annex 1 - euromax resources · annex 1a ilovica gold-copper project - eia team march 2016 project...

ILOVICA EIA

March 2016 Report No. 13514150363.702/B.1

ANNEX 1 EIA Process

ILOVICA EIA

March 2016 Report No. 13514150363.702/B.1

Annex 1A: EIA Team

ANNEX 1A Ilovica Gold-Copper Project - EIA Team

March 2016 Project No. 13514150363.702/B.1 Annex 1A - 1/1

EIA TEAM

The EIA Project Team is predominantly an in-house team of Golder Associates (Golder) specialists,

Schlumberger Water Services (SWS) specialists and Macedonian specialists.

Role Name Company / Institution

Working Base

Field of Expertise

Project Director Simon Aldrich Golder UK ESIA

Project Manager Andrew Morsley Golder UK Mining ESIA

Assistant Project Manager Michaela Simms Golder UK ESIA and ESIA co-ordination

Technical Lead - Geology Gareth Digges Le Touche

Golder UK Geology

Technical Lead - Geomorphology, Soils and Land Use Capability

Collen Middleton Golder Canada Soils and geomorphology

Technical Lead – Ecology and Biodiversity

Freddy Brookes Golder UK Ecology and biodiversity

Technical Lead – Climate and Air Quality

Julia Stalleicken Golder UK Climate and air quality

Technical Lead - Noise Simon Waddell Golder UK Noise

Technical Lead – Archaeology and Cultural Heritage

Paul Wheelhouse Golder UK Archaeology and cultural heritage

Technical Lead - Socio-economics and Stakeholder Engagement

Linda Havers Golder Canada Socio-economics and stakeholder engagement

Technical Lead - LVIA Nigel Rockliff DRaW Ltd UK Visual impact assessment and integrated land planning

Technical Lead – GIS and Information Management

Lisa Doyle Golder UK Information management

Technical Lead – Surface Water Peter Baur SWS UK Surface water

Technical Lead – Groundwater Rod Mitchell SWS UK Groundwater

Technical Lead – Water Quality and Geochemistry

Julia Dent SWS UK Water quality and geochemistry

Authorised signatory for the EIA Dragi Peltechki Euromax Resources Macedonia Mining engineering

Macedonian Specialist – Noise, Air Quality, Major Hazards

Dejan Mirakovski University of Shtip Macedonia Noise, air quality, major hazards

Macedonian Specialist – Ecology and Biodiversity

Branko Micevski Biomaster Macedonia Ecology and biodiversity

Macedonian Specialist – Soils, Water Quality, Geochemistry

Blazho Boev University of Shtip Macedonia Soils, water quality, geochemistry

Macedonian Specialist – Water Quantity

Ivancho Kaevski Hydro-Energo Engineering

Macedonia Water quantity

Macedonian Specialist – Sediment Goran Tasev University of Shtip Macedonia Sediment

Macedonian Specialist – Noise, Major Hazards

Marija Hadzi-Nikolova

University of Shtip Macedonia Noise, major hazards

Macedonian Specialist – LVIA Aleksandar Vasilev Studio Atrium Macedonia LVIA

Macedonian Specialist – Archaeology and Cultural Heritage

Vangel Ivanov Independent consultant

Macedonia Archaeology and cultural heritage

ILOVICA EIA

March 2016 Report No. 13514150363.702/B.1

Annex 1B: EIA Scoping Decision

QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ISO: 9001:2008

Republic of Macedonia Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning

Archive no. 11-540/2 Date: 25.02.2016 To: EUROMAX RESOURCES DOO, Company for trade, production and services Partizanski odredi Blvd, No. 14-1/2/3 Skopje Subject: Delivery of Decision Connection: Your reference number 0302-16/16 dated 21.01.2016 Dear all, Acting upon your notification on the intention of developing the Project on open pit exploitation of minerals – copper and gold at the Ilovica site, Municipality of Bosilovo and Municipality of Novo Selo and the Request on determining the scope of the Project environmental impact assessment (EIA) for the investor EUROMAX RESOURCES DOO, Company for trade, production and services, with address at Partizanski odredi Blvd, No. 14-1/2/3, Skopje, attached to this letter is the Decision on determining the requirement for environmental impact assessment for the Project on open pit exploitation of minerals – copper and gold at the Ilovica site, Municipality of Bosilovo and Municipality of Novo Selo as well as the scope of the Project environmental impact assessment.

Yours faithfully,

Minister Nurhan Izairi /personally signed/

Official round stamp of the institution Prepared by: Zoran Boshev, MSc /personally signed/ Controlled by/Agreed upon by: Aleksandar Petkovski /personally signed/ Approved by: Daniel Eftimov /personally signed/ Acting Director of Environment Directorate

Republic of Macedonia Ministry of Environment And Physical Planning Goce Delchev Blvd bb 1000 Skopje Republic of Macedonia Tel (02) 3251 400 Fax. (02) 3220 165 e-mail: [email protected] web: www.moepp.gov.mk

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.moepp.gov.mk/



Archive no. 11-540/2 Date: 25.02.2016 To: EUROMAX RESOURCES DOO, Company for trade, production and services Partizanski odredi Blvd, No. 14-1/2/3 Skopje Subject: Delivery of Decision Connection: Your reference number 0302-16/16 dated 21.01.2016 Pursuant to Article 81 of the Law on the Environment (Official Gazette of RM, no. 53/05, 81/05, 24/07, 159/08, 83/09, 48/2010, 124/2010, 51/2011, 123/2012, 93/2013, 42/2014, 44/2015 and 129/2015), the Minister of Environment and Physical Planning adopted the following

D E C I S I O N

1. This decision is confirming the requirement for environmental

impact assessment (EIA) for the Project on open pit exploitation of minerals – copper and gold at the Ilovica site, Municipality of Bosilovo and Municipality of Novo Selo for the investor EUROMAX RESOURCES DOO, Company for trade, production and services, with address at Partizanski odredi Blvd, No. 14-1/2/3, Skopje, as well as the scope of the Project EIA.

2. The scope of the EIA is set in the Checklist on determining the scope of the Project EIA: questions related to the Project description, and the Checklist is an appendix to this Decision.

3. Additionally to the Checklist on determining the scope of the Project EIA, the scope of the Project EIA should comprise matters related to geological and hydrogeological aspects, impacts on climate, biodiversity, noise impacts, visual aspects, cumulative impacts and socioeconomic aspects.

4. This decision shall enter into force on the day of its adopting and it shall be published in at least one daily newspaper accessible throughout the Republic of Macedonia, on the web page and the notice board of the Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning.






Rationale

A Notification on the intention of developing the Project on open pit exploitation of minerals – copper and gold at the Ilovica site, Municipality of Bosilovo and Municipality of Novo Selo, no. 11-540/1, and the Request on determining the scope of the Project environmental impact assessment (EIA), no. 11/541/1, were submitted to the Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning by the investor on 21.01.2016.

The investor, EUROMAX RESOURCES DOO, Company for trade, production and services, has the intention on developing the Project on open pit exploitation of minerals – copper and gold at the Ilovica site, Municipality of Bosilovo and Municipality of Novo Selo.

The planned Project is an open pit for exploitation of minerals – copper and gold at the Ilovica site, Municipality of Bosilovo and Municipality of Novo Selo. Euromax Resources DOO Skopje has signed an Agreement for exploitation of minerals – copper and gold at the Ilovica site, Municipality of Bosilovo and Municipality of Novo Selo with the Government of the Republic of Macedonia on 13.01.2016, Agreement number 24-40/2. The Ilovica concession area, where the exploitation of minerals will be done, covers an area of 13.7395 km2 = 1373.95 ha. The projected annual throughput of the open pit is 10 million tonnes of sulfide ore and approximately 7 million tonnes of waste.

The main processes of the open pit shall consist of: exploitation with discontinuous mining technology, drilling and blasting, loading the ROM in haul trucks and transporting it to the primary crusher, crushing the ore in cone crusher and transporting it to the processing plant via a conveyor, mineral processing (milling, flotation and concentration, carbon in leach), using the waste rock to construct the tailings management facility embankment and disposal of the tailings. The final products of the mining process are copper concentrate and gold dorè produced on site and dispatched to a refinery for further processing and refining.

According to the Law on the Environment (Official Gazette of RM, no. 53/05, 81/05, 24/07, 159/08, 83/09, 48/2010, 124/2010, 51/2011, 123/2012, 93/2013, 42/2014, 44/2015 and 129/2015) and the Regulation on defining the projects and the criteria upon which the requirement on implementing the EIA procedure is defined (Official Gazette of RM, no. 74/2005, 109/2009 and 164/2012), the proposed project is classified within Appendix 1 – Projects requiring






compulsory EIA, item 16 – Quarries and open pits in which the mining area covers more than 25 ha or underground exploitation or extraction in which the mining area covers more than 150 ha, and we hereby find that an EIA procedure is required to be carried out for the Project. The follow-up was to fill in the Checklist on determining the scope of the Project EIA: questions related to the Project description and determine the scope of the Project EIA. Additionally to the questions of the Checklist on determining the scope of the Project EIA, the investor should provide more details on the following:

Geological and hydrogeological aspects

These aspects are significant in relation to the environment during construction and operation of such projects. Therefore, they represent an important segment to be included in the EIA.

Impacts on climate

These aspects are also significant for this type of projects in relation to the environment during construction and operation. Therefore, they represent an important segment to be included in the EIA.

Biodiversity

The scope of the EIA should include biodiversity baseline in the area, possible occurrence of protected and affected habitats, occurrence of protected areas, recorded areas for protection, occurrence of ecological networks, as well as potential impacts of project implementation.

Noise impacts

Noise may represents a major issue during field activities, during construction and operation. The EIA should provide noise impact analysis in all phases.

Visual aspects

These aspects are significant in relation to the environment during operation and closure. It therefore represents an important segment to be included in the EIA, comprising the landscape effects as well.

Cumulative impacts

The EIA should also provide an analysis of cumulative effects in case there are projects/facilities with the potential of similar environmental impacts in the proposed project area.






Socioeconomic aspects

The socioeconomic impact assessment shall provide a review of the potential direct and indirect effects of the project on the economy and social conditions in the project area.

Pursuant to the above, a decision has been adopted as referred to in the enacting terms.

Legal notice: The investor, the affected legal and natural entities and civil associations for environmental protection and promotion may appeal against this Decision to the Commission for decisions in administrative procedure of second degree in relation the environment within eight days from the publishing date of the decision.

Minister Nurhan Izairi /personally signed/

Official round stamp of the institution Prepared by: Zoran Boshev, MSc /personally signed/ Controlled by/Agreed upon by: Aleksandar Petkovski /personally signed/ Approved by: Daniel Eftimov /personally signed/ Acting Director of Environment Directorate




ILOVICA EIA

March 2016 Report No. 13514150363.702/B.1

Annex 1C: EIA Methods

ANNEX 1C Impact Analysis Methods

March 2016 Project No. 13514150363.702/B.1 Annex 1C - 1/4

IMPACT ANALYSIS METHODS

Effects Analysis

The term “effect” will be used when describing the consequence of a change arising from the Project on a

receptor. The term “impact” will be used to describe an effect that results in a change which requires mitigation

or management to be considered.

The types of effect that will be considered in the EIA include:

Direct – an effect that arises directly from activities that form an integral part of the Project (e.g. new

infrastructure) and is within the control of the developer;

Indirect – an effect that arises from activities not explicitly forming part of the Project but as a “knock on

effect” of it, that may not be within the control of the developer (e.g. changes to water availability due to

increased influx of people); and

Combined – the combination of other direct or indirect effects of the Project on any one or group of

receptors.

Impact Classification

The environmental or social consequence will be determined by taking into account several parameters.

These will vary by technical discipline, but generally include the following:

Magnitude of change;

Geographic extent of change;

Duration of change; and

Frequency.

The magnitude of change varies by topic (generally with relation to change from baseline conditions or with

reference to the EDC) and is defined in the relevant section. Geographic extent, duration and frequency are

defined in Table 1 and are used consistently across the disciplines so that the resulting impact classifications

are consistent. The parameters are combined to achieve an impact classification, by following the decision

matrix presented in Table 2.

Table 1: Definition of impact classification parameters

Geographic Extent Duration Frequency

Local: occurs within the biophysical

local study area

Regional: occurs within the

biophysical regional study area

Beyond regional: occurs outside

the biophysical regional study area or crosses an international boundary

Short-term: Effect is reversible at

end of construction

Medium-term: Effect is reversible at

end of operations

Long-term: Effect is reversible within

a defined length of time or beyond closure

Permanent: Effect is not reversible

Infrequent: Effect occurs

intermittently but not continuously over the assessment period

Frequent: Effect occurs repeatedly

or continuously over the assessment period



Table 2: Decision matrix for impact classification

Magnitude Geographic Extent Duration Frequency Impact Classification

Negligible All All All Negligible

Low Local Short-term Infrequent/Frequent Negligible

Low Local Medium-term Infrequent Negligible

Low Local Medium-term Frequent Low

Low Local Long-term Infrequent/Frequent Low

Low Local Permanent Infrequent Low

Low Local Permanent Frequent Moderate

Low Regional/ Beyond Regional Short-term Infrequent Negligible

Low Regional/ Beyond Regional Short-term Frequent Low

Low Regional/ Beyond Regional Medium-term Infrequent/Frequent Low

Low Regional/ Beyond Regional Long-term Infrequent Low

Low Regional/Beyond Regional Long-term Frequent Moderate

Low Regional/Beyond Regional Permanent Infrequent Low

Low Regional/Beyond Regional Permanent Frequent Moderate

Moderate Local Short-term Infrequent/Frequent Low

Moderate Local Medium-term Infrequent Low

Moderate Local Medium-term Frequent Moderate

Moderate Local Long-term Infrequent/Frequent Moderate

Moderate Local Permanent Infrequent Moderate

Moderate Local Permanent Frequent High

Moderate Regional Short-term Infrequent Low

Moderate Regional Short-term Frequent Moderate

Moderate Regional Medium-term Infrequent/Frequent Moderate

Moderate Regional Long-term Infrequent Moderate

Moderate Regional Long-term Frequent High

Moderate Regional Permanent Infrequent/Frequent High

Moderate Beyond Regional Short-term Infrequent/Frequent Moderate

Moderate Beyond Regional Medium-term Infrequent/Frequent High

Moderate Beyond Regional Long-term Infrequent/Frequent High

Moderate Beyond Regional Permanent Infrequent/Frequent High

High Local Short-term Infrequent/Frequent Moderate

High Local Medium-term Infrequent Moderate

High Local Medium-term Frequent High

High Local Long-term Infrequent/Frequent High

High Local Permanent Infrequent/Frequent High

High Regional Short-term Infrequent Moderate

High Regional Short-term Frequent High

High Regional Medium-term Infrequent/Frequent High

High Regional Long-term Infrequent/Frequent High

High Regional Permanent Infrequent/Frequent High

High Beyond Regional Short-term Infrequent/Frequent High

High Beyond Regional Medium-term Infrequent/Frequent High

High Beyond Regional Long-term Infrequent/Frequent High

High Beyond Regional Permanent Infrequent/Frequent High



Table 3 presents the matrix to be used to determine impact consequence by combining the impact

classification with receptor sensitivity, where relevant (primarily for ecological and social receptors).

Table 3: Determination of impact consequence by taking sensitivity into account

Impact classification*

High Moderate Low Negligible

Re

ce

pto

r

Se

ns

itiv

ity

or

imp

ort

an

ce Very High Major Major Moderate Minor

High Major Moderate Minor Negligible

Medium Moderate Minor Minor Negligible

Low Minor Minor Negligible Negligible

*Determined by combining magnitude, geographic extent, duration and frequency.

