Hydrogeological Investigation Report for the Proposed Berenice Coal Mine in Makhado, Limpopo Province

Report Prepared by NALEDZI WATERWORKS (PTY) LTD 12/8/2016

Prepared for:

i | P a g e

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER PAGE

1 Introduction and Scope of work...... 4 1.1 Background of the project ...... 4 1.2 Applicable legislation and standards ...... 5 1.3 Objectives ...... 5 1.4 Scope of work undertaken...... 6 2 Site description ...... 6 2.1 Location ...... 6 2.2 Land use...... 6 2.3 Topography ...... 7 2.4 Climate ...... 7 2.5 Drainage ...... 8 2.6 Geology ...... 8 2.7 Groundwater use ...... 17 2.8 Hydrogeology ...... 21 3 Hydraulic testing ...... 23 3.1 Slug test in the exploration coreholes ...... 23 3.2 Pumping testing of existing boreholes...... 26 4 Groundwater levels and flow ...... 29 5 Water quality ...... 32 5.1 Baseline Water quality ...... 32 5.2 Applicable guidelines ...... 35 5.3 Chemical analysis ...... 35 6 Conceptual model ...... 38 7 Numerical model ...... 39 7.1 Model boundaries and discretisation ...... 40 7.2 Model Characteristics...... 41 7.3 Model Calibration ...... 43 7.4 Simulated water balance ...... 45 7.5 Model Predictions ...... 45 7.6 Mass Transport Simulation ...... 61 8 Impact assessment and mitigation ...... 63 ii | P a g e

8.1 Methodology ...... 63 8.2 Impact Assessment ...... 66 9 Water management programme ...... 69 9.1 Purpose and scope...... 69 9.2 Monitoring programme ...... 69 10 Groundwater supply potential ...... 72 11 Conclusions...... 72

iii | P a g e

1 Introduction and Scope of work

1.1 Background of the project

Universal Coal is planning to establish an opencast operation, Berenice Coal Project, located in the Limpopo Province of South Africa. The project is located approximately 120 kilometers (km) north of Polokwane and east of the settlement of Alldays (Figure 1). Universal Coal appointed Jomela Consulting (Pty) Ltd (Jomela) to undertake the Environmental Impact Assessment for the Berenice Project.

Ms. Yvonne of Jomela has appointed Naledzi Group (Pty) Ltd (Naledzi) to conduct a hydrogeological, which will form part of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) that is being undertaken for the proposed Berenice Coal Project. The process is conducted in an integrated approach. It is conducted in line with the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act 107 of 1998) in support of the Application for a Mining Right. This will also involve compliance with other sets of legislation to obtain all the necessary permits to commission the project.

Figure 1: Locality map ______

1.2 Applicable legislation and standards

The mining and associated mining activities will be undertaken in compliance with environmental standards accepted as good mining practices in South Africa. The main legislations relevant to this groundwater study are:

 Constitution of the Republic of South Africa No. 108 of 1996;  National Water Act 36 of 1998;  Regulation 704 of the National Water Act (NWA);  Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act No. 28 of 2002 (MPRDA).

1.3 Objectives

The purpose of this report is to present the baseline hydrogeological conditions of the project prior to mining and establishment of mining related infrastructures. The baseline assessment of the prevailing groundwater conditions is required for the environmental impact assessment of the project.

This report also quantifies impacts that the proposed project will have on groundwater (levels, quantity and quality) and recommends mitigation and management measures to minimize environmental impacts throughout the mine life (construction, operation, closure and post closure).

The objectives for the groundwater study are as follows:

 To characterize the hydrogeological regime and establish baseline conditions for the proposed development;  To develop a hydrogeological conceptual and numerical model to assist in the assessment of the pit dewatering requirements as well as understanding the impacts of the proposed mine development on the water resources;  To use the results of the numerical model to quantify impacts on groundwater levels, yields and quality;  Recommend mitigation and management measures to minimize environmental impacts throughout the mine life (operation, closure and post closure).

______

1.4 Scope of work undertaken

The completed hydrogeological investigation scope of work for the current study consisted of the following:

 Review of existing relevant data and reports compiled for the project area and the surrounding properties;  Site visit and hydrocensus;  Compilation of baseline hydrogeological conditions based on existing data and site observation;  Development of the conceptual and numerical hydrogeological model;  Calibration of the numerical hydrogeological model;  Impact assessment;  Development of mitigation measures;  Reporting.

2 Site description

2.1 Location

The project is located in the Limpopo Province of South Africa, some 120°km to the North of Polokwane and to the east-southeast of the settlement of Alldays. The project may be reached via an all-weather gravel road which branches off from the tar road between Alldays and Waterpoort. The project area is approximately 50 km by road from Alldays and about 30°km by road from Waterpoort. The nearest sizeable town is Makhado (Louis Trichardt) some 80°km by road to the south-east. The nearest accessible railway siding is at Waterpoort, approximately 30°km south-east.

2.2 Land use

The study area is used as commercial game hunting farms as well as commercial cattle grazing. Some of the farms near the project area are being used for commercial crop farming.

______

2.3 Topography

The topographical setting of the study area is closely related to its geology and structural history. The area south of the project area is mainly underlain by Karoo lava which forms a monotonous and featureless landscape. The project area is located in an area which is relatively flat lying with the incision of the Brak River valley towards the north of the area, at a surface elevation of 690-735 mamsl (Gemecs, 2016). The elevation in the area rises gently to 900 mamsl in the south (Golder, 2012).

Some distance to the south of the project area, the Soutpansberg forms high mountainous terrain with an elevation of 2000 mamsl and this exceptionally high ground extends for more than 60 km’s in an east-westerly trending direction.

2.4 Climate

The project area is located within a dry tropical climate zone characterised by dry winters and hot humid summers. The area experiences one cycle of rainfall that extends from October of the previous year and end in March of the following year (approximately 182 days). The rainfall information is based on the data obtained from Meteoblue weather; station N0.949649 - Vetfontein Farm (Figure 2). Most of the rainfall occurs as localized heavy thunderstorms.

The area normally receives about 209 mm of rain per year, peaking during January and February, with most rainfall occurring during the summer. The area receives the lowest rainfall (1 mm) in July and highest (47 mm) in December (Figure 2).

______

Figure 2: Average monthly rainfall and temperature for Weather Station N0.949649 The monthly distribution of average daily maximum temperatures shows that the average midday temperatures range from 22°C in July to 30°C in January (Figure 2). The region is coldest during July when the mercury drops to 4°C on average during the night (Figure 2).

2.5 Drainage

The Berenice project is located mostly in the quaternary catchment A72B and to a much lesser extent in the A71J. The drainage system in the area is defined by the non-perennial Brak River in the quaternary catchment A72B and the perennial Sand River (A71J) in the north-easterly direction. The Brak River flows in the north-easterly direction, north of the planned mine pits and mine infrastructures.

2.6 Geology

Several historical geological assessments and studies have been carried out to characterise the regional geology of the area and to quantify the coal reserve in the project area and surrounding farms. These include:

______

 The geological mapping of the general extent of the Karoo by RSA Geological Survey (published maps sheet 2228 ‘Alldays’, 1:250 000, 2002);

 The drilling of five boreholes by Trans-Natal Coal Corporation, a subsidiary of General Mining & Finance Corporation, on the farm Cygnus 549MS in 1974 as a part of the evaluation of coal deposits in their so-called Langjan Proposition;

 The drilling of two boreholes by Goldfields of South Africa in 1977 on the farm Celine 547MS;

 Mapping and drilling of four boreholes by Rio Tinto Mining and Exploration in 2004/5 Cygnus 549MS, Berenice 548MS, Celine 547MS and Doorvaardt 355MS);  Resource assessment by Venmyn Rand Consulting for Pioneer Coal in 2008;  Gemecs produced a Competent Person Report (CPR) for the portions of the farms Berenice 548MS, Celine 547MS and Doorvaardt 355MS, based on limited historical borehole data projected from the farm Cygnus 549MS in 2010;  Golder compiled the geological and hydrogeological conditions of the Berenice Coal project as part of the Preliminary Hydrogeological Study in 2012.  Gemecs produced a Competent Person Report (CPR) for the whole Berenice Coal project in 2016.

The regional and local geological setting of the area is well documented in the reports by Golder (2012) and Gemecs (2016).

The project area fall within the 1:250 000 Geological Map series of South Africa – Sheet 2228 of Alldays (2002). The description of the regional geological settings of the area is based on the geological description by Günter Brandl (2002). The regional geology is depicted in Figure 3 with major faults of relevance (Tshipise, Bosbokpoort and Verrulam) labelled.

2.6.1 Regional geology

Regionally, the Berenice project is located within the Soutpansberg Coalfield which is situated north of the Soutpansberg Mountain Range along the north-eastern edge of the Kaapvaal Craton. Coal-bearing strata in Soutpansberg Coalfield are inconsistently developed within this area with the coal occurrences being typically bright coal/carbonaceous mudstone associations, forming composite coal ‘zones’.

______

The Soutpansberg Coalfield is characterised by intensive faulting. Dislocations both parallel to strike and at a high angle thereto are common and subdivide the coalfield into numerous irregular-sized blocks. The displacements vary between 20 m and 200 m. Syn-depositional faulting has to some degree controlled the size of individual coal “blocks” and has affected coal distribution significantly.

