 2009) Figure A-3 Comparison of late Quaternary sea-level curves from oxygen isotope data Figure A-4 Regional map showing locations of previous marine terrace investigations Figure A-5 Cenozoic coastal sediments in South Africa Figure A-6 Marine terrace chronology and altimetry of South Africa Figure A-7 Height of terraces with OSL age dates Figure A-8 Schematic representation of middle Pleistocene to Holocene stratigraphic units

List of Plates Plate A-1 Shore-parallel profile showing regional marine terraces

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 66

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 67

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 68

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 69

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 70

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 71

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 72

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 73

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 74

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version A - 75

APPENDIX B1: GIS DATABASE

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 146

Borehole Data X (m) Y (m) X (m) Y (m) Z (m) EOH (m) Drill Drill type Document title Report or Report Latitude Longitude No Source inclin‐ Contract # date (Decimal (Decimal ation degrees) Degrees)

Abbreviations: BH: borehole. SV: Subvertical. TLB/BA: Tractor Loader Back Actor. TP: Trial Pit. U: Unspecified. V: Vertical BH1 Gibb 373875 ‐ 61909.20 ‐ 5.500 17.00 V BH Coega IDZ initiative: proposed harbour development, geotechnical J195 24B 1997‐02 ‐ 25.668350 Africa 8.000 61909 000 3738758.00 site investigation report 33.77367 2778 .200 000 38889 BH2 Gibb 374007 ‐ 62532.50 ‐ 2.500 28.00 V BH Coega IDZ initiative: proposed harbour development, geotechnical J195 24B 1997‐02 ‐ 25.675171 Africa 3.600 62532 000 3740073.60 site investigation report 33.78549 6667 .500 000 72222 BH3 Gibb 374066 ‐ 63222.20 ‐ 2.200 26.50 V BH Coega IDZ initiative: proposed harbour development, geotechnical J195 24B 1997‐02 ‐ 25.682660 Africa 0.200 63222 000 3740660.20 site investigation report 33.79074 0000 .200 000 44444 BH4 Gibb 373917 62905 ‐ ‐ 5.900 8.00 V BH Coega IDZ initiative: proposed harbour development, geotechnical J195 24B 1997‐02 Africa 4.800 .800 62905.80 3739174.80 site investigation report 000 000 BH4A Gibb 373919 ‐ 62915.20 ‐ 5.600 13.45 V BH Coega IDZ initiative: proposed harbour development, geotechnical J195 24B 1997‐02 ‐ 25.679241 Africa 4.500 62915 000 3739194.50 site investigation report 33.77754 1111 .200 000 94444 BH5 Gibb 374062 63656 63656.40 ‐ 2.500 25.50 V BH Coega IDZ initiative: proposed harbour development, geotechnical J195 24B 1997‐02 ‐ 25.687345 Africa 6.700 .400 000 3740626.70 site investigation report 33.79041 8333 000 63889 BH6 Gibb 374112 ‐ 63775.40 ‐ 1.900 30.00 V BH Coega IDZ initiative: proposed harbour development, geotechnical J195 24B 1997‐02 ‐ 25.688666 Africa 7.400 63775 000 3741127.40 site investigation report 33.79492 6667 .400 000 30556 BH7 Gibb 374128 63658 63658.70 ‐ 1.800 22.50 V BH Coega IDZ initiative: proposed harbour development, geotechnical J195 24B 1997‐02 ‐ 25.687418 Africa 5.000 .700 000 3741285.00 site investigation report 33.79635 0556 000 08333 BH8 Gibb 374147 ‐ 63538.80 ‐ 2.000 21.30 V BH Coega IDZ initiative: proposed harbour development, geotechnical J195 24B 1997‐02 ‐ 25.686136 Africa 1.500 63538 000 3741471.50 site investigation report 33.79803 6667 .800 000 94444 BH9 Gibb 374087 ‐ 63884.00 ‐ 2.000 23.00 V BH Coega IDZ initiative: proposed harbour development, geotechnical J195 24B extract ‐ 25.689821 Africa 8.300 63884 000 3740878.30 site investigation report In: J804 of 1997‐ 33.79267 3889 .000 000 05G 02 11111 BKS BH1 BKS 374102 64250 64250.88 ‐ 2.000 24.94 V BH Coega IDZ initiative: proposed harbour development, geotechnical J195 24B 198302 ‐ 25.693793 4.56 .88 000 3741024.56 site investigation report 27 33.79396 3333 000 72222 BKS BH2 BKS 374117 64161 64161.40 ‐ 2.000 25.00 V BH Coega IDZ initiative: proposed harbour development, geotechnical J195 24B 198302 ‐ 25.692838 8.95 .4 000 3741178.95 site investigation report 27 33.79536 3333 000 44444 BKS BH3 BKS 374142 63884 63884.21 ‐ 2.000 25.00 V BH Coega IDZ initiative: proposed harbour development, geotechnical J195 24B 198303 ‐ 25.689862 1.05 .21 000 3741421.05 site investigation report 04 33.79756 7778 000 38889 BKS BH4 BKS 374157 63635 63635.09 ‐ 2.000 20.47 V BH Coega IDZ initiative: proposed harbour development, geotechnical J195 24B 198303 ‐ 25.687183 5.44 .09 000 3741575.44 site investigation report 10 33.79897 8889 000 05556 BKS BH5 BKS 374141 63573 63573.68 ‐ 2.000 19.07 V BH Coega IDZ initiative: proposed harbour development, geotechnical J195 24B 198303 ‐ 25.686509 5.79 .68 000 3741415.79 site investigation report 15 33.79753 4444

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 1

000 50000 BKS BH6 BKS 374128 63587 63587.72 ‐ 2.000 20.44 V BH Coega IDZ initiative: proposed harbour development, geotechnical J195 24B 198303 ‐ 25.686651 4.21 .72 000 3741284.21 site investigation report 13 33.79634 3889 000 80556 BKS BH7 BKS 374090 63954 63954.39 ‐ 2.000 28.10 V BH Coega IDZ initiative: proposed harbour development, geotechnical J195 24B 198303 ‐ 25.690583 3.51 .39 000 3740903.51 site investigation report 23 33.79289 0556 000 38889 BKS BH B BKS 374070 ‐ 64760.47 ‐ 2.000 16.33 V BH Coega IDZ initiative: proposed harbour development, geotechnical J195 24B 198008 ‐ 25.699272 6.250 64760 000 3740706.25 site investigation report 13 33.79106 2222 .470 000 66667 BH101 Gibb 63447.4 ‐ 63447.41 ‐ 3.400 26.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.685104 Africa 10 37408 000 3740834.65 33.79230 1667 34.65 000 36111 0 BH102 Gibb 63502.8 ‐ 63502.82 ‐ 3.660 26.20 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.685708 Africa 20 37409 000 3740922.68 33.79309 8889 22.68 000 38889 0 BH103 Gibb 63639.9 ‐ 63639.96 ‐ 2.810 24.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.687183 Africa 60 37408 000 3740834.29 33.79228 0556 34.29 000 88889 0 BH104 Gibb 63430.0 ‐ 63430.07 ‐ 8.951 30.97 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.684927 Africa 77 37409 700 3740976.34 33.79358 2222 76.34 100 22222 1 BH105 Gibb 63565.4 ‐ 63565.44 ‐ 2.350 25.20 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.686387 Africa 40 37409 000 3740960.47 33.79343 5000 60.47 000 08333 0 BH106 Gibb 63571.7 ‐ 63571.78 ‐ 2.150 26.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.686459 Africa 80 37410 000 3741007.33 33.79385 4444 07.33 000 30556 0 BH107 Gibb 63561.8 ‐ 63561.82 ‐ 1.774 25.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.686355 Africa 20 37410 000 3741063.56 33.79436 8333 63.56 000 05556 0 BH108 Gibb 63602.3 ‐ 63602.37 ‐ 2.190 27.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.686792 Africa 70 37410 000 3741043.43 33.79417 2222 43.43 000 66667 0 BH109 Gibb 63627.6 ‐ 63627.60 ‐ 1.680 26.30 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.687061 Africa 00 37409 000 3740995.28 33.79374 3889 95.28 000 11111 0 BH110 Gibb 63524.4 ‐ 63524.47 ‐ 3.030 26.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.685955 Africa 75 37410 500 3741098.29 33.79467 2778 98.29 700 58333 7 BH111 Gibb 63689.2 ‐ 63689.24 ‐ 1.950 23.70 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.687732

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 2

Africa 40 37410 000 3741071.85 33.79442 5000 71.85 000 75000 0 BH111 Gibb 63689.2 ‐ 63689.24 ‐ 1.950 23.70 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.687732 Africa 40 37410 000 3741071.85 33.79442 5000 71.85 000 75000 0 BH112 Gibb 63613.9 ‐ 63613.97 ‐ 3.260 26.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.686924 Africa 70 37411 000 3741135.68 33.79500 1667 35.68 000 75000 0 BH112 Gibb 63613.9 ‐ 63613.97 ‐ 3.260 26.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.686924 Africa 70 37411 000 3741135.68 33.79500 1667 35.68 000 75000 0 BH113 Gibb ‐ 37411 63663.18 ‐ 3.550 23.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.687455 Africa 63663.1 27.19 000 3741127.19 33.79492 0000 80 0 000 80556 BH113 Gibb ‐ 37411 63663.18 ‐ 3.550 23.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.687455 Africa 63663.1 27.19 000 3741127.19 33.79492 0000 80 0 000 80556 BH114 Gibb 63790.6 ‐ 63790.62 ‐ 1.600 28.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.688825 Africa 20 37410 000 3741056.49 33.79428 8333 56.49 000 30556 0 BH114 Gibb 63790.6 ‐ 63790.62 ‐ 1.600 28.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.688825 Africa 20 37410 000 3741056.49 33.79428 8333 56.49 000 30556 0 BH115 Gibb 63919.0 ‐ 63919.07 ‐ 1.730 30.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.690205 Africa 70 37409 000 3740949.61 33.79331 2778 49.61 000 16667 0 BH115 Gibb 63919.0 ‐ 63919.07 ‐ 1.730 30.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.690205 Africa 70 37409 000 3740949.61 33.79331 2778 49.61 000 16667 0 BH116 Gibb 63692.8 ‐ 63692.84 ‐ 2.710 26.60 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 0.000000 0.0000000 Africa 40 37416 000 374160.350 0000 000 0.350 00 BH116 Gibb 63692.8 ‐ 63692.84 ‐ 2.710 26.60 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 0.000000 0.0000000 Africa 40 37416 000 374160.350 0000 000 0.350 00 BH117 Gibb 63610.1 ‐ 63610.18 ‐ 6.080 30.20 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.686889 Africa 80 37412 000 3741224.26 33.79580 7222 24.26 000 63889 0 BH117 Gibb 63610.1 ‐ 63610.18 ‐ 6.080 30.20 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.686889 Africa 80 37412 000 3741224.26 33.79580 7222 24.26 000 63889 0

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 3

BH118 Gibb 63669.5 ‐ 63669.57 ‐ 2.170 27.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.687530 Africa 70 37412 000 3741212.33 33.79569 0000 12.33 000 52778 0 BH118 Gibb 63669.5 ‐ 63669.57 ‐ 2.170 27.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.687530 Africa 70 37412 000 3741212.33 33.79569 0000 12.33 000 52778 0 BH119 Gibb 63726.1 ‐ 63726.19 ‐ 1.830 27.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.688140 Africa 90 37412 000 3741203.63 33.79561 8333 03.63 000 33333 0 BH119 Gibb 63726.1 ‐ 63726.19 ‐ 1.830 27.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.688140 Africa 90 37412 000 3741203.63 33.79561 8333 03.63 000 33333 0 BH120 Gibb 63754.4 ‐ 63754.41 ‐ 1.590 28.30 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.688448 Africa 10 37412 000 3741242.51 33.79596 3333 42.51 000 22222 0 BH120 Gibb 63754.4 ‐ 63754.41 ‐ 1.590 28.30 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.688448 Africa 10 37412 000 3741242.51 33.79596 3333 42.51 000 22222 0 BH121 Gibb 63691.7 ‐ 63691.75 ‐ 1.550 24.60 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.687779 Africa 50 37413 000 3741344.87 33.79688 1667 44.87 000 86111 0 BH121 Gibb 63691.7 ‐ 63691.75 ‐ 1.550 24.60 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.687779 Africa 50 37413 000 3741344.87 33.79688 1667 44.87 000 86111 0 BH122 Gibb 63782.5 ‐ 63782.54 ‐ 3.120 25.20 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.688768 Africa 40 37414 000 3741469.60 33.79800 6111 69.60 000 75000 0 BH122 Gibb 63782.5 ‐ 63782.54 ‐ 3.120 25.20 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.688768 Africa 40 37414 000 3741469.60 33.79800 6111 69.60 000 75000 0 BH123 Gibb 63784.3 ‐ 63784.35 ‐ 1.440 27.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.688774 Africa 50 37412 000 3741280.85 33.79630 4444 80.85 000 58333 0 BH123 Gibb 63784.3 ‐ 63784.35 ‐ 1.440 27.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.688774 Africa 50 37412 000 3741280.85 33.79630 4444 80.85 000 58333 0 BH124 Gibb 63813.4 ‐ 63813.42 ‐ 2.080 29.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.689090 Africa 20 37413 000 3741317.23 33.79663 8333 17.23 000 22222

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 4

0 BH124 Gibb 63813.4 ‐ 63813.42 ‐ 2.080 29.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.689090 Africa 20 37413 000 3741317.23 33.79663 8333 17.23 000 22222 0 BH125 Gibb 63791.5 ‐ 63791.50 ‐ 1.490 26.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.688858 Africa 00 37413 000 3741369.20 33.79710 0556 69.20 000 19444 0 BH125 Gibb 63791.5 ‐ 63791.50 ‐ 1.490 26.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.688858 Africa 00 37413 000 3741369.20 33.79710 0556 69.20 000 19444 0 BH126 Gibb 63844.3 ‐ 63844.38 ‐ 2.870 27.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.689428 Africa 80 37413 000 3741358.74 33.79700 3333 58.74 000 44444 0 BH126 Gibb 63844.3 ‐ 63844.38 ‐ 2.870 27.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.689428 Africa 80 37413 000 3741358.74 33.79700 3333 58.74 000 44444 0 BH127 Gibb 63834.9 ‐ 63834.97 ‐ 2.450 27.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.689331 Africa 70 37414 000 3741427.95 33.79762 6667 27.95 000 88889 0 BH127 Gibb 63834.9 ‐ 63834.97 ‐ 2.450 27.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.689331 Africa 70 37414 000 3741427.95 33.79762 6667 27.95 000 88889 0 BH128 Gibb 63947.5 ‐ 63947.51 ‐ 1.280 36.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.690533 Africa 10 37412 000 3741245.54 33.79597 6111 45.54 000 77778 0 BH128 Gibb 63947.5 ‐ 63947.51 ‐ 1.280 36.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.690533 Africa 10 37412 000 3741245.54 33.79597 6111 45.54 000 77778 0 BH129 Gibb 64075.2 ‐ 64075.23 ‐ 0.940 26.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.691904 Africa 30 37411 000 3741136.87 33.79499 7222 36.87 000 02778 0 BH129 Gibb 64075.2 ‐ 64075.23 ‐ 0.940 26.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.691904 Africa 30 37411 000 3741136.87 33.79499 7222 36.87 000 02778 0 BH130 Gibb 64187.2 ‐ 64187.21 ‐ 1.780 23.90 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.693108 Africa 10 37410 000 3741062.70 33.79431 6111 62.70 000 50000 0 BH130 Gibb 64187.2 ‐ 64187.21 ‐ 1.780 23.90 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.693108 Africa 10 37410 000 3741062.70 33.79431 6111

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 5

62.70 000 50000 0 BH131 Gibb 63884.0 ‐ 63884.03 ‐ 2.790 28.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.689860 Africa 30 37414 000 3741408.96 33.79745 0000 08.96 000 47222 0 BH131 Gibb 63884.0 ‐ 63884.03 ‐ 2.790 28.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.689860 Africa 30 37414 000 3741408.96 33.79745 0000 08.96 000 47222 0 BH132 Gibb 63469.3 ‐ 63469.32 ‐ 2.870 19.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.689860 Africa 20 37417 000 3741747.88 33.79745 0000 47.88 000 47222 0 BH132 Gibb 63469.3 ‐ 63469.32 ‐ 2.870 19.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.689860 Africa 20 37417 000 3741747.88 33.79745 0000 47.88 000 47222 0 BH133 Gibb 63164.0 ‐ 63164.00 ‐ 2.000 9.16 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.682131 Africa 00 37420 000 3742063.00 33.80339 9444 63.00 000 41667 0 BH133 Gibb 63164.0 ‐ 63164.00 ‐ 2.000 9.16 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.682131 Africa 00 37420 000 3742063.00 33.80339 9444 63.00 000 41667 0 BH134 Gibb 62818.9 ‐ 62818.94 ‐ 3.720 10.10 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.678425 Africa 40 37423 000 3742334.03 33.80585 0000 34.03 000 80556 0 BH134 Gibb 62818.9 ‐ 62818.94 ‐ 3.720 10.10 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.678425 Africa 40 37423 000 3742334.03 33.80585 0000 34.03 000 80556 0 BH135 Gibb 62846.9 ‐ 62846.98 ‐ 2.350 7.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.678630 Africa 80 37409 000 3740960.47 33.79347 0000 60.47 000 38889 0 BH135 Gibb 62846.9 ‐ 62846.98 ‐ 2.350 7.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.678630 Africa 80 37409 000 3740960.47 33.79347 0000 60.47 000 38889 0 BH137 Gibb 63707.1 ‐ 63707.10 ‐ 1.650 27.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.687907 Africa 00 37408 000 3740824.63 33.79219 5000 24.63 000 77778 0 BH137 Gibb 63707.4 ‐ 63707.41 ‐ 1.650 27.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.687907 Africa 10 37408 000 3740824.63 33.79219 5000 24.63 000 77778 0 BH138 Gibb 63783.5 ‐ 63783.57 ‐ 5.176 29.80 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.688730

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 6

Africa 70 37407 000 3740784.46 33.79183 2778 84.46 000 11111 0 BH138 Gibb 63783.5 ‐ 63783.57 ‐ 5.176 29.80 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.688730 Africa 70 37407 000 3740784.46 33.79183 2778 84.46 000 11111 0 BH138 Gibb 63783.5 ‐ 63783.57 ‐ 5.176 29.80 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.688730 Africa 70 37407 000 3740784.46 33.79183 2778 84.46 000 11111 0 BH140 Gibb 63812.0 ‐ 63812.08 ‐ 1.703 27.35 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.689044 Africa 83 37408 300 3740874.69 33.79264 4444 74.69 000 27778 0 BH140 Gibb 63812.0 ‐ 63812.08 ‐ 1.703 27.35 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.689044 Africa 83 37408 300 3740874.69 33.79264 4444 74.69 000 27778 0 BH140 Gibb 63812.0 ‐ 63812.08 ‐ 1.703 27.35 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.689044 Africa 83 37408 300 3740874.69 33.79264 4444 74.69 000 27778 0 BH141 Gibb 63759.4 ‐ 63759.46 ‐ 1.820 27.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.688479 Africa 60 37409 000 3740922.22 33.79307 7222 22.22 000 44444 0 BH141 Gibb 63759.4 ‐ 63759.46 ‐ 1.820 27.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.688479 Africa 60 37409 000 3740922.22 33.79307 7222 22.22 000 44444 0 BH143 Gibb 63828.5 ‐ 63828.56 ‐ 1.740 27.88 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.689224 Africa 67 37409 700 3740903.96 33.79290 7222 03.96 600 58333 6 BH143 Gibb 63828.5 ‐ 63828.56 ‐ 1.740 27.88 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.689224 Africa 67 37409 700 3740903.96 33.79290 7222 03.96 600 58333 6 BH144 Gibb 63859.2 ‐ 63859.28 ‐ 1.950 28.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.689559 Africa 80 37409 000 3740943.23 33.79325 1667 43.23 000 77778 0 BH144 Gibb 63859.2 ‐ 63859.28 ‐ 1.950 28.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.689559 Africa 80 37409 000 3740943.23 33.79325 1667 43.23 000 77778 0 BH145 Gibb 63827.5 ‐ 63827.58 ‐ 1.690 29.70 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.689219 Africa 80 37409 000 3740981.74 33.79360 7222 81.74 500 69444 5

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 7

BH145 Gibb 63827.5 ‐ 63827.58 ‐ 1.690 29.70 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.689219 Africa 80 37409 000 3740981.74 33.79360 7222 81.74 500 69444 5 BH146 Gibb 63886.2 ‐ 63886.27 ‐ 1.700 28.70 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.689853 Africa 70 37409 000 3740985.02 33.79363 6111 85.02 000 27778 0 BH146 Gibb 63886.2 ‐ 63886.27 ‐ 1.700 28.70 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.689853 Africa 70 37409 000 3740985.02 33.79363 6111 85.02 000 27778 0 BH147 Gibb 63916.1 ‐ 63916.10 ‐ 2.010 31.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 0.000000 0.0000000 Africa 02 37410 200 374103.111 0000 000 3.111 00 BH147 Gibb 63916.1 ‐ 63916.10 ‐ 2.010 31.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 0.000000 0.0000000 Africa 02 37410 200 374103.111 0000 000 3.111 00 BH148 Gibb 63891.1 ‐ 63891.10 ‐ 1.790 29.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.689912 Africa 00 37410 000 3741073.34 33.79442 2222 73.34 000 88889 0 BH148 Gibb 63891.1 ‐ 63891.10 ‐ 1.790 29.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.689912 Africa 00 37410 000 3741073.34 33.79442 2222 73.34 000 88889 0 BH149 Gibb 63970.7 ‐ 63970.77 ‐ 1.910 21.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.690768 Africa 70 37410 000 3741014.68 33.79389 0556 14.68 000 52778 0 BH149 Gibb 63970.7 ‐ 63970.77 ‐ 1.910 21.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.690768 Africa 70 37410 000 3741014.68 33.79389 0556 14.68 000 52778 0 BH150 Gibb 63947.1 ‐ 63947.10 ‐ 1.920 33.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.690516 Africa 04 37410 400 3741064.82 33.79434 1111 64.82 500 86111 5 BH150 Gibb 63947.1 ‐ 63947.10 ‐ 1.920 33.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.690516 Africa 04 37410 400 3741064.82 33.79434 1111 64.82 500 86111 5 BH150 Gibb 63947.1 ‐ 63947.10 ‐ 1.920 33.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.690516 Africa 04 37410 400 3741064.82 33.79434 1111 64.82 500 86111 5 BH150 Gibb 63947.1 ‐ 63947.10 ‐ 1.920 33.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.690516 Africa 04 37410 400 3741064.82 33.79434 1111 64.82 500 86111 5 BH151 Gibb 63680.8 ‐ 63680.83 ‐ 2.560 27.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.687678