Probability is not considered in the effects analysis for most technical disciplines. An analysis of hazards

associated with malfunctions or accidents will be reported in Section 5.11 (Environmental Risks and Accidents)

and will feed into the Emergency Preparedness and Response Plan.

Mitigation

Should the results of the impact analysis show unacceptable results (e.g. unacceptable exceedance of the

EDC or baseline conditions; negative effects outweighing positive effects), mitigation will be identified

according to the mitigation hierarchy:

Avoid - make changes to the Project’s design or location to avoid adverse effects.

Minimise - reduce adverse effects through sensitive environmental treatments/design.

Restore - measures taken during or after construction to repair/reinstate and return a site to the situation

prior to unacceptable long term impacts.

Compensate/offset - where avoidance or reduction measures are not available, it may be appropriate to

provide compensatory/offsetting measures. Compensatory measures do not eliminate the original

adverse effect; they merely seek to offset it with a comparable positive one.

Improvement measures - projects can have positive effects as well as negative ones and the Project

preparation stage presents an opportunity to enhance these positive features through innovative design.

Mitigation will be included for all impacts that are classified as moderate or high/major. These mitigations may

also be effective in reducing low/minor impacts, however low/minor impacts will not be the focus of specific or

targeted mitigations.

Residual Impacts

Residual impacts are those that remain following the implementation of the proposed mitigation. Residual

impacts will be defined based on the same process applied to the evaluation of impacts.

Cumulative Impact Assessment

Cumulative impacts are defined by the IFC as impacts that “result from the incremental impact, on areas or

resources used or directly impacted by the Project, from other existing, planned or reasonably defined

developments at the time the risks and impacts identification process is conducted”. Cumulative impacts will

be assessed as part of an analysis of the Project and will be prepared as a separate chapter alongside the

technical chapters.

The assessment of cumulative impacts will consider the effects of other developments in the vicinity of the

Project which are operating, under construction or have been consented which, when combined with the

effects of the Project, may have an incremental effect.



Environmental and Social Management Plan

An environmental management plan and monitoring & control plan will be developed for submission with the

EIA to the Macedonian government. These plans will be developed in accordance with Macedonian legislation

and regulation. Euromax will establish an ESMS to implement these plans.

ILOVICA EIA

March 2016 Report No. 13514150363.702/B.1

Annex 1D: Ilovica Gold-Copper Project - Environmental and Social Engineering Considerations

July 2015

ILOVICA GOLD-COPPER PROJECT

Environmental and Social Engineering Considerations

REPO

RT

Report Number. 13514150363.526/A.0

Distribution: Euromax Resources (Macedonia) UK Ltd- 1 copy (pdf) Golder Associates (UK) Ltd. - 1 copy

Submitted to: Euromax Resources (Macedonia) UK Ltd 5th Floor 12 Berkley Street London W1J 8DT

ILOVICA ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................ 6

2.0 OBJECTIVE ............................................................................................................................................................... 6

2.1 AMEC Key Information Requirements .......................................................................................................... 7

3.0 CLIMATE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................ 8

3.1 Rainfall .......................................................................................................................................................... 8

3.1.1 Ilovica Village .......................................................................................................................................... 8

3.1.2 Rainfall at Plant Site and Deposit Area ................................................................................................. 10

3.1.3 Extreme Rainfall Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 11

3.1.4 Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP) ............................................................................................... 13

3.2 Snow ........................................................................................................................................................... 13

3.2.1 Ilovica Village ........................................................................................................................................ 14

3.2.2 Berovo/Ilovica Plant Site ....................................................................................................................... 15

3.3 Evaporation................................................................................................................................................. 16

3.4 Thunder and Lightning ................................................................................................................................ 17

3.5 Wind ........................................................................................................................................................... 18

3.6 Temperature ............................................................................................................................................... 19

3.7 Solar Radiation ........................................................................................................................................... 19

3.8 Humidity ...................................................................................................................................................... 20

4.0 FLOOD STUDIES .................................................................................................................................................... 20

4.1 Effects of Snowmelt on Runoff.................................................................................................................... 20

4.2 100-year Flood Line at Ilovica Reservoir .................................................................................................... 22

4.3 100-year Flood Lines on the Jazga River ................................................................................................... 24

4.4 River Protection in Vicinity of the Pit Entrance ............................................................................................ 25

4.5 Flood Risk Assessment at Shtuka Village .................................................................................................. 25

5.0 WATER QUALITY ................................................................................................................................................... 25

6.0 POTENTIAL CONSTRAINTS TO ENGINEERING DESIGN ................................................................................... 26

6.1 Identification of Potential Constraints .......................................................................................................... 26

6.1.1 Potential Ecological Constraints ............................................................................................................ 26

6.1.2 Archaeological Constraints ................................................................................................................... 26

6.1.3 Flooding Constraints ............................................................................................................................. 26

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 i


6.1.4 Noise Constraints .................................................................................................................................. 26

6.2 Landfill Design Considerations ................................................................................................................... 26

6.2.1 EU Landfill Directive (LFD) .................................................................................................................... 26

6.2.2 Additional Landfill Design Considerations ............................................................................................. 27

6.3 Construction Materials Risk Assessment .................................................................................................... 28

7.0 WATER SUPPLY OPTIONS UNDER CONSIDERATION ....................................................................................... 31

7.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 31

7.2 Water Balance Model Update ..................................................................................................................... 31

7.3 Ilovica Reservoir ......................................................................................................................................... 32

7.4 Coffer Dam ................................................................................................................................................. 34

7.5 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................. 34

8.0 POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ISSUES AND APPROACH TO MITIGATION AND MANAGEMENT ....................................................................................................................................................... 35

8.1 Mitigation Hierarchy .................................................................................................................................... 35

8.2 Environmental Design Criteria .................................................................................................................... 35

8.3 Golder Potential Issues and Mitigation ....................................................................................................... 36

8.4 SWS Possible Water Impacts and Mitigation Options ................................................................................ 46

9.0 SUMMARY OF ENGINEERING MEASURE FOR EARLY CONSIDERATION ....................................................... 56

9.1 Erosion Control and Sediment Management .............................................................................................. 56

9.2 Dust/Air Quality Management ..................................................................................................................... 56

9.3 Water Management .................................................................................................................................... 56

9.4 Hazardous Materials Areas ........................................................................................................................ 58

9.5 Visual Impacts ............................................................................................................................................ 58

9.6 Noise Management ..................................................................................................................................... 58

TABLES Table 2.1.1 Information required from the ESIA consultant (Golder): .................................................................................. 7

Table 2.1.2 Information required from the water studies consultant (SWS) ........................................................................ 7

Table 3.1.1 Statistics for the Ilovica village annual rainfall records, 1960/61-2010/11 ........................................................ 9

Table 3.1.2 Estimates of annual rainfall (mm) in dry, average and wet years at Ilovica village based on data 1960/61 – 2010/11 ............................................................................................................................................. 9

Table 3.1.3 Mean monthly rainfalls (mm) and their percentage contribution to mean annual rainfall, Ilovica village, 1960/61-2010/11 ................................................................................................................................................ 9

Table 3.1.4 Percentile monthly rainfall (mm) at Ilovica village, 1960/61-2010/11 ................................................................ 9

Table 3.1.5 Average, maximum and minimum number of non-precipitation days at Ilovica village, 1960/61-2010/11 ............................................................................................................................................................ 10

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 ii


Table 3.1.6 Statistics for the synthesised plant site annual rainfall records, 1960/61-2013/14.......................................... 10

Table 3.1.7 Estimates of annual rainfall (mm) in dry, average and wet years at the plant site based on synthesised data 1960/61 – 2013/14 ................................................................................................................................... 10

Table 3.1.8 Estimated mean monthly rainfalls (mm) and their percentage contribution to mean annual rainfall, plant site, 1960/61-2013/14 .............................................................................................................................. 11

Table 3.1.9 Estimated percentile monthly rainfall (mm) at the plant site, 1960/61-2013/14 .............................................. 11

Table 3.1.10 Estimated average, maximum and minimum number of non-precipitation days at the plant site, 1960/61-2013/14 .............................................................................................................................................. 11

Table 3.1.11 Rainfall depth-duration-frequency results (mm) for the project site .............................................................. 12

Table 3.1.12 Rainfall intensity-duration-frequency results (mm/h) for the project site ....................................................... 12

Table 3.1.13 Estimate of 24-hour PMP for Strumica and Ilovica ....................................................................................... 13

Table 3.2.1 Mean monthly snow depth (cm) at Ilovica village (290 masl), 1960/61-2010/11 ............................................ 14

Table 3.2.2 Monthly snow water equivalent (mm) at Ilovica village (290 masl), 1960/61-2010/11 .................................... 14

Table 3.2.3 Mean monthly precipitation (mm) at Ilovica village (290 masl), 1960/61-2010/11 .......................................... 14

Table 3.2.4 Average, maximum and minimum number of days per month of lying snow at Ilovica village (290 masl), 1960/61-2010/11 ................................................................................................................................... 14

Table 3.2.5 Mean monthly snow depth (cm) at Berovo (850 masl), 1960/61-2013/14 ...................................................... 15

Table 3.2.6 Monthly snow water equivalent (mm) at Berovo meteorological station (850 masl), 1960/61-2013/14 .......... 15

Table 3.2.7 Mean monthly precipitation (mm) at plant site using Berovo data for snow water equivalent, 1960/61-2013/14 ............................................................................................................................................................ 15

Table 3.2.8 Average, maximum and minimum number of days per month of lying snow at Berovo (850 masl), 1960/61-2013/14 .............................................................................................................................................. 16

Table 3.3.1 Mean monthly Class A pan evaporation (Epan) at Strumica, 1979/80-2010/11 ............................................. 16

Table 3.3.2 Mean monthly Penman open water evaporation (Eo) at Strumica, 1981/82-2011/12 .................................... 16

Table 3.3.3 Mean monthly reference Penman-Monteith crop evapotranspiration (ETo) at Strumica, 1981/82-2011/12 ............................................................................................................................................................ 16

Table 3.3.4 Monthly open water evaporation (Eo) at EOX meteorological stationA ........................................................... 17

Table 3.3.5 Monthly reference crop evapotranspiration (ETo) at EOX meteorological stationA ......................................... 17

Table 3.3.6 Plant site mean monthly rainfalls (mm) 1960/61-2010/11, monthly open water evaporation (Eo) and reference crop evapotranspiration (ETo) at EOX meteorological stationA and effective rainfall ....................... 17

Table 3.4.1 Strumica (230 masl) days with thunder and lightning, 2008/09-2013/14 ........................................................ 18

Table 3.4.2 Berovo (850 masl) days with thunder and lightning, 2009/10-2013/14 ........................................................... 18

Table 3.5.1 Monthly average for wind speed, EOX meteorological station ....................................................................... 18

Table 3.6.1 Summary of temperature data, EOX meteorological station .......................................................................... 19

Table 3.7.1 Summary of solar radiation data, daily totals (kJ/m2) ..................................................................................... 19

Table 3.8.1 Summary of humidity data .............................................................................................................................. 20

Table 4.1.1 Ranked annual maximum daily spill volumes from Ilovica reservoir and causative precipitation, 2000-2014. ................................................................................................................................................................ 20

Table 4.2.1 Water Economy Bureau peak flood flow estimates and associated reservoir levels ...................................... 24

Table 4.3.1 HEC-RAS model inputs .................................................................................................................................. 24

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 iii


Table 6.3.1 Summary of geochemical issues and risks .................................................................................................... 29

Table 5.3.1 Potential environmental issues and potential engineering solutions ............................................................... 36

Table 5.4.1 Potential issues and potential engineering solutions (water only) .................................................................. 46

FIGURES

Figure 3.1.1 - Annual rainfall series, Ilovica Village, hydrological years 1960/61 to 2010/11

Figure 3.1.2 - Frequency analysis of annual rainfalls at Ilovica Village, 1960/61-2010/11

Figure 3.1.3 - Ilovica monthly rainfall percentiles, 1960/61-2010/11

Figure 3.1.4 - Annual rainfall series, plant site, hydrological years 1960/61-2013/14

Figure 3.1.5 - Frequency analysis of annual rainfalls at plant site, 1960/61-2013/14

Figure 3.1.6 - Plant site monthly rainfall percentiles, 1960/61-2013/14

Figure 3.1.7 - Depth duration frequency curves for design rainfalls at the plant site

Figure 3.1.8 - Design rainfall intensity duration frequency curves at the plant site

Figure 3.2.1 - Plant site average monthly precipitation and evaporation

Figure 3.5.1 - Monthly Average and Daily Wind Speeds, EOX Meteorological Station

Figure 3.5.2 - Windrose Plot from EOX Meteorological Station

Figure 3.6.1 - Monthly and Daily Temperature Data from EOX Meteorological Station

Figure 3.7.1 - Daily Solar Radiation Data from EOX Meteorological Station

Figure 3.8.1 - Daily Relative Humidity Data from EOX Meteorological Station

Figure 4.2.1 - HEC-HMS model of the Ilovica reservoir catchment

Figure 4.2.2 - HEC-HMS model calibration results (5th June 2004 event) and predicted reservoir response to a 100yr return, 24hr design storm

Figure 4.3.1 - Preliminary 100-year flood inundation map, Jazga River and oxide tributary

Figure 4.3.2 - Preliminary 100-year flood profile, Jazga River and oxide tributary

Figure 7.1.1 - Ilovica operations network diagram, including current water source options

Figure 7.2.1 - Probabilistic projection of total annual raw water requirement

Figure 7.2.2 - Probabilistic projection of TMF pond volume

Figure 7.3.1 - Ilovica Reservoir: Storage yield return period of supply failure without additional inputs

Figure 7.3.2 - Ilovica Reservoir: Storage yield return period of supply failure with additional inputs

Figure 7.4.1 - Coffer dam: Storage yield curve assuming 10m3/hr constant abstraction

Figure 7.4.2 - Coffer dam: Storage yield curve assuming a 20m3/hr constant abstraction

No table of figures entries found.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 iv


APPENDICES APPENDIX A Figures

APPENDIX B Summary Water Quality Data

APPENDIX C Constraints Maps

APPENDIX D Environmental Design Criteria

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 v


1.0 INTRODUCTION This document provides some initial engineering design considerations, driven by environmental and/or social issues and is intended to inform engineering design of the Ilovica Project. The need for this document was precipitated by a list of Key Information Requirements received from AMEC Foster Wheeler (AMEC) in March 2015, which were required to support the Feasibility Study for the Ilovica Gold-Copper Project. Golder Associates (UK) Ltd (Golder) and Schlumberger Water Services (SWS), in consultation with Euromax (EOX), have prepared this document to not only provide some general design considerations, but also to respond directly to the information request.

Golder is responsible for the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) for the Ilovica Project, with SWS providing all input on water topics (surface water, groundwater and geochemistry). Golder and SWS are currently completing baseline studies for the ESIA and as such, the following information should be treated as preliminary guidance based upon good international practice and experience.

The assessment of environmental and social impacts is an iterative process. The information presented in this document should not be considered mitigation. It is intended that engineering teams will use the information provided herein to guide design in the Feasibility Study and to minimise impacts in the initial design. A Project description, considering the engineering considerations and environmental design data presented herein, will be produced by the start of September 2015 for assessment in the ESIA. The ESIA will then assess impacts, where necessary define mitigation in collaboration with the engineers, and assess the residual impacts incorporating mitigation. Any mitigation, assessed during the ESIA process, should be described by end of November 2015, for incorporation into the Feasibility Study. The ESIA will also inform environmental and social management plans for construction, operations and closure.