The thickest coal zone in this region is to be found some distance to the east of Waterpoort, comprising up to nine composite seams separated by carbonaceous mudstone, over a stratigraphic interval of about 40 m.

The coal zones in this area are developed within the Ecca Group in strata which may be broadly correlated to the Mikambeni and Madzaringwe Formations. The Mikambeni and Madzaringwe Formations are the local representatives of the Vryheid and Volksrust Formations of the Main Karoo basin. These formations consist principally of fine-grained sediments such as siltstone, mudstone and shale and a number of zones/seams of coal.

______

Figure 3: Regional geological setting ______

The Ecca Group strata are underlain by varying thicknesses of the Tshidzi Formation (Dwyka Group) comprising a glacial sequence of tillites, diamictites, etc., representing the encroachment of the Karoo Supergroup over the pre-Karoo basement.

The Karoo Sequence rocks in the Soutpansberg Coalfield overlie Limpopo Mobile Belt and Soutpansberg-age rocks and dip at 2°-20° northwards, terminating against east-west trending strike faults forming the northern margins of the coalfield (Gemecs, 2016).

2.6.2 Geology of the Berenice project

The Berenice project is reported to be located within the so-called “B”-block of the Mopane sector of the Soutpansberg coalfield (Gemecs, 2016). The coal-bearing strata in the “B” block are deposited in a half-graben within the basement (Limpopo Mobile Belt) bedrock, fault- bounded toward the north-west and sub-outcropping towards the south-east. The locality of the Berenice Coal Project, superimposed on the regional geological map is shown in Figure 4.

The full Karoo Sequence is present in the Berenice area is shown in Figure 5 and the coal-rich Ecca Formation is underlain by tillites and diamictites of the Tshidzi Formation (Dwyka Group) and overlain by the sandstone package of the Fripp Formations (Figure 5).

In the deeper parts of the basin the Fripp Formation is overlain by siltstones and red mudstone/shales of the Beaufort Group.

______

Figure 4: Berenice Coal Project location (published geological map extract) ______

Figure 5: Generalised stratigraphic column for the Berenice Coal Project area

2.6.2.1 Description of the coal zones

The coal deposits of this locality consist typically of bright coal/carbonaceous mudstone associations, forming a series of composite coal ‘zones’. Three coal zones (Figure 6) can be identified and are named from top to bottom:

 Upper Coal Zone - The Upper Coal Zone consist mostly of interlaminated to inter- bedded mudstone, coal and shale. The zone appears to be more variable in terms of thickness and is seemingly absent in some localities. In general this zone comprises

______

between two and five sub-zones or “plies”. The upper portion of this zone generally contains a slightly greater proportion of coal to the lower section and in some areas “shaling-out” of plies. The zone consists of only one ply which is regarded as a carbonaceous zone with minor coal content that includes greyish mudstone partings. The ply is mostly absent in the south-western segment (Matsuri, Longford and Doorvaardt) of the project area and is best developed on Celine, Berenice and the north-eastern part of Doorvaardt; hence to the north (and east).  Main Coal Zone - The Main Coal zone is also consisted mostly of interlaminated to inter- bedded mudstone, coal and shale. This zone where preserved from weathering and erosion, is persistently well-developed and contains a number of sub-zones comprising “plies” with a significant proportion of bright coal. This zone is divided into up to 15 plies based mainly on lithological criteria but also taking into account mineability considerations in terms of economic feasibility of extraction.  Lower Coal Zone – The zone, where well developed, tends to be formed of a number of relatively thin coal beds or seams separated by non-carbonaceous or carbonaceous partings. This zone appears to be only significantly developed towards the west of the exploration area (farms Longford and Matsuri) and is seemingly absent in general in the east (Berenice farm). The zone is not consistently developed and is absent over elevated palæo-topographic (basement) “highs. The zone is overlain by mudstone that seems to be devoid of carbonaceous and/or coaly content. Carbonaceous content gradually increases towards the base to the point that carbonaceous shales are identified with minor coal occurrences found in the vicinity of diamictite and sandstone beds (Gemecs, 2016).

______

Figure 6 : Typical profile showing the Coal Zones in the Berenice Coal Project ______

2.6.3 Structural geology

Regionally, the Karoo strata of the Tshipise basin are slightly tilted to the north-northwest at an angle of 10° to 20°. Intense block faulting caused the developments of a series of stepped half- grabens, seen as repeatedly occurring narrow strips of Karoo sediments.

Several brittle shear zones are developed in the area, which are generally normal faults with an east-north-east or easterly trend. Most of them are down-thrown to the south. The more prominent faults are the Tshipise and Bosbokpoort Faults with estimated vertical displacement of about 500 m. The Tshipise fault is generally identifiable on aerial photos as a line of dense vegetation, in particular where Karoo Basalt is displaced against lower Karoo sediments.

The envisaged local geological structure has been interpreted based on the available borehole intersections, both historical and from Universal Coal’s 1st phase drilling programme, and with reference to the published surface geological map. Based on the structural interpretation, the following conclusions were made:

 The coal measures are preserved within down-faulted (graben-type) structures.  The coal measures are dislocated by faulting both parallel to strike and at an angle  The western section of the coal-bearing area of the Berenice project appears to be structurally more stable than further towards the north-east and east.  Regional dip appears to be towards the north with local deviations towards the north- east or north-west presumably due to block rotation of strata between fault zones or resulting from presently undetected cross-faulting.  The predominant west-east faulting pattern appears to be represented by faulted zones and the widths of the fault zones is not known.

2.7 Groundwater use

The primary objective of the hydrocensus was to identify the baseline groundwater use and users within the study area. A detailed hydrocensus in the area was conducted by Golder in 2012 as part of the Preliminary Hydrogeological Study for the Berenice Coal Water Resource Options. The hydrocensus covered Berenice, Margate, Brenhilda, Celine, Cygnus, Doorvaardt, Longford, Matsuri and Thurso farms.

______

In the current programme, several water sources were visited to confirm their existence by Naledzi hydrogeological team. The results of the current hydrocensus together with the previous hydrocensus by Golder (2012) were used to determine the baseline water use in the area. The groundwater in the project area is used for domestic and game watering purpose with several boreholes pumping water into the drinking troughs located in the bushes (Figure 7). The details of the visited sites are presented in Appendix A and their positions are shown in Figure 8.

Figure 7: Water trough in Berenice farm 2.7.1 Existing boreholes

Golder in 2012 visited of 39 boreholes located within the eight farms (Figure 8). Of these, four boreholes are equipped with mono pump, 13 are equipped with submersible and 2 are equipped with windmills. These boreholes are used for both domestic and game watering. A total of 20 boreholes are not equipped and unused.

The borehole recorded borehole depths ranged between, 26 and 146 mbgl with average borehole depths of 72 mbgl. Two collapsed boreholes BGA-23 and BGA-14 with depths of 8.7 And 10.2 mbgl, respectively, were excluded. The static water level in the visited boreholes ranges between 8.6 and 60 mbgl, with average static water level of 27 mbgl. ______

Figure 8: Hydrocensus results ______

2.7.2 Coreholes

A total of 29 coreholes were visited and recorded by Golder in 2012 (Figure 8). Of these, 16 coreholes were drilled and completed as large diameter holes. These coreholes are not in use and some of them are not capped (Figure 9). Most of these coreholes have collapsed. The groundwater resting level in the coreholes ranges between 19 and 52 mbgl with an average of 52 mbgl.

Figure 9: Uncapped large diameter core hole

2.7.3 Monitoring boreholes

Two Department of Water and Sanitation regional groundwater monitoring boreholes, H18- 1521 and H18-1522, were visited and recorded (Figure 8). These boreholes are located in the southern part of the project area. The static water level in the monitoring boreholes is reported to be 52 and 56 mbgl.

______

2.8 Hydrogeology

While several boreholes were drilled within and around the Berenice project area, several comprehensive regional hydrogeological investigations of the groundwater potential in the western parts of the project area were carried out by Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS) between 1982 and 1989 (Golder, 2012). The studies were aimed at identifying additional water resources for the Alldays area and the detailed report was compiled by Fayazi and Orpen in 1989.

The detailed hydrogeological investigation of the Berenice project was undertaken by Golder in 2012 as part of the preliminary hydrogeological investigation for Berenice Project. The study was aimed at assessing the existing groundwater sources within the Berenice project area and further identifies possible groundwater supply options in the areas surrounding the project area. Several boreholes within the project area were tested to determine the sustainable yields and for quality.

The information published on the 1:500 000 hydrogeological map – 2127 Messina (2002), indicate that the regional geohydrological attributes of the area are clearly a function of the geological host matrix distribution. The groundwater in the area primarily occurs within the fractured and weathered zones or in joints and fractures of the competent arenaceous rocks, related to tensional and compressional stresses and offloading. Groundwater also occurs along the sedimentary contacts. The borehole yield potential of the Ecca Group (Pe) and differential Ecca and Clarens Formation (Pe-Trc) is classified as b3 in the 1:500 000 hydrogeological map, indicating that an average borehole yield in the group ranges between 0.5 and 2.0 l/s.

2.8.1 Aquifers

Golder (2012) analysed the pump testing data and geological settings of the area to determine the occurrence of groundwater and to assess the types of aquifer systems that occur in the area. This analysis revealed that there are two dominant aquifer types that occur in the area, the secondary fractured aquifer system and secondary intergranular and fractured aquifer systems associated with the geological formations. The analysis of core logs revealed that the aquifer system in the area can be divided into three aquifer systems as follows.

