ESKOM HOLDINGS SOC (LTD) KOMATI POWER STATION SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC, BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM, WIND ENERGY FACILITIES AND ANCILLARY INFRASTRUCTURE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT PART IV – APPENDICES E8 – E14 22 AUGUST 2022 FINAL KOMATI POWER STATION SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC, BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM, WIND ENERGY FACILITIES AND ANCILLARY INFRASTRUCTURE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT - PART IV – APPEDICES E8– E14 ESKOM HOLDINGS SOC (LTD) TYPE OF DOCUMENT (VERSION) FINAL PROJECT NO.: 41103965 DATE: AUGUST 2022 WSP BUILDING C, KNIGHTSBRIDGE 33 SLOANE STREET BRYANSTON, 2191 SOUTH AFRICA T: +27 11 361 1300 F: +27 11 361 1301 WSP.COM WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd. QUALITY MANAGEMENT ISSUE/REVISION FIRST ISSUE REVISION 1 REVISION 2 REVISION 3 Remarks Draft ESIA Draft ESIA Draft ESIA Date July 2022 July 2022 August 2022 Prepared by Megan Govender Megan Govender Megan Govender Signature Checked by Tutayi Chifadza Tutayi Chifadza Tutayi Chifadza Signature Authorised by Ashlea Strong Ashlea Strong Ashlea Strong Signature Project number 41103965 41103965 41103965 Report number 01 01 01 File reference \\corp.pbwan.net\za\Central_Data\Projects\41100xxx\41103965 - Eskom Komati PV ESIA and WULA\41 ES\01-Reports\02-Screening WSP is an ISO9001:2015, ISO14001:2015 and OHSAS18001:2007 certified company SIGNATURES PREPARED BY Megan Govender Senior Consultant REVIEWED BY Tutayi Chifadza Principal Consultant This Draft Environmental Impact Assessment Report (Report) for the Proposed Construction of a Solar Photovoltaic, Battery Energy Storage System and Wind Energy Facility at the Komati Power Station has been prepared by WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd (WSP) on behalf and at the request of Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd (Client), as part of the application process for Environmental Authorisation. Unless otherwise agreed by us in writing, we do not accept responsibility or legal liability to any person other than the Client for the contents of, or any omissions from, this Report. To prepare this Report, we have reviewed only the documents and information provided to us by the Client or any third parties directed to provide information and documents to us by the Client, as well as the supporting specialist studies. We have not reviewed any other documents in relation to this Report, except where otherwise indicated in the Report. TABLE OF PART I – ESIA REPORT CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION............................................1 2 GOVERNANCE FRAMEWORK .................... 8 3 SCREENING METHODOLOGY.................. 40 4 STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT............... 49 5 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................... 58 6 NEED AND JUSTIFICATION....................... 70 7 IDENTIFICATION OF ALTERNATIVES .... 74 8 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL CONTEXT .................................................... 75 9 IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS ................................................... 161 10 DRAFT ESIA IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE . 200 11 PLAN OF STUDY FOR THE ESIA.......... 241 12 CONCLUSION AND WAY FORWARD .. 253 BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................... 254 KOMATI POWER STATION SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC, BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM, WIND WSP ENERGY FACILITIES AND ANCILLARY INFRASTRUCTURE August 2022 Project No. 41103965 ESKOM HOLDINGS SOC (LTD) TABLES TABLE 1-1 DETAILS OF PROJECT PROPONENT .................................. 4 TABLE 1-2 DETAILS OF THE EAP .................. 4 TABLE 1-3: DETAILS OF SPECIALISTS .......... 5 TABLE 2-1 APPLICABLE NATIONAL LEGISLATION ................................. 8 TABLE 2-2 APPLICABLE REGIONAL POLICIES AND PLANS ............... 18 TABLE 2-3 PROVINCIAL PLANS ................... 22 TABLE 2-4 DISTRICT AND LOCAL MUNICIPALITY PLANS ............... 23 TABLE 2-5: ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO THE PROJECT .............................. 24 TABLE 2-6: SOCIO-ECONOMIC GUIDELINES APPLICABLE TO THE PROJECT .....................................................30 TABLE 2-7: KEY REQUIREMENTS OF WB ESS AGAINST THE SOUTH AFRICAN LEGISLATION ............. 34 TABLE 3-1 SENSITIVIES IDENTIFIED IN THE DFFE SCREENING REPORT ..... 40 TABLE 3-2 SENSITIVIES IDENTIFIED IN THE DFFE SCREENING REPORT ..... 42 TABLE 3-3: ADDITIONAL SENSITIVITIES IDENTIFIED ................................... 44 TABLE 3-4 SIGNIFICANCE SCREENING TOOL .............................................. 45 TABLE 3-5 PROBABILITY SCORES AND DESCRIPTORS ............................ 45 TABLE 3-6 CONSEQUENCE SCORE DESCRIPTIONS ........................... 45 TABLE 3-7 IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE COLOUR REFERENCE SYSTEM TO INDICATE THE NATURE OF THE IMPACT .......................................... 46 TABLE 4-1: PRELIMINARY STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS ...................................... 50 TABLE 4-2 NOTIFICATION METHODS ........ 54 TABLE 4-3: COMMENTS AND RESPONSES RECEIVED AT FOCUS GROUP MEETING ....................................... 55 TABLE 5-1 HIGH-LEVEL PROJECT SUMMARY – RENEWABLE ENERGY FACILITIES .................. 62 TABLE 5-2: CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES ... 65 TABLE 5-3: OPERATIONAL ACTIVITIES ...... 66 TABLE 5-4: DECOMMISSIONING ACTIVITIES .....................................................67 KOMATI POWER STATION SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC, BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM, WIND WSP ENERGY FACILITIES AND ANCILLARY INFRASTRUCTURE August 2022 Project No. 41103965 ESKOM HOLDINGS SOC (LTD) TABLE 5-5: WASTE MANAGEMENT OPTIONS .....................................................68 TABLE 5-6: PRELIMINARY PROJECT TIMEFRAMES ............................... 69 TABLE 6-1 OPPORTUNITIES AVAILABLE ALONG THE SOLAR VALUE CHAIN ............................................. 73 TABLE 8-1: SENSITIVE RECEPTORS WITHIN A 10 KM RADIUS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT ............... 83 TABLE 8-2: SENSITIVE RECEPTORS WITHIN A 5 KM RADIUS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT ............... 84 TABLE 8-3: HYDROCENSUS BOREHOLES .88 TABLE 8-4: RATINGS FOR THE AQUIFER QUALITY MANAGEMENT CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM ....... 93 TABLE 8-5: APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF GROUNDWATER PROTECTION REQUIRED .................................... 93 TABLE 8-6: AQUIFER CLASSIFICATION AND VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT .....................................................93 TABLE 8-7: LAND CAPABILITY: CLASS CONCEPTS ................................... 95 TABLE 8-8: LAND CAPABILITY: BROAD LAND USE OPTIONS .............................. 96 TABLE 8.9: PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREAS............................................ 97 TABLE 8-10: GROUNDWATER MONITORING DATA (06 JUNE 2022) ............... 102 TABLE 8-11: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS IN SOIL AND GROUNDWATER FOR EACH AREA ............................................ 108 TABLE 8-12: CONFIRMED/EXPECTED SCC IN THE REGION .............................. 118 TABLE 8-13: CONFIRMED/EXPECTED MAMMAL SPECIES WITHIN THE 2629AB AND 2629BA QDS (SYNERGISTICS ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, 2008; ANIMAL DEMOGRAPHIC UNIT VIRTUAL MUSEUM, 2022) ...................................................119 TABLE 8-14: CONFIRMED/EXPECTED BIRD SPECIES WITHIN THE 2629AB QDS (ANIMAL DEMOGRAPHIC UNIT VIRTUAL MUSEUM, 2022) ...................................................120 TABLE 8-15: PREVIOUSLY CONFIRMED FROG SPECIES WITHIN THE 2629BA QDS (ANIMAL DEMOGRAPHIC KOMATI POWER STATION SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC, BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM, WIND WSP ENERGY FACILITIES AND ANCILLARY INFRASTRUCTURE August 2022 Project No. 41103965 ESKOM HOLDINGS SOC (LTD) UNIT VIRTUAL MUSEUM, 2022) ...................................................122 TABLE 8-16: PREVIOUSLY CONFIRMED REPTILE SPECIES WITHIN THE 2629AB AND 2629BA QDS (ANIMAL DEMOGRAPHIC UNIT VIRTUAL MUSEUM, 2022) ........ 123 TABLE 8-17: SUMMARY OF IMPACT SCORES AND PES CLASS ........................ 133 TABLE 8-18: SUMMARY OF WETLAND EIS SCORES AND RATINGS .......... 137 TABLE 8-19: CAPACITY ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR THE WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR ........................................... 142 TABLE 8-20: CAPACITY ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR THE WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR ........................................... 142 TABLE 8-21: DISTRIBUTION OF STLM BY POPULATION GROUP .............. 156 TABLE 8-22: DISTRIBUTION OF STLM BY LANGUAGE SPOKEN ................ 157 TABLE 8-23: DISTRIBUTION OF THE LEVELS OF EDUCATION REPRESENTED IN THE MUNICIPALITY.............. 157 TABLE 9-1: POTENTIAL IMPACTS FOR SOLAR AND BESS FACILITIES ...................................................162 TABLE 9-2: POTENTIAL IMPACTS FOR WEF ...................................................178 TABLE 9-3: WASTE MANAGEMENT OPTIONS ...................................................196 TABLE 10-1: POTENTIAL CONSTRUCTION PHASE IMPACTS ....................... 200 TABLE 10-2: POTENTIAL OPERATIONAL PHASE IMPACTS ....................... 203 TABLE 10-3: POTENTIAL DECOMMISSIONING PHASE IMPACTS ....................... 204 TABLE 10-4: PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES FOR CONSTRUCTION PHASE IMPACTS ..................................... 206 TABLE 10-5: PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES FOR OPERATIONAL PHASE IMPACTS ....................... 213 TABLE 10-6 PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES FOR DECOMISSIONING PHASE IMPACTS ..................................... 215 TABLE 10-7: POTENTIAL CONSTRUCTION PHASE IMPACTS ....................... 219 TABLE 10-8: POTENTIAL OPERATIONAL PHASE IMPACTS ....................... 222 KOMATI POWER STATION SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC, BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM, WIND WSP ENERGY FACILITIES AND ANCILLARY INFRASTRUCTURE August 2022 Project No. 41103965 ESKOM HOLDINGS SOC (LTD) TABLE 10-9: POTENTIAL DECOMMISSIONING PHASE IMPACTS ....................... 224 TABLE 10-10 PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES FOR CONSTRUCTION PHASE IMPACTS ..................................... 226 TABLE 10-11 PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES FOR OPERATIONAL PHASE IMPACTS ....................... 233 TABLE 10-12 PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES FOR DECOMISSIONING PHASE IMPACTS ..................................... 236 TABLE 11-1: NATURE OR TYPE OF IMPACT ...................................................242 TABLE 11-2: PHYSICAL EXTENT RATING OF IMPACT ........................................ 243 TABLE 11-3: DURATION RATING OF IMPACT ...................................................243 TABLE 11-4: REVERSIBILITY OF THE IMPACT ...................................................244 TABLE 11-5: MAGNITUDE RATING OF IMPACT ...................................................244 TABLE 11-6: PROBABILITY RATING OF IMPACT ........................................ 244 TABLE 11-7: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ACTIVITIES DURING ESIA ....... 250 FIGURES FIGURE 1-1: LOCALITY MAP .............................. 3 FIGURE 5-1: ILLUSTRATION OF THE MAIN COMPONENTS OF A SOLAR POWER PLANT ............................ 59 FIGURE 5-2: BESS COMPONENTS SCHEMATIC (SOURCE: WWW.RESEARCHGATE.NET) .. 59 FIGURE 5-3: ILLUSTRATION OF THE MAIN COMPONENTS OF A WIND TURBINE ........................................ 60 FIGURE 5-4: SITE LAYOUT ............................... 61 FIGURE 5-5: TYPICAL TURBINE HARD STANDING REQUIREMENTS (ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES ONLY) ............................................. 63 FIGURE 8-1: AVERAGE, MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM TEMPERATURES FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY TO DECEMBER 2018 FROM THE KOMATI STATION (SAAQIS) ..... 76 KOMATI POWER STATION SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC, BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM, WIND WSP ENERGY FACILITIES AND ANCILLARY INFRASTRUCTURE August 2022 Project No. 41103965 ESKOM HOLDINGS SOC (LTD) FIGURE 8-2: MONTHLY RAINFALL AND AVERAGE HUMIDITY FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY TO DECEMBER 2018 FROM THE KOMATI STATION (SAAQIS) ..... 76 FIGURE 8-3: LOCAL WIND CONDITIONS FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY TO DECEMBER 2018 FROM THE KOMATI STATION (SAAQIS) ..... 78 FIGURE 8-4: TOPOGRAPHY ............................. 79 FIGURE 8-5: GEOLOGICAL MAP OF THE AREA .............................................. 80 FIGURE 8-6: SEISMIC HAZARD MAP AND ZONES (SOURCE: ESKOM, 2022) .....................................................81 FIGURE 8-7: A RECENT SEISMIC HAZARD MAP (2003) OBTAINED FROM THE COUNCIL FOR GEOSCIENCE (SOURCE: ESKOM, 2022)............................... 82 FIGURE 8-8: SITE LAYOUT AND SENSITIVE RECEPTORS FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT ............... 83 FIGURE 8-9: SITE LAYOUT AND SENSITIVE RECEPTORS FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT ............... 85 FIGURE 8-10: QUATERNARY CATCHMENT OF THE PROJECT AREA AND SURROUNDS ............................... 86 FIGURE 8-11: GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION AREA ............... 87 FIGURE 8-12: HYDROCENSUS .......................... 90 FIGURE 8-13: GROUNDWATER CONTOURS (HALENYANE, 2019) .................... 92 FIGURE 8-14: SOIL CLASS .................................. 96 FIGURE 8-15: LAND CAPABILITY (SCHOEMAN ET AL., 2000) ................................. 97 FIGURE 8-16: SAMPLE LOCALITIES ............... 104 FIGURE 8-17: LOCAL AND REGIONAL STUDY AREAS.......................................... 112 FIGURE 8-18: MPUMALANGA BIODIVERSITY SECTOR PLAN IN RELATION TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ...................................................113 FIGURE 8-19: PRIORITY AREAS FOR PROTECTED AREA EXPANSION IN RELATION TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT .. 114 FIGURE 8-20: NATURAL, MODIFIED AND CRITICAL HABITAT ................... 115 FIGURE 8-21: PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IN RELATION TO MUCINA & KOMATI POWER STATION SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC, BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM, WIND WSP ENERGY FACILITIES AND ANCILLARY INFRASTRUCTURE August 2022 Project No. 41103965 ESKOM HOLDINGS SOC (LTD) RUTHERFORD VEGETATION TYPES .......................................... 116 FIGURE 8-22: PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IN RELATION TO THE NATIONAL THREATENED ECOSYSTEMS (SANBI, 2018) ............................. 117 FIGURE 8-23: GRASS OWL SENSITIVITY MAP ...................................................122 FIGURE 8-24: AQUATIC BIODIVERSITY LOCAL STUDY AREA .............................. 124 FIGURE 8-25: AQUATIC BIODIVERSITY REGIONAL STUDY AREA AS DEFINED BY THE QUATERNARY CATCHMENT B11B.................... 124 FIGURE 8-26: MAP OF RELATIVE AQUATIC BIODIVERSITY THEME SENSITIVITY (ENVIRONMENTAL SCREENING TOOL, 2022) ........ 125 FIGURE 8-27: MBSP FRESHWATER ASSESSMENT (MTPA, 2011) ... 126 FIGURE 8-28: STUDY AREA IN RELATION TO FEPA SUB-CATCHMENTS ....... 127 FIGURE 8-29: PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IN RELATION TO NFEPA WETLANDS (2011) ..................... 127 FIGURE 8-30: PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IN RELATION TO NWM5 WETLANDS (2019) ........................................... 128 FIGURE 8-31: AN OVERVIEW OF THE CHANNELLED VALLEY BOTTOM WETLAND (UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM) ......................... 129 FIGURE 8-32: SOIL SAMPLE TAKEN AT 50-60 CM IN THE SEASONAL ZONE OF THE WETLAND ........................... 129 FIGURE 8-33: A) AN OVERVIEW OF SEEP 1 WETLAND AND POOLING OF WATER AT DAM, B) SOIL SAMPLE TAKEN IN THE PERMANENT ZONE OF THE SEEP WETLAND INDICATING SIGNS OF SOIL CONTAMINATION FROM THE ASH DAM ..................................... 130 FIGURE 8-34: AN OVERVIEW OF THE SEEP WETLAND: UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM VIEW ............... 130 FIGURE 8-35: SOIL SAMPLE TAKEN AT THE PERMANENT ZONE OF THE WETLAND .................................... 131 FIGURE 8-36: WETLAND DELINEATION AND CLASSIFICATION ...................... 132 KOMATI POWER STATION SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC, BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM, WIND WSP ENERGY FACILITIES AND ANCILLARY INFRASTRUCTURE August 2022 Project No. 41103965 ESKOM HOLDINGS SOC (LTD) FIGURE 8-37: IMPACTS: A) SOIL EROSION AT CVB MAIN CHANNEL; B) POOLING OF WATER IN DAM; C)EFFLUENT DISCHARGE INTO THE WETLAND; D) CROP FARMING AND CATTLE GRAZING IN WETLAND ............ 134 FIGURE 8-38: ASH DAM FACILITY AND POOLING OF WATER AT DAM135 FIGURE 8-39: IMPACTS: A) POOLING OF WATER AT DAM; B) TRENCHES AND BERMS IN WETLAND; C) EFFLUENT DISCHARGE INTO THE WETLAND FROM A LEAKING PIPE; D) IMPOUNDMENT OF WATER AT ROADS IN WETLAND ................ 136 FIGURE 8-40: ECOSYSTEM SERVICES SUPPLIED BY/DEMANDED FROM THE CVB WETLAND .................. 137 FIGURE 8-41: ECOSYSTEM SERVICES SUPPLIED BY/DEMANDED FROM SEEP WETLANDS...................... 138 FIGURE 8-42: ECOSYSTEM SERVICES SUPPLIED BY/DEMANDED FROM DEPRESSION WETLAND ......... 138 FIGURE 8-43: NATURAL, MODIFIED AND CRITICAL HABITAT ................... 139 FIGURE 8-44: LOCALITY MAP SHOWING ROADS IN THE VICINITY OF THE DEVELOPMENT (ITS, 2022)..... 140 FIGURE 8-45: INTERSECTIONS FOR TRAFFIC COUNT ......................................... 141 FIGURE 8-46: VIEW OF THE PV SITE A FROM THE R542 ARTERIAL ROAD (LOGIS, 2022) ............................. 145 FIGURE 8-47: VIEW OF THE PV SITE B FROM THE WEST ................................... 145 FIGURE 8-48: TYPICAL COAL MINING ACTIVITY WITHIN THE STUDY AREA ...... 146 FIGURE 8-49: GENERAL ENVIRONMENT WITHIN THE STUDY AREA ...... 146 FIGURE 8-50: POWER LINES NEAR THE R542 ARTERIAL ROAD ....................... 147 FIGURE 8-51: THE KOMATI COAL-FIRED POWER STATION AND ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE ...................................................147 FIGURE 8-52: MAP INDICATING THE POTENTIAL (PRELIMINARY) VISUAL EXPOSURE OF THE PROPOSED KOMATI POWER KOMATI POWER STATION SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC, BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM, WIND WSP ENERGY FACILITIES AND ANCILLARY INFRASTRUCTURE August 2022 Project No. 41103965 ESKOM HOLDINGS SOC (LTD) STATION SOLAR PV ENERGY FACILITY ...................................... 149 FIGURE 8-53: MAP INDICATING THE POTENTIAL (PRELIMINARY) VISUAL EXPOSURE OF THE PROPOSED KOMATI POWER STATION BESS .......................... 150 FIGURE 8-54: SOUTH AFRICAN REGIONAL MAP .............................................. 153 FIGURE 8-55: NKANGALA DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY ........................... 154 FIGURE 8-56: STLM POPULATION SIZE ........ 155 FIGURE 8-57: STLM GENDER DISTRIBUTION ...................................................156 APPENDICES PART II – APPENDICES A – D-3 A EAP CVS B SPECIALIST CVS C DFFE SCREENING REPORTS C-1 DFFE Screening Report for Solar PV and BESS C-2 DFFE Screening Report for WEF D PROOF OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION D-1 Proof of Newspaper Adverts D-2 Proof of Site Notices D-3 Focus Group Meeting Register and Notes PART III – APPENDICES E-1 – E-7 E SPECIALIST STUDIES E-1 Air Quality E-2 Noise E-3 Soil and Agricultural Potential E-4 Surface Water E-5 Terrestrial Biodiversity E-6 Heritage E-7 Paleontology KOMATI POWER STATION SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC, BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM, WIND WSP ENERGY FACILITIES AND ANCILLARY INFRASTRUCTURE August 2022 Project No. 41103965 ESKOM HOLDINGS SOC (LTD) PART IV – APPENDICES E-8 – E-14 E-8 Visual E-9 Aquatic Biodiversity E-10 Traffic E-11 Social E-12 Groundwater E-13 Contaminated Land E-14 Geotechnical Desktop Study KOMATI POWER STATION SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC, BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM, WIND WSP ENERGY FACILITIES AND ANCILLARY INFRASTRUCTURE August 2022 Project No. 41103965 ESKOM HOLDINGS SOC (LTD) APPENDIX E-8 VISUAL PROPOSED KOMATI POWER STATION SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC (PV) AND BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM (BESS), MPUMALANGA PROVINCE VISUAL ASSESSMENT – INPUT FOR SCOPING REPORT Produced for: Eskom Holdings SOC (Ltd) On behalf of: WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C Knightsbridge 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston 2191 South Africa Produced by: Lourens du Plessis (PrGISc) t/a LOGIS PO Box 384, La Montagne, 0184 M: 082 922 9019 E: lourens@logis.co.za W: logis.co.za - July 2022 - CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 2. SCOPE OF WORK 3. METHODOLOGY 4. THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 5. VISUAL EXPOSURE/VISIBILITY 6. ANTICIPATED ISSUES RELATED TO THE VISUAL IMPACT 7. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 8. REFERENCES/DATA SOURCES FIGURES Figure 1: Regional locality of the study area. Figure 2: Photovoltaic (PV) solar panels. Figure 3: Aerial view of PV arrays. Figure 4: Aerial view of a BESS facility. Figure 5: Close up view of a BESS facility. Figure 6: Aerial view of the proposed Solar PV Energy Facility Development Footprints (orange PV Site A and white PV Site B) and BESS (blue). Figure 7: View of the PV Site A from the R542 arterial road. Figure 8: View of the PV Site B from the west. Figure 9: Typical coal mining activity within the study area. Figure 10: General environment within the study area. Figure 11: Power lines near the R542 arterial road. Figure 12: The Komati coal-fired power station and associated infrastructure. MAPS Map 1: Shaded relief map of the study area. Map 2: Land cover and broad land use patterns. Map 3: Map indicating the potential (preliminary) visual exposure of the proposed Komati Power Station Solar PV Energy Facility. Map 4: Map indicating the potential (preliminary) visual exposure of the proposed Komati Power Station BESS. TABLES Table 1: Impact table summarising the potential primary visual impacts associated with the proposed PV facility. Lourens du Plessis (t/a LOGIS) is a Professional Geographical Information Sciences (GISc) Practitioner registered with The South African Geomatics Council (SAGC) and specialises in Environmental GIS and Visual Impact Assessments (VIA). Lourens has been involved in the application of Geographical Information Systems (GIS) in Environmental Planning and Management since 1990. He has extensive practical knowledge in spatial analysis, environmental modeling, and digital mapping, and applies this knowledge in various scientific fields and disciplines. His GIS expertise are often utilised in Environmental Impact Assessments, Environmental Management Frameworks, State of the Environment Reports, Environmental Management Plans, tourism development and environmental awareness projects. He holds a BA degree in Geography and Anthropology from the University of Pretoria and worked at the GisLAB (Department of Landscape Architecture) from 1990 to 1997. He later became a member of the GisLAB and in 1997, when Q- Data Consulting acquired the GisLAB, worked for GIS Business Solutions for two years as project manager and senior consultant. In 1999 he joined MetroGIS (Pty) Ltd as director and equal partner until December 2015. From January 2016 he worked for SMEC South Africa (Pty) Ltd as a technical specialist until he went independent and began trading as LOGIS in April 2017. Lourens has received various awards for his work over the past two decades, including EPPIC Awards for ENPAT, a Q-Data Consulting Performance Award and two ESRI (Environmental Systems Research Institute) awards for Most Analytical and Best Cartographic Maps, at Annual International ESRI User Conferences. He is a co-author of the ENPAT atlas and has had several of his maps published in various tourism, educational and environmental publications. He is familiar with the "Guidelines for Involving Visual and Aesthetic Specialists in EIA Processes" (Provincial Government of the Western Cape: Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning) and utilises the principles and recommendations stated therein to successfully undertake visual impact assessments. 1. INTRODUCTION Eskom Holdings SOC (Ltd) (Eskom) is a South African utility that generates, transmits and distributes electricity. Several of Eskom’s coal-fired power stations are reaching the end of life. These power stations will go into extended cold reserve and are most likely to be fully decommissioned in the future (2035). Eskom is considering a shutdown, dismantling and repurposing of some of its fleet as it reaches its end of life. Komati Power Station, situated in Mpumalanga will reach its end-of-life expectancy in September 2022. Eskom is proposing the establishment of a solar electricity generating facility and associated infrastructure as part of its repurposing programme for the Komati Power Station. The plan is to install 100MW of Solar Photovoltaics (PV) and 150MW of Battery Energy Storage System (BESS). The Komati Power Station is situated about 37km from Middelburg, 43km from Bethal and 40km from Emalahleni, via Vandyksdrift in the Mpumalanga Province of South Africa. The power station has a total of 9 units, five 100MW units on the east (Units 1 to 5) and four 125 MW units on the west (Units 6 to 9), with a total installed capacity of 1000 MW. Its units operated on a simple Rankine Cycle without reheat and with a low superheat pressure, resulting in a lower thermodynamic efficiency (efficiency up to 27%). Komati units are small and have a higher operating & maintenance cost per megawatt generated compared to more modern power stations. The specifications of the Solar PV and BESS project are outlined below: • The total site area for PV installation is approximately 200-250 hectares to allow for the construction of a PV facility with capacity up to 100 MW and BESS up to 150 MW. • Solar PV modules, up to a total of approximately 720,000 m2 that converts solar radiation directly into electricity. The solar PV modules will be elevated above the ground, and will be mounted on either fixed tilt systems or tracking systems (comprised of galvanised steel and aluminium). The Solar PV modules will be placed in rows in such a way that there is allowance for a perimeter road and security fencing along the boundaries, and O&M access roads in between the PV module rows. • Inverter stations, each occupying a footprint up to approximately 30 m2, with up to 100 Inverter stations installed on the identified sites. Each Inverter station will contain an inverter step-up transformer, and switchgear. The Inverter stations will be distributed on the site, located alongside its associated Solar PV module arrays. The Inverter station will perform conversion of DC (direct current) to AC (alternating current), and step-up the LV voltage of the inverter to the appropriate voltage to allow the electricity to be fed into the appropriate substation / grid point of connection (PoC). Inverter stations will connect several arrays of Solar PV modules and will be placed along the internal roads for easy accessibility and maintenance. • Below ground electrical cables with trenching for connecting PV arrays, Inverter stations, O&M buildings, and Combiner Substations. • Above ground overhead lines for connecting Combiner Substations to grid PoC. • Adequately designed foundations and mounting structures that will support the Solar PV modules and Inverter stations. • Access roads that provide access to the Komati PV sites. • Perimeter roads around the PV sites. • Internal roads for access to the Inverter stations. • Internal roads/paths between the Solar PV module rows, to allow access to the Solar PV modules for operations and maintenance activities. • Infrastructure required for the operation and maintenance of the Komati PV installations: o Meteorological Station o O&M Building – comprising control room, server room, security equipment room, offices, boardroom, kitchen, and ablution facilities (including water supply and sewage infrastructure) o Spares warehouse and workshop o Hazardous chemical store – approx. 30 m2 o Security building o Parking areas and roads • Small diameter water supply pipeline from existing supply infrastructure. • Fire water supply during construction and operation. • Sewage interconnection to existing infrastructure. • Storm water channels. • Perimeter fencing of the Komati PV sites, with access gates. • Temporary laydown area, occupying a footprint up to approx. 10 hectares. The laydown area will be used during construction and rehabilitated thereafter. • Temporary concrete batching plant, occupying a footprint up to approx. 1 hectare. The concrete batching plant area will be used during construction and rehabilitated thereafter. • Temporary site construction office area, occupying a footprint up to approx. 1 hectare. This area will accommodate the offices for construction contractors during construction and rehabilitated thereafter. Figure 1: Regional locality of the study area. The Solar PV Energy Facility and BESS will take up to 12 months to construct. The operational lifespan of the facility is estimated at up to 25 years. The proposed development sites identified for the Solar PV Energy Facility and associated infrastructure are indicated on the maps within this report. Sample images of similar PV technology and Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) facilities are provided below. Figure 2: Photovoltaic (PV) solar panels. (Photo: SunPower Solar Power Plant – Prieska). Figure 3: Aerial view of PV arrays. (Photo: Scatec Solar South Africa). Figure 4: Aerial view of a BESS facility (Photo: Power Engineering International). Figure 5: Close up view of a BESS facility (Photo: Greenbiz.com). 2. SCOPE OF WORK The scope of the work includes a scoping level visual assessment of the issues related to the visual impact. The scoping phase is the process of determining the spatial and temporal boundaries (i.e. extent) and key issues to be addressed in an impact assessment. The main purpose is to focus the impact assessment on a manageable number of important questions on which decision-making is expected to focus and to ensure that only key issues and reasonable alternatives are examined. The study area for the visual assessment encompasses a geographical area of approximately 220km² (the extent of the full-page maps displayed in this report) and includes a minimum 6km buffer zone (area of potential visual influence) from the proposed project infrastructure. The study area includes predominantly mining and industrial land, farm land and sections of the R35 and R542 arterial roads. 3. METHODOLOGY The study was undertaken using Geographical Information Systems (GIS) software as a tool to generate viewshed analyses and to apply relevant spatial criteria to the proposed facility. A detailed Digital Terrain Model (DTM) for the study area was created from topographical data provided by the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), Earth Observation Research Centre, in the form of the ALOS Global Digital Surface Model "ALOS World 3D - 30m" (AW3D30) elevation model. The methodology utilised to identify issues related to the visual impact included the following activities: • The creation of a detailed digital terrain model of the potentially affected environment. • The sourcing of relevant spatial data. This included cadastral features, vegetation types, land use activities, topographical features, site placement, etc. • The identification of sensitive environments or receptors upon which the proposed facility could have a potential impact. • The creation of viewshed analyses from the proposed project sites in order to determine the visual exposure and the topography's potential to absorb the potential visual impact. The viewshed analyses take into account the dimensions of the proposed structures and activities. This report (scoping report) sets out to identify the possible visual impacts related to the proposed Komati Power Station Solar PV and BESS from a desktop level. 4. THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT The Komati Power Station is situated about 37km from Middelburg, 43km from Bethal and 40km from Emalahleni within the Highveld region of the Mpumalanga Province. It falls within the Steve Tshwete Local Municipality of the Nkangala District Municipality. The larger region is considered as the power generation hub of South Africa with extensive coal fields that cover almost all of the area, numerous large coal mines and an additional seven coal-fired power stations located within a 60km radius of the Komati Power Station. These are: • Kusile • Kendal • Duvha • Hendrina • Arnot • Kriel • Matla The study area for the VIA is centred on the Komati Power Station and includes a 6km buffer zone (zone of potential visual influence) from the Eskom PV project area. Two PV plant development sites are being considered for the Komati Power Station Solar Facility. Site A is located immediately north of the R542 arterial road, approximately 1.6km south-west of the power station. Site B is located immediately west of the Komati residential area, approximately 1.2km west of the power station. This site includes the Komati airstrip. Both sites are considered for development and they are not considered as alternative developments sites. The BESS development sites are located within the power station property; in very close proximity to the existing power station infrastructure i.e. the core power plant, cooling towers and substations. Figure 6: Aerial view of the proposed Solar PV Energy Facility Development Footprints (orange PV Site A and white PV Site B) and BESS (blue). Topography, hydrology and vegetation The study area is situated on land that ranges in elevation from approximately 1,530m (in the south-west of the study area) to 1,700m to the east. The project site itself is located at an average elevation of approximately 1,626m above sea level (see Map 1). The terrain morphological unit identified for the entire study area is described as undulating plains. The most prominent elevated topographical units are the ash dumps, slimes dams and mine dumps surrounding the power station and the Goedehoop Colliery located west of the power station. There are two perennial rivers in the study area, the Koringspruit River (traversing north of the project site) and the Olifants River to the far south-west. Besides these rivers there are a number of non-perennial rivers or streams feeding into the previously mentioned rivers. The study area is characterised by flat or gently undulating terrain, grasslands and has a tropical or subtropical climate. This area also contains pans. A pan is defined as a large, shallow, flat- floored depression found in arid and semi-arid regions and may be flooded seasonally or permanently. There are also a number of man-made dams either related to the agricultural or mining activities of the region. The vegetation type for the entire study area is Eastern Highveld Grassland within the Mesic Highveld Grassland Bioregion of the Grassland Biome. It should be noted that most of the natural grassland has been transformed by either agricultural or mining activities. Wetlands occur along the rivers and drainage lines mentioned above. Other than the natural grassland and wetlands there are very limited additional land cover types, such as woodland in places. There are also very limited exotic plantations. These planted trees are generally associated with farm residences or homesteads throughout the region. Refer to Map 2 for the land cover types and broad land use patterns. Land use and settlement patterns The majority of the study area is relatively sparsely populated with a population density of less than approximately 33 people per km2. Most of these people are located within the towns of Komati (at the power station) or at Blinkpan north of the Goedehoop Colliery. Other than these towns, or residential areas, the rest of the study area is dotted with farm residences or homesteads. These residences are inhabited by the farmers producing mainly maize crops (dryland agriculture) within the region. Other than the agricultural activities the most prominent land use within the area is the mining and the associated power generation activities at the power station. Some of the homesteads within the study area include1: • Rooiblom • Welverdiend (1, 2 and 3) • Broodsnyersplaas • Blinkpan • Geluk • Bultfontein (1 – 8) • Willmansrust • Goedehoop (1, 2 and 3) • Koornfontein It is uncertain whether all of these farmsteads are inhabited or not. It stands to reason that farmsteads that are not currently inhabited will not be visually impacted upon at present. These farmsteads do, however retain the potential to be affected visually should they ever become inhabited again in the future. For this reason, the author of this document operates under the assumption that they are all inhabited. The R35 and R542 arterial roads provide motorised access to the project site from respectively the N4 and N12 national roads traversing north and north-west of the larger region. There are no identified tourist attractions of designated protected areas within the study area.2 In spite of the overall rural character of the region, there are a large number of power lines and substations in the study area, mostly associated with the Komati Power Station, the coal mines and the railway lines traversing the study area. These include: • Camden-Duvha 400kV • Komati-Matla 275kV • Arnot-Kruispunt 275kV • Camden-Komati 275kV • Komati-Kruispunt 275kV 1 The names listed below are of the homestead or farm dwelling as indicated on the SA 1: 50 000 topographical maps and do not refer to the registered farm name. 2 Sources: DEAT (ENPAT Mpumalanga), NBI (Vegetation Map of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland), NLC2018 (ARC/CSIR), REEA_OR_2021_Q1 and SAPAD2021 (DFFE). • Halfgewonnen-Kudu 88kV • Kudu-Export 132kV • Broodsnyersplaas-Spoornet 132kV • Aberdeen-Gloria Colliery 132kV • Export-Duvha Colliery 132kV • Kudu-Nasarete 132kV • Hendrina-Aberdeen 132kV • Aberdeen-Kudu 132kV • Aberdeen-Ysterkop 132kV • Duvha Colliery-Kudu 132kV • Abina 132kV Overhead Line • Kudu-Dorstfontein 88kV • Komati-Kudu 1 and 2 132kV • Aberdeen-Spoornet 132kV • Klicoal-Kudu 132kV • Aberdeen-Gloria Shaft 132kV These power lines and substations are indicated on the maps below. There are no additional solar energy generation plants (or applications) within the study area. The closest approved application is the proposed installation of a solar photovoltaic power plant at the Eskom Duvha Power Station, some 18km north- west of the project site. The photographs below aid in describing the general environment within the study area and surrounding the proposed project infrastructure. Figure 7: View of the PV Site A from the R542 arterial road. Figure 8: View of the PV Site B from the west. Figure 9: Typical coal mining activity within the study area. Figure 10: General environment within the study area. Figure 11: Power lines near the R542 arterial road. Figure 12: The Komati coal-fired power station and associated infrastructure. Map 1: Shaded relief map of the Study Area. Map 2: Land cover and broad land use patterns. 5. VISUAL EXPOSURE/VISIBILITY The result of the viewshed analysis for the proposed Solar PV Energy Facility is shown on the map below (Map 3). The viewshed analysis was undertaken from a representative number of vantage points within the Site A and B development footprints at an offset of 5m above ground level (as a worst-case-scenario). This was done in order to determine the general visual exposure (visibility) of the area under investigation, simulating the maximum height of the proposed structures (PV panels, inverters, BESS, etc.) associated with the proposed project. The visual exposure of the BESS is show on Map 4. It should be noted that the viewshed analysis is based on both the Site A and B project boundaries (in their entirety) as provided and that the results may differ once a final layout, structure positions and dimensions are provided during the EIA phase of the project. The viewshed analysis will be further refined once a preliminary and/or final layout is completed and will be regenerated for the actual position of the infrastructure on the site and actual proposed infrastructure during the EIA phase of the proposed project. Map 3 also indicates proximity radii from the development footprints in order to show the viewing distance (scale of observation) of the facilities in relation to their surrounds. Results – PV facility The PV facility (both sites) is expected to be visible for up to 6km from the development sites. The visual exposure is relatively scattered due to the undulating nature of the topography, with lower-lying land (e.g. along the Koringspruit and Olifants Rivers) shielded from the infrastructure, and only higher-lying terrain being exposed. It should be noted that the potential visual exposure will not occur in isolation, but rather in conjunction with the existing mining, power line and power station infrastructure in closer proximity to the sites. The following is evident from the viewshed analyses: 0 – 1km The PV facility may be highly visible within a 1 km radius. This zone includes the town of Komati where visual exposure is expected from the outlying edges of the built-up areas. The R542 arterial road will be highly exposed to PV Site A where it traverses south of the site. The R35 could similarly be exposed to PV Site A, but from a slightly longer distance. There are a number of homesteads located within a 1km radius of PV Site A, namely the Goedehoop 3 residence and a number of unnamed houses east of the site. 1 – 3km This zone predominantly falls within mining land, vacant farmland an open space, but does contain sections of the abovementioned roads, some houses further south along the R35, and the Geluk homestead east of the power station and the development sites. 3 - 6km Within a 3 – 6km radius, the visual exposure will be significantly reduced, especially to the south-east. Exposed residences may include the Bultfontein 2 and 3 homesteads (to the east) and the Broodsnyersplaas and Welverdiend 3 residences to the north. > 6km At distances exceeding 6km, the intensity of visual exposure is expected to be very low and highly unlikely due to the distance between the object (Solar PV Energy Facility) and the observer, and the developed and industrial nature in closer proximity to the proposed infrastructure. Conclusion In general terms, it is envisaged that the structures, where visible from shorter distances (e.g. less than 1km and potentially up to 3km), and where sensitive visual receptors may find themselves within this zone, may constitute a high visual prominence, potentially resulting in a visual impact. This may include observers travelling along the R542 and R35 arterial roads, residents along the outskirts of the Komati residential area, and the farm residences mentioned above. It should once again be stressed that the visual exposure of the PV facility structures will be in conjunction with the existing visual clutter (power lines, power station and mining infrastructure) within the region. Results – BESS The visual exposure of the BESS infrastructure is expected to be very limited, mainly within a 1km radius of the BESS structures. The only potentially affected receptor site within this zone may be a short section of the R35 arterial road where it traverses east of the power station. The location of the BESS structures immediately adjacent to the power station further reduces the potential visual exposure, and ultimately the potential visual impact, due to the fact that the visual amenity has already been compromised at this location. Map 3: Map indicating the potential (preliminary) visual exposure of the proposed Komati Power Station Solar PV Energy Facility. Map 4: Map indicating the potential (preliminary) visual exposure of the proposed Komati Power Station BESS. 6. ANTICIPATED ISSUES RELATED TO THE VISUAL IMPACT Anticipated issues related to the potential visual impact of the proposed Solar PV Energy Facility include the following: • The visibility of the Solar PV Energy Facility to, and potential visual impact on, observers travelling along the R542 and R35 arterial roads in closer proximity to the proposed infrastructure. • The visibility of the Solar PV Energy Facility to, and potential visual impact on residents of dwellings within the study area, with specific reference to residents of the Komati residential area and the farm residences in closer proximity to the proposed development. • The potential visual impact of the Solar PV Energy Facility on the visual character or sense of place of the region. • The potential visual impact of the Solar PV Energy Facility on tourist routes or tourist destinations/facilities (if present). • The potential visual impact of the construction of ancillary infrastructure (i.e. internal access roads, buildings, power line, etc.) on observers in close proximity to the facility. • The visual absorption capacity of the natural vegetation or built structures/mining infrastructure (if applicable). • Potential cumulative visual impacts (or consolidation of visual impacts), with specific reference to the placement of the Solar PV Energy Facility within a predominantly mining and industrial area. • The potential visual impact of operational, safety and security lighting of the facility at night on observers residing in close proximity of the Solar PV Energy Facility. • Potential visual impact of solar glint and glare as a visual distraction and possible air/road travel hazard (if required). • Potential visual impact of solar glint and glare on static ground-based receptors (residents of homesteads) in close proximity to the Solar PV Energy Facility (if required). • Potential visual impacts associated with the construction phase. • The potential to mitigate visual impacts and inform the design process. It is envisaged that the issues listed above may potentially constitute a visual impact at a local and/or regional scale. These need to be assessed in greater detail during the EIA phase of the proposed project. Table 1: Impact table summarising the potential primary visual impacts associated with the proposed Solar PV Energy Facility. Impact Visual impact of the facility on observers in close proximity to the proposed Solar PV Energy Facility infrastructure and activities. Potential sensitive visual receptors 22 include: • Residents of Komati and farm dwellings (if present in closer proximity to the facility) • Observers travelling along the R542 and R35 arterial roads Issue Nature of Impact Extent of Impact No-Go Areas The viewing Primarily observers The potential negative N.A. of the PV situated within a experience of viewing facility 1km (and the infrastructure and infrastructure activities potentially up to and activities 3km) radius of the facility Description of expected significance of impact Extent: Local Duration: Long term Magnitude: Moderate Probability: Probable Significance: Moderate Status (positive, neutral or negative): Negative Reversibility: Recoverable Irreplaceable loss of resources: No Can impacts be mitigated: Yes Gaps in knowledge & recommendations for further study A preliminary and/or final layout of the Solar PV Energy Facility and ancillary infrastructure is required for further analysis. This includes the provision of the dimensions of the proposed structures and ancillary equipment. Additional spatial analyses are required in order to create a visual impact index that will include the following criteria: • Visual exposure • Visual distance/observer proximity to the structures/activities • Viewer incidence/viewer perception (sensitive visual receptors) • Visual absorption capacity of the environment surrounding the infrastructure and activities Additional activities: • Identify potential cumulative visual impacts • Undertake a site visit • Recommend mitigation measures and/or infrastructure placement alternatives Refer to the Plan of Study for the EIA phase of the project below. 7. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS The fact that some components of the proposed Komati Power Station Solar PV Energy Facility and associated infrastructure may be visible does not necessarily imply a high visual impact. Sensitive visual receptors within (but not restricted to) a 3km buffer zone from the facility need to be identified and the severity of the visual impact assessed within the EIA phase of the proposed project. 23 It is recommended that additional spatial analyses be undertaken in order to create a visual impact index that will further aid in determining potential areas of visual impact. This exercise should be undertaken for the core PV infrastructure (solar field) as well as for the ancillary infrastructure, as these structures (e.g. the BESS structures and power line) are envisaged to have varying levels of visual impact at a more localised scale. The site-specific issues (as mentioned earlier in the report) and potential sensitive visual receptors should be measured against this visual impact index and be addressed individually in terms of nature, extent, duration, probability, severity and significance of visual impact. This recommended work must be undertaken during the EIA Phase of reporting for this proposed project. In this respect, the Plan of Study for the EIA is as follows: Visual Impact Assessment (VIA) The VIA is determined according to the nature, extent, duration, intensity or magnitude, probability and significance of the potential visual impacts, and will propose management actions and/or monitoring programs and may include recommendations related to the solar energy facility layout. The visual impact is determined for the highest impact-operating scenario (worst- case scenario) and varying climatic conditions (i.e. different seasons, weather conditions, etc.) are not considered. The VIA considers potential cumulative visual impacts, or alternatively the potential to concentrate visual exposure/impact within the region. The following VIA-specific tasks must be undertaken: • Determine potential visual exposure The visibility or visual exposure of any structure or activity is the point of departure for the visual impact assessment. It stands to reason that if (or where) the proposed project and associated infrastructure were not visible, no impact would occur. The viewshed analyses of the proposed project and the related infrastructure are based on a detailed digital terrain model of the study area. The first step in determining the visual impact of the proposed project is to identify the areas from which the structures would be visible. The type of structures, the dimensions, the extent of operations and their support infrastructure are taken into account. • Determine visual distance/observer proximity to the proposed Project In order to refine the visual exposure of the proposed project on surrounding areas/receptors, the principle of reduced impact over distance is applied in order to determine the core area of visual influence for this type of structure. Proximity radii for the proposed infrastructure are created in order to indicate the scale and viewing distance of the proposed project and to determine the prominence of the structures in relation to their environment. 24 The visual distance theory and the observer's proximity to the facility are closely related, and especially relevant, when considered from areas with a high viewer incidence and a predominantly (anticipated) negative visual perception of the proposed facility. • Determine viewer incidence/viewer perception (sensitive visual receptors) The next layer of information is the identification of areas of high viewer incidence (i.e. main roads, residential areas, settlements, etc.) that may be exposed to the Project infrastructure. This is done in order to focus attention on areas where the perceived visual impact of the proposed project will be the highest and where the perception of affected observers will be negative. Related to this data set, is a land use character map, that further aids in identifying sensitive areas and possible critical features (i.e. tourist facilities, protected areas, etc.), that should be addressed. • Determine the visual absorption capacity (VAC) of the landscape This is the capacity of the receiving environment to absorb the potential visual impact of the proposed project. The VAC is primarily a function of the vegetation, and will be high if the vegetation is tall, dense and continuous. Conversely, low growing, sparse and patchy vegetation will have a low VAC. The VAC would also be high where the environment can readily absorb the structure in terms of texture, colour, form and light / shade characteristics of the structure. On the other hand, the VAC for a structure contrasting markedly with one or more of the characteristics of the environment would be low. The VAC also generally increases with distance, where discernible detail in visual characteristics of both environment and structure decreases. • Calculate the visual impact index The results of the above analyses are merged in order to determine the areas of likely visual impact and where the viewer perception would be negative. An area with short distance visual exposure to the proposed infrastructure, a high viewer incidence and a predominantly negative perception would therefore have a higher value (greater impact) on the index. This focusses the attention to the critical areas of potential impact and determines the potential magnitude of the visual impact. Geographical Information Systems (GIS) software is used to perform all the analyses and to overlay relevant geographical data sets in order to generate a visual impact index. • Determine impact significance The potential visual impacts are quantified in their respective geographical locations in order to determine the significance of the anticipated impact on identified receptors. Significance is determined as a function of extent, duration, magnitude (derived from the visual impact index) and probability. Potential cumulative and residual visual impacts are also addressed. The results of this section are displayed in impact tables and summarised in an impact statement. 25 • Propose mitigation measures The preferred alternative (or a possible permutation of the alternatives) will be based on its potential to reduce the visual impact. Additional general or site- specific mitigation measures will be proposed in terms of the planning, construction, operation and decommissioning phases of the proposed Project. • Reporting and map display All the data categories, used to calculate the visual impact index, and the results of the analyses will be displayed as maps in the accompanying report. The methodology of the analyses, the results of the visual impact assessment and the conclusion of the assessment will be addressed in the VIA report. • Site visit Undertake a site visit in order to collect a photographic record of the affected environment, to verify the results of the spatial analyses and to identify any additional site-specific issues that may need to be addressed in the VIA report. 8. REFERENCES/DATA SOURCES Chief Directorate National Geo-Spatial Information, varying dates. 1:50 000 Topographical Maps and Data. CSIR, 2015. The Strategic Environmental Assessment for wind and solar photovoltaic energy in South Africa. DFFE, 2018. National Land-cover Database 2018 (NLC2018). DFFE, 2021. South African Protected Areas Database (SAPAD_OR_2021_Q1). DFFE, 2021. South African Renewable Energy EIA Application Database (REEA_OR_2021_Q1). DEA&DP, 2011. Provincial Government of the Western Cape. Guideline on Generic Terms of Reference for EAPS and Project Schedules. Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEA&T), 2001. Environmental Potential Atlas (ENPAT) for the Mpumalanga Province. JAXA, 2021. Earth Observation Research Centre. ALOS Global Digital Surface Model (AW3D30). National Botanical Institute (NBI), 2004. Vegetation Map of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland (Unpublished Beta Version 3.0) Oberholzer, B. (2005). Guideline for involving visual and aesthetic specialists in EIA processes: Edition 1. The Environmental Impact Assessment Amendment Regulations. In Government Gazette Nr. 33306, 18 June 2010. 26 APPENDIX E-9 AQUATIC BIODIVERSITY REPORT Eskom Komati - Aquatic Biodiversity (riparian and wetland systems) Specialist Assessment - Scoping Report Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd Submitted to: Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd Submitted by: Golder Associates Africa (Pty) Ltd. Building 1, Maxwell Office Park, Magwa Crescent West, Waterfall City, Midrand, 1685, South Africa P.O. Box 6001, Halfway House, 1685 +27 11 254 4800 22521869-352949-2 June 2022 Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 Distribution List 1 x electronic copy Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd 1 x electronic copy to SharePoint Site 1 x electronic copy to projectreports@golder.co.za i Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 Executive Summary Eskom Holdings SOC (Ltd) (Eskom) is proposing the establishment of a solar electricity generating facility and associated infrastructure as part of its repurposing programme for Komati Power Station. Eskom plans to install 100MW of Solar Photovoltaics (PV) and 150MW of Battery Energy Storage System (BESS), for which authorisation at a national level, and financing at the international level, must be sought, supported by an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) that is aligned to the requirements of the World Bank Environmental & Social Framework; World Bank Group (WBG) Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines (EHSG) both for general and sector; the International Finance Corporation (IFC) Performance Standards; Good International Industry Practices (GIIP) and South African legislation and applicable regulations. Golder Associates Africa (Pty) (Ltd), now a member of WSP (Golder), was appointed to undertake the necessary aquatic biodiversity baseline specialist studies and impact assessments, in support of the scoping, baseline and impact assessment phases of the environmental regulatory process required to authorise development-related activities. This report describes the baseline aquatic (riparian and wetland) ecology of areas that will be impacted by the proposed infrastructure developments at Eskom Komati Power Station, and documents the scoping-level assessment of the potential impacts of the proposed Project on aquatic ecosystems and biodiversity, i.e. riparian and wetland ecosystems, and associated species. The report also provides recommended measures for the mitigation of any negative impacts for inclusion in the updated EMPr for the Project, as well as guidance on any additional baseline data gathering needs for the ESIA. The proposed study area is located within the B11B quaternary sub-catchment of the upper Olifants Water Management Area. An unnamed tributary of the Koringspruit passes immediately north of the study area while a small drainage line runs through the center of the study area, eventually reporting to the Koornfontein River via the Gras Dam, and ultimately draining into the Olifants River. Based on the National Web-based Environmental Screening Tool, the study area is located within an area classified as having a Very High Sensitivity in terms of the Aquatic Biodiversity Theme. The study area is located within the Eskom Power Station facility and is boarded by a number of land uses such as crop farming, residential setting (both informal and formal) and mining activities. Four Wetland HGM units (Channel valley bottom, two seep wetlands and a depression wetland) were identified and mapped within the study area. These wetlands were considered Largely Modified in terms of their Present Ecological State and are of low/marginal ecological importance. The channeled valley bottom wetland was however assessed as having Moderate importance in terms of its Ecological Importance and Sensitivity as well as having a Moderately high importance in terms of ecosystem services, on account of biodiversity maintenance. The proposed project is likely to have Medium impact significant on wetland systems, with the exception of one potentially high impact significance associated with the loss of wetland habitat. With the implementation of recommended mitigation measures the potential impacts are expected to be of low significance. ii Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 DETAILS OF THE SPECIALIST Table 1: Details of specialist Specialist Information Name: Lufuno Nemakhavhani Phone number: +27 72 718 9952 Email: Lufuno.nemakhavhani@wsp.com SACNASP Registration Number 116461 Curriculum Vitae See APPENDIX B Declaration of Independence by Specialist I, Lufuno Nemakhavhani declare that I – ▪ Act as the independent specialist for the undertaking of a specialist section for the proposed project. ▪ Do not have and will not have any financial interest in the undertaking of the activity, other than remuneration for work performed; ▪ Do not have nor will have a vested interest in the proposed activity proceeding; ▪ Have no, and will not engage in, conflicting interests in the undertaking of the activity; ▪ Undertake to disclose, to the competent authority, any information that have or may have the potential to influence the decision of the competent authority or the objectivity of any report, plan, or document. iii Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Abbreviation Explanation AC Alternating Current BESS Battery Energy Storage System CARA Conservation if Agricultural Resources Act CVB Channel Valley Bottom DC Direct Current DSD Dead Stop Date EA Environmental Authorisation EHSG Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EIS Ecological Importance Sensitivity EMPr Environmental Management Programme ESIA Environmental Social Impact Assessment ESS6 Environmental Social Services 6 FEPA Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas GIIP Good International Industry Practices IFC International Finance Corporation LSA Local Study Area MBSP Mpumalanga Biodiversity Sector Plan MRA Mining Rights Area NEMA National Environmental Management Act NEMBA National Environmental Management Biodiversity Act NFEPA Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas NG Net Gain NNL No Net Loss NPAES National Protected Area Expansion Strategy NWM5 National Wetland Map 5 PES Present Ecological State PoC Point of Connection PV Photovoltaics SANBI South African National Biodiversity Institute WBG World Bank Group iv Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 v Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose of the report ....................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 PROJECT LOCATION AND EXTENT ........................................................................................................ 1 2.1 Current Operation ............................................................................................................................ 1 2.2 Proposed Infrastructure and Activities ............................................................................................. 1 2.2.1 Project Components ................................................................................................................... 2 2.2.2 Solar PV Construction................................................................................................................. 3 2.2.3 Solar PV Operation ..................................................................................................................... 4 3.0 APPLICABLE LEGISLATION, POLICY AND STANDARDS .................................................................... 7 3.1 South African Legislation and Policy ................................................................................................ 7 3.2 Lender requirements ........................................................................................................................ 7 3.2.1 World Bank Environmental and Social Standard 6 ..................................................................... 7 3.2.2 International Finance Corporation’s Performance Standard 6 ................................................... 8 3.3 Good International Industry Practices (GIIP) ................................................................................... 8 4.0 METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................................ 9 4.1 Study Area ....................................................................................................................................... 9 4.2 Literature Review ........................................................................................................................... 12 4.3 Wetland Baseline Assessment ...................................................................................................... 12 4.3.1 Wetland Delineation .................................................................................................................. 12 4.3.2 Wetland Classification............................................................................................................... 13 4.3.3 Present Ecological State (PES) ................................................................................................ 14 4.3.4 Wetland Ecosystem Services ................................................................................................... 14 4.3.5 Ecological Importance and Sensitivity ...................................................................................... 15 4.4 Scoping Level Screening of Impacts and Mitigation ...................................................................... 16 4.5 Study Assumptions and Limitations ............................................................................................... 18 4.5.1 Data used for Specialist Assessments ..................................................................................... 18 4.5.2 Assumptions, uncertainties, or gaps in knowledge ................................................................... 18 5.0 BASELINE DESCRIPTION ....................................................................................................................... 18 5.1 Regional Biodiversity Context ........................................................................................................ 18 vi Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 5.1.1 Environmental Screening Tool .................................................................................................. 18 5.1.2 Freshwater Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBAs) and Ecological Support Areas (ESAs) ............ 18 5.1.3 Strategic Water Source Areas (SWSAs) .................................................................................. 19 5.1.4 Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Area (FEPA) sub-catchments ................................................. 19 5.2 Wetlands ........................................................................................................................................ 25 5.2.1 Delineation and classification ................................................................................................... 25 5.2.1.1 Channelled Valley Bottom wetland ........................................................................................ 