Technical information can be found in the following key sections of this report:

Section 2.0: Key information requirements requested by AMEC and the corresponding section of this report where the response can be found.

Section 3.0: Climate summaries for all parameters for which data is currently available.

Section 4.0: Study of potential flood risk and design requirements.

Section 5.0: Summary water quality data.

Section 6.0: Description of potential environmental constraints and influence of site layout.

Section 7.0: Description of water supply options currently under consideration by SWS.

Section 8.2: Potential environmental issues and design considerations (all ESIA topics except water).

Section 8.3: Potential environmental issues and design considerations (all water topics).

Section 9.0: Summary of environmental design considerations.

2.0 OBJECTIVE The objective of this report is to highlight preliminary design considerations which are driven by environmental or social issues and to provide adequate information to guide environmentally and socially driven elements of the Feasibility Study.

The information provided herein provides recommendations that can be incorporated into project design to avoid or minimise environmental and social impacts which would otherwise require mitigation or management later in the ESIA process.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 6


2.1 AMEC Key Information Requirements Table 2.1.1 and Table 2.1.2 have been copied from AMEC’s information requirement document. Tables have been extended to include the final column which indicates where the information requested can be found in this document.

Table 2.1.1 Information required from the ESIA consultant (Golder):

Key question to be answered… Dependent Design or Capital Cost Section Reference

What should be done for stockpile management and materials management with respect to dust?

• Stockpile and conveyor covering civil, mechanical, structural cost

• Dust suppression/extraction mechanical, structural cost

• Water run-off and erosion requirements civil costs

Table 8.3.1 (rows 7, 8, 21, 22, 23) Section 9.2

How should water run-off and pollution control be managed? *

• Plant layout civil costs • Water diversion and containment civil,

mechanical, piping costs

Table 8.4.1 (rows 14-17, 26, 35-37, 41, 42, 46, 48, 50, 51) Section 9.1 Section 9.3

How should excess (positive) water balance be managed? *

• Mass and water balance mechanical, civil costs

Table 8.4.1 (row 41) Section 9.3

Do any areas on the site need to be preserved for sustainability reasons?

• Plant layout and size mechanical, piping, structural, electrical and civil costs

• Plant site selection mechanical, piping, structural, electrical and civil costs

Table 8.3.1 (rows 12-17, 19, 39, 41, 44) Section 6.1

Management plan for operational phase • Potential effect on civil design Section 9

Management plan for construction phase

• Potential effect on contractors’ methodology, for instance stockpiling of materials, closure of borrow pits and control of runoff

Section 9

* Response provided by SWS.

Table 2.1.2 Information required from the water studies consultant (SWS)


What is the maximum water supply? • Water constraints, if any Section 7

Water quality in Ilovica reservoir as well as underground supply, with seasonal variation?

• Influence of contaminants on process design • Suitability for batching concrete Section 5

Intensity-duration-frequency relationship for storm events up to 1:100 yr return period and up to 24 hrs duration?

• Sizing of drainage and stormwater containment systems Table 3.1.12

Snow component of overall precipitation? • Sizing of stormwater systems, snow loads Section 3.2

Effect of snow melt on runoff • Sizing of stormwater systems Section 3.2

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 7



Flood lines, including flood levels at Ilovica Reservoir, wherever these can impact on placement of infrastructure?

• Positioning and configuration of infrastructure such as intake structure, stockpiles, construction camp/laydown, embankments and culverts

Section 4

Average precipitation by month and number of non-precipitation days by month (if possible)?

• Information for contractors to plan construction activities and preventative measures for dewatering excavations

Tables 3.1.3, 3.1.5, 3.1.8, and 3.1.10

3.0 CLIMATE SUMMARY 3.1 Rainfall This section presents an analysis of rainfall data for Ilovica village and the plant site/deposit area. Data on snowfall are presented in Section 3.2. Note that data are presented by hydrological year, which starts in October. The hydrological year starts when the hydrological system is on average at its driest.

Daily rainfall data was available at Ilovica village for the period October 1960 to January 2012 and at Strumica weather station for January 1950 to April 2015. EOX rainfall records commenced in May 2013 at the Met Station and in late 2013/early 2014 at stand-alone rain gauges distributed across the Jazga and Shtuka catchments. Therefore the record at Strumica overlapped the EOX rainfall records whereas the Ilovica record did not.

A method was sought for transposing the long rainfall records at Ilovica or Strumica to the upper catchments and the plant site whilst taking account of the observed increase in rainfall with elevation. Comparison of daily rainfalls over 2 mm at Ilovica and Strumica showed a strong correlation between rainfalls at the two stations and that the record at either rain gauge could be used to represent the other. Daily rainfalls recorded at each EOX rain gauge in the upper catchments and at Strumica for the common period of record (May 2013-April 2015) were sorted in descending order regardless of date (there was a poor correlation between rainfall on the mountain and at Strumica on a day by day basis). Adjustment factors were derived that could be applied to the Strumica daily rainfalls to transpose the data set to each individual rain gauge in the upper catchments. A daily rainfall record was then synthesised at each EOX rain gauge for the period October 1960 to January 2012 by applying the derived adjustment factors to rainfall events in the Ilovica record above 2 mm and the Strumica record below 2 mm. The Strumica record was used for the period from February 2012 to the start of the EOX rainfall records. Additional daily rainfalls events less than 0.6 mm were added at each EOX rain gauge to account for the higher frequency of low rainfalls observed in the upper catchments when compared to Strumica. The result was a daily rainfall record at each EOX rain gauge and at the plant site for the period January 1961 to April 2015. The method used to synthesise rainfall records in the project catchments is described in detail in SWS Technical Memo 55018TM4, dated 24 June 2015, available on the Amec Foster Wheeler project website.

The following analyses are based on the observed record at Ilovica village and a synthesised record at the plant site. The plant site record may be assumed to also apply to the deposit area.

3.1.1 Ilovica Village Table 3.1.1 presents annual statistics for the historical rainfall record at Ilovica village

.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 8


Table 3.1.1 Statistics for the Ilovica village annual rainfall records, 1960/61-2010/11

Elevation (masl) Start End

Length of record (years)

Mean (mm)

Min (mm)

Max (mm)

Variance (mm2)

Standard Deviation (mm)

Coefficient of Variation (%)

Ilovica 292 Oct 1960

Sep 2011 51 546 297 835 12659 113 21

Data source: Hydrometeorological Service, Skopje

Figure 3.1.1 shows the historical time series of annual rainfalls at Ilovica. Rainfall was relatively variable from year to year, varying from 297 mm to 835 mm and showing some evidence of cyclicity. Whereas the previous version of the Engineering Considerations Report split the data set into two halves, it was decided that the entire data set should be modelled. Normal and Log-normal distributions were fitted to the annual totals for the entire dataset (1960/61–2010/11). It was decided that the Normal distribution provided the better fit to the lower annual rainfalls (Figure 3.1.2) and so this distribution was adopted for estimating the frequency of annual rainfalls in dry, average and wet years (Table 3.1.2).

Table 3.1.2 Estimates of annual rainfall (mm) in dry, average and wet years at Ilovica village based on data 1960/61 – 2010/11

Dry years Mean Wet years

Return period (years) 100 50 25 10 5 2 5 10 25 50 100

Annual exceedance probability 0.99 0.98 0.96 0.90 0.80 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.02 0.01 284 314 348 401 451 546 640 690 743 777 808

Table 3.1.3 presents mean monthly rainfalls at Ilovica village and the percentage contribution of each month to the annual mean total.

Table 3.1.3 Mean monthly rainfalls (mm) and their percentage contribution to mean annual rainfall, Ilovica village, 1960/61-2010/11 O N D J F M A M J J A S Ann

Mean 49.2 57.9 62.5 39.1 41.3 41.1 41.2 54.4 51.1 35.4 38.4 34.3 546 % 9.0% 10.6% 11.5% 7.2% 7.6% 7.5% 7.5% 10.0% 9.4% 6.5% 7.0% 6.3% Data source: Hydrometeorological Service, Skopje

Percentiles of monthly rainfall were calculated from the Ilovica monthly record and are presented in Table 3.1.4 and Figure 3.1.3. Estimated total precipitation at Ilovica (including water equivalent from snow) is presented in Section 3.2.1.

Table 3.1.4 Percentile monthly rainfall (mm) at Ilovica village, 1960/61-2010/11 O N D J F M A M J J A S

90% 94.2 115.8 114.8 72.6 70.9 73.8 77.4 95.9 97.9 89.2 85.5 79.2 75% 66.7 84.5 82.6 51.2 59.5 54.9 60.9 69.0 68.5 55.2 65.9 48.1 50% 41.4 47.2 54.8 30.7 39.4 40 36.9 50.1 40.8 23 32.9 22.9 25% 20.8 25.0 31.7 19.9 18.5 19.1 21.8 36.6 26.2 11.7 11.2 10.5 10% 3.4 19.0 17.4 10.5 9.1 8.6 12.3 14.1 19.9 2.3 3.4 4.5

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 9


July, August and September are the driest months but substantial rainfall may be recorded. The wettest months are November-December which are also the most variable. A lesser rainfall peak occurs in May-June. Rainfall variability in May-June is lower than in November-December.

The average number of non-precipitation days, when it is neither raining nor snowing, for each month has been calculated for Ilovica village using the daily rainfall and snowfall data sets and is presented in Table 3.1.5.

Table 3.1.5 Average, maximum and minimum number of non-precipitation days at Ilovica village, 1960/61-2010/11 O N D J F M A M J J A S Average

Mean 25.3 22.7 21.4 23.0 20.0 24.7 23.1 23.6 24.3 27.0 27.3 25.9 288 Max 30 27 29 31 28 31 29 29 28 31 31 29 324 Min 20 11 11 0 5 14 15 16 17 20 21 17 231 Data source: Hydrometeorological Service, Skopje

3.1.2 Rainfall at Plant Site and Deposit Area Analysis of rainfall data from the EOX meteorological station (elevation 790 masl) revealed that this rain gauge under catches rainfall compared with the stand-alone rain gauges. It is thought that this might be due to wind effects on the col between the Jazga and Shtuka catchments. The plant site is situated at about 850 masl. A daily rainfall record was generated for the plant site by interpolating between the EOX stand-alone rain gauges (see SWS Technical Memo 55018TM04, 24 June 2015). The rainfall record for the plant site may also be considered representative of rainfall on the deposit area.

Table 3.1.6 presents annual statistics for the synthesised annual rainfall record at the plant site.

Table 3.1.6 Statistics for the synthesised plant site annual rainfall records, 1960/61-2013/14

Elevation (masl) Start End

Length of record (years)

Mean (mm)

Min (mm)

Max (mm)

Variance (mm2)

Standard Deviation (mm)

Coefficient of Variation (%)

Plant site 850 Oct

1961 Sep 2014 53 715 406 1039 18738 137 19

Figure 3.1.4 shows the synthesised annual rainfall record for the plant site. Table 3.1.7 presents estimates of annual rainfalls in dry, average and wet years for a range of return periods, obtaining by fitting a Normal distribution to the annual data set (Figure 3.1.5).

Table 3.1.7 Estimates of annual rainfall (mm) in dry, average and wet years at the plant site based on synthesised data 1960/61 – 2013/14

Dry years Mean Wet years

Return period (years) 100 50 25 10 5 2 5 10 25 50 100

Annual exceedance probability 0.99 0.98 0.96 0.90 0.80 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.02 0.01 396 433 475 539 600 715 830 891 955 997 1034

Table 3.1.8 presents mean monthly rainfalls at the plant site and the percentage contribution of each month to the annual mean total. Estimated total precipitation at the plant site (including water equivalent from snow) is presented in Section 3.2.2.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 10


Table 3.1.8 Estimated mean monthly rainfalls (mm) and their percentage contribution to mean annual rainfall, plant site, 1960/61-2013/14 O N D J F M A M J J A S Ann

Mean 60.9 69.1 77.3 54.1 57.6 55.8 58.1 73.6 64.7 46.9 47.9 49.1 715 % 8.5 9.7 10.8 7.6 8.1 7.8 8.1 10.3 9.0 6.6 6.7 6.9

Percentiles of monthly rainfall were calculated from the plant site monthly record and are presented in Table 3.1.9 and Figure 3.1.6.

Table 3.1.9 Estimated percentile monthly rainfall (mm) at the plant site, 1960/61-2013/14 O N D J F M A M J J A S

90% 109.1 135.3 129.8 94.1 98.1 91.6 98.7 120.6 119.0 108.2 94.9 108.9 75% 88.1 94.5 101.0 74.8 76.5 73.0 75.3 91.2 79.1 71.7 76.5 61.7 50% 51.4 58.2 72.7 48.8 51.6 58.1 51.5 66.9 55.7 33.0 45.3 39.4 25% 28.0 34.1 46.3 28.2 28.1 28.5 35.4 51.0 35.4 20.7 16.5 15.8 10% 10.8 24.7 31.5 17.8 16.4 17.1 20.5 27.3 29.9 6.6 8.9 11.4

The average number of non-precipitation days for each month has been estimated for the plant site using the synthesised daily rainfall data set for the plant site and the observed daily snowfall data set for Berovo and is presented in Table 3.1.10.

Table 3.1.10 Estimated average, maximum and minimum number of non-precipitation days at the plant site, 1960/61-2013/14 O N D J F M A M J J A S Average

Mean 15.7 12.5 9.9 10.7 8.7 12.3 12.8 13.3 14.4 16.9 16.2 15.4 159 Max 23 20 24 18 19 19 22 23 19 23 23 22 183 Min 9 4 3 0 0 0 6 3 4 11 5 5 112

3.1.3 Extreme Rainfall Analysis The first version of this report (May 2015) presented DDF (depth duration frequency) and IDF (intensity duration frequency) curves for Strumica rather than Ilovica because the Strumica record (1950-2010) was longer than that for Ilovica and resulted in more conservative results.

Work carried out for this report has focused on transposing the rainfall record at Ilovica (1960/61-2010/11) to generate a long daily rainfall record at each of the EOX rain gauges at elevation in the upper Jazga and Shtuka catchments (Section 3.1). For the purposes of the extreme rainfall analysis reported here the synthesised records at elevation were extended back to 1950 using the Strumica record for 1950-1960. A daily rainfall record for the period 1950/51-2010/11 was in turn generated at the plant site by interpolating between the nearest rain gauges.

The annual maximum daily rainfalls were extracted from the plant site synthetic record and a standard graphical frequency analysis was carried out. Prior to analysis the annual maxima daily data were converted to 24-hour rainfall equivalents by multiplying them by 1.13 as recommended in WMO (1986)1. The same daily data were used to determine annual maxima series for the 2-day and 3-day rainfall totals and were converted to equivalent 48-hour and 72-hour rainfall totals. The Log-Normal distribution was found to be best fit. The resulting rainfall depths for 24-hr, 48-hr and 72-hr durations were plotted against storm duration and

1 Daily rainfalls are measured in a fixed observational interval, eg a day starting at 09:00 hrs. In preparation for frequency analysis they need to be converted to an equivalent 24-hour interval that can start at any time

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 11


regression ‘lines of best fit’ were extended back to shorter storm durations. This process was repeated for a range of return periods.

Table 3.1.11 and Figure 3.1.7 present depth-duration-frequency (DDF) results for the plant site. These curves are considered to also be representative of the wider project site. Equations for the lines of best fit for each return period are presented in Figure 3.1.7. The tabulated and plotted values should be used for hydrological analysis. The equations should only be used to estimate rainfall depths for storm durations which are not presented.