______

2.8.1.1 Shallow weathered aquifer system

This is the predominant aquifer system present within the project area and is laterally extensive, occurring in the shallow weathered zone and weathering related fractured zone. This aquifer extends across the entire extent of the project area and ranges between 5 and 26 mbgl. This is a minor aquifer system and water drains through into the underlying aquifer systems. It is unconfined to semi-confined in nature and highly susceptible to surface induced activities and impacts.

2.8.1.2 Secondary intergranular and fractured aquifer system

This is the predominant and major aquifer system in the area. This aquifer system is laterally extensive occurring between the shallow weathered aquifer system and the underlying fractured aquifer system. The aquifer system is comprised of fractured zone overlain by varying thicknesses of weathered saturated materials. The groundwater storage and flow is controlled by the fractures that again act as conduits during abstraction and vertical recharge from intergranular zone.

2.8.1.3 Secondary fractured aquifer system

The localized fractured aquifers systems are restricted to the contact zones between the fault zone and contacts between the sedimentary sequences. Although these aquifer systems may be high yielding, they have limited storage capacity and recharge. Most of groundwater in the fractured aquifer system is drained laterally from the storage within the overlying shallow weathered and intergranular and fractured aquifer systems.

2.8.2 Recharge

The mean annual recharge to the groundwater system in the study area is estimated to be between 5.6 and 9.6 mm per annum (Golder 2012).

______

3 Hydraulic testing

Hydraulic tests were undertaken to determine the in-situ hydraulic parameters of the hydrostratigraphic units underlying the area. The hydraulic test was comprised of the test pumping of existing boreholes and slug testing of the exploration coreholes. These tests were undertaken by Golder in 2012. The tested boreholes and coreholes are shown in Figure 10 and Figure 11.

3.1 Slug test in the exploration coreholes

The slug test involved positive displacement of water by injecting a known volume of water into the identified exploration and using the rate at which the water levels returns to its undisturbed state to determine the hydraulic conductivity. The hydraulic conductivity values were determined using the Bouwer and Rice (1976) method.

Slug tests were performed on open exploration coreholes with a nominal inside diameter of 150 mm. A total 14 exploration coreholes and one monitoring borehole (H18-1522) were tested and their details are presented in Table 1 together with the estimated hydraulic conductivity (k).

Table 1: Summary of the slug testing programme (Golder, 2012)

GPS Coordinates WGS 84 Water level Est. hydraulic Site ID Latitude Longitude Depth (mbgl) (mbgl) Conductivity (m/d)

BGAC-6 -22.72335 29.51875 106 45.1 0.0353

BGAC-7 -22.73469 29.49068 71 45.9 0.0109

BGAC-8 -22.73755 29.46358 60 33.4 0.00781

BGAC-9 -22.73761 29.46354 69.1 33.5 0.1100

BGAC-10 -22.72035 29.48618 66 44 0.1400

BGAC-11 -22.72082 29.46679 - 26.3 0.0583

BGAC-12 -22.72716 29.47307 - 29.4 0.0353

BGAC-13 -22.68617 29.51700 - 32.7 0.019

BGAC-14 -22.69107 29.53883 - 32.7 0.0136

______

GPS Coordinates WGS 84 Water level Est. hydraulic Site ID Latitude Longitude Depth (mbgl) (mbgl) Conductivity (m/d)

BGAC-15 -22.67328 29.53076 - 18.8 0.0295

BGAC-16 -22.73403 29.45369 91.6 20.4 0.00478

BGAC-17 -22.72931 29.50428 - 24.1 0.0215

BGAC-19 -22.70953 29.54431 - 47.4 1.3800

BGAC-21 -22.71692 29.53894 - 39 0.00025

H18-1522 -22.72976 29.53827 - 55.9 0.0581

The hydraulic conductivity of the tested areas ranges between 0.00025 and 1.38 m/d indicating a low to very high permeability (Table 1). Corehole BGAC-19 was drilled through a very high permeability zone with an estimated hydraulic conductivity of 1.38 m/d. Coreholes, BGAC-9 and BGAC-10, were drilled through a moderate permeable zone with estimated hydraulic conductivities of 0.11 and 0.14 m/d, respectively. The moderate to high hydraulic conductivities in coreholes, BGAC-19, BGAC-9 and BGAC-10, indicate the high permeability of the fractured bedrock aquifer system and the less permeable weathered aquifer system. The low to very low hydraulic conductivities reported in other tested coreholes suggest that the bedrock matrix is absence or the fracturing is less or very tight.

______

F i g u r e 10: Location of the test pumped boreholes

______

3.2 Pumping testing of existing boreholes

The test pumping was undertaken to determine the bulk hydraulic parameters of the underlying hydrostratigraphic units penetrated by the tested borehole. A total of 21 boreholes were subjected to a full test pumping programme which included step drawdown and constant discharge tests which were followed by recovery monitoring. The details of the tested boreholes are presented in Table 2 and their positions in Figure 11. The tests were undertaken as detailed below:

 The Step Drawdown Test (SDT) comprised of up to 4 x 1 hour steps with the discharge at the subsequent step increased immediately after the completion of the previous step. Each step was undertaken for 60 minutes. Water level drawdown was recorded in each pumping hole during the SDT. After the completion of the last step of the SDT, water level recovery was recorded.  The Constant Discharge Test (CDT) comprised pumping at a constant yield for extended periods of time. The duration of the CDTs run on the boreholes varied from 1 to 24 hours according to the borehole capacity. Water level drawdown was recorded in each pumping hole during the entire duration of CDT pumping. Recovery was recorded immediately after CDT pumping ceased.  A Recovery Test (RT) followed directly after pump shut down at the end of the SDT and CDT in the tested borehole. The residual drawdown over time (water level recovery) was measured in the tested borehole until 95% recovery was reached or up to the equivalent of the pumping time.

The test pumping data were interpreted using FC-Method, an aquifer testing software developed by the Institute for Groundwater Studies (IGS). The software includes various methods and allows for aquifer boundary conditions. The methods used for parameter estimations included basic Flow Characteristics Method (FC), Cooper-Jacob and Barker Bangoy. Aquifer Transmissivity were determined for all boreholes subjected to SDT and CDT. A summary of the pumping tests results are presented in Error! Not a valid bookmark self-reference..

______

Table 2: Summary of the aquifer test pumping (adopted from Golder, 2012)

GPS Coordinates WGS 84 Water level Site ID Latitude Longitude Depth (mbgl) (mbgl) T (m2/d)

BGA-1 -22.76449 29.43482 58.6 26 10.0

BGA-2 -22.74664 29.41682 68.3 12.7 3.2

BGA-3 -22.75104 29.42799 66.4 18.3 23.6

BGA-4 -22.74090 29.45683 78.6 26.5 8.0

BGA-5 -22.73571 29.46560 51.6 32.5 6.0

BGA-6 -22.73057 29.48132 117.6 37.3 2.0

BGA-7 -22.73050 29.48119 53 37.8 1

BGA-12 -22.67106 29.50627 53.8 20.3 23.2

BGA-13 -22.67240 29.50992 81 26.6 5.7

BGA-15 -22.75045 29.46630 60 31.9 1

BGA-18 -22.71540 29.46802 52.3 24.4 5.6

BGA-20 -22.71136 29.48423 146.1 41.2 2.0

BGA-21 -22.72729 29.46159 114.5 28.8 1

BGA-24 -22.72608 29.46018 41.2 26.9 1

BGA-27 -22.67398 29.54159 121.4 13.5 8.5

BGA-29 -22.66740 29.53858 29.7 23.8 24.0

BGA-31 -22.63533 29.53192 56.7 28.9 11.0

BGA-32 -22.67757 29.52559 45.6 18.3 <1

BGA-33 -22.73250 29.44803 33 13.6 26.1

BGA-37 -22.72108 29.53422 110.5 60.8 1.8

BGA-39 -22.72856 29.44822 50.6 8.6 13.1

The estimated transmissivities of the tested areas ranges between 1 and 26.1 m2/d, indicating an anisotropic nature of the underlying weathered and fractured aquifer systems.

______

F i g u r e 11: L o c ation of the test pumped boreholes

______

4 Groundwater levels and flow No consistent groundwater monitoring is being undertaken in the area and no water level data was available for the area until Golder conducted a hydrogeological investigation in 2012. The project baseline groundwater level is based on data obtained from:

 Water levels as measured in the existing boreholes and coreholes by Golder 2012;  Water levels as measured in the existing boreholes and coreholes by Naledzi 2016.

The groundwater level data used to compile the groundwater surface piezometric map (Figure 12) is presented in Appendix A.

The groundwater elevation in the Berenice Coal Project area ranges between 667 and 700 mamsl with an average of 680 mamsl (Appendix A). The depth to the groundwater level is generally increasing with an increase in distance from the Brak River, therefore, the groundwater flow directions is towards the River, suggesting that Brak is a gaining stream.

To assess the groundwater flow systems in the area, the water elevations were plotted against topography elevations. Two distinct sets of water elevations were identified from the collected data, the shallow weathered aquifer system characterised by water levels shallower than 26 mbgl and a ‘deeper system’ with water level deeper than 26 mbgl.

Figure 13 shows the correlation between groundwater and topography elevations in the shallow weathered system. There is a good correlation between topography and groundwater elevations in the shallow aquifer system (Figure 13), suggesting unconfined aquifer conditions and the groundwater mimics the topography.