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 8

Africa 30 37415 000 3741589.11 33.79909 8889 89.11 000 11111 0 BH151 Gibb 63680.8 ‐ 63680.83 ‐ 2.560 27.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.687678 Africa 30 37415 000 3741589.11 33.79909 8889 89.11 000 11111 0 BH152 Gibb 63319.6 ‐ 63319.65 ‐ 2.208 25.30 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.683801 Africa 50 37419 000 3741902.00 33.80193 1111 02.00 000 36111 0 BH152 Gibb 63319.6 ‐ 63319.65 ‐ 2.208 25.30 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.683801 Africa 50 37419 000 3741902.00 33.80193 1111 02.00 000 36111 0 BH153 Gibb 63375.2 ‐ 63375.28 ‐ 4.110 19.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.684275 Africa 80 37401 000 3740145.49 33.78609 8333 45.49 000 52778 0 BH153 Gibb 63375.2 ‐ 63375.28 ‐ 4.110 19.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.684275 Africa 80 37401 000 3740145.49 33.78609 8333 45.49 000 52778 0 BH153 Gibb 63375.2 ‐ 63375.28 ‐ 4.110 19.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.684275 Africa 80 37401 000 3740145.49 33.78609 8333 45.49 000 52778 0 BH153 Gibb 63375.2 ‐ 63375.28 ‐ 4.110 19.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.684275 Africa 80 37401 000 3740145.49 33.78609 8333 45.49 000 52778 0 BH154 Gibb 63029.7 ‐ 63029.71 ‐ 2.070 22.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.680566 Africa 10 37404 000 3740443.23 33.78880 1111 43.23 000 00000 0 BH154 Gibb 63029.7 ‐ 63029.71 ‐ 2.070 22.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.680566 Africa 10 37404 000 3740443.23 33.78880 1111 43.23 000 00000 0 BH156 Gibb 63964.3 ‐ 63964.39 ‐ 2.457 32.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.690724 Africa 90 37413 000 3741363.84 33.79704 4444 63.84 000 33333 0 BH156 Gibb 63964.3 ‐ 63964.39 ‐ 2.457 32.00 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.690724 Africa 90 37413 000 3741363.84 33.79704 4444 63.84 000 33333 0 BH157 Gibb 63863.3 ‐ 63863.39 ‐ 1.640 24.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.689622 Africa 98 37412 800 3741202.82 33.79559 2222 02.82 600 77778 6

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 9

BH157 Gibb 63863.3 ‐ 63863.39 ‐ 1.640 24.50 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.689622 Africa 98 37412 800 3741202.82 33.79559 2222 02.82 600 77778 6 BH158 Gibb 63933.1 ‐ 63933.12 ‐ 1.530 32.60 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.690370 Africa 20 37411 000 3741140.62 33.79503 5556 40.62 000 27778 0 BH158 Gibb 63933.1 ‐ 63933.12 ‐ 1.530 32.60 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.690370 Africa 20 37411 000 3741140.62 33.79503 5556 40.62 000 27778 0 BH158 Gibb 63933.1 ‐ 63933.12 ‐ 1.530 32.60 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.690370 Africa 20 37411 000 3741140.62 33.79503 5556 40.62 000 27778 0 BH159 Gibb 64086.4 ‐ 64086.45 ‐ 2.439 33.80 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.692035 Africa 52 37412 200 3741265.03 33.79614 2778 65.03 000 50000 0 BH159 Gibb 64086.4 ‐ 64086.45 ‐ 2.439 33.80 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.692035 Africa 52 37412 200 3741265.03 33.79614 2778 65.03 000 50000 0 BH160 Gibb 64181.4 ‐ 64181.44 ‐ 2.700 27.80 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.693055 Africa 40 37411 000 3741182.14 33.79539 0000 82.14 000 19444 0 BH160 Gibb 64181.4 ‐ 64181.44 ‐ 2.700 27.80 V BH Coega Industrial harbour: geotechnical site investigation report J804 05G 1998‐11 ‐ 25.693055 Africa 40 37411 000 3741182.14 33.79539 0000 82.14 000 19444 0 201 Gibb 64517.8 ‐ 64517.89 ‐ ‐0.104 21.70 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.696676 Africa 90 37410 000 3741027.01 Bay 33.79389 3889 27.01 000 72222 0 201 Gibb 64517.8 ‐ 64517.89 ‐ ‐0.104 21.70 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.696676 Africa 90 37410 000 3741027.01 Bay 33.79389 3889 27.01 000 72222 0 202 Gibb 64346.3 ‐ 64346.31 ‐ ‐0.175 20.30 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.694835 Africa 10 37411 000 3741178.48 Bay 33.79534 0000 78.48 000 91667 0 202 Gibb 64346.3 ‐ 64346.31 ‐ ‐0.175 20.30 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.694835 Africa 10 37411 000 3741178.48 Bay 33.79534 0000 78.48 000 91667 0 203 Gibb 64478.9 ‐ 64478.92 ‐ ‐6.513 19.70 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.696278 Africa 20 37413 000 3741333.35 Bay 33.79673 0556 33.35 000 72222

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 10

0 203 Gibb 64478.9 ‐ 64478.92 ‐ ‐6.513 19.70 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.696278 Africa 20 37413 000 3741333.35 Bay 33.79673 0556 33.35 000 72222 0 203 Gibb 64478.9 ‐ 64478.92 ‐ ‐6.513 19.70 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.696278 Africa 20 37413 000 3741333.35 Bay 33.79673 0556 33.35 000 72222 0 209 Gibb 64010.7 ‐ 64010.71 ‐ ‐8.014 17.75 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.691252 Africa 10 37417 000 3741751.10 Bay 33.80053 7778 51.10 000 16667 0 209 Gibb 64010.7 ‐ 64010.71 ‐ ‐8.014 17.75 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.691252 Africa 10 37417 000 3741751.10 Bay 33.80053 7778 51.10 000 16667 0 211 Gibb 64597.9 ‐ 64597.96 ‐ ‐ 5.70 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.697615 Africa 66 37420 600 3742047.74 15.34 Bay 33.80317 8333 47.74 700 0 00000 7 211 Gibb 64597.9 ‐ 64597.96 ‐ ‐ 5.70 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.697615 Africa 66 37420 600 3742047.74 15.34 Bay 33.80317 8333 47.74 700 0 00000 7 212 Gibb 64135.3 ‐ 64135.32 ‐ ‐ 8.10 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.692615 Africa 25 37419 500 3741989.52 13.10 Bay 33.80267 5556 89.52 700 2 33333 7 212 Gibb 64135.3 ‐ 64135.32 ‐ ‐ 8.10 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.692615 Africa 25 37419 500 3741989.52 13.10 Bay 33.80267 5556 89.52 700 2 33333 7 213 Gibb 63639.0 ‐ 63639.00 ‐ ‐2.450 19.50 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.687243 Africa 00 37418 000 3741820.43 Bay 33.80117 8889 20.43 000 88889 0 213 Gibb 63639.0 ‐ 63639.00 ‐ ‐2.450 19.50 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.687243 Africa 00 37418 000 3741820.43 Bay 33.80117 8889 20.43 000 88889 0 214 Gibb 63822.2 ‐ 63822.29 ‐ ‐ 11.00 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.689237 Africa 90 37420 000 3742020.99 10.14 Bay 33.80297 5000 20.99 000 6 61111 0 214 Gibb 63822.2 ‐ 63822.29 ‐ ‐ 11.00 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.689237 Africa 90 37420 000 3742020.99 10.14 Bay 33.80297 5000 20.99 000 6 61111 0 214 Gibb 63822.2 ‐ 63822.29 ‐ ‐ 11.00 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.689237 Africa 90 37420 000 3742020.99 10.14 Bay 33.80297 5000

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 11

20.99 000 6 61111 0 214 Gibb 63822.2 ‐ 63822.29 ‐ ‐ 11.00 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.689237 Africa 90 37420 000 3742020.99 10.14 Bay 33.80297 5000 20.99 000 6 61111 0 218 Gibb 63498.7 ‐ 63498.75 ‐ ‐9.120 12.21 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.685764 Africa 50 37423 000 3742313.80 Bay 33.80563 7222 13.80 000 00000 0 218 Gibb 63498.7 ‐ 63498.75 ‐ ‐9.120 12.21 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.685764 Africa 50 37423 000 3742313.80 Bay 33.80563 7222 13.80 000 00000 0 219 Gibb 63329.4 ‐ 63329.44 ‐ ‐2.256 19.30 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.683921 Africa 40 37420 000 3742098.18 Bay 33.80370 1111 98.18 000 13889 0 219 Gibb 63329.4 ‐ 63329.44 ‐ ‐2.256 19.30 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.683921 Africa 40 37420 000 3742098.18 Bay 33.80370 1111 98.18 000 13889 0 220 Gibb 62931.6 ‐ 62931.66 ‐ ‐0.895 16.70 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.679649 Africa 60 37424 000 3742438.06 Bay 33.80678 7222 38.06 000 91667 0 220 Gibb 62931.6 ‐ 62931.66 ‐ ‐0.895 16.70 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.679649 Africa 60 37424 000 3742438.06 Bay 33.80678 7222 38.06 000 91667 0 221 Gibb 63022.9 ‐ 63022.99 ‐ ‐3.080 18.77 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.680641 Africa 90 37425 000 3742513.16 Bay 33.80746 3889 13.16 000 08333 0 221 Gibb 63022.9 ‐ 63022.99 ‐ ‐3.080 18.77 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.680641 Africa 90 37425 000 3742513.16 Bay 33.80746 3889 13.16 000 08333 0 222 Gibb 63195.1 ‐ 63195.17 ‐ ‐ 10.07 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.682513 Africa 77 37426 700 3742687.47 11.08 Bay 33.80902 3333 87.47 600 0 19444 6 222 Gibb 63195.1 ‐ 63195.17 ‐ ‐ 10.07 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.682513 Africa 77 37426 700 3742687.47 11.08 Bay 33.80902 3333 87.47 600 0 19444 6 223 Gibb 62765.0 ‐ 62765.06 ‐ ‐7.669 8.80 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.677885 Africa 60 37429 000 3742929.05 Bay 33.81122 5556 29.05 000 52778 0 223 Gibb 62765.0 ‐ 62765.06 ‐‐7.669 8.80 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.677885

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 12

Africa 60 37429 000 3742929.05 Bay 33.81122 5556 29.05 000 52778 0 224 Gibb 64016.3 ‐ 64016.37 ‐ ‐ 6.07 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.691353 Africa 70 37423 000 3742301.34 14.97 Bay 33.80549 6111 01.34 000 0 16667 0 224 Gibb 64016.3 ‐ 64016.37 ‐ ‐ 6.07 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.691353 Africa 70 37423 000 3742301.34 14.97 Bay 33.80549 6111 01.34 000 0 16667 0 225 Gibb 63589.9 ‐ 63589.98 ‐ ‐ 10.20 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.686801 Africa 80 37430 000 3743028.79 15.80 Bay 33.81207 6667 28.79 000 0 52778 0 225 Gibb 63589.9 ‐ 63589.98 ‐ ‐ 10.20 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.686801 Africa 80 37430 000 3743028.79 15.80 Bay 33.81207 6667 28.79 000 0 52778 0 227 Gibb 64235.6 ‐ 64235.68 ‐ ‐ 8.70 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.693799 Africa 80 37433 000 3743370.55 17.50 Bay 33.81511 7222 70.55 000 0 72222 0 227 Gibb 64235.6 ‐ 64235.68 ‐ ‐ 8.70 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.693799 Africa 80 37433 000 3743370.55 17.50 Bay 33.81511 7222 70.55 000 0 72222 0 228 Gibb 63753.4 ‐ 63753.49 ‐ ‐ 9.42 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.688622 Africa 90 37437 000 3743791.13 17.00 Bay 33.81893 5000 91.13 000 0 77778 0 228 Gibb 63753.4 ‐ 63753.49 ‐ ‐ 9.42 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.688622 Africa 90 37437 000 3743791.13 17.00 Bay 33.81893 5000 91.13 000 0 77778 0 204 Gibb 64313.2 ‐ 64313.27 ‐ ‐4.255 17.08 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.694493 Africa 70 37413 000 3741392.70 Bay 33.79728 6111 92.70 000 22222 0 205 Gibb 64124.0 ‐ 64124.01 ‐ ‐1.345 20.45 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.692449 Africa 10 37413 000 3741381.07 Bay 33.79718 1667 81.07 000 88889 0 206 Gibb 63970.6 ‐ 63970.67 ‐ ‐1.519 19.77 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.690803 Africa 70 37415 000 3741510.85 Bay 33.79836 0556 10.85 000 80556 0 207 Gibb 64262.8 ‐ 64262.83 ‐ ‐7.168 14.05 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.693959 Africa 30 37415 000 3741532.42 Bay 33.79854 1667 32.42 000 50000 0

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 13

208 Gibb 64574.1 ‐ 64574.17 ‐ ‐ 8.50 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.697323 Africa 79 37415 900 3741557.17 12.52 Bay 33.79874 0556 57.17 000 0 91667 0 210 Gibb 64356.4 ‐ 64356.48 ‐ ‐ 8.45 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.694987 Africa 82 37417 200 3741765.72 12.81 Bay 33.80064 5000 65.72 700 0 25000 7 215 Gibb 64307.0 ‐ 64307.01 ‐ ‐ 5.55 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.694491 Africa 10 37422 000 3742286.34 15.48 Bay 33.80533 1111 86.34 000 0 88889 0 216 Gibb 64372.2 ‐ 64372.27 ‐ ‐ 9.80 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.695211 Africa 71 37425 100 3742503.62 16.26 Bay 33.80729 9444 03.62 400 0 36111 4 217 Gibb 64013.4 ‐ 64013.48 ‐ ‐ 10.25 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.691344 Africa 80 37425 000 3742599.82 16.17 Bay 33.80818 1667 99.82 000 0 25000 0 226 Gibb 64384.4 ‐ 64384.45 ‐ ‐ 9.00 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.695380 Africa 53 37430 300 3743016.35 17.20 Bay 33.81191 8333 16.35 500 0 50000 5 228 Gibb 63753.4 ‐ 63753.49 ‐ ‐ 9.42 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.688622 Africa 90 37437 000 3743791.13 17.00 Bay 33.81893 5000 91.13 000 0 77778 0 228 Gibb 63753.4 ‐ 63753.49 ‐ ‐ 9.42 V BH Marine geotechnical investigation for the proposed Coega Port, Algoa J901 13A 1999‐09 ‐ 25.688622 Africa 90 37437 000 3743791.13 17.00 Bay 33.81893 5000 91.13 000 0 77778 0 301 Gibb 63545.9 ‐ 63545.96 ‐ 5.314 25.29 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.686136 Africa 60 37403 000 3740391.29 geotechnical report 33.78830 3889 91.29 000 08333 0 301 Gibb 63545.9 ‐ 63545.96 ‐ 5.314 25.29 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.686136 Africa 60 37403 000 3740391.29 geotechnical report 33.78830 3889 91.29 000 08333 0 302 Gibb 62922.4 ‐ 62922.41 ‐ 3.028 24.00 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.679386 Africa 10 37401 000 3740151.86 geotechnical report 33.78617 9444 51.86 000 97222 0 302 Gibb 62922.4 ‐ 62922.41 ‐ 3.028 24.00 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.679386 Africa 10 37401 000 3740151.86 geotechnical report 33.78617 9444 51.86 000 97222 0 302 Gibb 62922.4 ‐ 62922.41 ‐ 3.028 24.00 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.679386 Africa 10 37401 000 3740151.86 geotechnical report 33.78617 9444 51.86 000 97222

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 14

0 303 Gibb 63197.0 ‐ 63197.07 ‐ 2.940 23.00 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.682333 Africa 70 37398 000 3739887.44 geotechnical report 33.78362 3333 87.44 000 97222 0 303 Gibb 63197.0 ‐ 63197.07 ‐ 2.940 23.00 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.682333 Africa 70 37398 000 3739887.44 geotechnical report 33.78362 3333 87.44 000 97222 0 303 Gibb 63197.0 ‐ 63197.07 ‐ 2.940 23.00 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.682333 Africa 70 37398 000 3739887.44 geotechnical report 33.78362 3333 87.44 000 97222 0 303 Gibb 63197.0 ‐ 63197.07 ‐ 2.940 23.00 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.682333 Africa 70 37398 000 3739887.44 geotechnical report 33.78362 3333 87.44 000 97222 0 304 Gibb 63238.3 ‐ 63238.32 ‐ 3.148 23.85 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.682805 Africa 20 37402 000 3740259.20 geotechnical report 33.78712 2778 59.20 000 86111 0 304 Gibb 63238.3 ‐ 63238.32 ‐ 3.148 23.85 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.682805 Africa 20 37402 000 3740259.20 geotechnical report 33.78712 2778 59.20 000 86111 0 304 Gibb 63238.3 ‐ 63238.32 ‐ 3.148 23.85 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.682805 Africa 20 37402 000 3740259.20 geotechnical report 33.78712 2778 59.20 000 86111 0 305 Gibb 63069.6 ‐ 63069.64 ‐ 2.724 22.72 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.680964 Africa 40 37399 000 3739980.78 geotechnical report 33.78462 4444 80.78 000 86111 0 305 Gibb 63069.6 ‐ 63069.64 ‐ 2.724 22.72 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.680964 Africa 40 37399 000 3739980.78 geotechnical report 33.78462 4444 80.78 000 86111 0 305 Gibb 63069.6 ‐ 63069.64 ‐ 2.724 22.72 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.680964 Africa 40 37399 000 3739980.78 geotechnical report 33.78462 4444 80.78 000 86111 0 306 Gibb 62974.1 ‐ 62974.17 ‐ 2.404 22.65 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.679906 Africa 70 37395 000 3739595.37 geotechnical report 33.78116 1111 95.37 000 00000 0 306 Gibb 62974.1 ‐ 62974.17 ‐ 2.404 22.65 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.679906 Africa 70 37395 000 3739595.37 geotechnical report 33.78116 1111 95.37 000 00000 0 306 Gibb 62974.1 ‐ 62974.17 ‐ 2.404 22.65 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.679906 Africa 70 37395 000 3739595.37 geotechnical report 33.78116 1111

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 15

95.37 000 00000 0 307 Gibb 62740.3 ‐ 62740.34 ‐ 2.710 23.35 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.677401 Africa 40 37398 000 3739870.46 geotechnical report 33.78365 3889 70.46 000 36111 0 307 Gibb 62740.3 ‐ 62740.34 ‐ 2.710 23.35 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.677401 Africa 40 37398 000 3739870.46 geotechnical report 33.78365 3889 70.46 000 36111 0 307 Gibb 62740.3 ‐ 62740.34 ‐ 2.710 23.35 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.677401 Africa 40 37398 000 3739870.46 geotechnical report 33.78365 3889 70.46 000 36111 0 308 Gibb 62867.8 ‐ 62867.82 ‐ 2.848 23.80 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.678767 Africa 20 37397 000 3739723.22 geotechnical report 33.78231 2222 23.22 000 88889 0 308 Gibb 62867.8 ‐ 62867.82 ‐ 2.848 23.80 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.678767 Africa 20 37397 000 3739723.22 geotechnical report 33.78231 2222 23.22 000 88889 0 309 Gibb 62374.7 ‐ 62374.70 ‐ 2.355 23.70 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.673418 Africa 00 37393 000 3739377.68 geotechnical report 33.77923 8889 77.68 000 30556 0 309 Gibb 62374.7 ‐ 62374.70 ‐ 2.355 23.70 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.673418 Africa 00 37393 000 3739377.68 geotechnical report 33.77923 8889 77.68 000 30556 0 309 Gibb 62374.7 ‐ 62374.70 ‐ 2.355 23.70 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.673418 Africa 00 37393 000 3739377.68 geotechnical report 33.77923 8889 77.68 000 30556 0 309 Gibb 62374.7 ‐ 62374.70 ‐ 2.355 23.70 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.673418 Africa 00 37393 000 3739377.68 geotechnical report 33.77923 8889 77.68 000 30556 0 310 Gibb 62536.2 ‐ 62536.29 ‐ 2.947 23.16 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.675151 Africa 90 37392 000 3739207.26 geotechnical report 33.77768 3889 07.26 000 69444 0 310 Gibb 62536.2 ‐ 62536.29 ‐ 2.947 23.16 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.675151 Africa 90 37392 000 3739207.26 geotechnical report 33.77768 3889 07.26 000 69444 0 310 Gibb 62536.2 ‐ 62536.29 ‐ 2.947 23.16 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.675151 Africa 90 37392 000 3739207.26 geotechnical report 33.77768 3889 07.26 000 69444 0 311 Gibb 62478.2 ‐ 62478.21 ‐ 2.446 22.34 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.674529