Table 3.1.11 Rainfall depth-duration-frequency results (mm) for the project site

Return period (years) Storm duration (hours)

0.5 1 6 12 24 48 72 2 15.3 19.1 33.6 41.9 52.1 65.2 73.8 5 20.4 25.3 44.3 55.0 68.1 85.3 95.7 10 23.7 29.4 51.1 63.3 78.2 98.1 109.7 20 26.8 33.2 57.6 71.2 87.8 110.2 122.7 25 27.8 34.4 59.6 73.7 90.8 114.0 126.8 50 30.9 38.1 65.8 81.3 100.0 125.6 139.3 100 33.9 41.8 71.9 88.8 109.0 137.0 151.5 500 40.9 50.3 86.2 106.1 129.8 163.4 179.7 1000 44.0 54.1 92.3 113.6 138.8 174.8 191.9

Bell (1969) developed generalised worldwide DDF relationships and showed that for a 1-hour duration, the 100-year amount is normally about 2.3 times the 2-year amount and this ratio is reasonably consistent from stations around the world. The range of the ‘Bell ratio’ is from about 1.9 to 2.9. The ‘Bell ratio’ for the project site is 2.2, falling within the normal range expected and therefore lending some confidence to these results.

Further confidence is provided with a check on the plant site derivations using the appropriate r term given in the UK Flood Studies Report (NERC, 19752). The corresponding values obtained were very similar to the estimated values in Table 3.1.11.

Table 3.1.12 and Figure 3.1.8 present the DDF results in terms of rainfall intensity-duration-frequency (IDF) for the project site.

Table 3.1.12 Rainfall intensity-duration-frequency results (mm/h) for the project site

Return period (years) Storm duration (hours)

0.5 1 6 12 24 48 72 2 30.6 19.1 5.6 3.5 2.2 1.4 1.0 5 40.8 25.3 7.4 4.6 2.8 1.8 1.3 10 47.4 29.4 8.5 5.3 3.3 2.0 1.5 20 53.7 33.2 9.6 5.9 3.7 2.3 1.7 25 55.6 34.4 9.9 6.1 3.8 2.4 1.8 50 61.7 38.1 11.0 6.8 4.2 2.6 1.9 100 67.7 41.8 12.0 7.4 4.5 2.9 2.1 500 81.8 50.3 14.4 8.8 5.4 3.4 2.5 1000 87.9 54.1 15.4 9.5 5.8 3.6 2.7

It is noted that the rainfall depths and intensities presented in Tables 3.1.11 and 3.1.12 differ from the values presented in the previous version of this report. However these results are considered to be representative

2 NERC, 1975. Section 3.3.3 (Table 3.7) of Volume II (Meteorological Studies) – Flood Studies Report; Natural Environment Research Council (UK Institute of Hydrology), 1975.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 12


of the project site and may be used for hydrological design until at least 4 years of detailed rainfall records have been recorded by the project rain gauges whereupon analysis of those data should be undertaken to possibly provide alternative design curves to those presented here.

3.1.4 Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP) The probable maximum precipitation (PMP) for Strumica, Ilovica and the plant site was estimated using the statistical method of Herschfield (1965) as described in WMO 20093. The estimate of PMP using this approximate method will be superseded by a more robust meteorological PMP analysis undertaken by the UK Met. Office. The meteorological PMP estimate will be available from the end of July 2015. The report on the meteorological estimate will be available from mid-August 2015.

Herschfield’s statistical method provides an estimate of PMP for point rainfall or small watersheds up to 1000 km2 in area using the following equation:

PMP = Pmean + K*Sdev

Where Pmean = the mean of the annual maximum 24-h rainfall series (mm) subject to adjustment

K = a factor dependent on the magnitude of Pmean.

Sdev = the standard deviation of the annual maximum 24-h rainfall series (mm).

Adjustment factors recommended in WMO (2009) were applied to Pmean and Sdev. Table 3.1.13 presents the results of the analysis.

Table 3.1.13 Estimate of 24-hour PMP for Strumica and Ilovica

Location 24-hour mean

Pmean, mm

Adjustment factor applied

to Pmean, K factor*

Standard deviation Sdev, mm

Adjustment factor applied

to Sdev,

24-hour PMP mm

Strumica 52.2 0.99 17.0 16.9 0.93 318.6 Ilovica 49.0 1.00 17.4 15.3 1.03 322.5 Project site 54.6 1.01 17.0 16.8 1.02 346.7 * The K factor was estimated from Figure 4.1 given in WMO (1986)

A check on the above estimates was performed using the guidance for England and Wales in NERC, 19754. The 2 day, 5 year return period rainfall at Strumica was approximately 61 mm, using the NERC procedure and the 2 day PMP estimate was approximately 288 mm. The corresponding 1 day PMP was estimated to be approximately 270 mm. The estimates derived for Strumica, Ilovica and the project site using the Hershfield methodology are more conservative and therefore can be viewed as appropriate until more bespoke assessments are provided, as planned, by the UK Met Office.

3.2 Snow In the previous version of this report only a few observations of snow depth made by EOX in the winters of 2013/14 and 2014/15 could be reported. Since then daily snow depth records have been obtained for Ilovica village and Berovo meteorological station. Berovo is situated some 40 km north of the Ilovica mine site and at 850 masl, an altitude comparable to that of the plant site. However, unlike the plant site which is situated on a south-facing mountain slope, Berovo is situated in a valley and is surrounded by mountains. Nevertheless, snow fall at Berovo may be indicative of snowfall at the plant site.

3 Section 4 of Manual on Estimation of Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP); World Meteorological Organization, 2009; [ISBN 978-92-63-11045-9] 4 NERC, 1975. Section 4.3.2 (Table 4.2) of Volume II (Meteorological Studies) – Flood Studies Report; Natural Environment Research Council (UK Institute of Hydrology), 1975.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 13


3.2.1 Ilovica Village Table 3.2.1 summarises mean monthly snowfall data recorded at Ilovica village (290 masl) over the period Oct 1961 to September 2011.

Table 3.2.1 Mean monthly snow depth (cm) at Ilovica village (290 masl), 1960/61-2010/11 O N D J F M A M J J A S Annual

Mean 0 3 15 14 9 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 Max 6 42 94 90 47 22 11 0 0 0 0 0 94 Min 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Data source: Hydrometeorological Service, Skopje

A daily record of snow water equivalent was estimated for Ilovica by assuming a snow density of 0.1, a commonly used average density of new snow (DeWalle & Rango, 20085). Table 3.2.2 summarises monthly snow water equivalent at Ilovica village.

Table 3.2.2 Monthly snow water equivalent (mm) at Ilovica village (290 masl), 1960/61-2010/11 O N D J F M A M J J A S Average

Mean 0.3 2.6 14.6 13.7 9.2 3.5 0.4 0 0 0 0 0 44.2 Max 6 42 94 90 47 22 11 0 0 0 0 0 94 Min 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Data source: Hydrometeorological Service, Skopje

In Table 3.2.3 average monthly snow water (SWE) equivalent is added to average monthly rainfall to calculate the total average monthly precipitation. Table 3.2.3 suggests that on average snow water equivalent can form up to about 26% of precipitation on a monthly basis and 7% of precipitation on an annual basis at Ilovica village.

Table 3.2.3 Mean monthly precipitation (mm) at Ilovica village (290 masl), 1960/61-2010/11 O N D J F M A M J J A S Average

Rain 49.2 57.9 62.5 39.1 41.3 41.1 41.2 54.4 51.1 35.4 38.4 34.3 546 SWEa 0.3 2.6 14.6 13.7 9.2 3.5 0.4 0 0 0 0 0 44.2 Total 49.5 60.5 77.1 52.8 50.5 44.6 41.6 54.4 51.1 35.4 38.4 34.3 590 SWE%b 0.61 4.30 18.94 25.95 18.22 7.85 0.96 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.5 Data source: Hydrometeorological Service, Skopje. Notes: a – Snow water equivalent (mm). b – Snow water equivalent as a percentage of total monthly precipitation.

Table 3.2.4 summarises the number of days per month that snow lies on the ground at Ilovica village.

Table 3.2.4 Average, maximum and minimum number of days per month of lying snow at Ilovica village (290 masl), 1960/61-2010/11 O N D J F M A M J J A S Average

Mean 0.1 0.8 4.5 6.2 3.1 0.8 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 15.6 Max 2 16 21 31 15 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 31 Min 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Data source: Hydrometeorological Service, Skopje

5 DeWalle D R & Rango A (2008) Principles of snow hydrology. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-82362-3.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 14


3.2.2 Berovo/Ilovica Plant Site Snow data for Berovo meteorological station at 850 masl are presented here to provide an indication of the importance of snow at the plant site. Table 3.2.5 summarises monthly snowfall data recorded at Berovo over the period Oct 1961 to September 2014.

Table 3.2.5 Mean monthly snow depth (cm) at Berovo (850 masl), 1960/61-2013/14 O N D J F M A M J J A S Annual


A daily record of snow water equivalent was estimated for Berovo by assuming a snow density of 0.1. Table 3.2.6 summarises monthly snow water equivalent at Berovo.

Table 3.2.6 Monthly snow water equivalent (mm) at Berovo meteorological station (850 masl), 1960/61-2013/14 O N D J F M A M J J A S Average

Mean 0.8 6.7 19.7 19.6 15.3 9.5 2.2 0.5 0 0 0 0 74.3 Max 25 66 78 81 53 32 18 28 0 0 0 0 81 Min 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Data source: Hydrometeorological Service, Skopje

In Table 3.2.7 and Figure 3.2.1 average monthly snow water equivalent for Berovo (Table 3.2.6) is added to average monthly rainfall for the plant site (Table 3.1.8) to estimate the average total monthly precipitation at the plant site. Table 3.2.7 suggests that on average snow water equivalent may form up to about 26% of precipitation on a monthly basis and 9% of precipitation on an annual basis at the plant site. Owing to the topographic situation at Berovo (see above) it is likely that snowfall at Berovo is greater than at the Ilovica plant site, but the Berovo data likely provide an indication of the maximum contribution of snowfall to precipitation at the plant site.

Table 3.2.7 Mean monthly precipitation (mm) at plant site using Berovo data for snow water equivalent, 1960/61-2013/14 O N D J F M A M J J A S Average

Raina 60.9 69.1 77.3 54.1 57.6 55.8 58.1 73.6 64.7 46.9 47.9 49.1 715

SWEb 0.8 6.7 19.7 19.6 15.3 9.5 2.2 0.5 0 0 0 0 74

Total 61.7 75.8 97 73.7 72.9 65.3 60.3 74.1 64.7 46.9 47.9 49.1 789

SWE%c 1.3 8.8 20.3 26.6 21.0 14.5 3.6 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.4

Data source: Hydrometeorological Service, Skopje. Notes: a – rainfall for Ilovica plant site (Table 3.1.8). b – Berovo snow water equivalent (Table 3.2.6). c – Snow water equivalent as a percentage of total monthly precipitation.

Table 3.2.8 summarises the number of days per month that snow lies on the ground at Berovo. The number of days of lying snow given in Table 3.2.8 probably represents a maximum upper limit for the Ilovica plant site.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 15


Table 3.2.8 Average, maximum and minimum number of days per month of lying snow at Berovo (850 masl), 1960/61-2013/14 O N D J F M A M J J A S Average

Mean 0.2 2.9 11.2 14.3 10.6 4.3 0.6 0 0 0 0 0 44 Max 4 28 25 31 28 21 5 2 0 0 0 0 31 Min 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Data source: Hydrometeorological Service, Skopje

3.3 Evaporation Penman-Monteith reference crop evapotranspiration (ETo) (Allen et al, 1998) and Penman open water evaporation (Eo) (Penman, 1948) have been calculated for the following two locations:

Strumica meteorological station;

The EOX meteorological station.

Meteorological data (temperature, humidity, wind speed and solar radiation) from the respective stations have been used. Evaporation calculations at the Strumica meteorological station are based on monthly data provided by the Macedonian Hydrometeorological Service. Evaporation values calculated for the EOX met station are based on daily data.

Tables 3.3.1, 3.3.2 and 3.3.3 summarise (measured) mean monthly pan evaporation, Penman open water evaporation and Penman-Monteith reference crop evapotranspiration respectively at Strumica. All data were provided by the Macedonian Hydrometeorological Service.

Table 3.3.1 Mean monthly Class A pan evaporation (Epan) at Strumica, 1979/80-2010/11 O N D J F M A M J J A S Ann

Total, mm 71.7 N/M N/M N/M N/M N/M 103.7 143.3 179.3 208.6 184.7 127.4 1019 Average, mm/d 2.3 - - - - - 3.5 4.6 6.0 6.7 6.0 4.2

N/M – not measured

Table 3.3.2 Mean monthly Penman open water evaporation (Eo) at Strumica, 1981/82-2011/12 O N D J F M A M J J A S Ann

Total, mm 49.8 22.5 11.9 11.1 23.8 56.7 90.5 130.8 162.9 178.4 155.7 99.9 994 Average, mm/d 1.6 0.8 0.4 0.4 0.8 1.9 2.9 4.2 5.4 5.8 5.2 3.2

Table 3.3.3 Mean monthly reference Penman-Monteith crop evapotranspiration (ETo) at Strumica, 1981/82-2011/12 O N D J F M A M J J A S Ann

Total, mm 35.5 15.4 7.4 6.2 15.9 40.7 65.9 96.7 122.6 135.8 118.4 75.4 736 Average, mm/d 1.1 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.5 1.4 2.1 3.1 4.1 4.4 3.9 2.4

Tables 3.3.4 and 3.3.5 summarise monthly open water evaporation and reference crop evapotranspiration respectively at the EOX meteorological station for the period December 2013 to April 2015.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 16


Table 3.3.4 Monthly open water evaporation (Eo) at EOX meteorological stationA O N D J F M A M J J A S Ann

Total, mm 48.1 57.6C 18.9B 30.1 41.5 46.1 75.5 106.8 126.2 149.1 126.4 75.5 902 Average, mm/d 1.6 1.9 0.6 1.0 1.5 1.5 2.5 3.4 4.2 4.8 4.1 2.5 A Calculations are based on data from the period Dec 2013 to Apr 2015. B Calculated from daily data. C Estimated by linear interpolation between values for Oct 2014 and Dec 2013.

Table 3.3.5 Monthly reference crop evapotranspiration (ETo) at EOX meteorological stationA O N D J F M A M J J A S Ann

Total, mm 31.0 21.0C 11.0B 19.3 27.0 31.5 50.7 71.7 86.6 99.8 85.5 50.3 585 Average, mm/d 1.0 0.7 0.4 0.6 1.0 1.0 1.7 2.3 2.9 3.2 2.8 1.7

A Calculations are based on data from the period Dec 2013 to Apr 2015. B Calculated from daily data. C Estimated by linear interpolation between values for Oct 2014 and Dec 2013.

Figure 3.2.1 shows the seasonal variation in calculated evaporation at the EOX met station.

Effective rainfall can be calculated by comparing monthly rainfall and evaporation/evapotranspiration. Average monthly rainfall at the plant site (1960/61 – 2013/14) is presented alongside Eo and ETo calculated at the EOX meteorological station (December 2013 – April 2015) in Table 3.3.6 and Figure 3.2.1.