Due to low yields in the shallow aquifer system, most of the drilled boreholes penetrated the deep aquifer systems. The main and lower coal zones are deeper than 26 mbgl and all exploration coreholes penetrated the deeper aquifer system. The correlation between topography and groundwater elevation in boreholes and coreholes penetrating the deeper aquifer system is shown in Figure 14. The figure (Figure 14) shows poor topography-groundwater elevation correlation compared to the correlation in the shallow aquifer system. It is postulated that poor correlation in deeper aquifer system indicates compartmentalization of the groundwater flow system by structural features in the area. Groundwater flow in the deeper aquifer system is controlled by geological structures in the area. ______

F i g u r e 12: Piezometric surface map of the project area

______

740 y = 1.0278x R² = 0.9113 730

720

710 Series1

700 Linear (Series1) 690

680

670 650.00 660.00 670.00 680.00 690.00 700.00 710.00 720.00

Figure 13: Correlation between topography and groundwater elevation (shallow aquifer system)

750 y = 1.0558x R² = 0.0352 740

730

720 Series1 710 Linear (Series1) 700

690

680 650.00 660.00 670.00 680.00 690.00 700.00 710.00

Figure 14: Correlation between topography and groundwater elevation (deeper aquifer system)

______

5 Water quality

5.1 Baseline Water quality

The baseline description for surface and groundwater quality in the Berenice Coal Project area is required to characterize the water quality condition in the area before infrastructure construction and mining at Berenice begins.

5.1.1 Surface water

The rivers and streams in the area are non-perennial and only flow after floods. No surface water samples were collected to determine the surface water baseline quality.

5.1.2 Groundwater

No consistent groundwater monitoring is being undertaken in the area, currently. No samples were collected and analysed in the area prior to the hydrogeological investigations by Golder in 2012. Therefore, the baseline groundwater quality is based on data obtained from water samples collected from the existing groundwater supply boreholes by Golder (2012) and Naledzi (2016). A total of 21 boreholes were sampled by Golder in 2012. Naledzi only sampled eight boreholes which were in use and pumping during the site visit. The samples were submitted to UIS Laboratories in Pretoria and Capricorn Veterinary Laboratories for analysis. The analytical results for the samples collected by Naledzi were still pending during the compilation of this report, therefore, only Golder water quality data was used to define the baseline groundwater quality in the area.

The details of the sampled boreholes are presented in Table 3 and their locations are shown in Figure 15.

The groundwater quality information for the Berenice Coal Project was compiled to characterise the groundwater condition in the area before mining begins. The water quality gathered in this study will form part of the baseline water quality condition to be used as reference in assessing possible groundwater contamination emanating from mining activities in the future. Note the water quality presented here is a ‘snap shot’ and variability of the water quality should be established prior to mining. The details of the recommended monitoring network to establish a baseline groundwater level and quality data is presented in Section 9.2. ______

Table 3: Details of the sampled boreholes

GPS Coordinates WGS 84

Site ID Latitude Longitude Sampling events Sampled by Comments

BGA-1 -22.76449 29.43482 October 2012; June 2016 Golder; Naledzi June 2016 results still outstanding

BGA-2 -22.74664 29.41682 October 2012; June 2016 Golder; Naledzi June 2016 results still outstanding

BGA-3 -22.75104 29.42799 October 2012; June 2016 Golder; Naledzi June 2016 results still outstanding

BGA-4 -22.74090 29.45683 October 2012; June 2016 Golder; Naledzi June 2016 results still outstanding

BGA-5 -22.73571 29.46560 October 2012 Golder Not sampled in 2016

BGA-6 -22.73057 29.48132 October 2012 Golder Not sampled in 2016

BGA-7 -22.73050 29.48119 October 2012 Golder Not sampled in 2016

BGA-8 -22.73288 29.50891 June 2016 Naledzi June 2016 results still outstanding

BGA-12 -22.67106 29.50627 October 2012 Golder Not sampled in 2016

BGA-13 -22.67240 29.50992 October 2012 Golder Not sampled in 2016

BGA-15 -22.75045 29.46630 October 2012 Golder Not sampled in 2016

BGA-18 -22.71540 29.46802 October 2012; June 2016 Golder; Naledzi June 2016 results still outstanding

BGA-20 -22.71136 29.48423 October 2012 Golder Not sampled in 2016

BGA-21 -22.72729 29.46159 October 2012 Golder Not sampled in 2016

BGA-24 -22.72608 29.46018 October 2012 Golder Not sampled in 2016

BGA-27 -22.67398 29.54159 October 2012 Golder Not sampled in 2016

BGA-29 -22.66740 29.53858 October 2012; June 2016 Golder; Naledzi June 2016 results still outstanding

BGA-31 -22.63533 29.53192 October 2012 Golder Not sampled in 2016

BGA-32 -22.67757 29.52559 October 2012 Golder Not sampled in 2016

BGA-33 -22.73250 29.44803 October 2012 Golder Not sampled in 2016

BGA-37 -22.72108 29.53422 October 2012 Golder Not sampled in 2016

BGA-39 -22.72856 29.44822 October 2012 Golder Not sampled in 2016

______

F i g u r e 15: Location of the s a m p l e d b o r e h o l e s

______

5.2 Applicable guidelines

The land use within the Berenice Coal Project area is mainly associated with agricultural practices, game farming, and a few residential areas. The people and wild animals in the area rely on groundwater from boreholes for daily domestic and stock watering purposes. On the basis of the current water use in the area, the baseline water quality is assessed against:

 South African National Standard for drinking water (SANS241:2011); and  Department of Water Affairs Irrigation and Livestock Watering Guidelines (DWAF, 1996).

A summary of groundwater analytical results together with the stipulated SANS 241:2015 and Irrigation and Livestock Watering Guidelines are presented in Table 4. Parameters with concentrations above the stipulated standards and guidelines are highlighted in yellow.

5.3 Chemical analysis

The groundwater from the sampled boreholes is neutral to slightly alkaline with pH ranging between 6.9 and 7.8 (Table 4). The groundwater is brackish to saline with Electric Conductivity (EC) ranging between 92 to 752 S/m and 668 to 7 430 S/m, respectively (Table 4). The concentration of EC in the groundwater is above the stipulated Drinking Water Standard (SANS 241) of 170 mg/l. The total dissolved solids of several groundwater samples are above the stipulated Drinking Water Standard (SANS 241) and Livestock Watering Guidelines (DWAF, 1996), of 1 200 and 2000 mg/l (Table 4), respectively.

5.3.1 Major ions

A Piper diagram was used to graphically depict the overall composition of the groundwater in the project area based on its major cation and anion composition. To present information on a Piper plot, concentrations in milligrams per litre for major anions and cations are converted to milli-equivalents per litre and then plotted in the lower ternary diagrams to show the percentage contribution of each major ion; one for anions and one for cations. The locations of each sample in the anion and cation ternary fields are then projected into the “diamond” plot. Waters that lie in similar locations in the “diamond” plot are interpreted to be of the same origin and general composition.

______

Table 4: Summary of groundwater quality analytical results and compliance limits

Livestock SANS 241 BGA- BGA- BGA- BGA- BGA- BGA- BGA- BGA- BGA-

Variables Units Watering (2015) BGA-1 BGA-2 BGA-3 BG-4 5 6 7 12 13 15 18 20 21 BGA-24 BGA-27 BGA-29 BGA-31 BGA-32 BGA-33 BGA-37 BGA-39

<5.0 7.63 7.82 7.71 7.12 6.95 7.07 7.17 7.75 7.31 7.45 7.53 6.94 7.60 7.35 7.54 7.51 7.45 7.13 7.69 7.39 7.74

pH >9.7

E. Conductivity mS/m 170 98.2 114 92.1 369 509 752 544 130 300 96.3 369 917 432 240 580 348 143 273 120 302 135

TDS mg/l 0 - 2000 1 200 72.2 774 684 2 830 4 040 6 010 4 030 944 2 430 668 2 570 7 430 2 940 1 630 4 500 2 690 950 1 790 816 2 180 912

Suspended Solids mg/l <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 109 133 <20 <20 209 <20 31.6 339 65.6 20.2 <20 <20 298 <20 <20 <20

Chloride mg/l 300 61.2 100 75.7 1040 1370 2300 1460 125 714 31.3 712 2860 1130 364 1560 919 141 426 129 589 160

Sulphates mg/l 468 500 13.5 1.55 13.1 128 317 417 22.5 75.8 214 1.02 397 869 201 127 660 291 27.3 241 23.5 351 82.8

Fluoride mg/l 1.5 0.567 <0.1 0.454 0.626 1.39 0.132 0.226 0.413 0.319 0.453 0.455 0.565 0.572 0.572 0.533 0.364 0.533 0.407 0.617 0.342 0.606

Nitrate as N mg/l < 11 11.00 20.3 <0.3 13 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 30.5 <0.3 <0.3 0.94 <0.3 <0.3 7.87 <0.3 1.56 8.55 <0.3 12.3 1.04 6.94

Sodium mg/l 0 – 2000 200 86.1 163 69.1 314 498 573 415 115 235 178 604 1 070 626 329 727 354 206 438 165 344 190

Potassium mg/l 100 11.9 4.49 7.51 20.5 35.9 42.9 42.4 42.4 12.4 14.9 6.22 21.1 52.1 20.7 20.3 31.2 11.1 15.4 12 8.62 27.6

Calcium mg/l 300 45.1 22.3 41.1 116 182 328 78 75.4 201 28.8 48.1 265 105 66.8 179 136 56.8 80 34.3 140 35.7

mg/l 100 74.3 49.1 72.2 262 350 538 360 85.6 191 25.5 167 594 188 143 349 235 73 117 68.8 185 52 Magnesium

Iron mg/l 0 - 10 2 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.2 <0.05 <0.05 0.14 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05

Manganese mg/l 0.4 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.016 <0.01 0.11 0.118 <0.01 0.061 0.172 0.016 0.302 0.285 0.123 0.142 0.021 <0.01 0.175 0.016 0.049 <0.01

______

The groundwater composition of the area is presented on a piper diagram (Figure 16). The piper diagram indicates that the water in the area is dominated by recently recharged magnesium carbonate water with a chloride dominance mixing line. The mixing is due to

Figure 16: Piper diagram

5.3.2 Metals

The analytical results indicate very low concentrations of several metals in the groundwater.