25 5.2.1.2 Seep 1.................................................................................................................................... 26 5.2.1.3 Seep 2.................................................................................................................................... 27 5.2.1.4 Depression ............................................................................................................................. 27 5.2.2 Present Ecological State ........................................................................................................... 29 5.2.2.1 Channelled Valley Bottom ..................................................................................................... 29 5.2.2.2 Seep 1.................................................................................................................................... 30 5.2.2.3 Seep 2.................................................................................................................................... 31 5.2.2.4 Depression ............................................................................................................................. 32 5.2.3 Ecological Importance and Sensitivity ...................................................................................... 32 5.2.4 Ecoservices ............................................................................................................................... 33 5.3 Existing Impacts on Biodiversity and Drivers of Change ............................................................... 35 5.4 Natural, Modified and Critical Habitats ........................................................................................... 35 6.0 SCREENING OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS ................................................................................................ 36 6.1 Construction Phase ........................................................................................................................ 36 6.1.1 Loss of wetland habitat ............................................................................................................. 36 6.1.2 Changes in wetland health/functioning ..................................................................................... 36 6.1.3 Contamination of riparian systems ........................................................................................... 37 6.1.4 Soil erosion ............................................................................................................................... 37 6.1.5 Establishment and spread of alien invasive species ................................................................ 37 6.2 Operational Phase ......................................................................................................................... 37 6.2.1 Spread of alien and invasive species ....................................................................................... 37 6.2.2 Soil Erosion ............................................................................................................................... 37 6.2.3 Water quality deterioration and contamination of wetland soils ............................................... 38 6.3 Mitigation Measures ....................................................................................................................... 40 6.3.1 Identification of areas to be avoided (including buffers) ........................................................... 40 vii Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 6.3.2 Minimisation .............................................................................................................................. 40 6.3.3 Alien and Invasive Species Management ................................................................................. 40 6.3.4 Biodiversity Management Plan ................................................................................................. 40 6.4 Monitoring Requirements ............................................................................................................... 41 6.5 Cumulative Impacts ........................................................................................................................ 41 7.0 ADDITIONAL PLANNED STUDIES TO BE COMPLETED DURING ESIA ............................................. 41 8.0 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................... 42 TABLES Table 1: Details of specialist ................................................................................................................................ iii Table 2: Wetland Hydrogeomorphic Units (after Kotze et al., 2008) .................................................................. 13 Table 3: Impact scores and categories of Present Ecological State used by WET-Health for describing the integrity of wetlands (Macfarlane et al., 2020) ..................................................................................... 14 Table 4: Ecosystem services classes and descriptions (Kotze et al., 2020). ..................................................... 15 Table 5: Ecological importance and sensitivity categories ................................................................................. 16 Table 6: Significance screening tool ................................................................................................................... 16 Table 7: Probability scores and descriptors........................................................................................................ 16 Table 8: Consequence score descriptions ......................................................................................................... 17 Table 9: Impact Significance Colour Reference System to Indicate the Nature of the Impact .......................... 17 Table 10: Summary of Impact Scores and PES Class ....................................................................................... 29 Table 11: Summary of wetland EIS scores and ratings. .................................................................................... 33 Table 12: Wetland Impact Assessment summary .............................................................................................. 39 Figure 1: Locality Map- Eskom Komati Power Station ......................................................................................... 5 Figure 2: Proposed infrastructure overview .......................................................................................................... 6 Figure 3: Aquatic biodiversity local study area ................................................................................................... 10 Figure 4: Aquatic biodiversity regional study area as defined by the quaternary catchment B11B ................... 11 Figure 5: Map of relative Aquatic Biodiversity Theme Sensitivity (Environmental Screening Tool, 2022) ......... 20 Figure 6: MBSP Freshwater Assessment (MTPA, 2011) ................................................................................... 21 Figure 7: Study area in relation to FEPA sub-catchments ................................................................................. 22 Figure 8: Proposed development in relation to NFEPA wetlands (2011) ........................................................... 23 Figure 9: Proposed development in relation to NWM5 wetlands (2019) ............................................................ 24 Figure 10: An overview of the Channelled valley Bottom wetland (upstream and downstream) ....................... 25 Figure 11: Soil Sample taken at 50-60 cm in the seasonal zone of the wetland................................................ 26 viii Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 Figure 12: a) An overview of Seep 1 wetland and pooling of water at dam, b) Soil sample taken in the permanent zone of the seep wetland indicating signs of soil contamination from the ash dam .......... 26 Figure 13: An overview of the seep wetland: upstream and downstream view ................................................. 27 Figure 14: Soil sample taken at the permanent zone of the wetland ................................................................. 27 Figure 15: Wetland delineation and classification .............................................................................................. 28 Figure 16: Impacts: a) Soil Erosion at CVB main channel; b) pooling of water in dam; c)effluent discharge into the wetland; d) crop farming and cattle grazing in wetland .................................................................. 30 Figure 17: Ash dam facility and pooling of water at dam .................................................................................... 31 Figure 18: Impacts: a) pooling of water at dam; b) trenches and berms in wetland; c) effluent discharge into the wetland from a leaking pipe; d) impoundment of water at roads in wetland .................................. 32 Figure 20: Ecosystem Services supplied by/demanded from the CVB wetland. .............................................. 33 Figure 21: Ecosystem Services supplied by/demanded from seep wetlands ................................................... 34 Figure 22: Ecosystem Services supplied by/demanded from Depression wetland........................................... 34 FIGURES Figure 1: Locality Map- Eskom Komati Power Station ......................................................................................... 5 Figure 2: Proposed infrastructure overview .......................................................................................................... 6 Figure 3: Aquatic biodiversity local study area ................................................................................................... 10 Figure 4: Aquatic biodiversity regional study area as defined by the quaternary catchment B11B ................... 11 Figure 5: Map of relative Aquatic Biodiversity Theme Sensitivity (Environmental Screening Tool, 2022) ......... 20 Figure 6: MBSP Freshwater Assessment (MTPA, 2011) ................................................................................... 21 Figure 7: Study area in relation to FEPA sub-catchments ................................................................................. 22 Figure 8: Proposed development in relation to NFEPA wetlands (2011) ........................................................... 23 Figure 9: Proposed development in relation to NWM5 wetlands (2019) ............................................................ 24 Figure 10: An overview of the Channelled valley Bottom wetland (upstream and downstream) ....................... 25 Figure 11: Soil Sample taken at 50-60 cm in the seasonal zone of the wetland................................................ 26 Figure 12: a) An overview of Seep 1 wetland and pooling of water at dam, b) Soil sample taken in the permanent zone of the seep wetland indicating signs of soil contamination from the ash dam .......... 26 Figure 13: An overview of the seep wetland: upstream and downstream view ................................................. 27 Figure 14: Soil sample taken at the permanent zone of the wetland ................................................................. 27 Figure 15: Wetland delineation and classification .............................................................................................. 28 Figure 16: Impacts: a) Soil Erosion at CVB main channel; b) pooling of water in dam; c)effluent discharge into the wetland; d) crop farming and cattle grazing in wetland .................................................................. 30 Figure 17: Ash dam facility and pooling of water at dam .................................................................................... 31 Figure 18: Impacts: a) pooling of water at dam; b) trenches and berms in wetland; c) effluent discharge into the wetland from a leaking pipe; d) impoundment of water at roads in wetland .................................. 32 Figure 19: Ecosystem Services supplied by/demanded from the CVB wetland. .............................................. 33 ix Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 Figure 20: Ecosystem Services supplied by/demanded from seep wetlands ................................................... 34 Figure 21: Ecosystem Services supplied by/demanded from Depression wetland........................................... 34 APPENDICES APPENDIX A Document Limitations APPENDIX B Specialist CV x Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Eskom Holdings SOC (Ltd) (Eskom) is proposing the establishment of a solar electricity generating facility and associated infrastructure as part of its repurposing programme for Komati Power Station, which is situated in Mpumalanga, about halfway between Middelburg and Bethal (Figure 1). Eskom plans to install 100MW of Solar Photovoltaics (PV) and 150MW of Battery Energy Storage System (BESS), for which authorisation at a national level, and financing at the international level, must be sought, supported by an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) that is aligned to the requirements of the World Bank Environmental & Social Framework; World Bank Group (WBG) Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines (EHSG) both for general and sector; the International Finance Corporation (IFC) Performance Standards; Good International Industry Practices (GIIP) and South African legislation and applicable regulations. Golder Associates Africa (Pty) (Ltd), now a member of WSP (Golder), was appointed to undertake the necessary ecological baseline studies and impact assessments, in support of the scoping, baseline and impact assessment phases of the environmental regulatory process required to authorise development-related activities. 1.1 Purpose of the report This report describes the baseline aquatic biodiversity (riparian and wetland systems) of areas that will be impacted by the proposed infrastructure developments at Komati Power Station and documents the results of the scoping-level screening of the potential impacts of the proposed Project on riparian and wetland ecosystems and species. The report also provides a preliminary set of recommended measures for the mitigation of any negative impacts for inclusion in the updated EMPr for the Project, to ensure that the lender objectives of No Net Loss (NNL) of Natural Habitats, and Net Gain (NG) of Critical habitats, as well as South African biodiversity legislation and policy requirements, are satisfactorily met. 2.0 PROJECT LOCATION AND EXTENT The Komati Power Station is situated about 37 km from Middelburg, 43 km from Bethal and 40 km from Witbank, via Vandyksdrift in the Mpumalanga Province of South Africa (Figure 1). 2.1 Current Operation The station has a total of nine units, five 100MW units on the east (Units 1 to 5) and four 125 MW units on the west (Units 6 to 9), with a total installed capacity of 1000 MW. Komati Power Station will reach its end-of-life expectancy in September 2022 when Unit 9 will have reached its dead stop date (DSD). Units 1 to 8 have already reached its DSD. 2.2 Proposed Infrastructure and Activities Eskom is proposing the establishment of a solar electricity generating facility and associated infrastructure as part of its repurposing programme for Komati Power Station. The plan is to install 100MW of Solar Photovoltaics (PV) and 150MW of Battery Energy Storage System (BESS). The parcels of land in Komati for the proposed development are owned by Eskom. The proposed infrastructure that are the subject of the current application process are illustrated in Figure 2. 1 Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 2.2.1 Project Components The specifications of the Solar PV and BESS project including aspects of construction and operation are outlined below: ▪ The total site area for PV installation is approximately 200-250 hectares to allow for the construction of a PV facility with capacity up to 100 MW and BESS up to 150 MW. ▪ Solar PV modules, up to a total of approximately 720,000 m2, that convert solar radiation directly into electricity. The solar PV modules will be elevated above the ground and will be mounted on either fixed tilt systems or tracking systems (comprised of galvanised steel and aluminium). The Solar PV modules will be placed in rows in such a way that there is allowance for a perimeter road and security fencing along the boundaries, and O&M access roads in between the PV module rows. ▪ Inverter stations, each occupying a footprint up to approximately 30 m 2, with up to 100 Inverter stations installed on the identified sites. Each Inverter station will contain an inverter step-up transformer, and switchgear. The Inverter stations will be distributed on the site, located alongside its associated Solar PV module arrays. The Inverter station will perform conversion of DC (direct current) to AC (alternating current), and step-up the LV voltage of the inverter to the appropriate voltage to allow the electricity to be fed into the appropriate substation / grid point of connection (PoC). Inverter stations will connect several arrays of Solar PV modules and will be placed along the internal roads for easy accessibility and maintenance. ▪ Below ground electrical cables with trenching for connecting PV arrays, Inverter stations, O&M buildings, and Combiner Substations. ▪ Above ground overhead lines for connecting Combiner Substations to grid PoC. ▪ Adequately designed foundations and mounting structures that will support the Solar PV modules and Inverter stations. ▪ Access roads that provide access to the Komati PV sites. ▪ Perimeter roads around the PV sites. ▪ Internal roads for access to the Inverter stations. ▪ Internal roads/paths between the Solar PV module rows, to allow access to the Solar PV modules for operations and maintenance activities. ▪ Infrastructure required for the operation and maintenance of the Komati PV installations: - ▪ Meteorological Station ▪ O&M Building – comprising control room, server room, security equipment room, offices, boardroom, kitchen, and ablution facilities (including water supply and sewage infrastructure) ▪ Spares Warehouse and Workshop ▪ Hazardous Chemical Store – approx. 30 m2 ▪ Security Building ▪ Parking areas and roads ▪ Small diameter water supply pipeline from existing supply infrastructure. ▪ Fire water supply during Construction and Operation. 2 Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 ▪ Sewage interconnection to existing infrastructure. ▪ Stormwater channels. ▪ Perimeter fencing of the Komati PV sites, with access gates. ▪ Temporary laydown area, occupying a footprint up to approx. 10 hectares. The laydown area will be used during construction and rehabilitated thereafter. ▪ Temporary concrete batching plant, occupying a footprint up to approx. 1 hectare. The concrete batching plant area will be used during construction and rehabilitated thereafter. ▪ Temporary site construction office area, occupying a footprint up to approx. 1 hectare. This area will accommodate the offices for construction contractors during construction and rehabilitated thereafter. 2.2.2 Solar PV Construction It is estimated that approximately 200-300 construction workers will be required on the site. During the construction phase of the project the following activities are anticipated: ▪ Site Preparation - Vegetation and topsoil will be cleared for the footprint of the infrastructure as well as for the access roads to the solar PV site, internal roads and the laydown yard, etc. The topsoil removed will need to be stored for rehabilitation purposes of the site. ▪ Transportation of Equipment - All equipment to site will be transported by means of national, provincial and district roads. This includes but is not limited to, transformers, solar PV modules, inverters, excavators, graders, trucks, compacting equipment, construction material, etc. ▪ Site Establishment Works - The site will have temporary laydown areas and offices for the construction contractors. This will include the contractor’s chosen electricity supply infrastructure e.g. use of generators and fuel storage that will be required to conform to acceptable measures to ensure no harm to the environment. The laydown area will also be used for assembling of solar PV modules and structures. A concrete batching plant may also be required as part of the site establishment works. ▪ Construction of the Solar PV Facility ▪ Trenches would need to be excavated for underground cabling to connect Solar PV arrays, Inverter stations, and Combiner Substations. ▪ Foundations for the solar PV array mounting structures and Inverter stations may need to be excavated, with the final extent depending on the geotechnical studies that will be conducted. The geotechnical studies will determine the type of foundations that can be utilised at the PV site. ▪ Construction of access, perimeter, and internal gravel roads may require material to be imported from outside the site, from a permitted quarry. ▪ Water consumption during construction phase - The water consumption during the construction phase is estimated as 15,000 kilolitres (total for construction period estimated as 24 months). ▪ Construction of Electrical Interconnection Line - Construction and installation of overhead electrical interconnection lines, connecting the Solar PV facilities to the grid PoC. ▪ Storage of diesel and oil for construction activities. ▪ Once all the construction activities are completed the site will be rehabilitated where possible and practical. All temporal structures and facilities will be removed from site and the area rehabilitated. 3 Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 ▪ Solar glare reflection – proximity to air strip. ▪ End of life waste management for both solar panels and batteries. 2.2.3 Solar PV Operation The solar PV plant has a minimum design life of 25 years. ▪ During the life of the Solar PV facility, there will be normal maintenance of all electrical and mechanical components of the plant. ▪ In addition, there will be periodic cleaning and washing of the solar PV modules. This PV module cleaning will be performed when required, and it is estimated to occur 2-4 times a year. ▪ The water consumption during operation - estimated water required per year during operation is 10,000 kilolitres (total per year for design life of plant). . 4 Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 Figure 1: Locality Map- Eskom Komati Power Station 5 Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 Figure 2: Proposed infrastructure overview 6 Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 3.0 APPLICABLE LEGISLATION, POLICY AND STANDARDS The ESIA must be aligned to the requirements of the World Bank Environmental & Social Framework; World Bank Group (WBG) Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines (EHSG) both for general and sector; the International Finance Corporation (IFC) Performance Standards; and Good International Industry Practices (GIIP) and South African legislation and applicable regulations. Biodiversity-related South African legislation and policy, and international lender standard requirements that were used to guide this scoping assessment are summarized as follows. 3.1 South African Legislation and Policy Applicable national and provincial legislation, associated regulations and policies that are pertinent to wetlands, which were used to guide the EIA, include: ▪ National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) (Act No. 107 of 1998) including Section 24, concerning Procedures for the assessment and minimum criteria for reporting on identified themes in terms of Sections 24(5)(a) and (h) and 44 of the NEMA, when applying for environmental authorisation; ▪ Protocol for the specialist assessment and minimum report content requirements for environmental impacts on aquatic biodiversity; ▪ National Water Act (Act No. 36 of 1998); ▪ Mpumalanga Nature Conservation Act (Act No. 10 of 1998); ▪ Mpumalanga Biodiversity Sector Plan (Lötter, 2015). ▪ National Protected Area Expansion Strategy (2016). 3.2 Lender requirements The ESIA must be aligned to the requirements of the World Bank Environmental & Social Framework; World Bank Group (WBG) Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines (EHSG) both for general and sector; the International Finance Corporation (IFC) Performance Standards; and Good International Industry Practices (GIIP) and South African legislation and applicable regulations. Biodiversity-related South African legislation and policy, and international lender standard requirements that were used to guide this scoping assessment are summarised as follows. 3.2.1 World Bank Environmental and Social Standard 6 The World Bank’s (WB) Environmental and Social Standard 6 (ESS6) on Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Management of Living Natural Resources (World Bank, 2016) separates habitat into four categories for the purposes of implementing a differentiated risk management approach to habitats based on their sensitivity and values. The categories include ‘Modified habitat’, ‘Natural habitat’, ‘Critical Habitat’ and ‘Legally protected and internationally and regionally recognized areas of biodiversity value’ ; each of which have varying levels of Borrower obligation in terms of biodiversity mitigation and management, and offset requirements. Whilst the assessment of Modified and Natural habitats is largely based on the establishment of the ecological condition of mapped habitat/vegetation units, and the boundaries of legally protected and/or internationally recognised areas of high biodiversity value are generally defined; the identification and assessment of Critical Habitat requires additional, focussed effort – usually focussed on the presence of Critically Endangered, Endangered, range-restricted or migratory/congregatory species in significant numbers. 7 Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 3.2.2 International Finance Corporation’s Performance Standard 6 ▪ The IFC’s Performance Standard 6 also sets specific biodiversity protection and conservation standards relating to potential project impact; that are largely aligned with the ESS6 requirements. The specific requirements are separated according to the following categories: ▪ Modified Habitat: areas that may contain a large proportion of plant and/or animal species of non-native origin, and/or where human activity has substantially modified an area’s primary ecological functions and species composition. PS6 relates to areas of modified habitat that have significant biodiversity value and requires that impacts on such biodiversity must be minimised, and mitigation measures implemented as appropriate. ▪ Natural Habitat: viable assemblages of plant and/or animal species of largely native origin, and/or where human activity has not essentially modified an area’s primary ecological functions and species composition. In such areas, the conservation outcome required by PS6 is no-net-loss of biodiversity value achieved using the “like-for-like” or better principle of biodiversity offsets, where feasible. ▪ Critical Habitat: areas with high biodiversity value, including (i) habitat of significant importance to Critically Endangered and/or Endangered species; (ii) habitat of significant importance to endemic and/or restricted- range species; (iii) habitat supporting globally significant concentrations of migratory species and/or congregatory species; (iv) highly threatened and/or unique ecosystems; and/or (v) areas associated with key evolutionary processes. When a project occurs in critical habitat supporting exceptional biodiversity value, a net gain in biodiversity value is required by PS6. This is achievable through appropriate biodiversity offsets. ▪ Legally Protected and Internationally Recognised Areas: such areas often have high biodiversity value; when this is the case these areas are likely to qualify as critical habitat. As such, the conservation outcome required by PS6 is also a net gain in biodiversity value, as well as obtaining the relevant legal permits, following standard governmental regulatory procedures, and engagement of affected communities and other stakeholders. ▪ Invasive Alien Species: the development project should not intentionally introduce any new alien species (unless carried out within the appropriate regulatory permits) and should not deliberate any alien species with a high risk of invasive behaviour under any circumstance. PS6 requires that any introduction of alien species be the subject of a risk assessment for potential invasive behaviour, and that the project should implement measures to avoid the potential for accidental or unintended introductions 3.3 Good International Industry Practices (GIIP) Best practice guidelines that were taken into consideration in the development of the scoping report are listed below. These guidelines are generally accepted as the best practice standards for usage in wetland and riparian habitat assessment in South Africa: ▪ A Practical Field Procedure for the Identification and Delineation of Wetlands and Riparian Areas”, DWAF (2005) and updated by DWAF (2008), ▪ WET-Health Version 2.0: A refined suite of tools for assessing the present ecological state of wetland ecosystems- technical guide. Report No. TT 820/20 (Macfarlane, et al., 2008) ▪ WET-EcoServices Version 2.0: A technique for rapidly assessing ecosystem services supplied by wetlands and riparian areas. WRC Report No. TT 833/20. Water Research Commission, Pretoria, South Africa (Kotze, D., Macfarlane et al., 2020) 8 Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 ▪ Manual for the Rapid Ecological Reserve Determination of Inland Wetlands (Version 2.0). WRC Report No. 1788/1/13. Water Research Commission, Pretoria (Rountree et al., 2013). 4.0 METHODOLOGY The aquatic biodiversity baseline description and preliminary impact assessment took cognisance of Government Notice No. 320, published in 2020 under the National Environmental Management Act (1998) concerning ‘Procedures for the Assessment and Minimum Criteria for Reporting on Identified Environmental Theme in terms of Sections 24(5)(a) and (h) and 44 of the National Environmental Management Act (1998), when applying for Environmental Authorisation’. In line with the assessment and reporting requirements set out in the protocol, the aquatic ecology assessment included two main study components; a desktop literature review, supplemented by a wetland delineation and assessment field survey conducted on the 31st of May and the 01st of June 2022. The objectives and tasks associated with these components are described below. 4.1 Study Area The study area for the Aquatic Specialist Assessment was defined at two levels: ▪ Local study area: The proposed development footprint plus a 500 m buffer, so that the project interaction with any watercourses and their ‘regulated zone’ as defined by the National Water Act can be identified, since this is the area within which direct impacts on biodiversity receptors (i.e. wetlands / aquatic ecosystems) could occur (Figure 3); ▪ Regional study area: The catchment within which the proposed development is situated, which is considered to be an ecologically appropriate area of analysis within which indirect impacts on aquatic receptors (e.g. downstream water quality deterioration, alteration of sub-catchment hydrology, soil erosion, hydrological changes) could occur (Figure 4). 9 Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 Figure 3: Aquatic biodiversity local study area 10 Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 Figure 4: Aquatic biodiversity regional study area as defined by the quaternary catchment B11B 11 Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 4.2 Literature Review The aim of the desktop literature review component was to collate and review the extensive available ecological information related to important aquatic biodiversity features in the Eskom Komati power station area of influence, key wetland processes and function, and the likely composition and structure of local riparian and wetland communities. The existing comprehensive specialist reports that were reviewed and consolidated to assess aquatic biodiversity include: 1) Komati Power Station Hydrological & Geohydrological Baseline Study December 2008 (GHT Consulting Services, 2009) 2) Construction and Operation of Ash Dam Extension 3 & The Deviation Of Transmission And Distribution Lines At Komati Power Station, Mpumalanga (Synergistics Environmental Services 2008). Other sources that were also used in the description of the regional aquatic resources included: 1) Nationally-available datasets which were consulted to inform the site sensitivity verification for wetland and riparian habitat include the South African National Wetland Map version 5 (NWM5) (Van Deventer et al., 2019), and the National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Area database; and 2) The formal conservation context of the region at a provincial and national level was established based on the Mpumalanga Biodiversity Sector Plan (2019), the National List of Threatened Ecosystems (NEMBA Threatened Ecosystems, 2011), the South African Protected Areas Database (SAPAD), the South African Conservation Areas Database (SACAD) and the national protected area expansion strategy; 3) National spatial planning datasets, namely the Mpumalanga Biodiversity Sector Plan (freshwater), National Freshwater Ecological Priority Areas (NFEPA), National Wetland Map version 5 (NWM5), National Environmental Management Biodiversity Act (Act No 10 of 2004)) (NEMBA), Threatened Ecosystems, and national protected area expansion strategy, provide a regional/national context for assessing the biodiversity significance of the site. 4.3 Wetland Baseline Assessment A field survey to identify and delineate the wetlands within 500 m of the proposed Project infrastructure footprint was conducted on 31 May and 01 June 2022. The methods used in the identification, delineation, classification and assessment of wetlands in the study area are described in the sections that follow. 4.3.1 Wetland Delineation The delineation procedure originally set out in “A Practical Field Procedure for the Identification and Delineation of Wetlands and Riparian Areas”, DWAF (2005) and updat ed by DWAF (2008), describes the following four indicators of wetland presence that can be used to define the boundary of a wetland: 1) The position in the landscape, which helps identify those parts of the landscape where wetlands are more likely to occur; 2) The type of soil form (i.e. the type of soil according to a standard soil classification system), since wetlands are associated with certain soil types; 3) The presence of wetland vegetation species, and 4) The presence of redoxymorphic soil features, which are morphological signatures that appear in soils with prolonged periods of saturation (due to the anaerobic conditions which result). 12 Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 These indicators were used in the field to delineate the outer boundary of wetland systems encountered within the study area. 4.3.2 Wetland Classification To allow for the differentiation between wetland systems and the prioritisation of systems either for conservation or management purposes, the wetlands were classified in accordance with each hydrogeomorphic (HGM) unit for assessment purposes according to (Kotze et al., 2008). Six major inland HGM types are recognised for the purposes of wetland classification (Table 2), and these criteria were applied to the current assessment. Table 2: Wetland Hydrogeomorphic Units (after Kotze et al., 2008) Wetland Hydro- Description Source of water geomorphic type maintaining the wetland1 Surface Sub-surface Floodplain Valley bottom areas with a well-defined stream channel, *** * gently sloped and characterised by floodplain features such as oxbow depressions and natural levees and the alluvial (by water) transport and deposition of sediment, usually leading to a net accumulation of sediment. Water inputs from main channel (when channel banks overspill) and from adjacent slopes. Channelled valley Valley bottom areas with a well-defined stream channel *** */*** bottom but lacking characteristic floodplain features. May be gently sloped and characterised by the net accumulation of alluvial deposits or may have steeper slopes and be characterized by the net loss of sediment. Water inputs from main channel (when channel banks overspill) and from adjacent slopes. Unchannelled Valley bottom areas with no clearly defined stream *** */*** valley bottom channel, usually gently sloped and characterised by alluvial sediment deposition, generally leading to a net accumulation of sediment. Water inputs mainly from channel entering the wetland and also from adjacent slopes. Hillslope seepage Slopes on hillsides, which are characterized by the * *** with channelled colluvial (transported by gravity) movement of outflow materials. Water inputs are mainly from sub-surface flow and outflow is usually via a well-defined stream channel connecting the area directly to a stream channel. Hillslope seepage Slopes on hillsides, which are characterized by the * *** without channelled colluvial movement of materials. Water inputs mainly outflow from sub-surface flow and outflow either very limited or through diffuse sub-surface and/or surface flow but with no direct surface water connection to a stream channel. Depression A basin shaped area with a closed elevation contour */*** */*** (includes pans) that allows for the accumulation of surface water (i.e. it is inward draining). It may also receive sub-surface water. An outlet is usually absent, and therefore this type is usually isolated from the stream channel network. 1 Precipitationis an important water source and evapotranspiration an important output in all of the above settings. Water source: * Contribution usually small; *** Contribution usually large; **** Contribution may be small or important depending on the local circumstances 13 Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 4.3.3 Present Ecological State (PES) WET-Health (Macfarlane et al., 2020) provides an appropriate framework for undertaking an assessment to indicate the ecological integrity of each of the wetland systems being assessed. The outcome of the assessment also highlights specific impacts, therefore highlighting issues that should be addressed through mitigation and rehabilitation interventions. A level 2 Wet-Health approach was applied for this study, which assesses wetlands using four characteristics, namely hydrology, geomorphology, vegetation and water quality. Each of these modules follows a broadly similar approach and is used to evaluate the extent to which anthropogenic changes have an impact on wetland functioning or condition. The purpose of WET-Health is to aid users in understanding the ecological condition of the wetland and to identify the causes of degradation. The four drivers are assessed by taking into account the extent, intensity and magnitude of an impact which then produces a health score. Evaluation scores within each driver are then combined to produce an overall impact of activities on the wetland system which corresponds to a Present State health category that provides an impact score scale of 0-10 and associated health category (ecological state) from A-F (Table 3). Table 3: Impact scores and categories of Present Ecological State used by WET-Health for describing the integrity of wetlands (Macfarlane et al., 2020) Impact Description Impact Score Present Category Range Ecological State Category None Unmodified, or approximates natural condition 0 – 0.9 A Small Largely natural with few modifications, but with some 1 – 1.9 B loss of natural habitats Moderate Moderately modified, but with some loss of natural 2 – 3.9 C habitats Large Largely modified. A large loss of natural habitat and 4 – 5.9 D basic ecosystem function has occurred Serious Seriously modified. The losses of natural habitat and 6 – 7.9 E ecosystem functions are extensive Critical Critically modified. Modification has reached a critical 8 – 10.0 F level and the system has been modified completely with almost complete loss of natural habitat 4.3.4 Wetland Ecosystem Services Wetlands are specialised systems that perform ecological functions vital for human welfare and environmental sustainability. The WET – Ecoservices tool (Kotze et al., 2020), a technique for rapidly assessing ecosystem services supplied by wetlands, was used to determine the key ecological services provided by each wetland in the study area. The rapid field assessment (version 2) approach was applied, and the following services were examined and rated: ▪ Flood attenuation; ▪ Toxicant assimilation; ▪ Food for livestock; ▪ Stream flow regulation; ▪ Carbon storage; ▪ Cultivated foods; ▪ Sediment trapping; ▪ Biodiversity maintenance; ▪ Tourism and recreation; 14 Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 ▪ Erosion control; ▪ Water supply for human use; ▪ Education and research; and ▪ Phosphate assimilation; ▪ Harvestable resources; ▪ Cultural & spiritual significance. ▪ Nitrate assimilation; Each of the above-listed services was scored according to the following general level of service provided. Table 4: Ecosystem services classes and descriptions (Kotze et al., 2020). Importance Category Description Very Low 0-0.79 The importance of services supplied is very low relative to that supplied by other wetlands. Low 0.8 – 1.29 The importance of services supplied is low relative to that supplied by other wetlands. Moderately-Low 1.3 – 1.69 The importance of services supplied is moderately-low relative to that supplied by other wetlands. Moderate 1.7 – 2.29 The importance of services supplied is moderate relative to that supplied by other wetlands. Moderately-High 2.3 – 2.69 The importance of services supplied is moderately-high relative to that supplied by other wetlands. High 2.7 – 3.19 The importance of services supplied is high relative to that supplied by other wetlands. Very High 3.2 - 4.0 The importance of services supplied is very high relative to that supplied by other wetlands. 4.3.5 Ecological Importance and Sensitivity The EIS was determined using the methodology developed by Rountree et al. (2013). It is a rapid scoring system to evaluate: ▪ Ecological Importance and Sensitivity; ▪ Hydrological Functions; and ▪ Direct Human Benefits. The scoring assessment incorporates: ▪ EIS score derived using aspects of the original Ecological Importance and Sensitivity assessments developed for riverine assessments (DWAF, 1999); ▪ Hydro-function importance score derived from the WET-EcoServices tool for the assessment of wetland ecosystem services Kotze et al. (2020); and ▪ Direct human benefits score derived from the WET-EcoServices tool for the assessment of wetland ecosystem services Kotze et al. (2020). The highest score of the three derived scores (each with range 0 – 4) was then used to indicate the overall importance category of the wetland (Table 5). 15 Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 Table 5: Ecological importance and sensitivity categories Ecological Importance and Sensitivity Category Description Range of EIS score Very high: Wetlands that are considered ecologically important and sensitive on a national > 3 and ≤ 4 or even international level. The biodiversity of these systems is usually very sensitive to flow and habitat modifications. They play a major role in moderating the quantity and quality of water of major rivers High: Wetlands that are considered to be ecologically important and sensitive. The > 2 and ≤ 3 biodiversity of these systems may be sensitive to flow and habitat modifications. They play a role in moderating the quantity and quality of water of major rivers. Moderate: Wetlands that are considered to be ecologically important and sensitive on a > 1 and ≤ 2 provincial or local scale. The biodiversity of these systems is not usually sensitive to flow and habitat modifications. They play a small role in moderating the quantity and quality of water of major rivers Low/marginal: Wetlands that are not ecologically important and sensitive at any scale. The > 0 and ≤ 1 biodiversity of these systems is ubiquitous and not sensitive to flow and habitat modifications. They play an insignificant role in moderating the quantity and quality of water of major rivers. 4.4 Scoping Level Screening of Impacts and Mitigation Appendix 2 of GNR 982, as amended, requires the identification of the significance of potential impacts during scoping. To this end, an impact screening tool has been used in the scoping phase (Table 6). The screening tool is based on two criteria; namely probability (Table 7) and consequence (Table 8), where the latter is based on general consideration to the intensity, extent, and duration. Table 6: Significance screening tool CONSEQUENCE SCALE PROBABILITY 1 2 3 4 SCALE 1 Very Low Very Low Low Medium 2 Very Low Low Medium Medium 3 Low Medium Medium High 4 Medium Medium High High Table 7: Probability scores and descriptors SCORE DESCRIPTOR 4 Definite: The impact will occur regardless of any prevention measures 3 Highly Probable: It is most likely that the impact will occur 2 Probable: There is a good possibility that the impact will occur 16 Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 1 Improbable: The possibility of the impact occurring is very low Table 8: Consequence score descriptions SCORE NEGATIVE POSITIVE 4 Very severe: An irreversible and permanent Very beneficial: A permanent and very change to the affected system(s) or party(ies) substantial benefit to the affected system(s) or which cannot be mitigated. party(ies), with no real alternative to achieving this benefit. 3 Severe: A long term impacts on the affected Beneficial: A long term impact and substantial system(s) or party(ies) that could be benefit to the affected system(s) or party(ies). mitigated. However, this mitigation would be Alternative ways of achieving this benefit difficult, expensive or time consuming or some would be difficult, expensive or time combination of these. consuming, or some combination of these. 2 Moderately severe: A medium to long term Moderately beneficial: A medium to long term impacts on the affected system(s) or party impact of real benefit to the affected system(s) (ies) that could be mitigated. or party(ies). Other ways of optimising the beneficial effects are equally difficult, expensive and time consuming (or some combination of these), as achieving them in this way. 1 Negligible: A short to medium term impacts on Negligible: A short to medium term impact and the affected system(s) or party(ies). Mitigation negligible benefit to the affected system(s) or is very easy, cheap, less time consuming or party(ies). Other ways of optimising the not necessary. beneficial effects are easier, cheaper and quicker, or some combination of these. The nature of the impact must be characterised as to whether the impact is deemed to be positive (+ve) (i.e. beneficial) or negative (-ve) (i.e. harmful) to the receiving environment/receptor. For ease of reference, a colour reference system (Table 9) has been applied according to the nature and significance of the identified impacts. Table 9: Impact Significance Colour Reference System to Indicate the Nature of the Impact Negative Impacts (-ve) Positive Impacts (+ve) Negligible Negligible Very Low Very Low Low Low Medium Medium 17 Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 Negative Impacts (-ve) Positive Impacts (+ve) High High 4.5 Study Assumptions and Limitations 4.5.1 Data used for Specialist Assessments ▪ The field survey for the aquatic biodiversity assessment was conducted on 31 May – 01 June 2022, which coincides with the dry season period; however, following a summer of exceptional rainfall, flows in the channelled valley bottom wetland remained high, and dominant wetland vegetation was discernible. ▪ This scoping report was prepared on the basis of the site sensitivity verification process undertaken in response to the national web-based screening report. The site sensitivity verification was completed via desktop analysis of the existing baseline knowledge of riparian or wetlands systems in the study area, supplemented by the findings of the field survey conducted on 31 May – 01 June 2022. ▪ It is therefore considered that there are no sampling or information limitations pertaining to riparian or wetlands systems impacting on this assessment and the recommendations contained in this report. 4.5.2 Assumptions, uncertainties, or gaps in knowledge ▪ The results of the analysis of the diatom samples gathered on 31 May – 01 June 2022 were not yet available at the time of writing; these will be included in the updated baseline report at ESIA stage. ▪ Since the watercourses in the study area are wetland systems, no assessment of macroinvertebrates or fish is included in the baseline description. 5.0 BASELINE DESCRIPTION This section summarises the baseline biodiversity environment of the local and regional study areas. It draws upon existing studies, published information, local knowledge and scoping site visits. 5.1 Regional Biodiversity Context The study area is located within the B11B quaternary sub-catchment of the upper Olifants Water Management Area (WMA) (Figure 4). An unnamed tributary of the Koringspruit passes immediately to the north of the study area, while a small drainage line runs through the centre of the study area, eventually reporting to the Koornfontein River via the Gras Dam, and ultimately draining into the Olifants River (Synergistics Environmental Services, 2008). 5.1.1 Environmental Screening Tool The proposed infrastructure footprint was assessed at desktop level using the National Web-based Environmental Screening Tool. According to the Tool, the Aquatic Biodiversity Theme for the study area is rated ‘Very High Sensitivity’ due to the presence of wetlands features in and around the study area (Figure 5). Since the watercourses in the study area are wetland systems, no assessment of macroinvertebrates or fish is included in the baseline description. 5.1.2 Freshwater Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBAs) and Ecological Support Areas (ESAs) The proposed development site was compared to available relevant spatial biodiversity planning datasets in order to assess the local and regional biodiversity context of the site. The following datasets were considered: 1) Mpumalanga Biodiversity Sector Plan Freshwater Assessment (2011). 18 Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 The MBSP (2011) freshwater assessment spatial dataset includes various areas mapped as ‘other natural areas’ throughout the local study area (Figure 6), as well as part of the channelled valley bottom wetland associated with the Koringspruit which was classified as ‘Ecological Sensitivity Area (ESA): wetland’. It is important to note that the MPSBP freshwater assessment was based largely on remotely sensed imagery, and thus some wetlands are not included (e.g. historic wetlands lost through drainage or ploughing); similarly, some features have been mapped as wetlands, which, once examined in the field, are not defined as wetlands. The most up-to-date spatial dataset at the national level is now considered to be the National Wetland Map 5 (see Figure 9), which displays a more accurate representation of actual wetland conditions on site. 5.1.3 Strategic Water Source Areas (SWSAs) No strategic water source areas occur in the region of the proposed development footprint; as such these are not included as receptors for the current scoping impact assessment or considered further here. 5.1.4 Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Area (FEPA) sub-catchments The proposed development footprint in relation to FEPA sub-catchments and mapped National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas (NFEPA) wetlands is illustrated on Figure 7 and Figure 8 respectively. As mentioned above, the National Wetland Map version 5 (NWM5) (Van Deventer et al., 2019), is the most up-to-date and accurate representation of spatial extent and type of inland wetland ecosystem types at desktop level in South Africa. The NWM5 dataset indicates the presence of channelled valley bottom and seep wetland habitat within the LSA (Figure 9); these systems were prioritised for confirmation of delineation, and assessment of wetland health and ecological importance, during the wetland field survey. 19 Sensitivity: Internal (C3) June 2022 22521869-352949-2 Figure 5: Map of relative Aquatic Biodiversity Theme Sensitivity (Environmental Screening Tool, 2022) 20 June 2022 22521869-352949-2 Figure 6: MBSP Freshwater Assessment (MTPA, 2011) 21 June 2022 22521869-352949-2 Figure 7: Study area in relation to FEPA sub-catchments 22 June 2022 22521869-352949-2 Figure 8: Proposed development in relation to NFEPA wetlands (2011) 23 June 2022 22521869-352949-2 Figure 9: Proposed development in relation to NWM5 wetlands (2019) 24 June 2022 22521869-352949-2 5.2 Wetlands 5.2.1 Delineation and classification Four wetlands have been identified to occur within a 500m of the proposed Project development (Figure 15). The infield sampling of soil and vegetation in conjunction with the recording of diagnostic topographical /terrain indicators and features, enabled the delineation of the following distinct watercourse units: ▪ A Channelled valley bottom wetland (CVB), ▪ Two isolated seepage wetlands (Seep 1 and Seep 2), and ▪ Depression wetland Several areas of highly disturbed grassland were also identified within the study area. Excavations and earthworks in these areas have resulted in high levels of disturbance of the soil profile, with some ephemeral accumulation of water during periods of high rainfall enabling Imperata cyclindrica (which although it occurs in wetlands, is not a reliable wetland indicator, since it can proliferate in disturbed terrestrial areas with high rainfall) to proliferate; however water is not retained in these disturbed soils for long enough to sustain hydrophytic plant species, or soil form indicators to develop, These areas were therefore not classified as wetland habitat 5.2.1.1 Channelled Valley Bottom wetland A channelled valley bottom wetland associated with the Koringspruit occurs within the study area ( Figure 10 and Figure 15). Channelled valley bottoms wetlands (CVB) are characterised by having a well-defined stream channel but lacking characteristic floodplain features, which was the case for the CVB wetland on site. These systems receive water inputs from the main channel and from adjacent slopes (Kotze et al., 2008). The CVB wetland was dominated by permanent and seasonal wetland plant species including Typha capensis, Phragmites australis, Schoenoplectus paludicola, and Cyperus latifolius as well as hygrophilous grassland community such as Eragrostis rotifer. The wetland was also characterised by temporary and seasonal hydromorphic soil characteristics (Figure 11), indicating brown wetland soils. The wetland is highly impacted and appears to receive effluent discharge from the Power Station. The wetland channel shows signs of extensive flows during large storm events and also lateral inputs from surrounding land uses. The CVB is situated adjacent to the proposed Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) footprint. Figure 10: An overview of the Channelled valley Bottom wetland (upstream and downstream) 25 June 2022 22521869-352949-2 Figure 11: Soil Sample taken at 50-60 cm in the seasonal zone of the wetland 5.2.1.2 Seep 1 A seep wetland of approximately 24.5 ha traverses the eastern extent of the proposed PV site A footprint. The wetland is bordered by the Ash dam facility towards the north-east and crop fields to the south-west (Figure 15). The hydrology of the seep wetland is largely impacted by flow input from surrounding activities, particularly the seepage from the Ash dam, as evidenced by the soil sample taken at the permanent zone of the wetland (Figure 12). Furthermore, a dam which has been excavated in the wetland HGM, which has resulted in impounding and pooling of water in the wetland (Figure 12). Dominant wetland vegetation at this site includes Typha capensis, Phragmites australis which dominated the permanent wet area and Imperata cylindrica, which dominated much of the seasonal zone. Figure 12: a) An overview of Seep 1 wetland and pooling of water at dam, b) Soil sample taken in the permanent zone of the seep wetland indicating signs of soil contamination from the ash dam 26 June 2022 22521869-352949-2 5.2.1.3 Seep 2 A second seep wetland of approximately 20 ha in extent was identified in the northern extent of the study area (Figure 15). This wetland is located downslope of Eskom’s pollution control dams and is bordered by the Komati village to the west. The wetland is dominated by seasonal to permanent hydromorphic soil characteristics (Figure 14), with sedges and obligate wetland vegetation including Typha capensis, Phragmites australis and Cyperus latifolius occurring in the permanent zone, and I. cylindrica occurring in temporary-seasonally wet areas. Evidence of significant levels of disturbance in the form of small drains and berms diverting the water from the Eskom property into the receiving environment was observed in the seep. Figure 13: An overview of the seep wetland: upstream and downstream view Figure 14: Soil sample taken at the permanent zone of the wetland 5.2.1.4 Depression A shallow depression wetland is located within a crop field in the southern extent of the study area, outside of the Project site boundary. The wetland is approximately 3 ha in extent and is cut off from the Project site by the tarred R542 (Figure 15). The wetland appears to be geomorphologically intact (other than loss likely sustained to the R542 construction) and driven entirely by rainfall accumulation. The wetland considered to be ephemeral in nature. 27 June 2022 22521869-352949-2 Figure 15: Wetland delineation and classification 28 June 2022 22521869-352949-2 5.2.2 Present Ecological State The most significant drivers of change currently present in the study area include industrial operations (seepage from ash dam, increased water inflow from Eskom operations) impoundment of water at dams, road crossings, mining operations in the catchments, spread of alien invasive species as well formal and informal settlements within the wetland’s catchment. The Present Ecological State (PES) score for the wetlands in the study area are presented in Table 10, and discussed in greater detail in the paragraphs that follow. Table 10: Summary of Impact Scores and PES Class Unit Hydrology Geomorphology Water Quality Vegetation Overall PES Score & Impact Impact Rating Impact Score Impact Class Rating Score CVB 4.8 3.8 6.0 4.0 4.6 D Seep 1 5.0 3.9 6.0 3.5 4.6 D Seep 2 5.0 4.2 5.8 5.0 5 D Depression 3.0 3.0 4.6 4.0 3.5 C 5.2.2.1 Channelled Valley Bottom Major impacts identified within the channelled valley bottom wetland include head cut erosion, impoundment of flow in dams and at road crossings, cattle farming and crop farming, and effluent discharge from industrial operations (Power Station). These impacts resulted in a Largely Modified Impact category (PES D), with the hydrology and water quality component contributing substantially to the modified state of the wetland. 29 June 2022 22521869-352949-2 Figure 16: Impacts: a) Soil Erosion at CVB main channel; b) pooling of water in dam; c)effluent discharge into the wetland; d) crop farming and cattle grazing in wetland 5.2.2.2 Seep 1 The Present Ecological Status of the Seep 1 wetland was considered Largely Modified (PES D), on account of the hydrological state and the water quality of the wetland. The wetland appears to be substantially impacted by the adjacent infrastructure and activities, particularly the ash dam facility. As seen in Figure 12 the wetland soils are contaminated by sediment inputs from the ash dam. Furthermore, the increased surface water input from the ash dam facility and the impoundment of flow in the excavated dam (Figure 17) have changed the hydrological regime of the wetland. 30 June 2022 22521869-352949-2 Figure 17: Ash dam facility and pooling of water at dam 5.2.2.3 Seep 2 Major impacts identified in the Seep 2 wetland include increased water inputs into the wetland system from the PCD, spread of alien invasive species, impoundment of flow along roads and dams, and the presence of drains and trenches. These disturbances, together with the likely impact on water quality as a result of seepage from the PCDs, have contributed to the Largely Modified state (PES Category D) of the wetland. 31 June 2022 22521869-352949-2 Figure 18: Impacts: a) pooling of water at dam; b) trenches and berms in wetland; c) effluent discharge into the wetland from a leaking pipe; d) impoundment of water at roads in wetland 5.2.2.4 Depression The present ecological state of the depression wetland was considered Moderately modified (PES category C). although the wetland is considered to sustain impacts from the surrounding crop farming and the tarred R542 road, the wetland was still considered moderately modified, due to the fact that depression wetlands are mostly rainfall driven and may also receive sub-surface water, therefore the presence of the R542 and crop fields may not have a substantial impact on the hydrology of the wetland. 5.2.3 Ecological Importance and Sensitivity All wetlands in the study area were assessed as being of Low /Marginal EIS, with the exception of the CVB wetland which was assessed as being of Moderate EIS (Table 11). The moderate EIS of the CVB was attributed to its hydrological functional importance as this wetland performs a role in landscape connectivity at the regional level, providing regulating and supporting benefits such as streamflow regulation and flood attenuation. 32 June 2022 22521869-352949-2 Table 11: Summary of wetland EIS scores and ratings. Wetland Unit Ecological Hydrological Direct Human Integrated EIS Integrated EIS Importance Functions Benefits Score Score Rating and Sensitivity Score Score CVB 1.2 1.0 0.0 1.2 Moderate Seep 1 0.8 0.9 0.0 0.9 Low/Marginal Seep 2 0.8 0.9 0.0 0.9 Low/Marginal Depression 0.8 0.9 0.0 0.9 Low/Marginal 5.2.4 Ecoservices The importance scores for the ecosystem services provided by wetlands within the study area are illustrated in the spider diagrams presented in Figure 19, Figure 20 and Figure 21. The majority of the ecosystem services were rated as very low in terms of their overall importance. Regulating and supporting services such as sediment trapping, phosphate assimilation, nitrate assimilation and toxicant assimilation were determined as moderate, particularly for the CVB wetland which is also important in terms of streamflow regulation and flood attenuation. The CVB was also assessed as having a Moderately High importance in terms of the biodiversity maintenance (Figure 19). This was attributed to the likelihood of the African Grass Owl (Tyto capensis) to occur on site based on the result of the national screening tool as well as the avifauna survey undertaken on 17 June 2022 to confirm habitat suitability for the Grass Owl to occur. Furthermore, based on the MBSP freshwater (2011), the CVB was mapped as biodiversity ecological support area. Figure 19: Ecosystem Services supplied by/demanded from the CVB wetland. 33 June 2022 22521869-352949-2 Figure 20: Ecosystem Services supplied by/demanded from seep wetlands Figure 21: Ecosystem Services supplied by/demanded from Depression wetland 34 June 2022 22521869-352949-2 5.3 Existing Impacts on Biodiversity and Drivers of Change The proposed project infrastructure will be situated in close proximity to the existing power generation facilities and activities. All areas visited are currently experiencing some level of impact from the surrounding agricultural activities primarily through habitat transformation, and disturbance arising from power generation facilities and activities. The presence of the existing facilities within close proximity to the proposed development footprint is expected to have an established impact on the interruption of surface hydrology in wetlands and potentially exacerbate erosion in the study area due to increased surface water runoff as a result of increased hardened surfaces in the study area. 5.4 Natural, Modified and Critical Habitats The study area is dominated by agricultural cultivation, power station infrastructure and residential/industrial areas, interspersed with some remnant wetland habitat. While some very disturbed wetland habitat has been identified in the eastern extent of PV Site A, it is no longer considered to constitute ‘Natural’ habitat as defined by WB ESS6 or IFC PS6, due to its heavily degraded state and loss of ecological function. The channelled valley bottom wetland to the north east of the site, and the seep wetland that crosses the northern boundary of the site, while moderately modified/disturbed, still support biodiversity and deliver ecological services to an extent that enables them both to be considered ‘Natural’ habitat (Figure 22) as defined by the lender standards. Figure 22: Natural, modified and critical habitat At present, no areas of potentially Critical Habitat, as defined by IFC and WB standards, have been identified within the study area. 35 June 2022 22521869-352949-2 6.0 SCREENING OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS The construction and operation of the proposed new infrastructure is anticipated to result in the following key impacts on wetland receptors: 1) Direct impacts through clearing of land and resultant loss of associated biodiversity. 2) Loss of wetland habitat 3) Interruption to surface hydrology. 4) Establishment and spread of alien and invasive species. 5) Increased sediment movement into wetlands 6) Increased potential for erosion in wetlands. The outcomes of the screening of the potential impacts are summarised in Table 12 and described in detail in the following sections. 6.1 Construction Phase Construction phase impacts on aquatic (wetland and riparian systems) largely arise as a result of direct impacts on the receiving environment due to clearing of land within wetlands or their immediate catchments in advance of project development, and resultant loss of wetland habitat. The earthworks and activities involved during the construction phase of the Project can potentially exert negative impacts on sensitive ecosystems including loss of wetland habitat, catchment landcover changes resulting in increased sediment entry to downstream systems, construction of wetland/riparian system crossings causing impoundments/barriers to movement for aquatic species, contamination of water bodies by construction materials / vehicles (hydrocarbons etc), increased potential of erosion due to surface runoff and soil disturbances and the establishment and spread of alien and invasive species (AIS). The preliminary list of predicted construction phase impacts are outlined in the sections that follow, and summarised on Table 12. 6.1.1 Loss of wetland habitat Site establishment and construction of the proposed project infrastructure, particularly PV Site A which overlaps with Seep 1, could lead to the permanent loss of wetland habitat within the project footprint. This impact has a high probability of occurrence and a high impact consequence. The impact significance is of High significance prior to the implementation of mitigation measures and can be reduced to a Medium significance with the application of recommended mitigation measures. Significant residual impacts (Medium/High) will need to be addressed via modification of the final layout to ensure that wetland loss is avoided, or design of an appropriate offset for unavoidable habitat loss. 6.1.2 Changes in wetland health/functioning Bulk earthworks involved in site development in the immediate catchment of wetlands have the potential to cause indirect impacts on wetland habitat through compaction/removal of recharge or interflow soils, as well as increased sediment deposition to downslope wetland ecosystems in stormwater runoff. If not carefully managed, the potential impact could be moderately severe, and the likelihood highly probable, resulting in an impact of Medium significance. Mitigation measures to address the potentially reduced wetland functioning, such as diffuse distribution of clean stormwater runoff around the PV and BESS foundations and road crossing 36 June 2022 22521869-352949-2 to affected downslope wetland systems could reduce the consequence of the potential impacts and likelihood of occurrence of the potential impact. 