Table 3.3.6 Plant site mean monthly rainfalls (mm) 1960/61-2010/11, monthly open water evaporation (Eo) and reference crop evapotranspiration (ETo) at EOX meteorological stationA and effective rainfall

O N D J F M A M J J A S Ann

Rain, mm 60.9 69.1 77.3 54.1 57.6 55.8 58.1 73.6 64.7 46.9 47.9 49.1 715

ETo, mm 31.0 21.0C 11.0B 19.3 27.0 31.5 50.7 71.7 86.6 99.8 85.5 50.3 585

Eo, mm 48.1 57.6C 18.9B 30.1 41.5 46.1 75.5 106.8 126.2 149.1 126.4 75.5 902 Eff. Rain, mmD

29.9 48.1 66.3 34.8 30.6 24.3 7.4 1.9 - - - -

A Calculations are based on data from the period Dec 2013 to Apr 2015. B Calculated from daily data. C Estimated by linear interpolation between values for Oct 2014 and Dec 2013. D. Effective rainfall = Rain – ETo (mm).

Table 3.3.6 indicates on average a surplus of rainfall over evapotranspiration occurs during the period October to May. This is the period when most runoff might be expected to occur.

3.4 Thunder and Lightning Table 3.4.1 summarises the number of days per month of thunder and lightning at Strumica meteorological station. It is assumed that the incidence of thunder and lightning will be similar at Ilovica village.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 17


Table 3.4.1 Strumica (230 masl) days with thunder and lightning, 2008/09-2013/14 O N D J F M A M J J A S Ann


The occurrence of thunder and lightning is not monitored at the EOX meteorological station. In the absence of data on the Ograzden Mountain, data for Berovo meteorological station (elev. 850 masl) are presented in Table 3.4.2.

Table 3.4.2 Berovo (850 masl) days with thunder and lightning, 2009/10-2013/14 O N D J F M A M J J A S Ann


The lower occurrence of thunder and lightning at Berovo than at Strumica may be due to local meteorological conditions at both locations. Reduced convective activity at elevation could account for the difference observed. The Berovo data provide an indication of the frequency of days with thunder and lightning at the elevation of the plant site.

A small scale map for the whole of Europe showing annual detected lightning flash density published by Anderson and Klugmann (2014)6 suggest between 1.6 and 4 lightning flashes per km2 for eastern Macedonia.

3.5 Wind Wind speed and direction data from the EOX meteorological station from 14 May 2013 to 8 April 2015 have been used to generate the monthly average data in Table 3.5.1. The monthly average is plotted with the daily average in Figure 3.5.1.

Wind data was gathered with an hourly frequency from May 2013 until 12 December 2013 and with a ten minute frequency thereafter.

There was a wind direction data gap observed between 25 July 2014 and 22 December 2014. A wind rose, presented in Figure 3.5.2 was plotted from hourly data where possible or from an hourly average of the ten minute data.

Wind speed averages 1.79 m/s overall. Ilovica appears to experience consistent low to moderate wind speeds throughout the data period with some fluctuation between the winter/summer seasons. Wind direction generally prevails from south east.

Table 3.5.1 Monthly average for wind speed, EOX meteorological station Month May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 Oct-13 Nov-13 Dec-13

Average Speed m/s 2.11 1.65 1.90 1.61 1.89 1.36 2.56 1.72

Month Jan-14 Feb-14 Mar-14 Apr-14 May-14 Jun-14 Jul-14 Aug-14 Average Speed m/s 1.40 1.42 2.17 1.76 1.89 2.10 2.12 1.50

Month Sep-14 Oct-14 Nov-14 Dec-14 Jan-15 Feb-15 Mar-15 Apr-15

6 Anderson G and Klugmann D (2014) A European lightning density analysis using 5 years of ATDnet data. Nat. Hazards and Earth Sys. Sci., 14, 815-829.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 18


Month May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 Oct-13 Nov-13 Dec-13

Average Speed m/s 1.71 1.43 1.29 1.31 2.34 2.47 1.64 2.96

3.6 Temperature Air temperature data from the EOX meteorological station from 14 May 2013 to 8 April 2015 was used to generate a data summary table (Table 3.6.1) of the monthly average, minimum and maximum temperature. The monthly average data is plotted with the daily average, minimum and maximum data in Figure 3.6.1. Data was analysed from a series of hourly data records till 12h December 2013 and then ten minute records thereafter. During the period 6 November 2013 to 10 November 2013 no temperature data was available. It should be noted that there was also a coincidental reduction in temperature at this time. Minimum and maximum data was not available for 2015. Table 3.6.1 Summary of temperature data, EOX meteorological station Month May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 Oct-13 Nov-13 Dec-13 Jan-14 Feb-14 Mar-14

Average 19.0 19.6 22.3 24.5 18.5 14.1 4.8 4.3 5.2 7.1 9.0 Minimum 8.0 10.3 13.3 15.8 9.5 1.5 -3.6 -4.2 -8.3 -1.9 -1.0 Maximum 29.3 32.1 35.1 33.6 29.5 25.2 20.8 12.7 15.5 21.5 22.6 Month May-14 Jun-14 Jul-14 Aug-14 Sep-14 Oct-14 Nov-14 Dec-14 Jan-15 Feb-15 Mar-15 Average 15.2 19.5 21.8 22.6 16.9 12.7 8.2 4.8 3.0 3.6 4.9 Minimum 5.9 7.9 13.1 13.0 6.2 1.5 0.2 -1.5 Maximum 27.1 30.1 31.0 32.7 27.7 26.1 18.8 12.6

Annual temperature averages 11◦C with a maximum of 34◦C and a minimum of -8◦C. The data indicates that the project area experiences consistently warm summers (May to October) and cold winters (October to April). There is a distinct change in temperature seasonally.

3.7 Solar Radiation Solar radiation data from the EOX meteorological station from 12 December 2013 to 8 April 2015 was used to generate a data summary table (Table 3.7.1) of the monthly average, minimum and maximum for daily total radiation. The monthly data is plotted with the daily totals in Figure 3.7.1. Data was analysed from a series of ten minute data records for total radiation.

Table 3.7.1 Summary of solar radiation data, daily totals (kJ/m2) Month Dec-13 Jan-14 Feb-14 Mar-14 Apr-14 May-14 Jun-14 Jul-14 Aug-14

Minimum 796 736 2953 2177 2792 6592 5843 5779 9848 Maximum 9001 10526 15325 21014 23600 30130 29755 43119 42320 Average 6440 5319 10132 12897 12401 19309 21639 25364 34891 Month Sep-14 Oct-14 Nov-14 Dec-14 Jan-15 Feb-15 Mar-15 Apr-15 Minimum 4768 3069 1587 1548 1522 1111 914 3160 Maximum 34982 29832 20153 14235 10669 16362 23809 24921 Average 22571 15225 8691 6165 6325 9553 9535 11857

Total solar radiation per day averages 14,299 kJ/m2. The data indicates that the project area experiences a consistent trend of increased radiation in the summer and less radiation in the winter. The trend is consistent with that for temperature with the greater amounts of radiation occurring in the months May to October.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 19


3.8 Humidity Solar radiation data from the EOX meteorological station from 14 May 2013 to 22 December 2014 was used to generate a data summary table (Table 3.8.1) of the monthly average for the daily minimum and maximum values. The monthly averages are plotted with the daily minimum and maximum values in Figure 3.8.1.

Data was analysed from a series of records for minimum and maximum humidity. Data was analysed from a series of hourly data records until 12 December 2013 and then ten minute records thereafter. It should be noted that for the period 22 February 2014 to 27 March 2014, the data was disregarded due to erroneous data values. Other data values were removed from the series due the erroneous nature of the reported values.

Table 3.8.1 Summary of humidity data Month May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 Oct-13 Nov-13 Dec-13 Jan-14 Feb-14

Avg daily min 31.80 45.40 36.85 30.17 34.00 49.20 42.11 47.33 66.33 52.58 Avg daily max 67.63 87.43 73.00 63.64 75.71 81.65 75.90 80.31 95.52 90.83 Month Mar-14 Apr-14 May-14 Jun-14 Jul-14 Aug-14 Sep-14 Oct-14 Nov-14 Dec-14 Avg daily min 47.48 60.70 46.46 44.19 41.85 42.37 54.79 64.86 72.20 64.10 Avg daily max 96.06 94.91 94.22 86.23 85.84 82.41 94.93 95.77 99.18 93.10

Minimum and maximum humidity averages 71 and 76 % respectively. The data indicates that the project area experiences slightly increased humidity in the autumn and winter months.

4.0 FLOOD STUDIES 4.1 Effects of Snowmelt on Runoff Three potential mechanisms are likely to produce floods in the Jazga and Shtuka catchments:

Long duration frontal rainfall which saturates catchment vegetation and soil storages;

Winter rainfall falling on snow or frozen ground followed by rapid thaw;

Intense summer storms whose intensities exceed catchment infiltration capacities.

This section considers the effect of snowmelt on runoff and the degree to which it should be taken into account in drainage design. Since hydrological monitoring commenced at Ilovica in late November 2013/early 2014 there has been little indication that snowmelt has played a significant role in runoff. A longer indication of floods is provided by the record of daily spill volumes from Ilovica reservoir from 2000 to 2014. Although peak levels/flows were not recorded, the available data indicate the date of occurrence and the relative magnitude of the event. Table 4.1.1 lists the maximum spill volumes ranked, their dates and the date and form of the causative precipitation.

Table 4.1.1 Ranked annual maximum daily spill volumes from Ilovica reservoir and causative precipitation, 2000-2014.

Rank Spill volume (m3) Date

Causative precipitation (mm)

Date of precipitation Comment

1 250,100 5 Jun 2004 86 mm** 5 Jun 2004 Summer storm on moderately wet catchment. 11.1 mm of rain in previous 5 days.

2 71,100 22 Aug 2003 - - Summer storm, but not recorded at Ilovica village (so absent from

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 20





the plant site synthesised record).

3 55,300 11-12 May 2001 - -

Late spring storm, but not recorded at Ilovica village (so absent from the plant site synthesised record).

4 42,620 24 Jun 2010 7.6 mm** 23 Jun 2010 Summer storm on relatively dry catchment. 12.1 mm estimated at plant site in previous 5 days.

5 39,100 13-20 Mar 2006 23.7 mm** 13 Mar 2006

Spring storm on a damp catchment. 17.9 mm in previous 5 days. Additional 12.3 mm at Plant site on 18 Mar. 9.2 mm distributed over other days. Snow record at Ilovica is not available.

6 26,300 1 Feb 2009 3.3 mm** 1 Feb 2009

Winter storm not properly recorded at Ilovica. Catchment relatively wet: 48.4 mm estimated at Plant site 27-29 Jan. No snow on ground at Ilovica.

7 24,800 13-14 Oct 2002

14.3 mm** 16.4 mm**

13 Oct 2002 14 Oct 2002

Autumn storm on dry catchment. 2.8 mm in previous 5 days.

8 24,800 6-8 Mar 2005 3 Oct 2005

16.6 mm** 39.8 mm

5 Mar 2005 2 Oct 2005

Snowmelt possibly exacerbated by rain. 14 cm snow at Ilovica on 2 Mar, melted by 3 Mar. Autumn storm. Relatively wet catchment. 21.5 mm in previous 5 days. No snow.

9 22,000 3-6 May 2014 28.9 mm** 3 May 2014 Spring frontal storm. Catchment relatively wet: 49.1 mm estimated at Plant site over previous 5 days.

10 12,700 8 Feb-12 Apr 2000 - -

Occasional rainfall over the period. Max daily rainfalls: 10.6 mm on 13 Feb, 11.6 mm on 3 Mar. Rest was minor. No snow recorded at Ilovica.

11 12,700

27-28 Feb 2007 27 Mar-9 Apr 2007

10.4 mm** -

27 Feb 2007 -

Minor event. 10 mm rain in previous 5 days. No snow at Ilovica. Minor event. 3.5 mm was largest daily rainfall in the period. No snow at Ilovica.

12 7,700 1-16 Jan 2011 - -

Possibly due to snowmelt. 2 cm snow recorded at Ilovica on 3 Jan which melted next day. 7 mm was largest daily rainfall recorded on 16 Jan.

13 6,000 25-28 Feb 2013

33.2 mm** 35.6 mm**

25 Feb 2013 26 Feb 2013

Persistent heavy rain? Catchment wet: 25.1 mm at plant site in previous 5 days. Event

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 21





33.4 mm** 27 Feb 2013 may have been larger than recorded. Snow record not available.

14 3,500

5-14 Feb 2012 1-14 Mar 2012 24-31 May 2012

55.8 mm** 18.9 mm** 107 mm**

5-14 Feb 2012 9 Mar 2012 23-31 May 2012

Catchment wet. Rained almost every day. Catchment damp: 41.6 mm between 8 and 12 Mar. Long duration frontal rainfall, catchment wet. Spill possibly under-recorded. No snow record available

15 3,000 2-31 Jan and 5 Apr-12 May 2008

8.9 mm** 135 mm**

2 Jan 2008 5-Apr-12May 2008

Snowmelt event. 11 cm snow recorded at Ilovica 2-6 Jan, then melting to 0 cm on 11 Jan. Occasional light rain at plant site over period 5-18 Jan. Distributed mainly in 4 rainfall events of 12-33 mm separated by dry periods. No snow recorded at Ilovica

** Plant site rainfall record synthesised from Ilovica rainfall record.

The following observations can be made on the basis of the information in Table 4.1.1:

Snow melt has not played a significant role in causing flooding in the Jazga catchment in the period 2000-2014. Snow melt does however contribute to ‘wetting up’ the catchment and should a significant storm occur under these conditions then flooding could be significantly enhanced. Allowance should be made for wet antecedent catchment conditions when estimating floods due to rainfall;

Long duration frontal rainfall events occur leading to saturation of the catchment. Should a significant storm occur under wet antecedent conditions then flooding could be significant; and

Intense summer/late spring storms are relatively common and have resulted in the four largest flood events as estimated by spill volume in the Jazga catchment over the period 2000-2014. The largest event recorded appears to have fallen under moderately wet antecedent conditions, emphasising their importance in affecting runoff generation.

In conclusion, it is suggested that estimation of design floods should assume wet antecedent conditions prior to the design event. Explicit allowance for snow melt in design flood estimation is unnecessary.

4.2 100-year Flood Line at Ilovica Reservoir The elevation of the 100-year flood line (the peak water level attained during the routing of the 100-year return period flood) for Ilovica reservoir was estimated to be 354.3 masl. This elevation is consistent with previous flood estimates (reviewed below). The following text describes the estimation of the flood line.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 22


Ilovica reservoir has a ‘Kruger’ type spillway. The following rating was provided by the Strumichko Pole Water Management Company:

Q = 1.86 B H(3/2)

Where: Q is discharge (m3/s)

B is spillway length (30 m)

H is head over the spillway crest (m)

The spillway was modelled with an elevation of 353.74 masl, surveyed during the April 2015 bathymetric survey of the reservoir (APEM, “Hydrographic Survey Report – Ilovitza Reservoir, Macedonia”, May 2015). The spillway is not absolutely level; it was observed to be spilling across approximately 50% of the spillway during the bathymetric survey.

A rainfall runoff and reservoir model based on the US Natural Resources Conservation Service runoff curve method was constructed and calibrated to the Jazga catchment using the HEC-HMS rainfall runoff modelling package (Figure 4.2.1). Daily records (maintained by the Strumichko Pole Water Management Company) of Ilovica reservoir water level, storage and spill volumes were available from 2000 to 2014. The maximum spill (assumed to be the largest flood) on record and its causative rainfall, on 5 June 2004, were selected for calibration of the model. The (synthesised) 24-hour rainfall on 5 June 2004 at the plant site (see Section 3.1) was 86.0 mm. Reference to Table 3.1.2 suggests that the return period of this storm was about 20 years.