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 16

Africa 10 37392 000 3739274.38 geotechnical report 33.77829 1667 74.38 000 55556 0 311 Gibb 62478.2 ‐ 62478.21 ‐ 2.446 22.34 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.674529 Africa 10 37392 000 3739274.38 geotechnical report 33.77829 1667 74.38 000 55556 0 311 Gibb 62478.2 ‐ 62478.21 ‐ 2.446 22.34 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.674529 Africa 10 37392 000 3739274.38 geotechnical report 33.77829 1667 74.38 000 55556 0 312 Gibb 63208.5 ‐ 63208.56 ‐ 9.720 33.15 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.682546 Africa 60 37411 000 3741127.50 geotechnical report 33.79495 1111 27.50 000 80556 0 312 Gibb 63208.5 ‐ 63208.56 ‐ 9.720 33.15 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.682546 Africa 60 37411 000 3741127.50 geotechnical report 33.79495 1111 27.50 000 80556 0 313 Gibb 63321.0 ‐ 63321.03 ‐ 8.671 34.50 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.683781 Africa 30 37414 000 3741415.17 geotechnical report 33.79754 1111 15.17 000 47222 0 313 Gibb 63321.0 ‐ 63321.03 ‐ 8.671 34.50 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.683781 Africa 30 37414 000 3741415.17 geotechnical report 33.79754 1111 15.17 000 47222 0 314 Gibb 63326.9 ‐ 63326.96 ‐ 3.533 24.00 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.683817 Africa 60 37410 000 3741030.81 geotechnical report 33.79407 7778 30.81 000 94444 0 314 Gibb 63326.9 ‐ 63326.96 ‐ 3.533 24.00 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.683817 Africa 60 37410 000 3741030.81 geotechnical report 33.79407 7778 30.81 000 94444 0 314 Gibb 63326.9 ‐ 63326.96 ‐ 3.533 24.00 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.683817 Africa 60 37410 000 3741030.81 geotechnical report 33.79407 7778 30.81 000 94444 0 314 Gibb 63326.9 ‐ 63326.96 ‐ 3.533 24.00 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.683817 Africa 60 37410 000 3741030.81 geotechnical report 33.79407 7778 30.81 000 94444 0 315 Gibb 63486.7 ‐ 63486.75 ‐ 1.974 22.50 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.685562 Africa 50 37413 000 3741301.50 geotechnical report 33.79651 5000 01.50 000 00000 0 315 Gibb 63486.7 ‐ 63486.75 ‐ 1.974 22.50 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.685562 Africa 50 37413 000 3741301.50 geotechnical report 33.79651 5000 01.50 000 00000 0

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 17

316 Gibb 63411.9 ‐ 63411.95 ‐ 2.010 27.41 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.684776 Africa 5 37416 000 3741608.00 geotechnical report 33.79927 9444 08.00 000 75000 316 Gibb 63411.9 ‐ 63411.95 ‐ 2.010 27.41 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.684776 Africa 5 37416 000 3741608.00 geotechnical report 33.79927 9444 08.00 000 75000 317 Gibb 63233.9 ‐ 63233.95 ‐ 11.27 31.50 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.682850 Africa 5 37415 000 3741551.95 1 geotechnical report 33.79878 8333 51.95 000 30556 317 Gibb 63233.9 ‐ 63233.95 ‐ 11.27 31.50 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.682850 Africa 5 37415 000 3741551.95 1 geotechnical report 33.79878 8333 51.95 000 30556 318 Gibb 63114.0 ‐ 63114.01 ‐ 13.08 33.63 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.681532 Africa 1 37412 000 3741231.05 9 geotechnical report 33.79589 7778 31.05 000 72222 318 Gibb 63114.0 ‐ 63114.01 ‐ 13.08 33.63 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.681532 Africa 1 37412 000 3741231.05 9 geotechnical report 33.79589 7778 31.05 000 72222 319 Gibb 63245.6 ‐ 63245.68 ‐ 15.42 40.94 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.682955 Africa 8 37412 000 3741244.82 5 geotechnical report 33.79601 2778 44.82 000 36111 319 Gibb 63245.6 ‐ 63245.68 ‐ 15.42 40.94 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.682955 Africa 8 37412 000 3741244.82 5 geotechnical report 33.79601 2778 44.82 000 36111 320 Gibb 63280.5 ‐ 63280.54 ‐ 18.15 43.70 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.683337 Africa 4 37413 000 3741328.33 7 geotechnical report 33.79676 7778 28.33 000 41667 320 Gibb 63280.5 ‐ 63280.54 ‐ 18.15 43.70 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.683337 Africa 4 37413 000 3741328.33 7 geotechnical report 33.79676 7778 28.33 000 41667 321 Gibb 63360.9 ‐ 63360.98 ‐ 15.60 41.70 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.684218 Africa 8 37415 000 3741500.96 4 geotechnical report 33.79831 6111 00.96 000 55556 321 Gibb 63360.9 ‐ 63360.98 ‐ 15.60 41.70 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.684218 Africa 8 37415 000 3741500.96 4 geotechnical report 33.79831 6111 00.96 000 55556 322 Gibb 62754.0 ‐ 62754.03 ‐ 37.13 32.65 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.677654 Africa 3 37413 000 3741356.08 9 geotechnical report 33.79704 4444 56.08 000 58333 322 Gibb 62754.0 ‐ 62754.03 ‐ 37.13 32.65 V BH Coega Industrial Harbour‐Saltworks and proposed container berth: JA0 319A 2001‐01 ‐ 25.677654 Africa 3 37413 000 3741356.08 9 geotechnical report 33.79704 4444 56.08 000 58333 BHQ1 Transnet 374218 ‐ 63488.50 ‐ 3.090 29.70 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.685644 4.5 63488 000 3742184.50 02‐20 33.80447 7222 .5 000 00000 BHQ1 Transnet 374218 ‐ 63488.50 ‐ 3.090 29.70 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.685644 4.5 63488 000 3742184.50 02‐20 33.80447 7222 .5 000 00000 BHQ1 Transnet 374218 ‐ 63488.50 ‐ 3.090 29.70 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.685644 4.5 63488 000 3742184.50 02‐20 33.80447 7222 .5 000 00000

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 18

BHQ2 Transnet 374227 ‐ 63528.20 ‐ 3.140 30.26 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686080 6.3 63528 000 3742276.30 02‐20 33.80529 2778 .2 000 52778 BHQ2 Transnet 374227 ‐ 63528.20 ‐ 3.140 30.26 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686080 6.3 63528 000 3742276.30 02‐20 33.80529 2778 .2 000 52778 BHQ2 Transnet 374227 ‐ 63528.20 ‐ 3.140 30.26 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686080 6.3 63528 000 3742276.30 02‐20 33.80529 2778 .2 000 52778 BHQ3 Transnet 374236 ‐ 63567.90 ‐ 2.610 29.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686515 8.1 63567 000 3742368.10 02‐20 33.80612 5556 .9 000 05556 BHQ3 Transnet 374236 ‐ 63567.90 ‐ 2.610 29.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686515 8.1 63567 000 3742368.10 02‐20 33.80612 5556 .9 000 05556 BHQ3 Transnet 374236 ‐ 63567.90 ‐ 2.610 29.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686515 8.1 63567 000 3742368.10 02‐20 33.80612 5556 .9 000 05556 BHQ4 Transnet 374245 ‐ 63607.60 ‐ 2.670 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686950 9.8 63607 000 3742459.80 02‐20 33.80694 8333 .6 000 47222 BHQ4 Transnet 374245 ‐ 63607.60 ‐ 2.670 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686950 9.8 63607 000 3742459.80 02‐20 33.80694 8333 .6 000 47222 BHQ4 Transnet 374245 ‐ 63607.60 ‐ 2.670 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686950 9.8 63607 000 3742459.80 02‐20 33.80694 8333 .6 000 47222 BHQ5 Transnet 374255 ‐ 63647.30 ‐ 2.350 30.25 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.687386 1.6 63647 000 3742551.60 02‐20 33.80777 1111 .3 000 00000 BHQ5 Transnet 374255 ‐ 63647.30 ‐ 2.350 30.25 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.687386 1.6 63647 000 3742551.60 02‐20 33.80777 1111 .3 000 00000 BHQ5 Transnet 374255 ‐ 63647.30 ‐ 2.350 30.25 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.687386 1.6 63647 000 3742551.60 02‐20 33.80777 1111 .3 000 00000 BHQ6 Transnet 374264 ‐ 63687.00 ‐ 2.150 29.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.687821 3.4 63687 000 3742643.40 02‐20 33.80859 3889 000 52778 BHQ6 Transnet 374264 ‐ 63687.00 ‐ 2.150 29.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.687821 3.4 63687 000 3742643.40 02‐20 33.80859 3889 000 52778 BHQ6 Transnet 374264 ‐ 63687.00 ‐ 2.150 29.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.687821 3.4 63687 000 3742643.40 02‐20 33.80859 3889 000 52778 BHQ7 Transnet 374273 ‐ 63726.80 ‐ 3.260 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.688258 5.2 63726 000 3742735.20 02‐20 33.80942 0556 .8 000 02778 BHQ7 Transnet 374273 ‐ 63726.80 ‐ 3.260 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.688258 5.2 63726 000 3742735.20 02‐20 33.80942 0556 .8 000 02778

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 19

BHQ7 Transnet 374273 ‐ 63726.80 ‐ 3.260 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.688258 5.2 63726 000 3742735.20 02‐20 33.80942 0556 .8 000 02778 BHQ8 Transnet 374220 ‐ 63573.50 ‐ 2.510 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686564 2.2 63573 000 3742202.20 02‐20 33.80462 1667 .5 000 44444 BHQ8 Transnet 374220 ‐ 63573.50 ‐ 2.510 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686564 2.2 63573 000 3742202.20 02‐20 33.80462 1667 .5 000 44444 BHQ8 Transnet 374220 ‐ 63573.50 ‐ 2.510 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686564 2.2 63573 000 3742202.20 02‐20 33.80462 1667 .5 000 44444 BHQ9A Transnet 374219 ‐ 63595.50 ‐ 2.410 6.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686800 2.7 63595 000 3742192.70 02‐20 33.80453 8333 .5 000 75000 BHQ10A Transnet 374255 ‐ 63754.40 ‐ 2.070 13.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.688543 9.8 63754 000 3742559.80 02‐20 33.80783 3333 .4 000 75000 BHQ9 Transnet 374238 ‐ 63653.00 ‐ 2.030 30.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.687435 5.7 63653 000 3742385.70 02‐20 33.80627 8333 000 41667 BHQ9 Transnet 374238 ‐ 63653.00 ‐ 2.030 30.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.687435 5.7 63653 000 3742385.70 02‐20 33.80627 8333 000 41667 BHQ9 Transnet 374238 ‐ 63653.00 ‐ 2.030 30.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.687435 5.7 63653 000 3742385.70 02‐20 33.80627 8333 000 41667 BHQ10 Transnet 374256 ‐ 63732.40 ‐ 2.100 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.688306 9.3 63732 000 3742569.30 02‐20 33.80792 3889 .4 000 44444 BHQ10 Transnet 374256 ‐ 63732.40 ‐ 2.100 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.688306 9.3 63732 000 3742569.30 02‐20 33.80792 3889 .4 000 44444 BHQ10 Transnet 374256 ‐ 63732.40 ‐ 2.100 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.688306 9.3 63732 000 3742569.30 02‐20 33.80792 3889 .4 000 44444 BHQ11 Transnet 374247 ‐ 63692.60 ‐ 1.710 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.687870 7.5 63692 000 3742477.50 02‐20 33.80709 0000 .6 000 91667 BHQ11 Transnet 374247 ‐ 63692.60 ‐ 1.710 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.687870 7.5 63692 000 3742477.50 02‐20 33.80709 0000 .6 000 91667 BHQ12 Transnet 374229 ‐ 63613.30 ‐ 3.260 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.687000 4 63613 000 3742294.00 02‐20 33.80544 5556 .3 000 97222 BHQ12 Transnet 374229 ‐ 63613.30 ‐ 3.260 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.687000 4 63613 000 3742294.00 02‐20 33.80544 5556 .3 000 97222 BHQ12 Transnet 374229 ‐ 63613.30 ‐ 3.260 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.687000 4 63613 000 3742294.00 02‐20 33.80544 5556 .3 000 97222

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 20

BHQ13 Transnet 374210 ‐ 63532.30 ‐ 2.890 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686112 9.9 63532 000 3742109.90 02‐20 33.80379 5000 .3 000 50000 BHQ13 Transnet 374210 ‐ 63532.30 ‐ 2.890 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686112 9.9 63532 000 3742109.90 02‐20 33.80379 5000 .3 000 50000 BHQ14 Transnet 374218 ‐ 63564.20 ‐ 2.430 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686462 2.1 63564 000 3742182.10 02‐20 33.80444 2222 .2 000 38889 BHQ14 Transnet 374218 ‐ 63564.20 ‐ 2.430 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686462 2.1 63564 000 3742182.10 02‐20 33.80444 2222 .2 000 38889 BHQ15 Transnet 374219 ‐ 63580.80 ‐ 2.410 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686642 8.1 63580 000 3742198.10 02‐20 33.80458 5000 .8 000 72222 BHQ15 Transnet 374219 ‐ 63580.80 ‐ 2.410 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686642 8.1 63580 000 3742198.10 02‐20 33.80458 5000 .8 000 72222 BHQ16 Transnet 374222 ‐ 63580.70 ‐ 2.490 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686643 0.3 63580 000 3742220.30 02‐20 33.80478 0556 .7 000 72222 BHQ16 Transnet 374222 ‐ 63580.70 ‐ 2.490 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686643 0.3 63580 000 3742220.30 02‐20 33.80478 0556 .7 000 72222 BHC1 Transnet 374224 ‐ 63480.80 ‐ 2.960 19.07 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.685565 2.3 63480 000 3742242.30 02‐20 33.80499 8333 .8 000 16667 BHC1 Transnet 374224 ‐ 63480.80 ‐ 2.960 19.07 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.685565 2.3 63480 000 3742242.30 02‐20 33.80499 8333 .8 000 16667 BHC1 Transnet 374224 ‐ 63480.80 ‐ 2.960 19.07 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.685565 2.3 63480 000 3742242.30 02‐20 33.80499 8333 .8 000 16667 BHC2 Transnet 374233 ‐ 63520.50 ‐ 3.020 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686001 4.1 63520 000 3742334.10 02‐20 33.80581 1111 .5 000 69444 BHC2 Transnet 374233 ‐ 63520.50 ‐ 3.020 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686001 4.1 63520 000 3742334.10 02‐20 33.80581 1111 .5 000 69444 BHC2 Transnet 374233 ‐ 63520.50 ‐ 3.020 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686001 4.1 63520 000 3742334.10 02‐20 33.80581 1111 .5 000 69444 BHC3 Transnet 374242 ‐ 63560.20 ‐ 2.950 30.30 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686436 5.9 63560 000 3742425.90 02‐20 33.80664 3889 .2 000 19444 BHC3 Transnet 374242 ‐ 63560.20 ‐ 2.950 30.30 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686436 5.9 63560 000 3742425.90 02‐20 33.80664 3889 .2 000 19444 BHC3 Transnet 374242 ‐ 63560.20 ‐ 2.950 30.30 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686436 5.9 63560 000 3742425.90 02‐20 33.80664 3889 .2 000 19444

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 21

BHC4 Transnet 374251 ‐ 63600.00 ‐ 2.560 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686873 7.7 63600 000 3742517.70 02‐20 33.80746 0556 000 72222 BHC4 Transnet 374251 ‐ 63600.00 ‐ 2.560 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686873 7.7 63600 000 3742517.70 02‐20 33.80746 0556 000 72222 BHC4 Transnet 374251 ‐ 63600.00 ‐ 2.560 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.686873 7.7 63600 000 3742517.70 02‐20 33.80746 0556 000 72222 BHC5 Transnet 374260 ‐ 63639.70 ‐ 2.530 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.687308 9.5 63639 000 3742609.50 02‐20 33.80829 3333 .7 000 25000 BHC5 Transnet 374260 ‐ 63639.70 ‐ 2.530 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.687308 9.5 63639 000 3742609.50 02‐20 33.80829 3333 .7 000 25000 BHC5 Transnet 374260 ‐ 63639.70 ‐ 2.530 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.687308 9.5 63639 000 3742609.50 02‐20 33.80829 3333 .7 000 25000 BHT1 Transnet 374175 ‐ 63104.90 ‐ 5.270 18.73 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.681471 1.2 63104 000 3741751.20 02‐20 34.38694 3889 .9 000 44444 BHT1 Transnet 374175 ‐ 63104.90 ‐ 5.270 18.73 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.681471 1.2 63104 000 3741751.20 02‐20 34.38694 3889 .9 000 44444 BHT1 Transnet 374175 ‐ 63104.90 ‐ 5.270 18.73 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.681471 1.2 63104 000 3741751.20 02‐20 34.38694 3889 .9 000 44444 BHT2 Transnet 374202 ‐ 63224.00 ‐ 5.200 18.88 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.682777 6.6 63224 000 3742026.60 02‐20 33.80306 2222 000 25000 BHT2 Transnet 374202 ‐ 63224.00 ‐ 5.200 18.88 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.682777 6.6 63224 000 3742026.60 02‐20 33.80306 2222 000 25000 BHT2 Transnet 374202 ‐ 63224.00 ‐ 5.200 18.88 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.682777 6.6 63224 000 3742026.60 02‐20 33.80306 2222 000 25000 BHT3 Transnet 374230 ‐ 63343.20 ‐ 5.240 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.684084 1.9 63343 000 3742301.90 02‐20 33.80553 1667 .2 000 72222 BHT3 Transnet 374230 ‐ 63343.20 ‐ 5.240 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.684084 1.9 63343 000 3742301.90 02‐20 33.80553 1667 .2 000 72222 BHT3 Transnet 374230 ‐ 63343.20 ‐ 5.240 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.684084 1.9 63343 000 3742301.90 02‐20 33.80553 1667 .2 000 72222 BHT4 Transnet 374248 ‐ 63422.60 ‐ 5.280 27.44 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.684954 5.5 63422 000 3742485.50 02‐20 33.80718 7222 .6 000 75000 BHT4 Transnet 374248 ‐ 63422.60 ‐ 5.280 27.44 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.684954 5.5 63422 000 3742485.50 02‐20 33.80718 7222 .6 000 75000

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 22

BHT4 Transnet 374248 ‐ 63422.60 ‐ 5.280 27.44 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.684954 5.5 63422 000 3742485.50 02‐20 33.80718 7222 .6 000 75000 BHT5 Transnet 374266 ‐ 63502.00 ‐ 3.780 28.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.685825 9 63502 000 3742669.00 02‐20 33.80883 5556 000 69444 BHT5 Transnet 374266 ‐ 63502.00 ‐ 3.780 28.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.685825 9 63502 000 3742669.00 02‐20 33.80883 5556 000 69444 BHT6 Transnet 374181 ‐ 62967.20 ‐ 6.670 15.37 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.679988 0.8 62967 000 3741810.80 02‐20 33.80113 8889 .2 000 25000 BHT7 Transnet 374208 ‐ 63086.40 ‐ 6.790 13.45 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.681295 6.1 63086 000 3742086.10 02‐20 33.80360 5556 .4 000 72222 BHT7 Transnet 374208 ‐ 63086.40 ‐ 6.790 13.45 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.681295 6.1 63086 000 3742086.10 02‐20 33.80360 5556 .4 000 72222 BHT7 Transnet 374208 ‐ 63086.40 ‐ 6.790 13.45 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.681295 6.1 63086 000 3742086.10 02‐20 33.80360 5556 .4 000 72222 BHT8 Transnet 374236 ‐ 63205.50 ‐ 6.780 28.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.682601 1.5 63205 000 3742361.50 02‐20 33.80608 3889 .5 000 27778 BHT8 Transnet 374236 ‐ 63205.50 ‐ 6.780 28.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.682601 1.5 63205 000 3742361.50 02‐20 33.80608 3889 .5 000 27778 BHT8 Transnet 374236 ‐ 63205.50 ‐ 6.780 28.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.682601 1.5 63205 000 3742361.50 02‐20 33.80608 3889 .5 000 27778 BHT9 Transnet 374254 ‐ 63284.90 ‐ 6.660 28.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.683471 5 63284 000 3742545.00 02‐20 33.80773 9444 .9 000 22222 BHT9 Transnet 374254 ‐ 63284.90 ‐ 6.660 28.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.683471 5 63284 000 3742545.00 02‐20 33.80773 9444 .9 000 22222 BHT9 Transnet 374254 ‐ 63284.90 ‐ 6.660 28.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.683471 5 63284 000 3742545.00 02‐20 33.80773 9444 .9 000 22222 BHT10 Transnet 374272 ‐ 63364.30 ‐ 6.620 28.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.684342 8.6 63364 000 3742728.60 02‐20 33.80938 7778 .3 000 25000 BHT10 Transnet 374272 ‐ 63364.30 ‐ 6.620 28.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.684342 8.6 63364 000 3742728.60 02‐20 33.80938 7778 .3 000 25000 BHT10 Transnet 374272 ‐ 63364.30 ‐ 6.620 28.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.684342 8.6 63364 000 3742728.60 02‐20 33.80938 7778 .3 000 25000 BHT11 Transnet 374228 ‐ 63002.50 ‐ 8.060 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.680403 5.9 63002 000 3742285.90 02‐20 33.80541 8889 .5 000 33333

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 23

BHT11 Transnet 374228 ‐ 63002.50 ‐ 8.060 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.680403 5.9 63002 000 3742285.90 02‐20 33.80541 8889 .5 000 33333 BHT11 Transnet 374228 ‐ 63002.50 ‐ 8.060 30.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.680403 5.9 63002 000 3742285.90 02‐20 33.80541 8889 .5 000 33333 BHT12 Transnet 374251 ‐ 63101.80 ‐ 8.070 29.40 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.681492 5.3 63101 000 3742515.30 02‐20 33.80747 5000 .8 000 52778 BHT12 Transnet 374251 ‐ 63101.80 ‐ 8.070 29.40 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.681492 5.3 63101 000 3742515.30 02‐20 33.80747 5000 .8 000 52778 BHT12 Transnet 374251 ‐ 63101.80 ‐ 8.070 29.40 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.681492 5.3 63101 000 3742515.30 02‐20 33.80747 5000 .8 000 52778 BHT13 Transnet 374269 ‐ 63177.60 ‐ 8.260 25.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.681492 3 63177 000 3742693.00 02‐20 33.80747 5000 .6 000 52778 BHT13 Transnet 374269 ‐ 63177.60 ‐ 8.260 25.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.681492 3 63177 000 3742693.00 02‐20 33.80747 5000 .6 000 52778 BHT13 Transnet 374269 ‐ 63177.60 ‐ 8.260 25.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.681492 3 63177 000 3742693.00 02‐20 33.80747 5000 .6 000 52778 BHP1 Transnet 374208 ‐ 62815.00 ‐ 18.98 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.682323 3.7 62815 000 3742083.70 0 02‐20 33.80907 8889 000 27778 BHP1 Transnet 374208 ‐ 62815.00 ‐ 18.98 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.682323 3.7 62815 000 3742083.70 0 02‐20 33.80907 8889 000 27778 BHP1 Transnet 374208 ‐ 62815.00 ‐ 18.98 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.682323 3.7 62815 000 3742083.70 0 02‐20 33.80907 8889 000 27778 BHP2 Transnet 374222 ‐ 62874.60 ‐ 19.26 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.679018 1.4 62874 000 3742221.40 0 02‐20 33.80483 0556 .6 000 94444 BHP2 Transnet 374222 ‐ 62874.60 ‐ 19.26 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.679018 1.4 62874 000 3742221.40 0 02‐20 33.80483 0556 .6 000 94444 BHP3 Transnet 374235 ‐ 62934.20 ‐ 19.68 18.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.679671 9 62934 000 3742359.00 0 02‐20 33.80607 3889 .2 000 63889 BHP3 Transnet 374235 ‐ 62934.20 ‐ 19.68 18.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.679671 9 62934 000 3742359.00 0 02‐20 33.80607 3889 .2 000 63889 BHP3 Transnet 374235 ‐ 62934.20 ‐ 19.68 18.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.679671 9 62934 000 3742359.00 0 02‐20 33.80607 3889 .2 000 63889 BHP4 Transnet 374249 ‐ 62993.80 ‐ 19.58 22.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.680325 6.6 62993 000 3742496.60 0 02‐20 33.80731 0000 .8 000 33333