6.1.3 Contamination of riparian systems Stripping of topsoil and civil works activities, resulting in a decrease in water quality due to erosion, sedimentation and the alteration in the distribution and quantity of surface water runoff, is considered highly probable during the construction phase, and could be moderately severe, resulting in an impact of Medium significance. The residual impact can be reduced to Low significance with the application of the recommended mitigation measures, since the likelihood of the impact occurring as predicted would be reduced. 6.1.4 Soil erosion The removal of wetland vegetation for the construction of the proposed development could result in an increase of bare soil/surfaces in the study area which could lead to increased runoff, ultimately resulting in soil erosion. The occurrence of soil erosion is considered moderately probable during construction and could have a moderate consequence on wetland soil, resulting in a Medium impact significance without mitigation. With the implementation of mitigation measures it is anticipated that the probability and consequence of this impact can be reduced, ultimately resulting in a residual impact of Low significance. 6.1.5 Establishment and spread of alien invasive species Disturbances caused by vegetation clearing and earth works during construction will exacerbate the establishment and spread of alien invasive vegetation. Alien plant infestations can spread exponentially, suppressing, or replacing indigenous vegetation. This may result in a breakdown of ecosystem functioning and a loss of wetland wbiodiversity. Consequently, the potential impact is considered moderately severe, while the possibility of the impact occurring is highly probable, amounting to a potential impact of Medium significance. With the development of an auditable AIS Management Plan for the project, and the strict implementation of the recommended active control and monitoring measures throughout the construction phase, the probability of the impact occurring can be reduced, resulting in a residual impact of Low significance 6.2 Operational Phase Operational phase impacts relate to the possible exacerbation of the construction-phase impacts, including soil erosion, surface water and soil contamination and ongoing risk of spread of the alien and invasive plant species that may have colonised new areas during the construction phase. 6.2.1 Spread of alien and invasive species The potential establishment of alien invasive species in, and immediately adjacent to, wetlands in the vicinity of the proposed development footprint will continue to be an impact of concern during the operational phase. Without mitigation, the consequence of the potential impact is considered moderately severe, while the possibility of the impact occurring is highly probable, amounting to a potential impact of Medium significance. With the development of an auditable AIS Management Plan for the project, and the strict implementation of the recommended active control and monitoring measures throughout the operational phase, the probability of the impact occurring can be reduced, resulting in a residual impact of Low significance. 6.2.2 Soil Erosion The increased presence of hardened surfaces in the study area could potentially exacerbate soil erosion, through increased and concentrated surface run off. This impact is assessed as having a medium probability of occurrence with a medium impact severity resulting in an impact of Medium significance prior to mitigation. With the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, this impact may have a residual impact of Low significance on wetland soils. 37 June 2022 22521869-352949-2 6.2.3 Water quality deterioration and contamination of wetland soils Quarterly washing and maintenance of the PV panels could potentially have a negative impact on water quality and wetland soils, due to inputs of detergents, and possible erosion paths forming in the soils of adjacent wetland areas, should large amounts of water be discharged to the environment. The probability of the impact occurring during operation is considered medium, with a medium consequence, which could result in an impact of Medium significance prior to the application of the recommended mitigation measures. The application of proposed mitigation measures could reduce both the probability of the impact occurring as well as the likely consequence, amounting to a residual impact of Low significance. 38 June 2022 22521869-352949-2 Table 12: Wetland Impact Assessment summary ACTIVITY POTENTIAL IMPACT AFFECTED RECEPTORS PHASE without Mitigation Significance with In which impact is anticipated Consequence Consequence Significance Probability Probability Mitigation Bulk earthworks Direct loss of wetland Wetland habitats Construction 4 4 High 2 4 Medium and clearance of habitat vegetation in construction Erosion Wetland soils Construction 3 3 Medium 2 2 Low footprint Establishment and Wetland habitat Construction 3 2 Medium 2 2 Low spread of AIS Catchment land use Changes in wetland health/ functioning Construction, 3 3 Medium 2 2 Low changes and operation activities Contamination of riparian systems Construction, 3 3 Medium 2 2 Low operation Indirect Habitat quality Wetland habitat Operation 3 2 Medium 2 2 Low loss/disturbance reductions due to of natural habitat stormwater runoff, land use changes Quarterly Spread of AIS Wetland habitat Operation 3 3 Medium 2 2 Low washing of PV panels Increased run-off, Wetland soils Operation 3 3 Medium 1 2 Low Erosion Water quality Wetland soils and water quality Operation 3 3 Medium 2 2 Low deterioration and contamination of wetland soils 39 June 2022 22521869-352949-2 6.3 Mitigation Measures Mitigation measures that are designed to avoid and minimise the loss and degradation of the wetland habitat and function on the site are summarised in the sections that follow. 6.3.1 Identification of areas to be avoided (including buffers) ▪ Areas of undisturbed, natural grassland and wetland habitat should be avoided to the extent possible. Areas of direct loss that cannot be avoided must be addressed via additional conservation actions/offsets as required. ▪ A loss/disturbance buffer zone of at least 100 m should be maintained between the maximum extent of construction works and the outer boundary of wetlands and riparian zones 6.3.2 Minimisation ▪ To prevent loss of natural habitat in wetlands beyond the direct disturbance footprint, prior to any vegetation clearing, the development footprints should be clearly marked out with flagging tape/posts in the field. Vegetation clearing should be restricted to the proposed project footprints only, with no clearing permitted outside of these areas. ▪ The extent of disturbance should be limited by restricting all construction activities to the servitude as far as practically possible. ▪ Locate all stockpiles, laydown areas and temporary construction infrastructure at least 50 m from the edge of delineated wetlands. ▪ Wetland/river crossings should be constructed utilizing designs that ensure that hydrological integrity of the affected wetlands is preserved, and natural flow regimes are maintained (i.e. no impoundment upstream of crossings, or flow concentration downstream of crossings. ▪ Ideally construction activities within wetlands should take place in winter (during the dry season). Where summer construction is unavoidable, temporary diversions of the streams might be required. ▪ Install erosion prevention measures prior to the onset of construction activities. Measures should include low berms on approach and departure slopes to crossings to prevent flow concentration, sediment barriers along the lower edge of bare soil areas, placement of hay bales around the within wetland construction areas, and re-vegetation of disturbed areas as soon as possible 6.3.3 Alien and Invasive Species Management ▪ An alien and invasive species management plan should be developed for the Project, which includes details of strategies and procedures that must be implemented on site to control the spread of alien and invasive species. A combined approach using both chemical and mechanical control methods, with periodic follow- up treatments informed by regular monitoring, is recommended. 6.3.4 Biodiversity Management Plan ▪ Specific provision for biodiversity conservation, including details of any required offsets, should be made in the project BMP/BAP, in alignment with the objectives of the MBSP (2011). ▪ Inclusion of a practical framework and schedule, details of key performance indicators, and recommended monitoring protocols for the delivery of existing and currently recommended mitigation measures in the BMP is recommended. 40 June 2022 22521869-352949-2 6.4 Monitoring Requirements The following monitoring requirements are anticipated: ▪ Monitoring of wetland health to be conducted within one year of completion of construction, to measure any changes to the baseline status and ensure that recommended mitigation measures are sufficient to address any significant impacts. ▪ Follow up monitoring of wetland health PES/EIS every three years throughout the operating period. 6.5 Cumulative Impacts The landscape within which the proposed infrastructure is located is almost completely modified and fragmented as a consequence of the existing surrounding land uses (i.e., power station, mining, agricultural practices, residential areas, and informal settlement). While the currently proposed project infrastructure largely avoids the loss of significant areas of natural habitat due to active avoidance of these areas as part of the ongoing planning process, vegetation clearing would result in loss of additional 24.5 ha of moderately/largely modified seep habitats (Seep 1), contributing to cumulative impacts in terms of direct loss of seep wetlands at the landscape level. 7.0 ADDITIONAL PLANNED STUDIES TO BE COMPLETED DURING ESIA Additional baseline data gathering surveys and impact assessments that will be conducted at ESIA phase will include the following: ▪ Aquatic Biodiversity Specialist Assessment: ▪ Update of the wetland baseline description with scientifically-determined buffer zones, and revision of the EIS scores in the context of the completed flora and fauna study findings, as required ▪ Diatom sample results and analysis. ▪ Updated impact assessment, using NEMA-prescribed methods. ▪ Finalised mitigation measures for inclusion in the Project EMPr. 41 June 2022 22521869-352949-2 8.0 REFERENCES Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism Guideline document on EIA Regulations, April 1998. Department of Environmental Affairs (2016) National Protected Areas Expansion Strategy for South Africa 2016. Department of Environmental Affairs, Pretoria, South Africa. DWAF (2008) Updated Manual for the Identification and Delineation of Wetlands and Riparian Areas, prepared by M. Rountree, A. L. Batchelor, J. MacKenzie and D. Hoare. Stream Flow Reduction Activities, Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, Pretoria, South Africa DWAF (1999). Resource Directed Measures for Protection of Water Resources. Volume 4. Wetland Ecosystems. GHT Consulting Services., 2009. Komati Power Station Hydrological & Geohydrological Baseline Study December 2008 Kleynhans CJ, Louw MD., 2007. Module A: EcoClassification and EcoStatus determination in River EcoClassification: Manual for EcoStatus Determination (version 2). Joint Water Research Commission and Department of Water Affairs and Forestry report. WRC Report No. TT 329/08. Kotze, D. C., Macfarlane, D. M. & Edwards, R. J., 2020. WET-EcoServices (Version 2): A technique for rapidly assessing ecosystem services supplied by wetlands and riparian areas. Final Report. WRC Project K5/2737. , Pretoria, South Africa: Water Research Commission. Kotze, D., Macfarlane, D., Edwards, R., Mander, M., Collins, N., Texeira-Leite, A., Lagesse, J., Pringle, C., Marneweck, G., Batchelor, A. and Lindley, D., 2020. WET-EcoServices Version 2.0: A technique for rapidly assessing ecosystem services supplied by wetlands and riparian areas. WRC Report No. TT 833/20. Water Research Commission, Pretoria, South Africa. Macfarlane, D., Holness, S.D., von Hase, A., Brownlie, S. & Dini, J., 2014. Wetland offsets: a best-practice guideline for South Africa. South African National Biodiversity Institute and the Department of Water Affairs. Pretoria. Macfarlane, D. & Bredin, I., 2017. Buffer Zone Guidelines for Rivers, Wetlands and Estuaries. WRC Report No. TT 715-1-17, South Africa: Water Research Commision (WRC). Macfarlane, D.M., Ollis, D.J., and Kotze, D.C. (2020). WET-Health Version 2.0: A refined suite of tools for assessing the present ecological state of wetland ecosystems- technical guide. Water Research Commission. Report No. TT820/20 Macfarlane, D.M., Kotze, D.C., Ellery, W.N., Walters, D., Koopman, V., Goodman, P. and Goge, M. (2008). WETHealth: A technique for rapidly assessing wetland health. WRC Report No. TT 340/09. Water Research Commission, Pretoria. Mpumalanga Parks and Tourism (MPTA) (2015). Ecostatus of the Komati River Catchment, Inkomati River System. Report submitted to Inkomati – Usuthu Catchment Management Agency (IUCMA) by MTPA – Scientific Services: Aquatic Systems. Nel, J. L. & Driver, A., (2012) National Biodiversity Assessment 2011: Technical Report. Volume 2: Freshwater Component. Council for Scientific & Industrial Research (CSIR) Report No. CSIR/NRE/ECO/IR/2012/0022/A., Stellenbosch: CSIR. 42 June 2022 22521869-352949-2 Lötter, M.C. 2015. Technical Report for the Mpumalanga Biodiversity Sector Plan – MBSP. Mpumalanga Tourism & Parks Agency, Mbombela (Nelspruit). Rountree, M.W., Malan, H.L. and Weston, B.C. (2013). Manual for the Rapid Ecological Reserve Determination of Inland Wetlands (Version 2.0). WRC Report No. 1788/1/13. Water Research Commission, Pretoria. Ollis, D.J., Snaddon, C.D., Job, N.M. & Mbona, N. (2013). Classification System for Wetlands and other Aquatic Ecosystems in South Africa. User Manual: Inland Systems. SANBI Biodiversity Series 22. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria. Strategic Water Source Areas (SWSA) (2017) South African National Biodiversity Institute. Accessed at http://bgisviewer.sanbi.org. Synergistics Environmental Services (2008) Construction and Operation Of Ash Dam Extension 3 & The Deviation Of Transmission And Distribution Lines At Komati Power Station, Mpumalanga van Deventer, H., van Niekerk, L., Adams, J., Dinala, M. K., Gangat, R., Lamberth, S.J., Lotter, M., Mbona, N., MacKay, F., Nel, J.L., Ramjukadh, C-L., Skowno, A. and Weerts, S. P. (2019). National Wetland Map 5 – An improved spatial extent and representation of inland aquatic and estuarine ecosystems in South Africa. bioRxiv preprint first posted online May. 17, 2019; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/6404. World Bank (2016) World Bank Environmental and Social Framework.” World Bank, Washington, DC.] License: Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 3.0 IGO Signature Page Golder Associates Africa (Pty) Ltd. Lufuno Nemakhavhani Aisling Dower Wetland Ecologist Senior Ecologist TK/AD/nb Reg. No. 2002/007104/07 Directors: RGM Heath, MQ Mokulubete, SC Naidoo, GYW Ngoma https://golderassociates.sharepoint.com/sites/golderbiodiversity-southafrica/shared documents/projects/22521869_komatips/reviewed aquatic scoping report/22521869-352949-2 _eskom_komati_aquaticr(riparian_wetlands)_ecology_scoping_draft_june2022_ad_ln.docx 43 June 2022 22521869-352949-2 APPENDIX A Document Limitations June 2022 22521869-352949-2 APPENDIX B Specialist CV APPENDIX E-10 TRAFFIC                     Komati Power Station Repurposing  Transport Impact Assessment – Scoping Report  Scoping Report    WSP Group Africa          June 2022                  SUMMARY SHEET    Report Type  Transport Impact Assessment – Scoping Report  Title  Komati Power Station Repurposing  Location  Steve Tshwete Local Municipality  Client  WSP Group Africa  Reference  ITS 4484  Number  Project Team  Nico Jonker Pr. Eng    Maruis Brand  Carina Dippenaar  Tilly Phale  Reviewed by  Nico Jonker Pr. Eng  Contact Details  Tel: 012 394 1664  Date  June 2022  Report Status  Draft  File Name  Y:\4484_Komati Power Station TIA\12. Reports\Drafts\4484_Komati Power  Station_Scoping Study_Rev1_ReviewNJ_2022‐06‐24.docx        INNOVATIVE TRANSPORT SOLUTIONS (PTY) LTD      Page i      TABLE OF CONTENTS 1  INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 1  2  PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND LAND USE .............................................................................. 1  3  TRIP GENERATION .................................................................................................................... 1  4  EXISTING ROAD NETWORK ....................................................................................................... 2  5  ACCESS ...................................................................................................................................... 2  6  TRAFFIC VOLUMES .................................................................................................................... 2  6.1  Background Traffic Volumes 2022 ..................................................................................... 2  6.2  .......................................................................... 2  Future Background Traffic Volumes 2024  6.3  .......................................................................... 2  Future Background Traffic Volumes 2027  7  CAPACITY ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................. 3  8  PUBLIC TRANSPORT .................................................................................................................. 4  9  ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE TRANSPORT ACTIVITIES ..................................................... 4  .............................................................................................................................. 7  10  REFERENCES          INNOVATIVE TRANSPORT SOLUTIONS (PTY) LTD      Page ii        LIST OF TABLES  Table 1: Scenarios Analysed for the Proposed Komati PV Developments ........................................... 3  Table 2: Capacity Analysis Results for the Weekday AM Peak Hour ................................................... 3  Table 3: Capacity Analysis Results for the Weekday PM Peak Hour .................................................... 4  Table 4: Impact Assessment Criteria and Scoring System ................................................................... 5  Table 5: Environmental Impact Assessment for Construction Phase .................................................. 6  Table 6: Environmental Impact Assessment for Operational  Phase ................................................... 6    ANNEXURES  Annexure A – Figures   Figure A1  Locality Plan  Figure A2  Intersections Counted  Figure A3  Existing Geometry    Annexure B – Traffic Volumes and Geometry        INNOVATIVE TRANSPORT SOLUTIONS (PTY) LTD      Page iii  Komati Power Station Repurposing  June 2022  Draft  ITS 4484    1 INTRODUCTION  The proposed development consists of Photovoltaic (PV) solar energy facilities (SEF) with ancillary  Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS), to generate a total of 150 MW of energy, located on various  Eskom  owned  land  parcels  surrounding  the  existing  Komati  Power  Station,  Middelburg,  Mpumalanga, refer to  Annexure A, Figure A1  for the locality map. Komati Power Station is located  approximately 40 km south of Middelburg within the Steve Tshwete Local Municipality.  In this TIA, the impact of the additional traffic of the proposed developments on the road network  will  be  investigated  and  mitigation  measures  will  be  proposed  if  required.  The  transportation  activities will include transportation activities during the construction phase as well as transportation  activities during the operational phase.  2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND LAND USE  The proposed development is located on Eskom property and is currently zoned for various land uses  including mining and an airstrip. Permission for the applicable land use rights will have to be obtained  from the relevant authorities through a town planning process.   The  proposed  150  MW  PV  facilities  are  proposed  to  be  spread  over  two  sites  shown  in  the  development layout as PV Site A and PV Site B.   3 TRIP GENERATION  The trip generation of the proposed developments will be calculated based on the estimated number  of person trips and truck trips during the construction of the different sites. The operational phase of  each site will also develop a certain number of person trips.  The estimated number of person trips will be converted into vehicle trips for the phases and sites. It  is  expected  that  the  trip  generation  of  the  proposed  sites  will  be  low  to  medium  during  the  construction and low to very low during the operational phase.  The expected number of person trips based on the employment opportunities for the developments  is  1  285  during  the  construction  phase  and  150    person  trips  during  the  operational  phase.  The  number of vehicle trips will be adjusted for public transport usage.  The  trip  assignment  of  the  proposed  developments  will  be  calculated  based  on  the  land  use  and  traffic patterns once the relevant information has been finalised.          INNOVATIVE TRANSPORT SOLUTIONS (PTY) LTD      Page 1  Komati Power Station Repurposing  June 2022  Draft  ITS 4484    4 EXISTING ROAD NETWORK  The roads in the vicinity of the proposed development are as follows:    R543:  Is a Class 3 provincial road and is located to the south of the proposed PV Site A and  the town of Komati. This road serves as an East‐West link between the R544 and the R35.   R35: Is a Class 3 provincial road and is located to the northeast of the proposed developments  and the town of Komati. This road serves as the link between Middelburg and Bethal.   Main  Road:  Is  a  Class  4  municipal  road  and  borders  the  proposed  developments  on  the  western boundaries of PV Site A and PV Site B.   Flamingo  Street:  Is  a  Class  5  municipal  road  and  borders  the  proposed  PV  Site  A  on  the  northern boundary of the site. Flamingo Street also provides access to the town of Komati.  The locations of these roads relative to the proposed development are shown on the locality map in  Annexure A, Figure A1.   5 ACCESS  Access to the proposed developments is proposed from Flamingo Street for PV Site A and from the  current road that borders the airfield for PV Site B respectively.   6 TRAFFIC VOLUMES  6.1 Background Traffic Volumes 2022  Traffic counts were conducted, at the intersections shown in Figure A2 in Annexure A, covering a 12‐ hour period on Wednesday, 1 June 2022. The counts conducted were used for the 2022 base year  traffic.  The  background  weekday  AM  and  PM  peak  hour  traffic  volumes  for  2022  are  shown  in  Annexure B.  6.2 Future Background Traffic Volumes 2024  A growth rate of 2% per annum was applied to the 2022 background peak hour volumes to estimate  the future background volumes for the 2024 horizon year. The horizon year 2024 was chosen to align  with  the  estimated  construction  period. The  estimated  background  AM and  PM  peak  hour  traffic  volumes for 2024 are shown in Annexure B.  6.3 Future Background Traffic Volumes 2027  A growth rate of 2% per annum was applied to the 2022 background peak hour volumes to estimate  the future background volumes for the 2027 horizon year. The horizon year 2027 was chosen as it is  5 years from the start of the project and it is expected that operations will have started within a 5  year period. The estimated background AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes for 2027 are shown in  Annexure B.    INNOVATIVE TRANSPORT SOLUTIONS (PTY) LTD      Page 2  Komati Power Station Repurposing  June 2022  Draft  ITS 4484    7 CAPACITY ANALYSIS  PTV Vistro software was used to conduct the capacity analysis for the intersections included in the  study area. The intersections that were included in the analysis are:   Int 1 – Main Road / Koornfontein Mine Access   Int 2 – R542 / Main Road   Int 3 – R35 / R542 to Emalahleni   Int 4 – R35 / R542 to Hendrina   Int 5 – R35 / Komati Power Station   Int 6 – Main Road / Flamingo St    The scenarios that were analysed for the peak hours are summarised in Table 1.   Table 1: Scenarios Analysed for the Proposed Komati PV Developments  No  Scenario No  Scenario  1  Scenario 1  2022 AM and PM Weekday Peak Hour Background Traffic with Existing Geometry.  2  Scenario 2  2024 AM and PM Weekday Peak Hour Background Traffic with Existing Geometry.  3  Scenario 3  2027 AM and PM Weekday Peak Hour Background Traffic with Existing Geometry.  The  capacity  analysis  results  for  the  intersections  included  in  the  study  area  are  summarised  in      Table 2 and Table 3. Refer to Annexure B for the PTV Vistro output.  Table 2: Capacity Analysis Results for the Weekday AM Peak Hour  Scenario Intersection INT 1 INT 2 INT 3 INT 4 INT 5 INT 6 Scenario 1: 2022 AM Peak Hour  LOS A A A A B A Traffic with existing geometry Del 9.02 9.22 9.91 9.96 10.81 8.94 v/c 0.03 0.02 0.05 0.08 0.04 0.02 Scenario 2: 2024 AM Peak Hour  LOS A A A A B A with existing geometry Del 9.04 9.25 9.97 10.04 10.93 8.96 v/c 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.08 0.04 0.02 Scenario 3: 2027 AM Peak Hour  LOS A A A A B A with existing geometry Del 9.08 9.31 10.09 10.14 11.09 8.99 v/c 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.09 0.04 0.03       INNOVATIVE TRANSPORT SOLUTIONS (PTY) LTD      Page 3  Komati Power Station Repurposing  June 2022  Draft  ITS 4484      Table 3: Capacity Analysis Results for the Weekday PM Peak Hour  Scenario Intersection INT 1 INT 2 INT 3 INT 4 INT 5 INT 6 Scenario 1: 2022 AM Peak Hour Traffic  LOS A B B B B A with existing geometry Del 9.53 10 11.81 10.99 10.86 9.24 v/c 0 0.02 0.11 0.12 0.02 0.01 Scenario 2: 2024 AM Peak Hour with  LOS A B B B B A existing geometry Del 9.54 10.07 11.98 11.1 10.97 9.27 v/c 0 0.02 0.11 0.12 0.03 0.01 Scenario 3: 2027 AM Peak Hour with  LOS A B B B A A existing geometry Del 9.57 10.16 12.28 11.32 11.15 9.32 v/c 0 0.03 0.13 0.13 0.03 0.01   The existing road network is operating at acceptable levels of service with the existing geometry.  The future background traffic scenarios are also expected to operate at acceptable levels of service  with the existing geometry. The existing geometry of the road network is shown schematically in  Annexure A in Figure A3.  8 PUBLIC TRANSPORT   Due to the locality of the proposed developments, no formal public transport facilities are located in  close approximation to the proposed development. It is unlikely that public transport facilities will be  required.  9 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE TRANSPORT ACTIVITIES  The environmental impact of the transport activities for the PV developments will be assessed and  quantified according to the prescribed impact tables as provided. The assessment based on available  data is shown below.  The impact of the transport activities for both the construction phase and operational phase of the  project will be assessed based on the following parameters and scoring as provided in the impact  tables:   Impact Magnitude (M)   Impact Extent (A)   Impact Reversibility (R)   Impact Duration (D)   Probability of Occurrence (P)   Significance Rating [ S = (E + D + R + M) x P]   INNOVATIVE TRANSPORT SOLUTIONS (PTY) LTD      Page 4  Komati Power Station Repurposing  June 2022  Draft  ITS 4484    Table 4: Impact Assessment Criteria and Scoring System  CRITERIA SCORE 1 SCORE 2 SCORE 3 SCORE 4 SCORE 5 Impact Magnitude (M) Very low: Low: Medium: High: Very High: The degree of alteration of the No impact on Slight impact Processes Processes Permanent affected environmental receptor processes on processes continue but in temporarily cessation of a modified way cease processes Impact Extent (E) The Site: Site only Local: Inside Regional: National: International: geographical extent of the impact on activity area Outside National scope Across borders a given environmental receptor activity area or level or boundaries Impact Reversibility (R) The Reversible: Recoverable: Irreversible: ability of the environmental receptor Recovery Recovery with Not possible to rehabilitate or restore after the without rehabilitation despite action activity has caused environmental rehabilitation change Impact Duration (D) The length of Immediate: Short term: Medium term: Long term: Permanent: permanence of the impact on the On impact 0-5 years 5-15 years Project life Indefinite environmental receptor Probability of Occurrence (P) The Improbable Low Probable Highly Definite likelihood of an impact occurring in Probability Probability the absence of pertinent environmental management measures or mitigation Significance (S) is determined by combining the above criteria in the following formula: IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE RATING Total Score 4 to 15 16 to 30 31 to 60 61 to 80 81 to 100 Environmental Significance Very low Low Moderate High Very High Rating (Negative (-)) Environmental Significance Very low Low Moderate High Very High Rating (Positive (+))     The initial assessment of the transportation activities for the proposed developments are shown in  the tables below:    INNOVATIVE TRANSPORT SOLUTIONS (PTY) LTD      Page 5  Komati Power Station Repurposing            June 2022  Draft               ITS 4484      Table 5: Environmental Impact Assessment for Construction Phase  CONSTRUCTION      Impact Ease of Pre-Mitigation Post-Mitigation Aspect Description Stage Character number Mitigation (M+ E+ R+ D)x P= S Rating (M+ E+ R+ D)x P= S Rating Impact of construction Impact 1: Transportation vehicles on Construction Negative Moderate 1 1 2 2 5 30 N2 1 1 2 2 5 30 N2 roads and access roads Significance N2 - Low N2 - Low   Table 6: Environmental Impact Assessment for Operational  Phase  OPERATIONAL                                                           Impact Ease of Pre-Mitigation Post-Mitigation Receptor Description Stage Character number Mitigation (M+ E+ R+ D)x P= S Rating (M+ E+ R+ D)x P= S Rating Transportation Impact 1: Transportation activities during Operational Negative Moderate 1 1 1 4 5 35 N3 1 1 1 4 5 35 N3 operations Significance N3 - Moderate N3 - Moderate   INNOVATIVE TRANSPORT SOLUTIONS (PTY) LTD      Page 6  Komati Power Station Repurposing  June 2022  Draft     ITS 4484    10 REFERENCES  [1]   Committee of Transport Officials (COTO) Technical Methods for Highways (TMH 17) Volume 1  “South African Trip Data Manual. [2]  Committee of Transport Officials (COTO) Technical Methods for Highways (TMH 16) Volume 1,  South African Traffic Impact and Site Traffic Assessment Standards Manual, August 2012.  [3]  Committee of Transport Officials (COTO) Technical Methods for Highways (TMH 16) Volume 2,  South African Traffic Impact and Site Traffic Assessment Standards and Requirements Manual,  August 2012.          INNOVATIVE TRANSPORT SOLUTIONS (PTY) LTD      Page 7    Annexure A  Figures   Blinkpan N2 Komati_BESS_D Komati_BESS_A Komati_BESS_C Komati_BESS_B R35 Komati_PV_B Komati_PV_A R542 R542 4484 /Fig A1 PROJECT: MAP: NO: KOMATI POWER STATION TIA LOCALITY MAP A1 Komati_BESS_D Komati_PV_B Komati_BESS_C N2 Komati_BESS_A R35 1 Komati_BESS_B 5 Komati_PV_A 6 R35 R542 2 4 3 R542 PROJECT: MAP: SCALE: NO: KOMATI POWER STATION TIA INTERSECTIONS COUNTED 1:18 000 A2 → BESS D URG 1 LB DDE BESS A R35 MI R35 BESS B BESS C DR N L CO FA 5 KOMATI PV A 6 T INGO S FLAM MAIN RD LEGEND DEVELOPMENT KOMATI PV A STOP CONTROL 2 4 SHARED LANE LEFT LANE R542 THROUGH LANE ← R542 EMALAHLENI RIGHT LANE SLIP LANE 3 R542 HENDRINA → HAL R542 BET R35 ← SCHEMATIC PROJECT: FIGURE: NUMBER: KOMATI POWER STATION TIA EXISTING GEOMETRY A3 Y:\4484_Komati Power Station TIA\11. Drawings, Figures and GIS\CAD\4484_Komati_TIA_Figures_CDi_2022-06-15.dwg     Annexure B   Traffic Volumes and Geometry    Generated with AM Peak Hour 2022 Background Traffic 4484 Version 2022 (SP 0-3) Lane Configuration and Traffic Control Innovative Transport Solutions Generated with AM Peak Hour 2022 Background Traffic 4484 Version 2022 (SP 0-3) Traffic Volume - Future Total Volume Innovative Transport Solutions Generated with AM Peak Hour 2022 Background Traffic 4484 Version 2022 (SP 0-3) Traffic Conditions Innovative Transport Solutions Generated with AM Peak Hour 2024 Background Traffic 4484 Version 2022 (SP 0-3) Lane Configuration and Traffic Control Innovative Transport Solutions Generated with AM Peak Hour 2024 Background Traffic 4484 Version 2022 (SP 0-3) Traffic Volume - Future Total Volume Innovative Transport Solutions Generated with AM Peak Hour 2024 Background Traffic 4484 Version 2022 (SP 0-3) Traffic Conditions Innovative Transport Solutions Generated with AM Peak Hour 2027 Background Traffic 4484 Version 2022 (SP 0-3) Lane Configuration and Traffic Control Innovative Transport Solutions Generated with AM Peak Hour 2027 Background Traffic 4484 Version 2022 (SP 0-3) Traffic Volume - Future Total Volume Innovative Transport Solutions Generated with AM Peak Hour 2027 Background Traffic 4484 Version 2022 (SP 0-3) Traffic Conditions Innovative Transport Solutions Generated with PM Peak Hour 2022 Background Traffic 4484 Version 2022 (SP 0-3) Lane Configuration and Traffic Control Innovative Transport Solutions Generated with PM Peak Hour 2022 Background Traffic 4484 Version 2022 (SP 0-3) Traffic Volume - Future Total Volume Innovative Transport Solutions Generated with PM Peak Hour 2022 Background Traffic 4484 Version 2022 (SP 0-3) Traffic Conditions Innovative Transport Solutions Generated with PM Peak Hour 2024 Background Traffic 4484 Version 2022 (SP 0-3) Lane Configuration and Traffic Control Innovative Transport Solutions Generated with PM Peak Hour 2024 Background Traffic 4484 Version 2022 (SP 0-3) Traffic Volume - Future Total Volume Innovative Transport Solutions Generated with PM Peak Hour 2024 Background Traffic 4484 Version 2022 (SP 0-3) Traffic Conditions Innovative Transport Solutions Generated with PM Peak Hour 2027 Background Traffic 4484 Version 2022 (SP 0-3) Lane Configuration and Traffic Control Innovative Transport Solutions Generated with PM Peak Hour 2027 Background Traffic 4484 Version 2022 (SP 0-3) Traffic Volume - Future Total Volume Innovative Transport Solutions Generated with PM Peak Hour 2027 Background Traffic 4484 Version 2022 (SP 0-3) Traffic Conditions Innovative Transport Solutions Komati Power Station Repurposing  June 2022  Draft  ITS 4484      INNOVATIVE TRANSPORT SOLUTIONS (PTY) LTD        Page D‐1  APPENDIX E-11 SOCIAL REPORT The Proposed Solar Photovoltaic and Battery Energy Storage System at Komati Power Station Social Impact Assessment Submitted to: Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd Submitted by: Golder Associates Africa (Pty) Ltd. Building 1, Maxwell Office Park, Magwa Crescent West, Waterfall City, Midrand, 1685, South Africa P.O. Box 6001, Halfway House, 1685 +27 11 254 4800 22521869 June 2022 June 2022 22521869 Distribution List 1 x Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd 1 x electronic copy e-projects library projectreports@golder.co.za 1 x electronic copy Golder project folder i June 2022 22521869 Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .......................................................................................................................... 1 2.1 Project location ................................................................................................................................. 1 3.0 SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY................................................................................. 3 3.1 Data collection .................................................................................................................................. 3 3.1.1 Desktop review ........................................................................................................................... 3 3.1.2 Primary Research ....................................................................................................................... 3 4.0 WORLD BANK AND SOUTH AFRICAN LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS ............................................. 3 4.1.1 World Bank Borrower Requirements .......................................................................................... 3 4.1.2 The Constitution of South Africa ................................................................................................. 4 4.1.3 National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (NEMA) (Act No 107 of 1998) ........................ 5 4.1.4 National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act (Act 39 of 2004) ..................................... 5 4.1.5 National Environmental Management: Waste Act (Act 59 of 2008) ........................................... 5 4.1.6 National Water Act (Act 36 of 1998) ........................................................................................... 5 4.1.7 National Energy Act (Act No. 34 of 2008) ................................................................................... 5 4.1.8 National Development Plan ........................................................................................................ 5 4.1.9 New growth path framework ....................................................................................................... 5 4.1.10 Industrial Policy Action Plan (IPAP) ............................................................................................ 6 4.1.11 Integrated Resource Plan 2019 .................................................................................................. 6 4.1.12 National Spatial Development Perspective................................................................................. 7 4.1.13 Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act (Act 16 of 2013) ........................................... 7 4.1.14 Mpumalanga Spatial Development Framework .......................................................................... 7 4.1.15 Nkangala District Municipality Integrated Development Plan ..................................................... 7 4.1.16 Steve Tshwete Local Municipality Integrated Development Plan ............................................... 7 4.1.17 GPN - Addressing Sexual Exploitation and Abuse and Sexual Harassment (SEA/SH) in Investment Project Financing involving Major Civil Works, 2020 ............................................... 7 4.1.18 GPN - Addressing Gender Based Violence in Investment Project Financing involving Major Civil Works, 2018 ................................................................................................................................ 8 4.1.19 GPN – Gender, 2019 .................................................................................................................. 8 4.1.20 GPN - Road safety, 2019 ............................................................................................................ 8 ii June 2022 22521869 4.1.21 GPN - Assessing and managing the risks and impacts of the use of security personnel, 2018 9 4.1.22 GPN - Assessing and Managing the risks of adverse impacts on communities from temporary project induced labor influx, 2016 ............................................................................................... 9 4.1.23 Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) ... 9 4.1.24 Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98) .................................. 9 4.1.25 Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29) ................................................................................. 9 4.1.26 Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) ............................................................ 9 4.1.27 Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138) .............................................................................. 10 4.1.28 Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182) ...................................................... 10 4.1.29 Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) .................................................................... 10 4.1.30 Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111) ............................ 10 4.1.31 Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155) .................................................. 10 5.0 SOCIAL BASELINE .................................................................................................................................. 11 5.1 Mpumalanga Province ................................................................................................................... 11 5.2 Nkangala District Municipality ........................................................................................................ 11 5.3 Steve Tshwete Local Municipality .................................................................................................. 12 5.3.1 Population ................................................................................................................................. 12 5.3.2 Ethnicity and language.............................................................................................................. 13 5.3.3 Education .................................................................................................................................. 14 5.3.4 Vulnerable Groups .................................................................................................................... 14 5.3.5 Indigenous People .................................................................................................................... 14 5.3.6 Employment and income profile ............................................................................................... 15 5.3.7 Types of Employment ............................................................................................................... 15 5.3.8 Labour ....................................................................................................................................... 15 5.3.9 Child Labour .............................................................................................................................. 15 5.3.10 Housing ..................................................................................................................................... 15 5.3.11 Health ........................................................................................................................................ 15 5.3.12 Security and Safety ................................................................................................................... 15 5.3.13 Gender-Based Violence ............................................................................................................ 16 5.3.14 Agricultural Lands ..................................................................................................................... 16 5.4 Social and physical infrastructure .................................................................................................. 16 iii June 2022 22521869 5.4.1 Schools ..................................................................................................................................... 16 5.4.2 Healthcare ................................................................................................................................. 16 5.4.3 Water and sanitation ................................................................................................................. 16 5.4.4 Electricity ................................................................................................................................... 16 5.4.5 Access to sanitation .................................................................................................................. 17 5.4.6 Access to waste removal .......................................................................................................... 17 5.4.7 Telecommunications ................................................................................................................. 17 5.4.8 Public Transport ........................................................................................................................ 17 6.0 IDENTIFICATION AND HIGH-LEVEL SCREENING IMPACTS .............................................................. 17 6.1 Impact assessment approach ........................................................................................................ 17 6.1.1 Identification of impacts ............................................................................................................ 19 6.2 Preliminary key impacts ................................................................................................................. 19 6.2.1 Construction Phase ................................................................................................................... 19 6.2.1.1 Economic Impact ................................................................................................................... 19 6.2.1.2 Community, Health and Safety Risk ...................................................................................... 20 6.2.2 Operational phase ..................................................................................................................... 20 6.2.2.1 Low Carbon Power Generation ............................................................................................. 20 6.2.2.2 Impact on the community ....................................................................................................... 20 6.2.2.3 Employment and Business Opportunities .............................................................................. 20 6.2.3 Decommissioning and closure phase ....................................................................................... 21 6.2.3.1 Loss of employment ............................................................................................................... 21 6.2.3.2 Reduced community investment ........................................................................................... 21 6.3 Cumulative impacts ........................................................................................................................ 21 6.3.1 Visual impacts ........................................................................................................................... 21 6.3.2 Employment .............................................................................................................................. 21 6.3.3 Traffic ........................................................................................................................................ 22 6.3.4 Economic benefits ..................................................................................................................... 22 7.0 TERMS OF REFERENCE ......................................................................................................................... 22 8.0 CONCLUSION........................................................................................................................................... 22 9.0 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................... 23 TABLES iv June 2022 22521869 Table 1: Aspects of the South African Constitution Applicable to SIA ................................................................. 4 Table 3: Distribution of Steve Tshwete Local Municipality by population group [11] ......................................... 13 Table 4: Distribution of Steve Tshwete Local Municipality by language spoken ................................................ 14 Table 5: Distribution of the levels of education represented in the municipality................................................. 14 Table 8: Ratings of impacts during the construction phase ................................................................................ 20 Table 9: Ratings of impacts during the operational phase ................................................................................. 21 Table 10: Ratings of impacts during the decommissioning phase ..................................................................... 21 Figure 1: Locality map .......................................................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2: South African regional map [6] ............................................................................................................ 11 Figure 3: Nkangala District Municipality [9] ........................................................................................................ 12 Figure 4: STLM population size [10] ................................................................................................................... 13 Figure 5: STLM gender distribution [11] ............................................................................................................. 13 FIGURES Figure 1: Locality map .......................................................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2: South African regional map [6] ............................................................................................................ 11 Figure 3: Nkangala District Municipality [9] ........................................................................................................ 12 Figure 4: STLM population size [10] ................................................................................................................... 13 Figure 5: STLM gender distribution [11] ............................................................................................................. 13 v June 2022 22521869 TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS EAP Environmental Assessment Practitioner EIA Environmental Impact Assessments ESS Environmental and Social Standards FGM Focus Group Meeting GPN Good Practice Note GW Giga Watt I&AP Interested and Affected Parties IDP Integrated Development Plans MSDF Mpumalanga Spatial Development Framework NEMA National Environmental Management Act 107 of 1998 NDM Nkangala District Municipality NDP National Development Plan SIA Social Impact Assessment STLM Steve Tshwete Local Municipality ToR Terms of Reference vi June 2022 22521869 1.0 INTRODUCTION Eskom has commissioned WSP to undertake the environmental permitting processes required for the repurposing of the Komati Power Station located in Komati, Mpumalanga. The following sections provide the project description, world bank and South African legislative requirement, screening impact assessment, and terms of reference for the EIA phase Social Impact Assessment (SIA). 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Eskom is proposing the establishment of a solar electricity generating facility and associated infrastructure as part of its repurposing programme for the Komati Power Station. The plan is to install 100MW of Solar Photovoltaics (PV) and a 150MW Battery Energy Storage System. The parcels of land for the proposed development are provided in Figure 1 below. Eskom owns the identified parcels of land. 2.1 Project location The Komati Power Station is situated about 37km from Middelburg, 43km from Bethal and 40km from Emalahleni, via Vandyksdrift in the Mpumalanga Province of South Africa. The GPS coordinates for the power plant are 26.0896668 S, and 29.4655907 E. The station has nine units, five 100MW units on the east (Units 1 to 5) and four 125 MW units on the west (Units 6 to 9), with a total installed capacity of 1000 MW. Its units operated on a simple Rankine Cycle without reheat and with a low superheat pressure, resulting in a lower thermodynamic efficiency (efficiency up to 27%). Komati Units are small and have a higher operating and maintenance cost per megawatt generated than modern newer stations. Komati Power Station will reach its end-of-life expectancy in September 2022, when Unit 9 will have reached its dead stop date (DSD). Units 1 to 8 have already reached their DSD [1]. 1 June 2022 22521869 Figure 1: Locality map 2 June 2022 22521869 3.0 SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 3.1 Data collection To understand the socio-economic baseline conditions of the project-affected areas and the socio-economic implications of the proposed project to the receiving environment, WSP - Golder conducted secondary desktop data collection (desktop review) and primary data collection as part of the stakeholder consultation process. These two methods are elaborated further in the following sections. 3.1.1 Desktop review Golder reviewed available documents to obtain information regarding the socio-economic conditions in the study area. The documents reviewed include the following: ▪ IDPs and Spatial Development Frameworks of the affected local and district municipalities. ▪ Socio-economic and demographic statistics (sourced from Statistics South Africa’s 2011 census data, municipal report, provincial data, and the 2016 community survey). ▪ Documents concerning the proposed project, which included the project description document, ▪ Social impact assessments undertaken for the closure of the Komati Power Station. ▪ Available maps and satellite imagery. 3.1.2 Primary Research Golder consulted with interested and affected parties (I&AP) during the scoping phase of the project. . A focus group meeting (FGM) was held on 09 June 2022 at the Eskom Komati SBSS Conference Room. In addition, the draft scoping report will be made available for public review for 30 days. All issues, questions, concerns, and suggestions for enhanced benefits raised by I&APs to date have been captured in the Comment and Response Report. The information derived from the meeting minutes was used to understand better the stakeholder’s concerns, issues, and expectations. This process formed part of the primary research proc ess. The main issues raised by participants at the meeting were: ▪ Where would the labour for the project be sourced? ▪ What skills will be required when construction commences? ▪ Local business and contractors should be used during the construction and maintenance of the Solar Photovoltaics and Battery Energy Storage System. 4.0 WORLD BANK AND SOUTH AFRICAN LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS The legislation related to the project aids in identifying and assessing the associated potential impacts. This section identifies the documentation reviewed as part of assessment process. 4.1.1 World Bank Borrower Requirements The World Bank Environmental and Social Framework sets out the mandatory requirements for projects seeking funding from the Bank. The aim of this Framework is to ensure that the Borrower (Eskom) assesses and manages the environmental and social risks and impacts associated with the project and where possible minimises the impact of the project. The framework is underpinned by the Environmental and Social Standards (ESS) and in Particular ESS1 which set out the requirements for borrowers relating to the identification and 3 June 2022 22521869 assessment of environmental and social risks and impacts associated with projects supported by the Bank through Investment Project Financing. The objectives of the ESS1 are: ▪ To identify, evaluate, and manage the environment and social risks and impacts of the project in a manner consistent with the ESSs. ▪ To adopt a mitigation hierarchy approach to: a) Anticipate and avoid risks and impacts; b) Where avoidance is not possible, minimize or reduce risks and impacts to acceptable levels; c) Once risks and impacts have been minimized or reduced, mitigate; and d) Where significant residual impacts remain, compensate for or offset them, where technically and financially feasible. ▪ To adopt differentiated measures so that adverse impacts do not fall disproportionately on the disadvantaged or vulnerable, and they are not disadvantaged in sharing development benefits and opportunities resulting from the project. ▪ To utilize national environmental and social institutions, systems, laws, regulations, and procedures in the assessment, development, and implementation of projects, whenever appropriate. ▪ To promote improved environmental and social performance, in ways which recognize and enhance Borrower capacity. [2] 4.1.2 The Constitution of South Africa The Constitution in Section 151 states that local government should provide a democratic and accountable government for communities. It also encourages municipalities to ensure the provision of services to communities in a sustainable manner to promote social and economic development. The local government must promote a safe and healthy environment and encourage community involvement in matters of local government. Table 1: Aspects of the South African Constitution Applicable to SIA Regulation Description Section 24 of the Constitution Everyone has the right a. to an environment that is not harmful to their health or wellbeing; and b. to have the environment protected, for the benefit of present and future generations, through reasonable legislative and other measures that: i. prevent pollution and ecological degradation. ii. promote conservation; and iii. secure ecologically sustainable development and use of natural resources while promoting justifiable economic and social development. 4 June 2022 22521869 4.1.3 National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (NEMA) (Act No 107 of 1998) According to NEMA, sustainable development requires the integration of social, economic, and environmental factors in the planning, implementation, and evaluation of decisions to ensure that development serves present and future generations. NEMA also sets out the process for public participation. 4.1.4 National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act (Act 39 of 2004) This act advocates for the enhancement and protection of air quality in the country. Future projects should not contribute to air pollution and ecological degradation. It also promotes justifiable economic and social development while securing ecologically sustainable development. 4.1.5 National Environmental Management: Waste Act (Act 59 of 2008) The Act seeks to ensure that future interventions should protect the health, well-being and environment of the affected communities and seeks to increase awareness of the impact of waste on the health, well-being and environment of affected communities. 4.1.6 National Water Act (Act 36 of 1998) The National Water Act seeks to ensure that projects and future interventions should not alter the capability of water resources to meet basic human needs. And seeks to maintain equitable access to water and the efficient, sustainable, and beneficial use of water. Future developments must reduce and prevent the pollution and degradation of water resources. 4.1.7 National Energy Act (Act No. 34 of 2008) The Electricity Regulation Act gives the Minister of Energy the power to determine the need for new generation capacity and to take the initiative for its procurement. It also states that one needs a generation licence to produce over one megawatt of electricity. The Act aims to strengthen energy planning in Electricity Regulation Act (Act No. 4 of 2006), Second Amendment (2011). The Act gives power to the Minister of Energy to determine new generation capacity and to approve the generation and procurement of electricity. A licence for generation capacity is subject to ministerial approval. An amendment to the Electricity Regulations on new generation capacity was made in 2015 this amendment provides for renewable energy power generation including PV generation. 4.1.8 National Development Plan The National Development Plan (NDP) seeks to eliminate poverty and reduce inequality by 2030. The NDP aims to achieve its goal by growing an inclusive economy, building capabilities, enhancing the capacity of the state, and promoting leadership and partnerships throughout society. A key focus of the NDP is the country’s ability to return to a state of continued and uninterrupted electricity supply. This was to be achieved by increasing the electricity generation reserve margin from 1% (2014) to 19% in 2019, which would require the development of 10 Giga Watt (GW) of additional electricity capacity by 2019 against the 2010 baseline of 44GW. Five of the 10 GW were to be sourced from renewable energy sources, with an additional 2GW to be operational by 2020. The NDP aims to acquire 2GW of renewable energy in efforts to move the country to less carbon reliant means of energy production by 2030. 4.1.9 New growth path framework The New growth Path framework sets out the framework for economic policy and the drivers for creating jobs in the South African economy. The NGP targeted 5 million new jobs by 2020. It also aimed for 300,000 additional direct jobs by 2020 to green the economy. The framework identifies investments in five key areas namely: energy, transport, communication, water and housing. Sustaining high levels of public investment in these areas will create jobs in construction, operation and maintenance of infrastructure. The New Growth Path identifies five other priority areas as part of the programme to create jobs, through a series of partnerships between the 5 June 2022 22521869 State and the private sector. The Green economy will include expansions in construction and the production of technologies for solar, wind and biofuels as supported by the draft Energy on Integrated Resource Plan. There is potential for renewable energy generation to provide for some of these 300 000 jobs and to provide green power to the economy to generate additional jobs (State of Renewable energy in south Africa, 2015). 4.1.10 Industrial Policy Action Plan (IPAP) The IPAP is driven by the Department of Trade and Industry. The IPAP is an annually updated, three-year rolling plan for industrial policy implementation; since 2011 it has specifically identified the energy sector (solar and wind energy); as a priority for the country’s industrial sector in (2014). In its review report the following was reported in terms of progress made in the green economy specifically reporting on the Renewable Energy Independent Power Producer Programme (REIPPPP) programme stating that this has proved an extraordinarily successful green economy project, attracting investment to the value of R201.8 billion, contributing 3,162 MW of electricity generation capacity and mandating South African entity participation of 40% (Industrial Policy Action Plan 2018/19-2020/21). 4.1.11 Integrated Resource Plan 2019 The Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) is an electricity infrastructure development plan based on least-cost electricity supply and demand balance, considering security of supply and the environment namely to minimize negative emissions and water usage. The first plan was promulgated in March 2011, the plan is a living plan and was last updated in 2019. The 2019 report indicates that a total 6 422 MW under the REIPPP has been procured, with 3 876 MW operational and made available to the grid. Current base from wind is 1 980 MW in 2018 by 2030 this will be 17 742 MW which is the highest of all renewable energy sources. The next closest is PV Solar 8 288 but coal will still dominate with in 2030 with 333 64 MW. Table 2: Draft IRP 2018 6 June 2022 22521869 However, the 2019 report also states that build limits on renewables (wind and solar) will remain in place until the next review limiting the development of new renewable energy build projects. Imposing annual build limits on renewables for the period up to 2030 does not affect the capacity from wind or solar PV in any significant way. 4.1.12 National Spatial Development Perspective According to the National Spatial Development Perspective, spatial development should, where appropriate, accommodate and promote private economic ventures, which can aid sustainable economic growth, relieve poverty, increase social investment, and improve service delivery. Consequently, municipal-level spatial planning has been considered where relevant. 4.1.13 Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act (Act 16 of 2013) The Act seeks to ensure that projects do not alter the progress made in promoting social and economic inclusion and that future interventions should promote the efficient and sustainable use of land. Interventions should contribute towards redressing equity concerns in the affected communities through land-use management systems. 4.1.14 Mpumalanga Spatial Development Framework The Mpumalanga Spatial Development Framework (MSDF) emanates from the SPLUMA. It serves to outline the role of transparent developmental, regulatory land and development management. The MSDF plans to explore the possibility of renewable energy generation. It intends to make use of land that has low agricultural potential and is unused for renewable energy production, namely solar and wind [3]. 4.1.15 Nkangala District Municipality Integrated Development Plan The Municipal Systems Act 32 of 2000 requires municipal planning to be developmentally oriented and that municipalities undertake an integrated development planning process to produce Integrated Development Plans (IDP). The IDP highlights the Nkangala District Municipality’s (NDM) vision to “improve the quality of life for all.” The NDM aims to accomplish its vision by aligning its priorities with the National Development Plan – Vision 2030 (NDP) [4]. 4.1.16 Steve Tshwete Local Municipality Integrated Development Plan The Steve Tshwete Local Municipality (STLM) strives to be the leading service delivery and governance municipality. It intends to achieve this by the following strategic goals: 1. Provision of sustainable and accessible basic services to all. 2. Provide a safe, healthy environment. 3. Promote economic growth and job creation. 4. Promote good governance, organisational development, and financial sustainability. 4.1.17 GPN - Addressing Sexual Exploitation and Abuse and Sexual Harassment (SEA/SH) in Investment Project Financing involving Major Civil Works, 2020 This Good Practice Note (GPN) aims to assist Task Teams in identifying risks of SEA/SH that can emerge in projects involving major civil works contracts – and to advise on how to best manage such risks. The ESIA will identify the potential social impacts that the project may have on women in the project affected area and will recommend measures to mitigate these potential impacts. 7 June 2022 22521869 4.1.18 GPN - Addressing Gender Based Violence in Investment Project Financing involving Major Civil Works, 2018 This GPN was seeks to assist Task Teams in establishing an approach to identify risks of Gender Based Violence, in particular SEA and SH, that can emerge in Investment Project Financing with major civil works contracts and to advise accordingly on how to best manage such risks. The GPN builds on World Bank experience and good international industry practices, including those of other development partners. While World Bank Task Teams are the primary audience, the GPN also aims to contribute to a growing knowledge base on the subject. The ESIA identifies the potential social impacts that the project may have on women in the project affected area. 4.1.19 GPN – Gender, 2019 To address constraints cited in many economies as impediments to closing these gaps, such as occupational sex segregation, with women and girls often streamed into lower-paying, less secure fields of study and work; high rates of unpaid work by women; lack of safe, affordable transportation; high prevalence of gender-based violence and, more specifically, of SEA/SH in workplaces; lack of clear land and housing ownership and tenure security, wherein women’s rights tend to be informal so that they are at greater risk of being displaced from land and other asset ownership; and inadequate investment in and prioritization of care services, from early childhood to old age. The strategy sets out to help countries address challenges such as maternal mortality while also considering emerging challenges such as ageing populations, climate change, fragility, conflict, and violence, and slowing economic growth. The ESIA will identify the potential social impacts that the project may have on the health and wellbeing of women in the project affected area. It also assesses the potential impacts on the social standing and benefits from the project. There will be no physical or economic displacement as a result of the project. 