The model was calibrated to reproduce observed reservoir levels and estimated reservoir outflows during the 5 June 2004 flood event. The calibration returned a curve number (CN) of 58 which is consistent with a forested land with good cover and soils of moderate infiltration rates (NRCS Hydrologic Group B soils). The modelled and observed reservoir levels and outflows for the 5th June 2004 event are shown in Figure 4.2.2.

The design (100-year 24-hour) storm was selected from Table 3.1.2. The storm depth (109.0 mm) was distributed according to a symmetrical storm profile using the ‘depth-duration-frequency method’ (Haan, Barfield & Hayes, 1981). An areal reduction factor (0.97) was calculated based on the catchment area and duration of the design storm and was applied to convert the point profile to an areal profile.

The model CN value was weighted to account for deforested/stripped land associated with future pit development and oxide stockpiling. Deforested areas were assigned a CN of 81 – selected for cultivated land without conservation treatment. This represents a worst case scenario for the project during construction. During operations the pit and water management infrastructure would result in lower peak flows. The model was run to generate and route the 100-year flood hydrograph through Ilovica reservoir. A peak reservoir outflow of 22.8 m³/s and maximum predicted reservoir water surface elevation of 354.3 masl were obtained (Figure 4.2.2).

The peak outflow compares well with the Water Economy Bureau’s estimated 100-year peak flow estimate of 19.0 m³/s determined as part of the hydrological studies for the design of Ilovica reservoir (Table 4.2.1). Peak water surface elevations for floods of 2-yrs to 1000-yrs in Table 4.2.1 were estimated by SWS based on the spillway rating and crest elevation of 353.74 masl. The peak water surface elevation for the 10,000-yr flood was taken from the Water Economy Bureau’s spillway design drawings. Enquiries revealed that no documentation is available in the Water Management Company’s offices to substantiate the 10,000-yr flood or water level estimates.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 23


Table 4.2.1 Water Economy Bureau7 peak flood flow estimates and associated reservoir levels

Return Period Estimated peak flow (m³/s) Estimated peak reservoir elevation (masl)

10,000yr 85.0 355.06 1,000-yr 46.7 354.63 100-yr 19.0 354.23 50-yr 12.6 354.11 10-yr 4.4 353.93 2-yr 0.97 353.81

4.3 100-year Flood Lines on the Jazga River A preliminary 100-year flood inundation map for the Jazga River and the oxide tributary in the vicinity of the proposed pit is presented in Figure 4.3.1. The map is preliminary in the sense that a crude calibration to an observed historical event is possible, but has not so far been completed, and the forthcoming LiDAR topographic data are required for realistic depiction of the inundated area. A preliminary 100-year flood water surface profile is presented in Figure 4.3.2. The maximum flood depth within the modelled sections is 2.4m (cross section 33) and the greatest inundated channel width is 21.3 m (cross section 24). Flow velocities vary from about 1 m/s to about 2 m/s. Froude numbers vary from about 0.3 to 1.0. The following text describes the estimation of the flood lines.

A rapid topographic survey of the Jazga River was carried out by EOX surveyors in May 2015 (“Geodetic Survey of Jazga River and Oxide Tributary”, GEODET D.O.O.E.L. RADOVISH). Cross sections of the Jazga River and oxide tributary were surveyed at 20m to 50m intervals and a long section was surveyed along the deepest part of both channels.

A 1-dimensional hydraulic model of the Jazga River and the oxide tributary was built using HEC-RAS (River Analysis System) based on the river surveys. HEC-RAS is an industry standard water surface profile modelling package developed by the US Army Corps of Engineers. A water surface profile was predicted using peak 100yr flood flow estimates generated at gauging station JZGS02 and at the most downstream point of the oxide tributary derived from the HEC-HMS model. The HEC-HMS model is described in Section 4.2 (100-year flood lines at Ilovica reservoir). A summary of the key HEC-RAS model inputs are presented in

Table 4.3.1 HEC-RAS model inputs

Jazga River at JZGS02 Oxide tributary Jazga River downstream of the

tributary/river confluence

Peak 100-yr flood flow (from HEC-HMS) (m³/s) 14.3 2.2 16.5

Cross sections from May 2015 survey (Figure 4.3.1) 25 - 34 26 - 27, 35 - 39 21 - 24

Channel slope (v/h) 0.05 0.07 0.05 Manning’s n 0.2 0.2 0.2

The storm rainfall that produced the flood of the 5 June 2004 was estimated to have a return period of about 20 years (Section 4.2). The resulting flood may be assumed to also have had a return period of about 20 years. EOX geologists sampling stream sediments along the Jazga River near JZGS02 in July 2004 observed wrack marks at about 1.5 m above river bed level. SWS assumes that the wrack marks were left

7 Water Economy Bureau (1992) Embankment for the Ilovica small reservoir near Strumica: Main Design. Report to ZIK Strumica DO Kooperacija – Strumica, June 1992, Water Economy Bureau of the Republic of Macedonia, Skopje.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 24


by the June flood. The flood inundation map (Figure 4.3.1) is not depicted realistically owing to the need to interpolate linearly between cross sections. When the LiDAR topographic data become available (expected late June 2015) the map will be reproduced and will then reflect flood plain topography more realistically. The work will be reported in a Technical Memo on the flood studies.

4.4 River Protection in Vicinity of the Pit Entrance A seepage collection pond is recommended on the flood plain of the Jazga River in the vicinity of confluence of the Jazga River and the oxide tributary (Figure 4.3.1). The pond will receive seepage and runoff from the oxide stockpile, runoff via ditches from nearby roads and slopes and water pumped out of the pit that will have high suspended solids concentrations. Water will be pumped from the pond up to the water storage facility at the plant site. The water quality of the oxide seepage and pumped pit water will be low (acid rock drainage) and the pond must not be allowed to overflow into the Jazga River. Management of this low quality water is outside the scope of this document.

To make space for the pond on the narrow valley floor three options seem to be available:

A diversion tunnel through the west side of the river;

A diversion channel above the west bank of the river; and

Culvert the river against the west bank.

In any of the above cases a design flood flow will be required. The 100-year peak flow at gauging station JZGS02 is estimated to be 14.3 m3/s (Section 4.3). If the oxide stockpile is not processed in the plant before mine closure and is to remain in closure SWS suggests that the return period of the design flood flow should be 500 years. The 500-year peak flow is estimated to be:

24.3 m3/s at JZGS02 (entrance to Jazga diversion channel /culverts)

3.5 m3/s at downstream end of oxide tributary.

Other areas of the site (roads, laydown/hardstanding areas) will also require drainage and sediment control ponds. These are not considered here.

4.5 Flood Risk Assessment at Shtuka Village This work will be reported by SWS in a technical memo on the flood studies by 31 July 2015.

5.0 WATER QUALITY Appendix B presents tables of analytical water quality for the various potential sources of make-up water for the project water supply. Tables 5.1 to 5.3 present the summary water quality data at the following locations:

Table 5.1 - Groundwater from deposit (JZSP22);

Table 5.2 - Coffer dam (STGS03); and

Table 5.3 - Turija canal (TCGS01) and Ilovica reservoir (ILWT01), Groundwater from plain (Suchica water supply borehole SUB02).

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 25


6.0 POTENTIAL CONSTRAINTS TO ENGINEERING DESIGN 6.1 Identification of Potential Constraints Constraints maps are presented in Appendix C. These maps identify sensitive ecological, archaeological, and surface water areas as understood at the present time (noting that field studies are ongoing and these constraints maps may need to be updated once further information is available).

6.1.1 Potential Ecological Constraints There are ecological sensitivities in the concession area. While these cannot be defined as constraints, they should be considered when developing the design and direct impacts on these areas should be minimised where possible. The following comprise the known ecological sensitivities in the vicinity of the site.

Ograzden Prime Butterfly Area;

Riparian Zone;

Sightings of species of potential concern;

Aquatic habitat of stone crayfish (found along stretches of both the Shtuka and Jazga); and

Adit – potential bat roost.

The biodiversity action plan will define how to manage these sensitivities during construction and operations; however it is important that engineering design teams are aware of these sensitivities at an early stage.

6.1.2 Archaeological Constraints Two sites of potential archaeological interest are known to occur within the concession area: an adit/tunnel of unknown origin and an old, disused mill in the upper reaches of the Shtuka stream. Both will be investigated as part of the cultural heritage baseline survey, which may identify additional sites of archaeological interest. Findings of the baseline survey will be presented in revised constraints maps (July/August 2015).

In the short term, it would be prudent for the design of the TMF to avoid the old mill location.

6.1.3 Flooding Constraints Figure 4.3.1 presents a preliminary flood inundation map for the 100 year return period flood in the Jazga. Mine infrastructure and related facilities should avoid the floodplain. Section 4 provides further guidance on the siting of facilities close to the floodplain. Maps and guidance regarding flooding constraints will be updated once LiDAR topographic data becomes available.

6.1.4 Noise Constraints Engineering design should consider that noise from the mine and associated facilities is likely to be audible above background noise to a distance of approximately 3 km and noise from the access road will be potentially audible above background noise to a distance of 1 km (likely to be 500 m).

6.2 Landfill Design Considerations 6.2.1 EU Landfill Directive (LFD) The following presents some commentary on the requirements of the LFD with regard to landfill design and liner equivalence.

The LFD is the primary piece of European Union legislation that regulates the landfill of waste (excluding mining waste), and sets out minimum requirements for design, construction and operation.

The LFD classifies landfills into three classes: hazardous; non-hazardous; and inert. Only wastes meeting the relevant designations may be disposed of, for example inert waste may not be disposed of in a non-hazardous landfill. The Directive requires that landfills shall be subject to a permit, that specifies conditions

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 26


for the preparation, operation, monitoring, and control of the facility including during closure and aftercare periods.

The engineering requirements of the LFD are set out at Annex I of the LFD and require that protection to groundwater is provided by a combination of a “geological barrier” and a “bottom liner” during the operation of the site, and by a geological barrier and a “top liner” (more commonly known as a cap) during the passive/post-closure phase. This requirement recognises that geomembrane liners have a finite life. The LFD states that, subject to specific minimum requirements, the nature of the geological barrier should be determined by the geological and hydrogeological conditions below and near the site and should provide “sufficient attenuation capacity” to prevent a potential risk to soil and groundwater. The minimum requirements for a hazardous landfill are:

A 5 m thick geological barrier with a hydraulic conductivity (K) ≤1x10-9 m/s;

An artificial sealing liner; and

A drainage layer ≥0.5 m thick.

However, it is stated at Annex I, Section 3.2 of the LFD that:

“Where the geological barrier does not naturally meet the above conditions it can be completed artificially and reinforced by other means giving equivalent protection.”

In other words the LFD allows for the construction of an “artificially established geological barrier” when the geological barrier does not meet the 5 m thick with a K ≤1x10-9 m/s requirement. In such a situation, the artificial geological barrier must be at least 0.5 m thick, and the requirements for an artificial sealing liner (i.e., a geomembrane liner) and a drainage layer remain. In addition, the artificial geological barrier must give “equivalent protection” to the 5 m thick geological barrier with a K ≤1x10-9 m/s.

The geological barrier for non-hazardous and inert landfills may also “be completed artificially and reinforced by other means giving equivalent protection” to that provided by the specified thickness (1 m) and hydraulic conductivity (1x10-9 m/s and 1x10-8 m/s respectively) requirements.

The LFD makes no specification with regard to the stability of the landfill or liner systems other than to state at Section 6 of Annex I that:

“The emplacement of waste … shall take place in such a way as to ensure stability of the mass of waste and associated structures, particularly in respect of the avoidance of slippages.”

and,

“Where an artificial barrier is established, it must be ascertained that the geological substratum … is sufficiently stable to prevent settlement that may cause damage to the barrier”

In the United Kingdom, the de facto guidance on the construction of landfill lining systems is Environment Agency R&D Technical Report P1-385/TR2 entitled “Stability of Landfill Lining Systems: Report No. 2”8. This report was prepared by Golder Associates on behalf of the Environment Agency. With regard to the stability of lining systems, no prescriptive requirements such as maximum bench heights are specified.

6.2.2 Additional Landfill Design Considerations Golder recommends that the landfill design process should also consider the following elements/activities:

Stability assessment of site;

Basal heave analysis;

8 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/290637/sp1-385-tr2-e-e.pdf

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 27


If construction of a mineral barrier is considered, trials to test the suitability of the proposed compaction techniques;

Determination of requirement for geomembrane lining system;

Groundwater management or drainage of shallow groundwater;

Leachate collection infrastructure, which could include:

Drainage blanket;

Leachate drainage pipes and extraction well;

Filter geotextile;

Geocomposite drainage layer; and

Leachate monitoring wells.

Leachate disposal or removal; and

Construction Quality Assurance by a suitably qualified CQA engineer.

6.3 Construction Materials Risk Assessment The following table (Table 6.3.1) is a summary of the ARD classification of the material tested to date at the Ilovica deposit. This also includes a brief assessment of other contaminants of concern suggested by testwork data. The table provides an assessment of the geochemical risks for use of the materials for construction. This is an initial draft of this risk assessment and will need to be further refined as the Project continues, especially as material units and proportions of waste material become better defined.

The ARD classifications are as follows:

A Strong Potentially Acid Generating (PAG) classification is applied to rock units for which average NNP is less than -80 kg CaCO3/t and/or in which pad leachate pH is equal to or less than 3.0.

A Weak PAG classification is applied to units in which NNP is <-20 kg CaCO3/t, or in which NNP is negative with pad leachate pH levels of <5.0.

A Low-Reactivity classification is applied to samples with NNP between zero and -20 CaCO3/t, subject to pad leachate pH of >5.0.

An Acid-Consuming classification is assigned to material with buffered pad leachate solution or an NNP of > 20 CaCO3/t.

The estimated material proportions need to be further refined and updated following work between Tetratech and EOX’s ARD specialist to merge the block model geological classifications and ARD classifications. When this is complete the table will be re-issued with more accurate estimations of geochemical risks associated with waste material.

A full review of the current understanding of geochemistry at Ilovica will be issued as a Technical Memorandum in the week commencing 29 June 2015 and should be considered for further information.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 28


Table 6.3.1 Summary of geochemical issues and risks

ARD UNIT Description

Estimated waste material (using block model geological codes)*

ARD category Other geochemical risks

Geochemical Construction utility

DACDIST Dacite, distal from ore zone Unknown Strong PAG SO4, Cu, Fe, Cd, Ni, Zn Poor

DACMIX Dacite, mixed zone 7% Low Reactivity Uncertain Good DACOX Dacite, oxidised

23%

Weak PAG Fe, Zn Fair DACOXBR Dacite, oxidised, brecciated Strong PAG Uncertain Poor DACOXSW Dacite, oxide, stockwork Weak PAG Uncertain Poor DACOXUD Dacite, oxide, hydrothermally undisturbed Weak PAG Uncertain Fair DACUNOX Dacite, unoxidised

14%

Weak PAG Uncertain Fair

DACUNOXBR Dacite, unoxidised, brecciated Strong PAG Cu, Fe, Cd, Ni, Zn Poor

DACUNOXUD Dacite, unoxidised, hydrothermally undisturbed Strong PAG SO4, Cu, Fe, As, Cd, Ni, Zn Poor

GDIOMIX Granodiorite, mixed zone 3% Low Reactivity Uncertain Good GDIOOX Granodiorite, oxidised 2% Low Reactivity Uncertain Good GNDIO Granodiorite, unaltered 3% Low Reactivity Good GDIOUNOX Granodiorite, unoxidised

11%

Strong PAG Uncertain Poor

GDUNOXSW Granodiorite, unoxidised, stockwork Strong PAG SO4, Cu, Fe, Zn Poor

GNDIOCA Granodiorite, carbonate bearing Acid Consuming Good

GNDIONON Granodiorite, nontronitic Weak PAG Cu, Zn Poor GRTOX / GRTALOX Granite, oxide zone 6% Low Reactivity Fe, Zn Good GRTFR Fresh granite*** Weak PAG Fair GRTMIX Granite, mixed zone 4% Weak PAG Uncertain Fair GRTAL Granite, altered 15% Strong PAG Cu, Fe, Zn Poor

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 29


ARD UNIT Description

Estimated waste material (using block model geological codes)*

ARD category Other geochemical risks

Geochemical Construction utility

GRTALHS Granite, altered, high sulphides StrongPAG Uncertain Poor GRTNON Granite, nontronitic Weak PAG Uncertain Poor GRTUNOX Granite, unoxidised Weak PAG Uncertain Fair * Estimations are based on block model geology codes, which do not fully breakdown into the ARD units described, some units may not be clearly defined in the block model but this will be updated by EOX and JC in June PAG = potentially acid generating

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 30


7.0 WATER SUPPLY OPTIONS UNDER CONSIDERATION 7.1 Introduction This section presents the results to date of the site wide water balance model with the present estimate of the overall water need of the Project (between 3 and 8 Mm3/annum), and water resource evaluations of the coffer dam source option on the Shtuka River and of the Ilovica reservoir source option. Further updates, including an assessment of the Turija canal source option, will be presented by SWS in a technical memo at the end of June 2015. An evaluation of the Strumica plain groundwater source option will be presented when results are available.