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 24

BHP4 Transnet 374249 ‐ 62993.80 ‐ 19.58 22.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.680325 6.6 62993 000 3742496.60 0 02‐20 33.80731 0000 .8 000 33333 BHP4 Transnet 374249 ‐ 62993.80 ‐ 19.58 22.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.680325 6.6 62993 000 3742496.60 0 02‐20 33.80731 0000 .8 000 33333 BHP5 Transnet 374263 ‐ 63053.30 ‐ 19.74 26.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.680977 4.4 63053 000 3742634.40 0 02‐20 33.80855 2222 .3 000 19444 BHP5 Transnet 374263 ‐ 63053.30 ‐ 19.74 26.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.680977 4.4 63053 000 3742634.40 0 02‐20 33.80855 2222 .3 000 19444 BHP6 Transnet 374228 ‐ 62737.00 ‐ 18.40 10.07 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.677536 0.9 62737 000 3742280.90 0 02‐20 33.80538 3889 000 38889 BHP6 Transnet 374228 ‐ 62737.00 ‐ 18.40 10.07 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.677536 0.9 62737 000 3742280.90 0 02‐20 33.80538 3889 000 38889 BHP7 Transnet 374214 ‐ 62677.40 ‐ 19.19 10.07 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.676883 3.2 62677 000 3742143.20 0 02‐20 33.80414 0556 .4 000 61111 BHP7 Transnet 374214 ‐ 62677.40 ‐ 19.19 10.07 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.676883 3.2 62677 000 3742143.20 0 02‐20 33.80414 0556 .4 000 61111 BHP8 Transnet 374241 ‐ 62796.50 ‐ 18.90 20.80 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.678188 8.6 62796 000 3742418.60 0 02‐20 33.80662 6111 .5 000 19444 BHP8 Transnet 374241 ‐ 62796.50 ‐ 18.90 20.80 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.678188 8.6 62796 000 3742418.60 0 02‐20 33.80662 6111 .5 000 19444 BHP8 Transnet 374241 ‐ 62796.50 ‐ 18.90 20.80 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.678188 8.6 62796 000 3742418.60 0 02‐20 33.80662 6111 .5 000 19444 BHP9 Transnet 374255 ‐ 62856.10 ‐ 18.70 24.73 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.678842 6.2 62856 000 3742556.20 0 02‐20 33.80785 2222 .1 000 86111 BHP9 Transnet 374255 ‐ 62856.10 ‐ 18.70 24.73 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.678842 6.2 62856 000 3742556.20 0 02‐20 33.80785 2222 .1 000 86111 BHP9 Transnet 374255 ‐ 62856.10 ‐ 18.70 24.73 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.678842 6.2 62856 000 3742556.20 0 02‐20 33.80785 2222 .1 000 86111 BHP10 Transnet 374261 ‐ 62718.40 ‐ 17.57 10.95 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.677359 5.8 62718 000 3742615.80 0 02‐20 33.80840 1667 .4 000 41667 BHP10 Transnet 374261 ‐ 62718.40 ‐ 17.57 10.95 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.677359 5.8 62718 000 3742615.80 0 02‐20 33.80840 1667 .4 000 41667 BHP11 Transnet 374247 ‐ 62658.90 ‐ 17.78 19.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.676706 8.1 62658 000 3742478.10 0 02‐20 33.80716 9444 .9 000 63889

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 25

BHP11 Transnet 374247 ‐ 62658.90 ‐ 17.78 19.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.676706 8.1 62658 000 3742478.10 0 02‐20 33.80716 9444 .9 000 63889 BHP11 Transnet 374247 ‐ 62658.90 ‐ 17.78 19.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.676706 8.1 62658 000 3742478.10 0 02‐20 33.80716 9444 .9 000 63889 BH R1 Transnet 373876 ‐ 61547.30 ‐ 23.78 20.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.664441 7.9 61547 000 3738767.90 0 02‐20 33.77378 6667 .3 000 41667 BH R1 Transnet 373876 ‐ 61547.30 ‐ 23.78 20.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.664441 7.9 61547 000 3738767.90 0 02‐20 33.77378 6667 .3 000 41667 BH R2 Transnet 373858 ‐ 61459.50 ‐ 22.61 20.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.663483 8.2 61459 000 3738588.20 0 02‐20 33.77216 8889 .5 000 91667 BH R2 Transnet 373858 ‐ 61459.50 ‐ 22.61 20.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.663483 8.2 61459 000 3738588.20 0 02‐20 33.77216 8889 .5 000 91667 BH R3 Transnet 373840 ‐ 61371.60 ‐ 19.44 15.20 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.662522 8.5 61371 000 3738408.50 0 02‐20 33.77055 5000 .6 000 44444 BH R3 Transnet 373840 ‐ 61371.60 ‐ 19.44 15.20 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.662522 8.5 61371 000 3738408.50 0 02‐20 33.77055 5000 .6 000 44444 BH R4 Transnet 373822 ‐ 61283.80 ‐ 15.55 10.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.661562 8.8 61283 000 3738228.80 0 02‐20 33.76893 2222 .8 000 94444 BH R4 Transnet 373822 ‐ 61283.80 ‐ 15.55 10.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.661562 8.8 61283 000 3738228.80 0 02‐20 33.76893 2222 .8 000 94444 BH R5 Transnet 373898 ‐ 61654.30 ‐ 26.33 20.40 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.665614 7 61654 000 3738987.00 0 02‐20 33.77575 4444 .3 000 30556 BH R5 Transnet 373898 ‐ 61654.30 ‐ 26.33 20.40 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.665614 7 61654 000 3738987.00 0 02‐20 33.77575 4444 .3 000 30556 BH R6 Transnet 373786 ‐ 61108.10 ‐ 14.35 10.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.659640 9.4 61108 000 3737869.40 0 02‐20 33.76570 8333 .1 000 94444 BH R6 Transnet 373786 ‐ 61108.10 ‐ 14.35 10.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.659640 9.4 61108 000 3737869.40 0 02‐20 33.76570 8333 .1 000 94444 BH R7 Transnet 373768 ‐ 61020.30 ‐ 13.87 10.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.658680 9.8 61020 000 3737689.80 0 02‐20 33.76409 8333 .3 000 55556 BH R7 Transnet 373768 ‐ 61020.30 ‐ 13.87 10.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.658680 9.8 61020 000 3737689.80 0 02‐20 33.76409 8333 .3 000 55556 BH R8 Transnet 373755 ‐ 60954.40 ‐ 12.16 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.657960 5 60954 000 3737555.00 0 02‐20 33.76288 2778 .4 000 41667

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 26

BH R8 Transnet 373755 ‐ 60954.40 ‐ 12.16 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.657960 5 60954 000 3737555.00 0 02‐20 33.76288 2778 .4 000 41667 BH R9 Transnet 373751 ‐ 60932.50 ‐ 8.160 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.657720 0.1 60932 000 3737510.10 02‐20 33.76248 8333 .5 000 05556 BH R9 Transnet 373751 ‐ 60932.50 ‐ 8.160 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.657720 0.1 60932 000 3737510.10 02‐20 33.76248 8333 .5 000 05556 BH R10 Transnet 373746 ‐ 60910.50 ‐ 8.660 14.53 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.657480 5.2 60910 000 3737465.20 02‐20 33.76207 2778 .5 000 69444 BH R10 Transnet 373746 ‐ 60910.50 ‐ 8.660 14.53 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.657480 5.2 60910 000 3737465.20 02‐20 33.76207 2778 .5 000 69444 BH R11 Transnet 373742 ‐ 60888.60 ‐ 10.06 15.25 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.657240 0.2 60888 000 3737420.20 0 02‐20 33.76167 5556 .6 000 27778 BH R11 Transnet 373742 ‐ 60888.60 ‐ 10.06 15.25 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.657240 0.2 60888 000 3737420.20 0 02‐20 33.76167 5556 .6 000 27778 BH R12 Transnet 373737 ‐ 60866.60 ‐ 8.940 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.657000 5.3 60866 000 3737375.30 02‐20 33.76126 0000 .6 000 91667 BH R12 Transnet 373737 ‐ 60866.60 ‐ 8.940 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.657000 5.3 60866 000 3737375.30 02‐20 33.76126 0000 .6 000 91667 BH R13 Transnet 373724 ‐ 60800.70 ‐ 10.43 15.25 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.656279 0.6 60800 000 3737240.60 0 02‐20 33.76005 4444 .7 000 86111 BH R13 Transnet 373724 ‐ 60800.70 ‐ 10.43 15.25 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.656279 0.6 60800 000 3737240.60 0 02‐20 33.76005 4444 .7 000 86111 BH R13 Transnet 373724 ‐ 60800.70 ‐ 10.43 15.25 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.656279 0.6 60800 000 3737240.60 0 02‐20 33.76005 4444 .7 000 86111 BH R14 Transnet 374010 ‐ 62257.80 ‐ 4.190 10.30 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.672208 8.8 62257 000 3740108.80 02‐20 33.78583 3333 .8 000 08333 BH R14 Transnet 374010 ‐ 62257.80 ‐ 4.190 10.30 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.672208 8.8 62257 000 3740108.80 02‐20 33.78583 3333 .8 000 08333 BH R15 Transnet 374019 ‐ 62377.40 ‐ 2.810 10.30 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.673506 8.7 62377 000 3740198.70 02‐20 33.78663 1111 .4 000 41667 BH R16 Transnet 374029 ‐ 62489.50 ‐ 1.610 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.674723 7.9 62489 000 3740297.90 02‐20 33.78752 3333 .5 000 19444 BH R16 Transnet 374029 ‐ 62489.50 ‐ 1.610 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.674723 7.9 62489 000 3740297.90 02‐20 33.78752 3333 .5 000 19444

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 27

BH R16 Transnet 374029 ‐ 62489.50 ‐ 1.610 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.674723 7.9 62489 000 3740297.90 02‐20 33.78752 3333 .5 000 19444 BH R17 Transnet 374040 ‐ 62596.80 ‐ 1.550 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.675889 5.2 62596 000 3740405.20 02‐20 33.78848 4444 .8 000 27778 BH R17 Transnet 374040 ‐ 62596.80 ‐ 1.550 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.675889 5.2 62596 000 3740405.20 02‐20 33.78848 4444 .8 000 27778 BH R17 Transnet 374040 ‐ 62596.80 ‐ 1.550 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.675889 5.2 62596 000 3740405.20 02‐20 33.78848 4444 .8 000 27778 BH R18 Transnet 374048 ‐ 62723.80 ‐ 1.500 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.677266 4.3 62723 000 3740484.30 02‐20 33.78918 1111 .8 000 86111 BH R18 Transnet 374048 ‐ 62723.80 ‐ 1.500 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.677266 4.3 62723 000 3740484.30 02‐20 33.78918 1111 .8 000 86111 BH R18 Transnet 374048 ‐ 62723.80 ‐ 1.500 15.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.677266 4.3 62723 000 3740484.30 02‐20 33.78918 1111 .8 000 86111 BH PC1 Transnet 374101 ‐ 64504.70 ‐ 3.150 10.38 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.696533 8.3 64504 000 3741018.30 02‐20 33.79389 3333 .7 000 52778 BH PC2 Transnet 374109 ‐ 64510.60 ‐ 1.540 10.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.696603 8 64510 000 3741098.00 02‐20 33.79461 0556 .6 000 36111 BH PC2 Transnet 374109 ‐ 64510.60 ‐ 1.540 10.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.696603 8 64510 000 3741098.00 02‐20 33.79461 0556 .6 000 36111 BH PC2 Transnet 374109 ‐ 64510.60 ‐ 1.540 10.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.696603 8 64510 000 3741098.00 02‐20 33.79461 0556 .6 000 36111 BH PC3 Transnet 374102 ‐ 64378.90 ‐ 7.490 10.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.695175 6.2 64378 000 3741026.20 02‐20 33.79397 8333 .9 000 41667 BH PC3 Transnet 374102 ‐ 64378.90 ‐ 7.490 10.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.695175 6.2 64378 000 3741026.20 02‐20 33.79397 8333 .9 000 41667 BH PC4 Transnet 374103 ‐ 64229.10 ‐ 17.01 10.45 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.693558 4.5 64229 000 3741034.50 0 02‐20 33.79405 8889 .1 000 83333 BH PC4 Transnet 374103 ‐ 64229.10 ‐ 17.01 10.45 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.693558 4.5 64229 000 3741034.50 0 02‐20 33.79405 8889 .1 000 83333 BH PC5 Transnet 374098 ‐ 64087.50 ‐ 26.45 10.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.692026 4.9 64087 000 3740984.90 0 02‐20 33.79361 3889 .5 000 97222 BH PC6 Transnet 374086 ‐ 63999.70 ‐ 31.16 10.45 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.691069 3.1 63999 000 3740863.10 0 02‐20 33.79252 4444 .7 000 69444

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 28

BH PC7 Transnet 374071 ‐ 63965.40 ‐ 37.84 10.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.690688 8 63965 000 3740718.00 0 02‐20 33.79122 6111 .4 000 08333 BH PC7 Transnet 374071 ‐ 63965.40 ‐ 37.84 10.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.690688 8 63965 000 3740718.00 0 02‐20 33.79122 6111 .4 000 08333 BH PC7 Transnet 374071 ‐ 63965.40 ‐ 37.84 10.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.690688 8 63965 000 3740718.00 0 02‐20 33.79122 6111 .4 000 08333 BH PC8 Transnet 374058 ‐ 63891.20 ‐ 50.39 10.30 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.689878 6 63891 000 3740586.00 0 02‐20 33.79003 0556 .2 000 55556 BH PC9 Transnet 374056 ‐ 63735.20 ‐ 53.07 10.11 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.688191 1.9 63735 000 3740561.90 0 02‐20 33.78982 9444 .2 000 75000 BH PC9 Transnet 374056 ‐ 63735.20 ‐ 53.07 10.11 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.688191 1.9 63735 000 3740561.90 0 02‐20 33.78982 9444 .2 000 75000 BHB1 Transnet 374140 ‐ 64501.90 ‐ 1.350 18.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.696531 8.7 64501 000 3741408.70 02‐20 33.79741 3889 .9 000 50000 BHB1 Transnet 374140 ‐ 64501.90 ‐ 1.350 18.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.696531 8.7 64501 000 3741408.70 02‐20 33.79741 3889 .9 000 50000 BHB2 Transnet 374123 ‐ 64409.70 ‐ 2.230 14.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.695523 0.3 64409 000 3741230.30 02‐20 33.79563 0556 .7 000 75000 BHB2 Transnet 374123 ‐ 64409.70 ‐ 2.230 14.00 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.695523 0.3 64409 000 3741230.30 02‐20 33.79563 0556 .7 000 75000 BHB3 Transnet 374128 ‐ 64312.00 ‐ 1.350 24.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.694472 4.5 64312 000 3741284.50 02‐20 33.79630 2222 000 69444 BHB3 Transnet 374128 ‐ 64312.00 ‐ 1.350 24.50 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.694472 4.5 64312 000 3741284.50 02‐20 33.79630 2222 000 69444 BH N1 Transnet 373919 ‐ 61749.77 ‐ 27.26 15.50 U BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.666659 0.409 61749 100 3739190.40 9 02‐20 33.77758 4444 .771 900 13889 BH N1 Transnet 373919 ‐ 61749.77 ‐ 27.26 15.50 U BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.666659 0.409 61749 100 3739190.40 9 02‐20 33.77758 4444 .771 900 13889 BH N2 Transnet 373928 ‐ 61809.62 ‐ 15.25 5.45 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.667312 6.124 61809 800 3739286.12 5 02‐20 33.77844 2222 .628 400 05556 BH N3 Transnet 373936 ‐ 61844.43 ‐ 13.75 4.45 U BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.667693 6.909 61844 800 3739366.90 8 02‐20 33.77916 6111 .438 900 69444 BH N4 Transnet 373955 ‐ 61913.02 ‐ 2.167 6.50 U BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.668447 5.048 61913 700 3739555.04 02‐20 33.78085 2222 .027 800 88889

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 29

BH N4 Transnet 373955 ‐ 61913.02 ‐ 2.167 6.50 U BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.668447 5.048 61913 700 3739555.04 02‐20 33.78085 2222 .027 800 88889 BH N5 Transnet 373979 ‐ 62001.09 ‐ 2.017 13.11 U BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.669414 0.539 62001 100 3739790.53 02‐20 33.78297 4444 .091 900 66667 BH N5 Transnet 373979 ‐ 62001.09 ‐ 2.017 13.11 U BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.669414 0.539 62001 100 3739790.53 02‐20 33.78297 4444 .091 900 66667 BH N6 Transnet 374000 ‐ 62145.88 ‐ 2.275 4.03 U BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.670993 8.508 62145 300 3740008.50 02‐20 33.78493 0556 .883 800 33333 BH N6 Transnet 374000 ‐ 62145.88 ‐ 2.275 4.03 U BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.670993 8.508 62145 300 3740008.50 02‐20 33.78493 0556 .883 800 33333 BH N8 Transnet 374073 ‐ 62893.50 ‐ 10.70 5.35 U BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.679116 5.103 62893 500 3740735.10 1 02‐20 33.79143 3889 .505 300 94444 BH N9 Transnet 374092 ‐ 62953.87 ‐ 18.71 12.40 U BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.679781 3.969 62953 800 3740923.96 4 02‐20 33.79313 6667 .878 900 83333 BH N10 Transnet 374101 ‐ 62969.45 ‐ 20.10 14.14 U BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.679956 9.127 62969 600 3741019.12 1 02‐20 33.79399 6667 .456 700 52778 BH N11 Transnet 374117 ‐ 62974.83 ‐ 23.59 17.35 U BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.680026 9.715 62974 300 3741179.71 0 02‐20 33.79544 1111 .833 500 27778 BH N12 Transnet 374132 ‐ 62958.09 ‐ 21.34 16.42 U BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.679855 0.495 62958 500 3741320.49 8 02‐20 33.79671 5556 .095 500 27778 BH N13 Transnet 374147 ‐ 62916.58 ‐ 22.61 18.45 V BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.679418 1.667 62916 900 3741471.66 7 02‐20 33.79807 0556 .589 700 80556 BH N14 Transnet 374160 ‐ 62858.91 ‐ 27.52 23.01 U BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.678804 4.734 62858 300 3741604.73 3 02‐20 33.79928 7222 .913 400 11111 BH N14 Transnet 374160 ‐ 62858.91 ‐ 27.52 23.01 U BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.678804 4.734 62858 300 3741604.73 3 02‐20 33.79928 7222 .913 400 11111 BH N15 Transnet 374174 ‐ 62804.97 ‐ 29.69 18.02 U BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.678232 8.099 62804 000 3741748.09 0 02‐20 33.80057 5000 .97 900 66667 BH N15 Transnet 374174 ‐ 62804.97 ‐ 29.69 18.02 U BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.678232 8.099 62804 000 3741748.09 0 02‐20 33.80057 5000 .97 900 66667 BH N18 Transnet 374097 ‐ 62929.53 ‐ 22.49 15.22 U BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.679522 6.162 62929 300 3740976.16 7 02‐20 33.79361 5000 .533 200 02778 BH N19 Transnet 374128 ‐ 62925.53 ‐ 24.73 17.45 U BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.679501 3.56 62925 100 3741283.56 7 02‐20 33.79638 1111 .531 000 19444

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 30

BH N20 Transnet 373984 ‐ 62119.04 ‐ 1.944 9.45 U BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.670691 9.602 62119 000 3739849.60 02‐20 33.78350 9444 .04 200 22222 BH N20 Transnet 373984 ‐ 62119.04 ‐ 1.944 9.45 U BH Port of Ngqura Phase 2 expansion project‐ geotechnical report GDD 165K 2007‐ ‐ 25.670691 9.602 62119 000 3739849.60 02‐20 33.78350 9444 .04 200 22222 Z1H1TH1 Goba 374172 ‐ 61884.00 ‐ 44.6 1.90 TP‐SV TLB/BA CDC Electrical Substation 1084/01 2003‐10 TP4 7.00 61884 000 3741727.00 .00 000 Z1H1TH3 Goba 374170 ‐ 61849.00 ‐ 46.0 1.90 TP‐SV TLB/BA CDC Electrical Substation 1084/01 2003‐10 TP6 1.00 61849 000 3741701.00 .00 000 Z1SS016 Goba 374196 ‐ 61584.00 ‐ 44.2 3.00 TP‐SV TLB/BA CDC Electrical Substation 1084/01 2003‐10 TP12 9.00 61584 000 3741969.00 .00 000 Z1SS017 Goba 374181 ‐ 61258.00 ‐ 42.5 2.80 TP‐SV TLB/BA CDC Electrical Substation 1084/01 2003‐10 TP13 0.00 61258 000 3741810.00 .00 000 Z1SS027 Goba 374189 ‐ 60806.00 ‐ 47.1 3.00 TP‐SV TLB/BA CDC Electrical Substation 1084/01 2003‐10 TP14 8.00 60806 000 3741898.00 .00 000 Z1SS028 Goba 374166 ‐ 61073.00 ‐ 47.0 3.00 TP‐SV TLB/BA CDC Electrical Substation 1084/01 2003‐10 TP15 6.00 61073 000 3741666.00 .00 000 Z1H1TH1 Goba 374024 ‐ 57713.00 ‐ 56.6 3.00 TP‐SV TLB/BA CDC Electrical Substation 1084/01 2003‐10 TP16 2.00 57713 000 3740242.00 .00 000 Z1H1TH2 Goba 374021 ‐ 57683.00 ‐ 56.9 3.00 TP‐SV TLB/BA CDC Electrical Substation 1084/01 2003‐10 TP17 6.00 57683 000 3740216.00 .00 000 Z3SS001 Goba 374084 ‐ 57626.00 ‐ 53.9 3.00 TP‐SV TLB/BA CDC Electrical Substation 1084/01 2003‐10 TP18 4.00 57626 000 3740844.00 .00 000 Z3SS002 Goba 373969 ‐ 57831.00 ‐ 58.1 1.00 TP‐SV TLB/BA CDC Electrical Substation 1084/01 2003‐10 TP19 8.00 57831 000 3739698.00 .00 000 Z4SS001 Goba 374022 ‐ 58177.00 ‐ 54.4 0.65 TP‐SV TLB/BA CDC Electrical Substation 1084/01 2003‐10 TP20 4.00 58177 000 3740224.00 .00 000 Z4SS002 Goba 373969 ‐ 58380.00 ‐ 54.5 3.00 TP‐SV TLB/BA CDC Electrical Substation 1084/01 2003‐10 TP21 7.00 58380 000 3739697.00 .00 000 Z5H1TH1 Goba 373867 ‐ 58600.00 ‐ 59.6 3.00 TP‐SV TLB/BA CDC Electrical Substation 1084/01 2003‐10 TP22 4.00 58600 000 3738674.00 .00 000 Z5H1TH1 Goba 373865 ‐ 58541.00 ‐ 60.3 3.00 TP‐SV TLB/BA CDC Electrical Substation 1084/01 2003‐10 TP23 8.00 58541 000 3738658.00 .00 000 Z5H1TH2 Goba 373869 ‐ 58525.00 ‐ 60.3 3.00 TP‐SV TLB/BA CDC Electrical Substation 1084/01 2003‐10 TP24 0.00 58525 000 3738690.00 .00 000