4.1.20 GPN - Road safety, 2019 The ESF road safety requirements are defined in ESS 4. The following objective are applicable: ▪ To identify, evaluate and monitor the potential traffic and road safety risks to workers, affected communities and road users throughout the project life-cycle and, where appropriate, will develop measures and plans to address them. The Borrower will incorporate technically and financially feasible road safety measures into the project design to prevent and mitigate potential road safety risks to road users and affected communities” ▪ To undertake a road safety assessment for each phase of the project, and will monitor incidents and accidents, and prepare regular reports of such monitoring. The Borrower will use the reports to identify negative safety issues and establish and implement measures to resolve them. ▪ To put in place appropriate processes, including driver training, to improve driver and vehicle safety, as well as systems for monitoring and enforcement. The Borrower will consider the safety record or rating of vehicles in purchase or leasing decisions and require regular maintenance of all project vehicles. ▪ To take appropriate safety measures to avoid the occurrence of incidents and injuries to members of the public associated with the operation of construction equipment. The impacts on traffic and general road safety in the project affected area will be assessed in the ESIA. 8 June 2022 22521869 4.1.21 GPN - Assessing and managing the risks and impacts of the use of security personnel, 2018 To assess and manage potential environmental and social risks and impacts arising from projects. The health and safety and security of communities is assessed and considered in the ESIA. 4.1.22 GPN - Assessing and Managing the risks of adverse impacts on communities from temporary project induced labor influx, 2016 To assist the identification and management of risks to and impacts on local communities related to the influx of labour that typically results from construction works. The potential impacts of the influx of labourers and labour seekers will be assessed in the ESIA. 4.1.23 Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) Workers and employers, without distinction whatsoever, shall have the right to establish and, subject only to the rules of the organisation concerned, to join organisations of their own choosing without previous authorisation. The right to associate is enshrined in the constitution of South Africa. Eskom will adhere to the International Labour Organisation Conventions which have been ratified by South Africa. 4.1.24 Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98) Workers' and employers' organisations shall enjoy adequate protection against any acts of interference by each other or each other's agents or members in their establishment, functioning or administration. The right to collectively bargain is enshrined in the constitution of South Africa. Eskom will adhere to the International Labour Organisation Conventions which have been ratified by South Africa 4.1.25 Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29) Aims to suppress the use of forced or compulsory labour in all its forms within the shortest possible period. The constitution of South Africa states that no one may be subjected to slavery, servitude or forced labour. Eskom will adhere to the International Labour Organisation Conventions which have been ratified by South Africa. 4.1.26 Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) Undertakes to suppress and not to make use of any form of forced or compulsory labour-- a) As a means of political coercion or education or as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system; b) As a method of mobilising and using labour for purposes of economic development; c) As a means of labour discipline; d) As a punishment for having participated in strikes; e) As a means of racial, social, national or religious discrimination. The constitution of South Africa states that no one may be subjected to slavery, servitude or forced labour. 9 June 2022 22521869 Eskom will adhere to the International Labour Organisation Conventions which have been ratified by South Africa. 4.1.27 Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138) Seeks to ensure the effective abolition of child labour and to raise progressively the minimum age for admission to employment or work to a level consistent with the fullest physical and mental development of young persons. The Basic Conditions of Employment Act in South Africa states that it is a criminal offence to employ a child younger than 15. Eskom will adhere to the International Labour Organisation Conventions which have been ratified by South Africa. 4.1.28 Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182) To secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour as a matter of urgency. he Basic Conditions of Employment Act in South Africa states that it is a criminal offence to employ a child younger than 15. Eskom will adhere to the International Labour Organisation Conventions which have been ratified by South Africa. 4.1.29 Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) To ensure the application to all workers of the principle of equal remuneration for men and women workers for work of equal value. The Employment Equity Act states that no person may discriminate directly or indirectly against an employee on the basis of race, gender, sex, pregnancy, marital status, family responsibility, ethnic or social origin, colour, sexual orientation, age, disability, religion, HIV status, conscience, belief, political opinion, culture, language and birth or on any other arbitrary grounds. Eskom will adhere to the International Labour Organisation Conventions which have been ratified by South Africa. 4.1.30 Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111) To declare and pursue a national policy designed to promote, equality of opportunity and treatment in respect of employment and occupation. The Employment Equity Act states that no person may discriminate directly or indirectly against an employee on the basis of race, gender, sex, pregnancy, marital status, family responsibility, ethnic or social origin, colour, sexual orientation, age, disability, religion, HIV status, conscience, belief, political opinion, culture, language and birth or on any other arbitrary grounds. Eskom will adhere to the International Labour Organisation Conventions which have been ratified by South Africa. 4.1.31 Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155) Employers shall be required to ensure that the workplaces, machinery, equipment and processes under their control are safe and without risk to health. The Occupational Health and Safety Act seeks to provide for the health and safety of people at work or in connection with the use of plant and machinery. 10 June 2022 22521869 Eskom will adhere to the International Labour Organisation Conventions which have been ratified by South Africa. 5.0 SOCIAL BASELINE 5.1 Mpumalanga Province Mpumalanga Province is located in the north-eastern part of South Africa. The province borders two of South Africa's neighbouring countries, Mozambique and Swaziland; and four other South African provinces, namely, Gauteng, Limpopo, KwaZulu-Natal and Free State Provinces (Figure 2). Mpumalanga is characterised by the high plateau grasslands of the Middleveld, which roll eastwards for hundreds of kilometres. It rises towards mountain peaks in the northeast and terminates in an immense escarpment [5]. Figure 2: South African regional map [6] Mpumalanga province covers an area of 76 495km² and has a population of approximately 4 300 000 [7]. The capital city of Mpumalanga is Mbombela, and other major cities and towns include Emalahleni, Standerton, eMkhondo, Malelane, Ermelo, Barberton and Sabie. The province is divided into three district municipalities: Gert Sibande, Ehlanzeni and Nkangala District Municipalities. These three districts are further subdivided into 17 Local Municipalities. The proposed development falls within the Steve Tshwete Local Municipality (STLM). The STLM falls within the Nkangala District Municipality (NDM). 5.2 Nkangala District Municipality The NDM has municipal executive and legislative authority in an area that includes more than one municipality which makes it a Category C municipality 1, located in the Mpumalanga Province. It is one of three district municipalities in the province, making up 22% of its geographical area. The NDM comprises the Victor Khanye, Emalahleni, Steve Tshwete, Emakhazeni, Thembisile Hani, and Dr JS Moroka local municipalities (Figure 3). The NDM is headquartered in Middelburg. The NDM is the economic hub of Mpumalanga and is rich in minerals and natural resources [8]. 1 A municipality that has municipal executive and legislative authority in an area that includes more than one municipality. 11 June 2022 22521869 Figure 3: Nkangala District Municipality [9] 5.3 Steve Tshwete Local Municipality STLM is approximately 3,976 square kilometres in extent, representing 23.7% of the NDM’s land mass. To the west it is bordered by the Emalahleni and Thembisile Hani Local Municipalities; the Govan Mbeki and Msukaligwa Local Municipalities in Gert Sibande District to the south; and the Emakhazeni and Chief Albert Luthuli Local Municipalities to the east (Figure 3). Adjacent to the north of the Steve Tshwete Municipality is Elias Motsoaledi Municipality which forms part of the Sekhukhune District Municipality in Limpopo Province. 5.3.1 Population The STLM’s population increased to 278 749 between 2011 and 2016 (Figure 4) which represents an increase of 21.3% over the five-year period. The growth rate was 4.3% over the same period. It is estimated that in 2030 the population of the municipality will be approximately 510 000 [10]. The gender distribution of the municipality was almost equal with females representing 48% and males 52% of the population in 2011(Figure 5). People aged between 15 and 64 years old represent 70.7% of the population with 25% of the population representing the young and 4.3%, the elderly [11]. 12 June 2022 22521869 Figure 4: STLM population size [10] Figure 5: STLM gender distribution [11] 5.3.2 Ethnicity and language Almost 74% of the municipality is represented by Black African people followed by nearly 22 % White and smaller portions representing remaining ethnicities as shown in Table 3 [11]. Table 3: Distribution of Steve Tshwete Local Municipality by population group [11] Group Percentage Black African 73.6% Coloureds 2.6% Indian or Asian 1.6% White 21.8% Other 0.4% 13 June 2022 22521869 Isizulu is the language most spoken in the municipality followed by Afrikaans, isiNdebele, Sepedi and other in smaller proportions (Table 4). Table 4: Distribution of Steve Tshwete Local Municipality by language spoken Language Percentage IsiZulu 27,8% Afrikaans 22,1% IsiNdebele 14,6% Sepedi 10,6% English 5,8% Others 19.1% 5.3.3 Education In 2011, approximately 17 000 people over the age of 20 had no form of formal education and approximately 42 500 people have completed secondary education. Approximately 2.2 % (5 050 people) have received higher educational training. Table 5 shows the levels of education represented in the municipality. Table 5: Distribution of the levels of education represented in the municipality Group Percentage No Schooling 3,1% Some Primary 37,8% Completed Primary 5,8% Some Secondary 31,1% Completed Secondary 18,5% Higher Education 2,2% Not Applicable 1,5% 5.3.4 Vulnerable Groups Vulnerable groups include the economically disadvantaged, racial and ethnic minorities, the uninsured, low- income children, the elderly, the homeless, those with HIV, and those with other chronic health conditions, including severe mental illness and indigenous people. There are no identified vulnerable groups in the project area. 5.3.5 Indigenous People Due to the varied and changing contexts in which indigenous peoples live, there is no universally accepted definition of indigenous peoples. For this Project, the term indigenous people is used in a generic sense to refer to a distinct, vulnerable, social, and cultural group, which possess the following characteristics in varying degrees: ▪ Self-identification as members of a distinct indigenous cultural group and recognition of this identity by others 14 June 2022 22521869 ▪ Collective attachment to geographically distinct habitats or ancestral territories in the Project area and the natural resources in these habitats and territories ▪ Customary cultural, economic, social, or political institutions that are separate from those of the dominant society and culture; and ▪ An indigenous language, often different from the official language of the country or region. (World Bank, 2013) The screening was undertaken to determine whether indigenous peoples are present in, or have a collective attachment to, the Project-affected area. There are no indigenous people as defined above in the Komati power station area. 5.3.6 Employment and income profile The unemployment rate of STLM decreased from 19.7% in 2011 to 16.4% and is among the lowest in the municipalities within the Mpumalanga province. The unemployment rate for females of 21.8% is nearly double that of males at 12.9%. The youth unemployment, as recorded by the 2011 census, is 27.1% [10]. 5.3.7 Types of Employment In 2011, there were 682 people employed in the formal sector and 76 in the informal sector [12]. Eskom is the major employer in the area. Komati is also surrounded by agricultural land where people will be employed in this sector. 5.3.8 Labour Eskom will adhere to the International Labour Organisation Conventions which have been ratified by South Africa. 5.3.9 Child Labour Eskom will not employ child labour in the construction or in the operation of the facilities. 5.3.10 Housing The number of households in the STLM increased by almost 22 000 from 64 971 in 2011 to a total of 86 713 in 2016. The STLM provides services such as water, electricity and waste to these households. The average size of a household has declined from 3.5 to 3.2 people in the same period [10]. 5.3.11 Health The main challenges to the health care in the STLM is the prevalence of HIV/AIDS. A decrease in the HIV/AIDS prevalence rate was recorded between 2011 and 2013, seeing a decline from 52% to 43%. This decrease is attributed to increased HIV Counselling and Testing campaigns in the local municipality and increased community awareness [10]. 5.3.12 Security and Safety The Komati community is serviced by the Blinkpan Police Station. The crime statistic published for the 2020/2021 financial year by the South African Police Service (SAPS) indicated that only 62 contact crimes were committed during the period with Assault with the intent to inflict grievous bodily harm being record, Common assault and Robbery with aggravating circumstances representing 89% of contact crimes. In total, 298 community reported serious crimes were reported at the Blinkpan Police Station with 71% (208) being theft, followed by contact crimes (21%) and property related crimes (6%). 15 June 2022 22521869 Eskom will either provide or contract security during the construction and operation of the Project these will be trained professionals and will need to sign a code of conduct committing themselves to the protection of the local communities. 5.3.13 Gender-Based Violence In terms of gender-based violence, i.e. Rape, Sexual assault, and contact sexual offences, two cases were recorded at the Blinkpan Police Station during the2020/2021 period. Both cases were rape cases. There is no organisation based in the Komati area that offer GBV services to victims. However, the Department of Social Development established a GBV command centre in 2013 that allows a survivor to contact the centre and be assigned a social worker close to them. There are national NGOs that offer services to GBV victims namely, People Opposing Woman Abuse (POWA), Sonke Gender Justice and Shukumisa. 5.3.14 Agricultural Lands There are 8 681 households that take part in agricultural activities in the Steve Tshwete Local Municipality. The main types are poultry (28%), livestock (24%) and vegetable growing (21%). Other crops and other types of agriculture represent 9% and 19% respectively. 5.4 Social and physical infrastructure 5.4.1 Schools There is one school in the Komati area (Laerskool Koornfontein). The nearest secondary school (Allendale Secondary School) is 27 kilometres from Komati. 5.4.2 Healthcare The nearest hospital to the project location is the Impungwe Public Hospital which is 30 kilometres from Komati power station. The nearest provincial hospital is the Middleburg Provincial Hospital, which is 42 kilometres from Komati, in Middelburg. 5.4.3 Water and sanitation In the STLM, 60.8% of households have access to piped water inside dwellings and 24.2% have access to piped water inside the yard. Community stands provide piped water to 13.1% of households while the remainder of the households rely on tankers, boreholes, dams and other sources of water [13]. 5.4.4 Electricity Based on the District Municipality’s IDP, the STLM’s energy supply is licensed from a third party . The supply has become strained due to supply infrastructure failures and the unwillingness of coal suppliers to become long-term suppliers to Eskom. The export market is more lucrative for the coal suppliers [4]. The STLM must make efforts to address the electricity supply issues by emphasising the following [4]: 1. Partially licenced municipalities to provide electricity. 2. Municipalities exceeding their notified maximum demand. 3. Non-payment of bulk electricity. 4. Ageing of bulk electricity Infrastructure. 5. Inadequate bulk electricity infrastructure to meet the demand. 6. Lack of operation and maintenance plan. 7. Theft of solar panels from the borehole pump station. With the stated supply constraints, households in the STLM have good access to electricity with a 91% of households having access to electricity. 16 June 2022 22521869 5.4.5 Access to sanitation Over half (51%) of NDM households have access to flush toilet facilities and 43% use pit latrines. The rest of the households rely on other types of sanitation facilities. The majority of STLM households (84%) have access to flush toilet facilities,9% use pit latrines and the rest rely on other types of facilities [13]. 5.4.6 Access to waste removal In contrast to the NDM, who only 40% of its population makes use of refuse dumps [13], 84.7% of the households in the STLM have their waste removed weekly by the municipality and only 11% of the households make use of a refuse dump [11]. 5.4.7 Telecommunications Komati is serviced by all the major network providers in the country. It has access to 4G/LTE coverage and access to the internet via the service provider rain. 5.4.8 Public Transport The Komati area relies on taxis as the main form of public transportation. The area is serviced by the Middelburg District Taxi Association. Buses also operate in the area but are mainly used as scholar transport. 6.0 IDENTIFICATION AND HIGH-LEVEL SCREENING IMPACTS 6.1 Impact assessment approach GNR 982 requires the identification of the significance of potential impacts during scoping. To this end, an impact screening tool has been used in the scoping phase impacts. The screening tool is based on two criteria: probability; and consequence, where the latter is based on a general consideration of the intensity, extent, and duration. Significance Screening Tool Probability 1 2 3 4 Scale 1 Very Low Very Low Low Medium 2 Very Low Low Medium Medium 3 Low Medium Medium High 4 Medium Medium High High Probability Scores and Descriptors Score Descriptor 4 Definite: The impact will occur regardless of any prevention measures 3 Highly Probable: It is most likely that the impact will occur 2 Probable: There is a good possibility that the impact will occur 17 June 2022 22521869 Score Descriptor 1 Improbable: The possibility of the impact occurring is very low Table 6: Consequence Score Description Score Negative Positive 4 Very severe: An irreversible and permanent Very beneficial: A permanent and very substantial change to the affected system(s) or benefit to the affected system(s) or party(ies), with no party(ies) which cannot be mitigated. real alternative to achieving this benefit. 3 Severe: Long-term impacts on the affected Beneficial: A long-term impact and substantial benefit system(s) or party(ies) could be mitigated. to the affected system(s) or party(ies). Alternative However, this mitigation would be difficult, ways of achieving this benefit would be difficult, expensive or time consuming or some expensive or time-consuming, or some combination of combination of these. these. 2 Moderately severe: A medium to long-term Moderately beneficial: A medium to long-term impact impact on the affected system(s) or party of real benefit to the affected system(s) or party(ies). (ies) that could be mitigated. Other ways of optimising the beneficial effects are equally difficult, expensive and time-consuming (or some combination of these) as achieving them in this way. 1 Negligible: A short to medium term impact Negligible: A short to medium term impact and on the affected system(s) or party(ies). negligible benefit to the affected system(s) or Mitigation is straightforward, cheap, less party(ies). Other ways of optimising the beneficial time consuming or not necessary. effects are more accessible, cheaper, and quicker, or some combination of these. The nature of the impact must be characterised as to whether the impact is deemed to be positive (+ve) (i.e. beneficial) or negative (-ve) (i.e. harmful) to the receiving environment/receptor. For ease of reference, a colour reference system (Table 7) has been applied according to the nature and significance of the identified impacts. Table 7: Impact Significance Colour Reference System to Indicate the Nature of the Impact Negative Impacts (-ve) Positive Impacts (+ve) Negligible Negligible Very Low Very Low 18 June 2022 22521869 Negative Impacts (-ve) Positive Impacts (+ve) Low Low Medium Medium High High The key objectives of the risk assessment methodology are to identify any additional potential social issues and associated social impacts likely to arise from the proposed project, and to propose a significance ranking. Issues / aspects will be reviewed and ranked against a series of significance criteria to identify and record interactions between activities and aspects and resources and receptors to provide a detailed discussion of impacts. The assessment considers direct2, indirect3, secondary4 as well as cumulative5 impacts. The significance ranking is calculated using the following formula: Significance=(Extent+Duration+Reversibility+Magnitude)×Probability [ = ( + + + ) × ] 6.1.1 Identification of impacts Based on the collected secondary data, outcomes of the stakeholder consultation and expert knowledge, impacts were identified and categorised according to the project phase in which the impacts are likely to occur, construction, operation, closure and decommissioning phases. 6.2 Preliminary key impacts The Komati Solar Photovoltaic and Battery Energy Storage System has been selected based on several factors namely: repurposing the Komati power station, solar resources, environmental constraints, readily available grid connection, site access, and land ownership. The following section analyses the social impacts of the Komati facility with the preliminary impact’s construction, operational and closure phase of the facility. The following section analyses the social impacts of the Komati facility. 6.2.1 Construction Phase 6.2.1.1 Economic Impact During the construction phase of the project, the Principal Engineer appointed by Eskom will require various goods and services. These requirements are likely to generate economic opportunities for local businesses. It is anticipated that the construction workforce (sourced from outside the surrounding communities) will be housed in local accommodations (guest houses or rental options) adding to the local economy. Provided that a significant proportion of money derived from wages earned would likely be spent in the vicinity of the project area, it is expected to create substantial flows of revenue within the surrounding communities, thus acting as a catalyst for growth in the formal and secondary economy. Additionally, workers sources from the surrounding communities are foreseen to spend an even larger proportion of their wages within the local communities further adding to the flows of revenue. 2 Impacts that arise directly from activities that form an integral part of the Project. 3 Impacts that arise indirectly from activities not explicitly forming part of the Project. 4 Secondary or induced impacts caused by a change in the Project environment. 5 Impacts are those impacts arising from the combination of multiple impacts from existing projects, the Project and/or future projects. 19 June 2022 22521869 6.2.1.2 Community, Health and Safety Risk During construction, noise affects humans differently, and the new noise which will be coming from the facilities. The construction of facilities can result in traffic and resources are being transported. Waste material that results from the construction could be detrimental to aesthetics and nearby community. Social ills may also increase in the area with construction known to result in an influx of people from further afield seeking employment opportunities. The limited opportunities may result in increased unemployment in the area and thus increased crime. Construction activities can be take much longer than initially planned at the beginning of a project. This can result in extended stays away from home for the labourers, who are generally men, and this may lead to an increase in the night economy. Table 8: Ratings of impacts during the construction phase Impact Reversibility Significance Probability Magnitude Duration Extend Economic Impact 3 3 3 2 4 44 Community, Health and Safety Risk 3 3 3 2 3 33 6.2.2 Operational phase 6.2.2.1 Low Carbon Power Generation During the operational phase of the project, no waste or emissions will be produced by the facility. South Africa’s per capita greenhouse emissions are the highest in Africa [14] thus this project will aid in reducing the carbon footprint and emissions of the country. 6.2.2.2 Impact on the community The change in the landscape/view within the community and the increased presence of construction workers may lead to a decreased sense of place/belonging for the residents of the area. 6.2.2.3 Employment and Business Opportunities The maintenance of the facility and functioning of the facility will create employment. It is assumed that the unskilled labour will be sourced from the local community and that skilled labour, within reason, will be sourced from the local communities as well. 20 June 2022 22521869 Table 9: Ratings of impacts during the operational phase Impact Reversibility Significance Probability Magnitude Duration Extend Low Carbon Power Generation 3 4 1 4 5 60 Impact on the community 3 3 3 4 4 52 Employment and Business Opportunities 3 3 3 4 4 52 6.2.3 Decommissioning and closure phase 6.2.3.1 Loss of employment During this phase the operational workforce will lose their jobs and it may lead to adverse social consequences in the municipality and labour sending area. 6.2.3.2 Reduced community investment There will be reduced local spending by Eskom and its staff and contractors. Consequently, local business revenue may be affected. Table 10: Ratings of impacts during the decommissioning phase Impact Reversibility Significance Probability Magnitude Duration Extend Loss of employment 4 3 3 4 4 56 Reduced community investment 4 3 3 4 4 56 6.3 Cumulative impacts 6.3.1 Visual impacts The proposed development will change the aesthetics of the project area. Construction activities, dust mobilisation and construction vehicles traversing the proposed site, as well as the presence of new infrastructure will transform the landscape. The solar panels will be visually prominent from several vantage points. 6.3.2 Employment One of the positive short-term social impacts will be the creation of jobs. Construction activities will create several temporary employment opportunities. Other social impacts include the increased demand on local services, the influx of job seekers, social problems arising from population increase in the area, change in land use and the effect on sense of place. 21 June 2022 22521869 6.3.3 Traffic Transportation of construction materials and workers to the proposed site, during the construction phase is anticipated to have a significant impact on the condition of the transportation infrastructure and traffic volumes in the area. Additional heavy construction vehicles have the potential to damage roads, create noise, dust, and cause risks impacts for other road users and residents in the area. 6.3.4 Economic benefits Increased expenditure during the construction of the proposed facility will contribute to the local economy. The income of the workers will also increase spending in the local community and thus stimulate the formal and informal sectors and secondary industries, having a positive multiplier effect. The local businesses used will be skilled in the construction of solar facilities leading to a wider range of opportunities for the business and its workers. 7.0 TERMS OF REFERENCE Following the approval of the Terms of Reference (ToR) by the Mpumalanga Province: Department of Economic Development, Environment and Tourism, field work will be undertaken to collect socio-economic data. This study will employ a predominantly qualitative approach (i.e. interviews, meetings and focus group discussions) to gather data. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the project in line with the National Environmental Management Act 107 of 1998 (NEMA) [EIA Regulations (2014 as amended)] and the World Bank ESS Guidance notes will be undertaken. As part of the environmental authorisation process a Social Impact Assessment (SIA) is required. The SIA will: ▪ Describe the socio-economic conditions of the receiving environment. ▪ Identifying and describing the socio-economic implications associated with the proposed project. ▪ Identify, describe, and rate the significance of the socio-economic impact that may result from the proposed project. ▪ Recommend feasible (practical and cost-effective) mitigation measures to enhance positive effects and reduce negative impacts. 8.0 CONCLUSION The development of the proposed Komati Solar Photovoltaic and Battery Energy Storage System is in line with legislative and policy frameworks. The Project will create employment, training, and business opportunities during both the construction and operation phases of the project. The potential negative impacts associated with the construction phase and operation phase can be mitigated. Detailed mitigation measures will be outlined in the Social Impact Assessment Report. The proposed development will also represent an investment in clean, renewable energy infrastructure for the country which will go some way to offset the negative environmental and socio-economic impacts associated with coal-based fossil fuel energy generation. Renewable energy also addresses climate change and assists the country in meeting its climate change reduction goals. The potential visual, noise and dust impacts will be assessed from these specialist studies to be undertaken as part of the EIA. The cumulative impacts on the area’s sense of place and assessment of significance of impacts will be informed by the findings of the visual and noise assessments undertaken for the proposed facility as part of the EIA. 22 June 2022 22521869 9.0 REFERENCES [1] Eskom, “Terms of Reference for Komati Solar PV and BESS Environmental and Social Impact Assessment,” 2022. [2] World Bank, “Guidance Note for Borrowers Assessment and Management of Environmental and Social Risks and Impact,” 2018. [3] Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Mpumalanga Provincial Government, “Mpumalanga Spatial Development Framework,” 2019. [4] Nkangala District Municipality, “Final Integrated Development Plan,” February 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.cogta.gov.za/cgta_2016/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Nkangala-2020-21-reviewed-IDP.pdf. [5] Mpumalanga Provincial Government, “About Mpumalanga Province,” 31 May 2022. [Online]. Available: http://www.mpumalanga.gov.za/about/province.htm. [6] Global Africa Network, “An economic overview of Mpumalanga Province,” 14 November 2017. [Online]. Available: https://www.globalafricanetwork.com/company-news/economic-overview-of-mpumalanga- province/. [Accessed 17 June 2022]. [7] Statistics South Africa, 31 May 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.statssa.gov.za/. [8] Nkangala District Municipality, “Nkangala District Municipality Background,” 31 May 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.nkangaladm.gov.za/nkangala-district-municipality-background/. [9] Municipalities of South Africa, “Nkangala District Municipality (DC31),” [Online]. Available: https://municipalities.co.za/map/133/nkangala-district-municipality. [Accessed 17 June 2022]. [10] Steve Tshwete Local Municipality, “2017-2022 Integrated Development Plan,” 2016. [11] Statistics South Africa, “Steve Tshwete,” 31 May 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.statssa.gov.za/?page_id=993&id=steve-tshwete-municipality. [12] Urban-Econ, “Socio-economic impact study on the shutdown and repurposing of Komati Power Station to create a basis for sustainable livelihood,” 2020. [13] Urban-Econ Development Economists, “Socio-Economic Impact Study for the Shutdown and Repurposing of Komati Power Station to Create a Basis for Sustainable Livelihood,” Pretoria, 2022. [14] S. J. P. P. K. Jainb, “The rise of Renewable Energy implementation in South Africa,” Elsevier Ltd, Johannesburg , 2017. [15] EMAKHAZENI LOCAL MUNICIPALITY, “EMAKHAZENI LOCAL MUNICIPALITY 2018-2022 IDP,” 2018- 2022. 23 June 2022 22521869 Signature Page Golder Associates Africa (Pty) Ltd. Tumelo Mathulwe Stephen Horak Consultant Senior Social Scientist TM/SH Reg. No. 2002/007104/07 Directors: RGM Heath, MQ Mokulubete, MC Mazibuko (Mondli Colbert), GYW Ngoma https://golderassociates.sharepoint.com/sites/161403/project files/6 deliverables/social/22521869_komati_ps_sia_draft_ report_13july22_final.docx 24 golder.com APPENDIX E-12 GROUNDWATER REPORT Hydrogeological Investigation - Eskom Komati Power Station WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Submitted to: WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd WSP in Africa, Building C, Knightsbridge, 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston 2191, South Africa Submitted by: Golder Associates Africa (Pty) Ltd. Building 1, Maxwell Office Park, Magwa Crescent West, Waterfall City, Midrand, 1685, South Africa P.O. Box 6001, Halfway House, 1685 +27 11 254 4800 22521869-353050-4 August 2022 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 Distribution List 1 eCopy - WSP 1 eCopy - Project Sharepoint i August 2022 22521869-353050-4 Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background ...................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Proposed activity .............................................................................................................................. 1 1.3 Leglislative context ........................................................................................................................... 4 1.4 Objectives ........................................................................................................................................ 4 1.5 Scope of Work .................................................................................................................................. 4 1.6 Limitations and data gaps ................................................................................................................ 4 2.0 GEOGRAPHICAL SETTING ....................................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Topography and drainage ................................................................................................................ 5 2.2 Climate ............................................................................................................................................. 5 3.0 METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................................ 7 3.1 Desk study ....................................................................................................................................... 7 3.2 Hydro-census ................................................................................................................................... 8 3.3 Geophysical survey and results. .................................................................................................... 11 3.4 Drilling and siting of boreholes ....................................................................................................... 11 3.5 Aquifer testing ................................................................................................................................ 12 3.6 Sampling and chemical analysis .................................................................................................... 12 3.7 Groundwater recharge calculations ............................................................................................... 13 3.8 Groundwater modelling .................................................................................................................. 13 3.9 Groundwater availability assessment ............................................................................................ 13 4.0 PREVAILING GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS....................................................................................... 17 4.1 Geology .......................................................................................................................................... 17 4.1.1 Regional geology ...................................................................................................................... 17 4.1.2 Local geology ............................................................................................................................ 17 4.2 Acid generation capacity ................................................................................................................ 19 4.3 Hydrogeology ................................................................................................................................. 19 4.3.1 Unsaturated zone...................................................................................................................... 19 4.3.2 Saturated zone .......................................................................................................................... 19 4.3.3 Hydraulic conductivity ............................................................................................................... 19 ii August 2022 22521869-353050-4 4.4 Groundwater levels ........................................................................................................................ 19 4.5 Groundwater potential contaminants ............................................................................................. 23 4.6 Groundwater quality ....................................................................................................................... 23 4.7 In summary: ................................................................................................................................... 23 5.0 AQUIFER CHARACTERIZATION ............................................................................................................ 25 5.1 Groundwater vulnerability .............................................................................................................. 25 5.2 Aquifer classification ...................................................................................................................... 25 5.3 Aquifer protection classification ..................................................................................................... 25 6.0 GROUNDWATER MODELLING ............................................................................................................... 26 7.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT ........................................................................................................................... 26 8.0 GEOHYDROLOGICAL IMPACTS ............................................................................................................ 27 8.1 Construction phase ........................................................................................................................ 27 8.2 Operational phase .......................................................................................................................... 28 8.3 Decommissioning phase ................................................................................................................ 30 8.4 Cumulative phase .......................................................................................................................... 30 9.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................... 30 TABLES Table 1: Summary of available information .......................................................................................................... 7 Table 2: Hydrocensus boreholes (2008) with 2019 update indicated in blue text ................................................ 8 Table 3: Data for Monitoring boreholes (boreholes located in or adjacent to the proposed activities are indicated in blue text) ........................................................................................................................... 11 Table 4: Lithostratigraphy ................................................................................................................................... 17 Table 5: Water level data at KPS ....................................................................................................................... 20 Table 6: Statistical Water Quality ....................................................................................................................... 24 Table 7: Ratings for the Aquifer Quality Management Classification System .................................................... 25 Table 8: Appropriate level of groundwater protection required .......................................................................... 25 Table 9: Aquifer classification and vulnerability assessment ............................................................................. 25 FIGURES Figure 1: Regional setting ..................................................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2: Proposed Development ......................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 3: Topography and drainage ..................................................................................................................... 6 iii August 2022 22521869-353050-4 Figure 4: Hydrocensus localities and newly drilled boreholes (2022) ................................................................ 10 Figure 5: Site boreholes...................................................................................................................................... 14 Figure 6: Regional recharge distribution............................................................................................................. 15 Figure 7: Groundwater availability ...................................................................................................................... 16 Figure 8: Regional Geology ................................................................................................................................ 18 Figure 9: Groundwater contours - sourced from Halenyane, 2019 .................................................................... 22 APPENDICES APPENDIX A Document Limitations iv August 2022 22521869-353050-4 1.0 INTRODUCTION Eskom Holdings SOC Limited (Eskom) appointed WSP (Pty) Ltd (WSP) to undertake the Environmental & Social Impact Assessment (ESIA), and Water Use Licence Application (WULA) processes for the Solar Photovoltaics (PV) and Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) Project at Komati Power Station (KPS) - Request for Quote (RFQ): Task Order: 00211. This report provides the hydrogeological investigation and impact assessment of Eskom KPS as part of the Environmental & Social Impact Assessment (ESIA). It is understood that a Water Use License Application (WULA) authorization process will follow for potential (c) and (i) water uses. 1.1 Background The KPS is about 37 km from Middelburg, 43 km from Bethal and 40 km from Witbank via Vandyksdrift in the Steve Tshwete Municipality, Mpumalanga Province of South Africa. The regional setting is provided in Figure 1. KPS was initially commissioned in 1961 and operated until 1990. The power station was mothballed in 1990 but was returned to service in December 2005 (Eskom, 2021, Mochesane & Brummer, 2015). The station has a total of nine units, five 100 MW units on the east (Units 1 to 5) and four 125 MW units on the west (Units 6 to 9), with a total installed capacity of 1000 MW but will reach its end-of-life expectancy in September 2022. The regional layout is presented in Figure 1. Water is supplied via pipeline by the Komati Government Water Scheme which originates from the Nooitgedacht dam, (Mochesane & Brummer, 2015). 1.2 Proposed activity Eskom is proposing the establishment of a solar electricity generating facility and associated infrastructure as part of its repurposing programme for KPS. The plan is to install 100 MW of Solar Photovoltaics (PV) and 150 MW of Battery Energy Storage System (BESS). The proposed development (refer Figure 2) is located within the property owned by Eskom termed the Project Area for reporting purposes. KPS is located in the east of the Project Area with Komati town in the north. The areas of investigation within the Project Area include: Block A – located in the south-west corner of the Eskom property with the R542 to the south, Komati town to the north, agricultural land and the Goedehoop Colliery (an underground coal mine) to the west and the Eskom Komati Ash dumps and dams (termed the Ashing area) to the east, Block B – located in the north-west corner of the Eskom property with Goedehoop Colliery to the west and north and Komati town to the east and Four smaller portions are located around the KPS plant. These include:  Block C: Between Komati town and south-west of the KPS,  Block D: South-west of the KPS,  Block E: North-east of KPS in the coal stockyard bounded to the north-east by the Koringspruit River,  Block F: East of KPS and down-gradient of the KPS ash dams. Further information on the proposed infrastructure and specifications are provided in the ESIA report. 1 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 Figure 1: Regional setting 2 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 Figure 2: Proposed Development 3 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 1.3 Legislative context Eskom has an existing Water Use License (WUL) and an amendment (WULA):  Water Use License number 04/B11B/BCGI/1970 dated 2 February 2014 – Eskom KPS facility. The groundwater reserve is provided in this License.  Water Use License number 04/B11B/CI/2556 dated 11 January 2015 – c and I construction of Komati storage facility within 500m from a boundary of an unchanneled valley bottom wetland and seepage wetland.  Amendment License in terms of Section 50 and 158 of the NWA, 7/08/2017.  Amendment of Eskom holdings SOC (Pty) Limited: KPS WUL in terms of Section 50 and 158 of the NWA, 22 February 2021.  Waste Management Facility: KPS Ash Disposal facility (License #: 12/9/11/L1010/6), and Decommissioning Waste Management License (License #12/9/11/L73467/6). 1.4 Objectives The main objective of the hydrogeological investigation is to provide a report including:  Detailed baseline description of groundwater conditions,  Identification and high-level screening of impacts,  Recommendations for potential mitigation measures. 1.5 Scope of Work The scope of work includes the following:  Review of available information,  Compilation of a qualitative IA for the proposed new activities, and  Reporting on the current site groundwater conditions, conceptual model understanding. 1.6 Limitations and data gaps The following limitations were noted as part of the study:  The study is based on available data and has not been verified.  The available monitoring data is limited to the area surrounding the KPS. Groundwater monitoring data is therefore limited in the PV and BESS areas with no information for Block B, C, D and F. This was resolved following the completion of the study carried out as part of the Contaminated Land Scope of work (WSP Report 41103965 dated 16 August 2022) which included the drilling of 10 shallow boreholes.  Water level data for 2022 was not available and the borehole elevation has not been surveyed for the monitoring boreholes. The 2021 water level data was obtained from the monitoring reports, but it is noted that the latest data is handwritten, and the sample IDs are not verified. For example, there is no monitoring borehole AB08, it is assumed that this point is PB08. An update on water levels was provided from the boreholes drilled as part of the Contamination Land Scope of Work as discussed above. 4 August 2022 22521869-353050-4  Borehole logs are limited to 9 of the 26 boreholes. There was no water strike nor yield information supplied at the time of drilling. Depth to weathering has therefore been assumed. This was confirmed by the study carried out during the Contaminated Land Study. There is little distinction between a shallow perched aquifer and deeper fractured rock aquifer in the monitoring data. 2.0 GEOGRAPHICAL SETTING 2.1 Topography and drainage Topography information was sourced from the 1:50 000 topographic map series, Mathetsa, 2021 and Mathetsa, & Swatz, 2019. The Project Area is a generally undulating with Block A located in the higher lying areas and sloping towards the small drainage line of the Koringspruit River to the north (towards Block B) approximately 1585 mamsl in the floodplain. The highest points lie near the junction of R35 and R542 provincial roads at approximately 1655 mamsl in the southern portion of the site (Block A). The ashing area (east of Block A) is situated at 1650 to 1615 mamsl. The Project Area is located in the Olifants River quaternary sub-catchment B11B. The Koringspruit River flows past the northern boundary. The Koringspruit River also passes the Koornfontein and Goedehoop Coal mines and joins the Olifants River some 15 km downstream of the Project Area. The Komati spruit originates in the Ashing area (east of Block A) and drains the area west of the Ashing Area to the Koringspruit River. The Power Plant and Coal Stockyard (Area E) are situated on a topographic flat ±1605 mamsl with a poor drainage pattern. The Gelukspruit flows in a northwesterly direction and drains the area east and north of the Project Area towards the Koringspruit River. According to Mathetsa, & Swatz, 2019, this stream was diverted to prevent ingress into power plant areas and remains so due to the location of the current KPS activities. Several drains and dams have been constructed around the Ashing area, Power Plant area and Coal Stockyard area. A seepage area/drainage line within the dirty water area of the existing ash dams is noted by Mathetsa, 2021 and probably contains seepage off the ash dams which have been used as water storage facilities. Surface run-off from the KPS is in the order of 5% of the annual rainfall. An artificial wetland has developed to the east of the Coal stockyard area and is locally present along the Komati spruit between the KPS and Komati town (Mochesane & Brummer, 2015). 2.2 Climate The Project Area experiences summer rainfall (Eastern Highveld) with cold dry and mild winters and warm, wet summers. Temperatures vary from maximum temperatures from 27 0C in January to 17 0C in July. Frost occurs frequently between May and September. The area also hosts to dust storms during prolonged dry periods. Rainfall is seasonal with a Mean Annual Precipitation (MAP) of 687 mm and Mean Annual Evaporation (MAE) is 1550 mm per annum, (Mathetsa, 2021). A higher rainfall of approximately 735 mm was estimated by Halenyane, 2019. 5 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 Figure 3: Topography and drainage 6 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 3.0 METHODOLOGY 3.1 Desk study Previous groundwater studies focused on the KPS area. A summary of information provided by Eskom is presented in Table 1. Additional information is pending from the contaminant land investigation currently in progress. A report (SRK 566657, 2021) was sourced from public information on the adjacent Goedehoop Colliery. The report is referenced as Jeffrey, L and Wertz M, March 2021, Independent Competent Person’s Report on Goedehoop Colliery, SRK Report reference 566657. https://thungela.s3.eu-west- 1.amazonaws.com/downloads/investors/Goedehoop-Colliery-CPR-dated-25-March-2021.pdf. Table 1: Summary of available information Type of Report Reference information Baseline Van Niekerk, L.J. and Staats, S, July 2009, Komati Power Station information and Hydrological & geohydrological baseline study, GHT Consulting Scientists, RVN hydrocensus 537.5/909 IWWMP Mochesane, M & Brummer, D, December 2015, Integrated water and waste management plan for Komati Power Station, Mpumalanga Province, Lidwala Consulting Engineers (SA) (PTY) Ltd, 16906 PRO_ENV Numerical model Halenyane, K September 2019, Numerical modelling and geochemistry assessment, Eskom Komati Power Station, Gauteng, Kimopax (Pty) Ltd, KIM-WAT-2018-233 2019 hydrocensus Mathetsa, S & Swatz, N, August 2019, Komati Hydrocensus Report - 2019, Applied chemistry and microbiology section: sustainability Division Eskom, RTD/ACM/19/240- 149029270 Groundwater Komati WISH data – groundwater database supplied 15 June 2022. quality Water level and Mathoho, G & Khuzwayo, L, Oct 2017, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring quality monitoring Report, Phase 4, Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Reports Technical report, RTD/ACM/17/04 Mathoho, G, Khuzwayo, L, and Samuels, V, Oct 2017, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Phase 3, Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Technical report. RTD/ACM/16/240-118739170 Mathoho, G, April 2016, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Phase 01, Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Technical report. 240-112294332 Mathoho, G, January 2017, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Phase 02, Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Technical report. Rrtm/acm/16/240-118739170 Mathoho, G & Khuzwayo, L, April 2018, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Phase 5, Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Technical report, RTD/ACM/17/05 Mathoho, G & Khuzwayo, L, May 2018, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Phase 6, Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Technical report, RTD/ACM/17/06 Mathoho, G & Khuzwayo, L, May 2018, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Phase 7, Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Technical report, RTD/ACM/18/240-140434399 Mathetsa, S & Swartz, N, August 2018, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Phase 8, Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Technical report, RTD/ACM/18/240-140434709 7 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 Type of Report Reference information Mathetsa, S & Swartz, N, September 2019, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring Report, July to September 2019, Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Technical report, RTD/ACM/19/240-152749979 Mathetsa, S & Swartz, N, September 2019, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring Report, April to June 2019, Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Technical report, RTD/ACM/19/240-150762666 Sinthumule, N & Mathetsa, S, May 2020, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring Annual Report, 2020/2021, Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Technical report, RTD/ACM/20/240-163860231 Mathetsa, S, November 2020, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring - Quarter 2 of 2020/2021, Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Technical report, RTD/ACM/20/240-160324741 Latest Water Mathetsa, S, January 2021, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring - Quarter 3, quality reports by Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Technical report, Eskom RTD/ACM/21/240-1615539477 Latest Water Sinthumule, N, March 2022, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring - Quarter 3, quality reports by Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Technical report, Eskom RTD/ACM/21/240-190000008 3.2 Hydro-census A hydrocensus was carried out in 2008 (Van Niekerk & Staats, 2009) with selected points (thirteen) resampled in 2019 (Mathetsa & Swatz, 2019), Refer Figure 4. These covered an approximate 15 km radius around KPS. The census boreholes are focused in the area to the north-east of KPS and are presented in Table 2. The results of the hydrocensus confirmed the following:  The hydrocensus area is mainly underlain by the Ecca sediments of Karoo Supergroup.  Water level information was limited as most boreholes were installed with infrastructure which blocks access to water levels.  Water quality analyses was carried out on the hydrocensus boreholes. This confirmed that concentrations were generally below the SANS 241:2015 limits for domestic use and is therefore suitable for drinking (based on the parameters analysed).  Groundwater is utilized for domestic use with ad hoc use for irrigation. Table 2: Hydrocensus boreholes (2008) with 2019 update indicated in blue text Bore- WL Casing Longitude Latitude Farmer/ hole Below SiteID Farm Name Height Equipment Use Condition (oE) (oS) Owner Depth Collar (m)_2008 (m) (mbcl) Domestic BB10 29.42091 -26.04868 Engelbreght ~ 0.200 Submersible ~ Good Drink Welverdiend Domestic BB11 29.45898 -26.06239 G.F. Grobler ~ 0.520 Hand pump ~ Good 23/2 Drink Domestic BB12 29.46227 -26.06161 G.F. Grobler ~ 0.300 Submersible ~ Broken Drink Koornfontein Domestic BB13 29.44845 -26.06403 G.F. Grobler 27.2 0.280 Submersible 16.20 Blackish water 27/6 Drink Broodsnyers- Siyavuma Domestic BB14 29.48485 -26.05469 ~ 0.000 Submersible 11.80 Good plaas 25/10 Vervoer Drink Broodsnyers- Domestic BB15 29.49044 -26.05852 H De Beer ~ 0.350 Submersible ~ Good plaas 25/28 Drink Broodsnyers- Domestic BB16 29.50683 -26.07076 P Storm ~ 0.320 Hand pump ~ Good plaas 25/1 Drink Domestic BB17 29.49821 -26.07593 P Storm 66.0 0.000 Submersible 24.00 Good Broodsnyers- Drink plaas 25/5 None (2008), Dry hole (2008), BB18 29.49867 -26.07736 P Storm 85.0 0.000 ~ Dry Pump (2019) in use in 2019 8 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 Bore- WL Casing Longitude Latitude Farmer/ hole Below SiteID Farm Name Height Equipment Use Condition (oE) (oS) Owner Depth Collar (m)_2008 (m) (mbcl) Domestic BB19 29.49741 -26.07693 P Storm ~ 0.100 Hand pump ~ Good Drink Broodsnyers- Domestic BB20 29.48213 -26.08393 D Lee 26.1 0.100 Submersible 14.10 Good plaas 25/3 Drink 2.20 None (2008), MCL (2008); BB21 29.47954 -26.10598 Geluk 26/7 26.8 0.200 Windmill ~ Windmill (2019) Dippenaar 1.76 (2019) (2019) MCL Domestic BB22 29.47907 -26.10586 Geluk 26/7 ~ 0.000 Submersible ~ Good Dippenaar Drink Broken (2008) MCL Domestic BB23 29.47905 -26.10632 Geluk 26/7 11.0 0.230 Submersible 4.50 indicated to be in Dippenaar Drink use 2019 Goedehoop Domestic BB24 29.47125 -26.11574 F Schoeman ~ 0.300 Submersible 15.00 Good 46/3 Drink Domestic Goedehoop BB25 29.47127 -26.11574 F Schoeman 26.5 0.300 Submersible Drink, 20.50 Good 46/3 Livestock Bultfontein K Van BB26 29.47783 -26.11699 6.1 0.100 None ~ Dry Dry hole 187/2 Rensburg Domestic Bultfontein K Van BB27 29.47912 -26.11710 42.0 0.440 Submersible Drink, 32.00 Good 187/2 Rensburg Livestock Bultfontein Domestic BB28 29.50721 -26.11221 Van Niekerk ~ 0.680 Mono pump ~ Good 187/11 Drink Domestic Bultfontein BB29 29.49529 -26.12859 Von Wielligh 52.0 0.520 Submersible Drink, 13.00 Good 187/12 Livestock Bultfontein BB30 29.50947 -26.13509 E Erasmus 40.0 0.480 None ~ 8.50 No Equipment 187/6 Bultfontein Domestic BB31 29.50961 -26.13511 E Erasmus ~ 0.120 Mono pump ~ Good 187/6 Drink Hartebeestkuil D Van BB32 29.53378 -26.14317 ~ 0.370 None ~ 5.00 No Equipment 185/2 Woutenberg Hartebeestkuil D Van BB33 29.53470 -26.14244 8.0 0.360 None ~ 2.00 No Equipment 185/2 Woutenberg Domestic Hartebeestkuil D Van BB34 29.53840 -26.14023 ~ 0.100 Mono pump Drink, ~ Good 185/2 Woutenberg Livestock Domestic Wilmansrust C.J. Van der Works only in BB35 29.49518 -26.15330 15.0 0.180 Submersible Drink, 3.00 47/3 Merwe dry season Livestock Domestic Wilmansrust C.J. Van der BB36 29.49503 -26.16079 32.0 0.170 Submersible Drink, 18.00 Good 47/3 Merwe Livestock Domestic BB37 29.51189 -26.17976 Dunbar 189/2 Proefplaas 12.0 0.150 Submersible 3.50 Good Drink BB38 29.48366 -26.17902 BJ Grobler ~ 0.450 Windmill ~ ~ 2019: in use Occasional use BB39 29.48336 -26.17877 BJ Grobler ~ 0.300 Mono pump Livestock ~ Middelkraal for domestic 50/1 3.00 Domestic (2008), BB40 29.48339 -26.17864 BJ Grobler ~ 0.280 Submersible Drink, Not in use 2.72 Livestock (2019) Leeufontein Not in use for a BB41 29.47363 -26.16277 BJ Grobler ~ 0.450 Windmill ~ ~ 48/3 long time Leeufontein Not in use for a BB42 29.47537 -26.16495 BJ Grobler ~ 0.000 Windmill ~ ~ 48/16 long time Domestic BB43 29.42195 -26.12209 J Harmse 15.0 0.300 Submersible 8.00 Good Drink Domestic BB44 29.42193 -26.12198 J Harmse 55.0 0.100 Submersible Drink, 5.00 Good Goedehoop Livestock 46/7 Not in use for a BB45 29.41625 -26.11591 J Harmse ~ 0.300 Windmill ~ ~ long time Not in use for a BB46 29.42719 -26.11853 J Harmse ~ 0.600 Windmill ~ ~ long time It should be noted that groundwater is abstracted from the adjacent Goedehoop Colliery where groundwater is also utilized for supply, (SRK 566657, 2021). Monitoring boreholes are also present on the site (Refer Figure 4). Additional boreholes were drilled as part of a concurrent study which is still in progress (Figure 4). A summary of the information from the monitoring boreholes is included in Section 4.4 to follow. 9 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 Figure 4: Hydrocensus localities and newly drilled boreholes (2022) 10 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 3.3 Geophysical survey and results Geophysics was carried out for the 2008 baseline (Van Niekerk & Staats, 2009) and the geophysical survey focused on the boundaries of the ashing facility. The survey delineated potential drill sites for the ashing facilities for pollution remediation or management of pollution plumes from the facilities. The survey was conducted using the magnetic method to identify intrusive magmatic rocks, primarily dolerites sills or dykes, in the vicinity of the Project Area. 3.4 Drilling and siting of boreholes A monitoring program has been established for the KPS. While some information is available from (Van Niekerk & Staats, 2009), borehole logs were unavailable for all the points. Monitoring points located in or near the vicinity of the proposed activities are included in blue text in Table 3 below with additional information from the remaining monitoring points provided for reference. here are no monitoring boreholes located in or around Blocks B, C and D. Based on the data provided, it is inferred that shallow boreholes are drilled to depths of < 10 m below ground level (mbgl) whilst deeper boreholes are drilled to a depth of > 30 mbgl. Table 3: Data for Monitoring boreholes (boreholes located in or adjacent to the proposed activities are indicated in blue text) Locality Sample Latitude Longitude Eleva- Bore-hole Sample Lithology ID (oS) (oE) tion [5] depth depth (mbgl)(1) Ambient upstream (south) AB58 -26,1121 29,473 1662 ND of Ashing area and Block A T junction - Witbank AB59 -26,1121 29,476 1662 ND- road. shallow Inside Block A - Western AB01 -26.10885 29.4665 1652 35.5 15 Clay to 7,5m, weathered boundary of Ashing Area Sandstone to 17,5m, and downstream of old Siltstone and shale to 25m, rehabilitated domestic coal to 26m, Siltstone and waste site. sandstone to 40m AB63 -26,1040 29,465 1643 ND Outside Eastern boundary AB02 -26.10053 29.4681 32.5 20 Clay to 5m, weathered Block A - West of Ashing sandstone to 13m, shale and Area north of small ash siltstone layers to 26m dam as well as west of Dolerite at base. large ash dams. Outside Eastern boundary AB53 -26,0944 29,466 1617 ND-deep Block A - West of Ashing Area. West of ash dam and in town area Outside but adjacent to AB07 -26.09225 29.47787 1612 37.0 15 Gravel to 1m, clay to 3m, Block F (east of KPS weathered sandstone to boundary) downstream of 12m, Sandstone, siltstone seepage recovery dam and shale layers to 28m, AP03. coal to 29m, sandstone to 39m Inside Block E - Coal CB51 -26,0868 29,471 1601 ND Stockyard Area (water is black) Outside Block F on north- CB09 -26.08481 29.47110 36.5 31 Soil/Clay to 2m, shale to eastern corner of 12m, siltsone and sandstone boundary & downstream to 17m, shale to 20, coal to of Coal Stockyard Area & 21, shale to 23m, sandstone dirty water dam and siltstone to 37m, shale and coal layers at base. Outside Block F on PB60 -26,0880 29,474 1608 ND eastern boundary - downstream KPS Area Ashing Area- Monitoring AB03 -26.09855 29.46826 7.5 - Clay to 12m. borehole downstream and (collapsed) north of small ash dam as well as west of large ash dams. 11 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 Locality Sample Latitude Longitude Eleva- Bore-hole Sample Lithology ID (oS) (oE) tion [5] depth depth (mbgl)(1) Ashing Area north-west of AB04 -26.09615 29.46831 1621 38.0 8.5 Clay to 8m, weathered ash dams and south of sandstone to 11m, Shale dam AP02. and siltstone to 33m, dolerite at base Ashing Area next to AB05 -26.08999 29.46438 8.5 - Clay to 8m, weathered Komati Spruit west of (collapsed) sandstone to 16m KPS. Ashing Area north and AB06 -26.09551 29.47715 1620 37.0 downstream of ash dams. KPS & Sewage Plant Area PB08 -26.08780 29.47429 1604 35.5 13 Clay to 5m, coal to 6m, siltstone and shale to 11m, sandstone to 15m, shale and coal to 18m, shale to 40m Not indicated – probably AB08 ND ND ND incorrectly labelled Ashing Area close to AB47 -26,8096 29.464304 1609 ND Komati Spruit, west of KPS. Ashing Area west of ash AB54 -26,0944 29,466 1617 ND - dam, next to AB53 Shallow Ashing Area North of ash AB55 -26,0970 29,481 1621 ND - Deep dam. Next to tar road at Entrance road to KPS Ashing Area- North of ash AB56 -26,0970 29,481 1621 ND- dam. Next to tar road at shallow Entrance road to KPS Ashing Area - West of ash AB57 -26,0955 29,466 1621 ND dam Ashing Area - East of ash AB61 -26,1008 29,479 1634 ND- deep dam. Ashing Area east of Ash AB62 -26,1008 29,479 1634 ND- Area – Shallow borehole shallow and artesian Coal Stockyard Area CB49 -26,0841 29,466 ND- deep Coal Stockyard Area CB50 26,0842 29,467 ND- shallow Coal Stockyard Area CB52 -26,0850 29,465 1603 ND KPS Area- north of PB48 -26,0871 29,462 1608 ND sewage plant Notes: ND – no data (1) – Van Niekerk & Staats, 2009 (1) – Mathetsa & Swart, 2018 (2) – Mathetsa & Swart, 2018 (3) - Sinthumule & Mathetsa, 2019 (4) – Sinthumule, 2022. Note that water levels were interpolated from hand written notes in appendix. (5) - 1 Mathoho, G & Khuzwayo, 2017 An additional ten shallow boreholes were drilled as part of the current contaminated land study. This information will be included in that report once complete. 