A site-wide water network diagram for the Project during operations is shown in Figure 7.1.1.

The initial water balance includes the following elements:

TMF water balance from Golder;

Process plant water balance from Amec Foster Wheeler (AFW); and

All other elements of the water balance from SWS.

The objective of the initial water balance work is to evaluate the potential options for meeting the water needs for the Project (between 3 and 8 Mm3/annum).

Further iterations of the site wide water balance will be needed to ensure coordination of inputs and further certainty in the water balance

7.2 Water Balance Model Update The GoldSim site wide water balance model has been updated by SWS and Golder since the last version was distributed in April 2015. Updates to the site wide water balance made by SWS were:

Inclusion of stochastic precipitation model using a 54-year record of synthesised areal rainfall for the upper Shtuka catchment to the TMF.

Inclusion of the process plant water balance (Ilovitza Overall Plant & TMF Water Balance diagram 24 April 2015.pdf) provided by AFW

Update of surface water catchment areas, potable water demand and ore moisture content within the model.

Updates to the TMF water balance made by Golder were:

Capture of runoff from the TMF downstream embankment to a runoff collection pond and returned to the TMF

Reduction of mine life to 21 years

Update of ore production, tailings specific gravity, seepage rate through the TMF embankment and elevation-storage-area relationship of the TMF within the model.

During updating of the model SWS identified that high TMF losses are defined in the AFW plant and TMF water balance (5.6 Mm³/yr). However, the GoldSim TMF model (primarily using PFS percent solids data) predicts low losses of only 0.5 to 1.3 Mm³/yr which vary seasonally. These cause the TMF to flood within a few months of the start of operations. Only some of this water can be reclaimed back to the plant because some processes require raw water as opposed to reclaim.

To prevent flooding of the TMF and to replicate the total water demand in the AFW plant and TMF water balance, additional losses were added by SWS to the plant (as per the preliminary model). This causes the

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 31


total water requirement to increase substantially. Further integration of the two water balance models (SWS and AFW) is required to ensure consistency.

The results are presented in Figures 7.2.1 and 7.2.2. They show that total raw water demand averages 6.3 Mm³/yr, likely ranging between 6 and 6.5 Mm³/yr (Figure 7.2.1). However, this is considered an over estimate. Figure 7.2.2 shows that the TMF pool volume initially increases to a maximum volume of 1.6 Mm³ due to a lag in reclaim at the start of mine life. Once stabilised, the pool volume is likely to fluctuate seasonally between nearly 0 and 0.2 Mm³.

7.3 Ilovica Reservoir The reliability of Ilovica Reservoir to provide an uninterrupted water supply to the Project was assessed for a range of potential EOX abstraction rates. The assessment was carried out in GoldSim using the reservoir storage yield analysis detailed by Parks and Gustard (1982)9. The method is based on an analysis of reservoir behaviour based on inflows, releases, direct rainfall and evaporation losses over a varying reservoir surface area followed by a frequency analysis of annual maximum storage requirements. If the reservoir runs dry in any particular year this is considered a supply failure and the maximum storage requirement is set to the reservoir volume.

The assessment methodology for a fixed abstraction rate is summarised as follows.

1) For each timestep (1 day) identify the volume of water required to fill the reservoir to capacityaccounting for:

Water already in storage from the previous timestep;

Water added to the dam through surface runoff and direct rainfall;

Water removed from the reservoir as seepage or evaporation; and

Water removed from the reservoir as an abstraction.

2) For each year of record, identify the maximum volume of water required to fill the reservoir ascalculated in Step 1.

3) Perform a frequency analysis on annual maximum storage requirements (using a Blom plottingposition).

Using this methodology, the return period10 of supply failure (i.e. when the capacity of the reservoir is exceeded and the reservoir runs dry), or reliability of supply, can be identified for a range of potential abstraction (yield) scenarios.

The reservoir model was run using a 54-year dataset of synthesised inflows. The river flows were generated using a rainfall-runoff model calibrated to the observed rainfall and runoff record at gauging station JZGS01 on the Jazga River 1 km upstream of the reservoir and factored to include the ungauged portion of the catchment and a 54-year dataset of daily areal rainfalls generated for the Jazga catchment.

The following scenarios were modelled:

Current abstraction rate (equivalent to 0.24 Mm³/yr for public water supply and 0.18 Mm³/yr for irrigation) without an EOX abstraction;

Projected future abstraction rate (equivalent to 0.36 Mm³/yr for public water supply and 0.18 Mm³/yr irrigation) without an EOX abstraction;

Projected future abstraction rate with EOX abstraction of 0.2 Mm³/yr;

9 Parks Y P and Gustard A (1982) A reservoir storage yield analysis for arid and semiarid climates. Optimal Allocation of Water Resources (Proceedings of the Exeter Symposium, July 1982). IAHS Publ. No. 135. 10 Return period is the average number of years in the long run between events of a similar magnitude.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 32


Projected future abstraction rate with EOX abstraction of 0.4 Mm³/yr; and

Projected future abstraction rate with EOX abstraction of 0.6 Mm³/yr.

The resulting relationships between storage, yield and reliability of supply (return period of supply failure) are presented in Figure 7.3.1. It is shown that with the current abstraction rate Ilovica reservoir has a return period of supply failure of 1 in over 90 years. For a projected future abstraction without an EOX abstraction, the return period of supply failure reduces to 1 in 34 years. Therefore, any abstraction by EOX (additional to abstraction by existing users) will further reduce the return period of supply failure; to 1 in 5 years if EOX were to abstract 0.2 Mm³/yr in addition to the existing abstractions. It is concluded that Ilovica reservoir would be unable to sustain a supply to EOX and other users in the absence of pumping support from another source.

It may be argued that if EOX were to share the reservoir with the other users EOX should ensure that the current reliability of supply (return period of supply failure of 1 in over 90 years) should be maintained. To achieve this, EOX would have to replace the equivalent volume abstracted, plus additional water to meet the projected (future) demand for public water supply or irrigation. This is illustrated in Figure 7.3.2 for EOX abstraction rates of 3, 5 and 8 Mm³/yr. Inflows from other sources only occur when the water level in the dam is 1 m below the spillway; this prevents water being added which may spill.

It is concluded that, as a shared resource, Ilovica Reservoir alone would not provide a viable water supply source for the mine, but it could be utilised as a storage reservoir if inputs were available from an additional source. Furthermore, the projected water requirements for public water supply and irrigation (about 0.5 Mm³/yr) are small compared to the projected EOX requirements (3-8 Mm³/yr), so at present it is considered unnecessary to provide alternative water supplies for public and irrigation supply. This is provided that any additional water added to the reservoir does not have a negative impact on the water treatment process for public consumption or irrigation requirements.

The following data and assumptions were used for the model.

Synthesised 54-year areal rainfall record for the upper Jazga catchment to gauging station JZGS01;

Monthly mean potential evapotranspiration from the EOX met station;

Rainfall-runoff and soil moisture model calibrated to flows recorded from November 2013 to January 2015 at the Jazga gauging station JZGSS01;

Elevation-storage relationships for Ilovica Reservoir obtained by bathymetric survey performed in April 2015 and calibrated (including sedimentation rate) to:

Agricultural abstractions recorded by the Water Management Company (which manages Ilovicareservoir) from 2000 to 2014; and

Public water supply abstractions recorded by the Water Utility Company (which operates publicwater supply system) from 2007 to 2014.

Projected future public water supply requirements were estimated using:

The same seasonal water requirements per connection as present (between 432 and545 L/d/connection);

The same number of connections exclusive of Ilovica and Shtuka; and

All houses in Ilovica and Shtuka (750) being connected to the supply and all receiving water 365days of the year (currently only some houses are connected and only have water between May andSeptember).

Projected future irrigation requirements were assumed to not increase because it is understood that most of the available agricultural land is already under irrigation; and

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 33


It was assumed that no environmental flows were required (in line with practice by the Water Management Company of not making controlled environmental releases from Ilovica reservoir), no dead storage or additional sedimentation occurs and that seepage occurs at a rate of 0.3 m³/hr (80 L/s).

7.4 Coffer Dam The reliability of the coffer dam to provide an uninterrupted water source was assessed for a range of potential dam heights (5 to 25 m) and for two abstraction rates (10 m³/hr and 20 m³/hr). The assessment was carried out using the same methodology as used in Section 5.3 for Ilovica Reservoir. By following this method for a number of dam heights, and therefore storage volumes, a design storage-yield-reliability relationship was identified. This relationship allowed the minimum dam storage (or height) to be identified for the required reliability of supply.

The reservoir model was run using a 54-year dataset of synthesised inflows at gauging station STGS03 approximately 300 m downstream of the coffer dam site. The river flows were generated using a rainfall-runoff model calibrated to the observed rainfall and runoff record at gauging station STGS03 on the Shtuka River and a 54-year dataset of daily areal rainfalls generated for the upper Shtuka catchment.

The resulting design storage-return period relationships are presented in Figures 7.4.1 and 7.4.2 for 10 m³/hr and 20 m³/hr abstraction rates respectively. They show that, for a reliable abstraction rate of 10 m³/hr with a 50-year return period (i.e. 2% probability of failure), dam height would have to be 14 m. For a 20 m³/hr supply, dam height would need to be 19.5 m. Since the total water demand is of the order of 570-913 m3/hour (5-8 Mm3/yr) it is concluded that the coffer dam could meet only a small proportion of the demand and would be unlikely to provide an economic water supply source for the mine unless other water resources are more expensive. However, a small coffer dam may be suitable as an occasional abstraction source when minor works are being undertaken in the Shtuka Valley or on the TMF.

The following data and assumption were used for the model.

Synthesised 54-year areal rainfall record for the upper Shtuka catchment to gauging station STGS03.

Monthly mean potential evapotranspiration from the EOX met station.

Rainfall-runoff and soil moisture model calibrated to flows recorded from March 2014 to February 2015 at the coffer dam location (gauging station STGS03).

Elevation-storage relationships for the Coffer dam were extracted from existing topography data of the Shtuka catchment (LiDAR data not yet available).

It was assumed that no environmental flows were required, no dead storage or sedimentation occurs and no seepage to ground occurs.

7.5 Conclusion The conclusions of the water supply study to date are as follows.

The total raw water supply predicted by the site wide water balance will be between 6 and 6.5 Mm³/yr, although demand in year 1 will be higher if reclaim from the TMF is delayed while it stabilises.

The current predicted demand may be an over estimate because the site wide water balance predicts lower losses in the TMF than the AFW plant and TMF water balance. Additional losses were therefore added to the site wide water balance to ensure consistency.

Ilovica Reservoir alone would not provide a viable water supply source for the mine, but it could be utilised as a storage reservoir if inputs were available from an additional source such as Turija canal or groundwater from the Strumica plain.

The coffer dam would be unlikely to provide an economic water supply source for the mine unless other water resources are more expensive. However, a small coffer dam may be suitable as an occasional

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 34


abstraction source when minor works are being undertaken in the Shtuka Valley or on the TMF. It is not recommended to pump water from the coffer dam to Ilovica Reservoir.

Investigations have started to identify additional water sources; these include pit water, Turija Reservoir, groundwater from the Jazga and Shtuka valleys and groundwater from the Strumica plain. Both yield and water quality will be assessed as part of this process. Once completed, it is recommended that these results are reviewed with the conclusions above.

It is also recommended that the two current water balance models (SWS site wide water balance and AFW plant and Golder TMF water balance) are further integrated to ensure consistency.

SWS plans to issue a technical memo at the end of June 2015 to provide an update on the water source evaluations.

8.0 POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ISSUES AND APPROACH TO MITIGATION AND MANAGEMENT

8.1 Mitigation Hierarchy As described in Section 1, the assessment of environmental and social impacts is iterative. It is intended that engineering teams will use the information provided herein to guide design in the Feasibility Study and to minimise impacts.

The mitigation hierarchy is recommended as international best practice to reduce the potential impacts of a mine. Mitigation should be contemplated in the following sequence:

1) Avoidance (e.g., avoid placing infrastructure in sensitive areas such as areas of critical habitat orarchaeological remains);

2) Minimisation (e.g., keep the proposed footprint to areas of existing disturbance or to the minimumextent possible);

3) Restoration (e.g., progressive reclamation as the Project proceeds, and final reclamation at closure);and

4) Compensation and offsetting (only to be considered after points 1 to 3, and can include creation orimprovement of habitat offsite, however it is expensive and its efficacy is uncertain).

The measures recommended in Section 5 are the first pass at environmental and social considerations, which should be incorporated into project design to reduce the need for evaluation of some basic engineering measures in the impact assessment and allow the ESIA to focus on key issues.

Subsequent to the ESIA, environmental and social management plans (ESMP) will be developed to provide an action plan for the implementation of mitigation measures and monitoring required to help avoid or minimise adverse impacts and to optimise beneficial effects of a project. The management plans will form live documents which will be updated on a regular basis throughout the life of the Project.

8.2 Environmental Design Criteria Environmental Design Criteria (EDC) were generated by Tetratech. The existing document presents guidelines and standards from different sources which could be appropriate to the Project, including guidance on quality of discharge for the Project (water quality, air quality), plus considerations for noise and vibration.

The EDC provides some preliminary guidance to the engineering teams, however, Golder are due to take ownership of it and develop it into a succinct summary of environmental guidelines and standards specific for the Project. The revised EDC will be finalised by the end of June and will be included as Appendix D to this report.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 35


8.3 Golder Potential Issues and Mitigation Table 5.3.1 presents potential issues for environmental and social disciplines (except water) and provides suggested engineering solutions which should be incorporated into the design, in order to minimise impacts and reduce potential changes to design following the ESIA.

In Table 5.3.1, activities are not separated according to construction, operations and closure. The worst case of the three stages of the project life cycle is assumed.

Table 5.3.1 Potential environmental issues and potential engineering solutions

Row Potential Impacts Potential engineering solution Additional mitigation, subject to ESIA

1 Geology & Geomorphology

2 Seismic activities in vicinity of the Project

Tailings design to meet BREF and other international standards. Dam breach analysis for early stages of Tailings Management Facility (TMF) before buttress is fully constructed. Pit and infrastructure design to meet EU/international standards. Landfill to meet Landfill directive.