______

6 Conceptual model

Based on the interpretation of the available and gathered geological and hydrogeological information of the area, a conceptual hydrogeological model was developed as an adequate description of the groundwater system of the Berenice Coal Project. Due to limited information, the hydrogeological conceptual model of Berenice Coal Project comprise of an assemblage of justifiable, simplifying assumptions which summarises the principal characteristics of the real system so that its behaviour may be clearly understood. The hydrogeological conceptual model represents the current consensus on system behaviour based on the existing information and data gathered during the site visit and intrusive investigation.

The basic components of a conceptual hydrogeological model are the primary hydrogeological units derived from the geological settings of the area and the groundwater flow in the area. The conceptual hydrogeological model serves as an input and basis of the numerical hydrogeological model. For the purpose of the current study, the subsurface was envisaged to consist of the following hydrogeological units:

 Layer 1- The upper weathered zone few meters below surface consist of completely weathered material. This layer is anticipated to have a reasonable low to medium hydraulic conductivity. The depth of this zone (as determined by the contact between weathered and the fractured zone) ranges between 5 and 26 mbgl. The thickness of the aquifer system ranges between 2 and 20 m. The weathered aquifer system is less permeable and low yielding than the underlying fractured zone. This aquifer system stores and transports the bulk of the groundwater resource in the area. This aquifer is unconfined to semi-confined in places and it is highly susceptible to surface induced activities and impacts. The flow in this aquifer system is expected to follow topography.  Layer 2 – This zone underlines the weathered zone. This zone is slightly weathered, highly fractured with a medium to high hydraulic conductivity. The thickness of the fractured rock aquifer system ranges between 20 and 200 m and its depth is between 26 and 300 mbgl. The groundwater flow direction in this unit is influenced by regional topography and locally by the geological structures and in the project area the flow would be in general from high lying areas towards the Brak River.

______

7 Numerical model

The numerical groundwater was set up using the conceptual model as basis. The numerical model is intended to reflect the site specific conditions as accurately as possible to achieve the highest level of confidence in the simulated impacts.

Groundwater flow at the Berenice was simulated with a finite difference model called MODFLOW that was developed by the United States Geological Survey.

For the current model, the Block Centre Flow (BCF) flow package and the Preconditioned Conjugate Gradient 2 (PCG2) solver were used to solve the flow matrix (Hill, 1990). The BCF package involves assigning hydraulic properties to individual cells based on their location within a particular layer of the model domain. The critical assumption of this approach is that every cell within a particular section of a layer is assigned the same set of hydraulic properties and that any localized heterogeneity is subsumed into the bulk permeability of a zone. There is however no limit to how finely a layer can be discretized horizontally into rectangular cells, but each layer of a finite difference grid is necessarily one cell thick.

This numerical flow model is a mathematical representation of the conceptual model presented and enables a quantitative analysis of local groundwater flow and contaminant plume migration. The conceptual model was represented numerically based on the following assumptions:

 The aquifer system at the Berenice can be subdivided into hydrostratigraphic units;  Each hydrostratigraphic unit can be represented as a single model layer with representative hydraulic properties (i.e. hydraulic conductivity, anisotropy, storage) and recharge can be estimated as a proportion of incident rainfall;  Groundwater movement in the hydrostratigraphic units follows Darcy’s law and hence can be modelled using the ‘equivalent porous medium’ approach. i.e. the use of effective (or bulk) hydraulic properties to approximate conditions in the aquifer;  The available information on the geology and field tests was considered as correct; and  It is important to note that a numerical groundwater model is a representation of the real system. It is therefore at most an approximation and the level of accuracy depends

______

on the quality of the data that is available. This implies that there are always errors associated with groundwater models due to uncertainty in the data and the capability of numerical methods to describe natural physical processes.

7.1 Model boundaries and discretisation

The model domain and boundaries are given in Figure 17.

Boundaries of the numerical model domain were setup, in consideration with the proposed mine plan and natural groundwater flow boundaries such as topographical highs and rivers. The model is intended to reflect the site specific conditions as accurately as possible in order to achieve the highest level of confidence. However, it still has to be taken into consideration that this is regional model spanning an area of 75.2 km (east-west) by 66 km (north-south). The model is bounded by A71J and A72B quaternary catchments.

The numerical model domain was spatially discretized into a 3-dimensional grid with a uniform grid spacing of 50 m within the mine site, and up to 400 m by 400 m in areas beyond the mine site. The model domain was discretized as a 2-layer model to represent conceptual hydrostratigraphic units per the Golder (2012) conceptual model. Layer thicknesses and description are summarized as follows:

 Layer 1: 0 to 26 m to represent the weathered aquifer;  Layer 2: 26 to >300 m to represent the fractured aquifer.

SRTM elevation data was used to contour the surface elevation (top of Layer 1). The top of Layer 2 was offset by the thicknesses listed above. The bottom of Layer 2 was assigned a constant elevation of 400 mamsl.

______

Figure 17: Model mesh (rivers in cyan and drains in yellow)

7.2 Model Characteristics 7.2.1 Initial groundwater levels The initial groundwater levels for the steady state calibration model were interpolated and assigned based on the 2012 hydrocensus data. Once the model was calibrated, the calibrated groundwater levels for each aquifer as was assigned as starting conditions for the transient state calibration simulations.

7.2.2 Surface water bodies A number of rivers and streams occur in the area. The rivers were simulated using the river package where the river stage, river depth and hydraulic conductivity of the river bed material

______

were specified. The hydraulic conductivity of the river bed material was estimated from the surrounding geology. All seasonal streams were simulated with drain package by assigning drain elevation and conductance based on topography and geology.

7.2.3 Abstraction Existing abstraction boreholes were assigned (Figure 18) based on yields described in Golder 2012.

Figure 18: Model mesh with abstraction boreholes (red points)

7.2.4 Recharge The study area generally experiences low rainfall and is characterised by deep groundwater levels. This indicates regional low recharge rates. The low recharge rates are supported by very high chloride concentrations in groundwater. An initial recharge of 1% MAP was assigned for model calibration.

______

7.2.5 Hydraulic Conductivity Analysis of hydraulic conductivities from Golder 2012 indicated a geometric mean of 0.03 m/d. This value was assigned as starting value for model calibration.

7.3 Model Calibration The numerical model was calibrated in steady state by keeping the model complexity to minimum. Calibration was achieved by varying recharge, hydraulic conductivity, riverbed conductance and abstraction rates from existing abstraction boreholes within their acceptable range in order to fit the simulated groundwater levels to observed groundwater levels.

The quality of the fit between simulated and observed water levels was visually evaluated based on the geodetic elevation of the simulated water level and by means of a statistical analysis.

From an initial assigned value of 1 %, model calibration 0.1 % can be effectively used to simulate recharge to the model domain. The weathered aquifer can be represented with a hydraulic conductivity of 0.08 m/d and the thicker fractured aquifer, with a hydraulic conductivity of 0.008 m/d. Groundwater levels in boreholes the vicinity of the Brak River are very deeper than 13 m which signifies that the Rivers although perennial, are not continuous with the groundwater table. The disconnection between the rivers and groundwater table was achieved by assigning a low river bed conductance of 1.4 m2/d. The final stage of calibration was done by modifying abstraction rates in existing pumping boreholes.

The modelled versus measured groundwater levels are shown in Figure 19, depict a good correlation (91 %) between calculated and observed hydraulic heads. The mean residual value is calculated to be 1.1 m, meaning that on average the calculated groundwater levels are 1.1 m above the levels measured in the field. This slight difference will have an insignificant impact on the calculated groundwater inflow volumes into the pits. The simulated steady state flow field are shown in Figure 20.

______

Figure 19: Correlation between modelled and measured heads

Figure 20: Steady state groundwater flow fields ______

7.4 Simulated water balance Simulated inflow and outflow to the proposed open cast areas and the model domain are summarised on Table 5. Positive numbers denote an inflow to the groundwater system, such as recharge. Negative numbers represent an outflow from the groundwater system (i.e. groundwater discharge). Key aspects of the water balance are summarised as follows:

 Recharge to the entire model domain constitutes 59% of the total inflow. The remaining 41 % is sourced from rivers;  45 % of the total inflow is abstracted through pumping boreholes, 36 % contributes to flow in the rivers and the remaining 19 % contributes to flow in seasonal streams;  In the proposed OC1 footprint, groundwater comes in a rate of 475 m3/d, with recharge contributing only 16 m3/d. 70 % of the total influx is abstracted through pumping boreholes with the footprint and the remaining 30 % flows downgradient;  Groundwater passage through OC2 footprint is relatively small, with surrounding aquifers taking entirely what flows from up gradient; and  The portion of the Brak River that flows through OC3 contributes up 59 m3/d (24 %) of the total inflow to OC3 footprint. 49 % of the total influx is abstracted through pumping boreholes with the footprint and the remaining 51 % flows downgradient.