3.5 Aquifer testing The baseline report (Van Niekerk & Staats, 2009) carried out falling head tests on eight of the nine monitoring boreholes available at the time. Hydraulic conductivity was estimated as ranging from 0,007 m/d at AB07 to 2.4 m/d for AB04 with an average of 0,51 m/d. No further testing has been done. 3.6 Sampling and chemical analysis Eskom has an extensive monitoring network covering an area of 10 km2 (Mathetsa, 2021) and is focused on the KPS. According to Eskom’s monitoring data, the monitoring boreholes include:  Boreholes (AB58 and AB59) monitoring the ambient (upstream groundwater quality);  Boreholes (AB61, AB62, AB01, CB51, and PB48) were delineated as source monitoring boreholes and 12 August 2022 22521869-353050-4  Boreholes (AB02, AB03, AB63, AB55 and AB56) are used to track the groundwater plume. Sampling is carried out by Eskom. Eskom reports that it follows a groundwater sampling guideline which includes bailing of water samples at a discrete interval from pre-determined sampling depths. This was provided for a few monitoring boreholes from the baseline report in 2008 but is not stated in subsequent monitoring reports. It is noted that some of the boreholes appear to have collapsed over the preferred sample depth. Groundwater quality parameters that need to be analysed are specified in the WUL (Appendix IV, Table 6 Clause 3.6) as pH, Electrical conductivity (EC), Total Dissolved Solids (TDS), Total Suspended Solids (SS), Total Alkalinity, chloride (as Cl), sodium (as Na), sulphate, nitrate, ammonia, orthophosphate, fluoride, potassium, manganese, copper, iron, zinc, arsenic and chromium. As noted above, groundwater monitoring in the areas proposed for the BESS and PV are limited with monitoring boreholes located in Block A (area west of Ash dams) and in Block E (coal stock yard). Ten shallow boreholes have been drilled as part of a congruent study being carried out to assess the potential for contaminated land in the areas of investigation. This study is still pending, and the results were not available at the time of reporting. 3.7 Groundwater recharge calculations The regional recharge distribution (37 – 50 mm/a), as provided by the hydrogeological map series information for South Africa, is presented in Figure 6. This is slightly higher than provided by the available reports which provide the following estimates:  3% of annual rainfall (20,6 mm/a based on 687 mm/a) in undisturbed areas Mathetsa, 2021.  36,5 mm/a estimated by Halenyane, 2019 based on the chloride method. 3.8 Groundwater modelling Groundwater modelling was not carried out for this investigation as no pollution dams or 21 (g) water use are required for the PV and BESS plants. A comprehensive numerical groundwater model has been compiled for the KPS area as detailed by Halenyane, 2019. The model considered the potential existing sources for KPS of the existing ash dams, coal stock yard, new ash return water dam and raw water dams. Conclusions and recommendations from the model report are summarized as follows:  The groundwater contaminant plume is expected to migrate post closure past the KPS boundary to the Koringspruit. It was recommended that the coal stockyard area be removed upon closure and disposed to an approved waste disposal facility pending confirmation of waste classification results (not provided).  All water in contact with the ash dams should be contained and treated within the footprint area.  The raw water and new ash return water dams need to be removed on closure, contaminated soil removed, and the footprints rehabilitated.  Additional monitoring points were recommended, and it was noted that monitoring should continue for at least ten years following closure. 3.9 Groundwater availability assessment Groundwater is utilized by the surrounding communities and the adjacent Goedehoop Colliery for water supply. Groundwater availability is described as “d2” being primarily from an intergranular and fractured rock aquifer with an anticipated yield of between 0,1 and 0,5 l/s. 13 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 Figure 5: Site boreholes 14 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 Figure 6: Regional recharge distribution 15 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 Figure 7: Groundwater availability 16 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 4.0 PREVAILING GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS 4.1 Geology 4.1.1 Regional geology The Project Area is located within the Highveld (Witbank) Coalfield. The regional geology is described (Mathetsa, 2021, Halenyane, 2019) as falling within the Carboniferous to early Jurassic aged Karoo Basin. The Karoo Supergroup comprises, from oldest to youngest, the Dwyka, Ecca and Beaufort Groups, with the coal seams generally hosted within the Vryheid Formation of the Middle Ecca Group. The Vryheid Fromation includes interbedded sandstone, siltstone, shales and coal seams. Five coal seams are present within the Vryheid Formation and are numbered (from base up as the Number 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 Seams. The zone of undermining (Bohlweki Environmental, 2005) indicated as underlying the Block B is noted to be associated with the No 4. and No. 2 coal seams. The No 2 Seam ranges in between 1.5 and 4.0 m in thickness where it is laterally continuous whilst the No 4 Seam averages 4.0 m, varying from 1 – 12 m in thickness at Goedehoop mine (SRK 566657, 2021). The depth below ground level should be confirmed but based on the general stratigraphy is likely to be > 50 m below surface (SRK 566657, 2021). The coal seams are mined by the adjacent Goedehoop colliery. The coal seams are mined by the adjacent collieries. The Vryheid Formation overlies the Dwyka formation. A summary of the Lithostratigraphy is provided in Table 4. The regional geological map is presented in Figure 8. Table 4: Lithostratigraphy Age Supergroup Subsuite Lithology Quaternary Q Surficial alluvial deposits to the north associated with the Koringspruit River Jurassic Jd Fine-grained dolerite Permian Karoo Pv (Vryheid) Sandstone, shale and coal beds Carboniferous C-pd (Dwyka) Diamictite and shale 4.1.2 Local geology There is no information on the residual soils for the investigation areas. Additional investigations are, however, in progress. The following information is inferred from the available reports and borehole logs. All the groundwater monitoring and several hydrocensus sites are sitting on the Vryheid formation. The local geology generally comprises weathering products of the sandstones, siltstones and mudstones of the Vryheid Formation, with isolated patches of dolerite. The top layer consists of reddish-brown sandy soil, with clayey-sandy subsoil comprising yellowish to brown clays residual of the underlying sandstone formations. Weathering is not, based on the available borehole logs, expected to extend deeper than approximately 10 m. Surficial ash and coal is likely present within Block A associated with the historical ash footprint and in the coal stockyard area. A linear structure is indicated on the regional geological maps (Refer Figure 8) to be striking north-east to south- west through Block B. 17 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 Figure 8: Regional Geology 18 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 4.2 Acid generation capacity Not applicable as there are no waste facilities associated with the PV and BESS plant. 4.3 Hydrogeology 4.3.1 Unsaturated zone This zone is conceptualized (Halenyane, 2019) as an upper zone of completely weathered material to a depth of 8 to 10 m. This layer is anticipated to have a higher hydraulic conductivity (k of 1 m/d) compared to the underlying rock matrix but is generally unsaturated. However, a seasonal aquifer perched on the bedrock may occur on this layer after high rainfall events. Further information is pending from the contaminated land report currently in progress for the areas in which the PV and BESS is proposed. 4.3.2 Saturated zone Halenyane, 2019 and Van Niekerk & Staats, 2009 suggests that multiple aquifer types are represented at the site. These include:  Shallow aquifer with colluvial and alluvial matrix, the shallow aquifer is composed of weathered upper Ecca formation sediments, is seasonal, discontinuous, and perched above the more competent bedrock layers.  Semi-confined aquifers within the Vryheid Formation. These aquifers are commonly confined along essentially horizontal bedding interfaces between different lithologies but can be locally unconfined along the trend of fractures zones, which allows the aquifers to recharge seasonally. This is considered to be the regional aquifer within the Project Area occurring below the unsaturated zone in slightly weathered or fractured bedrock to a depth of approximately 30 m with a low k (0,001 – 0,1 m/d). Halenyane, 2019 notes that the permanent groundwater level resides in this unit and is about 1 to 10 metres below ground level. The groundwater flow direction in this unit is influenced by regional topography and for the site flow would be in general from high lying areas to the Koringspruit River. This aquifer is likely to be highly heterogeneous.  Deeper confined aquifers within basement lithologies. 4.3.3 Hydraulic conductivity Hydraulic conductivity was estimated based on falling head tests (Van Niekerk & Staats, 2009) as ranging from 0,007 m/d at AB07 to 2.4 m/d for AB04 with an average of 0,51 m/d. Porosity was estimated as 0,3. 4.4 Groundwater levels Water levels for monitoring boreholes located near the proposed BESS and PV areas (Block A, E and F) vary from around 2 to 12 mbgl and are provided in Table 5 below. The water levels for the other monitoring boreholes located within the KPS area vary from 0 (AB62) to around 6 mbgl are provided for reference. With the exception of AB55 and AB58, water levels vary between 0,6 and 3.6 m over the period provided (2016 to 2021). As noted, above, there is no information for Block B, C, and D. New shallow boreholes have been drilled in or near these areas and will be included in the pending contaminated land report. SRK 5666657 (2020) report that water levels have been lowered through dewatering of mine workings at Goedehoop Collieries. Water levels in the monitoring boreholes at KPS vary only slightly over time and do not appear to have been affected by dewatering at Goedehoop at the present time. Future undermining by Goodehoop Collieries to the south-east of the Ashing area may influence the local water levels. A summary of the latest water level data around August for the past three years is provided for reference in Table 5 Ambient boreholes and boreholes in or near the PV and BESS areas are presented first. 19 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 Table 5: Water level data at KPS Locality Sample Bore-hole Sample 19-Aug- 30-Jul- 20-Aug- 26-Aug- ID depth depth 2018(1) 19(2) 20(3) 2021(4) (mbgl)(1) Ambient upstream (south) of Ashing AB58 ND 3,68 4.85 4,29 5,04 area and Block A T junction - Witbank road. AB59 ND-shallow 7,62 8.3 7,58 8,54 Boreholes in or near the proposed PV and BESS plants Inside Block A - Western boundary of AB01 35.5 15 1,75 3.66 Ashing Area and downstream of old rehabilitated domestic waste site. AB63 ND 1,72 0 2,34 3,63 Outside Eastern boundary Block A - AB02 32.5 20 2.79 West of Ashing Area north of small ash dam as well as west of large ash dams. Outside Eastern boundary Block A - AB53 ND-deep 11,29 11.91 11,27 11,46 West of Ashing Area. West of ash dam and in town area Outside but adjacent to Block F (east of AB07 37.0 15 2,62 2,17 4,01 KPS boundary) downstream of seepage recovery dam AP03. Inside Block E - Coal Stockyard Area CB51 ND 1,85 1.18 4,28 4,92 (water is black) Outside Block F on north-eastern corner CB09 36.5 31 4.59 of boundary & downstream of Coal Stockyard Area & dirty water dam Outside Block F on eastern boundary - PB60 ND 2,23 2,54 2,33 downstream KPS Area Monitoring boreholes within the surrounding KPS area Ashing Area- Monitoring borehole AB03 7.5 - downstream and north of small ash dam (collapsed) as well as west of large ash dams. Ashing Area north-west of ash dams AB04 38.0 8.5 1.46 2,16 and south of dam AP02. Ashing Area next to Komati Spruit west AB05 8.5 - 4.3 of KPS. (collapsed) Ashing Area north and downstream of AB06 37.0 1,62 1,46 1,48 ash dams. KPS & Sewage Plant Area PB08 35.5 13 2,82 Not indicated – probably incorrectly AB08 4,83 2,95 labelled Ashing Area close to Komati Spruit, AB47 ND 2,09 west of KPS. Ashing Area west of ash dam, next to AB54 ND - Shallow 1,47 2.33 1,59 1,98 AB53 Ashing Area North of ash dam. Next to AB55 ND - Deep 5,83 6.22 5,64 6,39 tar road at Entrance Road to KPS Ashing Area- North of ash dam. Next to AB56 ND- shallow 1,43 1.53 1,64 2,2 tar road at Entrance Road to KPS Ashing Area - West of ash dam AB57 ND 2,64 4.86 3,13 3,45 Ashing Area - East of ash dam. AB61 ND- deep 1,68 1,72 Ashing Area east of Ash Area – Shallow AB62 ND- shallow 1.88 0 0 borehole and artesian 20 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 Locality Sample Bore-hole Sample 19-Aug- 30-Jul- 20-Aug- 26-Aug- ID depth depth 2018(1) 19(2) 20(3) 2021(4) (mbgl)(1) Coal Stockyard Area CB49 ND- deep 2.89 Coal Stockyard Area CB50 ND- shallow 2.8 Coal Stockyard Area CB52 ND 1,64 2,58 2,75 KPS Area- north of sewage plant PB48 ND 1,06 1,6 1,36 Mathetsa, 2021 indicates that the groundwater flow mimics the topography, and the direction of flow are towards the surface stream, particularly the Koringspruit River. There is little seasonal variation noted. The contoured groundwater level is provided after Halenyane, 2019 (Refer Figure 9). 21 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 Figure 9: Groundwater contours - sourced from Halenyane, 2019 22 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 4.5 Groundwater potential contaminants Residual contamination may be present in the PV and BESS areas due to historical activities generally related to the KPS. A contaminant land investigation is in progress to assess the potential for contamination to the groundwater. Of note is the residual ash footprint noted to the east of Block A. Block E is located in the coal stock yard area. Van Niekerk, 2009 noted that this area comprises the coal storage yard and coal stockyard pollution control dam as well as the settling ponds. Additional potential sources within the KPS area include a domestic waste dump, sewage plant and fuel depot, 4.6 Groundwater quality Water quality data is captured in the WISH database for all parameters. Groundwater quality parameters that need to be analysed are specified in the WUL (Appendix IV, Table 6 Clause 3.6) as pH, Electrical conductivity (EC), Total Dissolved Solids (TDS), Total Suspended Solids (SS), Total Alkalinity, chloride (as Cl), sodium (as Na), sulphate, nitrate, ammonia, orthophosphate, fluoride, potassium, manganese, copper, iron, zinc, arsenic and chromium. The groundwater reserve is provided in the WUL (Appendix IV, Table 7, Clause 4.1). Water quality is in, addition compared to the SANS 241-2015 standard for drinking water and to ambient water quality as represented by two upgradient monitoring boreholes (AB58 and AB59). The average and 95th percentile results for the upgradient ambient water quality (AB58 and AB59) and boreholes located in and around the proposed areas (Block B and Block E) are provided for reference in the table below 4.7 In summary: The groundwater reserve is conservative and provides several determinants at concentrations which exceed baseline groundwater quality. (Refer Table 6). As a result, several parameters are not in compliance with the WUL. The groundwater quality is generally alkaline with an average pH of 8,3 at the upstream ambient boreholes (AB58 and AB59). The 95th percentile results being higher at 9.1. pH is slightly lower in the boreholes located around the proposed areas with average pH varying from 7.2 to 8. Electrical conductivity (EC) in the ambient boreholes (average 17 and 32 mS/m for AB58 and AB58 respectively) is below the groundwater reserve of 112 mS/m. EC is comparatively elevated at some of the boreholes in the proposed areas with the 95th percentiles for EC exceeding ambient groundwater quality and the reserve for AB01, AB07, CB51, CB09, PB60. The localized increase in salinity is associated with elevated chloride, sulfate, calcium, magnesium, and sodium. Fluoride is near the groundwater reserve of 0,4 mg/l in the ambient boreholes (95th percentile of 0,3 and 0,4 mg/l) and is locally elevated particularly in the coal stock yard area (Block E) with the 95th percentile of 1.1 mg/l at CB09 and 0,5 mg/L at the boundary of the KPS at PB60. Metal concentrations for iron (95th percentile of 3.7 to 5.3 mg/l) and manganese (95th percentile of 6.6 mg/l) are slightly elevated compared to the ambient groundwater quality (<0,1 for iron and <0,5 for manganese) at AB07 (downgrade of the Ash dams) and in CB09 (coal stockyard). Arsenic is reported at below detection, Water quality is locally affected by KPS activities particularly from the Ash dams (ashing area) and coal stockyard. A pollution plume is anticipated to migrate from the pollution sources towards the Koringspruit River to the north. 23 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 Table 6: Statistical Water Quality Ambient Water Quality Block A Coal Stockyard Block F SANS Site Name WUL 241- 2015 AB58 AB59 AB01 AB63 AC02 AB53 AB07 CB51 CB09 PB60 Ave 95th Ave 95th Ave 95th Ave 95th Ave 95th Ave 95th Ave 95th Ave 95th Ave 95th Jan- Analyses Unit Oct-11 to Jan-22 Oct-11 to Jan-22 Aug-11 to May-21 Oct-11 to Jan-22 Jan -11 to Sep-18 Oct-11 to Jan-22 Oct-11 to Jan-22 Oct-11 to Mqy-20 11 Oct-11 to Jan-14 pH pH units 6.6 5.5-9.7 8,3 9,1 8,3 8,8 7,7 8,5 7,8 8,9 7,7 8,4 8,0 8,5 7,2 8,3 8,0 8,7 7,0 7,8 8,6 AS EC mS/m 112 ≤170 32 44 17 29 214 275 102 223 112 140 38 45 192 248 89 143 43 107 169 TDS mg/l NLG ≤1 200 AS 214 290 107 189 1680 2055 706 1597 491 606 242 302 1570 2204 715 1124 819 1167 Turbidity NTU 67 254 3 5 128 249 93 338 2 2 78 125 79 254 176 700 348 492 Ca mg/l 96 NLG 16 25 7 12 154 225 75 222 107 125 32 39 175 286 50 150 51 52 71 Mg mg/l 38 NLG 23 41 6 14 126 180 49 137 7 14 16 19 115 140 59 113 16 37 52 Na mg/l 0 ≤200AS 17 22 15 17 214 266 89 198 117 135 18 21 146 163 66 88 19 150 245 K mg/l NLG NLG 12 15 8 11 28 37 10 33 35 43 8 9 10 12 2 3 4 5 7 TAlk as mg/l NLG NLG CaCO3 165 253 75 126 480 823 197 484 100 136 112 141 169 210 197 383 156 315 484 F mg/l 0.4 ≤1.5 CH 0,3 0,4 0,1 0,3 3,1 0,6 1,5 1,0 0,3 0,4 0,9 0,5 2,5 0,6 0,3 0,7 0,7 0,1 0,5 Cl mg/l 31 ≤300 AS 7 11 7 10 106 189 58 137 60 79 55 80 69 83 45 82 22 50 79 ≤500 A. SO4 mg/l 0 ≤250A 8 21 2 8 669 999 293 940 403 497 5 15 852 1252 231 464 39 227 495 NO3-N mgN/l 10.9 ≤11A 0,4 1,1 0,4 1,4 0,2 0,8 0,6 1,9 0,3 0,8 0,1 0,5 0,2 0,5 0,2 0,6 0,1 0,2 0,5 NH4-N mgN/l NLG AS ≤1.5 0,4 1,9 0,9 1,1 0,1 0,2 0,2 0,9 <0,003 0,1 0,2 0,2 0,1 0,3 0,3 0,7 0,2 0,3 PO4 mgP/l NLG NLG <0,01 0,03 <0,01 0,02 <0,01 0,02 0,46 0,10 0,003 0,10 <0,01 0,03 0,03 0,04 <0,01 0,03 0,10 <0,02 0,01 COD 16,5 51,7 16,9 55,4 23,7 70,2 26,9 79,7 31,0 59,7 12,4 31,3 28,8 69,6 34,0 71,8 29,5 52,1 Suspended <25 Solids 18,5 65,7 14,5 140,6 59,4 129,2 51,7 145,2 16,2 43,7 20,8 43,0 37,5 93,6 68,5 256,2 121,6 311,1 As mg/l NLG ≤0,01 CH <0,03 <0,01 <0,03 <0,01 <0,04 <0,01 0,06 <0,01 1,60 3,04 <0,03 <0,01 <0,03 <0,01 <0,05 <0,01 <0,06 <0,01 Cr mg/l NLG ≤0,05 CH <0,018 0,004 <0,018 0,004 <0,020 0,002 <0,003 0,010 0,109 0,588 <0,019 0,004 <0,015 0,006 <0,024 0,002 0,006 <0,020 0,005 Cr6+ mg/l NLG <0,198 <0,002 0,331 <0,002 3,331 14,999 3,616 0,031 <0,002 <0,002 1,903 <0,002 2,208 4,198 <0,002 <0,002 <0,002 <0,002 Cu mg/l NLG ≤2 CH <0,01 0,01 <0,02 0,00 <0,02 0,03 <0,01 0,02 <0,11 0,01 <0,02 0,01 <0,01 0,03 <0,03 0,02 0,01 <0,03 0,01 ≤ 2 CH. Fe mg/l NLG 0,3AS 0,16 0,01 0,01 0,12 0,35 0,01 0,51 2,07 <0,03 0,17 0,02 0,07 0,98 5,28 0,16 0,01 0,1 0,0 0,0 Al mg/l NLG 300 (o) 0,52 0,88 0,01 0,16 0,98 0,06 0,42 0,29 1,08 5,50 0,08 0,12 1,45 0,30 <0,04 0,003 0,020 <0,037 0,003 Pb mg/l NLG ≤0,01CH <0,004 <0,004 <0,004 <0,004 <0,004 <0,004 0,243 <0,004 <0,004 <0,004 <0,004 <0,004 <0,004 <0,004 <0,004 <0,004 ≤0,4CH Mn mg/l NLG and ≤0,1AS 0,1 0,5 9,2 0,1 21,3 0,6 2,4 4,2 0,1 0,7 2,4 0,2 5,3 6,7 13,8 3,2 0,1 6,901 0,832 Hg mg/l NLG ≤0,006CH <0,004 <0,004 <0,004 <0,004 <0,004 <0,004 <0,004 <0,004 <0,004 <0,004 <0,004 <0,004 <0,004 <0,004 Zn mg/l NLG ≤5 AS <0,027 0,012 <0,029 0,006 0,4 2,0 0,1 0,02 <0,3 <0,03 <0,03 <0,0002 0,7 1,8 <0,1 <0,002 <0,052 0,009 Si mg/l NLG NLG 5,0 10,6 0,1 0,3 7,7 11,3 5,6 20,7 2,6 2,6 1,7 2,3 17,7 23,1 1,5 4,7 4,8 6,9 NLG: no guideline H: Health CH: Chronic health A: Aesthetic O= Operational 24 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 5.0 AQUIFER CHARACTERIZATION 5.1 Groundwater vulnerability The Project Area is vulnerable to groundwater contamination due to the shallow water table. This is mitigated by the low k and low recharge. Due to the surrounding use of groundwater by communities, the aquifer is considered to have a high vulnerability to contamination as is indicated by the observed localised impact from existing sources. 5.2 Aquifer classification The aquifer is classified as a Minor (Parsons 1, 1995; DWAF 2, 1998) or Poor (DEA 3, 2010) aquifer due to the 0F 1F 2F low exploitation potential and low yields. It does, however, represent an important source of water for domestic supply to the local communities. 5.3 Aquifer protection classification A weighting and rating approach is then used to decide on the appropriate level of groundwater protection (Table 7). After rating the aquifer system management and the aquifer vulnerability, the points are multiplied to obtain a Groundwater Quality Management (GQM) index. Table 7: Ratings for the Aquifer Quality Management Classification System Aquifer Classification Vulnerability Class Points Class Points Sole Source Aquifer System 6 High 3 Major Aquifer System 4 Medium 2 Minor Aquifer System 2 Low 1 Non-Aquifer System 0 Special Aquifer System 0–6 Table 8: Appropriate level of groundwater protection required GQM Index Level of Protection <1 Limited Protection 1–3 Low Level Protection 4–6 Medium Level Protection 7 – 10 High Level Protection >10 Strictly Non-degradation Table 9: Aquifer classification and vulnerability assessment Description Aquifer Vulnerability Rating Protection Regional Aquifer Minor (2) 1-2 4 Medium The above classification implies that the regional aquifer is less sensitive due to the low recharge and low k and hence a medium level of protection is required, (Parsons, 1995). 1 Parsons, R, 1995, A South African Aquifer System Management Classification, WRC Report No. KV77/95. 2 Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, Second Edition, 1998. Waste Management Series, Minimum Requirements for Water Monitoring as Waste Management Facilities. 3 Department of Environmental Affairs, May 2010, Framework for the Management of Contaminated Land. 25 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 6.0 GROUNDWATER MODELLING As stated in Section 4.5, a groundwater model is not required for this investigation as no pollution dams or 21 (g) water use are required for the PV and BESS plants. A comprehensive numerical groundwater model has been compiled for the KPS area as detailed by Halenyane, 2019. 7.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT The impact assessment follows the methodology as described in the EISA. The activity is described in the EISA as follows: The solar PV plant has a minimum design life of 25 years.  During the life of the Solar PV facility, there will be normal maintenance of all electrical and mechanical components of the plant. In addition, there will be periodic cleaning and washing of the solar PV modules. This PV module cleaning will be performed when required, and it is estimated to occur 2-4 times a year. The water consumption during operation - estimated water required per year during operation is 10,000 kilolitres (total per year for design life of plant)”.  The site will have temporary laydown areas and offices for the construction contractors. Electrical supply could include use of generators and fuel storage (potentially diesel and oil), A concrete batching plant may be required.  Construction could include excavation of trenches to allow for cabling and connections, foundations of the solar PV array and inverter stations.  The main impacts considered are in terms of groundwater quality and quantity.  Quality impacts could result from:  Hydrocarbons associated with heavy moving equipment during site preparation and construction.  Site equipment including transformers, solar PV modules, inverters, excavators, graders, trucks, compacting equipment and construction material etc.  Fuel storage areas (diesel and oil for example).  Existing contaminated footprint where washing of the panels could result in an increased leaching of contamination to the groundwater.  The following parameters were noted as needing to be considered for the new activity: arsenic, cadmium, chromium, iron, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, manganese, and zinc from the ash and coal storage areas; polychlorinated biphenyls, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon, BTEX (benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene, xylene), and other petroleum hydrocarbons from oil storage and mechanical and electrical equipment; and copper, iron, nickel, chromium, and zinc from metal cleaning and cooling tower blowdown wastewaters Quantity impacts could result from:  Reduced recharge as solar panels and an increased compacted/hard standing footprint will reduce the extent that rainfall can infiltrate to ground and recharge the aquifer.  Localised ad hoc artificial recharge from water used to wash the panels and/or footprint areas. It is noted that there is no groundwater abstraction planned from the groundwater for this activity. 26 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 The main receptors are considered to be community boreholes located in the surrounding farms and rivers both in terms of the aquatic ecology and as potential pathway of contaminated water downstream. 8.0 GEOHYDROLOGICAL IMPACTS The impact assessment follows the methodology provided for the Scope of Works and assesses the potential significance of the impact pre- and post-mitigation for the following:  Magnitude (M)  Extent (E)  Reversibility (R)  Probability (P) and  Duration (D) 8.1 Construction phase There a no groundwater quantity impacts identified during construction as water will not be obtained from the groundwater resource. Quality impacts are assessed as follows: Impac Aspect Descripti Charact Ease of Pre mitigation Post Mitigation t on er mitigati numb on M E R D P S Significan M E R D P S Significan er ce ce 1 Hydrocarbo Decrease -ve 2 1 3 2 3 2 N2 - Low 1 1 3 1 2 1 N1 n spills from in Moderat 4 2 moving groundwa e equipment ter quality 2 Leachate/sp Decrease -ve 2 1 3 2 3 2 N2 - Low 1 1 3 1 2 1 N1 ills from fuel in Moderat 4 2 storage groundwa e areas ter quality 3 Spoil from Decrease -ve 2 1 3 2 3 2 N2 - Low 1 1 3 1 2 1 N1 excavated in Moderat 4 2 trenches groundwa e may be ter quality contaminate d and could leach to the groundwate r. The following mitigation and management is recommended to manage the potential impacts:  The low k and low recharge will limit the migration of contamination to receptors.  Vehicles should be routinely inspected, and maintenance carried out to reduce likelihood of spillages.  Parking should be on hard standing.  Spill kits should be used to clean up spills when they occur.  Fuel storage areas should be located in hard standing and bunded areas and pipelines regularly inspected to avoid leaks. 27 August 2022 22521869-353050-4  Potentially contaminated areas should be assessed and identified such that spoil recovered from trenches in these areas can be disposed in an appropriate manner. 8.2 Operational phase There are no groundwater quantity impacts identified during construction as water will not be obtained from the groundwater resource. Note that the potential for leachate from contaminated land should be re-assessed following the outcome of the contaminated land investigation. The following mitigation and management are recommended to manage the potential impacts:  The aquifers within the proposed areas are limited and there are no groundwater users within the Project Area boundary. A reduction in recharge will therefore have a limited impact on receptors in the area. The potential for contaminated land in these areas is being assessed. However, groundwater is generally impacted (quality) by sources within the KPS, limiting the infiltration of rain through contaminated soils, particularly in the coal stock yard area which has been identified as a potential source, would reduce the leachate of contamination to the groundwater. This is therefore likely to result in a net positive benefit to the groundwater.  The low k and low recharge will limit the migration of contamination to receptors.  All equipment that has the potential to leach contamination to the environment should be stored on hard standing and in a bunded area (e.g., Fuel storage, soaps, greases, transformers etc.).  Surface water controls to capture and contain wash water for re-use/management will reduce the impact to groundwater. 28 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 Quantity impacts are assessed as follows: Impact Receptor Description Character Ease of Pre mitigation Post Mitigation number mitigation M E R D P S Significance M E R D P S Significance 1 Groundwater Reduced recharge due to increase in -ve Moderate 3 1 3 4 3 33 N2 - Low 2 1 3 4 2 20 N2- low hardstanding footprint 2 Groundwater Localised artificial recharge due to -ve Moderate 2 1 3 4 3 30 N2 - Low 1 1 3 1 2 12 N1 – very low & Rivers washing of solar panels Quality impacts are assessed as follows: Impact Receptor Description Character Ease of Pre mitigation Post Mitigation number mitigation M E R D P S Significance M E R D P S Significance 3 Groundwater Reduced leachate from +ve Moderate 2 1 4 4 3 33 2 1 5 4 3 36 P3 - moderate contaminated soils P3 - moderate 4 Groundwater Localised leachate from equipment -ve Moderate 3 1 5 4 3 39 N3 - Moderate 2 1 4 4 2 22 N2 - Low & Rivers 5 Groundwater Localised increased leachate from -ve Moderate 3 1 5 4 3 39 N3 - Moderate 2 1 4 4 2 22 N2 - Low & Rivers contaminated soils due to following washing of solar panels 29 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 8.3 Decommissioning phase There are no quantity impacts identified during decommissioning. The quality impacts are anticipated to be similar to that envisaged during construction. Impac Aspect Descripti Charact Ease of Pre mitigation Post Mitigation t on er mitigati numb on M E R D P S Significan M E R D P S Significan er ce ce 1 Hydrocarb Decrease -ve 2 1 3 2 3 2 N2 - Low 1 1 3 1 2 1 N1 on spills in Moderat 4 2 from groundwat e moving er quality equipment 2 Leachate Decrease -ve 3 1 4 5 3 3 N2 - 2 1 3 4 3 3 N2 from in Moderat 9 moderate 0 equipment groundwat e no longer er quality in use The following mitigation and management are recommended to manage the potential impacts:  The low k and low recharge will limit the migration of contamination to receptors.  Vehicles should be routinely inspected, and maintenance carried out to reduce likelihood of spillages.  Parking should be on hard standing.  Spill kits should be used to clean up spills when they occur.  Redundant equipment must be demolished and removed to an appropriate waste facility.  Footprints should be re-assessed in terms of the Norms and Standards for Contaminated land and the areas managed accordingly. A remediation plan may be required depending on the outcome of the study. 8.4 Cumulative phase Cumulative impacts are limited due to the low k and recharge. Monitoring and management as provided in the WUL should continue. 9.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS The potential impacts from the PV and BESS activities are anticipated to be low to moderate and can be mitigated. A positive impact may be possible during operation where the activities could reduce the recharge through contaminated soils to groundwater. Further monitoring requirements, other than the existing monitoring as provided by the WUL, has not been identified. 30 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 Signature Page Golder Associates Africa (Pty) Ltd. Skinner, Sarah Digitally signed by van der (gld_SaSkinner) Linde, Gerhard Pr Sci Nat 400016/01 (gld_gvanderlinde) 2022.08.24 11:00:27 Date: 2022.08.24 09:13:26 +02'00' +02'00' Sarah Skinner Gerhard van der Linde Hydrogeologist Mine Water - BU Lead SS/GVDL/ck Reg. No. 2002/007104/07 Directors: RGM Heath, MQ Mokulubete, MC Mazibuko (Mondli Colbert), GYW Ngoma \\corp.pbwan.net\za\central_data\projects\41100xxx\41103965 - eskom komati pv esia and wula\41 es\01-reports\09-specialists\scoping phase\12_groundwater\22521869-353050- 4_komati_power_station_geohydrological_rep_final_rev2_220822.docx 31 August 2022 22521869-353050-4 APPENDIX A Document Limitations August 2022 22521869-353050-4 golder.com APPENDIX E-13 CONTAMINATED LAND ESKOM HOLDINGS SOC LTD ESKOM KOMATI POWER STATION ESIA AND WULA PRELIMINARY CONTAMINATED LAND STUDY 18 AUGUST 2022 CONFIDENTIAL ESKOM KOMATI POWER STATION ESIA AND WULA PRELIMINARY CONTAMINATED LAND STUDY ESKOM HOLDINGS SOC LTD CONFIDENTIAL PROJECT NO.: 41103965 DATE: AUGUST 2022 WSP BUILDING C, KNIGHTSBRIDGE 33 SLOANE STREET BRYANSTON, 2191 SOUTH AFRICA T: +27 11 361 1300 F: +27 11 361 1301 WSP.COM WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd. | Registered Address: Building C, Knightsbridge, 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191, South Africa | Reg No. 1999/008928/07 QUALITY MANAGEMENT ISSUE/REVISION FIRST ISSUE REVISION 1 REVISION 2 REVISION 3 Remarks Fnal Date August 2022 Prepared by Sarah Skinner Digitally signed by Skinner, Sarah Signature Skinner, Sarah (gld_SaSkinner) DN: cn=Skinner, Sarah (gld_SaSkinner), ou=Users, email=sarah.skinner@wsp.com (gld_SaSkinner) Reason: Author Location: Midrand Date: 2022.08.19 11:41:31 +02'00' Checked by Adam Sanderson Signature Authorised by Adam Sanderson Signature Project number 41103965-006 Report number R01 File reference 41103965_Eskom KPS ESIA and WULA_Preliminary Contaminated Land Study_2022- 08-16 WSP is an ISO9001:2015, ISO14001:2015 and OHSAS18001:2007 certified company SIGNATURES PREPARED BY Digitally signed by Skinner, Sarah (gld_SaSkinner) Skinner, Sarah DN: cn=Skinner, Sarah (gld_SaSkinner), ou=Users, email=sarah.skinner@wsp.com (gld_SaSkinner) Reason: Author Location: Midrand Date: 2022.08.19 11:55:12 +02'00' Sarah J.W. Skinner Principal Hydrogeologist REVIEWED BY Adam Sanderson Director This report was prepared by WSP for the account of Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd, in accordance with the professional services agreement. The disclosure of any information contained in this report is the sole responsibility of the intended recipient. The material in it reflects WSP’s best judgement in light of the information available to it at the time of preparation. Any use which a third party makes of this report, or any reliance on or decisions to be made based on it, are the responsibility of such third parties. WSP accepts no responsibility for damages, if any, suffered by any third party as a result of decisions made or actions based on this report. This limitations statement is considered part of this report. The original of the technology-based document sent herewith has been authenticated and will be retained by WSP for a minimum of ten years. Since the file transmitted is now out of WSP’s control and its integrity can no longer be ensured, no guarantee may be given to by any modifications to be made to this document. The Eskom Komati Power Station has been designated as a National Key Point. This document, and those referenced during its preparation, are strictly confidential. Further, information contained in this report pertains to a site designated as National Key Point and, therefore, the exchange and storage of information must comply with the National Key Points Act, 1980. 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................ 1 TABLE OF 1.1 Authorisation ........................................................... 1 CONTENTS 1.2 Background and Proposed Development ............. 1 1.3 Aims and Objectives ............................................... 2 1.4 Referenced Documents .......................................... 2 1.5 Scope of Work and Limitations.............................. 3 2 SETTING .................................................... 4 2.1 Geography ................................................................ 4 2.2 Environmental.......................................................... 6 3 CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL .................... 9 3.1 Possible Sources ..................................................10 3.2 Key Receptors .......................................................10 3.3 Potential Pathways ................................................11 4 CURRENT INVESTIGATION ................... 13 4.1 Fieldwork ................................................................13 4.2 Laboratory Analysis ..............................................14 5 GROUND AND GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS ........................................... 15 5.1 Soils ........................................................................15 5.2 Groundwater ..........................................................15 5.3 Contamination Observations ...............................16 6 SOIL RESULTS........................................ 17 6.1 Initial Screening .....................................................17 6.2 Further Screening .................................................18 7 GROUNDWATER RESULTS ................... 19 7.1 Quality Control – Duplicate Sample ....................19 7.2 Discussion .............................................................20 Eskom Komati Power Station ESIA and WULA WSP Project No. 41103965 July 2022 Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd 8 CONCLUSIONS ....................................... 21 TABLES TABLE 1 – SITE SUMMARY..................................... 4 TABLE 2 – PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREAS .. 5 TABLE 3 – LITHOSTRATIGRAPHY ......................... 7 TABLE 4 – HYDROCENSUS BOREHOLES ............ 9 TABLE 5 – GROUNDWATER MONITORING DATA (06 JUNE 2022) ...........................14 TABLE 6 – RELATIVE PERCENTAGE DIFFERENCES BH03 (ORIGINAL) VERSUS BH10-01 (DUPLICATE) .....................................................19 FIGURES FIGURE A – CORRELATION: TOPOGRAPHY VERSUS GROUNDWATER ELEVATION .................................16 APPENDICES A FIGURES B BACKGROUND GROUNDWATER QUALITY C SERVICE CLEARANCE REPORT D EXPLORATORY HOLE LOGS E CERTIFICATES OF ANALYSIS Eskom Komati Power Station ESIA and WULA WSP Project No. 41103965 July 2022 Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 AUTHORISATION WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd (WSP) was commissioned by Eskom Holdings SOC Limited (Eskom) to undertake a preliminary contamination assessment for targeted portions of its Komati Power Station (KPS) facility in Mpumalanga Province, South Africa. The contamination assessment forms part of the Environmental & Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) and Water Use License Application (WULA) processes for the Solar Photovoltaics (PV) and Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) Project and Wind Energy Facilities. The offer to carry out the works was contained in WSP proposal reference 41103965, Eskom Komati PV ESIA and WULA, dated April 2022 and was commissioned by Eskom under Purchase Order No. 4503194444 for Contract No. 4600062770. 1.2 BACKGROUND AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT KPS was initially commissioned in 1961 and originally operated until 1990. The power station was mothballed in 1990 but was returned to full service in December 2008 (VPC, 2021). The station has a total of nine units, five 100 MW units on the east (Units 1 to 5) and four 125 MW units on the west (Units 6 to 9), with a total installed capacity of 1,000 MW (1 GW). KPS will reach its end-of-life expectancy in September 2022 when the remaining unit (Unit 9) will have reached its dead stop date (DSD), with eight units (Unit 1 to 8) having have already reached their DSDs. Eskom is proposing the establishment of a solar electricity generating facility, wind energy generating facility and associated infrastructure as part of its repurposing programme for KPS. The plan is to install 150 MW of solar PV and 150 MW of BESS and up to 70 MW of Wind Turbines (within the Solar PV footprint). The proposed development is located within the property owned by Eskom termed the study area for reporting purposes. The proposed development includes two sites for the solar PV installation (PV Site A and PV Site B) and four for the BESS (BESS A, B, C and D) located within the KPS as shown in Appendix A: Figure 1. The solar PV modules, which convert solar radiation directly into electricity, will occupy a space of up to approximately 720,000 m2 over a footprint of around 200 to 250 ha. The modules will be elevated above the ground and will be mounted on either fixed tilt systems or tracking systems (comprised of galvanised steel and aluminium). The modules will be placed in rows in such a way that there is allowance for both perimeter and maintenance access roads. The main components of the BESS include the batteries, power conversion system and transformer which will all be stored in various rows of containers. The BESS components will arrive on site pre-assembled. The BESS facilities are likely to include lithium battery technologies, such as lithium iron phosphate (LiFePO 4), lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxides (Li-NMC) or vanadium redox (VRB), however the specific technology will only be determined following Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) procurement. The BESS footprints will range from roughly 2 ha up to 6 ha. Further information on the proposed infrastructure and specifications are provided in the ESIA report. 1.2.1 EXISTING AUTHORISATIONS AND LICENCES Eskom has two existing Water Use Licences (WUL) with amendments obtained in August 2017 and February 2021 as follows: 1 WUL number 04/B11B/BCGI/1970 dated 2 February 2014 authorises the following water uses for the Eskom property located within the farm Komati Power Station No 56 IS: a Abstraction of water from the Komati Government Water Scheme (Section 21 b) b Diversion and impedances of the Koringspruit (Section 21 c and i) c Storage of water in the raw water dams (Section 21 b) and d Storage of waste and wastewater including the coal stockyard (BESS D), ash dams and return water dam associated with the Ashing Area (Section 21 g) Eskom Komati Power Station ESIA and WULA WSP Project No. 41103965 July 2022 Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd Page 1 This WUL includes water quality limits for surface water (Appendix III, Table 3) and groundwater reserve (Appendix IV, Table 6). Table 3 was revised in the August 2017 amendment whilst the amendment of February 2021 includes changes to frequency of monitoring. 2 WUL number 04/B11B/CI/2556 dated 11 January 2015 refers to construction of Komati storage facility within 500 m from a boundary of an unchanneled valley bottom wetland and seepage wetland which refers, based on the coordinates provided, to the Komati Spruit (Seep 2 wetland) In addition to the above WUL, Eskom possesses the following two Waste Management Licences (WML): 1 KPS Ash Disposal facility (License #: 12/9/11/L1010/6) 2 Decommissioning of the asbestos disposal site within the Old Ash dam (License #12/9/11/L73467/6) 1.3 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES The objective of the preliminary contamination assessment is to provide a review of available existing information and present the findings of the contemporary works. The aim of this report is therefore to: — Establish the environmental setting/s of the relevant development areas at KPS based on a review of existing information in conjunction with site reconnaissance, targeted intrusive investigations and laboratory analysis of selected samples — Prepare a Conceptual Site Model (CSM) utilising the supplementary information to conceptualise the hydrological, geological and hydrogeological conditions in respect to possible contamination concerns — Interpret the significance of recorded contamination impacts in broad accordance with Part 8 of the NEM: WA to ascertain the requirement for additional works and/or remediation 1.4 REFERENCED DOCUMENTS The chronological list of the documents and data sources which informed the desktop review are provided below and are referenced where appropriate in this report. This information includes reports and databases provided by Eskom with additional input from various published resources. — Bohlweki Environmental, September 2005, Single page (Figure 10) showing the undermining areas, subsidence and rehabilitation ash dump referenced to the Koornfontein Mines EMPR and originally titled Plan No. 4.5. — GHT Consulting, July 2009, Komati Power Station Hydrological & geohydrological baseline study, GHT Consulting Scientists, RVN 537.5/909. — Lidwala, December 2015, Integrated water and waste management plan for Komati Power Station, Mpumalanga Province, Lidwala Consulting Engineers (SA) (PTY) Ltd, 16906 PROS_ENV. — Anglo American, November 2015, Goedehoop Colliery, Hope No. 4 Seam Project Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and Environmental Management Programme (EMPr), DMR Reference No.: MP 30/5/1/2/2/1 (122) EA, https://minedocs.com/21/GoedehoopColliery_EIR_EMP_Report_November2015.pdf — Kimopax, September 2019, Numerical modelling and geochemistry assessment, Eskom Komati Power Station, Gauteng, Kimopax (Pty) Ltd, KIM-WAT-2018-233 — Eskom, August 2019, Komati Hydrocensus Report - 2019, Applied chemistry and microbiology section: sustainability Division Eskom, RTD/ACM/19/240-149029270 — Eskom, Oct 2017, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Phase 4, Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Technical report, RTD/ACM/17/04. — Eskom, Oct 2017, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Phase 3, Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Technical report. RTD/ACM/16/240-118739170 — Eskom, April 2016, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Phase 01, Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Technical report, 240-112294332 — Eskom, January 2017, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Phase 02, Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Technical report, Rrtm/acm/16/240- 118739170 Eskom Komati Power Station ESIA and WULA WSP Project No. 41103965 July 2022 Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd Page 2 — Eskom, April 2018, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Phase 5, Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Technical report, RTD/ACM/17/05 — Eskom, May 2018, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Phase 6, Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Technical report, RTD/ACM/17/06 — Eskom, May 2018, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Phase 7, Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Technical report, RTD/ACM/18/240-140434399 — Eskom, August 2018, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Phase 8, Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Technical report, RTD/ACM/18/240-140434709. (Mathetsa, S & Swartz, N) — Eskom, September 2019, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring Report, April to June 2019, Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Technical report, RTD/ACM/19/240- 150762666 (Authors Mathetsa, S & Swartz, N) — Eskom, September 2019, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring Report, July to September 2019, Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Technical report, RTD/ACM/19/240- 152749979 (Authors Mathetsa, S & Swartz, N) — Eskom, May 2020, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring Annual Report, 2020/2021, Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Technical report, RTD/ACM/20/240- 163860231 — Eskom, January 2021, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring - Quarter 3, Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Technical report, RTD/ACM/21/240-1615539477 — VPC, October 2021, Draft Report for Komati Thermal Power Plant Technical Analyses on retiring and repurposing four coal plants, South Africa. Report for the World Bank, VPC GmbH. P-2021-00547. — Eskom, March 2022, Komati Surface and Groundwater Monitoring - Quarter 3, Eskom Sustainability Division, Research, Testing and Development Technical report, RTD/ACM/21/240-190000008 — SRK Consulting, March 2021, Independent Competent Person’s Report on Goedehoop Colliery, SRK Report reference 566657. https://thungela.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/downloads/investors/Goedehoop- Colliery-CPR-dated-25-March-2021.pdf — Eskom, 2022, Komati Wish_August 2021 water quality databased received on the 15 June 2022 — Eskom, 2022, Discussion on site infrastructure and existing activities with the Eskom Environmental Manager on the 07 July 2022 1.5 SCOPE OF WORK AND LIMITATIONS This document comprises factual and interpretative reporting based on the findings of the contemporary ground investigations and incorporating available pertinent existing data. The works reported herein are focused on environmental issues pertaining to the defined aims and objectives, and with respect to the targeted areas at KPS only. The study specifically excludes geotechnical considerations. The preliminary risk assessment is based on potential source-pathway-receptor linkages (exposure pathways) applicable under specific land-use assumptions. Should the source-pathway-receptor linkages be altered, or the applicable land-use/s change, re-assessment may be necessary as the outcomes of the current assessment may no longer be valid. Moreover, the limitations associated with the finite nature of the intrusive works conducted should be recognised and the presence of other areas of impact that have not been identified during the current scope cannot be discounted. The preliminary quantification exercise has been conducted in targeted areas only and more detailed works will likely be necessary to validate the findings. Whilst broadly complying with Part 8 of the NEM: WA, the report does not constitute a Site Assessment Report (SAR) as described thereunder. Based on WSP’s experience it is almost certain that the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment (DFFE) would require consideration of the entire KPS under a single SAR. There is information on the depth of the existing and proposed undermining activities. Based on the available information, the coal seams being targeted for mining are located at depths of between 20 to 100 m. It is understood that additional ggeotechnical investigations will be carried out by Eskom to provide further clarity. Eskom Komati Power Station ESIA and WULA WSP Project No. 41103965 July 2022 Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd Page 3 2 SETTING 2.1 GEOGRAPHY While the works related to this document focussed on the proposed development areas only, these form part of the consolidated Eskom property as presented in Appendix A: Figure 1 and Figure 2 within the KPS 56 IS farm portion. A summary of the general information is provided in Table 1 with additional information specific to the proposed development in Table 2. The localities of current and historical activities are presented on Appendix A: Figure 2. Table 1 – Site Summary Site Name Eskom Komati Power Station Address R35, Emalahleni, 1034, South Africa, Witbank, Mpumalanga, 1034 Province Mpumalanga Municipality Steve Tshwete Municipality Current Owner Eskom (Title Deed No. T24999/1975) Location Summary KPS is situated about 37 km from Middelburg, 43 km from Bethal and 40 km from Witbank. The proposed PV Solar Sites (A and B) are located to the west of the farm portion in vacant open grasslands whilst the proposed BESS areas are located within the KPS footprint. Current Use KPS is a coal power station which includes eight cooling towers, coal stock yard, fuel depot, oil storage, mechanical and electrical equipment, distribution stations, contractors’ yards and a series of ash dams and return water dams (RWD) (termed the Ashing Area). A water treatment plant (WTP) to treat water to potable quality is located within the KPS. The PV Sites A and B are vacant separated by an Eskom servitude. Komati Town is a residential area located between the KPS and PV Site B. Size The consolidated land belonging to Eskom covers approximately 686.95 ha (VPC, 2021), with KPS covering about 315 ha. Brief History As previously stated, the KPS was commissioned in 1961 and operated until 1990 before being mothballed until it was returned to full service in 2008. Eskom personnel had limited information on the history of the dams and waste site. An indication has therefore been obtained based on the historical GoogleTM imagery where the earliest image is from 1985 (poor resolution) and subsequently for 2009 to 2022. The old ash dumps are unlined and were larger, including the historical ash dump footprint now rehabilitated within PV Site A. There were no records provided as to when this was rehabilitated but the footprint is shown in 1985 and not in the subsequent image from 2009. The footprint for the new lined ash dams first appears in 2011 with the lining in place from around 2015. Inference is made to a possible domestic waste site in an area adjacent to the historical ash dump footprint but the extent and detail for this site is not known and it is not clear on the historical imagery. An asbestos disposal site (License #12/9/11/L73467/6) was utilised for the disposal of 4,050 kg of asbestos and asbestos containing waste in 2008 and was covered with two layers of ash and fenced. VPC, 2021 notes that Ergosaf Environmental and Occupational Health Services confirmed that there was no environmental risk of the disposed asbestos in 2013. All asbestos material has been removed off site. A rehabilitated dump, subsequently identified by Eskom as a historical coal discard dump, is noted as being present in the north-west corner of PV Site B. This is in evidence in 1985 but not in 1990. This area is also noted by Bohlweki Environmental, 2005 to have been undermined with some subsidence noted as having occurred within this area. Eskom has confirmed that there are no underground storage tanks, but fuel storage areas are present in mobile tanks and at the fuel depot and there is a fuel transfer station located south of the coal stockyard. Potential contaminant areas have been identified at the coal stockyard, bulk chemical store (located in the vicinity of the Water treatment plan), Lake Stoffel, Lake Finn, Hazardous Eskom Komati Power Station ESIA and WULA WSP Project No. 41103965 July 2022 Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd Page 4 Waste Temporary storage (possibly in the vicinity of BESS C), Ashing Area and the historical asbestos disposal area (VPS, 2021). VPS note that limited soil testing (pH, electrical conductivity, calcium, magnesium, sodium, potassium, chloride, nitrate, aluminium, manganese and iron) was carried out to assess the impact of dust suppression near Ashing area, the coal stockyard and water treatment facilities in October 2020. Manganese was found to be elevated in the samples near the Ashing and coal stock yard area. Contaminants of Eskom identified the CoPC to include arsenic, cadmium, chromium, iron, lead, mercury, Potential Concern nickel, selenium, manganese, and zinc from the ash and coal storage areas; polychlorinated (CoPC) biphenyls (PCB), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH), benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX), and other petroleum hydrocarbons from oil storage and mechanical and electrical equipment; and copper, iron, nickel, chromium and zinc from metal cleaning and cooling tower blowdown wastewaters. Table 2 – Proposed Development Areas Area Approximate Size (ha) Locality and Current Use Centre Point Coordinates PV Site A 26° 6' 22.61" S 160.6 Southwest corner of the site with the R542 to the south, Komati town to 29° 27' 41.63" E the north, the Goedehoop Colliery (an underground coal mine) to the northwest, and the Eskom Komati Ashing Area to the east. Much of the area was historically a farm, (maize/corn rotated with bean crops). The historical ash and rehabilitated domestic waste footprints are in the eastern portion of the area. Mining of the underlying No. 4 coal seam is understood to be planned in this area. This seam is indicated as being some 20 to 100 m below surface (Anglo American, 2015). PV Site B 26° 5' 45.17" S 60.9 Northwest corner of the site with Goedehoop Colliery to the west and 29° 27' 15.52" E north, and Komati town to the east. The Blinkpan police station is located on the south-western boundary. This area is not in use but undermining and a historical coal discard dump are noted to have been present in the northwest of this area. A landing strip / road crosses the area upslope of the historical Coal discard dump. BESS A 26° 5' 27.74" S 2.6 Southwest portion of the KPS. Area is currently in use with several 29° 28' 8.22" E buildings and contractor’s yards (D.B Thermal, Alstom Howden, Siemens, Clyde Bergeman, Roshcon EL and Roshcon Storage) as well as offices, parking areas and a boiler within the proposed development footprint. According to the site layout plan (Eskom) the distribution station is located to the east, with the KPS cooling towers and various buildings and parking areas to the north. BESS B 26° 5' 33.34" S 3.2 The site is bounded by the Komati spruit (and wetland area) to the west 29° 28' 2.59" E and KPS (BESS A) to the northeast. Most of the area is not in use except for a church located in the south-eastern corner. There is no evidence of a graveyard, but this should be confirmed with Eskom. The church is located within a bunker which was historically an old shooting range. BESS C 26° 5' 30.92" S 2 Site is bounded to the west by the KPS cooling towers and the drainage 29° 28' 35.13" E line of the Gelukspruit (and wetland) to the northeast. The Ashing Area is located to the south. Much of the area is currently not in use but there is a scrap yard in the southern portion. Eskom noted in discussion that an unknown fenced off area was leased to an unknown subcontractor. Based on the map provided by VPS, 2021 this may have been the temporary hazardous waste storage area. BESS D 26° 5' 14.90" S 5.6 Site is the coal stockyard currently in use by KPS. 29° 28' 17.13" E Eskom Komati Power Station ESIA and WULA WSP Project No. 41103965 July 2022 Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd Page 5 2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL 2.2.1 TOPOGRAPHY Topographic information was sourced from the 1:50 000 topographic map series, (Eskom, 2021 and Eskom, 2019) and is presented in Appendix A: Figure 3. The topography is undulating with the highest point near the junction of the R35 and R542 provincial roads (south-eastern corner) at approximately 1,655 metres above mean sea level (mamsl). The topography slopes in a northerly direction to 1,600 mamsl on the northern boundary (PV Site B and KPS). 2.2.2 HYDROLOGY KPS is in the upper Olifants River quaternary sub-catchment, B11B. The Koringspruit flows some 700 m to the north. The Koringspruit also passes the Koornfontein and Goedehoop Coal mines (downstream of the KPS), eventually flowing into the Koornfontein River and ultimately joining the Olifants River some 15 km downstream. The Komati spruit is a small drainage line in the centre of the site and drains the area western portion of the Ashing Area to the Koringspruit River via dams located within the municipal sewage plant located external to the site boundary. The Gelukspruit (a tributary of the Koringspruit River) flows in a north-westerly direction to the east of the KPS. According to Eskom, 2019; this stream was diverted to prevent ingress into power plant areas and remains so due to the location of the current KPS activities. Dirty water from the Ashing Area, KPS and coal stockyard area drain to the Stoffel Dam, (VPS, 2021). Finn Dam is located downstream on the north-eastern corner of the KPS and receives water from the coal stockyard ( Appendix A: Figure 2). SENSITIVE AQUATIC RECEPTORS The study area is highly developed and water resources and dams have been altered by the mining and existing activities at the KPS. There are no wetland sites of national importance in the immediate area, but four wetlands were identified during the aquatic ecology study carried out by WSP 1 in June 2022 for the ESIA. These include: — A channel valley bottom associated with the Gelukspruit located to the east of the KPS. — Seep 1 is located on the southern boundary. The small dam (termed the Clean Water Dam) is located downstream of the seep and impounds and pools the water in the wetland. — Seep 2 is associated with the Komati spruit. It originates downstream of the Clean Water Dam and receives water from the Ashing Area. Seep 2 is bordered by the Komati village to the west. — A shallow depression wetland is located within a crop field south and external to PV Site A. The wetland is approximately 3 ha in extent and is cut off from PV Site A by the tarred R542 road. These wetlands were considered “Largely Modified” in terms of their Present Ecological State and are of low/marginal ecological importance. The channelled valley bottom wetland was however assessed as being moderate in terms of its Ecological Importance and Sensitivity as well as in terms of ecosystem services on account of biodiversity maintenance. No areas of potentially Critical Habitat, as defined by International Finance Corporation and World Bank standards, have been identified within the study area. The location of the wetlands is provided on Appendix A: Figure 2. 1 Golder Associates Africa (Pty) Ltd, a member of WSP (Pty) Limited, June 2022, Draft Aquatic ecology study for the Eskom Komati Power Station, Report No 22521869-352949-22, June 2022 Eskom Komati Power Station ESIA and WULA WSP Project No. 41103965 July 2022 Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd Page 6 2.2.3 GEOLOGY REGIONAL Eskom KPS is located within the Highveld (Witbank) Coalfield. The regional geology is described (Eskom, 2021, Kimopax, 2019) as falling within the Carboniferous to early Jurassic aged Karoo Basin. The Karoo Supergroup comprises, from oldest to youngest, the Dwyka, Ecca and Beaufort Groups, with the coal seams generally hosted within the Vryheid Formation of the Middle Ecca Group. The Vryheid Formation includes interbedded sandstone, siltstone, shales and coal seams. The coal seams are mined by the adjacent Goedehoop Colliery. Five coal seams are present within the Vryheid Formation and are numbered (from base up) as the Number 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 Seams. The zone of undermining (Bohlweki Environmental, 2005) indicated as underlying the PV Site B is noted to associated with the No. 4 and No. 2 coal seams. The No. 2 Seam ranges between 1.5 and 4.0 m in thickness where it is laterally continuous whilst the No. 4 Seam averages 4.0 m, varying from 1.0 – 12 m in thickness at Goedehoop mine (SRK 566657, 2021). The depth below ground level should be confirmed but based on the general stratigraphy is likely to be more than 50 m below surface (SRK 566657, 2021). The Vryheid Formation overlies the Dwyka formation. A summary of the Lithostratigraphy is provided in Table 3. The regional geological map is presented in Appendix A: Figure 4. Table 3 – Lithostratigraphy Age Supergroup Subsuite Lithology Quaternary Q Surficial alluvial deposits to the north associated with the Koringspruit River Jurassic Jd Fine-grained dolerite Permian Karoo Pv (Vryheid) Sandstone, shale and coal beds Carboniferous C-pd (Dwyka) Diamictite and shale LOCAL The local geology comprises weathering products of the sandstones, siltstones and mudstones of the Vryheid Formation, with isolated dolerite outcrops. The top layer consists of reddish-brown sandy soil, with clayey- sandy subsoil comprising yellowish to brown clays residual of the underlying sandstone formations. Weathering is not, based on the available borehole logs, expected to extend deeper than approximately 10 m. Surficial ash and coal may be present within PV Site A associated with the historical ash dump footprint and in BESS D in the coal stockyard area. A linear structure is indicated on the regional geological map to be orientated northeast to southwest through PV Site B. 2.2.4 HYDROGEOLOGY AQUIFER DESCRIPTION A monitoring program has been established for the KPS with the available boreholes presented on Appendix A: Figure 2. The boreholes are distinguished as shallow or deep but there is limited lithological information provided. Groundwater monitoring in the areas proposed for the BESS and PV Sites are limited with monitoring boreholes located in PV Site A (west of Ashing Area) and in BESS D (coal stockyard). There are no pre-existing monitoring boreholes located in or around PV Site B, BESS B, BESS C and BESS A. Whilst borehole logs and depth are not provided for all the boreholes, the available information implies that there are two distinct aquifers present in the Komati area, namely: — Seasonal shallow, discontinuous perched aquifer within the overlying weathered rock matrix. This zone is conceptualised (Kimopax, 2019) as an upper zone of completely weathered material to a depth of 8 to 10 m with a higher hydraulic conductivity (k of around 1 m/d). Monitoring boreholes which intercept this zone are typically less than 10 m deep. Boreholes drilled as part of this investigation (Section 3) target this aquifer. Eskom Komati Power Station ESIA and WULA WSP Project No. 41103965 July 2022 Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd Page 7 — Regional weathered and/or fractured rock aquifer within the Vryheid Formation. These aquifers are commonly confined along essentially horizontal bedding interfaces between different lithologies. This aquifer occurs below the unsaturated zone (> 10 mbgl) in slightly weathered or fractured bedrock with monitoring boreholes typically being > 30 m deep. GHT Consulting, 2009 indicate that the aquifer hydraulic conductivity for the regional aquifer ranges from 0.007 m/d at AB07 to 2.4 m/d for AB04 with an average of 0.51 m/d. This aquifer is likely to be highly heterogeneous. Recharge is estimated as 3 % of annual rainfall (20.6 mm/a based on 687 mm/a) in undisturbed areas, (Eskom, 2021). WATER LEVELS AND FLOW DIRECTIONS Water levels typically vary from around 1.4 to 12 mbgl with shallow groundwater at surface in AK62 between the Raw Water dams and Ashing Area. Eskom, 2021 indicates that the groundwater flow mimics the topography, and the direction of flow is towards the surface stream, particularly the Koringspruit. A comprehensive numerical groundwater model has been compiled for the KPS area as detailed by Kimopax, 2019 and also indicates that contamination is anticipated to migrate from the pollution sources towards the Koringspruit to the north. AQUIFER CLASSIFICATION The regional aquifer is classified as Minor (Parsons2, 1995 and DWAF3, 1998) or Poor (DEA4, 2010) due to the low exploitation potential (0.1 and 0.5 l/s). It does, however, represent an important source of water for domestic supply to the local communities. The aquifer is vulnerable to groundwater contamination due to the shallow water table. This is evident by the contaminant plume (sulphate) identified as underlying the Ashing Area and coal stockyard. The impact is mitigated by the low conductivity and low recharge. Due to the surrounding use of groundwater by communities, the aquifer is considered to require a medium level of protection5. GROUNDWATER QUALITY Water quality data is captured in the Eskom Komati Wish database. Groundwater quality parameters that need to be analysed are specified in the WUL (Appendix IV, Table 6, Clause 3.6) as pH, electrical conductivity (EC), Total Dissolved Solids (TDS), Total Suspended Solids (SS), Total Alkalinity, chloride (as Cl), sodium (as Na), sulphate, nitrate, ammonia, orthophosphate, fluoride, potassium, manganese, copper, iron, zinc, arsenic and chromium. The 95th percentile was estimated from the data provided for the upgradient (ambient) boreholes, selected boreholes within the KPS and boreholes located on or near the northern site boundary and is included in Appendix B (Table B3) for reference. In summary: — Ambient groundwater quality (as represented by AB58 and AB59) is generally alkaline with an average pH of 8.3. Electrical conductivity (EC) (average 17 and 32 mS/m for AB58 and AB59 respectively) is below the groundwater reserve of 112 mS/m. — Water quality is affected by KPS activities particularly from the Ashing Area and coal stockyard (BESS D). This is indicated by an increase in salinity associated with elevated chloride, sulphate, calcium, magnesium, sodium and fluoride in the coal stockyard area. Metal concentrations for iron and manganese are elevated compared to the ambient groundwater quality (<0.1 mg/l for iron and <0.5 mg/l for manganese) at AB07 (downgrade of the Ashing Area) and in CB09 (coal stockyard). — Boreholes located on and near the northern boundary (CB52, AB47 and CB51) comprise sulphate, fluoride and manganese concentrations which are elevated compared to the ambient water quality and South African drinking water standards. 