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 31

Z5H2TH1 Goba 374070 ‐ 60607.18 ‐ 43.13 3.00 TP‐SV TLB/BA CDC Electrical Substation 1084/01 2003‐10 TP25 1.60 60607 000 3740701.60 15 .18 000 Z5H2TH2 Goba 374063 ‐ 60528.00 ‐ 43.69 3.00 TP‐SV TLB/BA CDC Electrical Substation 1084/01 2003‐10 TP26 9.00 60528 000 3740639.00 19 .00 000 Z5H2TH3 Goba 374066 ‐ 60541.00 ‐ 43.53 3.00 TP‐SV TLB/BA CDC Electrical Substation 1084/01 2003‐10 TP27 6.00 60541 000 3740666.00 07 .00 000 Z5H2TH3 Goba 374066 ‐ 60541.00 ‐ 43.42 3.00 TP‐SV TLB/BA CDC Electrical Substation 1084/01 2003‐10 TP28 6.00 60541 000 3740666.00 .00 000 Z5SS002 Goba 374022 ‐ 61046.00 ‐ 42.2 3.00 TP‐SV TLB/BA CDC Electrical Substation 1084/01 2003‐10 TP29 2.00 61046 000 3740222.00 .00 000 Z5SS003 Goba 373947 ‐ 60943.00 ‐ 0.42 TP‐SV TLB/BA CDC Electrical Substation 1084/01 2003‐10 TP30 9.00 60943 000 3739479.00 .00 000 Z5SS004 Goba 373924 ‐ 58809.00 ‐ 3.00 TP‐SV TLB/BA CDC Electrical Substation 1084/01 2003‐10 TP31 4.00 58809 000 3739244.00 .00 000 Z5SS005 Goba 373836 ‐ 59958.00 ‐ 0.42 TP‐SV TLB/BA CDC Electrical Substation 1084/01 2003‐10 TP32 0.00 59958 000 3738360.00 .00 000 MH1 Goba ‐046985 37593 46985.00 ‐ 116.7 1.00 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 97 000 3759397.00 8 000 MH1 Goba ‐046985 37593 46985.00 ‐ 116.7 1.00 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 97 000 3759397.00 8 000 MH2 Goba ‐047040 37593 47040.00 ‐ 116.8 2.30 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 93 000 3759393.00 7 000 MH2 Goba ‐047040 37593 47040.00 ‐ 116.8 2.30 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 93 000 3759393.00 7 000 MH3 Goba ‐047117 37593 47117.00 ‐ 116.6 2.80 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 80 000 3759380.00 4 000 MH3 Goba ‐047117 37593 47117.00 ‐ 116.6 2.80 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 80 000 3759380.00 4 000 MH4 Goba ‐047196 37593 47196.00 ‐ 113.1 3.00 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 30 000 3759330.00 4 000 MH4 Goba ‐047196 37593 47196.00 ‐ 113.1 3.00 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 30 000 3759330.00 4 000 MH4 Goba ‐047196 37593 47196.00 ‐ 113.1 3.00 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 30 000 3759330.00 4 000

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 32

MH6 Goba ‐047356 37592 47356.00 ‐ 113.0 1.80 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 86 000 3759286.00 4 000 MH6 Goba ‐047356 37592 47356.00 ‐ 113.0 1.80 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 86 000 3759286.00 4 000 MH7 Goba ‐047436 37592 47436.00 ‐ 111.2 3.00 66 000 3759266.00 7 000 MH7 Goba ‐047436 37592 47436.00 ‐ 111.2 3.00 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 66 000 3759266.00 7 000 MH7 Goba ‐047436 37592 47436.00 ‐ 111.2 3.00 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 66 000 3759266.00 7 000 MH12 Goba ‐047615 37591 47615.00 ‐ 109.0 0.50 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 59 000 3759159.00 1 000 MH12 Goba ‐047615 37591 47615.00 ‐ 109.0 0.50 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 59 000 3759159.00 1 000 MH13 Goba ‐047653 37591 47653.00 ‐ 107.9 0.75 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 35 000 3759135.00 8 000 MH13 Goba ‐047653 37591 47653.00 ‐ 107.9 0.75 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 35 000 3759135.00 8 000 MH15 Goba ‐047789 37591 47789.00 ‐ 107.0 2.50 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 65 000 3759165.00 5 000 MH15 Goba ‐047789 37591 47789.00 ‐ 107.0 2.50 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 65 000 3759165.00 5 000 MH16 Goba ‐047856 37592 47856.00 ‐ 107.8 2.50 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 18 000 3759218.00 3 000 MH16 Goba ‐047856 37592 47856.00 ‐ 107.8 2.50 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 18 000 3759218.00 3 000 MH17 Goba ‐047906 37592 47906.00 ‐ 106.1 2.60 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 84 000 3759284.00 3 000 MH17 Goba ‐047906 37592 47906.00 ‐ 106.1 2.60 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 84 000 3759284.00 3 000 MH19 Goba ‐047952 37593 47952.00 ‐ 104.7 2.50 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 61 000 3759361.00 2 000 MH19 Goba ‐047952 37593 47952.00 ‐ 104.7 2.50 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 61 000 3759361.00 2 000

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 33

MH21 Goba ‐047040 37593 47040.00 ‐ 104.9 1.90 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 74 000 3759374.00 7 000 MH21 Goba ‐047040 37593 47040.00 ‐ 104.9 1.90 TP‐SV TLB/BA Woodlands Water Sewer Upgrade: Engineering Geological Report G‐Ges2 2008‐07 74 000 3759374.00 7 000 TH1 Goba 375545 ‐ 42824.00 ‐ n/a 0.75 TP‐SV TLB/BA Geotechnical assessment report of the proposed sewer route for the LO14 2008‐04 5.00 42824 000 3755455.00 augmentation of the paapenkuils main sewers in Parsonsvlei for FST .00 000 Consulting Engineers TH1 Goba 375545 ‐ 42824.00 ‐ n/a 0.75 TP‐SV TLB/BA Geotechnical assessment report of the proposed sewer route for the LO14 2008‐04 5.00 42824 000 3755455.00 augmentation of the paapenkuils main sewers in Parsonsvlei for FST .00 000 Consulting Engineers TH2 Goba 375553 ‐ 43090.00 ‐ n/a 1.44 TP‐SV TLB/BA Geotechnical assessment report of the proposed sewer route for the LO14 2008‐04 2.00 43090 000 3755532.00 augmentation of the paapenkuils main sewers in Parsonsvlei for FST .00 000 Consulting Engineers TH2 Goba 375553 ‐ 43090.00 ‐ n/a 1.44 TP‐SV TLB/BA Geotechnical assessment report of the proposed sewer route for the LO14 2008‐04 2.00 43090 000 3755532.00 augmentation of the paapenkuils main sewers in Parsonsvlei for FST .00 000 Consulting Engineers TH3 Goba 375546 ‐ 43368.00 ‐ n/a 1.70 TP‐SV TLB/BA Geotechnical assessment report of the proposed sewer route for the LO14 2008‐04 2.00 43368 000 3755462.00 augmentation of the paapenkuils main sewers in Parsonsvlei for FST .00 000 Consulting Engineers TH4 Goba 375534 ‐ 43697.00 ‐ n/a 0.97 TP‐SV TLB/BA Geotechnical assessment report of the proposed sewer route for the LO14 2008‐04 9.00 43697 000 3755349.00 augmentation of the paapenkuils main sewers in Parsonsvlei for FST .00 000 Consulting Engineers TH4 Goba 375534 ‐ 43697.00 ‐ n/a 0.97 TP‐SV TLB/BA Geotechnical assessment report of the proposed sewer route for the LO14 2008‐04 9.00 43697 000 3755349.00 augmentation of the paapenkuils main sewers in Parsonsvlei for FST .00 000 Consulting Engineers TH5 Goba 375540 ‐ 44147.00 ‐ n/a 1.48 TP‐SV TLB/BA Geotechnical assessment report of the proposed sewer route for the LO14 2008‐04 0.00 44147 000 3755400.00 augmentation of the paapenkuils main sewers in Parsonsvlei for FST .00 000 Consulting Engineers TH6 Goba 375561 ‐ 44666.00 ‐ n/a 2.00 TP‐SV TLB/BA Geotechnical assessment report of the proposed sewer route for the LO14 2008‐04 9.00 44666 000 3755619.00 augmentation of the paapenkuils main sewers in Parsonsvlei for FST .00 000 Consulting Engineers TH6 Goba 375561 ‐ 44666.00 ‐ n/a 2.00 TP‐SV TLB/BA Geotechnical assessment report of the proposed sewer route for the LO14 2008‐04 9.00 44666 000 3755619.00 augmentation of the paapenkuils main sewers in Parsonsvlei for FST .00 000 Consulting Engineers TH7 Goba 375589 ‐ 45237.00 ‐ n/a 0.23 TP‐SV TLB/BA Geotechnical assessment report of the proposed sewer route for the LO14 2008‐04 7.00 45237 000 3755897.00 augmentation of the paapenkuils main sewers in Parsonsvlei for FST .00 000 Consulting Engineers TH7 Goba 375589 ‐ 45237.00 ‐ n/a 2.30 TP‐SV TLB/BA Geotechnical assessment report of the proposed sewer route for the LO14 2008‐04 7.00 45237 000 3755897.00 augmentation of the paapenkuils main sewers in Parsonsvlei for FST .00 000 Consulting Engineers TH8 Goba 375579 ‐ 45563.00 ‐ n/a 0.50 TP‐SV TLB/BA Geotechnical assessment report of the proposed sewer route for the LO14 2008‐04 4.00 45563 000 3755794.00 augmentation of the paapenkuils main sewers in Parsonsvlei for FST .00 000 Consulting Engineers TH8 Goba 375579 ‐ 45563.00 ‐ n/a 0.50 TP‐SV TLB/BA Geotechnical assessment report of the proposed sewer route for the LO14 2008‐04 4.00 45563 000 3755794.00 augmentation of the paapenkuils main sewers in Parsonsvlei for FST .00 000 Consulting Engineers TH9 Goba 375567 ‐ 45861.00 ‐ n/a 1.80 TP‐SV TLB/BA Geotechnical assessment report of the proposed sewer route for the LO14 2008‐04 0.00 45861 000 3755670.00 augmentation of the paapenkuils main sewers in Parsonsvlei for FST .00 000 Consulting Engineers

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 34

TH9 Goba 375567 ‐ 45861.00 ‐ n/a 1.80 TP‐SV TLB/BA Geotechnical assessment report of the proposed sewer route for the LO14 2008‐04 0.00 45861 000 3755670.00 augmentation of the paapenkuils main sewers in Parsonsvlei for FST .00 000 Consulting Engineers TH10 Goba 375561 ‐ 46302.00 ‐ n/a 1.80 TP‐SV TLB/BA Geotechnical assessment report of the proposed sewer route for the LO14 2008‐04 2.00 46302 000 3755612.00 augmentation of the paapenkuils main sewers in Parsonsvlei for FST .00 000 Consulting Engineers

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B1 - 35

APPENDIX B2: LITHOLOGICAL DATABASE

On the CD at the back of this report

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 147

APPENDIX B3: SOURCE DATA REFERENCES

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 148

APPENDIX B3: SOURCE DATA REFERENCES

Abrahams, A.W., 2007. Joint Venture for the Design and Construction Supervision of the Access Road to Zones 7 and 10, Goba Dibane Joint Venture, Project No IND 101 244, 51 pp.

Board, W. & McStay, J., 2002a. Coega Industrial Corporation (Pty) Ltd: Coega Pedestrian Bridge / Underpass, Well’s Estate—Geotechnical Drilling Investigation Report, Joint Venture Arcus Gibb and African Engineering, J22 015A, 18 pp.

Board, W.S. & McStay, J., 2002b. Coega Conveyor Bridge Geotechnical Drilling Investigation Report, Joint Venture incorporating Arcus Gibb and African Engineering, Report no. J22 015A, 11 pp.

Board, W.S. & McStay, J., 2002c. Coega Industrial Corporation (Pty) Ltd: Coega-Neptune Interchange: Coega-Neptune Road over Rail Bridge—Geotechnical Drilling Investigation Report, Joint Venture Arcus Gibb and African Engineering, Report no. J22 015A, 53 pp.

Burgers, C. & Maclear, G., 2006. Coega IDZ Soil and Water Quality—Annual Monitoring Report 2005–2006, SRK Consulting Engineers and Scientists, Report no. 329 730/3, 23 pp.

Carter, N.G., 1972. Preliminary Environmental Study: Well’s Estate, Port Elizabeth, Hill Kaplan & Scott, Incorporated Consulting Engineers, Report no. 4037, 21 pp.

Carter, N., 1973a. Preliminary Geological and Soils Engineering Investigation—Chatty River Basin, Hill Kaplan & Scott, Incorporated Consulting Engineers, Report no. 3883, 16 pp.

Carter, N., 1973b. Report on Site Investigation G.P.O Offices and Workshops: Neale Street, Port Elizabeth, Hill Kaplan & Scott, Incorporated Consulting Engineers, Report no. JTH 2644, 19 pp.

Carter, N., 1981a. Sharley Cribb Nursing College: Port Elizabeth: Foundation Investigation, Hill Kaplan & Scott, Incorporated Consulting Engineers, Report no. 7010, 10pp.

Carter, N., 1981b. Soils Investigation, Emthonjeni Training Centre, Port Elizabeth, Hill Kaplan & Scott, Incorporated Consulting Engineers, Report no. 8329, 13 pp.

Carter, N., 1987. Foundation Investigation: New Building: Britos Bakery, Port Elizabeth, Hill Kaplan & Scott, Incorporated Consulting Engineers, Report no. 126 05, 15 pp.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B3 - 1

Centre for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), 1997. Coega IDZ Initiative, Feasibility Study: Strategic Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Industrial Development Zone and Harbour at Coega, CSIR Division of Water, Environment and Forestry Technology, Report no. RES, ENV/S-C97025, 17 pp.

Coastal and Environmental Services (CES), 2000. Environmental Management Programme Report: Western Coega Kop Quarry (Transnet), Coastal and Environmental Services, 290 pp.

Coega Implementing Authority, 1999. Coega Development zone Framework Plan: Report Images, Gibb Africa, 28 pp.

Doel, S. & McStay, J., 1999. Dana Corporation, BTR Automotive (Pty) Ltd Port Elizabeth, South Africa: Phase II Invasive Study, Gibb Africa, Report no. J90421A, 19 pp.

Fisher, G.J., 2007a. An Engineering Geological Investigation for the Proposed New Pedestrian Bridge over the Addo Road (R335) at Motherwell, prepared for Arcus Gibb Consulting Engineers, Bopite Engineering Geologists CC, Report no. BEG 075/75, 17 pp.

Fisher, G.J., 2007b. An Engineering Geological Investigation for the Proposed New Pedestrian Bridge Over the Addo Road (R335) at Motherwell: Supplementary Information, prepared for Arcus Gibb Consulting Engineers, Bopite Engineering Geologists CC, Report no. J27128-7231, 18 pp.

Geological and Environmental Services (GES), 2006. An Engineering Geological Investigation for the Proposed New Echo Edge Development at ERF 4682 Central, prepared for GOBA Engineers, Geological and Environmental Services, 26 pp.

Geological and Environmental Services (GES), 2008. An Engineering Geological Investigation for the Proposed New Reservoir at Kwanobuhle on the Outskirts of Uitenhage, prepared for GOBA Engineers, Geological and Environmental Services, Report no. 14/2009, 21 pp.

Gibb Africa, 1997q. Feasibility Study— Coega IDZ: Planning and Engineering Report, Report no. RTP FINAL, 22 pp.

Gibb Africa, 1997b. Coega IDZ Initiative: Feasibility Study—Waste and Hazardous Waste Report [abstract], Report no. CTD FINAL, 2 pp.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B3 - 2

Gibb Africa, 1998. Coega Industrial Harbour: Geotechnical Site Investigation Report, Appendix C, Report no. J80 405G, 205 pp.

Gibb Africa, Metroplan & City of Port Elizabeth, 1997. Coega IDZ Initiative: Feasibility Study—IDZ Planning and Engineering Report, Report no. RTI FINAL, 2 pp.

Gibb Africa, SRK Consulting Engineers & Scientists & Council for Geoscience, 1997a. Coega IDZ Initiative: Feasibility Study—Geotechnical Appendix Book 3, Report no. C195 24/3 DRAFT, 11 pp.

Gibb Africa, SRK Consulting Engineers and Scientists & Council for Geoscience, 1997b. Coega IDZ Initiative: Feasibility Study—Geotechnical Appendix Book 2, Report no. C195 24/3 DRAFT, 206 pp.

Gibb Africa, SRK Consulting Engineers and Scientists & Council for Geoscience, 1997c. Coega IDZ Initiative: Feasibility Study—Geotechnical Report, Report no. C195 24/3 FINAL DRAFT, 16 pp.

Gibb Africa, SRK Consulting Engineers and Scientists & Council for Geoscience, 1997d. Coega IDZ Initiative: Feasibility Study—Geotechnical Appendix 1, Report no. RTG FINAL, 29 pp.

Gibb Africa, n.d. Coega IDZ Initiative: Feasibility Study—Coega Industrial Development zone, Sewerage Report, Report no. CTSe Sewerage, 45 pp.

Gibb Africa, n.d. Coega Industrial Development zone: Transportation Report, Report no. CTRo/Ra FINAL, 45 pp.

Hill Kaplan Scott Inc. (HKS), 1973. Soils and Foundation Report—Roads Headquarters and Hospital Stores, Port Elizabeth, Report no. CTH212, 21 pp.

Hill Kaplan Scott Inc. (HKS), 1974a. Foundation Investigation—Muir College, Uitenhage, Report no. 3465, 20 pp.

Hill Kaplan Scott Inc. (HKS), 1974b. Soils Investigation—Muir College, Uitenhage, Provincial Administration of the Cape of Good Hope, Report no. CTH213, 25 pp.

Hill Kaplan Scott Inc. (HKS), 1978. Soils and Foundation Report—New Canteen for the Goodyear Tyre and Rubber Co. S.A. (Pty) Ltd., Uitenhage, Report no. 6739, 14 pp.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B3 - 3

Hill Kaplan Scott Inc. (HKS), 1981a. Foundation Investigation—Port Elizabeth Gas Works, Report no. 8468, 16 pp.

Hill Kaplan Scott Inc. (HKS), 1981b. Soils Investigation—BIFSA Training Centre, Port Elizabeth, Report no. 8503, 14 pp.

Hill Kaplan Scott Inc. (HKS), 1982. Foundation Investigation—Proposed Frozen Food Depot, Irvin & Johnson, Port Elizabeth, Report No. 8916, 15 pp.

Hill Kaplan Scott Inc. (HKS), 1988. Coega Urban Development Geology: Policy Plan for Urban Development, HKS Consulting Engineers, Report No. 131 36, 6 pp.

Hill Kaplan & Scott Inc. (HKS), 1989. Foundation Investigation—Erven 80–83—Markman Township, Port Elizabeth, Report no. 143 33, 9 pp.

Louw Strydom & Partners, 1994. Tyinira Street Motherwell: Ngonyama Street or Main Road 460 (3.7km), Port Elizabeth Transitional Local Council: Pemet Project H111, 22 pp.

MacFarlane, G., 2007. Port of Ngqura: Phase 2 Expansion Project, Geotechnical Report, Transnet, Report no. H500204-1-000-H-RPT-0001-JV, 312 pp.

Maclear, L.G.A., Libala, M. & Van der Merwe, O., 2003. Coega Water Quality Monitoring: Interim Report: 2002–2003 Period, SRK Consulting Engineers and Scientists, Report no. 258047/5, 24 pp.

McStay, J., 1994. Sydenham Locomotive Yard—Site Investigation Report, HKS Consulting Engineers, Report no. 1774-32, 31 pp.

McStay, J., 1998. Coega Industrial Harbour, Haul Road: Centreline Materials Investigation Report, Gibb Africa, Report no. J80 405G/100, 26 pp.

McStay, J. & Doel, S., 1998. Coega Kop Portnet Quarry: Geotechnical investigation, Gibb Africa, Report no. J200 00B, 144 pp.

Oates, R. & McStay, J., 1997.Coega IDZ Initiative: Proposed Harbour Development, Geotechnical Site Investigation Report, Gibb Africa, Report no. J19 524B, 113 pp.

Oates, R. & McStay, J., 1998. Coega Industrial Harbour: Geotechnical Site Investigation Report, Gibb Africa, Report no. J80 405G, 283 pp.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B3 - 4

Oates, R. & McStay, J., 1999a. Marine Geotechnical Investigation for the Proposed Coega Port, Algoa Bay—Geotechnical Report Appendix C and D, Gibb Africa and J Fairbrother Drill, Report no. J90 113A, 275 pp.