Table 5: Water balance

Component (all in m3/d) OC1 OC2 OC3 Model Domain Recharge 16 1 6 2177 Abstraction -342 0 -120 -1623 Inflow from surrounding aquifers 475 34 178 Outflow to Surrounding aquifers -149 -35 -123 Infiltration from rivers 59 1489 Exfiltration to rivers -1331 Exfiltration to streams -711 Balance 0 0 0 0

7.5 Model Predictions The predictive model was setup according to the mine plan to estimate the inflow rates, predict the cone of dewatering and contamination plume originating from potential sources. Aspects of the predictive model are discussed below.

______

7.5.1 Mine Dewatering The level of detail provided in the mine plan was modelled as accurately as possible by dividing the model into 26 stress periods, representing each mining strip per the mine plan.

Drain cells were used to model inflows due to mining. The modelled drain elevation were set to the final pit floors and progressed through yearly increments for the first 25 years. Year 26 to 33 was modelled as a single stress period.

All abstraction boreholes were left as is until such time when the mine plan approaches an abstraction borehole. Abstraction from boreholes affected by the mine plan was shut down to simulate destruction of the borehole. The following abstraction borehole will be affected by mining:

 BGA 6, BGA7, BGA 21, and BGA 24 in OC1;  BGA27 and BGA 32 in OC3.

It is important to mention that the portion of the Brak River that traverses OC3 was diverted in FY23 ahead of mining in FY25. The predicted inflows are given in Table 6. Key aspects of the simulated dewatering are as follows:

 Inflows into OC1 are predicted to oscillate between 2000 and 2400 m3/d during the first twelve years of mining;  Inflow are predicted to fall below 2000 m3/d from Y13 onwards, below 1000 m3/d from Y18 and finally to 530 m3/d as mining ceases in OC1 ceases in Y20;  Inflows into OC3 are predicted to peak at 1150 m3/d as mining commences in Y20. OC3 inflows are not predicted to fall below 800 m3/d year on year till Y25;  The average inflow into OC3 during the final 8 years of mining a predicted at 1190 m3/d. Similarly OC2 inflows during the final 8 years of mining are predicted at 1270 m3/d.

Table 6: Predicted inflows

FY OC1 OC1 OC3 Total Inflow to Active (m3/d) (m3/d) (m3/d) Mining (m3/d) Y1 2440 2440 Y2 2290 2290 Y3 2090 2090 Y4 2270 2270 Y5 2300 2300

______

FY OC1 OC1 OC3 Total Inflow to Active (m3/d) (m3/d) (m3/d) Mining (m3/d) Y6 2330 2330 Y7 2130 2130 Y8 2090 2090 Y9 1940 1940 Y10 2070 2070 Y11 2460 2460 Y12 2400 2400 Y13 1890 1890 Y14 1810 1810 Y15 1670 1670 Y16 1430 1430 Y17 1320 1320 Y18 1070 1070 Y19 924 924 Y20 530 1150 1680 Y21 1190 1190 Y22 1040 1040 Y23 818 818 Y24 852 852 Y25 930 930 Y26-33 1270 1190 2460

The predicted drawdown cones created by mining are depicted from Figure 21 to Figure 25. Associated predicted monitoring borehole hydrographs are given in Figure 26. The simulated hydraulic heads at end of mining are given in Figure 27. Hydrographs after closure are given in Figure 28. Figure 29 shows the final hydraulic heads 100 years after closure. Pit decant points and decant analyses are given from Figure 30 to Figure 33. Key aspects of the groundwater flow regime during and after mining are as follows:

 Impacts on groundwater levels are indicated by a 5 m drawdown. The steady state groundwater levels are used as initial conditions to delineate further drawdown due to mining;  The severity of groundwater drawdown on groundwater users will depend on the distance between the groundwater user and the pits. Higher drawdowns will be experienced by groundwater users closer to the pit. In the pits, the deeper the coal floor to the pre-mining groundwater level, the higher the drawdown;

______

 A maximum drawdown of 65 m is predicted in during mining Year 1. It should be mentioned that boreholes labelled BGAC are exploration boreholes and are not considered to represent groundwater users;  Therefore only boreholes BGA-06, BGA-07 and BGA-09 are predicted to fall within the cone of dewatering during mining Y1. A drawdown of 8 m is predicted in BGA-06 and BGA-07. A 6 m drawdown is predicted in BGA-09;  Mining will progress with concurrent rehabilitation. This was taken into consideration in the model. According to the mine plan, Year 19 marks the last year for mining at OC1 only. OC1 and OC3 will be mined in Year 20, which marks the final mining year in OC1;  In Year 19, a maximum drawdown of 95 m is predicted in OC1. The predicted drawdown cone extends about 5 km south, 2.6 km west and 4 km north of the pit outline. In addition to the boreholes that will be destroyed as part of the mining process, the following boreholes will fall with the drawdown cone; o BGA-20 (55 m drawdown); o BGA-18 ( 50 m drawdown); o BGA-05 ( 40 m drawdown); o BGA-04 ( 27 m drawdown); o BGA-39 ( 26 m drawdown); o BGA-33 ( 25 m drawdown); o BGA-15 ( 22 m drawdown); o BGA-37 (15 m drawdown); o H18-1522 (13 m drawdown) o H18-1521 (12 m drawdown); and o BGA-10 (9 m drawdown).  With the introduction of OC3 in Year 20, the boreholes BGA-32 and BGA-27 are predicted to fall within the new drawdown cone. A drawdown of 5 m is predicted for BGA 32 and 9 m for BGA-27. A maximum drawdown of 48 m is predicted in OC 3 during this year;  In Year 25, groundwater levels in OC1 would have recovered for 5 years. The levels in OC1 are predicted to be at a minimum of 35 m below pre-mining levels (a maximum

______

recovery of 50 m from Year 20 drawdowns). The maximum drawdown in OC3 during Year 25 is predicted to be 55 m. Boreholes BGA-12, BGA-13 and BGA-17 are predicted to add to the list of impacted boreholes. A 7 m drawdown is predicted in these boreholes;  The drawdown cone in the final 8 years of mining will be deepest in OC2 (105 m), with a corresponding hydraulic head of 570 mamsl;  Groundwater levels in impacted boreholes are predicted to recover to pre-mining levels with 100 years after closure;  Pre-mining groundwater levels are in the proposed pit areas are below the pits decant elevation. The decant elevation for OC1 is 709 mamsl, 697 mamsl for OC2 and 681 for OC3. Heads in OC1 are predicted to stabilise around 700 and 680 mamsl (or at least 9 m below the decant elevation) at 100 years after closure. OC2 and OC 3 will be connected after closure and heads are predicted to be just below 680 mamsl 100 years after closure. Water from OC2 will flow to OC3 due to their interconnection. Decant at OC3 is highly likely and decant at OC1 is probable. The decant rates will be the effective recharge rates to the pit areas;  In consideration of the pit surface areas and 20% of MAP as recharge rate to the backfilled pits, OC1 is predicted to decant at a rate of 1920 m3/d. OC2 is predicted to decant at a rate of 138 m3/d, and OC3 at a rate of 1 278 m3/d; and  Assuming the average sulphate generation rates at coal mines (7 kg/ha/d), approximately 1 130 mg/L of sulphate is predicted to be associated with the decanting pits.

______

F i g u r e 21: Year 1 drawdown ______

F i g u r e 22: Year 19 drawdown

______

F i g u r e 23: Year 20 drawdown

______

F i g u r e 24: Year 25 drawdown

______

F i g u r e 25: Y e a r 2 6 - 33 drawdown

______

F i g u r e 26: Predicted hydrographs during the life of mine

______

F i g u r e 27: Heads at end of mining

______

F i g u r e 28: Hydrographs after closure

______

F i g u r e 29: Heads at 100 years after closure

______

F i g u r e 30: Decant positions with decant elevations and hydrauli c heads 100 years after closure ______

3000 8000

2500 6000

2000

/d) 3

1500 4000

1000 Decant (m Decant 2000

500 SO4 Concentration (mg/l)

0 0 1.0 5.0 9.0 13.0 17.0 21.0 25.0 % Recharge

Figure 31: OC1 predicted decant rate and sulphate concentration Top

200 8000 180 160 6000

140 /d) 3 120 100 4000 80 60 Decant (m Decant 2000

40 SO4 Concentration (mg/l) 20 0 0 1.0 5.0 9.0 13.0 17.0 21.0 25.0 % Recharge

Figure 32: OC2 predicted decant rate and sulphate concentration Top

______

1800 8000

1600

1400 6000

1200

/d) 3 1000 4000 800

600 Decant (m Decant 2000 400

200 SO4 Concentration (mg/l)

0 0 1.0 5.0 9.0 13.0 17.0 21.0 25.0 % Recharge

Figure 33: OC3 predicted decant rate and sulphate concentration Top 7.6 Mass Transport Simulation

Solute transport in groundwater is controlled by physical and geochemical mass transport processes. All solutes are influenced by the same physical transport processes, namely advection and dispersion. In contrast, geochemical transport parameters depend on the solute of interest, as well as geochemical conditions in the aquifer. Solutes which are not influenced by geochemical transport processes are defined as non-reactive or conservative solutes and can be simulated using a conservative solute transport model. Solutes which are influenced by chemical transport processes are defined as reactive solutes and require the use of a reactive solute transport model.