2 Parsons, R, 1995, A South African Aquifer System Management Classification, WRC Report No. KV77/95 3 Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, Second Edition, 1998. Waste Management Series, Minimum Requirements for Water Monitoring as Waste Management Facilities 4 Department of Environmental Affairs, May 2010, Framework for the Management of Contaminated Land 5 Golder Associates Africa (Pty) Ltd, a member of WSP (Pty) Limited, June 2022, Draft Hydrogeological Investigation for the Eskom Komati Power Station, Report No 22521869-353050-43, June 202 Eskom Komati Power Station ESIA and WULA WSP Project No. 41103965 July 2022 Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd Page 8 PROXIMITY TO DRINKING WATER SUPPLIES Water is supplied via pipeline by the Komati Government Water Scheme which originates from the Nooitgedacht Dam (c132 km from KPS), (Lidwala, 2015). The water is treated by Eskom at the Water Plant and Eskom subsequently supplies water to the municipality; however, the layout of the distribution network and its potential proximity to the areas of proposed developments has not been provided to WSP. Groundwater is abstracted from the adjacent Goedehoop Colliery where groundwater is also utilised for supply (SRK 566657, 2021). The locality of the points of abstraction are not indicated in the available information. A hydrocensus (Appendix A: Figure 2) was carried out in 2008 (GHT Consulting, 2009) with selected points (thirteen) resampled in 2019 (Eskom, 2019). These covered an approximate 15 km radius around KPS. The results of the hydrocensus imply that the surrounding farms to the east, southeast and southwest of KPS obtain water from boreholes for domestic use and for irrigation of crops. The closest boreholes are located within 500 m of the Eskom boundary on the farms Goedehoop, Geluk and Broodsnyders with details included in Table 4. Boreholes identified on the National Groundwater Archive were confirmed to be beyond 1 km of the farm boundary. Table 4 – Hydrocensus Boreholes ID Longitude Latitude Depth Use Water Level Condition (oE) (oS) (m bgl) (mbcl) BB20 29.48213 26.08393 26.1 Domestic Drink 14.10 Good BB21 29.47954 26.10598 26.8 ~ 2.20 (2008); Windmill (2019) 1.76 (2019) BB22 29.47907 26.10586 ~ Domestic Drink ~ Good BB23 29.47905 26.10632 11.0 Domestic Drink 4.50 Broken (2008) indicated to be in use 2019 BB24 29.47125 26.11574 ~ Domestic Drink 15.00 Good BB25 29.47127 26.11574 26.5 Domestic Drink. 20.50 Good Livestock BB26 29.47783 26.11699 6.1 ~ Dry Dry hole BB27 29.47912 26.11710 42.0 Domestic Drink. 32.00 Good Livestock BB43 29.42195 26.12209 15.0 Domestic Drink 8.00 Good BB44 29.42193 26.12198 55.0 Domestic Drink. 5.00 Good Livestock BB45 29.41625 26.11591 ~ ~ ~ Not in use for a long time BB46 29.42719 26.11853 ~ ~ ~ Not in use for a long time Water quality analyses was carried out on the hydrocensus boreholes. According to Eskom (2019), concentrations were generally below the South African drinking water standards and therefore deemed suitable for drinking (based on the parameters analysed). No groundwater abstraction is known to take place within the study area. 3 CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL A Conceptual Site Model (CSM) has been developed based on the information contained within the preceding sections. The aim of the CSM is to define the source–pathway–receptor linkages which may be applicable under the assumption of an ongoing industrial land-use for the proposed development areas and recognising the existing surroundings and which, based on identification of linkages, could give rise to potential human and/or environmental risks. The CSM has been developed sequentially on the basis that in the event that no plausible linkages exist then no significant risk is considered to be present. Therefore, the CSM specifically focusses on the linkages between the three aspects (i.e. exposure pathway) based on the specified scenarios and if any of these are not identified Eskom Komati Power Station ESIA and WULA WSP Project No. 41103965 July 2022 Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd Page 9 then the risks are considered negligible. It should be acknowledged that the CSM would be expected to evolve as more information becomes available and it must be recognised that if the source–pathway–receptor linkages are altered, the CSM must be reviewed to ensure that the assumptions remain valid. 3.1 POSSIBLE SOURCES While the KPS and the associated Ashing Area along with the neighbouring colliery represent more widespread sources from long term operations, including secondary sources related to existing groundwater impacts, the potential pertinent primary sources specific to the targeted development areas are summarised as follows: PV SITE A — Rehabilitated Domestic Waste Site — Historical Rehabilitated Ash Dump — Unconfirmed use of fertilisers and/or pesticides for crop production PV SITE B — Historical coal discard dump — Ash and slurry used to backfill undermined areas BESS A — Leakages from mechanical and electrical equipment, chemicals and fabrication activities — Spillages of chemicals from storage areas and the contractor’s yard — Washing and maintenance of equipment including potential solvents and paints BESS B — Historical shooting range — Unconfirmed graves associated with church BESS C — Scrap yard — Possibly hazardous materials within fenced temporary storage area BESS D — Coal stockyard 3.2 KEY RECEPTORS The following plausible receptors have been identified assuming the use of the site and surrounds remain consistent with the current land use: HUMAN HEALTH — Site workers – industrial use (current and future) — Residents in neighbouring communities (i.e. Komati Town) — Groundwater Users: while there are no confirmed abstractions within the study area, groundwater use is known within 500 m of the Eskom boundary. Eskom Komati Power Station ESIA and WULA WSP Project No. 41103965 July 2022 Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd Page 10 ENVIRONMENTAL — Groundwater: The aquifer beneath the site (> 35m) is classified as Minor/Poor with the overlying shallow weathered zone (<10m) being perched and discontinuous. The overlying shallow aquifer is not considered a viable groundwater resource but may contribute to seepage in the wetland areas as well as vertical migration into the regional deeper weathered/fractured rock aquifer. It is again noted that the underlying groundwater is known to have been impacted by mining and activities at KPS. Future mining of the No.4 coal seam underlying PV Site A is understood to be planned. The seam is located 20 to 100 m below ground surface (Anglo American, 2015). — Surface water: The closest surface water features are the wetlands associated with the Komatispruit and Gelukspruit drainage lines which originate within or immediately downstream of the Ashing Area. These flow towards the Koringspruit to the north of KPS PROPERTY — Subsurface water supply pipelines and other infrastructure — Neighbouring third-party land — Buried concrete/metal 3.3 POTENTIAL PATHWAYS Taking account of the possible sources, and notwithstanding the potential for ongoing or future direct release/s of contaminants, the hypothetical pathways by which these may affect the identified receptors, thereby potentially completing the exposure pathway/s are discussed within the following subsections. 3.3.1 DIRECT EXPOSURE – DERMAL CONTACT AND INGESTION OF SOILS Dermal contact and/or ingestion of contaminated soils are possible pathways, especially during the proposed development or other maintenance works, and particularly in areas not covered by hardstanding. 3.3.2 VERTICAL MIGRATION OF CONTAMINATION Vertical migration of contamination may occur from source zones into the underlying groundwater by leaching and dissolution, or under the influence of gravity (i.e. liquid chemical products and oils). This will be exacerbated in areas where impervious cover is absent or of compromised integrity due to higher effective infiltration, where contaminant loading/s are more substantial, or where other conditions exist that may promote contaminant-specific mobility (i.e. introduction of acids). While contributory impacts related to activities in the discrete development areas cannot be discounted, the known existing plume originating from the Ashing Area likely represents the principal source of groundwater contamination associated with activities at the KPS. 3.3.3 LATERAL MIGRATION WITHIN GROUNDWATER The lateral migration of contamination will be highly affected by the geological structure, the hydraulic gradient of the underlying groundwater, the permeability of the aquifer unit/s, the efficacy of any attenuation, the effects of recharge and the influence of seasonal fluctuations, as well as by local abstractions. Groundwater is expected to flow generally towards the north towards the Koringspruit, and the plume associated with the impacts from the Ashing Area has been shown to already extend beyond the boundaries of Eskom’s premises and, therefore, lateral migration is confirmed. Future mining of the No. 4 coal seam underlying PV Site A could result in a change in the direction of groundwater flow during mining should groundwater from the regional aquifer be pumped from the workings. The mine workings will almost certainly be backfilled, but a cone of depression may remain until such time as the water levels recover post closure. Eskom Komati Power Station ESIA and WULA WSP Project No. 41103965 July 2022 Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd Page 11 3.3.4 DIRECT EXPOSURE – DERMAL CONTACT AND INGESTION OF GROUNDWATER The likelihood of direct contact to site personnel and users is likely negligible under normal operating circumstances in the absence of abstractions within Eskom’s boundaries. There is, however, evidence of groundwater uses within the vicinity of KPS, including for potable use and thus this pathway represents a potential cause for concern. 3.3.5 LATERAL MIGRATION OF CONTAMINATION VIA STORMWATER Surface water runoff from exposed and impacted soils, unconfined waste deposits, and/or impacted hardstanding may result in contaminant impacts to both man-made and natural stormwater channels and subsequent accumulation and/or migration therein. While appraisal of stormwater management is beyond the scope of the current document it should be recognised that any impacts may migrate from the site and may also contribute to subsurface impacts. 3.3.6 LATERAL MIGRATION VIA SUBSURFACE INFRASTRUCTURE CONDUITS It is plausible that subsurface utility trenches (i.e. sewers, effluent pipelines, water distribution network) may represent preferential flow-paths for the accumulation and migration of any contaminant impacts. 3.3.7 INHALATION OF VAPOURS Whilst unlikely to affect users of external areas, vapour intrusion into on-site buildings from either soils or shallow groundwater may represent a significant source of risk to human health. 3.3.8 GENERATION OF GROUND GAS In addition to, but distinct from, the inhalation of vapours is the potential generation of ground gases within impacted unsaturated and saturated zones. The characteristics, mass and degradation of potential contamination may lead to the generation of methane, oxides of carbon, ethane, ethene and hydrogen sulphide, depending on the active processes. If migration of such gases into internal structure occurs, these may lead to asphyxiation (via oxygen displacement) or potential explosion. 3.3.9 INHALATION OF AIRBORNE DUST AND FIBRES Agitation and disturbance of soils, especially during substantial earthworks and/or construction activities, may contribute to airborne particulate loads, including potential asbestos fibres, that could become inhaled either by site occupiers or by users of neighbouring areas, including residents of Komati. While specifically excluded from the current scope given its footprint outside of the development areas, the presence of the historical asbestos waste site should be acknowledged. 3.3.10 DIRECT CONTACT WITH PROPERTY Contamination has the potential to permeate water supply pipes used for human consumption or other processes and/or result in aggressive ground conditions which may compromise the structural integrity of buried concrete, as well as metal that may be in direct contact. Eskom Komati Power Station ESIA and WULA WSP Project No. 41103965 July 2022 Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd Page 12 4 CURRENT INVESTIGATION 4.1 FIELDWORK 4.1.1 SITE RECONNAISSANCE As well as to confirm health and safety arrangements, an initial site visit was conducted on 05 May 2022 to oversee and discuss the placement of intrusive positions within the relevant areas of concern. 4.1.2 SITING AND SERVICE CLEARANCE Twenty-five soil sample localities and ten shallow borehole locations were identified following the initial site reconnaissance. As well as to define baseline conditions, these primarily focused on areas where substantial contamination may have been brought about by historic and/or current site activities across the proposed solar PV and BESS development portions; however, at the request of Eskom, also included exploratory positions proximal the fuel depot and down-gradient of the Ashing Area. Where possible, positions were sited down- gradient of the activities/operations identified where any soil impact could be expected to be within the shallow soil profile. It should be noted that AH09 & AH10 were however situated to the east of BESS A due to access constraints and, therefore, may not be representative of potential impacts within the footprint of this proposed development area. Subsurface clearance was undertaken by Hydrometrix Technologies (Pty) Ltd on 08 June 2022 under the supervision of WSP at each of the targeted intrusive locations. A Cable Avoidance Tool (CAT) was used to determine the presence/absence of underground power cables and metal utilities; thereafter, Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) was adopted to confirm the absence (or otherwise) of other potential services. The clearance report is presented in Appendix C. 4.1.3 AUGERING AND SAMPLING Twenty-five auger holes (AH01–AH25) were manually advanced to depths ranging from 0.3–1.7 mbgl; geotechnical refusal was encountered in the majority of the holes. The positions of the auger holes, digitised using a handheld Global Positioning System (GPS), are illustrated on Appendix A: Figure 5. Headspace testing was undertaken to determine the potential presence of volatile contaminants within the profiles. Soil samples were obtained at approximate 0.5 m intervals (where possible) and placed in a receptacle such that headspace remained. After a period of exposure to ambient atmospheric conditions the concentration of volatile vapours within the closed headspace was measured using a Photo-Ionisation Detector (PID) calibrated using 100 ppm isobutylene. The recorded concentrations including the depth, descriptions of strata encountered and other pertinent comments on the conditions observed during the intrusive works are presented on the exploratory hole logs in Appendix D. 4.1.4 BOREHOLE ADVANCEMENT AND WELL INSTALLATION At the request of Eskom ten permanent monitoring wells (BH01–BH10) were advanced by Soil and Groundwater Remediation Services (SGRS) under supervision of WSP at targeted safely-accessible locations to depths of up to 10m bgl. These were generally positioned in areas where coverage from the existing monitoring network was limited. Boreholes were initially manually advanced to depths of up to 2 mbgl prior to completion by percussive techniques. Similar to the auger holes, headspace testing was completed at approximate 0.5 m intervals during manual advancement and, thereafter, at roughly 1 m intervals upon commencement of mechanical drilling; although, the inevitable loss of volatile due to the drilling methodology is recognised. The recorded vapour concentrations along with the depth and descriptions of strata encountered as well as other pertinent comments Eskom Komati Power Station ESIA and WULA WSP Project No. 41103965 July 2022 Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd Page 13 on conditions observed during the borehole advancement are again presented on the exploratory hole logs in Appendix D, alongside the construction details of each of the subsequently installed monitoring wells. The positions of the wells, determined via specialist surveyor subsequent to their installation, are illustrated on Appendix A: Figure 5. 4.1.5 GROUNDWATER MONITORING AND SAMPLING Due to the short timeframes associated with the project, a maximum period of one week (depending on drilling progression) was allowed following installation for the newly installed wells to stabilise. Measurements of static groundwater levels and the base of each position was first carried out using a dual phase interface meter that allowed the simultaneous measurement of the thickness of any potential Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid (NAPL). Thereafter, prior to sampling, accessible wells were purged of a maximum of three well volumes (where possible) using dedicated single-use bailers. Samples were then collected in laboratory prepared containers which were stored in a temperature-controlled environment for delivery to an accredited laboratory for subsequent analysis. All samples were taken according to internationally accepted protocols, ensuring the potential for cross contamination was minimised. A blind duplicate sample (BH10-01) was obtained from BH03 for quality control purposes. The monitoring data is summarised in Table 5. Table 5 – Groundwater Monitoring Data (06 June 2022) Locality Well Water level Water level (mamsl) Observation (m bgl) Ashing Area BH05 1.55 1,617.05 Light brown, no odour (Up-gradient) PV Site A BH07 1.52 1,629.28 Light brown, no odour BH08 1.25 1,649.55 Light brown, no odour BH06 1.3 1,624.1 Clear translucent, no odour PV Site B BH09 0.86 1,601.54 Clear translucent, no odour BH10 0.95 1,610.05 Clear translucent, no odour BH04 0.88 1,604.42 Clear translucent, no odour BESS C BH03 1.52 1,605.58 Light brown, no odour BESS D BH02 1.55 1,600.35 Brown, no odour BESS D BH01 1.97 1,596.73 Light brown, no odour (Down-gradient) 4.2 LABORATORY ANALYSIS The soil and groundwater samples were submitted to Element Materials Technology (Element), a SANAS accredited laboratory (Facility No T0729) for analyses broadly consistent with the priority contaminants listed in the National Norms and Standards for the Remediation of Contaminated Land and Soil Quality (GN R.331 of 2014); however, supplemented with other selected determinants at the request of Eskom, as follows: SOILS — Metals/metalloids: antimony, arsenic, cadmium, chromium (total and hexavalent), cobalt, copper, iron, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel, selenium, vanadium and zinc — Inorganics: ammoniacal nitrogen, chloride, cyanide, fluoride, nitrate, nitrite and sulphate — Aliphatic petroleum hydrocarbons (C7–C9, C10–C14 and C15–C36) — Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) including benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylenes (BTEX) — Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds (SVOC) including Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH) — Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB) — Physiochemical: pH and electrical conductivity NB: asbestos has been specifically excluded from the current assessment given the outcomes of VPC, 2021 as summarised in Table 1 in relation to the historical asbestos disposal site. Eskom Komati Power Station ESIA and WULA WSP Project No. 41103965 July 2022 Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd Page 14 GROUNDWATER — Metals/metalloids: antimony, arsenic, cadmium, calcium, chromium (total and hexavalent), cobalt, copper, iron, lead, magnesium, manganese, mercury, nickel, potassium, selenium, silicon, sodium, vanadium and zinc — Inorganics: ammoniacal nitrogen, chloride, fluoride, nitrate, ortho-phosphate and sulphate — Aliphatic petroleum hydrocarbons (C7–C9, C10–C14 and C15–C36) — VOC including BTEX and Tentatively Identified Compounds (TIC) — SVOC including PAH and TIC — PCB — Physiochemical: alkalinity (total), electrical conductivity, pH, Total Dissolved solids (TDS) and Total Organic Carbon (TOC) Laboratory certificates of analysis are provided in Appendix E. 5 GROUND AND GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS 5.1 SOILS The deepest soil profile that could be achieved was at PV Site A within the area previously used for crops. The soil profile comprised darker brown clayey sand which become lighter brown with depth. No crops were evident at the time of the investigation. The “natural” soil horizon (weathered bedrock) comprises a moist, orange, brown to red-brown sandy clay or clayey sand (residual Vryheid formation) with occasional mottled clayey sand with ferricrete nodules in most of the areas inferring a seasonally fluctuating water table. Fill/made ground was encountered in several samples including: — Coal was observed to 1.5 mbgl (BH02) in the coal stockyard; auger holes (AH01–AH03) refused at 1 mbgl and only coal samples could be obtained — Ash was observed downgrade of the Ashing Area at AH14 and in BH05 and BH06. While ash was not identified in AH13, the soil was darker in colour than elsewhere on the site implying that this area is affected by runoff from the ash dams. By contrast, there was no ash indicated in the historical ash dump footprint sample (AH15) within PV Site A. — A shallow horizon of around 0.5m was noted for the exploratory holes (AH23, AH24, AH25, BH9 and BH10) located in the area of the historical Coal discard dump in the vicinity of PV Site B. A seepage zone was noted as perched on mottled sandy clay under this layer in the auger holes (AH23, AH24 and AH25). There was no evidence of coal or ash in the vicinity of this historical Coal discard dump, but the gravel horizon could be backfilled weathered material sourced from the surrounding area. — A soil stockpile of unknown origin (possibly from road building or topsoil) was observed in PV Site A. Samples were obtained near the soils (AH16 and AH17). 5.2 GROUNDWATER 5.2.1 DEPTH Seepage was encountered in the boreholes with BH7 and BH8 (located in PV Site A), but the remaining boreholes were moist with no discrete groundwater strikes observed during drilling. Groundwater depths Eskom Komati Power Station ESIA and WULA WSP Project No. 41103965 July 2022 Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd Page 15 following stabilisation were recorded in all the boreholes with depths varying from 0.86 to 1.97 mbgl which is broadly consistent with the existing dataset (Komati WISH database). 5.2.2 FLOW DIRECTION AND HYDRAULIC GRADIENT Comparing topographic and groundwater elevations an R2 value of 0.99 is calculable (Figure A) resulting in a very strong correlation coefficient and consistent with previous works. The interpolated groundwater flow is illustrated on Appendix A: Figure 6 and confirms an overall flow direction to the north. Very broadly, an average hydraulic gradient is calculated with reference to groundwater elevations ( Table 5) at BH08 in the south and BH01 in the north. This represents a difference of ~52.82 m over a lateral distance of approximately 2,866 m, equating to a hydraulic gradient of ~0.018. It should be stressed that hydrogeological conditions are unlikely to be homogenous especially recognising that the shallow aquifer is discontinuous and, therefore, local variability should be expected that may differ markedly from this calculated average. Figure A – Correlation: Topography versus Groundwater Elevation 5.3 CONTAMINATION OBSERVATIONS The results of headspace testing indicated that volatile vapours were below the PID’s level of detection (<0.1 ppm) within all soil samples. Nonetheless, visual evidence of soil contamination was noted as follows: — Coal was noted to a depth of 1.5 mbgl in the coal stockyard — Ash was noted within the proximity of the Ashing Area — Discolouration (staining) was observed on the brick paving at the fuel depot (AH05 and AH06) — Denudation was seen in the vicinity of BESS Area A adjacent to the contractor’s yard. Groundwater samples varied from brown to clear with no obvious visual or olfactory evidence of contamination. Eskom Komati Power Station ESIA and WULA WSP Project No. 41103965 July 2022 Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd Page 16 6 SOIL RESULTS The South African Framework for the Management of Contaminated Land (Framework, May 2010) developed by the then Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA)6 in line with Part 8 of the NEM: WA, outlines the methodology for the screening of potentially contaminated sites to provide a risk-based decision support protocol for their assessment. Further, the then DEA gazetted GN R.331 in May 2014, with these being promulgated under Section 7(2)(d) of the NEM: WA by the then Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs. GN R.331 provides Soil Screening Values (SSVs), a tiered system of priority soil contaminants, to facilitate the determination of sensitivity of the relevant receptor which may be subject to exposure. These are defined as follows: — SSV1 represents the lowest value calculated for each parameter from both the human health and water resource protection pathways. SSV1 values are not land-use specific — SSV2 represents the land-use specific soil concentration and are appropriate for screening level site assessment in cases where protection of water resources is not an applicable pathway for consideration Separately, GN R.331 provides Soil Screening Levels (SSLs) for a number of anions; however, it is notable that these are not related to potential risks to human health via direct exposure. These are specifically investigation values that are relevant only to provide guidance on potentially excessive levels of salts, which can represent a major cause of deterioration of soil or water quality from an ecological perspective. 6.1 INITIAL SCREENING Recognising the general approach prescribed by the Framework, the analytical results for the analysed contaminants of concern have first been compared to the SSV1s published in GN R.331. Where SSV1s are not available reference has been made to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Regional Screening Levels (RSLs) for Residential Soil (May 2022) as a reasonable alternative while recognising the different paradigm behind their derivation. Whilst conservative under many potential exposure scenarios, such screening allows justified rationalisation of potential contaminants that may require further assessment and/or management, and discounts those potential exposure pathways that do not pose a significant risk. Cadmium, hexavalent chromium, cyanide and PCBs as well as the majority of the VOCs and SVOCs were recorded below their respective laboratory detection limits and, therefore, are not seen as contaminants of concern for further consideration. Otherwise, the following is noted: — Arsenic, lead, and manganese were above their respective SSV1s within shallow soils across most of the proposed development areas with the exception of BESS A and BESS B. Similar is noted for vanadium although this was also below its SSV1 at BESS D and the fuel depot, as well as down-gradient — Excluding samples from BH02, BH06 and AH10 copper was ubiquitously above its SSV1 — Iron was above its USEPA RSL within various samples, and largely within ferruginised soils — Sulphate was above its SSL within those samples retrieved from AH01 (coal stockyard) and AH15 (historical ash dump at PV Site A) — Pyrene and benzo(a)pyrene were above their respective SSV1s within the sample collected from AH06 at the fuel depot The pH of the samples collected ranged widely from 4.58–7.92. Although there are no SSVs published for the protection of human health under the NEM: WA, the South African National Standard (SANS) Globally Harmonised System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS), SANS 10234:2019 recognises materials with a pH within a range of 2–11.5 as not being hazardous 6 In June 2019, the DEA was renamed the Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries (DEFF) and, in April 2021, was renamed the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment (DFFE) Eskom Komati Power Station ESIA and WULA WSP Project No. 41103965 July 2022 Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd Page 17 6.2 FURTHER SCREENING Where contaminants have been recorded in excess of their respective initial assessment criteria and following the stepwise methodology described in the Framework, further screening has been separately carried out to ascertain whether these could plausibly represent risks to either human health or aquatic systems based on site- specific considerations. As indicated, the SSLs for anions (i.e. sulphate) are only relevant to provide guidance on potentially excessive levels of salts and, therefore, have not been carried forwards into the further screening exercise. Nonetheless, with the exception of localised instances of elevated sulphate within samples containing coal and ash these were consistently below their respective SSLs and so no concern is raised. 6.2.1 RISK TO HUMAN HEALTH Potential risks to human health are based on land-use specific considerations and refer to the applicable SSV2s for the following land uses: — Informal residential — Formal residential — Commercial/industrial Recognising that the town of Komati lies central to the overall proposed development areas, SSV2s relevant for formal residential use have been conservatively adopted to ascertain whether soil contamination may represent a potential health risk. The following is noted: — With the exception of manganese AH20 (PV Site A), BH10 (PV Site B) and BH04 (BESS B) as well as vanadium at AH21 (PV Site A), metals were below their respective SSV2s. While these localised anomalies are noted, overall average concentrations of both manganese (~754 mg/kg) and vanadium (~124 mg/kg) were below their SSV2s for a formal residential setting. Therefore, in the wider context these are considered unlikely to represent a significant source of risk with respect to human health, especially when recognising that all were below their SSV2s relevant for the commercial/industrial land-use of the proposed development areas — Benzo(a)pyrene was above both its formal residential and commercial/industrial SSV2s within AH06 at the fuel depot. This falls outside of the proposed development areas covered under this report; however, is indicative of potential risks to human health from ongoing operations and possibly symptomatic of more extensive impacts local to the fuel depot that will require consideration by Eskom during decommissioning 6.2.2 RISK TO AQUATIC SYSTEMS With respect to soil-based contamination, potential risks to aquatic systems are defined based on the sensitivity of the surface water and groundwater resources. The Framework methodology recognises the adoption of SSV1 as generic criteria in the event that there is a current or potential future groundwater use on or within 1 km of a site, or there is a permanent surface watercourse on or adjacent the site. Recognising the proximal surface water courses, including wetlands, as well as the abstractions within 500 m of the premises boundary, these criteria are considered to be satisfied and therefore, with the exception of iron (USEPA RSL for human health only), the commentary in Section 6.1 is relevant. It must, however, be acknowledged that the published SSV1s do not distinguish between the protection of drinking water and freshwater aquatic ecosystems, nor do they differentiate from where direct human health risks may represent the critical exposure pathway. In this regard the following is noted in respect of the published SSV1s: — Arsenic and lead are based on the protection of drinking water. While lead was noted in the shallow groundwater samples (Section 7), arsenic was consistently below its laboratory detection limit — Manganese, vanadium and benzo(a)pyrene are based on the direct human health risk under an informal residential land-use (as noted by their SSV1s being equivalent to their corresponding SSV2s) — Copper and pyrene are based on the protection of the freshwater aquatic environment Eskom Komati Power Station ESIA and WULA WSP Project No. 41103965 July 2022 Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd Page 18 7 GROUNDWATER RESULTS 7.1 QUALITY CONTROL – DUPLICATE SAMPLE To determine the accuracy of the field sampling methodology and the laboratory analysis, a blind field duplicate sample BH10-01 was collected from monitoring well BH03 and submitted for the full suite of analysis described. Data quality was evaluated based on the relative percentage difference (RPD) in the concentration of detected contaminants between the original and duplicate sample and assessed for a RPD target of 20%. Acknowledging that results from either the original or duplicate sample may be equally valid and that either one may be more, or less, representative of groundwater conditions, the following formula has been utilised to calculate the percentage difference: ( ) Relative Percentage Difference (RPD) = ( ) Excluding pH that is logarithmic, where determinants have been detected, the comparison of the original and duplicate sample results is presented in Table 6 whereby if two values have an RDP greater than 20%, the values are highlighted. Table 6 – Relative Percentage Differences BH03 (Original) versus BH10-01 (Duplicate) Concentration Determinant Units BH03 BH10-01 ~RPD (%) (Original) (Duplicate) Electrical conductivity mS/m 184.9 185 -0.05 Cobalt µg/l 11.1 11 0.9 Iron µg/l 164.4 163.7 0.4 Lead µg/l 4.6 4.6 0 Manganese µg/l 1,718.3 1,639.4 4.7 Nickel µg/l 12.8 12.6 1.6 Vanadium µg/l 1 1 0 Zinc µg/l 37.9 37 2.4 Calcium mg/l 141 141.5 -0.4 Magnesium mg/l 125.4 116.5 7.4 Potassium mg/l 6.2 6 3.28 Sodium mg/l 136.4 137.1 -0.5 Silicon µg/l 19,617 20,135 -2.6 Fluoride mg/l 0.3 0.4 -28.6 Chloride mg/l 73.9 69.9 5.6 Sulphate mg/l 983.1 837.9 16 Orthophosphate mg/l 0.055 0.042 26.8 Ammoniacal nitrogen mg/l 0.75 0.36 70 Alkalinity mg/l 260 256 1.6 Total Solids mg/l 1,537 1,533 0.3 While both fluoride and orthophosphate show RPDs greater than 20% this is in relation to low concentrations whereby the percentage difference is magnified. In real terms the recorded concentrations are of similar magnitudes and on this basis, it is considered that the laboratory analytical data obtained can be relied upon with a satisfactory degree of confidence, especially when noting that all other RPDs are well within the 20% target. Eskom Komati Power Station ESIA and WULA WSP Project No. 41103965 July 2022 Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd Page 19 7.2 DISCUSSION As per Section 5.2, the groundwater flow direction is from south to north. On this basis background groundwater quality is likely best represented by two boreholes located up-gradient of the KPS boundary (AB58 and AB59). The background water quality has been defined by the 95th percentile concentrations of determinants as sourced from the existing Komati Wish database supplied by Eskom. The groundwater reserve is provided in the WUL, 2014 (Appendix IV, Table 7, Clause 4.1) where it is noted that concentrations of 0 mg/l are presented for sodium and sulphate. It is expected that these will be naturally present in the regional aquifer as is evidenced for the ambient water quality at AB58 and AB59 where ranges of 17–22 mg/l and 8–21 mg/l are noted for sodium and sulphate, respectively. Although the reserve limits specified within the WUL have been adopted as the primary source of reference for those determinants included the zero values for sodium and sulphate are omitted from further consideration – Eskom should, however, liaise with the Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS) in this regard. In terms of pH and although lower than background (8.8–9.1) the shallow groundwater is generally near neutral (6.62–7.54) and satisfies the lower pH limit (6.6) specified within the WUL. The other determinants provided for within the WUL are also seen as being broadly compliant; however, exceptions are noted as follows: — A high salt content is recorded at BH03 (BESS C) where, together with elevated concentrations of sodium and sulphate, electrical conductivity, calcium, magnesium and chloride were above their respective reserve limits. This is expected due to the known groundwater plume extending from the up-gradient Ashing Area and concentrations decrease further down-gradient of the KPS (BH02, BESS D) to below the reserve limits. However, increases in the concentrations of a number of determinants are noted at the further down- gradient position (BH01), with magnesium and chloride again above the reserve criteria, albeit at far lower concentrations than BH03. — Electrical conductivity and magnesium are above their reserve limits at BH08. This is located up-gradient of KPS activities on the southern boundary of PV Site A but slightly down-gradient of the background borehole (AB58). — Chloride was above its reserve limit at both BH05 (northeast of the Ashing Area and north of Raw Water Dams) and BH04 (BESS B). The underlying shallow aquifer targeted as part of this investigation is considered a non-aquifer due to the low yield and discontinuous nature. Nonetheless, the possibility of vertical migration of contaminant impacts from this to the regional deeper weathered/fractured rock aquifer is recognised. While appraisal of the quality of water within the deeper aquifer is outside the scope of the current assessment, in recognition of groundwater use within 1 km together with the proximal freshwater aquatic surface water environs, analytical data has also been considered alongside the following: — South African National Standard (SANS) for Drinking Water, SANS 241-1:2015 Edition 2, or Edition 1 (2011) for determinants omitted from the second version — South African Water Quality Guidelines (SAWQG) Volume 1, Domestic Use, Second Edition, 1996 — SAWQG Volume 7, Aquatic Ecosystems, Second Edition, 1996 In this context the known plume associated with the Ashing Area expectedly dominates the signature of down- gradient groundwater quality with manganese at a concentration (1,718.3 µg/l) above both the drinking water chronic health standard (400 µg/l) and freshwater aquatic guideline (180 µg/l). While this plume has been shown to extend off-site to the north, seemingly additional contributions from the KPS and particularly the coal stockyard (BESS D) are also observed with a doubling in the concentration of manganese recorded at BH01 (3,269.5 µg/l). The likely lateral dispersivity of this plume is also apparent at BH05 to the northeast and BH06 to the west where manganese concentrations of 809.5 µg/l and 496.8 µg/l were respectively recorded. Manganese was not otherwise recorded above either its freshwater aquatic guideline or chronic health standard for drinking water; although was noted to be above its aesthetic drinking water standard at BH04 (BESS B). Compared to the background range (6.2–10 µg/l) concentrations of zinc appear elevated within the shallow groundwater across the entire property (16.2–59 µg/l). While far below the drinking water standard of 2 000 µg/l, these are above both the Target Water Quality Range (TWQR) and Chronic Effect Value (CEV) of 2 µg/l and 3.6 µg/l, respectively for aquatic ecosystems, and also above the Acute Effect Value (AEV) of 36 µg/l in four of ten boreholes (40%) sampled under the current scope. This includes positions both up- and down-gradient and therefore the source of zinc remains uncertain. Eskom Komati Power Station ESIA and WULA WSP Project No. 41103965 July 2022 Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd Page 20 While absent in the background, lead has been detected within all shallow groundwater samples obtained. Notably, however, this is an approximate order of magnitude greater, and above the drinking water standard, within the west of the property (BH06, BH07 and BH08 [PV Site A] and BH09 [PV Site B]). While the combustion of fossil fuels (i.e. coal) is a recognised source of environmental lead, the reason for the noted distribution is uncertain and therefore remains unconfirmed; however, appears to correlate with typically higher concentrations of lead in soils in the west of the premises (Section 6.2.2). Exceedances of the adopted standards/guidelines does not necessarily confirm the presence of an unacceptable risk but provides a conservative indication of where the shallow groundwater may represent a source of impact for the identified receptors. It is understood (VPC, 2021) that rehabilitation and management is planned for the plume associated with the Ashing Area and, as such, long term improvements in the quality of shallow groundwater would be expected once this process is implemented. While the sources of lead and zinc cannot be categorically confirmed these are almost certainly related to the activities at both KPS and the neighbouring colliery, and more detailed assessment/s are recommended to ensure appropriate protection of any potential receptors. Otherwise, the demonstrated impacts to shallow groundwater are not considered to represent substantial constraints to the proposed development specific to the two PV and four BESS sites. 8 CONCLUSIONS Based on the outcomes of the targeted investigatory works, a number of contaminants largely consisting of metals and nutrients/salts together with localised PAHs have been identified within both soils and/or shallow groundwater that are indicative of impacts related to activities at KPS, and particularly associated with the Ashing Area that lies outside of the proposed development areas that are the focus of this document. In summary: Table 7: Summary of findings in soil and groundwater for each area Area of Summary of concentrations Risk Summary investigation exceeding screening values PV Site A Soil: Cu (in almost all samples) and Potential sources: Area was historically used for crops As, Pb, Mn, and V were locally with historical footprints in the eastern portion. elevated above the SSV1 in some Receptors to which an exposure pathway are complete samples but less than SSV2 screening include site workers (human health) and the levels. Sulphate was elevated above environment. SSV in AH15. Soils are largely not considered to represent a Groundwater: Pb (all), Mn (BH6 significant source of risk with respect to human health only), SO4 (BH8 and BH6) elevated and/or aquatic systems when specifically considering above SANS 241:2015. the end-use of the areas of concern. Pb (all), Mn (BH6 only), Zn (all), There is an existing groundwater plume from the ammoniacal N (all) elevated above adjacent Ashing area and seeps to the adjacent wetland SAWQG for aquatic species are impacted by surface runoff from this area. No 4- (SAWQG). coal seam is anticipated to be mined some 20 – 100m below the surface. The risk to these workings from the existing plume is outside this scope of work. PV Site B Soil: Cu (in all samples) and As, Pb, Potential sources: A coal discard dump footprint is Mn, and V were locally elevated located to the north-west. Backfilled mine workings above the SSV1 in some samples but have been noted to occur at a depth greater than the 10m less than SSV2 screening levels. assessed by this study. Groundwater: Pb (BH9 only), Mn Receptors to which an exposure pathway may be (BH6 only), SO4 (BH8 and BH6) complete include site workers (human health), residents elevated above SANS 241:2015 and of Komati town, and the environment. SAWQG. Zn (both) > SAWQG Soils are largely not considered to represent a significant source of risk with respect to human health and/or aquatic systems when specifically considering the end-use of the areas of concern but there will, be a requirement to ensure appropriate management of excavations, and especially where these are required within areas proximal to residential dwellings of Komati. Eskom Komati Power Station ESIA and WULA WSP Project No. 41103965 July 2022 Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd Page 21 Area of Summary of concentrations Risk Summary investigation exceeding screening values BESS A Soil: Cu in AH9 elevated above the Area is currently in use with several buildings and SSV1 but less than SSV2 screening contractor’s yards. Samples were therefore obtained levels. Concentrations were all below from the adjacent area. SSV1 in the second sample AH10. Receptors to which an exposure pathway may be Groundwater: No samples complete include site workers (human health) and the environment. Soils are largely not considered to represent a significant source of risk with respect to human health and/or aquatic systems when specifically considering the end-use of the areas of concern. The risk from soils is as indicated above for the general site but visual inspection of this area may be necessary following demolition/ decommissioning to ensure there is no local areas of concern. BESS B Soil: Cu (in all samples), Pb and Mn Potential sources: Most of the area is not in use except locally in BH4 elevated above the for a church located in the south-eastern corner. There SSV1 in some samples but less than is no evidence of a graveyard, but this should be SSV2 screening levels confirmed with Eskom. The church is located within a Groundwater: Fe, Mn > SANS 241- bunker which was historically an old shooting range 2015 aesthetic and there could be spent bullets within the bunker. Mn, Zn > SAWQG Receptors to which an exposure pathway may be complete include site workers (human health). Komati town and the environment, specifically the aquatic environment of the Komati stream. Soils are largely not considered to represent a significant source of risk with respect to human health and/or aquatic systems when specifically considering the end-use of the areas of concern. The risk to the water resources (aquatic and groundwater) are influenced by the surface runoff and groundwater migration from the Ashing Area. BESS C Soil: Cu (in all samples), As, Pb, Mn Potential sources: KPS, Ashing Area (upgradient), and V locally elevated above the scrap yard and a possible temporary hazardous waste SSV1 in some samples but less than facility. SSV2 screening levels. Receptors to which an exposure pathway may be Groundwater: EC, Mn, SO4 > complete include site workers (human health) and the SANS241-2015. environment, specifically the aquatic environment of PO4, Ammoniacal N, Mn, Zn, Pb > the Gelukspruit (and wetland). SAWQG Soils are largely not considered to represent a significant source of risk with respect to human health and/or aquatic systems when specifically considering the end-use of the areas of concern. Ground water quality is affected by contamination migrating from the Ashing Area. BESS D All surface samples were taken from Potential sources: Site is the coal stockyard currently in coal fill. As, Cu, Pb, Zn locally use by KPS. elevated above the SSV1 in some Receptors to which an exposure pathway may be samples but less than SSV2 screening complete include site workers (human health), levels. groundwater users (combined impact from KPS area Sulphate elevated above SSV locally and not solely the coal stockyard) and surface runoff to in AH1. the streams. Soil results downgrade of the coal Soils were not assessed due to the thickness of the coal stockyard and KPS area: Cu (both layer. Based on the information available, soils are samples), As, Mn and Pb (AH4 only) largely not considered to represent a significant source Groundwater: Fe (BH2 only and not of risk with respect to human health and/or aquatic downgrade), Mn and ammonical N systems when specifically considering the end-use of (both and higher on boundary of KPS the areas of concern. The groundwater is affected by site in BH1), both the upgradient groundwater plume and the coal Eskom monitoring sites also show stock yard itself. There is a limited risk to groundwater elevated Mn in boreholes in coal users, but it is understood that the groundwater plume is stockyard and on boundary. SO4 Eskom Komati Power Station ESIA and WULA WSP Project No. 41103965 July 2022 Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd Page 22 Area of Summary of concentrations Risk Summary investigation exceeding screening values higher than SANS241-2015 and WSP the focus of a pending comprehensive groundwater borehole results. Pb, Mn, Zn > model, SAWQG However, when considering the approach to assessment as defined by the Framework for the Management of Contaminated Land and taking cognisance of the CSM, the magnitude of impact is largely not considered to represent a significant source of risk with respect to human health and/or aquatic systems when specifically considering the end-use of the areas of concern. There will, however, be a requirement to ensure appropriate management of excavations, and especially where these are required within areas proximal to residential dwellings of Komati. Further, although contributory impacts to groundwater contamination is evident at the Coal Stockyard (BESS D), this source will be removed during the decommissioning of this facility. Outside of the two PV and four BESS sites covered by this document, a potentially significant contamination has been highlighted proximal the fuel depot to the north of KPS in relation to the concentration of benzo(a)pyrene in shallow soils and Eskom should ensure that appropriate assessment is undertaken to inform relevant corrective actions. The NEM: WA provides the following definition of ‘contaminated’: “the presence in or under any land, site, buildings or structures of a substance or micro-organism above the concentration that is normally present in or under that land, which substance or micro- organism directly or indirectly affects or may affect the quality of soil or the environment adversely ” Therefore, and taking cognisance of Section 37(2) of the NEM: WA, it is WSP’s opinion that the proposed development areas would likely be regarded as ‘contaminated’ based on definition, with certain determinants clearly being above a ‘normal’ level. However, recognising the outcomes of the risk assessment, in terms of Section 38(1)(c) of the NEM: WA it is also considered likely that the demonstrated contamination specific to these areas “does not present an immediate risk, but that measures are required to address the monitoring and management of that risk”. As stated above, contaminated groundwater from the Ashing Area has been shown to extend to the north towards the Koringspruit. WSP understands that this is currently under investigation with an updated groundwater model in progress. The potential impact from future undermining of the PV Site A should be considered as part of this study and this may influence the planned remediation of the groundwater plume. The preliminary nature of this report is again stressed. WSP understands that further geotechnical investigations are planned by Eskom. Additional and more comprehensive intrusive works will almost certainly be necessary to validate the findings herein as well as to prepare a Site Assessment Report (SAR) for authority submission. This may need to be a consolidated submission to the DFFE covering the entirety of the Eskom premises and, as such, liaison with the authorities at the earliest opportunity is recommended. In this regard attention is also drawn to the implications of existing environmental authorisations (i.e. WUL and WML) within the areas of proposed development that will likely require separate management to the process applicable to Part 8 of the NEM: WA (i.e. provision for a Remediation Order). Eskom Komati Power Station ESIA and WULA WSP Project No. 41103965 July 2022 Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd Page 23 APPENDIX FIGURES CB49 KEY MAP LEGEND CB50 Kori n gspru i t CB09 Census 2008 BB20 LIM / CB52 Census 2019 NW MP FS KZN / CB51 NC + Site monitoring boreholes PB48 / EC PB60 PB08 WC Komati Power Station 56 IS Municipalitysewerage works Coal Stock Yard KPS AB47 Fuel Oil Transfer Municipality sewerage works Kom Fuel Depot AB05 Salvage Yard Goodhope No. 4 Seam at Water Plant i sp Proposed Infrastructure ru Chemical Services it Seep_2 Engen Waste Oils AB07 Kroonfontein UG (Ash filled) Church Hazardous Kroonfontein UG (Slurry filled) Scrap Yard Waste AB53 Storage Rivers - Perennial KPS CVB Ge Coal Discard Dump l uk spr Rivers - Non perennial AB54 u it AB06 Ash RWD Kori Wetland delineation Komati Town AB57 AB04 ngs prui AB55 t Channelled valley-bottom Clean Water Dam (AP02) Depression AB03 RWD AB56 Seep Blinkplan police station AB02 AB61 Raw Water Dams AB62 Lined New Ash Dam Old Ash Dams (1-3) Soil PATH: S:\GISS\Gis Projects\22521869_ Eskom Komati PS Hydrogeological Investigation\MXD\2022\Jul22\Contaminated land maps\22521869_Fig2_LocalityPlan_A3L.mxd PRINTED ON: 2022-08-16 AT: 12:09:58 PM AB63 Asbestos waste site BB22 BB21 Seep_1 Farmer's Crop Lands BB23 IF THIS MEASUREMENT DOES NOT MATCH WHAT IS SHOWN, THE SHEET SIZE HAS BEEN MODIFIED FROM: ISO A3 Historical Ash Dam Footprint AB01 0 200 400 600 Rehabilitated Domestic 1:15,000 METERS Waste Site NOTE(S) Depression AB58 AB59 REFERENCE(S) COORDINATE SYSTEM: WGS LO29 SERVICE LAYER CREDITS: CLIENT ESKOM PROJECT BB25 ESKOM KOMATI PV ESIA BB24 BB26 TITLE BB27 FIGURE 2: LOCALITY PLAN CONSULTANT YYYY-MM-DD 8/16/2022 25mm DESIGNED MB PREPARED MB REVIEWED SS APPROVED SS PROJECT NO. CONTROL REV. FIGURE 41103965 0 0 0 29 .4528 161 1615 KEY MAP LEGEND -26 .08034 -26 .08034 0 1585 1605 Koringspru LIM + New boreholes / it 1600 NW MP + Auger boreholes / NC FS KZN + Site monitoring boreholes / EC Contours (5m) WC BH1 Komati Power Station 56 IS Lake Finn KPS AH4 Municipality sewerage works 1590 BESS D AH1 Proposed Infrastructure 159 + Broodsnyders Farm 5 BH2 R35 Kroonfontein UG (Ash filled) , AH2 Municipal Sewerage works / Lake Stoffel 1610 + , AH3 Kroonfontein UG (Slurry filled) 5 AH5 159 Main road AH6 16 + Goodehoep Colliery 30 Rivers - Perennial Ko , 16 AH24 25 Rivers - Non perennial m BESS A at 1600 AH7 i sp BH4 AH9 16 BESS C ru BH10 20 AH8 it 16 AH11 BESS B BH3 15 AH25 1605 Church AH10 AH23 AH12 Ge l uk AH13 spr AH19 u it BH9 + / , 10 Komati Town AH14 16 1615 0 BH5 162 PV Site B PATH: S:\GISS\Gis Projects\22521869_ Eskom Komati PS Hydrogeological Investigation\MXD\2022\Jul22\Contaminated land maps\22521869_Fig5_FieldInvestigation_A3L.mxd PRINTED ON: 2022-08-16 AT: 11:11:39 AM Blinkplan police station / + , 1625 BH6 AH22 + Koornfontein School , BH7 30 16 AH16 AH17 IF THIS MEASUREMENT DOES NOT MATCH WHAT IS SHOWN, THE SHEET SIZE HAS BEEN MODIFIED FROM: ISO A3 1635 AH20 16 AH18 15 0 200 400 600 16 40 10 16 + , Geluk Farm NOTE(S) 1:15,000 METERS 16 05 AH15 PV Site A REFERENCE(S) COORDINATE SYSTEM: GCS WGS 1984 SERVICE LAYER CREDITS: AH21 1645 CLIENT ESKOM R542 BH8 1650 PROJECT ESKOM KOMATI PV ESIA TITLE FIGURE 5: FIELD INVESTIGATIONS CONSULTANT YYYY-MM-DD 8/16/2022 25mm DESIGNED MB 55 PREPARED MB 16 REVIEWED SS + Goodehoop Farm 6 0 16 , APPROVED SS PROJECT NO. CONTROL REV. FIGURE 29 .4528 41103965 0 0 0 45000 KEY MAP LEGEND LIM ( Groundwater level (mamsl) ! NW MP Groundwater flow direction Groundwater piezometric contour (mamsl) FS KZN NC EC Komati Power Station 56 IS WC PV Sites BESS Koringspruit River Dam Pan Rivers BH1 (1597 mamsl) ( ! Rivers - Non perennial 8 159 BH2 (1600 mamsl) ( ! 1602 1600 1604 BH4 (1604 mamsl) BH3 (1606 mamsl) BH10 (1602 mamsl) ( ! 1606 ! ( ( ! 1608 BH9 (1610 mamsl) 1610 ( ! 1612 1614 BH5 (1617 mamsl) 1616 ( ! PATH: S:\GISS\Gis Projects\22521869_ Eskom Komati PS Hydrogeological Investigation\MXD\2022\Jul22\Contaminated land maps\22521869_Fig6_GW_Piezometric_A3L.mxd PRINTED ON: 2022-07-21 AT: 7:20:10 PM 1618 1620 BH6 (1624 mamsl) 1622 1624 BH7 (1629 mamsl) ( ! 1626 ! ( 1628 1630 IF THIS MEASUREMENT DOES NOT MATCH WHAT IS SHOWN, THE SHEET SIZE HAS BEEN MODIFIED FROM: ISO A3 1632 1634 0 300 600 900 1636 1638 1:18,000 METERS NOTE(S) 1640 1642 1644 REFERENCE(S) COORDINATE SYSTEM: WGS LO29 SERVICE LAYER CREDITS: SOURCE: ESRI, MAXAR, EARTHSTAR GEOGRAPHICS, AND THE 1646 GIS USER COMMUNITY BH8 (1650 mamsl) CLIENT ! ( ESKOM PROJECT ESKOM KOMATI PV ESIA TITLE FIGURE 6: PIEZOMETRIC MAP CONSULTANT YYYY-MM-DD 7/13/2022 25mm DESIGNED MB G oe PREPARED MB d eh REVIEWED SS oo -2890000 -2890000 ps APPROVED SS pr ui t PROJECT NO. CONTROL REV. FIGURE 45000 41103965 0 0 0 APPENDIX BACKGROUND GROUNDWATER QUALITY Determinant Unit Ambient Water Quality th AB58 95 Percentile AB59 95th Percentile (October 2011-January 2022) (October 2011-January 2022) pH units 9.1 8.8 EC mS/m 44 29 Arsenic µg/l <10 <10 Total Chromium µg/l 2 2 Hexavalent Chromium mg/l - <2 Copper µg/l 11 2 Total Iron µg/l 10 124 Lead µg/l <4 <4 Manganese µg/l 490 111 Mercury µg/l - <4 Zinc µg/l 10 6.2 Calcium mg/l 25 12 Magnesium mg/l 41 14 Potassium mg/l 15 11 Sodium mg/l 22 17 Silicon µg/l - 316.8 Fluoride mg/l 0.4 0.3 Chloride mg/l 11 10 Sulphate mg/l 21 8 Nitrate as N mg/l 1.1 1.4 Ortho Phosphate as P mg/l 0.02 0.02 Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N mg/l 1.57 1.09 Total Alkalinity as CaCO3 mg/l 253 122 TDS mg/l - 148 APPENDIX SERVICE CLEARANCE REPORT Unit 20 30 Surprise Road Maxmead, 3610 South Africa Tel: +27 21 556 6680 Cell: +27 61 190 0644 Email: info@hydrometrix.co.za 10 June 2022 UTILITIES SURVEY REPORT ESKOM – KOMATI POWER STATION INTRODUCTION Hydrometrix Technologies was appointed by WSP Group PTY Ltd to clear borehole and auger positions as well as survey borehole positions at the Eskom Komati power station in Mpumalanga. The purpose of the survey was to identify buried utilities and depths around proposed drill positions. Site work was completed on 08 June 2022. The survey area as per image 1 below. ESKOM KOMATI POWER STATION SERVICES DETECTION METHODLOGY Detection of various underground services within the target area is conducted in the following manner: • Electrical and Telkom cables, steel pipes and other conductive utilities: A combination of an electromagnetic transmitter and receiver is used, inducing a signal onto the utility by means of: o Direct Connection at valves, lamp post etc.; o Clamping inside Telkom chambers, electrical substations etc. if accessible; o Induction scan where no contact points on services are available. • Storm Water and Sewer lines: These types of services are located by gaining access at points such as manholes, kerb inlets etc. A self-containing sonde is propelled down the pipe using a fibre flex rod. The sonde transmits a signal, which enables the operator to locate the exact position and depth of the sonde from above ground by using a receiver. • Non-metallic pipes and other non-conductive services: Non-metallic utilities, such as AC water mains and fibre optic cables, are located by means of Ground Penetrating radar (GPR). By scanning the servitude with GPR, changes in ground conductivity are detected. The alignment of several positions of this nature usually indicates the existence of non-metallic services. GPR will only be used to locate services that could not be located by means of electromagnetic methods. Note: Positive ground penetrating radar results are dependent on good soil conditions. If soil conditions are not favourable to good results, this will be noted by the contractor in the survey report. Utility line are drawn on the survey report with colour coding unique to each utility type: Type of Utility Colour Coding Electrical Cables RED Water Pipes BLUE Telkom and Fibre Optic Cables ORANGE Storm Water Pipes PURPLE Sewer Pipes GREEN Product Lines Yellow Unknown Utilities PINK SURVEY RESULTS UTILITY LAYOUTS Image 1: Auger Hole 01 Image 2: Auger Hole 02 Image 3: Auger Hole 03 Image 4: Auger Hole 04 Image 5: Auger Hole 05 Image 6: Auger Hole 06 Image 7: Auger Hole 07 Image 8: Auger Hole 08 Image 9: Auger Hole 11 Image 10: Auger Hole 12 Image 11: Auger Hole 14 Image 12: Auger Hole 15 Image 13: Auger Hole 16 Image 14: Auger Hole 17 Image 15: Auger Hole 18 Image 16: Auger Hole 19 Image 17: Auger Hole 20 Image 18: Auger Hole 21 Image 19: Auger Hole 23 Image 20: Auger Hole 24 Image 21: Borehole 01 Image 22: Borehole 02 Image 23: Borehole 03 Image 24: Borehole 04 Image 25: Borehole 05 Image 26: Borehole 06 Image 27: Borehole 07 Image 28: Borehole 08 Image 29: Borehole 09 Image 30: Borehole 10 APPENDIX EXPLORATORY HOLE LOGS CORE RECOVERY & ROCK QUALITY KEY TO SYMBOLS ON EXPLORATORY HOLE RECORDS IDENTIFIER DESCRIPTION SAMPLES, FIELD TESTS, TCR Total Core Recovery (%) MEASUREMENTS & RESULTS SCR Solid Core Recovery (%) TYPE DESCRIPTION RQD Rock Quality Designation (%) B Bulk sample (disturbed) UCS Unconfined Compressive Strengths (kN/m2) BLK Block sample FI Fracture Index (discontinuities per metre): NI – non intact, NR – no CORE Core sample recovery, NA – non applicable. CBR California Bearing Ratio mould sample GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS D Small tub sample (disturbed) SYMBOL DESCRIPTION ES Environmental soil sample Groundwater strike EW Environmental water sample Groundwater level after defined standing period G Gas sample SOIL AND ROCK SYMBOLS SPT Standard Penetration Test (COMBINED AS NECESSARY) Standard Penetration Test – solid 60O (C) cone PATTERN DESCRIPTION (S) Standard Penetration Test – Split Spoon Ash ‘x’ blows required to drive 0.3m after N=‘x’ seating Boulders and Cobbles N=‘x’/‘y’ ‘x’ blows for ‘y’ metres within the SPT Breccia Undisturbed sample of specified U ‘x’ diameter ‘x’ Chalk ‘x’ ‘x’ blows required to drive ‘U’ tube 0.45m blows Clay HSV Hand Shear Vane test in kN/m2 Coal P(F),(P) Piston sample, F – not recovered, P – partially recovered Concrete / Brick P.Pen Hand Pocket Penetrometer test in kN/m 2 Conglomerate PID Photo-Ionisation Detector test in ppm Gravel NVT No Valid Test Calcrete / Gypsum wsp.com Igneous (coarse grained) INSTALLATION, INSTRUMENTATION & BACKFILL DETAILS Igneous (fine grained) (COMBINED AS NECESSARY) Igneous (medium grained) PATTERN DESCRIPTION Limestone Plain pipe with concrete surround Made Ground Plain pipe with bentonite seal Metamorphic (massive) Slotted pipe with inert surround and Metamorphic (schistose) filter sock (where necessary) Vibrating Wire Piezometer Cable with Metamorphic (banded) bentonite seal Vibrating Wire Piezometer Tip with Mudstone sand surround Peat Arisings Sand NOTES AND GENERAL REMARKS FOR Sandstone INTERPRETATION OF EXPLORATORY HOLE RECORDS Shale 1 Soil and rock descriptions are primarily based on Silt observable materials recovered only 2 Lithostratigraphic classifications (groups, formations Siltstone etc.) are assigned based on a combination of the available geological map/s, visual observations and the Tarmac descriptions reported alongside professional judgement Topsoil Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG AH01 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 02-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.471 Hand Auger R. Netshirembe N -26.087 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) MADE GROUND: Slightly moist black GRAVEL of subangular to subrounded fine to coarse coal. <0.1 (1.00) MG 1.00 1.00 ES <0.1 End of Exploratory Hole END 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Elevation not surveyed; position digitised by eye only. 2. Groundwater not encountered. Scale 1:12.5 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG AH02 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 02-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.471 Hand Auger R. Netshirembe N -26.088 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) MADE GROUND: Slightly moist black GRAVEL of subangular to subrounded fine to coarse coal. <0.1 (1.00) MG 1.00 1.00 ES <0.1 End of Exploratory Hole END 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Elevation not surveyed; position digitised by eye only. 2. Groundwater not encountered. Scale 1:12.5 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG AH03 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 02-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.472 Hand Auger R. Netshirembe N -26.088 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) MADE GROUND: Slightly moist black GRAVEL of subangular to subrounded fine to coarse coal. <0.1 (1.00) MG 1.00 1.00 ES <0.1 End of Exploratory Hole END 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Elevation not surveyed; position digitised by eye only. 2. Groundwater not encountered. Scale 1:12.5 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG AH04 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 03-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.471 Hand Auger R. Netshirembe N -26.086 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) MADE GROUND: Moist dark brown clayey SAND. (0.30) MG 0.30 <0.1 Moist orange-brown clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.80) VF <0.1 1.10 1.10 ES End of Exploratory Hole END 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Elevation not surveyed; position digitised by eye only. 2. Groundwater not encountered. Scale 1:12.5 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG AH05 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 03-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.474 Hand Auger R. Netshirembe N -26.089 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) MADE GROUND: Brick. (0.20) MG 0.20 Moist (firm) orange to red sandy CLAY [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 (0.60) VF 0.80 0.80 ES <0.1 End of Exploratory Hole END 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Elevation not surveyed; position digitised by eye only. 2. Groundwater not encountered. Scale 1:12.5 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG AH06 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 03-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.474 Hand Auger R. Netshirembe N -26.089 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) MADE GROUND: Brick. (0.20) MG 0.20 Moist (firm) orange to red sandy CLAY [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 (0.60) VF 0.80 Moist (firm) orange to red mottled grey sandy CLAY [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.70) VF 1.50 1.50 ES <0.1 End of Exploratory Hole END 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Elevation not surveyed; position digitised by eye only. 2. Groundwater not encountered. Scale 1:12.5 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG AH07 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 02-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.476 Hand Auger R. Netshirembe N -26.091 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) MADE GROUND: Slightly