Oates, R. & McStay, J., 1999b. Marine Geotechnical Investigation for the Proposed Coega Port, Algoa Bay—Geotechnical Report, Gibb Africa and J Fairbrother Drill, Report no. J90 113A, 88 pp.

Oates, R. & McStay, J., 2001. Coega Industrial Harbour Saltworks and Container Berth: Geotechnical Report, Gibb Africa and TMF drilling, Report no. JA0 319A, 232 pp.

Pointer, C.M., Van Hooydonck, J., Kotze, J.C. & Rosewarne, P.N., 1998. Coega Industrial Harbour: Dewatering Investigation, SRK Consulting Engineers and Scientists, Report no. 242 978/1, 119 pp.

Rau, G. & De Decker, R.H., 1997. Industrial Harbour, Port Elizabeth: Pre-feasibility study: Marine surveys—Coega River and Existing Harbour Sites: Correlation of New Probe Holes with Existing Marine Geophysical and On-Land Borehole Data: A Follow-Up Study, Watermeyer Prestedge Retief Marine and Coastal Geo-Consultants, Report no. 256-64-009, 186 pp.

Simmons, J., Bodenham, R.K., Hunter, P., Alexander, R., Heydenrych, P., McStay, J., Oates, R., Retief, D., Dresner, J., Prestedge, G., Wijnberg, A., Woodborne, M., Rau, G., Moes, H., Lenhoff, L., Kapp, F., Kloos, M. & Fijen, T., 1997. Coega IDZ Initiative, Feasibility Study: Port Planning and Engineering Report: Feasibility Study, Gibb Africa, Watermeyer Prestedge Retief, CSIR (Environmentek) & Entech Consultants, Report no. J97 004A, RTP FINAL, 230 pp.

Steffen, Robertson and Kirsten Consulting Engineers (SRK), 1997a. Coega IDZ Initiative: Feasibility Study: Hydrogeology Report, Report no. CTHy FINAL, 19 pp.

Steffen, Robertson and Kirsten Consulting Engineers (SRK), 1997b. Coega IDZ Initiative: Waste Disposal Opportunities for the Coega IDZ, Report no. CEw 233 147, 2 pp.

Van Hooydonck, J.J., Libala, M. & Maclear, L.G.A., 2002a. Coega Water Quality Monitoring: Final Report: 2001–2002 Period, SRK Consulting Engineers and Scientists, Report no. 258047/4, 57 pp.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B3 - 5

Van Hooydonck, J.J., Libala, M. & Maclear, L.G.A., 2002b. Coega Water Quality Monitoring: Interim Report: 2001–2002 Period, SRK Consulting Engineers and Scientists, Report no. 258047/3, 60 pp.

Waggiet, G. & Waggiet, Y., 2003. CDC Electrical Substations, prepared for Goba Pty. Ltd., Indlela Lab Civil Engineering Laboratory, Report no. 108 4/01, 24 pp.

Witthuhn, R., 1984. Proposed New Motherwell Reservoir Port Elizabeth: Foundation Investigation Report,Hill Kaplan & Scott Inc. Consulting Engineers, Report no. 988 6, 15 pp.

Yates, J.R.C., 1996. Neave Collector Sewer: Geotechnical Investigation, Gibb Africa, Report no. 196 20, 33 pp.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version B3 - 6

APPENDIX C: BEDROCK UNCERTAINTY – BEDROCK UNCERTAINTY DESCRIPTIONS FOR PROFILES A TO AJ

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version Page 149

PROFILE A Level of uncertainty in Elevation of elevation and bedrock recognition of the BH surface (m) bedrock surface Bedrock Composition

Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Ks. Olive to olive grey weathered to slightly weathered and bedrock and overlying highly weathered. Mudstone siltstone and sandstone of the R13 2.4 BTL Sundays River Formation. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Ks. Grey and dark grey. Thinly banded and laminated. bedrock and overlying Mudstone and sandstone of the Sundays River Formation. R12 3.6 BTL Widely jointed at top. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Ks. Grey and dark grey. Thinly banded and laminated. bedrock and overlying Mudstone and sandstone of the Sundays River Formation. R11 3.4 BTL Widely jointed at top. Low uncertainty - clear Ks. yellowish grey streaked dark grey, banded grey and dark distinction between grey; and dark grey to black. Thinly bedded and banded. bedrock and overlying Unweathered to slightly weathered and highly weathered R10 2.0 BTL sandstone and mudstone of the Sundays River Formation. Moderate uncertainty between bedrock and overlying transported brownish grey clayey silt and silty fine sand in the upper 2.6m of the profile. The overlying sediments might be residual bedrock accumulation. Colour may be a distinction and is brown grey as opposed Ks. grey streaked orange, grey and yellowish grey. Highly to to red to green of the slightly weathered. Sandstone mudstone and siltstone of the Uitenhage Group Sundays River Formation. Overlain by residual sandstone and R9 6.1 bedrock. sandy mudstone (silty sand and sandy clay).

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 1

Ks. yellow orange and grey to grey brown and yellowish grey. Low uncertainty - clear Mottled and streaked, thinly banded, intensely laminated. distinction between Fissured and slickensided at top of bedrock. Mudstone, bedrock and overlying sandstone and interlaminated sandstone/ siltstone. Overlain by R8 7.8 BTL residual mudstone (silty clay) of the Sundays River Formation Low uncertainty - clear Ks. Dark grey olive and yellow brown highly weathered. Thinly distinction between banded to thinly bedded and laminated. Fine grained bedrock and overlying sandstone with siltstone and mudstone of the Sundays River R7 8.8 BTL Formation Low uncertainty - clear Ks. Dark grey, olive and yellow brown. Highly weathered. distinction between Intensely laminated and jointed. Mudstone and siltstone with bedrock and overlying subordinate sandstone of the Sundays River Formation. R6 8.3 BTL Circular floater structures and textures visible at top of bedrock Ks. Mottled grey and yellow brown; banded red brown and relatively clear distinction olive; to olive. Highly weathered to dense. Laminated mudstone between bedrock and and siltstone with pebbly siltstone overlain by residual R4 8.2 overlying BTL sandstone (silty sand) of the Sundays River Formation Ks. Olive mottled grey to red brown or banded. highly Low uncertainty - clear weathered to very dense. horizontally laminated to banded and distinction between jointed. Mudstone, siltstone and silty mudstone overlain by bedrock and overlying residual sandy siltstone (clayey fine sandy silt) of the Sundays R3 8.6 BTL River Formation Low uncertainty - clear Ks. Dark red brown highly weathered. Laminated to bedded. distinction between Very soft rock to soft rock. Mudstone sandstone and siltstone of bedrock and overlying the Sundays Rover Formation. 50mm diameter gravel horizon R2 8.3 BTL is described as "floating" in the siltstone at 1.6m Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Ks. Olive, highly weathered subhorizontally bedded (0- bedrock and overlying 5degrees) fine grained, very soft rock becoming soft rock below R1 4.8 BTL about 19.5m. Sandstone of the Sundays River Formation. Low uncertainty - clear Ks. Red brown, pale creamy green. Slightly to highly weathered distinction between and partially weathered. Residual weathered sandstone, sandy bedrock and overlying clay, clayey sand, sandstone, mudstone and weathered 2B 12.1 BTL residual mudstone of the Sundays River Formation

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 2

Low uncertainty - clear distinction between bedrock and overlying Ks. Greyish greenish brown, red brown, grey green streaked BTL. The BTL is overlain orange, black speckled pink, greenish dark grey. Slightly to by estuarine sediments moderately weathered. Jointed in places. Sandstone siltstone and is underlain by very and mudstone of the Sundays River Formation. Includes soft rock siltstone of the mudstone intraclasts, quartzite intraclasts, and zones of 1 -4.2 Uitenhage Group. microfracturing. Low uncertainty - Jkk. Light olive mottled light yellowish olive, light greenish olive. relatively clear distinction Highly weathered and residual at bedrock surface. Residual between bedrock and mudstone (sandy silty clay) and siltstone of the Kirkwood N4 -0.3 overlying sediment Formation. Includes a zone of intense fracturing. Jkk. Pale orange brown mottled light brown, dark yellowish brown speckled black, dark maroon brown mottled light Low uncertainty - greenish grey, light greenish grey mottled dark maroon, pale relatively clear distinction maroon brown mottled light greenish grey. Highly to moderately between bedrock and weathered. Siltstone, mudstone and sandstone of the Kirkwood N5 -4.7 overlying sediment Formation. zones of fracturing are present Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. mottled and streaked pale brown and light brown mottled bedrock and overlying grey. Sandy silty clay as a reworked residual mudstone of the N34 -6.8 sediment Kirkwood Formation

Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. Dark maroon brown occasionally light greenish grey. bedrock and overlying Highly to moderately weathered. Mudstone of the Kirkwood N36 -11.6 BTL Formation

Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. dark olive / greenish grey, dark grey becoming dark olive. bedrock and overlying Completely to highly weathered. Sandstone of the Kirkwood N6 1.2 BTL Formation

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 3

Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk underlain by residual fractured Jkk. olive and red brown bedrock and overlying very closely fractured silty clay residual mudstone Jkk overlying R14 2.9 BTL mudstone siltstone and sandstone Moderate uncertainty - 0.5m core loss directly above the bedrock surface. Core loss in the silty fine sand could be from the residual Jkk. Pale olive/ greenish grey, dark olive to yellowish brown sandstone or in the speckled dark yellowish orange. Residual sandstone (silty fine overlying estuarine sand) at bedrock surface and unweathered sandstone of the N37 -3.3 sediment. Kirkwood Formation. Jkk. Red brown to olive and pale olive with black, grey and yellowish grey. Highly weathered. Mudstone and sandstone of the Kirkwood Formation, including carbonaceous mudstone. Subhorizontally bedded towards the base. Note: there is a Low uncertainty - 40cm quartzite clast between -6.3m and -6.7m within the R15 2.8 exposed bedrock surface Kirkwood Formation Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. Reddish brown banded olive. Highly weathered. Mudstone bedrock and overlying and siltstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Includes residual R16 -8.9 BTL mudstone (clayey silt) at the top of bedrock.

Low uncertainty - clear distinction between bedrock and overlying sandy silt. The latter contains fine whole shells and fragments and grey Jkk. Olive and red brown. Highly weathered. Widely to vertically colour is indicative of jointed and very closely fractured. Mudstone siltstone and estuarine to marine sandstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Contains a horizon of R17 -11 environment very closely fractured residual mudstone (silty clay). Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Dark olive grey speckled and streaked dark yellowish distinction between orange, dark olive mottled dark yellowish orange and dark bedrock and overlying orange brown, dark olive brown. Moderately to slightly N38 -11.1 BTL weathered. Sandstone and siltstone of the Kirkwood Formation.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 4

Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. Yellowish olive to olive and red brown. Highly weathered. bedrock and overlying Horizontally bedded. Mudstone and sandstone of the Kirkwood R18 -8.8 BTL Formation. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between bedrock and overlying Ks. Olive green to grey, moderately to highly weathered soft 154 -10.9 BTL rock mudstone and sandstone of the Sundays River Formation Jkk. red brown, greyish brown streaked brown, reddish brown Low uncertainty - clear spotted grey/green. Slightly to highly weathered siltstone and distinction between mudstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Includes siltstone bedrock and overlying intraclasts, hairline fractures, chert intraclasts, and zones of 3 -14.8 BTL microfractures P2 below 4.3m borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Red brown to grey green and grey brown moderately to distinction between slightly weathered or fresh to decomposed soft to very soft rock bedrock and overlying mudstone, silty mudstone and muddy siltstone of the Kirkwood 104 -16.1 BTL Formation Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Grey green, red brown, green brown to purple. Highly to distinction between slightly weathered sandstone and mudstone of the Kirkwood bedrock and overlying Formation. Includes quartzite pebbles, mudstone intraclasts 110 -16.7 BTL and siltstone intraclasts. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. red brown mottle green grey and maroon. Moderately to bedrock and overlying highly weathered. Mudstone and siltstone of the Kirkwood 117 -17.9 BTL Formation. Includes mudstone and siltstone intraclasts. Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. red brown spotted/ streaked green, grey green spotted distinction between orange, brown dark grey striped brown. Moderately to highly bedrock and overlying weathered. Friable and microfractured to unjointed. Sandstone, 7 sediment siltstone and mudstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between bedrock and overlying Jkk. Red brown spotted green to grey green. Varieties of 121 -16.5 BTL siltstone and mudstone of the Kirkwood Formation.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 5

Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. red brown to maroon; green grey to green. Moderately to bedrock and overlying highly weathered. Microfractured towards the top of bedrock. 122 -15.7 BTL Mudstone siltstone and sandstone of the Kirkwood Formation Jkk. pale yellow green with light brown blotches, pale green with red blotches, purple red with green blotches, red brown Low uncertainty - clear with green blotches, pale olive green with red brown bands; distinction between and olive blotched red. Moderately to highly weathered. bedrock and overlying Fractured and highly fractured. sandstone, mudstone and 209 -18.2 BTL siltstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between bedrock and overlying Jkk. Green mottled purple silty sandstone of the Kirkwood 212 -20.9 BTL Formation 215 below -21m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock below - 216 26.1m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock PROFILE B Level of uncertainty in Elevation of elevation and bedrock recognition of the BH surface (m) bedrock surface Bedrock Composition Low uncertainty - clear distinction between BTL and bedrock. The BTL is Ks. Greyish greenish brown, red brown, grey green streaked overlain by estuarine orange, black speckled pink, greenish dark grey. Slightly to sediments and is moderately weathered. Jointed in places. Sandstone siltstone underlain by very soft and mudstone of the Sundays River Formation. Includes rock siltstone of the mudstone intraclasts, quartzite intraclasts, and zones of 1 -4.2 Uitenhage Group. microfracturing. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. dark red brown to light greenish grey and mottled light and bedrock and overlying dark greenish grey. Fresh to slightly weathered. Mudstone, 310 -5.6 BTL siltstone and sandstone of the Kirkwood Formation.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 6

Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Ks. greenish yellow, grey to grey brown and kaki, red brown. bedrock and overlying Fresh to slightly weathered sandstone mudstone and siltstone 306 -6.6 sediment of the Sundays River Formation Low uncertainty - clear Jkk and Ks. red brown to dark red brown and light grey to light distinction between grey brown with or without mottles. Siltstone and mudstone of bedrock and overlying the Sundays River and Kirkwood Formations. Included is a 303 -9.1 BTL residual fine sandy clay towards the base of the borehole. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk and Ks. red brown to grey and kaki green. Moderately bedrock and overlying weathered to highly weathered. Siltstone sandstone and 153 -8.4 BTL mudstone of the Kirkwood and Sundays River Formations. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. light to dark grey and brown. Slightly weathered to fresh. bedrock and overlying Siltstone and sandstone of the Kirkwood Formation. The top of 301 -14.9 BTL bedrock is comprised of a shattered clayey siltstone horizon. Jkk. Dark grey to grey streaked orange / yellow to dark brown Low uncertainty - clear and red brown spotted grey green. Moderately to slightly distinction between weathered. Sandstone, mudstone and siltstone of the Kirkwood bedrock and overlying Formation. A sandy clay is included at the top of bedrock. A 5 -17.5 BTL microfractured zone was intersected at this location. Jkk. Red brown mottled and blotched pale green, red brown, Low uncertainty - clear white mottled purple. Siltstone and mudstone of the Kirkwood distinction between Formation. Top of bedrock is taken as a 6m thick horizon of bedrock and overlying residual clay. Includes mudstone intercalations and zones of 138 -19.1 BTL microfracturing. below - 9 21.0m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock

Jkk and Op. Jkk: green with red blotches, highly weathered soft rock intermixed siltstone and mudstone with quartzite gravel from overlying layer. Op: greyish white highly fractured and Low uncertainty - clear shattered quartzite, hard rock. Fault breccia. And light olive distinction between green highly fractured, hard to very hard rock quartzite with bedrock and overlying lenses of shattered quartzite. fault Breccia lying at 45 degrees. 115 -19.7 BTL Fracture angle 45 and 60 degrees to the vertical)

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 7

Jkk. Red brown, Red brown mottled pale green, greenish grey spotted red brown, black, pale to dark grey and dark purplish Low uncertainty - clear grey. Sandstone, coal, mudstone and siltstone of the Kirkwood distinction between Formation. Includes residual mudstone (silty clay, clayey silt, bedrock and overlying clay) at the top of bedrock and soft plastic clay towards the 149 -21.4 BTL base of the borehole. zones of micro shattered clay are present Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Pinkish red, red brown, pale grey and pale pinkish brown distinction between mottled pale green. Mudstone, siltstone and mudstone bedrock and overlying intraclasts of the Kirkwood Formation. Slightly to highly 129 -20.4 BTL weathered. Includes a pale grey soft clay horizon. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. Mottled red brown and green grey to red brown. bedrock and overlying Moderately weathered. Mudstone, siltstone and mudstone with 160 -18.8 BTL siltstone intraclasts of the Kirkwood Formation. BKS2 below -23m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock below - 204 21.3m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock below - 208 21.0m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock PROFILE C Level of uncertainty in Elevation of elevation and bedrock recognition of the BH surface (m) bedrock surface Bedrock Composition Low uncertainty - clear distinction between BTL and bedrock. The BTL is Ks. Greyish greenish brown, red brown, grey green streaked overlain by estuarine orange, black speckled pink, greenish dark grey. Slightly to sediments and is moderately weathered. Jointed in places. Sandstone siltstone underlain by very soft and mudstone of the Sundays River Formation. Includes rock siltstone of the mudstone intraclasts, quartzite intraclasts, and zones of 1 -4.2 Uitenhage Group. microfracturing. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. Red brown, grey, grey and brown, greenish yellow, bedrock and overlying greenish grey. Weathered to slightly weathered and fresh. 311 -7.6 BTL Mudstone, siltstone and sandstone of the Kirkwood Formation.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 8

Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. Red brown, grey, dark grey. Fresh becoming residual at bedrock and overlying bedrock surface. Siltstone and sandstone of the Kirkwood 308 -14.2 BTL Formation. Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Light green grey, red brown, red brown spotted green, red distinction between brown to green grey, light greenish grey. Weathered at bedrock bedrock and overlying surface becoming fresh with depth. Siltstone, mudstone and 305 -14 BTL sandstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Jkk. Red brown to light green grey, light grey, dark red brown, Low uncertainty - clear mottled red brown and grey. Fresh towards base whereas distinction between residual to weathered at bedrock surface. Siltstone, mudstone bedrock and overlying of the Kirkwood Formation. Includes a residual horizon of clay 304 -15.3 BTL at bedrock surface Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Dark red brown, red brown, red brown mottled green grey. distinction between Mudstone intercalated with mudstone and siltstone of the bedrock and overlying Kirkwood Formation. A zone of microfracturing is preset at the 137 -17.4 BTL top of bedrock Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Pale grey green, red brown, brick red mudstone, siltstone distinction between and mudstone with siltstone intraclasts of the Kirkwood bedrock and overlying Formation. Zones of microfracturing. Highly weathered to 141 -19.5 BTL moderately weathered. Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Green grey, red brown mottled green grey, brown red. distinction between Moderately to highly weathered. Siltstone mudstone and bedrock and overlying sandstone of the Kirkwood Formation. A zone of 145 -20.8 BTL microfracturing is present Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. Red brown to red brown with green grey intraclasts. bedrock and overlying Siltstone and mudstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Moderately 148 -20.2 BTL to highly weathered. Low uncertainty - clear Jkk and Op. Jkk - Red brown. Moderately to highly weathered. distinction between Mudstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Microfractured in places, bedrock and overlying especially at the top of bedrock. Op - Fractured, hard, slightly 158 -21.5 BTL weathered quartzite. Peninsula Formation - Fault Breccia?