In most cases, contaminant transport is driven by advection i.e. groundwater flow is the main mechanism controlling the movement of solutes in groundwater. Advection implies that contaminants migrate at a rate similar to the groundwater flow velocity and in the same direction as the hydraulic gradient. Therefore, knowledge of groundwater flow patterns and

______

hydraulic parameters can be used to predict solute transport under advection. Other parameters to consider include dispersion, diffusion, effective porosity and the specific yield.

Dispersion of contaminants in groundwater is also important in terms of contaminant transport. Dispersive transport is caused by the tortuous nature of pores or fracture openings that result in variable flow velocity distributions within an aquifer and movement of contaminants due to the difference in concentration gradient.

Dispersion has two components; longitudinal and transversal dispersivity. The longitudinal dispersivity is scale dependent and is approximately 10% of the travel distance of the plume (Fetter, 1993). The transversal dispersivity is approximately 10% of the longitudinal dispersivity. The higher the dispersivity, the smaller the maximum concentration of the contaminant, as dispersion causes a spreading of the plume over a larger area. Considering the distance of centre of the tailings dam to the pit centres, a longitudinal dispersivity of 400 m is estimated.

The percentage of void volume that contributes to groundwater flow is expressed by the term porosity. Not all pores are interconnected and therefore cannot contribute equally to groundwater flow, leading to the derivation of the term effective porosity, used to express the interconnected void volume that effectively contributes to groundwater flow and therefore contaminant transport. No site specific field measurement of effective porosity is available. An average 10% effective porosity is assumed for the aquifer systems.

To simulate the constant availability of contaminants at the potential contaminant sources, a constant source term pollution simulation was done. In the absence of a geochemical characterisation, a unit source concentration of 100% was applied. The predicted plume indicates a limited movement of potential contaminants away from the project area. The dominant direction of migration of contaminants from the surface facilities will be towards the pits as they flood. Apart from boreholes with the pit areas which will be destroyed, boreholes BGA-18, BGA-20, and BGA-13 are predicted to be impacted by the mine wide plume.

______

8 Impact assessment and mitigation

8.1 Methodology The first stage of risk/impact assessment is the identification of environmental activities, aspects and impacts. This is supported by the identification of receptors and resources, which allows for an understanding of the impact pathway and an assessment of the sensitivity to change. The definitions used in the impact assessment are given below:

 An activity is a distinct process or task undertaken by an organization for which a responsibility can be assigned. Activities also include facilities or pieces of infrastructure that are possessed by an organization;  An environmental aspect is an ‘element of an organizations activities, products and services which can interact with the environment’1. The interaction of an aspect with the environment may result in an impact;  Environmental risks/impacts are the consequences of these aspects on environmental resources or receptors of particular value or sensitivity, for example, disturbance due to noise and health effects due to poorer air quality. Receptors can comprise, but are not limited to, people or human-made systems, such as local residents, communities and social infrastructure, as well as components of the biophysical environment such as aquifers, flora and palaeontology. In the case where the impact is on human health or well-being, this should be stated. Similarly, where the receptor is not anthropogenic, then it should, where possible, be stipulated what the receptor is;  Receptors comprise, but are not limited to people or man-made structures;  Resources include components of the biophysical environment;  Frequency of activity refers to how often the proposed activity will take place;  Frequency of impact refers to the frequency with which a stressor (aspect) will impact on the receptor;  Severity refers to the degree of change to the receptor status in terms of the reversibility of the impact; sensitivity of receptor to stressor; duration of impact

1 The definition has been aligned with that used in the ISO 14001 Standard. ______

(increasing or decreasing with time); controversy potential and precedent setting; threat to environmental and health standards;  Spatial scope refers to the geographical scale of the impact;  Duration refers to the length of time over which the stressor will cause a change in the resource or receptor.

The significance of the impact is then assessed by rating each variable numerically according to defined criteria as outlined in Figure 35. The purpose of the rating is to develop a clear understanding of influences and processes associated with each impact. The severity, spatial scope and duration of the impact together comprise the consequence of the impact and when summed can obtain a maximum value of 15.

The frequency of the activity and the frequency of the impact together comprise the likelihood of the impact occurring and can obtain a maximum value of 10. The values for likelihood and consequence of the impact are then read off a significance rating matrix (Figure 36), and are used to determine whether mitigation is necessary.

The assessment of significance should be undertaken twice. Initial significance is based only natural and existing mitigation measures (including built-in engineering designs). The subsequent assessment takes into account the recommended management measures required to mitigate the impacts. Measures such as demolishing infrastructure, and reinstatement and rehabilitation of land, are considered post-mitigation.

The model outcome of the impacts is then assessed in terms of impact certainty and consideration of available information. The Precautionary Principle is applied in line with South Africa’s National Environmental Management Act (No. 107 of 1998) in instances of uncertainty or lack of information by increasing assigned ratings or adjusting final model outcomes. In certain instances where a variable or outcome requires rational adjustment due to model limitations, the model outcomes are adjusted.

______

Figure 34: Criteria for assessing significance of impacts

Severity of impact RATING Insignificant / non-harmful 1

Small / potentially harmful 2 Significant / slightly harmful 3

Great / harmful 4

Disastrous / extremely harmful 5

Spatial scope of impact RATING Activity specific 1

Mine specific (within the mine boundary) 2 CONSEQUENCE Local area (within 5 km of the mine boundary) 3 Regional 4 National 5

Duration of impact RATING One day to one month 1

One month to one year 2 One year to ten years 3 Life of operation 4

Post closure / permanent 5

Frequency of activity/ duration of aspect RATING Annually or less / low 1 6 monthly / temporary 2

Monthly / infrequent 3 Weekly / life of operation / regularly / likely 4 Daily / permanent / high 5 LIKELIHOOD

Frequency of impact RATING Almost never / almost impossible 1 Very seldom / highly unlikely 2

Infrequent / unlikely / seldom 3

Often / regularly / likely / possible 4 Daily / highly likely / definitely 5

______

Figure 35: Significance Rating Matrix

Colour Significance Value Negative Impact Positive Impact Code Rating Management Management Recommendation Recommendation Very high 126-150 Improve current management Maintain current management

High 101-125 Improve current management Maintain current management Medium-high 76-100 Improve current management Maintain current management Low-medium 51-75 Maintain current management Improve current management Low 26-50 Maintain current management Improve current management Very low 1-25 Maintain current management Improve current management

Figure 36: Positive/Negative Mitigation Ratings

8.2 Impact Assessment 8.2.1 Introduction This section presents the environmental assessment for the effects of the proposed Berenice Coal project on groundwater resources. The information presented in this section meets the requirements of the terms of reference as well as the legislative requirements for the project and included details on:

 Components within each phase (construction, operation and closure) of the project that may influence or affect groundwater resources and/or groundwater quality;  Impact assessment for the potential impact of the project on the groundwater system;  Concerns that might be identified by stakeholders and regulators regarding groundwater impacts; ______

 Sustainability assessment for groundwater issues;  Proposed mitigation measures to be considered during the construction, operation and closure phases of the project to minimize groundwater-related effects; and  The monitoring program that will be used to identify and monitor project impacts on groundwater levels and quality.

This section also considers potential positive environmental impacts or opportunities that the proposed project will bring in the area. Given the location of the project, specific emphasis was placed on the relevant environmental, social and economic impacts that might be raised by the stakeholders. The identification of the significant potential impacts was guided by the professional judgement of the hydrogeological and EAP team.

The objectives of the specialist studies and further investigation by Naledzi of each of the potential environmental impacts identified was to determine their significance and to promote mitigation measures to reduce the impacts to an acceptable level where required.

Each of the identified impacts was assessed in a separate section. Considering the general nature of the proposed project each section will take cognisance of the construction, operational and closure phases as well as the different alternatives, where possible. This is intended to:

 Allow the comparison of the various alternatives of the proposed project, facilitate the comparison of the alternatives and to identify the preferred alternative during the decision making process of the Limpopo Department of Economic Development, Environment and Tourism (LDEDET) and Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA);  Enable stakeholders to understand the potential impact of the project in their specific area. All potential environmental impacts have been addressed in this section, according to the adopted methodology for assessing impacts as described in Section 8 and the impacts presented in Table 7.