moist brown gravelly SAND. Gravel is angular to subangular fine to coarse weathered shale. (0.30) MG 0.30 0.30 ES <0.1 Exploratory Hole Terminated due to Refusal END 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Elevation not surveyed; position digitised by eye only. 2. Groundwater not encountered. Scale 1:12.5 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG AH08 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 03-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.476 Hand Auger R. Netshirembe N -26.092 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) MADE GROUND: Moist brown gravelly SAND. Gravel is angular to subangular fine to coarse weathered shale. (0.50) MG 0.50 <0.1 Slightly moist orange-brown clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.60) VF <0.1 1.10 1.10 ES End of Exploratory Hole END 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Elevation not surveyed; position digitised by eye only. 2. Groundwater not encountered. Scale 1:12.5 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG AH09 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 04-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.470 Hand Auger R. Netshirembe N -26.092 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) Moist (firm) red-brown sandy CLAY [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.50) VF 0.50 <0.1 Moist red mottled brown clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.80) VF <0.1 1.30 1.30 ES <0.1 End of Exploratory Hole END 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Elevation not surveyed; position digitised by eye only. 2. Groundwater not encountered. Scale 1:12.5 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG AH10 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 04-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.470 Hand Auger R. Netshirembe N -26.092 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) Moist (firm) red-brown sandy CLAY [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.50) VF 0.50 <0.1 Moist red clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.60) VF <0.1 1.10 1.10 ES End of Exploratory Hole END 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Elevation not surveyed; position digitised by eye only. 2. Groundwater not encountered. Scale 1:12.5 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG AH11 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 02-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.467 Hand Auger R. Netshirembe N -26.092 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) Moist (firm) red-brown sandy CLAY [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.50) VF 0.50 <0.1 Moist red clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.50) VF 1.00 <0.1 End of Exploratory Hole END 1.50 ES 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Elevation not surveyed; position digitised by eye only. 2. Groundwater not encountered. Scale 1:12.5 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG AH12 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 02-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.467 Hand Auger R. Netshirembe N -26.093 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) Moist (firm) red-brown sandy CLAY [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.50) VF 0.50 <0.1 Moist red clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.50) VF 1.00 <0.1 End of Exploratory Hole END 1.50 ES 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Elevation not surveyed; position digitised by eye only. 2. Groundwater not encountered. Scale 1:12.5 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG AH13 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 04-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.474 Hand Auger R. Netshirembe N -26.095 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) Moist (firm) dark brown to black sandy CLAY [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.60) VF <0.1 0.60 0.60 ES Exploratory Hole Terminated due to Refusal END 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Elevation not surveyed; position digitised by eye only. 2. Groundwater not encountered. Scale 1:12.5 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG AH14 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 04-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.478 Hand Auger R. Netshirembe N -26.097 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) MADE GROUND: Moist grey ASH. (0.50) MG 0.50 <0.1 Moist (firm to stiff) orange-brown sandy CLAY [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.60) VF <0.1 1.10 1.10 ES End of Exploratory Hole END 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Elevation not surveyed; position digitised by eye only. 2. Groundwater not encountered. Scale 1:12.5 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG AH15 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 04-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.471 Hand Auger R. Netshirembe N -26.108 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) Moist dark brown clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.60) VF <0.1 0.60 Moist light brown clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.40) VF 1.00 1.00 ES <0.1 End of Exploratory Hole END 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Elevation not surveyed; position digitised by eye only. 2. Groundwater not encountered. Scale 1:12.5 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG AH16 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 04-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.463 Hand Auger R. Netshirembe N -26.102 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) Slightly moist orange to red clayey SAND with occasional weathered ferricrete nodules [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.30) VF 0.30 0.30 ES <0.1 Exploratory Hole Terminated due to Refusal END 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Elevation not surveyed; position digitised by eye only. 2. Groundwater not encountered. Scale 1:12.5 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG AH17 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 04-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.463 Hand Auger R. Netshirembe N -26.103 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) Moist dark brown clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.40) VF 0.40 <0.1 Moist light brown mottled red clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.40) VF 0.80 0.80 ES <0.1 Exploratory Hole Terminated due to Refusal END 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Elevation not surveyed; position digitised by eye only. 2. Groundwater not encountered. Scale 1:12.5 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG AH18 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 04-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.468 Hand Auger R. Netshirembe N -26.106 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) Moist dark brown clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.50) VF 0.50 <0.1 Moist light brown mottled red clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 (1.20) VF <0.1 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 1.70 1.70 ES End of Exploratory Hole END Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Elevation not surveyed; position digitised by eye only. 2. Groundwater not encountered. Scale 1:12.5 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG AH19 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 04-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.471 Hand Auger R. Netshirembe N -26.095 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) Moist orange to red mottled grey clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.50) VF 0.50 <0.1 Moist orange to grey clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.70) VF 1.00 ES <0.1 1.20 End of Exploratory Hole END 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Elevation not surveyed; position digitised by eye only. 2. Groundwater not encountered. Scale 1:12.5 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG AH20 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 03-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.453 Hand Auger R. Netshirembe N -26.105 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) Moist dark brown clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 (1.00) VF 1.00 <0.1 Moist light brown clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.60) VF <0.1 1.60 END 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 1.60 ES End of Exploratory Hole Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Elevation not surveyed; position digitised by eye only. 2. Groundwater not encountered. Scale 1:12.5 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG AH21 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 04-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.463 Hand Auger R. Netshirembe N -26.110 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) Moist dark brown clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.50) VF 0.50 <0.1 Moist brown to red SAND with occasional weathered ferricrete nodules [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.70) VF <0.1 1.20 1.20 ES End of Exploratory Hole END 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Elevation not surveyed; position digitised by eye only. 2. Groundwater not encountered. Scale 1:12.5 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG AH22 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 04-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.452 Hand Auger R. Netshirembe N -26.101 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) Moist dark brown clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 (1.00) VF 1.00 1.00 ES <0.1 End of Exploratory Hole END 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Elevation not surveyed; position digitised by eye only. 2. Groundwater not encountered. Scale 1:12.5 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG AH23 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 03-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.450 Hand Auger R. Netshirembe N -26.094 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) MADE GROUND: Moist (firm to stiff) dark brown gravelly CLAY. Gravel is angular to subangular fine to coarse weathered shale [Suspected Reworked/Transported Natural Material]. (0.50) MG 0.50 <0.1 Moist (firm) orange to brown sandy CLAY with occasional weathered ferricrete nodules [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.60) VF <0.1 1.10 1.10 ES End of Exploratory Hole END 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing 0.50 Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Elevation not surveyed; position digitised by eye only. 2. Seepage at 0.5m bgl. Scale 1:12.5 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG AH24 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 03-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.459 Hand Auger R. Netshirembe N -26.091 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) MADE GROUND: Moist dark brown gravelly SAND. Gravel is angular to subangular medium to coarse weathered sandstone [Suspected Reworked/Transported Natural Material]. (0.50) MG 0.50 <0.1 Moist (firm) orange to brown sandy CLAY with occasional weathered ferricrete nodules [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.60) VF <0.1 1.10 1.10 ES End of Exploratory Hole END 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing 0.50 Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Elevation not surveyed; position digitised by eye only. 2. Seepage at 0.5m bgl. Scale 1:12.5 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG AH25 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 03-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.452 Hand Auger R. Netshirembe N -26.093 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) MADE GROUND: Moist dark brown gravelly SAND. Gravel is angular to subangular medium to coarse weathered sandstone [Suspected Reworked/Transported Natural Material]. (0.50) MG 0.50 <0.1 Moist (firm) orange to brown sandy CLAY with occasional weathered ferricrete nodules [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (0.80) VF <0.1 1.30 1.30 ES <0.1 End of Exploratory Hole END 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing 0.50 Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Elevation not surveyed; position digitised by eye only. 2. Seepage at 0.5m bgl. Scale 1:12.5 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG BH01 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 02-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.471 Air Percussion R. Netshirembe N -26.085 1598.742 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology 50 Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) Moist orange-brown clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 (1.00) VF 1597.74 1.00 <0.1 Wet black slightly gravelly clayey SAND. Gravel is subangular to subrounded fine to coarse coal [Probable Weathered VRYHEID <0.1 FORMATION]. 1.50 ES <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 (6.00) VF <0.1 <0.1 1591.74 7.00 <0.1 Wet pale brown mottled black clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 (3.00) VF 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 1588.74 10.00 End of Exploratory Hole END Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing 7.00 Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Seepage at 7m bgl. Scale 1:68.75 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG BH02 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 02-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.471 Air Percussion R. Netshirembe N -26.087 1601.869 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology 50 Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) MADE GROUND: Moist black GRAVEL of subangular to subrounded fine to coarse coal. <0.1 (1.50) MG 1.00 ES <0.1 1600.37 1.50 <0.1 Moist orange-brown mottled black clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 (1.00) VF 1599.37 2.50 <0.1 Moist orange-brown clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (2.50) VF <0.1 1596.87 5.00 <0.1 Moist pale brown silty SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 <0.1 (4.00) VF <0.1 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 1592.87 9.00 <0.1 Moist grey to black silty SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. (1.00) VF 1591.87 10.00 <0.1 End of Exploratory Hole END Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing 8.00 Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Seepage at 8m bgl. Scale 1:68.75 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG BH03 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 02-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.477 Air Percussion R. Netshirembe N -26.092 1607.060 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology 50 Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) MADE GROUND: Moist brown SAND. MG 1606.56 0.50 <0.1 Moist orange-brown clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 (1.50) VF 1.50 ES <0.1 1605.06 2.00 <0.1 Moist pale orange silty SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 (3.00) VF <0.1 1602.06 5.00 <0.1 Moist light brown silty SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 <0.1 (5.00) VF <0.1 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 <0.1 1597.06 10.00 <0.1 End of Exploratory Hole END Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing 8.00 Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks Scale 1:68.75 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG BH04 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 01-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.467 Air Percussion R. Netshirembe N -26.092 1605.338 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology 50 Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) Moist (firm) red-brown sandy CLAY [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. VF 1604.84 0.50 <0.1 Moist becoming wet red mottled brown clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. 1.00 ES <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 (5.50) VF <0.1 <0.1 1599.34 6.00 <0.1 End of Exploratory Hole END 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing 1.50 Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks Scale 1:68.75 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG BH05 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 31-05-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.480 Air Percussion R. Netshirembe N -26.098 1618.645 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology 50 Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) MADE GROUND: Moist grey ASH. MG 1618.15 0.50 <0.1 MADE GROUND: Red brown and grey sandy GRAVEL of angular to subrounded fine to coarse brick and concrete. <0.1 (1.00) MG 1617.15 1.50 1.50 ES <0.1 Moist red to brown clayey SAND with frequent weathered ferricrete nodules [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 (2.50) VF <0.1 1614.65 4.00 <0.1 Wet brown clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 (6.00) VF <0.1 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 <0.1 1608.65 10.00 <0.1 End of Exploratory Hole END Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing 4.00 Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Hole collapsed from 6 - 10 m bgl. Scale 1:68.75 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG BH06 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 31-05-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.465 Air Percussion R. Netshirembe N -26.101 1625.457 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology 50 Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) MADE GROUND: Moist grey ASH. MG 1624.96 0.50 <0.1 Moist (firm to stiff) orange-brown sandy CLAY [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 (1.50) VF 1.50 ES <0.1 1623.46 2.00 <0.1 Moist red-brown clayey SAND with occasional ferricrete nodules [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 (2.00) VF 1621.46 4.00 <0.1 Wet pale brown silty SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 (6.00) VF <0.1 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 <0.1 1615.46 10.00 <0.1 End of Exploratory Hole END Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing 4.00 Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Seepage at 4m bgl. Scale 1:68.75 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG BH07 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 01-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.457 Air Percussion R. Netshirembe N -26.102 1630.761 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology 50 Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) Moist dark brown clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 (1.00) VF 1629.76 1.00 <0.1 Moist light brown clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 (1.00) VF 1628.76 2.00 2.00 ES <0.1 Moist light brown silty SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 (8.00) VF <0.1 <0.1 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 <0.1 1620.76 10.00 <0.1 End of Exploratory Hole END Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Groundwater not encountered. Scale 1:68.75 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG BH08 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 01-06-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.470 Air Percussion R. Netshirembe N -26.111 1650.798 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology 50 Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) Moist dark brown clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 (1.00) VF 1649.80 1.00 1.00 ES <0.1 Moist light brown clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 (1.00) VF 1648.80 2.00 <0.1 Moist light brown silty SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 (8.00) VF <0.1 <0.1 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 <0.1 1640.80 10.00 <0.1 End of Exploratory Hole END Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Groundwater not encountered. Scale 1:68.75 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG BH09 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 31-05-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.450 Air Percussion R. Netshirembe N -26.095 1611.041 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology 50 Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) MADE GROUND: Moist (firm) dark brown gravelly CLAY. Gravel is angular to subangular fine to coarse weathered shale [Suspected MG 1610.54 0.50 <0.1 Reworked/Transported Natural Material]. Moist (firm) light orange to brown sandy CLAY with occasional ferricrete nodules [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 (1.50) VF 1.50 ES <0.1 1609.04 2.00 <0.1 Moist (firm) light orange sandy CLAY [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 (2.00) VF 1607.04 4.00 <0.1 Moist becoming wet light brown clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 (6.00) VF <0.1 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 <0.1 1601.04 10.00 <0.1 End of Exploratory Hole END Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing 7.00 Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks Scale 1:68.75 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. Hole No. BOREHOLE LOG BH10 WSP Group Africa (Pty) Ltd Building C, Knightsbridge, Project Sheet 33 Sloane Street, Bryanston, 2191 Telephone: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1301 Komati Solar PV & BESS ESIA 1 of 1 Job No Client Date 41103965 Eskom Holdings SOC Limited 30-05-22 Contractor / Driller Method/Plant Used Logged By Co-Ordinates (DEC) Ground Level (m AOD) Soil & Groundwater E 29.456 Air Percussion R. Netshirembe N -26.092 1602.403 Remediation Services Install / SAMPLES & TESTS STRATA Backfill Depth (kN/m2) (kN/m2) Dia. (ppmV) P.Pen Water Test Elev. HSV PID Depth Type Description Legend Geology 50 Result (mAOD) (Thick mm -ness) MADE GROUND: Moist (firm) dark brown gravelly CLAY. Gravel is angular to subangular fine to coarse weathered shale [Suspected MG 1601.90 0.50 <0.1 Reworked/Transported Natural Material]. Moist (firm) light orange to brown sandy CLAY with occasional ferricrete nodules [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 (1.50) VF 1.50 ES <0.1 1600.40 2.00 <0.1 Moist (firm) light orange sandy CLAY [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 (2.00) VF 1598.40 4.00 <0.1 Moist light brown clayey SAND [Probable Weathered VRYHEID FORMATION]. <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 (6.00) VF <0.1 08 WSP BH LOG 41103965-GINT LOGS.GPJ WSPETEMPLATE1.03.GDT 21/07/22 <0.1 1592.40 10.00 <0.1 End of Exploratory Hole END Boring Progress Water Strikes Date Time Depth Casing Dpt Dia. (mm) Water Dpt Date Time Strike Minutes Standing Casing 2.00 Chiselling Water Added From To Hours Tool From To General Remarks 1. Seepage at 2m bgl. Scale 1:68.75 Notes: All dimensions in metres. Logs should be read in accordance with the provided Key. Descriptions are based on visual and manual identification. APPENDIX CERTIFICATES OF ANALYSIS Element Materials Technology Unit D2 & D5 9 Quantum Road Firgrove Business Park W: www.element.com Somerset West 7130 South Africa WSP Group Africa Building C, Knightsbridge 33 Sloane Street Bryanston Johannesburg Gauteng South Africa 2191 Attention : Noma Nyoka Date : 17th June, 2022 Your reference : Our reference : Test Report 22/528 Batch 1 Location : Eskom Komati Project Date samples received : 7th June, 2022 Status : Final report Issue : 1 Thirty five samples were received for analysis on 7th June, 2022 of which thirty five were scheduled for analysis. Please find attached our Test Report which should be read with notes at the end of the report and should include all sections if reproduced. Interpretations and opinions are outside the scope of any accreditation, and all results relate only to samples supplied. All analysis is carried out on as received samples and reported on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. Results are not surrogate corrected. Analysis was undertaken at either Element Materials Technology UK, which is ISO 17025 accredited under UKAS (4225) or Element Materials Technology (SA) which is ISO 17025 accredited under SANAS (T0729) or a subcontract laboratory where specified. NOTE: Under International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC), ISO 17025 (UKAS) accreditation is recognised as equivalent to SANAS (South Africa) accreditation. Authorised By: Organics Laboratory: Inorganics Laboratory: Debbie van Wyk Greg Ondrejkovic Greg Ondrejkovic Technical Supervisor Technical Supervisor Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced Element Materials Technology South Africa (Pty) Limited Registered Office: Unit D2/D5, 9 Quantum Road, Firgrove Business Park, Somerset West, Western Cape, 7130, South Africa Company Registration No: 2015/025446/07 1 of 15 Element Materials Technology Client Name: WSP Group Africa Report : Solid Reference: Location: Eskom Komati Project Solids: V=60g VOC jar, J=250g glass jar, T=plastic tub Contact: Noma Nyoka EMT Job No: 22/528 EMT Sample No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Sample ID AH 1 AH 2 AH 3 AH 4 AH 5 AH 6 AH 7 AH 8 AH 9 AH 10 (8) Depth 1M 1M 1M 1.1M 0.8M 1.5M 0.3M 1.1M 1.3M 1.1M Please see attached notes for all abbreviations and acronyms COC No / misc Containers B B B B B B B B B B Sample Date 02/06/2022 02/06/2022 02/06/2022 03/06/2022 03/06/2022 03/06/2022 02/06/2022 03/06/2022 04/06/2022 04/06/2022 Sample Type Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Batch Number 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Method LOD/LOR Units No. Date of Receipt 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 Antimony* 5 2 2 3 5 2 3 2 4 2 <1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Arsenic* 10.0 5.9 4.6 6.8 6.0 4.1 6.1 3.0 5.1 1.6 <0.5 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Cadmium* <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Chromium* 192.9 88.4 81.2 171.8 197.4 81.8 169.6 110.7 190.4 78.8 <0.5 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Cobalt* 25.0 16.5 10.8 32.0 25.2 14.5 25.0 18.5 10.3 7.6 <0.5 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Copper* 33 24 521AB 37 21 19 29 30 29 13 <1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Iron* 51570AB 39370 35070 55880AB 43890 32340 44670 37180 49310 19340 <20 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Lead* 24 15 28 45 30 11 20 7 8 6 <5 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Manganese* 754 663 543 1003 1006 275 1076 445 166 132 <1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Mercury* <0.1 <0.1 0.7 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Nickel* 28.2 33.9 44.4 35.0 25.2 30.3 26.2 39.1 23.1 12.3 <0.7 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Selenium* 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 1 2 <1 <1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Vanadium* 130 62 54 123 81 70 91 77 115 45 <1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Zinc* 42 67 361 33 31 27 33 32 21 12 <5 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 VOC MS Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Vinyl Chloride <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,1-Dichloroethene (1,1 DCE) SA <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 trans-1-2-Dichloroethene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 cis-1-2-Dichloroethene SA <3 <3 17 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Chloroform SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 SA Carbon tetrachloride <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2-Dichloroethane SA <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Benzene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Toluene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Chlorobenzene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 SA Ethylbenzene 3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Xylenes (sum of isomers) <8 <8 <8 <8 <8 <8 <8 <8 <8 <8 <8 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene SA <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,4-Dichlorobenzene SA <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2-Dichlorobenzene SA <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2-Dichloroethene (cis & trans) <6 <6 17 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Trichlorobenzenes (1,2,3 & 1,2,4) <14 <14 <14 <14 <14 <14 <14 <14 <14 <14 <14 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced QF-PM 3.1.2 v11 All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 2 of 15 Element Materials Technology Client Name: WSP Group Africa Report : Solid Reference: Location: Eskom Komati Project Solids: V=60g VOC jar, J=250g glass jar, T=plastic tub Contact: Noma Nyoka EMT Job No: 22/528 EMT Sample No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Sample ID AH 1 AH 2 AH 3 AH 4 AH 5 AH 6 AH 7 AH 8 AH 9 AH 10 (8) Depth 1M 1M 1M 1.1M 0.8M 1.5M 0.3M 1.1M 1.3M 1.1M Please see attached notes for all abbreviations and acronyms COC No / misc Containers B B B B B B B B B B Sample Date 02/06/2022 02/06/2022 02/06/2022 03/06/2022 03/06/2022 03/06/2022 02/06/2022 03/06/2022 04/06/2022 04/06/2022 Sample Type Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Batch Number 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Method LOD/LOR Units No. Date of Receipt 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 SVOC MS Phenols 2-Chlorophenol SA <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM16/SA_PM8 SA 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM16/SA_PM8 PAHs Naphthalene SA 549 <10 <10 <10 <10 47 237 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM16/SA_PM8 Pyrene SA 127 <10 <10 <10 13 78070AC 124 14 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM16/SA_PM8 Benzo(a)pyrene SA 49 <10 <10 <10 <10 26723AC 162 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM16/SA_PM8 Other SVOCs Nitrobenzene SA <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM16/SA_PM8 TPH CWG Aliphatics C7-C9 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 mg/kg SA_TM36/SA_PM12 C10-C14 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 55 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 mg/kg SA_TM5/SA_PM8/PM16 C15-C36 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 1278 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 mg/kg SA_TM5/SA_PM8/PM16 Total aliphatics C7-C36 <12 <12 <12 <12 <12 1333 <12 <12 <12 <12 <12 mg/kg SA_TM5/TM36/SA_PM8/PM12/PM16 PCBs (Total vs Aroclor 1254) <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM17/SA_PM8 Natural Moisture Content 11.1 15.6 58.9 13.1 13.9 16.5 11.9 20.3 24.3 17.7 <0.1 % SA_PM4/SA_PM0 Fluoride 0.8 0.7 1.0 1.0 2.8 2.4 2.0 0.9 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Chloride SA 7 8 21 3 6 5 5 9 3 <2 <2 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Nitrite as NO2 SA 1.8 <0.5 1.9 0.7 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.5 <0.5 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Nitrate as NO3 SA <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Sulphate as SO4 (2:1 Ext) SA 4173AD 286 675AA 1228AC 61 116 512AA 248 217 117 <3 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 SA Nitrite as N 0.5 <0.2 0.6 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Nitrate as N SA <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Hexavalent Chromium* <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 mg/kg UK_TM38/UK_PM20 Chromium III* 192.9 88.4 81.2 171.8 197.4 81.8 169.6 110.7 190.4 78.8 <0.5 mg/kg UK_TM30/TM38/UK_PM15/PM20 Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N 1.4 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 1.5 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Ammoniacal Nitrogen as NH4 1.8 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 1.9 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Total Cyanide* <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 mg/kg UK_TM89/UK_PM45 Electrical Conductivity @25C (5:1 ext) 1224 140 589 374 117 163 300 192 187 <100 <100 uS/cm SA_TM28/SA_PM58 pH SA 7.13 7.29 7.56 7.54 7.92 7.83 7.78 7.76 6.34 5.45 <2.00 pH units SA_TM19/SA_PM11 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced QF-PM 3.1.2 v11 All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 3 of 15 Element Materials Technology Client Name: WSP Group Africa Report : Solid Reference: Location: Eskom Komati Project Solids: V=60g VOC jar, J=250g glass jar, T=plastic tub Contact: Noma Nyoka EMT Job No: 22/528 EMT Sample No. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Sample ID AH 11 AH 12 AH 13 AH 14 AH 15 AH 16 AH 17 AH 18 AH 19 AH 20 Depth 1.5M 1.5M 0.6M 1.1M 1M 0.3M 0.8M 1.7M 1.6M Please see attached notes for all abbreviations and acronyms COC No / misc Containers B B B B B B B B B B Sample Date 03/06/2022 03/06/2022 04/06/2022 04/06/2022 04/06/2022 04/06/2022 04/06/2022 04/06/2022 04/06/2022 03/06/2022 Sample Type Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Batch Number 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Method LOD/LOR Units No. Date of Receipt 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 Antimony* 5 4 3 5 3 5 5 3 3 4 <1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Arsenic* 3.7 3.6 6.4 6.9 13.8 9.2 10.4 5.4 3.9 5.5 <0.5 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Cadmium* <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Chromium* 198.8 142.0 168.4 208.5 77.5 236.8 195.8 134.2 114.1 169.6 <0.5 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Cobalt* 35.5 9.8 31.7 45.8 5.3 25.5 9.4 8.5 24.3 140.5 <0.5 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Copper* 21 20 42 41 246AB 41 56 37 30 30 <1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Iron* 37430 40390 52830AB 79580AB 49030 68330AB 101500AB 56300AB 39520 54470AB <20 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Lead* 19 14 24 49 29 28 15 15 17 100 <5 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Manganese* 421 240 1209 983 121 850 45 66 831 1804 <1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Mercury* 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.9 0.1 0.2 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Nickel* 20.2 16.3 48.3 30.0 10.3 29.1 36.7 30.9 22.6 42.5 <0.7 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Selenium* 2 1 3 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 <1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Vanadium* 85 87 128 169 47 159 177 122 76 92 <1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Zinc* 19 18 38 24 13 30 25 21 24 18 <5 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 VOC MS Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Vinyl Chloride <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,1-Dichloroethene (1,1 DCE) SA <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 trans-1-2-Dichloroethene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 cis-1-2-Dichloroethene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Chloroform SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 SA Carbon tetrachloride <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2-Dichloroethane SA <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Benzene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Toluene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Chlorobenzene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 SA Ethylbenzene <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Xylenes (sum of isomers) <8 <8 <8 <8 <8 <8 <8 <8 <8 <8 <8 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene SA <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,4-Dichlorobenzene SA <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2-Dichlorobenzene SA <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2-Dichloroethene (cis & trans) <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Trichlorobenzenes (1,2,3 & 1,2,4) <14 <14 <14 <14 <14 <14 <14 <14 <14 <14 <14 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced QF-PM 3.1.2 v11 All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 4 of 15 Element Materials Technology Client Name: WSP Group Africa Report : Solid Reference: Location: Eskom Komati Project Solids: V=60g VOC jar, J=250g glass jar, T=plastic tub Contact: Noma Nyoka EMT Job No: 22/528 EMT Sample No. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Sample ID AH 11 AH 12 AH 13 AH 14 AH 15 AH 16 AH 17 AH 18 AH 19 AH 20 Depth 1.5M 1.5M 0.6M 1.1M 1M 0.3M 0.8M 1.7M 1.6M Please see attached notes for all abbreviations and acronyms COC No / misc Containers B B B B B B B B B B Sample Date 03/06/2022 03/06/2022 04/06/2022 04/06/2022 04/06/2022 04/06/2022 04/06/2022 04/06/2022 04/06/2022 03/06/2022 Sample Type Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Batch Number 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Method LOD/LOR Units No. Date of Receipt 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 SVOC MS Phenols 2-Chlorophenol SA <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM16/SA_PM8 SA 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM16/SA_PM8 PAHs Naphthalene SA <10 <10 <10 <10 337 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM16/SA_PM8 Pyrene SA <10 <10 <10 <10 72 19 <10 <10 18 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM16/SA_PM8 Benzo(a)pyrene SA <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM16/SA_PM8 Other SVOCs Nitrobenzene SA <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM16/SA_PM8 TPH CWG Aliphatics C7-C9 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 mg/kg SA_TM36/SA_PM12 C10-C14 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 mg/kg SA_TM5/SA_PM8/PM16 C15-C36 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 mg/kg SA_TM5/SA_PM8/PM16 Total aliphatics C7-C36 <12 <12 <12 <12 <12 <12 <12 <12 <12 <12 <12 mg/kg SA_TM5/TM36/SA_PM8/PM12/PM16 PCBs (Total vs Aroclor 1254) <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM17/SA_PM8 Natural Moisture Content 21.7 23.6 14.6 14.7 19.6 8.0 17.1 22.4 14.7 22.7 <0.1 % SA_PM4/SA_PM0 Fluoride <0.3 <0.3 0.4 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 0.4 <0.3 <0.3 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Chloride SA 6 10 33 6 32 6 <2 5 19 7 <2 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Nitrite as NO2 SA <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Nitrate as NO3 SA <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 6.8 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 10.0 <2.5 <2.5 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Sulphate as SO4 (2:1 Ext) SA 311 185 534AA 338 4302AD 412 54 172 2723AD 51 <3 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 SA Nitrite as N <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Nitrate as N SA <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Hexavalent Chromium* <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 mg/kg UK_TM38/UK_PM20 Chromium III* 198.8 142.0 168.4 208.5 77.5 236.8 195.8 134.2 114.1 169.6 <0.5 mg/kg UK_TM30/TM38/UK_PM15/PM20 Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Ammoniacal Nitrogen as NH4 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Total Cyanide* <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 mg/kg UK_TM89/UK_PM45 Electrical Conductivity @25C (5:1 ext) 158 109 287 194 2640 222 <100 103 1047 <100 <100 uS/cm SA_TM28/SA_PM58 pH SA 5.48 5.33 6.31 6.60 6.76 6.96 6.59 6.13 7.00 6.92 <2.00 pH units SA_TM19/SA_PM11 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced QF-PM 3.1.2 v11 All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 5 of 15 Element Materials Technology Client Name: WSP Group Africa Report : Solid Reference: Location: Eskom Komati Project Solids: V=60g VOC jar, J=250g glass jar, T=plastic tub Contact: Noma Nyoka EMT Job No: 22/528 EMT Sample No. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Sample ID AH 21 AH 22 AH 23 AH 24 AH 25 BH 1 BH 2 BH 3 BH 4 BH 5 Depth 1.2M 1M 1.1M 1.1M 1.3M 1.5M 1M 1.5M 1M 1.5M Please see attached notes for all abbreviations and acronyms COC No / misc Containers B B B B B B B B B B Sample Date 04/06/2022 04/06/2022 03/06/2022 03/06/2022 03/06/2022 02/06/2022 02/06/2022 02/06/2022 01/06/2022 31/05/2022 Sample Type Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Batch Number 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Method LOD/LOR Units No. Date of Receipt 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 Antimony* <5AB <5AB <5AB 2 3 2 <1 <5AB 3 <5AB <1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Arsenic* 28.6 14.0 14.8 2.6 4.5 3.2 3.5 7.6 3.0 9.3 <0.5 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Cadmium* <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Chromium* 610.3AB 341.6AB 388.9AB 83.6 133.6 86.5 11.0 313.1AB 156.5 301.3AB <0.5 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Cobalt* 103.7 28.2 8.6 66.7 3.9 8.0 5.3 16.5 74.2 38.8 <0.5 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Copper* 99 63 48 20 19 21 14 40 28 47 <1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Iron* 176900AB 127300AB 77500AB 31800 24840 29140 3903 77050AB 36030 88420AB <20 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Lead* 64 25 11 23 <5 <5 16 12 93 24 <5 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Manganese* 885 397 55 1104 21 104 70 238 2680AB 926 <1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Mercury* 0.3 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Nickel* 57.7 43.8 24.5 39.6 12.6 24.8 10.4 40.2 20.0 36.2 <0.7 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Selenium* 3 2 2 1 <1 1 <1 1 1 2 <1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Vanadium* 371AB 247AB 293AB 76 140 71 22 175 97 202 <1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Zinc* 28 22 13 21 9 24 16 21 18 26 <5 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 VOC MS Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Vinyl Chloride <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,1-Dichloroethene (1,1 DCE) SA <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 trans-1-2-Dichloroethene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 cis-1-2-Dichloroethene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Chloroform SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 SA Carbon tetrachloride <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2-Dichloroethane SA <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Benzene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Toluene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Chlorobenzene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 SA Ethylbenzene <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 4 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Xylenes (sum of isomers) <8 <8 <8 <8 <8 <8 <8 <8 <8 <8 <8 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene SA <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,4-Dichlorobenzene SA <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2-Dichlorobenzene SA <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2-Dichloroethene (cis & trans) <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Trichlorobenzenes (1,2,3 & 1,2,4) <14 <14 <14 <14 <14 <14 <14 <14 <14 <14 <14 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced QF-PM 3.1.2 v11 All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 6 of 15 Element Materials Technology Client Name: WSP Group Africa Report : Solid Reference: Location: Eskom Komati Project Solids: V=60g VOC jar, J=250g glass jar, T=plastic tub Contact: Noma Nyoka EMT Job No: 22/528 EMT Sample No. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Sample ID AH 21 AH 22 AH 23 AH 24 AH 25 BH 1 BH 2 BH 3 BH 4 BH 5 Depth 1.2M 1M 1.1M 1.1M 1.3M 1.5M 1M 1.5M 1M 1.5M Please see attached notes for all abbreviations and acronyms COC No / misc Containers B B B B B B B B B B Sample Date 04/06/2022 04/06/2022 03/06/2022 03/06/2022 03/06/2022 02/06/2022 02/06/2022 02/06/2022 01/06/2022 31/05/2022 Sample Type Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Batch Number 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Method LOD/LOR Units No. Date of Receipt 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 SVOC MS Phenols 2-Chlorophenol SA <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM16/SA_PM8 SA 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM16/SA_PM8 PAHs Naphthalene SA <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 934 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM16/SA_PM8 Pyrene SA <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 540 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM16/SA_PM8 Benzo(a)pyrene SA <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 321 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM16/SA_PM8 Other SVOCs Nitrobenzene SA <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM16/SA_PM8 TPH CWG Aliphatics C7-C9 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 mg/kg SA_TM36/SA_PM12 C10-C14 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 mg/kg SA_TM5/SA_PM8/PM16 C15-C36 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 mg/kg SA_TM5/SA_PM8/PM16 Total aliphatics C7-C36 <12 <12 <12 <12 <12 <12 <12 <12 <12 <12 <12 mg/kg SA_TM5/TM36/SA_PM8/PM12/PM16 PCBs (Total vs Aroclor 1254) <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM17/SA_PM8 Natural Moisture Content 10.2 18.4 14.1 16.9 18.7 13.2 7.7 14.6 24.7 15.2 <0.1 % SA_PM4/SA_PM0 Fluoride <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 1.3 0.4 0.4 <0.3 0.3 <0.3 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Chloride SA <2 3 4 6 2 3 2 9 17 74 <2 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Nitrite as NO2 SA <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.9 1.2 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Nitrate as NO3 SA <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 2.6 <2.5 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Sulphate as SO4 (2:1 Ext) SA 448AA 85 88 216 67 56 1997AC 280 34 584AB <3 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 SA Nitrite as N <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.3 0.4 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Nitrate as N SA <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Hexavalent Chromium* <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 mg/kg UK_TM38/UK_PM20 Chromium III* 610.3AB 341.6AB 388.9AB 83.6 133.6 86.5 11.0 313.1AB 156.5 301.3AB <0.5 mg/kg UK_TM30/TM38/UK_PM15/PM20 Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N 1.0 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Ammoniacal Nitrogen as NH4 1.3 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Total Cyanide* <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 mg/kg UK_TM89/UK_PM45 Electrical Conductivity @25C (5:1 ext) 172 <100 <100 127 <100 <100 729 187 <100 228 <100 uS/cm SA_TM28/SA_PM58 pH SA 4.58 5.44 6.31 6.24 6.04 6.96 6.91 6.99 6.32 6.55 <2.00 pH units SA_TM19/SA_PM11 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced QF-PM 3.1.2 v11 All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 7 of 15 Element Materials Technology Client Name: WSP Group Africa Report : Solid Reference: Location: Eskom Komati Project Solids: V=60g VOC jar, J=250g glass jar, T=plastic tub Contact: Noma Nyoka EMT Job No: 22/528 EMT Sample No. 31 32 33 34 35 Sample ID BH 6 BH 7 BH 8 BH 9 BH 10 Depth 1.5M 2M 1M 1.5M 1.5M Please see attached notes for all abbreviations and acronyms COC No / misc Containers B B B B B Sample Date 31/05/2022 01/06/2022 01/06/2022 31/05/2022 30/05/2022 Sample Type Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Batch Number 1 1 1 1 1 Method LOD/LOR Units No. Date of Receipt 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 Antimony* 1 2 <5AB 6 4 <1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Arsenic* 1.6 1.9 23.0 10.1 8.0 <0.5 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Cadmium* <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Chromium* 75.3 68.9 279.0AB 244.7 190.7 <0.5 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Cobalt* 3.6 7.4 69.5 58.1 121.2 <0.5 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Copper* 12 17 39 60 50 <1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Iron* 12680 20020 92300AB 71270AB 68530AB <20 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Lead* <5 5 50 29 53 <5 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Manganese* 43 101 968 967 5196AB <1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Mercury* <0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 <0.1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Nickel* 15.6 18.3 60.6 51.0 59.5 <0.7 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Selenium* <1 <1 <1 1 3 <1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Vanadium* 33 44 188 201 185 <1 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 Zinc* 16 18 40 19 26 <5 mg/kg UK_TM30/UK_PM15 VOC MS Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Vinyl Chloride <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,1-Dichloroethene (1,1 DCE) SA <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 trans-1-2-Dichloroethene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 cis-1-2-Dichloroethene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Chloroform SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 SA Carbon tetrachloride <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2-Dichloroethane SA <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Benzene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Toluene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Chlorobenzene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 SA Ethylbenzene <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Xylenes (sum of isomers) <8 <8 <8 <8 <8 <8 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene SA <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,4-Dichlorobenzene SA <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2-Dichlorobenzene SA <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2-Dichloroethene (cis & trans) <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Trichlorobenzenes (1,2,3 & 1,2,4) <14 <14 <14 <14 <14 <14 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced QF-PM 3.1.2 v11 All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 8 of 15 Element Materials Technology Client Name: WSP Group Africa Report : Solid Reference: Location: Eskom Komati Project Solids: V=60g VOC jar, J=250g glass jar, T=plastic tub Contact: Noma Nyoka EMT Job No: 22/528 EMT Sample No. 31 32 33 34 35 Sample ID BH 6 BH 7 BH 8 BH 9 BH 10 Depth 1.5M 2M 1M 1.5M 1.5M Please see attached notes for all abbreviations and acronyms COC No / misc Containers B B B B B Sample Date 31/05/2022 01/06/2022 01/06/2022 31/05/2022 30/05/2022 Sample Type Soil Soil Soil Soil Soil Batch Number 1 1 1 1 1 Method LOD/LOR Units No. Date of Receipt 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 SVOC MS Phenols 2-Chlorophenol SA <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM16/SA_PM8 SA 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM16/SA_PM8 PAHs Naphthalene SA <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM16/SA_PM8 Pyrene SA <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM16/SA_PM8 Benzo(a)pyrene SA <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM16/SA_PM8 Other SVOCs Nitrobenzene SA <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM16/SA_PM8 TPH CWG Aliphatics C7-C9 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 mg/kg SA_TM36/SA_PM12 C10-C14 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 mg/kg SA_TM5/SA_PM8/PM16 C15-C36 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 mg/kg SA_TM5/SA_PM8/PM16 Total aliphatics C7-C36 <12 <12 <12 <12 <12 <12 mg/kg SA_TM5/TM36/SA_PM8/PM12/PM16 PCBs (Total vs Aroclor 1254) <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/kg SA_TM17/SA_PM8 Natural Moisture Content 20.9 19.8 15.8 15.1 18.4 <0.1 % SA_PM4/SA_PM0 Fluoride <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Chloride SA 3 6 3 <2 4 <2 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Nitrite as NO2 SA 0.9 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Nitrate as NO3 SA <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Sulphate as SO4 (2:1 Ext) SA 34 51 247 60 27 <3 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 SA Nitrite as N 0.3 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Nitrate as N SA <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Hexavalent Chromium* <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 mg/kg UK_TM38/UK_PM20 Chromium III* 75.3 68.9 279.0AB 244.7 190.7 <0.5 mg/kg UK_TM30/TM38/UK_PM15/PM20 Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Ammoniacal Nitrogen as NH4 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 mg/kg SA_TM27/SA_PM20 Total Cyanide* <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 mg/kg UK_TM89/UK_PM45 Electrical Conductivity @25C (5:1 ext) <100 <100 126 <100 <100 <100 uS/cm SA_TM28/SA_PM58 pH SA 6.91 6.46 6.73 6.44 7.21 <2.00 pH units SA_TM19/SA_PM11 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced QF-PM 3.1.2 v11 All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 9 of 15 Element Materials Technology Notification of Deviating Samples Client Name: WSP Group Africa Reference: Location: Eskom Komati Project Contact: Noma Nyoka EMT EMT Job Batch Sample ID Depth Sample Analysis Reason No. No. No deviating sample report results for job 22/528 Please note that only samples that are deviating are mentioned in this report. If no samples are listed it is because none were deviating. Only analyses which are accredited are recorded as deviating if set criteria are not met. QF-PM 3.1.11 v3 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced 10 of 15 NOTES TO ACCOMPANY ALL SCHEDULES AND REPORTS EMT Job No.: 22/528 SOILS and ASH Please note we are only MCERTS accredited (UK soils only) for sand, loam and clay and any other matrix is outside our scope of accreditation. Where an MCERTS report has been requested, you will be notified within 48 hours of any samples that have been identified as being outside our MCERTS scope. As validation has been performed on clay, sand and loam, only samples that are predominantly these matrices, or combinations of them will be within our MCERTS scope. If samples are not one of a combination of the above matrices they will not be marked as MCERTS accredited. It is assumed that you have taken representative samples on site and require analysis on a representative subsample. Stones will generally be included unless we are requested to remove them. All samples will be discarded one month after the date of reporting, unless we are instructed to the contrary. Asbestos samples are retained for 6 months. If you have not already done so, please send us a purchase order if this is required by your company. Where appropriate please make sure that our detection limits are suitable for your needs, if they are not, please notify us immediately. All analysis is reported on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. Limits of detection for analyses carried out on as received samples are not moisture content corrected. Results are not surrogate corrected. Samples are dried at 35°C ±5°C unless otherwise stated. Moisture content for CEN Leachate tests are dried at 105°C ±5°C. Ash samples are dried at 37°C ±5°C. Where Mineral Oil or Fats, Oils and Grease is quoted, this refers to Total Aliphatics C10-C40. Where a CEN 10:1 ZERO Headspace VOC test has been carried out, a 10:1 ratio of water to wet (as received) soil has been used. % Asbestos in Asbestos Containing Materials (ACMs) is determined by reference to HSG 264 The Survey Guide - Appendix 2 : ACMs in buildings listed in order of ease of fibre release. Sufficient amount of sample must be received to carry out the testing specified. Where an insufficient amount of sample has been received the testing may not meet the requirements of our accredited methods, as such accreditation may be removed. Negative Neutralization Potential (NP) values are obtained when the volume of NaOH (0.1N) titrated (pH 8.3) is greater than the volume of HCl (1N) to reduce the pH of the sample to 2.0 - 2.5. Any negative NP values are corrected to 0. The calculation of Pyrite content assumes that all oxidisable sulphides present in the sample are pyrite. This may not be the case. The calculation may be an overesitimate when other sulphides such as Barite (Barium Sulphate) are present. WATERS Please note we are not a UK Drinking Water Inspectorate (DWI) Approved Laboratory . ISO17025 accreditation applies to surface water and groundwater and usually one other matrix which is analysis specific, any other liquids are outside our scope of accreditation. As surface waters require different sample preparation to groundwaters the laboratory must be informed of the water type when submitting samples. Where Mineral Oil or Fats, Oils and Grease is quoted, this refers to Total Aliphatics C10-C40. STACK EMISSIONS Where an MCERTS report has been requested, you will be notified within 48 hours of any samples that have been identified as being outside our MCERTS scope. As validation for Dioxins and Furans and Dioxin like PCBs has been performed on XAD-2 Resin, only samples which use this resin will be within our MCERTS scope. Where appropriate please make sure that our detection limits are suitable for your needs, if they are not, please notify us immediately. DEVIATING SAMPLES All samples should be submitted to the laboratory in suitable containers with sufficient ice packs to sustain an appropriate temperature for the requested analysis. The temperature of sample receipt is recorded on the confirmation schedules in order that the client can make an informed decision as to whether testing should still be undertaken. SURROGATES Surrogate compounds are added during the preparation process to monitor recovery of analytes. However low recovery in soils is often due to peat, clay or other organic rich matrices. For waters this can be due to oxidants, surfactants, organic rich sediments or remediation fluids. Acceptable limits for most organic methods are 70 - 130% and for VOCs are 50 - 150%. When surrogate recoveries are outside the performance criteria but the associated AQC passes this is assumed to be due to matrix effect. Results are not surrogate corrected. DILUTIONS A dilution suffix indicates a dilution has been performed and the reported result takes this into account. No further calculation is required. BLANKS Where analytes have been found in the blank, the sample will be treated in accordance with our laboratory procedure for dealing with contaminated blanks. Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced QF-PM 3.1.9 v34 All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 11 of 15 EMT Job No.: 22/528 NOTE Data is only reported if the laboratory is confident that the data is a true reflection of the samples analysed. Data is only reported as accredited when all the requirements of our Quality System have been met. In certain circumstances where all the requirements of the Quality System have not been met, for instance if the associated AQC has failed, the reason is fully investigated and documented. The sample data is then evaluated alongside the other quality control checks performed during analysis to determine its suitability. Following this evaluation, provided the sample results have not been effected, the data is reported but accreditation is removed. It is a UKAS requirement for data not reported as accredited to be considered indicative only, but this does not mean the data is not valid. Where possible, and if requested, samples will be re-extracted and a revised report issued with accredited results. Please do not hesitate to contact the laboratory if further details are required of the circumstances which have led to the removal of accreditation. Laboratory records are kept for a period of no less than 6 years. REPORTS FROM THE SOUTH AFRICA LABORATORY Any method number not prefixed with SA has been undertaken in our UK laboratory unless reported as subcontracted. Measurement Uncertainty Measurement uncertainty defines the range of values that could reasonably be attributed to the measured quantity. This range of values has not been included within the reported results. Uncertainty expressed as a percentage can be provided upon request. Customer Provided Information Sample ID and depth is information provided by the customer. Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced QF-PM 3.1.9 v34 All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 12 of 15 ABBREVIATIONS and ACRONYMS USED # ISO17025 (UKAS Ref No. 4225) accredited - UK. SA ISO17025 (SANAS Ref No.T0729) accredited - South Africa B Indicates analyte found in associated method blank. DR Dilution required. M MCERTS accredited. NA Not applicable NAD No Asbestos Detected. ND None Detected (usually refers to VOC and/SVOC TICs). NDP No Determination Possible SS Calibrated against a single substance SV Surrogate recovery outside performance criteria. This may be due to a matrix effect. W Results expressed on as received basis. + AQC failure, accreditation has been removed from this result, if appropriate, see 'Note' on previous page. Results above calibration range, the result should be considered the minimum value. The actual result could be significantly >> higher, this result is not accredited. * Analysis subcontracted to an Element Materials Technology approved laboratory. AD Samples are dried at 35°C ±5°C CO Suspected carry over LOD/LOR Limit of Detection (Limit of Reporting) in line with ISO 17025 and MCERTS ME Matrix Effect NFD No Fibres Detected BS AQC Sample LB Blank Sample N Client Sample TB Trip Blank Sample OC Outside Calibration Range AA x2 Dilution AB x5 Dilution AC x10 Dilution AD x20 Dilution Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced QF-PM 3.1.9 v34 All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 13 of 15 Element Materials Technology Method Code Appendix EMT Job No: 22/528 ISO Analysis done Prep Method MCERTS Reported on 17025 on As Received Test Method No. Description No. (if Description (UK soils dry weight (UKAS/S (AR) or Dried appropriate) only) basis ANAS) (AD) Gravimetric measurement of Natural Moisture Content and % Moisture Content at either SA_PM4 SA_PM0 No preparation is required. AR 35°C or 105°C. Calculation based on ISO 11465 and BS1377. Modified USEPA 8260. Quantitative Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds by Modified US EPA method 5021. Preparation of solid and liquid samples for GC SA_TM15 Headspace GC-MS. SA_PM10 headspace analysis. AR Yes Modified USEPA 8260. Quantitative Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds by Modified US EPA method 5021. Preparation of solid and liquid samples for GC SA_TM15 Headspace GC-MS. SA_PM10 headspace analysis. Yes AR Yes Modified USEPA 8270. Quantitative determination of Semi-Volatile Organic compounds End over end extraction of solid samples for organic analysis. The solvent mix varies SA_TM16 (SVOCs) by GC-MS. SA_PM8 depending on analysis required. AR Yes Modified USEPA 8270. Quantitative determination of Semi-Volatile Organic compounds End over end extraction of solid samples for organic analysis. The solvent mix varies SA_TM16 (SVOCs) by GC-MS. SA_PM8 depending on analysis required. Yes AR Yes Modified US EPA method 8270. Determination of specific Polychlorinated Biphenyl End over end extraction of solid samples for organic analysis. The solvent mix varies SA_TM17 congeners by GC-MS. SA_PM8 depending on analysis required. AR Yes SA_TM19 Determination of pH by bench pH meter SA_PM11 Extraction of as received solid samples using one part solid to 2.5 parts deionised water. Yes AR No Extraction of dried and ground or as received samples with deionised water in a 2:1 water to solid ratio using a orbital shaker for all analytes except hexavalent chromium. SA_TM27 Major ions by Ion Chromatography SA_PM20 Extraction of as received sample using 10:1 ratio of 0.2M sodium hydroxide to soil for AD Yes hexavalent chromium using a orbital shaker. Extraction of dried and ground or as received samples with deionised water in a 2:1 water to solid ratio using a orbital shaker for all analytes except hexavalent chromium. SA_TM27 Major ions by Ion Chromatography SA_PM20 Extraction of as received sample using 10:1 ratio of 0.2M sodium hydroxide to soil for Yes AD Yes hexavalent chromium using a orbital shaker. Extraction of dried and ground or as received samples with deionised water in a 2:1 water to solid ratio using a orbital shaker for all analytes except hexavalent chromium. SA_TM27 Major ions by Ion Chromatography SA_PM20 Extraction of as received sample using 10:1 ratio of 0.2M sodium hydroxide to soil for AR Yes hexavalent chromium using a orbital shaker. QF-PM 3.1.10 v14 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced 14 of 15 Element Materials Technology Method Code Appendix EMT Job No: 22/528 ISO Analysis done Prep Method MCERTS Reported on 17025 on As Received Test Method No. Description No. (if Description (UK soils dry weight (UKAS/S (AR) or Dried appropriate) only) basis ANAS) (AD) Dried and ground solid samples are extracted with water in a 5:1 water to solid ratio, the SA_TM28 Determination of Electrical Conductivity with hand held manual conductivity probe. SA_PM58 samples are shaken on an orbital shaker. AD Yes Modified US EPA method 8015B. Determination of Gasoline Range Organics (GRO) in Modified US EPA method 5021. Preparation of solid and liquid samples for GC SA_TM36 the carbon chain range of C4-12, MTBE and BTEX by headspace GC-FID. SA_PM12 headspace analysis. AR Yes End over end extraction of solid samples for organic analysis. The solvent mix varies Modified USEPA 8015B method for the determination of solvent Extractable Petroleum SA_TM5 Hydrocarbons (EPH) with carbon banding within the range C8-C40 GC-FID. SA_PM8/PM16 depending on analysis required/Fractionation into aliphatic and aromatic fractions using a AR Yes Rapid Trace SPE. TM005: Modified USEPA 8015B. Determination of solvent Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons (EPH) including column fractionation in the carbon range of C10-35 into aliphatic and aromatic fractions by GC-FID. TM036: Modified USEPA 8015B. SA_TM5/TM36 Determination of Gasoline Range Organics (GRO) in the carbon chain range of C5-10 SA_PM8/PM12/PM16 please refer to SA_PM8/PM16 and SA_PM12 for method details AR Yes by headspace GC-FID. Including determination of BTEX and calculation of Aliphatic fractions. Determination of Trace Metal elements by ICP-OES (Inductively Coupled Plasma - Acid digestion of dried and ground solid samples using Aqua Regia refluxed at 112.5 °C. UK_TM30 Optical Emission Spectrometry). Modified US EPA Method 200.7, 6010B and BS EN ISO UK_PM15 Samples containing asbestos are not dried and ground. Yes 11885 2009 Acid digestion of dried and ground solid samples using Aqua Regia refluxed at 112.5 °C. Determination of Trace Metal elements by ICP-OES (Inductively Coupled Plasma - Samples containing asbestos are not dried and ground. / Extraction of dried and ground Optical Emission Spectrometry). Modified US EPA Method 200.7, 6010B and BS EN ISO or as received samples with deionised water in a 2:1 water to solid ratio using a UK_TM30/TM38 11885 2009 / Soluble Ion analysis using the Thermo Aquakem Photometric Automatic UK_PM15/PM20 reciprocal shaker for all analytes except hexavalent chromium. Extraction of as received Yes Analyser. Modified US EPA methods 325.2, 375.4, 365.2, 353.1, 354.1 sample using 10:1 ratio of 0.2M sodium hydroxide to soil for hexavalent chromium using a reciprocal shaker. Extraction of dried and ground or as received samples with deionised water in a 2:1 Soluble Ion analysis using the Thermo Aquakem Photometric Automatic Analyser. water to solid ratio using a reciprocal shaker for all analytes except hexavalent UK_TM38 Modified US EPA methods 325.2, 375.4, 365.2, 353.1, 354.1 UK_PM20 chromium. Extraction of as received sample using 10:1 ratio of 0.2M sodium hydroxide to Yes soil for hexavalent chromium using a reciprocal shaker. Modified USEPA method OIA-1667. Determination of cyanide by Flow Injection Analyser. As received solid samples are extracted with 1M NaOH by orbital shaker for Cyanide and UK_TM89 Where WAD cyanides are required a Ligand displacement step is carried out before UK_PM45 Thiocyanate analysis. Yes analysis. QF-PM 3.1.10 v14 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced 15 of 15 Element Materials Technology Unit D2 & D5 9 Quantum Road Firgrove Business Park W: www.element.com Somerset West 7130 South Africa WSP Group Africa Building C, Knightsbridge 33 Sloane Street Bryanston Johannesburg Gauteng South Africa 2191 Attention : Sarah Skinner Date : 29th June, 2022 Your reference : 41103965 Our reference : Test Report 22/556 Batch 1 Location : Eskom Komati Power Station (ESIA and WULA project) Date samples received : 10th June, 2022 Status : Final report Issue : 1 Eleven samples were received for analysis on 10th June, 2022 of which eleven were scheduled for analysis. Please find attached our Test Report which should be read with notes at the end of the report and should include all sections if reproduced. Interpretations and opinions are outside the scope of any accreditation, and all results relate only to samples supplied. All analysis is carried out on as received samples and reported on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. Results are not surrogate corrected. Analysis was undertaken at either Element Materials Technology UK, which is ISO 17025 accredited under UKAS (4225) or Element Materials Technology (SA) which is ISO 17025 accredited under SANAS (T0729) or a subcontract laboratory where specified. NOTE: Under International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC), ISO 17025 (UKAS) accreditation is recognised as equivalent to SANAS (South Africa) accreditation. Authorised By: Organics Laboratory: Inorganics Laboratory: Debbie van Wyk Greg Ondrejkovic Greg Ondrejkovic Technical Supervisor Technical Supervisor Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced Element Materials Technology South Africa (Pty) Limited Registered Office: Unit D2/D5, 9 Quantum Road, Firgrove Business Park, Somerset West, Western Cape, 7130, South Africa Company Registration No: 2015/025446/07 1 of 19 Element Materials Technology Client Name: WSP Group Africa Report : Liquid Reference: 41103965 Location: Eskom Komati Power Station (ESIA and WULA project) Contact: Sarah Skinner Liquids/products: V=40ml vial, G=glass bottle, P=plastic bottle EMT Job No: 22/556 H=H2SO4, Z=ZnAc, N=NaOH, HN=HN03 EMT Sample No. 1-9 10-14 15-21 22-28 29-35 36-42 43-49 50-56 57-63 64-70 Sample ID BH 1 BH 2 BH 3 BH 4 BH 5 BH 6 BH 7 BH 8 BH 9 BH 10 Depth Please see attached notes for all abbreviations and acronyms COC No / misc Containers V HN P G VPG V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G Sample Date 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 Sample Type Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Batch Number 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Method LOD/LOR Units No. Date of Receipt 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 Dissolved Antimony* <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Dissolved Arsenic* <0.9 <0.9 <0.9 <0.9 <0.9 <0.9 <0.9 <0.9 <0.9 <0.9 <0.9 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Dissolved Cadmium* <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.04 0.03 <0.03 0.04 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Total Dissolved Chromium* <0.2 4.3 <0.2 1.4 0.4 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 0.3 <0.2 <0.2 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Dissolved Cobalt* 12.2 25.6 11.1 4.6 4.6 6.6 0.2 0.5 0.7 <0.1 <0.1 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Dissolved Copper* <1 2 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Total Dissolved Iron* 292.0 1692.1AB 164.4 492.9 12.6 25.6 11.2 7.9 43.9 9.9 <4.7 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Dissolved Lead* 1.5 2.1 4.6 1.6 7.8 12.8 38.1 33.0 28.3 2.7 <0.4 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Dissolved Manganese* 3269.5AB 1241.8AB 1718.3AB 114.8 809.5 496.8 15.7 68.8 18.3 6.8 <1.5 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Dissolved Mercury* <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Dissolved Nickel* 4.7 8.2 12.8 6.3 5.5 7.0 4.5 23.6 1.7 3.2 <0.2 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Dissolved Selenium* <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Dissolved Vanadium* <0.6 4.8 1.0 1.5 1.1 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 2.2 1.5 <0.6 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Dissolved Zinc* 16.2 30.7 37.9 29.4 37.8 46.4 34.5 59.0 32.4 24.5 <1.5 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Dissolved Calcium SA 73.1 27.7 141.0 11.0 46.3 42.4 13.6 83.0 17.0 8.0 <0.3 mg/l SA_TM27/SA_PM0 Dissolved Magnesium SA 50.0 22.5 125.4AB 11.2 26.4 34.6 9.1 74.3 11.2 5.0 <0.2 mg/l SA_TM27/SA_PM0 SA Dissolved Potassium 4.2 7.0 6.2 3.6 11.2 6.9 7.9 18.5 3.2 2.3 <0.1 mg/l SA_TM27/SA_PM0 Dissolved Sodium SA 71.6 85.8 136.4 15.2 82.6 44.2 26.3 48.4 46.5 25.6 <0.1 mg/l SA_TM27/SA_PM0 Dissolved Silicon* 21309AB 28801AB 19617AB 10607AB 8902 9616 6005 9986 23415AB 9350 <100 ug/l UK_TM30/UK_PM14 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced QF-PM 3.1.2 v11 All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 2 of 19 Element Materials Technology Client Name: WSP Group Africa Report : Liquid Reference: 41103965 Location: Eskom Komati Power Station (ESIA and WULA project) Contact: Sarah Skinner Liquids/products: V=40ml vial, G=glass bottle, P=plastic bottle EMT Job No: 22/556 H=H2SO4, Z=ZnAc, N=NaOH, HN=HN03 EMT Sample No. 1-9 10-14 15-21 22-28 29-35 36-42 43-49 50-56 57-63 64-70 Sample ID BH 1 BH 2 BH 3 BH 4 BH 5 BH 6 BH 7 BH 8 BH 9 BH 10 Depth Please see attached notes for all abbreviations and acronyms COC No / misc Containers V HN P G VPG V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G Sample Date 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 Sample Type Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Batch Number 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Method LOD/LOR Units No. Date of Receipt 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 VOC MS Dichlorodifluoromethane <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 SA Chloromethane <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Vinyl Chloride <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Bromomethane <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Chloroethane SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Trichlorofluoromethane SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 SA 1,1-Dichloroethene (1,1 DCE) <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Dichloromethane (DCM) SA <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 trans-1-2-Dichloroethene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,1-Dichloroethane SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 cis-1-2-Dichloroethene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 2,2-Dichloropropane <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Bromochloromethane SA <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Chloroform SA <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,1,1-Trichloroethane SA <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 SA 1,1-Dichloropropene <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Carbon tetrachloride SA <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2-Dichloroethane SA <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Benzene <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Trichloroethene (TCE) SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 SA 1,2-Dichloropropane <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Dibromomethane SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Bromodichloromethane SA <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 cis-1-3-Dichloropropene <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Toluene SA <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 trans-1-3-Dichloropropene <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,1,2-Trichloroethane SA <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Tetrachloroethene (PCE) SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,3-Dichloropropane SA <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Dibromochloromethane SA <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2-Dibromoethane SA <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Chlorobenzene SA <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane SA <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Ethylbenzene SA <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 SA p/m-Xylene <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 o-Xylene SA <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Styrene <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Bromoform SA <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Isopropylbenzene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Bromobenzene SA <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2,3-Trichloropropane SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced QF-PM 3.1.2 v11 All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 3 of 19 Element Materials Technology Client Name: WSP Group Africa Report : Liquid Reference: 41103965 Location: Eskom Komati Power Station (ESIA and WULA project) Contact: Sarah Skinner Liquids/products: V=40ml vial, G=glass bottle, P=plastic bottle EMT Job No: 22/556 H=H2SO4, Z=ZnAc, N=NaOH, HN=HN03 EMT Sample No. 1-9 10-14 15-21 22-28 29-35 36-42 43-49 50-56 57-63 64-70 Sample ID BH 1 BH 2 BH 3 BH 4 BH 5 BH 6 BH 7 BH 8 BH 9 BH 10 Depth Please see attached notes for all abbreviations and acronyms COC No / misc Containers V HN P G VPG V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G Sample Date 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 Sample Type Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Batch Number 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Method LOD/LOR Units No. Date of Receipt 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 VOC MS Continued Propylbenzene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 2-Chlorotoluene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 SA 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 4-Chlorotoluene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 tert-Butylbenzene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 sec-Butylbenzene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 SA 4-Isopropyltoluene <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,3-Dichlorobenzene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,4-Dichlorobenzene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 n-Butylbenzene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2-Dichlorobenzene SA <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Hexachlorobutadiene <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Naphthalene <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 VOC TICs ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND None SA_TM15/SA_PM10 SVOC MS Phenols 2-Chlorophenol <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 2-Methylphenol <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 2-Nitrophenol <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 2,4-Dichlorophenol <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 2,4-Dimethylphenol <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 4-Methylphenol <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 4-Nitrophenol <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Pentachlorophenol <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Phenol <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced QF-PM 3.1.2 v11 All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 4 of 19 Element Materials Technology Client Name: WSP Group Africa Report : Liquid Reference: 41103965 Location: Eskom Komati Power Station (ESIA and WULA project) Contact: Sarah Skinner Liquids/products: V=40ml vial, G=glass bottle, P=plastic bottle EMT Job No: 22/556 H=H2SO4, Z=ZnAc, N=NaOH, HN=HN03 EMT Sample No. 1-9 10-14 15-21 22-28 29-35 36-42 43-49 50-56 57-63 64-70 Sample ID BH 1 BH 2 BH 3 BH 4 BH 5 BH 6 BH 7 BH 8 BH 9 BH 10 Depth Please see attached notes for all abbreviations and acronyms COC No / misc Containers V HN P G VPG V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G Sample Date 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 Sample Type Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Batch Number 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Method LOD/LOR Units No. Date of Receipt 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 SVOC MS PAHs 2-Chloronaphthalene SA <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 SA 2-Methylnaphthalene <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Naphthalene SA <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Acenaphthylene SA <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Acenaphthene SA <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Fluorene SA <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 SA Phenanthrene <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Anthracene SA <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Fluoranthene SA <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Pyrene SA <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Benzo(a)anthracene SA <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Chrysene SA <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Benzo(b)fluoranthene SA <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Benzo(k)fluoranthene SA <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Benzo(a)pyrene SA <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 SA Indeno(123cd)pyrene <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Dibenzo(ah)anthracene SA <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Benzo(ghi)perylene SA <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Phthalates Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate SA <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Butylbenzyl phthalate <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Di-n-butyl phthalate SA <1.5 <1.5 <1.5 <1.5 <1.5 <1.5 <1.5 <1.5 <1.5 <1.5 <1.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Di-n-Octyl phthalate <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Diethyl phthalate SA <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Dimethyl phthalate SA <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced QF-PM 3.1.2 v11 All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 5 of 19 Element Materials Technology Client Name: WSP Group Africa Report : Liquid Reference: 41103965 Location: Eskom Komati Power Station (ESIA and WULA project) Contact: Sarah Skinner Liquids/products: V=40ml vial, G=glass bottle, P=plastic bottle EMT Job No: 22/556 H=H2SO4, Z=ZnAc, N=NaOH, HN=HN03 EMT Sample No. 1-9 10-14 15-21 22-28 29-35 36-42 43-49 50-56 57-63 64-70 Sample ID BH 1 BH 2 BH 3 BH 4 BH 5 BH 6 BH 7 BH 8 BH 9 BH 10 Depth Please see attached notes for all abbreviations and acronyms COC No / misc Containers V HN P G VPG V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G Sample Date 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 Sample Type Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Batch Number 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Method LOD/LOR Units No. Date of Receipt 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 SVOC MS Other SVOCs 1,2-Dichlorobenzene SA <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 SA 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 1,3-Dichlorobenzene SA <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 1,4-Dichlorobenzene SA <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 2-Nitroaniline <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 2,4-Dinitrotoluene SA <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 2,6-Dinitrotoluene <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 3-Nitroaniline <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 4-Bromophenylphenylether SA <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 4-Chloroaniline <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 4-Chlorophenylphenylether SA <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 4-Nitroaniline <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Azobenzene SA <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane SA <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether SA <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 SA Carbazole <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Dibenzofuran SA <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Hexachlorobenzene SA <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Hexachlorobutadiene SA <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene SA <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 SA Hexachloroethane <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Isophorone SA <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine SA <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Nitrobenzene SA <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 SVOC TICs ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND None SA_TM16/SA_PM30 TPH CWG Aliphatics C7-C9 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/l SA_TM36/SA_PM12 C10-C14 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/l SA_TM5/SA_PM16/PM30 C15-C36 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/l SA_TM5/SA_PM16/PM30 Total aliphatics C7-C36 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ug/l SA_TM5/TM36/SA_PM12/PM16/PM30 PCBs (Total vs Aroclor 1254) <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 ug/l SA_TM17/SA_PM30 Fluoride SA 0.4 <0.3 0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 0.3 <0.3 <0.3 mg/l SA_TM27/SA_PM0 Chloride SA 32.1 22.1 73.9 53.0 67.6 19.0 29.7 25.6 3.4 11.7 <0.3 mg/l SA_TM27/SA_PM0 Sulphate SA 133.1 183.6AA 983.1AB 5.4 213.0AA 234.8AA 67.3 446.0AB 51.1 55.4 <0.5 mg/l SA_TM27/SA_PM0 SA Nitrate as N <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.11 0.36 <0.05 1.27 <0.05 <0.05 mg/l SA_TM27/SA_PM0 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced QF-PM 3.1.2 v11 All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 6 of 19 Element Materials Technology Client Name: WSP Group Africa Report : Liquid Reference: 41103965 Location: Eskom Komati Power Station (ESIA and WULA project) Contact: Sarah Skinner Liquids/products: V=40ml vial, G=glass bottle, P=plastic bottle EMT Job No: 22/556 H=H2SO4, Z=ZnAc, N=NaOH, HN=HN03 EMT Sample No. 1-9 10-14 15-21 22-28 29-35 36-42 43-49 50-56 57-63 64-70 Sample ID BH 1 BH 2 BH 3 BH 4 BH 5 BH 6 BH 7 BH 8 BH 9 BH 10 Depth Please see attached notes for all abbreviations and acronyms COC No / misc Containers V HN P G VPG V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G V HN P G Sample Date 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 07/06/2022 Sample Type Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Ground Water Batch Number 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Method LOD/LOR Units No. Date of Receipt 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 10/06/2022 Ortho Phosphate as P 0.046 0.039 0.055 0.033 0.029 0.023 0.036 0.046 0.039 0.026 <0.015 mg/l SA_TM191/SA_PM31 Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N SA 2.60 0.47 0.75 <0.03 0.47 0.19 <0.03 0.05 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 mg/l SA_TM27/SA_PM0 Hexavalent Chromium* <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 mg/l UK_TM38/UK_PM0 Total Alkalinity as CaCO3 SA 396 132 260 18 92 64 23 116 124 20 <3 mg/l SA_TM32/SA_PM0 Electrical Conductivity @25C SA 981 684 1849 248 835 679 304 1133 370 125 <2 uS/cm SA_TM28/SA_PM0 SA pH 7.44 7.44 7.25 7.10 7.54 6.67 7.00 7.42 7.54 6.62 <2.00 pH units SA_TM19/SA_PM0 Total Dissolved Solids SA 616 541 1537 205 563 486 187 894 250 136 <35 mg/l SA_TM20/SA_PM31 Total Organic Carbon* <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 2 <2 <2 <2 mg/l UK_TM60/UK_PM0 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced QF-PM 3.1.2 v11 All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 7 of 19 Element Materials Technology Client Name: WSP Group Africa Report : Liquid Reference: 41103965 Location: Eskom Komati Power Station (ESIA and WULA project) Contact: Sarah Skinner Liquids/products: V=40ml vial, G=glass bottle, P=plastic bottle EMT Job No: 22/556 H=H2SO4, Z=ZnAc, N=NaOH, HN=HN03 EMT Sample No. 71-77 Sample ID BH 10-01 Depth Please see attached notes for all abbreviations and acronyms COC No / misc Containers V HN P G Sample Date 07/06/2022 Sample Type Ground Water Batch Number 1 Method LOD/LOR Units No. Date of Receipt 10/06/2022 Dissolved Antimony* <2 <2 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Dissolved Arsenic* <0.9 <0.9 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Dissolved Cadmium* <0.03 <0.03 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Total Dissolved Chromium* <0.2 <0.2 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Dissolved Cobalt* 11.0 <0.1 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Dissolved Copper* <1 <1 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Total Dissolved Iron* 163.7 <4.7 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Dissolved Lead* 4.6 <0.4 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Dissolved Manganese* 1639.4AB <1.5 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Dissolved Mercury* <0.5 <0.5 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Dissolved Nickel* 12.6 <0.2 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Dissolved Selenium* <1.2 <1.2 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Dissolved Vanadium* 1.0 <0.6 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Dissolved Zinc* 37.0 <1.5 ug/l UK_TM170/UK_PM14 Dissolved Calcium SA 141.5 <0.3 mg/l SA_TM27/SA_PM0 Dissolved Magnesium SA 116.5AB <0.2 mg/l SA_TM27/SA_PM0 SA Dissolved Potassium 6.0 <0.1 mg/l SA_TM27/SA_PM0 Dissolved Sodium SA 137.1 <0.1 mg/l SA_TM27/SA_PM0 Dissolved Silicon* 20135AB <100 ug/l UK_TM30/UK_PM14 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced QF-PM 3.1.2 v11 All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 8 of 19 Element Materials Technology Client Name: WSP Group Africa Report : Liquid Reference: 41103965 Location: Eskom Komati Power Station (ESIA and WULA project) Contact: Sarah Skinner Liquids/products: V=40ml vial, G=glass bottle, P=plastic bottle EMT Job No: 22/556 H=H2SO4, Z=ZnAc, N=NaOH, HN=HN03 EMT Sample No. 71-77 Sample ID BH 10-01 Depth Please see attached notes for all abbreviations and acronyms COC No / misc Containers V HN P G Sample Date 07/06/2022 Sample Type Ground Water Batch Number 1 Method LOD/LOR Units No. Date of Receipt 10/06/2022 VOC MS Dichlorodifluoromethane <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether <0.1 <0.1 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 SA Chloromethane <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Vinyl Chloride <0.1 <0.1 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Bromomethane <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Chloroethane SA <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Trichlorofluoromethane SA <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 SA 1,1-Dichloroethene (1,1 DCE) <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Dichloromethane (DCM) SA <5 <5 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 trans-1-2-Dichloroethene SA <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,1-Dichloroethane SA <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 cis-1-2-Dichloroethene SA <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 2,2-Dichloropropane <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Bromochloromethane SA <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Chloroform SA <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,1,1-Trichloroethane SA <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 SA 1,1-Dichloropropene <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Carbon tetrachloride SA <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2-Dichloroethane SA <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Benzene <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Trichloroethene (TCE) SA <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 SA 1,2-Dichloropropane <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Dibromomethane SA <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Bromodichloromethane SA <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 cis-1-3-Dichloropropene <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Toluene SA <5 <5 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 trans-1-3-Dichloropropene <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,1,2-Trichloroethane SA <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Tetrachloroethene (PCE) SA <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,3-Dichloropropane SA <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Dibromochloromethane SA <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2-Dibromoethane SA <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Chlorobenzene SA <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane SA <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Ethylbenzene SA <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 SA p/m-Xylene <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 o-Xylene SA <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Styrene <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Bromoform SA <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Isopropylbenzene SA <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <4 <4 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Bromobenzene SA <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2,3-Trichloropropane SA <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced QF-PM 3.1.2 v11 All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 9 of 19 Element Materials Technology Client Name: WSP Group Africa Report : Liquid Reference: 41103965 Location: Eskom Komati Power Station (ESIA and WULA project) Contact: Sarah Skinner Liquids/products: V=40ml vial, G=glass bottle, P=plastic bottle EMT Job No: 22/556 H=H2SO4, Z=ZnAc, N=NaOH, HN=HN03 EMT Sample No. 71-77 Sample ID BH 10-01 Depth Please see attached notes for all abbreviations and acronyms COC No / misc Containers V HN P G Sample Date 07/06/2022 Sample Type Ground Water Batch Number 1 Method LOD/LOR Units No. Date of Receipt 10/06/2022 VOC MS Continued Propylbenzene SA <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 2-Chlorotoluene SA <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 SA 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 4-Chlorotoluene SA <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 tert-Butylbenzene SA <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene SA <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 sec-Butylbenzene SA <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 SA 4-Isopropyltoluene <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,3-Dichlorobenzene SA <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,4-Dichlorobenzene SA <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 n-Butylbenzene SA <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2-Dichlorobenzene SA <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Hexachlorobutadiene <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 Naphthalene <2 <2 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <3 <3 ug/l SA_TM15/SA_PM10 VOC TICs ND None SA_TM15/SA_PM10 SVOC MS Phenols 2-Chlorophenol <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 2-Methylphenol <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 2-Nitrophenol <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 2,4-Dichlorophenol <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 2,4-Dimethylphenol <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 4-Methylphenol <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 4-Nitrophenol <10 <10 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Pentachlorophenol <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Phenol <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced QF-PM 3.1.2 v11 All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 10 of 19 Element Materials Technology Client Name: WSP Group Africa Report : Liquid Reference: 41103965 Location: Eskom Komati Power Station (ESIA and WULA project) Contact: Sarah Skinner Liquids/products: V=40ml vial, G=glass bottle, P=plastic bottle EMT Job No: 22/556 H=H2SO4, Z=ZnAc, N=NaOH, HN=HN03 EMT Sample No. 71-77 Sample ID BH 10-01 Depth Please see attached notes for all abbreviations and acronyms COC No / misc Containers V HN P G Sample Date 07/06/2022 Sample Type Ground Water Batch Number 1 Method LOD/LOR Units No. Date of Receipt 10/06/2022 SVOC MS PAHs 2-Chloronaphthalene SA <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 SA 2-Methylnaphthalene <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Naphthalene SA <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Acenaphthylene SA <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Acenaphthene SA <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Fluorene SA <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 SA Phenanthrene <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Anthracene SA <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Fluoranthene SA <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Pyrene SA <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Benzo(a)anthracene SA <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Chrysene SA <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Benzo(b)fluoranthene SA <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Benzo(k)fluoranthene SA <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Benzo(a)pyrene SA <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 SA Indeno(123cd)pyrene <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Dibenzo(ah)anthracene SA <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Benzo(ghi)perylene SA <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Phthalates Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate SA <5 <5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Butylbenzyl phthalate <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Di-n-butyl phthalate SA <1.5 <1.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Di-n-Octyl phthalate <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Diethyl phthalate SA <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Dimethyl phthalate SA <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced QF-PM 3.1.2 v11 All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 11 of 19 Element Materials Technology Client Name: WSP Group Africa Report : Liquid Reference: 41103965 Location: Eskom Komati Power Station (ESIA and WULA project) Contact: Sarah Skinner Liquids/products: V=40ml vial, G=glass bottle, P=plastic bottle EMT Job No: 22/556 H=H2SO4, Z=ZnAc, N=NaOH, HN=HN03 EMT Sample No. 71-77 Sample ID BH 10-01 Depth Please see attached notes for all abbreviations and acronyms COC No / misc Containers V HN P G Sample Date 07/06/2022 Sample Type Ground Water Batch Number 1 Method LOD/LOR Units No. Date of Receipt 10/06/2022 SVOC MS Other SVOCs 1,2-Dichlorobenzene SA <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 SA 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 1,3-Dichlorobenzene SA <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 1,4-Dichlorobenzene SA <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 2-Nitroaniline <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 2,4-Dinitrotoluene SA <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 2,6-Dinitrotoluene <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 3-Nitroaniline <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 4-Bromophenylphenylether SA <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 4-Chloroaniline <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 4-Chlorophenylphenylether SA <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 4-Nitroaniline <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Azobenzene SA <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane SA <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether SA <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 SA Carbazole <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Dibenzofuran SA <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Hexachlorobenzene SA <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Hexachlorobutadiene SA <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene SA <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 SA Hexachloroethane <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Isophorone SA <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine SA <0.5 <0.5 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 Nitrobenzene SA <1 <1 ug/l SA_TM16/SA_PM30 SVOC TICs ND None SA_TM16/SA_PM30 TPH CWG Aliphatics C7-C9 <10 <10 ug/l SA_TM36/SA_PM12 C10-C14 <10 <10 ug/l SA_TM5/SA_PM16/PM30 C15-C36 <10 <10 ug/l SA_TM5/SA_PM16/PM30 Total aliphatics C7-C36 <10 <10 ug/l SA_TM5/TM36/SA_PM12/PM16/PM30 PCBs (Total vs Aroclor 1254) <0.2 <0.2 ug/l SA_TM17/SA_PM30 Fluoride SA 0.4 <0.3 mg/l SA_TM27/SA_PM0 Chloride SA 69.9 <0.3 mg/l SA_TM27/SA_PM0 Sulphate SA 837.9AB <0.5 mg/l SA_TM27/SA_PM0 SA Nitrate as N <0.05 <0.05 mg/l SA_TM27/SA_PM0 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced QF-PM 3.1.2 v11 All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 12 of 19 Element Materials Technology Client Name: WSP Group Africa Report : Liquid Reference: 41103965 Location: Eskom Komati Power Station (ESIA and WULA project) Contact: Sarah Skinner Liquids/products: V=40ml vial, G=glass bottle, P=plastic bottle EMT Job No: 22/556 H=H2SO4, Z=ZnAc, N=NaOH, HN=HN03 EMT Sample No. 71-77 Sample ID BH 10-01 Depth Please see attached notes for all abbreviations and acronyms COC No / misc Containers V HN P G Sample Date 07/06/2022 Sample Type Ground Water Batch Number 1 Method LOD/LOR Units No. Date of Receipt 10/06/2022 Ortho Phosphate as P 0.042 <0.015 mg/l SA_TM191/SA_PM31 Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N SA 0.36 <0.03 mg/l SA_TM27/SA_PM0 Hexavalent Chromium* <0.006 <0.006 mg/l UK_TM38/UK_PM0 Total Alkalinity as CaCO3 SA 256 <3 mg/l SA_TM32/SA_PM0 Electrical Conductivity @25C SA 1850 <2 uS/cm SA_TM28/SA_PM0 SA pH 6.62 <2.00 pH units SA_TM19/SA_PM0 Total Dissolved Solids SA 1533 <35 mg/l SA_TM20/SA_PM31 Total Organic Carbon* <2 <2 mg/l UK_TM60/UK_PM0 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced QF-PM 3.1.2 v11 All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 13 of 19 Element Materials Technology Notification of Deviating Samples Client Name: WSP Group Africa Matrix : Liquid Reference: 41103965 Location: Eskom Komati Power Station (ESIA and WULA project) Contact: Sarah Skinner EMT EMT Job Batch Sample ID Depth Sample Analysis Reason No. No. 22/556 1 BH 1 1-9 SVOC Sample holding time exceeded 22/556 1 BH 2 10-14 SVOC Sample holding time exceeded 22/556 1 BH 3 15-21 SVOC Sample holding time exceeded 22/556 1 BH 4 22-28 SVOC Sample holding time exceeded 22/556 1 BH 5 29-35 SVOC Sample holding time exceeded 22/556 1 BH 6 36-42 SVOC Sample holding time exceeded 22/556 1 BH 7 43-49 SVOC Sample holding time exceeded 22/556 1 BH 8 50-56 SVOC Sample holding time exceeded 22/556 1 BH 9 57-63 SVOC Sample holding time exceeded 22/556 1 BH 10 64-70 SVOC Sample holding time exceeded 22/556 1 BH 10-01 71-77 SVOC Sample holding time exceeded Please note that only samples that are deviating are mentioned in this report. If no samples are listed it is because none were deviating. Only analyses which are accredited are recorded as deviating if set criteria are not met. QF-PM 3.1.11 v3 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced 14 of 19 NOTES TO ACCOMPANY ALL SCHEDULES AND REPORTS EMT Job No.: 22/556 SOILS and ASH Please note we are only MCERTS accredited (UK soils only) for sand, loam and clay and any other matrix is outside our scope of accreditation. Where an MCERTS report has been requested, you will be notified within 48 hours of any samples that have been identified as being outside our MCERTS scope. As validation has been performed on clay, sand and loam, only samples that are predominantly these matrices, or combinations of them will be within our MCERTS scope. If samples are not one of a combination of the above matrices they will not be marked as MCERTS accredited. It is assumed that you have taken representative samples on site and require analysis on a representative subsample. Stones will generally be included unless we are requested to remove them. All samples will be discarded one month after the date of reporting, unless we are instructed to the contrary. Asbestos samples are retained for 6 months. If you have not already done so, please send us a purchase order if this is required by your company. Where appropriate please make sure that our detection limits are suitable for your needs, if they are not, please notify us immediately. All analysis is reported on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. Limits of detection for analyses carried out on as received samples are not moisture content corrected. Results are not surrogate corrected. Samples are dried at 35°C ±5°C unless otherwise stated. Moisture content for CEN Leachate tests are dried at 105°C ±5°C. Ash samples are dried at 37°C ±5°C. Where Mineral Oil or Fats, Oils and Grease is quoted, this refers to Total Aliphatics C10-C40. Where a CEN 10:1 ZERO Headspace VOC test has been carried out, a 10:1 ratio of water to wet (as received) soil has been used. % Asbestos in Asbestos Containing Materials (ACMs) is determined by reference to HSG 264 The Survey Guide - Appendix 2 : ACMs in buildings listed in order of ease of fibre release. Sufficient amount of sample must be received to carry out the testing specified. Where an insufficient amount of sample has been received the testing may not meet the requirements of our accredited methods, as such accreditation may be removed. Negative Neutralization Potential (NP) values are obtained when the volume of NaOH (0.1N) titrated (pH 8.3) is greater than the volume of HCl (1N) to reduce the pH of the sample to 2.0 - 2.5. Any negative NP values are corrected to 0. The calculation of Pyrite content assumes that all oxidisable sulphides present in the sample are pyrite. This may not be the case. The calculation may be an overesitimate when other sulphides such as Barite (Barium Sulphate) are present. WATERS Please note we are not a UK Drinking Water Inspectorate (DWI) Approved Laboratory . ISO17025 accreditation applies to surface water and groundwater and usually one other matrix which is analysis specific, any other liquids are outside our scope of accreditation. As surface waters require different sample preparation to groundwaters the laboratory must be informed of the water type when submitting samples. Where Mineral Oil or Fats, Oils and Grease is quoted, this refers to Total Aliphatics C10-C40. STACK EMISSIONS Where an MCERTS report has been requested, you will be notified within 48 hours of any samples that have been identified as being outside our MCERTS scope. As validation for Dioxins and Furans and Dioxin like PCBs has been performed on XAD-2 Resin, only samples which use this resin will be within our MCERTS scope. Where appropriate please make sure that our detection limits are suitable for your needs, if they are not, please notify us immediately. DEVIATING SAMPLES All samples should be submitted to the laboratory in suitable containers with sufficient ice packs to sustain an appropriate temperature for the requested analysis. The temperature of sample receipt is recorded on the confirmation schedules in order that the client can make an informed decision as to whether testing should still be undertaken. SURROGATES Surrogate compounds are added during the preparation process to monitor recovery of analytes. However low recovery in soils is often due to peat, clay or other organic rich matrices. For waters this can be due to oxidants, surfactants, organic rich sediments or remediation fluids. Acceptable limits for most organic methods are 70 - 130% and for VOCs are 50 - 150%. When surrogate recoveries are outside the performance criteria but the associated AQC passes this is assumed to be due to matrix effect. Results are not surrogate corrected. DILUTIONS A dilution suffix indicates a dilution has been performed and the reported result takes this into account. No further calculation is required. BLANKS Where analytes have been found in the blank, the sample will be treated in accordance with our laboratory procedure for dealing with contaminated blanks. Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced QF-PM 3.1.9 v34 All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 15 of 19 EMT Job No.: 22/556 NOTE Data is only reported if the laboratory is confident that the data is a true reflection of the samples analysed. Data is only reported as accredited when all the requirements of our Quality System have been met. In certain circumstances where all the requirements of the Quality System have not been met, for instance if the associated AQC has failed, the reason is fully investigated and documented. The sample data is then evaluated alongside the other quality control checks performed during analysis to determine its suitability. Following this evaluation, provided the sample results have not been effected, the data is reported but accreditation is removed. It is a UKAS requirement for data not reported as accredited to be considered indicative only, but this does not mean the data is not valid. Where possible, and if requested, samples will be re-extracted and a revised report issued with accredited results. Please do not hesitate to contact the laboratory if further details are required of the circumstances which have led to the removal of accreditation. Laboratory records are kept for a period of no less than 6 years. REPORTS FROM THE SOUTH AFRICA LABORATORY Any method number not prefixed with SA has been undertaken in our UK laboratory unless reported as subcontracted. Measurement Uncertainty Measurement uncertainty defines the range of values that could reasonably be attributed to the measured quantity. This range of values has not been included within the reported results. Uncertainty expressed as a percentage can be provided upon request. Customer Provided Information Sample ID and depth is information provided by the customer. Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced QF-PM 3.1.9 v34 All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 16 of 19 ABBREVIATIONS and ACRONYMS USED # ISO17025 (UKAS Ref No. 4225) accredited - UK. SA ISO17025 (SANAS Ref No.T0729) accredited - South Africa B Indicates analyte found in associated method blank. DR Dilution required. M MCERTS accredited. NA Not applicable NAD No Asbestos Detected. ND None Detected (usually refers to VOC and/SVOC TICs). NDP No Determination Possible SS Calibrated against a single substance SV Surrogate recovery outside performance criteria. This may be due to a matrix effect. W Results expressed on as received basis. + AQC failure, accreditation has been removed from this result, if appropriate, see 'Note' on previous page. Results above calibration range, the result should be considered the minimum value. The actual result could be significantly >> higher, this result is not accredited. * Analysis subcontracted to an Element Materials Technology approved laboratory. AD Samples are dried at 35°C ±5°C CO Suspected carry over LOD/LOR Limit of Detection (Limit of Reporting) in line with ISO 17025 and MCERTS ME Matrix Effect NFD No Fibres Detected BS AQC Sample LB Blank Sample N Client Sample TB Trip Blank Sample OC Outside Calibration Range AA x2 Dilution AB x5 Dilution Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced QF-PM 3.1.9 v34 All solid results are expressed on a dry weight basis unless stated otherwise. 17 of 19 Element Materials Technology Method Code Appendix EMT Job No: 22/556 ISO Analysis done Prep Method MCERTS Reported on 17025 on As Received Test Method No. Description No. (if Description (UK soils dry weight (UKAS/S (AR) or Dried appropriate) only) basis ANAS) (AD) Modified USEPA 8260. Quantitative Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds by Modified US EPA method 5021. Preparation of solid and liquid samples for GC SA_TM15 SA_PM10 Headspace GC-MS. headspace analysis. Modified USEPA 8260. Quantitative Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds by Modified US EPA method 5021. Preparation of solid and liquid samples for GC SA_TM15 SA_PM10 Yes Headspace GC-MS. headspace analysis. Modified USEPA 8270. Quantitative determination of Semi-Volatile Organic compounds SA_TM16 SA_PM30 Water samples are extracted with solvent using a magnetic stirrer to create a vortex. (SVOCs) by GC-MS. Modified USEPA 8270. Quantitative determination of Semi-Volatile Organic compounds SA_TM16 SA_PM30 Water samples are extracted with solvent using a magnetic stirrer to create a vortex. Yes (SVOCs) by GC-MS. Modified US EPA method 8270. Determination of specific Polychlorinated Biphenyl SA_TM17 SA_PM30 Water samples are extracted with solvent using a magnetic stirrer to create a vortex. congeners by GC-MS. SA_TM19 Determination of pH by bench pH meter SA_PM0 No preparation is required. Yes SA_TM191 Orthophosphate as PO4 by Colorimetric Measurement v1 SA_PM31 Sample is filtered SA_TM20 Modified BS 1377-3: 1990 Gravimetric determination of Total Dissolved Solids SA_PM31 Sample is filtered Yes SA_TM27 Major ions by Ion Chromatography SA_PM0 No preparation is required. Yes SA_TM28 Determination of Electrical Conductivity with hand held manual conductivity probe. SA_PM0 No preparation is required. Yes QF-PM 3.1.10 v14 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced 18 of 19 Element Materials Technology Method Code Appendix EMT Job No: 22/556 ISO Analysis done Prep Method MCERTS Reported on 17025 on As Received Test Method No. Description No. (if Description (UK soils dry weight (UKAS/S (AR) or Dried appropriate) only) basis ANAS) (AD) Determination of Alkalinity by titration of the sample with a standard solution of acid by SA_TM32 SA_PM0 No preparation is required. Yes visual detection of end points. Modified US EPA method 8015B. Determination of Gasoline Range Organics (GRO) in Modified US EPA method 5021. Preparation of solid and liquid samples for GC SA_TM36 SA_PM12 the carbon chain range of C4-12, MTBE and BTEX by headspace GC-FID. headspace analysis. Modified USEPA 8015B method for the determination of solvent Extractable Petroleum Fractionation into aliphatic and aromatic fractions using a Rapid Trace SPE/Water SA_TM5 SA_PM16/PM30 Hydrocarbons (EPH) with carbon banding within the range C8-C40 GC-FID. samples are extracted with solvent using a magnetic stirrer to create a vortex. TM005: Modified USEPA 8015B. Determination of solvent Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons (EPH) including column fractionation in the carbon range of C10-35 into aliphatic and aromatic fractions by GC-FID. TM036: Modified USEPA 8015B. SA_TM5/TM36 SA_PM12/PM16/PM30 please refer to SA_PM16/PM30 and SA_PM12 for method details Determination of Gasoline Range Organics (GRO) in the carbon chain range of C5-10 by headspace GC-FID. Including determination of BTEX and calculation of Aliphatic fractions. Determination of Trace Metal elements by ICP-MS (Inductively Coupled Plasma - Mass Analysis of waters and leachates for metals by ICP OES/ICP MS. Samples are filtered for UK_TM170 UK_PM14 Spectrometry) modified USEPA 200.8/6020A and BS EN ISO 17294-2 2016 dissolved metals and acidified if required. Determination of Trace Metal elements by ICP-OES (Inductively Coupled Plasma - Analysis of waters and leachates for metals by ICP OES/ICP MS. Samples are filtered for UK_TM30 Optical Emission Spectrometry). Modified US EPA Method 200.7, 6010B and BS EN ISO UK_PM14 dissolved metals and acidified if required. 11885 2009 Soluble Ion analysis using the Thermo Aquakem Photometric Automatic Analyser. UK_TM38 UK_PM0 No preparation is required. Modified US EPA methods 325.2, 375.4, 365.2, 353.1, 354.1 Modified USEPA 9060. Determination of TOC by calculation from Total Carbon and UK_TM60 Inorganic Carbon using a TOC analyser, the carbon in the sample is converted to CO2 UK_PM0 No preparation is required. and then passed through a non-dispersive infrared gas analyser (NDIR). QF-PM 3.1.10 v14 Please include all sections of this report if it is reproduced 19 of 19 APPENDIX E-14 GEOTECHNICAL DESKTOP STUDY Standard Technology Title: GEOTECHNICAL DESKTOP STUDY Unique Identifier: GxKomatiPS-DS1 REPORT FOR KOMATI POWERSTATION Alternative Reference n/a Number: Area of Applicability: Engineering Documentation Type: Standard Revision: 1.0 Total Pages: 9 Next Review Date: N/A Disclosure Classification: Controlled Disclosure Compiled by Checked by Approved by Nkosazana Leseka Pr.Sci.Nat Sithembiso Mabena Andile Maneli Senior Geologist Substation Civil Engineer Substation Middle Manager Substation Engineering Engineering Engineering Date: 11/07/2022 Date: 11/07/2022 Date: 11 - 07 - 2022 PCM Reference: 240-53459042 SCOT Study Committee Number/Name: Click here to enter text. Document Classification: Controlled Disclosure GEOTECHNICAL DESKTOP STUDY REPORT FOR Unique Identifier: GxKomatiPS-DS1 KOMATI POWERSTATION Revision: 1.0 Page: 2 of 9 Content Page 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3 2. Supporting clauses ...................................................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Scope ................................................................................................................................................. 3 2.1.1 Purpose .................................................................................................................................. 3 2.1.2 Applicability ............................................................................................................................ 3 2.2 Normative/informative references ...................................................................................................... 3 2.2.1 Normative ............................................................................................................................... 3 2.2.2 Informative ............................................................................................................................. 4 2.3 Definitions ........................................................................................................................................... 4 2.3.1 General .................................................................................................................................. 4 2.3.2 Disclosure classification ......................................................................................................... 4 2.4 Abbreviations ...................................................................................................................................... 4 2.5 Roles and responsibilities .................................................................................................................. 4 2.6 Process for monitoring ....................................................................................................................... 4 2.7 Related/supporting documents .......................................................................................................... 4 3. Geotechnical Investigation Desktop Study Information ............................................................................... 5 3.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 5 3.1.1 Proposed Development ......................................................................................................... 5 3.1.2 Objective of the Investigation ................................................................................................. 5 3.1.3 Method of Investigation .......................................................................................................... 5 3.2 SITE DESCRIPTION .......................................................................................................................... 6 3.2.1 LOCATION ............................................................................................................................. 6 3.2.2 VEGETATION ........................................................................................................................ 6 3.2.3 CLIMATE................................................................................................................................ 6 3.2.4 SEISMICITY ........................................................................................................................... 7 3.3 REGIONAL GEOLOGY AND GROUND WATER .............................................................................. 8 3.3.1 GEOLOGY ............................................................................................................................. 8 3.3.2 GROUNDWATER .................................................................................................................. 9 3.4 GEOTECHNICAL PROPERTIES INFLUENCING THE DEVELOPMENT ........................................ 9 3.4.1 SOIL PROPERTIES ............................................................................................................... 9 3.4.2 EXISTING STRUCTURES NEARBY SITE ............................................................................ 9 3.5 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................... 9 4. AUTHORIZATION ....................................................................................................................................... 9 Figures Figure 1: Insert satellite image figure of Proposed Lesokwana Substation ....................................................... 6 Figure 2: Seismic Hazard map and Zones [1]...................................................................................................... 7 Figure 3: A recent seismic hazard map (2003) obtained from the Council for Geoscience [1]............................ 8 Figure 4: The Regional Geology of the proposed Komati Substation Sites ....................................................... 8 ESKOM COPYRIGHT PROTECTED When downloaded from the WEB, this document is uncontrolled and the responsibility rests with the user to ensure it is in line with the authorized version on the WEB. Document Classification: Controlled Disclosure GEOTECHNICAL DESKTOP STUDY REPORT FOR Unique Identifier: GxKomatiPS-DS1 KOMATI POWERSTATION Revision: 1.0 Page: 3 of 9 1. Introduction A desktop study is required as a pre-feasibility investigation, so that the consultant/contractors appointed to carry out a geotechnical investigation may efficiently choose suitable sites for a preliminary geotechnical investigation. It is also used to plan and develop the necessary investigation methods required to obtain parameters that can be used to choose a final site to be developed and also during the design and construction phase of a Substation related project. Eskom supports a diversified and balanced energy mix, with renewables forming an integral part of this diversified energy mix. Eskom therefore aspires to expand its renewables portfolio through Battery storage, Wind turbines and PV systems at Eskom owned power stations and selected greenfield sites. The proposed Solar PV plant, Battery Storages and Wind turbines for Komati Power Station is located within the boundary of Eskom-owned land. The area is in Mpumalanga province between Middleburg and Bethal. The area is 1623 m above the sea level. Suitable areas for renewable energy project was identified considering the wetlands, ash dams, existing underground and above ground services (electrical cables and overhead lines). The site is generally flat and partially identified as suitable for the installation of a Solar PV plants, Battery storages and Wind turbines. 2. Supporting clauses 2.1 Scope The desktop study covers a short description of the site, its topographical features, vegetation that is on the site, Climate considerations in relation to the Weinert N-value, seismic assessment of the site, geological information and geotechnical constraints on the proposed site. The information can be obtained from perusal of available maps, relevant literature and information obtained from site walkover surveys. 2.1.1 Purpose The purpose of this document is to record all necessary and required information used to choose a suitable site/s and plan a geotechnical investigation efficiently for Substation development related projects. 2.1.2 Applicability This document shall apply to the Substation Engineering Department in Transmission Technology. 2.2 Normative/informative references Parties using this document shall apply the most recent edition of the documents listed in the following paragraphs. 2.2.1 Normative [1] ISO 9001 Quality Management Systems. [2] TMH1:1979. Standard methods of testing road construction materials. [3] SAICE Site Investigation Code of Practice [4] SAICE Code of practice for the safety of persons working in small diameter Shafts and test pits for Civil Engineering Purposes. [5] SAIEG Guidelines for Soils and Rock profiling in South Africa. [6] SANS 1936 Part 1 – 5. Development on Dolomite Land. [7] SANS 10160: Basis of structural design and actions for buildings; Part 5: Basis for geotechnical design and actions. ESKOM COPYRIGHT PROTECTED When downloaded from the WEB, this document is uncontrolled and the responsibility rests with the user to ensure it is in line with the authorized version on the WEB. Document Classification: Controlled Disclosure GEOTECHNICAL DESKTOP STUDY REPORT FOR Unique Identifier: GxKomatiPS-DS1 KOMATI POWERSTATION Revision: 1.0 Page: 4 of 9 [8] SANS 10160-4:2011: Seismic actions and general requirements for buildings 2.2.2 Informative [1] Brink A.B.A. (1979) Engineering Geology of Southern Africa. Volume 1 – 4. Building Publications, Pretoria. [2] 1:250 000 Geological Series 2628 EAST RAND Map 2.3 Definitions 2.3.1 General Definition Description Weinert N-value Climatic descriptor with respect to the weatherability of rocks 2.3.2 Disclosure classification Controlled disclosure: controlled disclosure to external parties (either enforced by law, or discretionary). 2.4 Abbreviations Abbreviation Description SANS South African National Standards SAICE South African Institution of Civil Engineering 2.5 Roles and responsibilities The appointed Technician/Technologist/Engineer shall ensure that this document is compiled using the standards noted in this document or any other approved appropriate form of literature and shall also ensure that the document is issued with all required associated documentation. 2.6 Process for monitoring Not applicable. 2.7 Related/supporting documents Not applicable. ESKOM COPYRIGHT PROTECTED When downloaded from the WEB, this document is uncontrolled and the responsibility rests with the user to ensure it is in line with the authorized version on the WEB. Document Classification: Controlled Disclosure GEOTECHNICAL DESKTOP STUDY REPORT FOR Unique Identifier: GxKomatiPS-DS1 KOMATI POWERSTATION Revision: 1.0 Page: 5 of 9 3. Geotechnical Investigation Desktop Study Information 3.1 INTRODUCTION The main aim of the investigation is to conduct a desk study for the proposed site to evaluate if the site is suitable for a proposed substation development. For the evaluation of the proposed site during the desk study, factors such as the geology, vegetation, topography and drainage were considered. Information collected during this investigation is suitable for the site selection and verification purposes, once the final design is required, a detailed geotechnical investigation will be required to provide design parameters and confirm findings of this investigation. 3.1.1 Proposed Development The proposed Solar PV plant, Battery Storages and Wind turbines for Komati Power Station is located within the boundary of Eskom-owned land. The area is in Mpumalanga province between Middleburg and Bethal. The area is 1623m above the sea level. Suitable areas for renewable energy project were identified considering the wetlands, ash dams, existing underground and above ground services (electrical cables and overhead lines). The site is generally flat and partially identified as suitable for the installation of a Solar PV plants, Battery storages and Wind turbines. The proposed development would include the installation of the following equipments:  Solar PV plants  Battery Storages  Wind Turbines  Power Transformers.  High Voltage Switchgear.  Low Voltage switchgear.  Instrument Transformers  Surge Arrestors  Control Building and ancillary buildings  Platforms  Steel Structures and foundations  Access roads 3.1.2 Objective of the Investigation The primary objective of this investigation is to conduct intensive desk study of the proposed site selected to determine if it is suitable for the proposed green energy initiative. 3.1.3 Method of Investigation The desk study includes perusal of available information, such as Aerial photographs, Topographical maps, Geological maps and review of available geotechnical reports in the surrounds of the proposed site. ESKOM COPYRIGHT PROTECTED When downloaded from the WEB, this document is uncontrolled and the responsibility rests with the user to ensure it is in line with the authorized version on the WEB. Document Classification: Controlled Disclosure GEOTECHNICAL DESKTOP STUDY REPORT FOR Unique Identifier: GxKomatiPS-DS1 KOMATI POWERSTATION Revision: 1.0 Page: 6 of 9 3.2 SITE DESCRIPTION 3.2.1 LOCATION Komati power station is situated in Mpumalanga halfway between Middelburg and Bethe, corner of R35 and R542. Site Latitude (S) Longitude (E) Comments Proposed Site 26°05'26.4" 29°28'18.0" N/A Figure 1: Insert satellite image figure for Komati Power Station area for Geotechnical Investigation 3.2.2 VEGETATION There is farming vegetation on the proposed site. The vegetation on the selected site would have to be cleared during construction for the proposed development. Tree cutting to be conducted in accordance with environmental regulations and relevant authorities should be consulted. 3.2.3 CLIMATE According to the Engineering Geology of Southern Africa, Volume 1, the proposed site is in the climate zone which is referred to as “Sub-humid moist zone”. In this zone the soil are potentially highly compressible. The “Weinert N-Value” that describes the climatic environment of the are a is less than 5. Where “N” is less than “5”, chemical decomposition is predominant. In this study area, rocks anticipated to be particularly deeply weathered, often to depth of several tens of meters, and decomposition is pronounced. ESKOM COPYRIGHT PROTECTED When downloaded from the WEB, this document is uncontrolled and the responsibility rests with the user to ensure it is in line with the authorized version on the WEB. Document Classification: Controlled Disclosure GEOTECHNICAL DESKTOP STUDY REPORT FOR Unique Identifier: GxKomatiPS-DS1 KOMATI POWERSTATION Revision: 1.0 Page: 7 of 9 3.2.4 SEISMICITY The SANS code (Seismic actions and general requirements for buildings) SANS 10160-4:2011, shows that the site is situated in the area where the peak ground acceleration has a probability of being exceeded in 50 year period is 0.1g. Figure 2 also shows the zone (zone 1) where compliance with the minimum requirements is specified by the code. Zone 1 is defined as “Regions of natural seismic activity”. A more recent data produced by the Council of Geoscience is presented in Figure 3, showing peak ground acceleration with a 10% probability of being exceeded in 50 years. On this figure, the five sites are classified with ground acceleration of 0.1g (98cm/sec²) Komati Power Station Figure 2: Seismic Hazard map and Zones [1] ESKOM COPYRIGHT PROTECTED When downloaded from the WEB, this document is uncontrolled and the responsibility rests with the user to ensure it is in line with the authorized version on the WEB. Document Classification: Controlled Disclosure GEOTECHNICAL DESKTOP STUDY REPORT FOR Unique Identifier: GxKomatiPS-DS1 KOMATI POWERSTATION Revision: 1.0 Page: 8 of 9 Komati Power Station Figure 3: A recent seismic hazard map (2003) obtained from the Council for Geoscience [1] 3.3 REGIONAL GEOLOGY AND GROUND WATER 3.3.1 GEOLOGY According to the geological map, 1:250 000 Geological Series 2628 EAST RAND map the regional geology of the site comprises of Sandstone, Shale and Coal Beds (Pv), the site may have pockets of Dolerite dykes and sills(Jd) from the Vryheid Formation, from the Ecca Group of the Karoo Sequence, as shown in Figure 4 below. Site Location Figure 4: The Regional Geology of Komati Power Station ESKOM COPYRIGHT PROTECTED When downloaded from the WEB, this document is uncontrolled and the responsibility rests with the user to ensure it is in line with the authorized version on the WEB. Document Classification: Controlled Disclosure GEOTECHNICAL DESKTOP STUDY REPORT FOR Unique Identifier: GxKomatiPS-DS1 KOMATI POWERSTATION Revision: 1.0 Page: 9 of 9 3.3.2 GROUNDWATER There is a perennial river above the site and pockets of perennial pans running across or around the site, thus a shallow water table to be expected at some areas of the site. The depth of the water level can be confirmed during a detailed geotechnical investigation phase. 3.4 GEOTECHNICAL PROPERTIES INFLUENCING THE DEVELOPMENT 3.4.1 SOIL PROPERTIES The area predominantly consists of sandstone, shale and coal beds, sedimentary rock origin. Sandstone can be hard and form a strong hanging wall however in the presence of intercalation with mudrock, it could result in slope stability issues and rock falls in cases when the mudrock disintegrates or slake resulting in the exposure of the sandstone layers. Sandstone intercalating with siltstone in the Vryheid Formation are notorious for porewater pressures in the interfaces, which may result in sliding of the rock. The engineering properties of coal are not significant in conventional civil engineering applications of engineering geology. It is however important to assess the stability of underground workings and rehabilitation of the area. It is imperative to know the underground mining methods/quality of work or planned mining methods in areas deemed for surface development to not compromise the surface structures during pillar extractions with controlled goafing of the strata, in board and pillars mining method, for example. It is also important to know the rehabilitation strategy once the Life of Mine (LOM) has been reached, to avoid underground fires, which will result in surface subsidences, dolines and sinkholes which are prominent in the Mpumalanga area, a danger for surface developments. Dolerite, a basic igneous rock origin, which often results in onion skin weathering. This makes the area susceptible to producing problematic soils such as Clay (turf); silty clay changing to sandy clay with depth; corestones; gravel, cobbles and boulders. The engineering impacts associated with these weathered material are expansive clays; low shear strength semi- to impervious soils; poor compaction and workability; unstable slopes and uneven bedrock surface. 3.4.2 EXISTING STRUCTURES NEARBY SITE The site has various development such as underground mining nearby, surface mining, towns, powerlines, HV yard and a power station undergoing decommissioning, pipe lines, coal stockyard, ashdams and roads. 3.5 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the above, it is recommended a feasibility geotechnical study to be conducted before any developments. 4. AUTHORIZATION This document has been seen and accepted by: Name and surname Designation Sithembiso Mabena Civil Engineer Substation Engineering Nkosazana Leseka Senior Geologist Substation Engineering Andile Maneli Middle Manager Substation Engineering ESKOM COPYRIGHT PROTECTED When downloaded from the WEB, this document is uncontrolled and the responsibility rests with the user to ensure it is in line with the authorized version on the WEB.