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 9

Jkk. Green with red blotches, red brown with green blotches, Low uncertainty - clear red brown, pale green with red blotches, olive green, green distinction between grey, blue grey. Residual mudstone (sandy clay, clay, silty bedrock and overlying clay), mudstone and siltstone of the Kirkwood Formation. 128 -22.2 BTL Moderately to highly weathered and residual. 205 below -21.8 High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock 207 below -21.2 High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock 210 below -21.3 High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock Low uncertainty - clear distinction between bedrock and overlying Jkk. Greenish grey stained red brown. Highly weathered 211 -20.8 BTL siltstone of the Kirkwood Formation. PROFILE D Level of uncertainty in Elevation of elevation and bedrock recognition of the BH surface (m) bedrock surface Bedrock Composition

Jkk. Greyish dark green banded yellow-green, red brown, greenish grey and brown, green, grey brown, green and brown, red to dark brown, red spotted green, brown, greenish grey, brown greyish green. Sandstone, siltstone and mudstone of the Low uncertainty - clear Kirkwood Formation. Cleaved silty clay and microfractured silty distinction between mudstone is included in bedrock at the top of the borehole. bedrock and overlying Includes residual siltstone. microfracturing and zones of jointing 2 -4.2 sediment are also present in places. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. Red brown, green grey, grey green. Predominantly slightly bedrock and overlying weathered to fresh, with a weathered horizon at bedrock 307 -14.3 BTL surface. Mudstone, siltstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. Red brown, grey, dark grey. Fresh becoming residual at bedrock and overlying bedrock surface. Siltstone and sandstone of the Kirkwood 308 -14.2 BTL Formation.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 10

Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Ks. greenish yellow, grey to grey brown and kaki, red brown. bedrock and overlying Fresh to slightly weathered sandstone mudstone and siltstone 306 -6.6 sediment of the Sundays River Formation PROFILE E Level of uncertainty in Elevation of elevation and bedrock recognition of the BH surface (m) bedrock surface Bedrock Composition Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. Yellowish olive to olive and red brown. Highly weathered. bedrock and overlying Horizontally bedded. Mudstone and sandstone of the Kirkwood R18 -8.8 BTL Formation. Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Red brown, red brown mottled grey, dark red brown, grey distinction between mottled red brown, light grey, dark grey. Slightly weathered to bedrock and overlying fresh with a residual horizon at bedrock surface. Siltstone, 302 -15.3 BTL mudstone and sandstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Light green grey, red brown, red brown spotted green, red distinction between brown to green grey, light greenish grey. Weathered at bedrock bedrock and overlying surface becoming fresh with depth. Siltstone, mudstone and 305 -14 BTL sandstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Low uncertainty - clear Jkk and Ks. red brown to dark red brown and light grey to light distinction between grey brown with or without mottles. Siltstone and mudstone of bedrock and overlying the Sundays River and Kirkwood Formations. Included is a 303 -9.1 BTL residual fine sandy clay towards the base of the borehole. PROFILE F Level of uncertainty in Elevation of elevation and bedrock recognition of the BH surface (m) bedrock surface Bedrock Composition N18 below 7.3m borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock Low uncertainty - clear distinction between bedrock and overlying Ks. Olive green to grey, moderately to highly weathered soft 154 -10.9 BTL rock mudstone and sandstone of the Sundays River Formation

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 11

Jkk. Red brown to light green grey, light grey, dark red brown, Low uncertainty - clear mottled red brown and grey. Fresh towards base whereas distinction between residual to weathered at bedrock surface. Siltstone, mudstone bedrock and overlying of the Kirkwood Formation. Includes a residual horizon of clay 304 -15.3 BTL at bedrock surface Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk and Ks. red brown to grey and kaki green. Moderately bedrock and overlying weathered to highly weathered. Siltstone sandstone and 153 -8.4 BTL mudstone of the Kirkwood and Sundays River Formations. PROFILE G Level of uncertainty in Elevation of elevation and bedrock recognition of the BH surface (m) bedrock surface Bedrock Composition Low uncertainty - clear Ks. Red brown, pale creamy green. Slightly to highly weathered distinction between and partially weathered. Residual weathered sandstone, sandy bedrock and overlying clay, clayey sand, sandstone, mudstone and weathered 2B 12.1 BTL residual mudstone of the Sundays River Formation Low uncertainty - clear distinction between BTL and bedrock. The BTL is Ks. Greyish greenish brown, red brown, grey green streaked overlain by estuarine orange, black speckled pink, greenish dark grey. Slightly to sediments and is moderately weathered. Jointed in places. Sandstone siltstone underlain by very soft and mudstone of the Sundays River Formation. Includes rock siltstone of the mudstone intraclasts, quartzite intraclasts, and zones of 1 -4.2 Uitenhage Group. microfracturing. Low uncertainty - clear Ks. Orange brown, brown and green, yellow brown, greenish distinction between yellow, grey, red brown, grey and brown. Weathered at bedrock bedrock and overlying surface becoming fresh with depth. Siltstone sandstone and 309 -6.5 sediment mudstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. Red brown, green grey, grey green. Predominantly slightly bedrock and overlying weathered to fresh, with a weathered horizon at bedrock 307 -14.3 BTL surface. Mudstone, siltstone of the Kirkwood Formation.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 12

Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Red brown, red brown mottled grey, dark red brown, grey distinction between mottled red brown, light grey, dark grey. Slightly weathered to bedrock and overlying fresh with a residual horizon at bedrock surface. Siltstone, 302 -15.3 BTL mudstone and sandstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Light green with red brown patches, green with isolated distinction between red-brown patches. Moderately to highly weathered. Siltstone bedrock and overlying and mudstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Partly friable and 101 -16.3 BTL zones of partial fracturing. Jkk. Red brown, red brown mottled green, red brown to green Low uncertainty - clear grey. Siltstone with siltstone intraclasts, mudstone with siltstone distinction between intraclasts and layers, mudstone with siltstone intraclasts of the bedrock and overlying Kirkwood Formation. Highly weathered to moderately 102 -17.3 sediment weathered. predominantly microfractured. Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Red brown, green grey, green grading into red brown. distinction between Moderately to highly weathered. Mudstone and siltstone and bedrock and overlying mudstone with siltstone intraclasts of the Kirkwood Formation. 105 -14.2 sediment Friable and microfractured in places Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Red brown spotted green, grey and red brown spotted distinction between green, grey green, pale brown grey. Moderately highly and bedrock and overlying slightly weathered. Sandstone, siltstone and mudstone (with or 106 -16.6 BTL without intraclasts) of the Kirkwood Formation. Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Light grey green to green, red brown with green bands and distinction between blotches. Highly to slightly weathered with depth. Partially bedrock and overlying fractured and fractured at top of bedrock. Mudstone and 108 -15.8 BTL siltstone of the Kirkwood Formation Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. Purple brown/ highly weathered and friable. mudstone and bedrock and overlying siltstone with mudstone intraclasts of the Kirkwood Formation. 113 -16.7 BTL Microfractured at base of borehole Jkk. Yellow green, purple spotted orange red, red brown spotted green, greenish grey. Slightly to moderately weathered Low uncertainty - clear and highly weathered and decomposed at top of bedrock. distinction between Siltstone sandstone and mudstone (with and without mudstone bedrock and overlying intraclasts) of the Kirkwood Formation. decomposed siltstone 116 -16.8 BTL has green mudstone intraclasts and quartzite pebbles

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 13

Jkk. Red brown, red brown and green, dark green mottled red Low uncertainty - clear brown, green intraclasts, green grey. Moderately to highly distinction between weathered. Siltstone and mudstone of the Kirkwood Formation. bedrock and overlying Includes microfractured zones, unjointed zones and a high 119 -16.7 BTL angle joint Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Green brown speckled red brown, green. Highly distinction between weathered and friable. Siltstone with intraclasts of mudstone, bedrock and overlying mudstone, siltstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Includes zones 120 -17.9 BTL of micro jointing near top of bedrock. Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Red brown, red brown with green intercalations. Highly distinction between weathered at top of bedrock, slightly weathered towards the bedrock and overlying base. Microfractured at top of bedrock. Mudstone and siltstone 123 -17.6 BTL of the Kirkwood Formation Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Red brown, light green. Highly weathered at bedrock distinction between surface. Mudstone and siltstone of the Kirkwood Formation. bedrock and overlying Includes near vertical fractures, and zones of fracturing and 124 -17.7 BTL microfracturing at bedrock surface Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Red brown and green. Highly weathered to slightly distinction between weathered with depth. Mudstone with and without sandstone bedrock and overlying siltstone intraclasts. Includes highly microfractured zones at 126 -17.6 BTL bedrock surface.

Jkk. Pale green and yellow, green streaked purple, purple patched green, red brown and grey green, red brown, green brownish grey, greenish grey. Fresh to slightly weathered or Low uncertainty - clear moderately weathered. Siltstone and mudstone (with or without distinction between intercalations) of the Kirkwood Formation. includes fissured bedrock and overlying sandy clay with silty mudstone at bedrock surface. micro 131 -17.7 sediment jointing in places. below - 206 21.3m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 14

PROFILE H Level of uncertainty in Elevation of elevation and bedrock recognition of the BH surface (m) bedrock surface Bedrock Composition P6 below 8.3m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock P2 below 4.3m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock Low uncertainty - clear distinction between bedrock and overlying Jkk. Olive. Highly weathered. Sandstone and siltstone of the T7 0.5 BTL Kirkwood Formation. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. Brown, olive, olive grey. Highly weathered to residual at bedrock and overlying bedrock surface. Residual mudstone (sandy clay), sandstone, T2 -7.8 BTL siltstone and mudstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Jkk. Green grey, purple brown, purple mottles, red brown Low uncertainty - clear mottled green grey, red brown spotted green. Highly weathered distinction between at bedrock surface becoming slightly to moderately weathered bedrock and overlying at base. Siltstone and mudstone (with or without intercalations) 151 -15.4 sediment of the Kirkwood Formation. below - 206 21.3m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock below - 205 21.8m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Red brown, dark olive mottled brown, olive. Highly distinction between weathered at bedrock surface grading into slightly weathered bedrock and overlying with depth. Mudstone and siltstone and sandstone of the 202 -18.5 BTL Kirkwood Formation. Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Red brown, brown, grey, red brown mottled grey, reddish distinction between brown mottled olive green, dark olive green. Slightly weathered bedrock and overlying to fresh. Mudstone siltstone and sandstone of the Kirkwood 201 -7.9 BTL Formation. Some zones of fracturing

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 15

PROFILE I Level of uncertainty in Elevation of elevation and bedrock recognition of the BH surface (m) bedrock surface Bedrock Composition N25 below 15.9m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock P7 below 9.1m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock Low uncertainty - clear Jkk or Ks. Pale greyish olive to pale olive becoming red brown distinction between and reddish grey. Highly weathered and subhorizontally jointed bedrock and overlying at bedrock surface. Mudstone and sandstone of the Kirkwood P1 7 sediment Formation. Low uncertainty - clear Ks. Red brown and grey green grey, grey. Weathered at distinction between bedrock surface becoming fresh with depth. Sandstone bedrock and overlying mudstone and siltstone of the Sundays River. Microfractured at 317 -10.7 BTL bedrock surface. Jkk. Grey, grey brown, red brown and grey, green grey, red Low uncertainty - clear brown becoming grey. Predominantly slightly weathered with distinction between residual horizon at bedrock surface. Siltstone mudstone and bedrock and overlying sandstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Fissuring within the 321 -16 sediment residual silty clay at bedrock surface. Jkk. Grey brown, red brown spotted / layered green, brown Low uncertainty - clear patched green/grey and green grey. Moderately to highly distinction between weathered and slightly weathered. Siltstone of the Kirkwood bedrock and overlying Formation. Zones of micro jointing, jointing and microfracturing 8 -15.7 BTL are present. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between bedrock and overlying Jkk or Ks. Alternating red mudstone and soft rock, closely BKS6 -13.6 BTL fractured siltstone. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between bedrock and overlying Jkk. Red brown spotted green to grey green. Varieties of 121 -16.5 BTL siltstone and mudstone of the Kirkwood Formation.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 16

Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Red brown, red brown with green intercalations. Highly distinction between weathered at top of bedrock, slightly weathered towards the bedrock and overlying base. Microfractured at top of bedrock. Mudstone and siltstone 123 -17.6 BTL of the Kirkwood Formation Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Red brown to green grey, red brown mottled grey. Highly distinction between weathered at bedrock surface becoming moderately weathered bedrock and overlying with depth. Mudstone and siltstone of the Kirkwood Formation. 157 -16.4 BTL Microfractured at bedrock surface. Low uncertainty - clear Jkk and Op. Jkk - Red brown. Moderately to highly weathered. distinction between Mudstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Microfractured in places, bedrock and overlying especially at the top of bedrock. Op - Fractured, hard, slightly 158 -21.5 BTL weathered quartzite. Peninsula Formation - Fault Breccia? Jkk. Green brown, red brown, red brown with brown blotches, Low uncertainty - clear red brown with green siltstone intraclasts and bands. distinction between Weathered becoming slightly weathered with depth. Mudstone bedrock and overlying and siltstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Partially fractured with 130 -16.5 sediment depth Low uncertainty - clear distinction between bedrock and overlying Jkk. red brown, red brown mottled olive. Highly weathered. B3 -8.5 BTL Sandstone and mudstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Jkk. Reddish brown mottled olive, olive, red brown. Highly weathered and residual sediment at bedrock surface. Residual mudstone (silty clay), sandstone and mudstone of the Kirkwood Low uncertainty - clear Formation. distinction between bedrock and overlying B2 -7.1 BTL PROFILE J Level of uncertainty in Elevation of elevation and bedrock recognition of the BH surface (m) bedrock surface Bedrock Composition P7 below 9.1m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock P6 below 8.3m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 17

Low uncertainty - clear distinction between bedrock and overlying Jkk or Ks. Yellow brown, olive and green. Highly weathered. P8 3.4 sediment Sandstone of the Kirkwood or Sundays River Formations. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. Grey speckled dark grey to black, olive and yellowish bedrock and overlying brown. Slightly weathered to highly weathered. Sandstone of P9 1.5 BTL the Kirkwood Formation. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. Pale green grey, pale olive brown, grey. Friable, bedrock and overlying moderately weathered. Siltstone, sandstone and mudstone. 220 -3.4 sediment Includes zones of fracturing, including highly fractured zones. Low uncertainty - clear Ks. Pale khaki green, pale grey, green, dark olive, grey. Partly distinction between friable to fresh. Siltstone, sandstone and limestone of the bedrock and overlying Sundays River Formation. Includes a fracture plane at 60 221 -9.1 sediment degrees orientation towards the base PROFILE K Level of uncertainty in Elevation of elevation and bedrock recognition of the BH surface (m) bedrock surface Bedrock Composition Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. Pale green grey, pale olive brown, grey. Friable, bedrock and overlying moderately weathered. Siltstone, sandstone and mudstone. 220 -3.4 sediment Includes zones of fracturing, including highly fractured zones. P5 below -6.3m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock Moderate uncertainty - basal depth of the overlying gravel is recorded as being approximate. Uncertainty cannot be better quantified and extends through a 1.7m zone, within the BTL and Jkk. Yellowish brown and grey / olive. Highly weathered. T9 -8.6 above the bedrock Mudstone of the Kirkwood Formation

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 18

surface.

Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. Grey, olive, red brown, pale grey and olive, pale greyish bedrock and overlying brown. Highly weathered. Siltstone mudstone and sandstone of T4 -9.2 sediment the Kirkwood Formation. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. thickly banded olive dark red brown purple and grey to bedrock and overlying dark grey. Highly weathered. Mudstone of the Kirkwood CD09 -10.5 sediment Formation Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Olive green, olive brown, dark red brown mottled olive, distinction between olive grey, dark olive grey, dark red brown, dark olive. Highly bedrock and overlying weathered. Sandstone siltstone and mudstone of the Kirkwood C3 -11.2 sediment Formation. Jkk. Olive greenish brown, dark grey, dark brown, dark brown banded dark olive grey, dark red brown / dark maroon, olive Low uncertainty - clear greenish grey, banded dark olive grey and dark red brown. distinction between Highly weathered, in places to residual sediment. Mudstone, bedrock and overlying sandstone and siltstone of the Kirkwood Formation. zones of Q9 -13.9 BTL fracturing are present Jkk. Brown, red brown mottled green, dark grey olive, dark Low uncertainty - clear olive, dark grey. Fresh to slightly weathered with highly distinction between weathered horizons. Siltstone, mudstone and sandstone of the bedrock and overlying Kirkwood Formation. Includes slickensiding along a fracture 214 -17 BTL plane Jkk. pale yellow green with light brown blotches, pale green with red blotches, purple red with green blotches, red brown Low uncertainty - clear with green blotches, pale olive green with red brown bands; distinction between and olive blotched red. Moderately to highly weathered. bedrock and overlying Fractured and highly fractured. sandstone, mudstone and 209 -18.2 BTL siltstone of the Kirkwood Formation. below - 207 21.2m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock below - 204 21.3m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 19

Moderate Uncertainty - bedrock surface might extend to -16.7m. The material between that and -19.3m consists of olive green brown cemented to partially cemented fine sand and is interpreted to be the Salnova Formation. However, the colour and Ks. Olive green brown olive green to blue grey brown, cream composition could also green with brown and orange specs and blotches, blue grey, be the same as that of pale green with red blotches, red brown. Weathered to highly the Sundays River weathered. Sandstone siltstone and mudstone of the Sundays 203 -19.3 Formation. River Formation. PROFILE L Level of uncertainty in Elevation of elevation and bedrock recognition of the BH surface (m) bedrock surface Bedrock Composition Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. yellow brown thinly banded olive grey, grey speckled bedrock and overlying black. Highly weathered to slightly weathered with depth. P11 4.3 BTL Siltstone and sandstone of the Kirkwood Formation. P10 below 6.6m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Olive, dark purplish grey. Residual at bedrock surface to distinction between slightly weathered with depth. Clay, clayey silt, with calcareous bedrock and overlying concretions at bedrock surface. Mudstone and siltstone of the 134 1.2 sediment Kirkwood Formation Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. Pale green grey, pale olive brown, grey. Friable, bedrock and overlying moderately weathered. Siltstone, sandstone and mudstone. 220 -3.4 sediment Includes zones of fracturing, including highly fractured zones.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 20

Low uncertainty - clear Ks. Pale khaki green, pale grey, green, dark olive, grey. Partly distinction between friable to fresh. Siltstone, sandstone and limestone of the bedrock and overlying Sundays River Formation. Includes a fracture plane at 60 221 -9.1 sediment degrees orientation towards the base Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. olive green brown, grey with olive green blotches, light distinction between grey. Weathered to highly weathered at bedrock surface. bedrock and overlying Mudstone, siltstone and sandstone of the Kirkwood Formation. 222 -13.5 BTL Fractured at base Moderate uncertainty - uncertainty stems from the sandy clay with nodules. It is uncertain whether this 0.5m section between a transgressive lag and the bedrock is a residual part of the Ks. pale green brown, pale olive green, pale grey. Highly bedrock or whether it is weathered to moderately weathered with depth. Predominantly representative of younger highly fractured. Residual Sundays River Formation sandstone 225 -21.8 sediment. (sandy clay) and mudstone and siltstone. Low uncertainty - clear Ks. Light brown, pale grey. Highly weathered becoming distinction between weathered towards base. Siltstone of the Sundays River bedrock and overlying Formation. Highly fractured at bedrock surface, becoming 227 -22.2 BTL fractured towards base of borehole. PROFILE M Level of uncertainty in Elevation of elevation and bedrock recognition of the BH surface (m) bedrock surface Bedrock Composition N11 below 6.2m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock N27 below -0.5m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock N20 below 0.3m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Red brown, green grey mottled red brown, green grey distinction between mottled purple grey, grey mottled brown. Mudstone sandstone bedrock and overlying and siltstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Includes a highly 318 -7.9 BTL fractured zone.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 21

Low uncertainty - clear Ks. Red brown and grey green grey, grey. Weathered at distinction between bedrock surface becoming fresh with depth. Sandstone bedrock and overlying mudstone and siltstone of the Sundays River. Microfractured at 317 -10.7 BTL bedrock surface. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. Brown, olive, olive grey. Highly weathered to residual at bedrock and overlying bedrock surface. Residual mudstone (sandy clay), sandstone, T2 -7.8 BTL siltstone and mudstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Jkk. Dark grey streaked orange, yellow brown, grey streaked orange green, grey brown, dark grey/red brown, dark grey to Low uncertainty - clear purple. Highly weathered at bedrock surface becoming fresh to distinction between slightly weathered with depth, and a zone of moderate bedrock and overlying weathering. mudstone, siltstone of the Kirkwood Formation. 152 -12.3 BTL includes decomposed mudstone at bedrock surface. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. Olive, grey, olive grey blotched brown, yellowish olive. bedrock and overlying Highly weathered. Sandstone, mudstone and siltstone of the T3 -13.2 BTL Kirkwood Formation Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. Grey, olive, red brown, pale grey and olive, pale greyish bedrock and overlying brown. Highly weathered. Siltstone mudstone and sandstone of T4 -9.2 sediment the Kirkwood Formation. Jkk. Pale red brown, red brown, grey, pale green grey, pale Low uncertainty - clear grey, pale greenish grey. Highly weathered at bedrock surface distinction between becoming slightly weathered to fresh with depth. Siltstone bedrock and overlying mudstone and sandstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Includes 218 -13.8 BTL a fracture at base of borehole Low uncertainty - clear distinction between bedrock and overlying Jkk. Olive grey, greyish olive, olive becoming grey. Highly T5 -14.2 sediment weathered. Siltstone and sandstone of the Kirkwood Formation

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 22

PROFILE N Level of uncertainty in Elevation of elevation and bedrock recognition of the BH surface (m) bedrock surface Bedrock Composition N23 below 13.1 High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock Jkk. Olive greenish grey, dark reddish brown, olive green. bedrock exposure at Highly weathered. Siltstone, mudstone and sandstone of the T6 6.7 surface Kirkwood Formation Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Reddish brown / maroon, pale olive green, greenish grey distinction between and purple, dark purple. Highly weathered, closely fissured at bedrock and overlying bedrock surface. Residual mudstone (silt), mudstone and T1 -9.1 BTL sandstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Green grey mottled grey brown, red brown, grey, light distinction between grey. Highly weathered at bedrock surface. Siltstone mudstone bedrock and overlying and sandstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Fractured to highly 313 -9.6 sediment fractured. Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Red brown mottled green grey, red brown, grey brown. distinction between Highly weathered at bedrock surface. Residual horizons. bedrock and overlying Mudstone sandstone and siltstone of the Kirkwood Formation. 315 -14.5 sediment Highly fractured towards base of hole. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. red brown mottle green grey and maroon. Moderately to bedrock and overlying highly weathered. Mustone and siltstone of the Kirkwood 117 -17.9 BTL Formation. Includes mudstone and siltstone intraclasts.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 23

Moderate uncertainty - the top horizon of the bedrock surface is described as being highly disturbed mudstone with pebbles from the overlying gravel, but it is not clear to what depth the pebbles extend. The top of bedrock is therefore marked at - 17.3m, though Jkk. Red brown, red brown with green blotches and bands. uncertainty can extend Highly weathered to weathered. Siltstone and mudstone of the 118 -17.3 down to -19.3m Kirkwood Formation. Jkk. Yellow green, purple spotted orange red, red brown spotted green, greenish grey. Slightly to moderately weathered Low uncertainty - clear and highly weathered and decomposed at top of bedrock. distinction between Siltstone sandstone and mudstone (with and without mudstone bedrock and overlying intraclasts) of the Kirkwood Formation. decomposed siltstone 116 -16.8 BTL has green mudstone intraclasts and quartzite pebbles Jkk. red brown spotted/ streaked green, red brown becoming Low uncertainty - clear brown. Highly weathered at bedrock surface becoming slightly distinction between weathered with depth. Siltstone, sandstone and mudstone of bedrock and overlying the Kirkwood Formation. Zones of microfracturing and jointing 6 -16.8 BTL especially at bedrock surface. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. Red brown to red brown with green grey intraclasts. bedrock and overlying Siltstone and mudstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Moderately 148 -20.2 BTL to highly weathered. Jkk. Red brown, pale reddish brown. Residual at bedrock Low uncertainty - clear surface becoming slightly weathered with depth. Residual distinction between mudstone comprised of silty clay, clayey silt and clay. bedrock and overlying Thereafter, siltstone with intercalated layers of soft red brown 147 -21.8 BTL mudstone, mudstone, sandstone of the Kirkwood Formation.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 24

Jkk. Red brown, Red brown mottled pale green, greenish grey spotted red brown, black, pale to dark grey and dark purplish Low uncertainty - clear grey. Sandstone, coal, mudstone and siltstone of the Kirkwood distinction between Formation. Includes residual mudstone (silty clay, clayey silt, bedrock and overlying clay) at the top of bedrock and soft plastic clay towards the 149 -21.4 BTL base of the borehole. zones of micro shattered clay are present PC4 below 6.6m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock PROFILE O Level of uncertainty in Elevation of elevation and bedrock recognition of the BH surface (m) bedrock surface Bedrock Composition N9 below 6.3m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock N10 below 6.0m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock N26 below -1.6m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock N28 below 2.1m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. Light greenish grey mottled dark maroon, dark maroon bedrock and overlying mottled light greenish grey. Moderately weathered. Sandstone N40 -6.6 BTL and mudstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Jkk. Red brown, grey green, grey, red brown spotted green, Low uncertainty - clear grey spotted red brown, green spotted red brown, grey and distinction between brown. Slightly weathered at bedrock surface becoming fresh bedrock and overlying with depth. Mudstone, sandstone and siltstone of the Kirkwood 319 -9.9 BTL Formation. Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Green grey, red brown and green, red brown, red brown distinction between and grey, grey streaked red brown, maroon, red brown and bedrock and overlying grey. Fresh to moderately weathered. Sandstone, mudstone 320 -9.3 BTL and siltstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Low uncertainty - clear Jkk. Green grey mottled grey brown, red brown, grey, light distinction between grey. Highly weathered at bedrock surface. Siltstone mudstone bedrock and overlying and sandstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Fractured to highly 313 -9.6 sediment fractured.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 25

Jkk. Grey, grey brown, red brown and grey, green grey, red Low uncertainty - clear brown becoming grey. Predominantly slightly weathered with distinction between residual horizon at bedrock surface. Siltstone mudstone and bedrock and overlying sandstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Fissuring within the 321 -16 sediment residual silty clay at bedrock surface. Jkk. yellow green, yellow mottled red, green grey mottled red brown, red brown, light grey mottled red brown, dark brown Low uncertainty - clear mottled red and black, green grey and black, red brown and distinction between grey, green grey and purple black, light grey green, red brown bedrock and overlying mottled green. slightly weathered. sandstone mudstone and 316 -11.5 BTL siltstone of the Kirkwood Formation.