______

Table 7: Impact assessment and mitigation measures

ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL BEFORE MITIGATION RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES/ AFTER MITIGATION IMPACT REMARKS S S D F Se Sp Du Fa Fi TOTAL SP Fi TOTAL SP e p u a Construction and Operation Phase Impacts Site construction and grading could cause changes in runoff Construction stage will be planned to minimise the removal of vegetation and opportunities for revegetation will be 2 1 4 1 3 28 Low (-) 1 1 4 1 2 18 Very Low (-) and infiltration that could reduce maximised. groundwater recharge

Fuel & hydrocarbons leakages All storage areas containing hazardous materials will have secondary containments capable of containing the and spillages from the storage 2 1 4 1 3 28 Low (-) volume of the largest tank or container plus 10%. Resort to immediate clean-up after accidental spillages. 1 1 4 1 2 18 Very Low (-) and transporting vehicles may cause groundwater contamination Divert run-off from haul roads that may contain hydrocarbons into lined pollution control dams Pit inflows cannot be mitigated (required to enable a safe work environment). Provision needs to be made within the Open cast mining below the water Low Medium 2 2 4 4 4 64 mine water balance for the reuse or treatment of pit inflows. In case the water should be discharged, treatment will 2 2 4 4 4 64 Low Medium (-) table will result in pit inflows (-) be required before discharge. Baseflow reduction caused by Brak River and other streams in the project area are non-perennial and there are no baseflow into them. The 1 1 1 1 1 6 Very low (-) 1 1 1 1 1 6 Very Low (-) mining baseflow into the streams and Brak River won’t be affected by mining activities. Pit dewatering will cause a cone of drawdown which will affect the neighbouring farms in the north, east and south Mine dewatering and groundwater of the Berenice Coal Project area. The extent of the zone of influence will not extend beyond 1 000m and the abstraction for water supply 3 3 4 4 4 80 Med High (-) maximum drawdown in the affected areas will range between 1 and 5 m, thereby not expected to impact on the 2 2 3 4 4 56 Low Medium (-) purposes could reduce yields of any supply boreholes around the mining area. Possible mitigation against such an impact is temporary groundwater levels in the area water supply by the mine.

Increased potential for Compact footprint area of the overburden stockpiles to minimize groundwater infiltration. groundwater contamination due to 1 1 2 2 2 16 Very Low (-) Stormwater run-off from the overburden stockpiles will be diverted into dirty water dams. 1 1 2 2 2 16 Very Low (-) seepages from the overburden stockpiles A groundwater resources monitoring program will be implemented during to detect the groundwater contamination. Pollution control dams need to be lined and designed to comply with NEMA and NWA requirements (Act 36 of Water contained in dirty water 1998). dams may impact on groundwater 2 1 4 4 4 56 Low Med (-) 1 1 1 1 2 6 Very Low (-) Manage any leakages and spills to prevent groundwater contamination. quality Implement groundwater monitoring to detect groundwater contamination Post Closure Impacts Salt Load contribution towards The dominant direction of migration of contaminants from the surface facilities will be towards the pits and Brak Brak River or other streams 1 1 2 2 2 16 Very Low (-) 1 1 1 1 2 6 Very Low (-) River or any nearby streams won’t be affected.

Pollution plume migration will be towards the mine pits and around the stockpiles areas and the plume won’t affect Aquifer contamination caused by the nearby farms. backfill 4 3 5 5 4 108 High (-) 3 3 5 5 4 99 Med High (-) The final backfilled opencast topography should be engineered in such that runoff is diverted away from the

opencast area. The water level will rebound but unlikely that it will decant, however, two of the three potential decant positions are Rebound water levels within located within the mining area. In case there is decant, an impermeable layer can be applied below the topsoil backfill material may cause 1 2 1 1 2 12 Very Low (-) cover, which will need to be compacted to prevent the ingress of water. 1 1 1 1 2 6 Very Low (-) decant Install water monitoring boreholes closer to the decant points to monitor the water level and water quality.

______

9 Water management programme 9.1 Purpose and scope The operation and decommissioning of the project will result in generation of waste from several mine facilities that will have the potential to impact on groundwater quality. Also in cases where the depth to water table is shallower than the depth of mining, associated mine activities and dewatering could result in groundwater quality impacts and lowering of regional water levels within the radius of influence of the dewatering activity. This section describes the action plan that has been designed to implement the measures required to mitigate, monitor and manage impacts on groundwater resources (quality and quantity) that might be posed by the proposed project. Berenice Coal mine will put in place specific actions to appropriately reduce, mitigate, manage and monitor the impacts of the proposed project on the groundwater resources from development to post closure (Table 7). In this report, mitigation is taken to represent all facets of actions taken to avoid or reduce negative effects and enhance positive effects, including the following hierarchy:

 avoidance.  minimization.  rehabilitation.  compensation.

NOTE: Closure mitigation requirements are addressed in Berenice Coal Mine Closure Plan. 9.2 Monitoring programme The groundwater monitoring program is designed to detect changes in groundwater levels and quality associated with the mine operations, and to provide early detection of undesirable impacts arising from the construction, operation and closure activities of the project. The program will also be used to establish a robust, pre-disturbance baseline. Such information is used to demonstrate compliance with regulatory requirements and to amend the action plan, as and when necessary, in order to ensure safe operation and optimal environmental protection. The observed data will be compared to those predicted in the environmental impact assessment and to provide information to refine and improve the calibration and predictions of the groundwater flow model. The gathered data will also provide information that can be used to guide continuous improvement in groundwater management approach and actions.

______

The groundwater monitoring will include the following components, water quality, water level and groundwater abstraction monitoring in the abstracting boreholes. The main objectives in positioning the initial monitoring boreholes are to:

 Monitor the lowering of the water table and the radius of influence;

 Monitor the movement of polluted groundwater migrating away from the mine area; and

 Monitor post closure groundwater recovery rates and possibility of decanting. The details of the groundwater monitoring network are presented in Table 8. The monitoring network is comprised of 16 existing boreholes and 6 proposed additional boreholes to be installed in the identified areas. Each new borehole is recommended to be drilled to a maximum depth of 120 m to monitor the water level and quality in the weathered and fractured aquifer that are expected to contribute to inflows in the pits.

Table 8: Details of groundwater monitoring locations

Site name X Y Status

BGA-01 44656 -2518522 Existing borehole BGA-02 42813 -2516540 Existing borehole BGA-03 43959 -2517031 Existing borehole BGA-04 46925 -2515917 Existing borehole BGA-05 47827 -2515345 Existing borehole BGA-12 52029 -2508199 Existing borehole BGA-13 52404 -2508348 Existing borehole BGA-15 47894 -2516977 Existing borehole BGA-18 48083 -2513096 Existing borehole BGA-20 49750 -2512654 Existing borehole BGA-27 55658 -2508535 Existing borehole BGA-29 55352 -2507805 Existing borehole BGA-32 54012 -2508927 Existing borehole BGA-33 46024 -2514984 Existing borehole BGA-37 54882 -2513748 Existing borehole BGA-39 46044 -2514547 Existing borehole BBH1 51585 -2513444 Proposed monitoring borehole BBH2 51514 -2515543 Proposed monitoring borehole BBH3 56477 -2509757 Proposed monitoring borehole BBH4 52536 -2511236 Proposed monitoring borehole ______

Site name X Y Status

BBH5 51656 -2509842 Proposed monitoring borehole BBH6 53767 -2507529 Proposed monitoring borehole The baseline groundwater monitoring period will be for a year. The baseline groundwater monitoring programme will include sampling of the listed boreholes for a minimum of four times in a year. The abstraction monitoring will be done in the water supply boreholes and the monthly abstraction volumes will be recorded. The groundwater levels will be recorded on monthly basis. Following two years of operational monitoring, the number of sites and frequency of sampling will be revised to determine the optimal monitoring strategy.

______

10 Groundwater supply potential Universal Coal appointed Golder to undertake a preliminary hydrogeological investigation aimed at assessing the groundwater supply potential from the existing boreholes within the project area. Apart from the groundwater supply option, Universal coal also requested Golder to assess the surface water supply options. The indicated water demand for the planned mining operation was estimated at 3 to 5 Ml/day.

The groundwater potential, to supply the mine with its process water and domestic use, was evaluated from the pumping tests completed by Golder in 2012. The study concluded that the groundwater resources within the Brak River – Berenice Groundwater Management Unit should be considered as a viable water supply option for the planned mine operations. The study also indicated that an estimated volume of 1.1 Ml/day should be developed within the Berenice project area.

To meet the estimated water demand for the mine operations, additional groundwater sources should be developed along the Waterpoort – Alldays road (referred as T2 by Golder).

11 Conclusions This report is an interim document detailing the summary of the hydrogeological investigations to date by Naledzi as part of the groundwater specialist study for the proposed mining activities at the Berenice Coal Project. Golder conducted a detailed hydrogeological investigation in the area and several boreholes were tested to determine the hydraulic parameters and sustainable yields. Due to the amount of work covered by Golder (2012) and the distribution of the tested coreholes and boreholes throughout the project area, the groundwater specialist study by Naledzi included most of the data collected by Golder.

Naledzi collected several water samples from the boreholes which were pumping during the site visits and the samples were submitted to the analytical laboratory in Polokwane for analysis. During the compilation of this report, the analytical results of the submitted water samples were still outstanding.

The drilling and testing of three boreholes for hydrogeological and geochemical investigations is in progress and the findings from this programme will be used to update the report.

______

The initial model predictions show that the dewatering cone of drawdown will extend into the neighbouring farms in the north, east and south of the project area and might affect some of the groundwater sources in those farms, if there are any. To date Naledzi is not aware of any groundwater sources that will be affected by the cone of drawdown in these farms.

The extent, at which the groundwater sources in the neighbouring farms will be affected by the cone of drawdown, will be determined after identifying the existence of groundwater sources and use in the nearby farms. A detailed hydrocensus in the nearby farms is required. The hydrocensus will record the positions of the groundwater sources as well as the water level and depth of these sources.

Prepared by

MUNYAI F.D. (PrSciNat) Senior Geohydrologist NALEDZI WATERWORKS (Pty) Ltd

______