Moderate level of uncertainty. Uncertainty is in a range of 1.1m because there was core loss (no recorded core) between -10.9 and - 12.0m. In the section, it is interpreted that the core loss is ascribed to the pale grey mottled olive sandy clay overlying the bedrock. Hence the depth to bedrock was taken at - 12.0m. The alternative is that the core loss occurred in decomposed residual Sundays River Formation, and therefore the bedrock extends to Jkk. Olive, olive brown, purplish brown, grey stained yellow between - the base of the pebbly along joints, grey. Slightly weathered to highly weathered. 132 10.9 to -12.0 gravel at -10.9m. Sandstone mudstone and siltstone of the Kirkwood Formation.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 26

Jkk. Dark brown mottled greenish grey and yellow brown, dark Low uncertainty - clear brown, olive grey, dark olive green, becoming grey. Pale grey distinction between and dark grey banded. Highly weathered at bedrock surface bedrock and overlying becoming slightly weathered with depth. Sandstone, mudstone Q1 -12.6 BTL and siltstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Jkk. Olive becoming grey, pale grey, mottled and streaked dark brown, olive green and yellow brown. Highly weathered to slightly weathered. Vertical to sub vertical jointing. Residual clear distinction between mudstone (silty clay) and sandstone, mudstone and siltstone of bedrock and overlying the Kirkwood Formation. Fissured and slickensided in residual Q2 -10.9 sediment clay at bedrock surface. clear distinction between Jkk. dark olive, dark brown, dark grey, grey-brown banded, bedrock and overlying olive greenish grey. Highly weathered. Mudstone, siltstone and Q3 -13.1 BTL sandstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Jkk. Olive green, streaked black, maroon, yellowish brown blotches and olive bands, dark brown, dark olive grey, olive green and grey, olive greenish grey, grey and yellow brown. clear distinction between Highly weathered and residual at bedrock surface. Sandy silt bedrock and overlying and mudstone, siltstone and sandstone of the Kirkwood Q4 -12.2 BTL Formation. clear distinction between Jkk. Dark brown blotched olive grey, olive greenish grey. Highly bedrock and overlying weathered to depth. Mudstone sandstone and siltstone of the Q5 -15.3 BTL Kirkwood Formation Jkk. Dark red brown, olive greenish grey, maroon bands, dark red brown, grey, dark grey, olive green. Highly weathered to clear distinction between residual (clayey silt) at bedrock surface. Residual mudstone bedrock and overlying (clayey silt), mudstone, sandstone and siltstone of the Q6 -16.7 BTL Kirkwood Formation. Jkk. Pale olive greenish grey, reddish brown streaked pale olive grey and yellow brown, olive grey, banded dark grey and olive grey, dark grey tending to black banded dark grey. Highly clear distinction between weathered towards bedrock surface, slightly weathered with bedrock and overlying depth. sandstone siltstone and mudstone of the Kirkwood Q7 -16 sediment Formation.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 27

Low uncertainty - clear Ks. Light brown, pale grey. Highly weathered becoming distinction between weathered towards base. Siltstone of the Sundays River bedrock and overlying Formation. Highly fractured at bedrock surface, becoming 227 -22.2 BTL fractured towards base of borehole. PROFILE P Level of uncertainty in Elevation of elevation and bedrock recognition of the BH surface (m) bedrock surface Bedrock Composition C1 below 49.6m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock Below TP18 50.8m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock Below TP16 53.6m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock TP19 below 57.1m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock B9 below 56.8m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock TP24 below 57.3m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock TP23 below 57.3m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock

Moderate level of uncertainty: Uncertainty is in a 0.3m vertical band, from 24.0 to 23.7. The grey residual slickensided Cretaceous clay is overlain by grey sandy silt which could also be a 24.0 to residual portion of the Jkk. mottled residual clay (Cretaceous) and structured purple B2 23.7m Cretaceous bedrock. slickensided residual Kirkwood clay B1 below 15.6m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Ks. Olive to olive grey weathered to slightly weathered and bedrock and overlying highly weathered. Mudstone siltstone and sandstone of the R13 2.4 BTL Sundays River Formation.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 28

Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. dark maroon brown mottled light brown stained black, bedrock and overlying highly to completely weathered. Fine grained mudstone of the A3 15 BTL Kirkwood Formation A4 below 37.4 High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock Moderate to high uncertainty - it is interpreted that the residual clay is representative of the Cretaceous bedrock. Uncertainty in whether this represents bedrock or a younger surface A5 42.8 deposit. Jkk or Ks. mottled residual clay A7 below 47.8 High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock Low uncertainty - clear distinction between bedrock and overlying Ks. slightly moist, completely weathered, friable silty mudstone THI 56.3m sediment - Sundays River Formation Low uncertainty - clear distinction between bedrock and overlying A8 55.4 sediment Jkk or Ks. Cretaceous micro shattered clay stone THR below 64.4m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock PROFILE Q Level of uncertainty in Elevation of elevation and bedrock recognition of the BH surface (m) bedrock surface Bedrock Composition Low uncertainty - clear distinction between bedrock and overlying C5 36.0m sediment Jkk or Ks. Cretaceous micro shattered claystone

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 29

Low uncertainty - clear distinction between bedrock and overlying C15 38.3m sediment Jkk or Ks. Grey residual slickensided clay (cretaceous) Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk or Ks. grey residual slickensided clay (Cretaceous) bedrock and overlying underlain by interbedded cretaceous shale, siltstone, C14 39.2m sediment sandstone Low uncertainty - clear distinction between bedrock and overlying B25 40.8m sediment Jkk or Ks. Cretaceous siltstone B24 below 42.0m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock B23 below 42.0m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock B22 below 43.3m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock Low uncertainty - clear distinction between bedrock and overlying Jkk or Ks. kaki-white and green. Silty sand with calcrete lenses. TP26 43.2m sediment Residual - completely weathered Kirkwood Formation TP29 below 39.9m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock High level of uncertainty: Uncertainty is in a 0.6m vertical band, from 40.5 to 39.9. The grey residual slickensided Cretaceous clay is overlain by grey sandy silt which could also be a residual portion 40.5 to of the Cretaceous A25 39.9m. bedrock. Jkk or Ks. Grey residual slickensided clay (cretaceous) Low uncertainty - clear distinction between bedrock and overlying A24 32.4 sediment Jkk or Ks. Cretaceous Sandstone

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 30

Although the sediment overlying the bedrock is the same pale brown colour as the bedrock, the material above the bedrock contact contains subangular gravels whereas the bedrock Jkk. Dark maroon brown mottled olive grey stained black or contains organic material mottled light greenish grey speckled black. Light olive brown within the reworked mottled light brown. Moderately to highly weathered. N17 24.9 portion Sandstone and mudstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Jkk. Pale brown speckled light yellowish orange becoming pale Low uncertainty - clear yellowish brown, pale yellowish brown to yellowish brown. distinction between Highly weathered to residual nature at bedrock surface bedrock and overlying becoming moderately weathered with depth. Silty fine sand and N39 -4 BTL sandstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Low uncertainty - clear Ks. Orange brown, brown and green, yellow brown, greenish distinction between yellow, grey, red brown, grey and brown. Weathered at bedrock bedrock and overlying surface becoming fresh with depth. Siltstone sandstone and 309 -6.5 sediment mudstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. Red brown, grey, grey and brown, greenish yellow, bedrock and overlying greenish grey. Weathered to slightly weathered and fresh. 311 -7.6 BTL Mudstone, siltstone and sandstone of the Kirkwood Formation. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Jkk. dark red brown to light greenish grey and mottled light and bedrock and overlying dark greenish grey. Fresh to slightly weathered. Mudstone, 310 -5.6 BTL siltstone and sandstone of the Kirkwood Formation. A51 below 1.5m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock TH8 below 12.5m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock A50 below 18.2m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock A49 below 21.1m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock A48 below 27.7m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock A42 below 46.8 High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock TH3 below 45.8m High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 31

PROFILE R Level of uncertainty in Elevation of elevation and bedrock recognition of the BH surface (m) bedrock surface Bedrock Composition Low uncertainty - clear distinction between bedrock and overlying C5 36 sediment Jkk or Ks Cretaceous siltstone Low uncertainty - clear distinction between bedrock and overlying C15 38.3 sediment Jkk or Ks. Grey residual slickensided clay Low uncertainty - clear distinction between bedrock and overlying Jkk or Ks. Grey residual slickensided clay (Cretaceous) C14 39.2 sediment underlain by interbedded shale, siltstone and sandstone. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between bedrock and overlying B25 40.8 sediment Cretaceous siltstone B24 below 42.0 High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock B23 below 42.0 High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock B22 below 43.3 High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock Low uncertainty - clear distinction between bedrock and overlying Khaki green and white silty sand with calcrete lenses. TP26 43.2 sediment Completely weathered Jkk Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Khaki green and grey white clayey sand. Residual. Weathered bedrock and overlying Jkk sandstone with calcrete gravel 50 mm dia. Hardpan TP29 41.9 sediment calcrete towards the base. Gleyed horizon.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 32

Moderate level of uncertainty: Uncertainty is in a 0.6 m vertical band, from 40.5 to 39.9 m amsl. The grey residual slickensided Cretaceous clay is overlain by grey sandy silt which could also be a residual portion of the Cretaceous A25 39.9 bedrock. Jkk or Ks. Grey residual slickensided clay (Cretaceous) Low uncertainty - clear distinction between bedrock and overlying A24 32.4 sediment Jkk or Ks. Cretaceous sandstone Moderate level of uncertainty: Uncertainty is in a 1.0 m vertical Pale brown mottled and blotched light brown, light olive yellow band, from 24.9 to 23.9 m and black in colour. Slightly clayey fine sand with organic amsl. The source data material. Source data describes this upper package as describes this upper reworked and residual. The lower package consists of dark package as being of maroon brown occasionally mottled olive-grey stained black, reworked and residual very stiff to very soft rock. Mudstone of the Kirkwood N17 24.9 natute. Formation. Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Pale brown speckled light yellowish orange become pale bedrock and overlying yellowish brown fine sand. Residual sandstone to -4.072. N39 -4 sediment thereafter sandstone of Jkk greenish yellow to grey, brown, red brown, green grey, grey brown, to grey and red-brown weathered to fresh sandstone, mudstone and siltstone of Ks (upper portion) and Jkk (lower portion). Can be fine- to medium grained and may contain 309 -6.5 disseminated organic matter. Low uncertainty - clear Red-brown to red brown and grey, grey, brown, greenish distinction between yellow, dark greenish grey and green grey sandstone, bedrock and overlying mudstone and siltstone. Fresh to slightly weathered. Includes 311 -7.6 sediment residual clay horizons. Sandstone may contain bifurcating

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 33

burrow structures.

Low uncertainty - clear distinction between Dark red-brown, light greenish grey, mottled light and dark bedrock and overlying greenish grey; fresh to slightly weathered mudstone, siltstone 310 -5.6 sediment and sandstone of Jkk. A51 below 1.5 High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock TH8 below 12.5 High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock A50 below 18.2 High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock A49 below 21.1 High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock A48 below 27.7 High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock A42 below 46.8 High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock TH3 below 45.8 High level of uncertainty borehole was not deep enough to intersect bedrock

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version C - 34

APPENDIX D: REVIEWER COMMENTS

Controlled copy Page 150

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version D - 1

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version D - 2

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version D - 3

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version D - 4

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version D - 5

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version D - 6

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version D - 7 TECHNICAL REPORT REVIEW ANNOTATION FORM

Rev. 0 REFERENCE: ISSUE DATE: CGS/TP10/FM02 20 December 2010

as contained in CGS report 2010-0171

2. Project #: CGS Report 3. Report ID: 2012-0029 Rev.: 0 number or filename: VR Mitha, KL Hanson, DL 4. Author(s) Name(s) Organisation/Unit CGS/AMEC/CGS Roberts The referenced document is submitted for your review. Please return the completed form to the Project Administrator [email protected] If you have any questions, please call ______at______

Comments Due: / / . Reviewer Signature/Date: Organization/Department: Designated Reviewer: (Upon completion of review)

Dr John Rogers

Comment Comments and Recommendations: Resolution: # Type* 1. E Numerous track changes Amended as per suggestions. 2. O Note comments to improve diagrams Noted. Amended as per suggestions. especially profiles 3. O Page 3 palaeobeach criteria poorly After discussion with the principal scientist defined working with the data, it is indeed the presence of heavy minerals that defined the palaeobeach. During recent discussion with the principal investigator/supervisor for the dissertation and subsequent to a re-analysis of the dissertation, two other factors identified by the CGS (i.e. particle size distribution and roller-shaped heavy minerals) were discounted by the principal investigator himself, a lecturer at the local Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University. The original text therefore is a fair summary of how the palaeobeach was identified. The text has also been modified with a revised analysis. 4. O Appendix D diagram should be a figure for Acknowledged. Moved. text on page 6 5. O Pg.. 8. Riy Bank dredged by CGs team? No, Riy Bank was not dredged by the CGS team. Riy Bank was also not dredged by Dr Bremner and associates. 6. O Pg. 9. West coast reference may not be We acknowledge that west coast references are relevant far removed and that this is vulnerability in doing so; however, there is a lack of recent investigation detailing the subject in the Eastern Cape. We now acknowledge this summary in the report. 7. O Pg. 12. Isolines need to be labeled on Fig Addressed 10-11e

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version D - 8 TECHNICAL REPORT REVIEW ANNOTATION FORM

Rev. 0 REFERENCE: ISSUE DATE: CGS/TP10/FM02 20 December 2010

as contained in CGS report 2010-0171

8. O P 13 – profiles comments There is a location map and it is referred to in the text. It could be easier to follow the suggestion of including a map for each profile; however due to time constraints, this will be added to lessons learned. 9. M Pg.. 16 queries re logging by engineer Addressed in text. and geologists 10. M Pg. 17. Comments re drilling method and Addressed in text. samples 11. M Pg.. 18 more comments on drilling and Addressed in text. sampling 12. O Pg. 18. Residual soil reference needed Addressed. A figure has also been added to illustrate residual definitions from a pedological and engineering geological point of view. 13. M Pg. 19. No drilling method discussed – Addressed in text. problems in assessing residual soil determination 14. O Pg. 20. Why were trial pits dug? Trial pits were dug to assess the subsurface geological conditions for any future development. 15. M Pg. 21. Logging query Addressed. 16. O Cooper (2001) – Coega valley? Cooper (2001) does not specifically refer to the palaeovalley of the Coega River but rather refers to valleys (present tense). Text has been modified to reflect this 17. O Pg. 24. Detailed bathymetry needed. Error Bathymetry at 10 m intervals has been added. re gradient commented/corrected 18. O Pg.. 24. Seismic profile needed across We have not included seismic profiles due to offshore palaeovalley of Coega River the poor quality of the original information. 19. O Pg. 25. Include Figure 7.4 of Bremner and Originally Included in Figure 4. Text has been Day (1991) amended to emphasize this inclusion. 20. O Pg. 26. Relevance of references queried Deleted. 21. O Pg. 28. Illustrate “flats” Illustrated on figure 22. O Pg. 29. Define excessively Excessively changed to height in metres. 23. O Pg. 32. Table 4 old young The table represents a section on data description. Should the table be restructured according to age, then description and interpretation would become indistinct. The CGS and AMEC declines the suggestion to re-order the table. 24. M Pg. 37. Effect of drilling method on Addressed. sedimentology 25. O Pg. 39. Table 5 old young The table represents a section on data description. Should the table be restructured according to age, then description and interpretation would become indistinct. The CGS and AMEC declines the suggestion to re-order the table. 26. O Pg. 42. How far from land what elevation Addressed is BH310 27. O Pg. 49. Suggested reference Added to reference list 28. O Pg. 69. Mud query Addressed in text. 29. O Pg. 50. Drilling method plea. A request for Added description of general drilling methods

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version D - 9 TECHNICAL REPORT REVIEW ANNOTATION FORM

Rev. 0 REFERENCE: ISSUE DATE: CGS/TP10/FM02 20 December 2010

as contained in CGS report 2010-0171

a discussion of drilling methods and core- which is neither conducive to the preservation of photos needed. sedimentary structures nor sediment in its undisturbed state. 30. O Pg. 58. CN, OSL age limits Addressed 31. O Pg. 59. Clast query CGS and AMEC decline the suggestion to include all 4 clasts in former Figure 25b. The reason is that the caption for Table 8 explains where the samples were collected. 32. O Pg. 60. Analysis of** Fig 25 D Addressed in text 33. O Pg. 60. Illustrate artefacts Figure showing artefacts is included in the report. 34. O Pg. 63. Appendix D1  text Addressed in text 35. O Pg. 64** extension  seen of Coega fault Addressed. zone? 36. O Pg. 654. Position of Jahleel Island re Addressed in text Coega Fault Zone 37. O Pg. 64. Photos of Neogene reverse Figure showing reverse faulting is included in faulting the report. 38. O Pg. 64. Query re expansive clay heave Addressed in text. 39. M Pg. 65. Drilling method – effect on Addressed in text. slickensiding 40. O Pg. 65. Montomorrilonite query Addressed in text. No XRD analyses provided. 41. O Pg. 65. Dispatch map illustrate effect of Added a figure. Regarding maximum heave at heave – damaged houses depth, Reid (1996a) provides only a maximum (presumably) surface heave of 12 mm. 42. O Pg. 66- gilagi suggestions Definition added. Google Earth image added. 43. M Pg. 67 – core photos? Outcrop photos? Outcrop photographs added in a report figure. Extension of Coega Fault Zone? Core photographs were generally not included suggestion for selected cores, sited and in the reports. Extension of Coega Fault Zone logged by geologists included in maps.

Drilling was not within the scope of this project. Given the distance from the Thyspunt site, extensive studies to characterise this possible fault was not warranted. 44. Pg. 70. Old  young Addressed. 45. O Pg. 72. Add references from text that are Addressed. not yet in the reference 46. M Pg. 82. Partridge (1990) must precede Addressed. Partridge (1998) 47. M Pg. 85. Roberts (2005) – 11 font Addressed 48. M Added Pg.. 25: calcified pedotubules The majority of references to roots and calcrete include “with calcrete pieces and roots” “nodular hardpan calcrete with roots” “calcrete gravel and roots”. There was however little distinction between roots sensu stricto and calcified roots because in most cases, root as signifying identification thereof was tagged at the end of a sentence after the word “and”. From the descriptions, I am still uncertain as to whether pedotubules themselves were actually identified; however, considering the depositional environment, it is very likely that pedotubules do

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version D - 10 TECHNICAL REPORT REVIEW ANNOTATION FORM

Rev. 0 REFERENCE: ISSUE DATE: CGS/TP10/FM02 20 December 2010

as contained in CGS report 2010-0171

identified; however, considering the depositional environment, it is very likely that pedotubules do exist. To ensure that both scenarios are accounted for, we have included pedotubules in the report. 49. Added Pg. 82: drilling of a borehole Drilling was not within the scope of this investigation. Given the distance from the Thyspunt site, extensive studies to characterize this possible fault was not warranted. 50. Added: section 7.3.1. Pg. 80, second No indication in source data regarding rounding paragraph below Table 7 re: rounded characteristics. boulders and pebbles 51. Added: TQn Amended to Cn 52. Added: Figure 4 palaeogeomorphology General comment regarding geology: Figure 4 was not specifically meant to show geology although parts of the geology are used as a filler. The geology is shown albeit in smaller scale in Figure 2.

Figure 4 is meant to show the palaeogeography associated with various stages during the Flandrian transgression and provide time-based snapshots of the area – this is why the palaeoshorelines were included in Figure 4. The addition of marine terraces cut into the pre-Quaternary bedrock. Figure title has been modified to reflect this.

Lat/Long S&E: addressed.

Coega Kop Quarry extent: Unfortunately, the extent of the Coega Kop Quarry within such a regional context is small. The label is meant to indicate the existence thereof.

Coalesced: Coalescing/coalesced was a term adopted from Stear (1987). The area is comprised of vegetated albeit weathered dunes. Concur with comment resolution, review complete. Comments Resolved By:

______

______Report Author(s) Signature Date Reviewer Signature Date

*Type: E – Editorial, addresses word processing errors that do not adversely impact the validity of the results/findings/conclusions of the report. O – Optional, comment resolution would provide clarification, but does not impact the validity of the results/findings/conclusions of the report. M – Mandatory, comment shall be resolved; reviewer identifies impact on the validity of the results/findings/conclusions of the report.

The downloaded document is uncontrolled; therefore the user must ensure that it conforms to the authorised database version D - 11