Emergency Preparedness Plan.

3 Landslips in river valleys due to deforestation/soil exposure/roads

Minimise disturbance footprint (eg. limit stripping and number and extent of site roads, only deforest and/or strip areas necessary for infrastructure/access/health and safety, efficient stockpiling of soils/oxide ore. Early afforestation where disturbance occurs. Installation of slope stabilisation/erosion control measures around disturbance footprint, especially in high hazard areas (steep slope and exposed, unconsolidated material). Effective drainage design (including design of roads and road drainage) to ensure rainfall runoff is attenuated and dissipated during extreme events. Consider ground stabilising techniques such as geocells or geotextiles to minimise erosion of road shoulders or bearing surfaces. Drainage designs and consideration for attenuation within the catchment (rainfall – runoff management). Refer to IFC Mining Guidelines (2007) for return periods, plus use Section 3 of this report.

Managed forestry, soil management in construction environment management plan and closure plan, in accordance with geomorphological assessment and hazard mapping.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 36



4 Increased sedimentation in project drainage

Characterisation of sediment loading from project affected areas. Sediment control structures (designed to meet expected loading and 100 year flood event), in accordance with permanent structure design criteria in IFC guidelines for Mining 2007. Locate sedimentation ponds to intercept surface water runoff with suspended sediment.

Passive treatment system, Sediment Management Plan.

5 Soils & Land Use Capability

6

Soil degradation due to physical temporary or permanent loss (removal or burial due to construction, erosion potential, changes on the landscape)

Stockpiling volumes should be estimated based on known soil mapping (volumes will be estimated by Golder following completion of the soils baseline study, approx. end July 2015, then refined after ESIA baseline soil mapping). Minimise disturbance areas, only strip soils where necessary. Separate topsoil and subsoil and stockpile. Progressive soil restoration and afforestation. Plan to undertake vegetation clearance in phases and no more than 6 months in advance of when the cleared land is required in order to minimise exposure of bare soil.

Soil Management Plan, Construction Management Plan, Forestry Management, and Closure Plan.

7 Soil degradation due to stockpiling (loss of soil biodiversity, organic matter, and soil fertility)

Separation of stockpiled material: no mixing of topsoil/organic matter and subsoil. Progressive soil restoration, hydroseeding, afforestation and coppicing.

Soil Management Plan

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 37



8 Soil degradation due to dust deposition or leaching of metals.

Dust suppression (spraying non-tarmacked roads/pit area/stockpiles/material transfer points, with water or a commercial dust suppressant). Dusty loads on vehicles to be covered where possible and when required Dust plumes from waste rock blasting will be reduced through design of the blast to prevent fly rock and dust. Separation of stockpiled material: no mixing of topsoil/organic matter and subsoil. Locating soil stockpiles appropriately (away from sensitive areas shown on constraints maps, away from potential sources of contamination and upwind of prevailing wind likely to convey dust).

Soil Management Plan, Environmental Management Plan (dust management).

9 Loss of land for forestry, grazing and agriculture.

Design roads to minimise agricultural land take. Design in accordance with guidelines from the land acquisition plan. Minimise disturbance footprint (e.g. limit stripping and number and extent of site roads, only deforest and/or strip areas necessary for infrastructure/access/health and safety, efficient stockpiling of soils/oxide ore.

Forestry management, economic displacement, closure plan to identify restoration.

10 Indirect impact to land use due to change in local socioeconomics. None. Labour management, Economic

displacement.

11 Ecology, Biodiversity & Ecosystem Services

12

Construction in Prime Butterfly Area “Ograzden” internationally designated, which occasionally overlaps with the borders of the concession area.

Minimise footprint in sensitive areas (see Section 6 and Appendix C). Biodiversity Action Plan.

13

Permanent loss of aquatic habitat within the Shtuka valley (may support species such as the Stone crayfish (IUCN data deficient, no data from Macedonia). This species is in decline across Europe.

Minimise footprint of TMF and associated facilities and ensure habitat is maintained where possible downstream of TMF (see Section 6 and Appendix C).

Biodiversity Action Plan.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 38



14

Permanent loss of transitional forest and scrub mosaic (terrestrial invertebrates such as the large blue butterfly (IUCN endangered) and spur thighed tortoise (IUCN Vulnerable)).

Minimise footprint in sensitive areas (see Section 6 and Appendix C) Progressive soil restoration, hydroseeding and afforestation according to habitat management plan.

Biodiversity Action Plan and Restoration, and Forestry management .

15 Permanent loss of saproxylic (dead wood) habitat (supports species such as the Stag beetle (Habitats directive protection).


Biodiversity Action Plan.

16 Impacts on Natural and semi-natural vegetation types.


Biodiversity Action Plan and Restoration, and Forestry management.

17 Loss/modification of wetland habitats associated with freshwater springs in upper catchment, unique plant assemblages.

Minimise footprint of TMF and associated facilities and ensure habitat is maintained upstream of TMF according to the springs mapping completed by SWS.

Biodiversity Action Plan, Water Management Plan.

18 Bats, widespread throughout the LSA, all on Habitat Regulations loss of foraging, severance of flight paths.

None. Biodiversity Action Plan.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 39



19

Impacts on Priority Ecosystem Services:

Freshwater (provisioning);

Regulation of water (regulating);

Erosion (regulating);

Forage value (including hunting) (barter/Commercial sale) of mushrooms/firewood (provisioning); and

Milk, milk products, and meat from livestock (provisioning).

Minimise footprint in hunting areas, grazing areas and areas of forage value.

Water management, Forestry management, Economic displacement (grazing areas).

20 Air Quality

21

Soiling caused by dust generated during the construction of access roads, power line, and mine infrastructure as well as wind-whipping of materials from open stockpiles.

Dust suppression measures (spraying non-tarmacked roads/ stockpiles/material transfer points, with water or a commercial dust suppressant; dusty loads on vehicles will be covered). Minimise the number of stockpiles and ensure where necessary outside of the concession area, they are combined and at distance/downwind of key receptors. Cover temporary stockpiles Progressive soil restoration and afforestation . Restrict speed limits. Limit height and slope of stockpiles and ensure that exposed soil is covered or revegetated as soon as is practicable. Locate stockpiles away from and downwind of receptors such as local communities, camps or work areas, where possible.

Soil Management Plan, Environmental Management Plan (dust management), Construction Management Plan.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 40



22 Soiling caused by dust generated during the mine excavation and from wind whipping of material from TMF.

Dust suppression (spraying non-tarmacked roads/pit area/stockpiles/material transfer points, with water or a commercial dust suppressant; dusty loads on vehicles will be covered; dust plumes from blasting will be reduced through design of the blast to prevent fly rock and dust). Progressive soil restoration, hydroseeding, afforestation and coppicing on TMF and buttress.

Environmental Management Plan (dust management).

23

Soiling and deterioration of air quality from dust and fine particulates generated during the processing and beneficiation of ore, and ancillary facilities.

Dust suppression (spraying non-tarmacked roads/pit area/stockpiles/material transfer points, with water or a commercial dust suppressant; dusty loads on vehicles will be covered; water sprayer at material transfer points). Use best available technology for processing facilities to reduce emissions. Install dust extraction/collection systems, such as baghouse filters, within mills, crusher houses, ore storage bins, bulk chemical storage, and mixing areas. Covered conveyor design.

Environmental Management Plan (dust management).

24 Deterioration in air quality due to emissions from vehicle and machinery exhaust, and combustion plant.

Use best available technology for plant/facilities and any power generation to reduce emissions. Use low sulphur diesel and MFO as far as possible. Maximise vehicle movement on public highways during periods of higher traffic volumes (agriculture harvest). Minimise vehicle movements on public roads during rush hour and when children will be by roads. Minimise travel distances.

Environmental Management Plan Traffic Management Plan.

25 Climate

26 Increases to greenhouse gas emissions (CO2 accounting for >25,000 tonnes annually).

Modern, well-maintained vehicles Use best available technology to minimise emissions Consideration and use (where feasible) of renewable energy sources

GHG accounting

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 41



27 Noise

28 Disturbance caused by noise generated during the construction of access roads, power line and mine infrastructure.

Allow for material for construction of noise bunds if ESIA determines that incremental change is unacceptable and nearby receptors are sensitive. Reduced construction at night. Modern, well-maintained vehicles. The fleet should be fitted with standard silencers and will be serviced regularly to ensure smooth operation.

Bund locations and sizes assessed in ESIA Environmental Management Plan.

29 Disturbance due to mining activity noise during the operational phase of the mine.

Allow material for construction of noise bunds if ESIA determines that incremental change is unacceptable and nearby receptors are sensitive. Reduced operations at night (export of concentrate only during daytime hours; no blasting at night). Blast design to ensure that the effects of noise, air overpressure, fly rock and ground borne vibration are minimised. Optimisation of the blast design to eliminate the requirement for secondary blasting. Transportation to and from site will be planned for daylight hours. Include noise insulation cladding on all mine facility buildings housing noise generating equipment. Locate noise generating activities as far from sensitive receptors as possible. Where feasible, operate semi-permanent moveable plant within noise reducing enclosures.

Bund locations and sizes assessed in ESIA Environmental Management Plan.

30 Disturbance due to vehicle movements during the operational phase of the mine.

Modern, well-maintained vehicles. The fleet will be fitted with standard silencers and will be serviced regularly to ensure smooth operation. Reduced operations at night (export of concentrate only during daytime hours).

Restriction of vehicle movements if incremental change is unacceptable and nearby receptors are sensitive. Environmental Management Plan.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 42



31 Socio-economics & Agriculture

32 Direct employment (construction).

Design construction camp to be self-contained. Use local workers where possible (in decreasing order of preference: local villages, southeast region of Macedonia, national, international).

Operational, labour and procurement policies.

33 Direct employment (mine). Use local workers where possible (in decreasing order of preference: local villages, southeast region of Macedonia, national, international).


34 Indirect impact of employment and economic activity through businesses that support the operation of the mine.

Use local suppliers where possible (in decreasing order of preference: local villages, southeast region of Macedonia, national, international).


35 Capacity building in the local labour force.

Use local suppliers where possible (in decreasing order of preference: local villages, southeast region of Macedonia, national, international). Consider social investment in education in mining and associated skills.


36 Impacts to local infrastructure and initiatives (drinking water, waste).

Construction and operational waste to be managed on site (landfill or similar). Discharges to meet standards and guidelines (according to EDC). Refer to engineering solutions in Table 5.4.1

Environmental Management Plan. Waste Management Plan.

37 Impacts to health (workers). Occupational health guidelines to be followed (e.g. dust, AQ, noise on site – in the EDC). Operational policy/labour policies.

38 Impacts on health, livelihoods and education (communities). Covered in air quality, noise and water sections.

Environmental Management Plan.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 43



39 Impacts to grazing, bee keeping and wood harvesting land uses (some illegal land uses).

Minimise footprint in sensitive areas. Design to minimise agricultural land take. Design in accordance with guidelines form the land acquisition plan.

Biodiversity Action Plan, forestry management, economic displacement, closure plan to identify restoration.

40 Archaeology & Cultural Heritage

41

Archaeological and cultural heritage remains within the project footprint

The area of greatest potential is in the lowland zone (access road and overhead powerline).

Remains of small cemeteries/burial grounds if these locations were not formalised and whose locations are known or areas of land used by the community for annual celebrations (e.g. religious or farming festivals).

Minimise footprint of pit, tailings in sensitive areas (see Section 6 and Appendix C). Training for construction staff in watching brief. Consider costs of watching brief.

Cultural Heritage Management Plan, watching brief procedures to be signed up to by contractors. Remains excavation or removal is appropriate.

42 Potential indirect effect of the Project upon the historic setting of cultural heritage sites

Provide access to culturally important areas if they remain e.g in Shtuka valley. (see Section 6 and Appendix C) Cultural Heritage Management Plan

43 Landscape & Visual

44

Physical changes to the character of the landscape

Modification of the landform, vegetation cover, land use and settlement patterns

Progressive Soil restoration, hydroseeding, afforestation and coppicing. Minimise footprint and size of visible structures (TMF).

CEMP and Closure Plan.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 44



45

Potential for mine components to affect views currently experienced by local inhabitants, visitors or workers:

Open pit;

Tailings management facility;

Access road;

Processing plant; and

Electricity transmission line.

The design of the process plant and buildings should make use of earth colours, and avoid any bright or reflective colours. No buildings above 25 m in height will be constructed. Wherever possible align access and haul roads along contours or at shallow gradients rather than zig-zags directly up slopes (this will also reduce tyre wear and fuel use). Wherever possible, locate dumps so they abut against natural hills and slopes. Front wall of tailings dams will be properly surfaced and revegetated to blend in with the natural topography. Progressive reclamation and revegetation to minimise visibility. Reclamation includes ripping of compacted areas and revegetation as soon as disturbed areas are no longer in use. Revegetation will use vegetation representative of natural vegetation in the area using locally procured seeds as far as possible. Unless site security or safety may be compromised, the use of outside lighting that projects downward and is shielded from releasing light outward will be used preferentially over floodlights. Time-control lights or motion sensor lights that go off after working hours at night will be used. Lights with the lowest feasible wattage levels that achieve the functional requirements of the Project will be used. Place facilities out of line of sight from villages.

CEMP and Closure Plan.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 45


8.4 SWS Possible Water Impacts and Mitigation Options Table 5.4.1 presents known potential issues for all water disciplines (surface water, groundwater and geochemistry) and provides suggested engineering solutions which should be incorporated into the design, in order to minimise impacts and reduce potential changes to design following the ESIA.

Table 5.4.1 is separated by activity and phase (construction, operations and closure). The preferred source of water to the Project is yet to be decided, therefore the range of alternative activities are presented with their respective issues and potential engineering solutions.

Table 5.4.1 Potential issues and potential engineering solutions (water only) Row Activity Potential impacts Potential engineering solution Additional mitigation, subject to ESIA

1 Construction Phase - surface water

2

Optional temporary abstraction from Ilovica reservoir (probably in tandem with Turija canal abstraction or groundwater in Strumica plain or from Turija River or Strumica River).

Reduction in reliability of supply to other users (public w/s, local ag.)

Automated abstraction monitoring and control system based on reservoir level/volume.

Summer: Replacement of pumped reservoir water with water from Turija canal (night time abstraction). Winter: If necessary, implement reservoir operation rule that restricts abstraction from reservoir based on reservoir contents.

3

Optional temporary abstraction from Turija canal (if decision is made to use TC water).

Potential reduction in irrigation water for farmers taking water from canal downstream.

Abstraction and conveyance system from Turija canal to Ilovica reservoir. Automated abstraction monitoring and control system based on agreed downstream flow.

Night time abstraction from Turija canal.

4 Potential water quality incompatibility to be assessed. -

Unlikely to be an issue as assumed that Turija Canal water is of good quality. Need for treatment unlikely, but needs further investigation.

5 Increased temperatures and variation in dissolved oxygen concentrations in Ilovica reservoir in summer.

Pebbled cascade discharge into reservoir to aerate canal water. Night time abstraction from Turija canal.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 46


Row Activity Potential impacts Potential engineering solution Additional mitigation, subject to ESIA

6

Optional temporary abstraction from Turija River or Strumica River (to Ilovica reservoir).

Reduced flows in river downstream, causing minor reduction in aquatic habitat and minor reduction in water quality downstream (reduced dilution of any effluent discharged into river downstream of abstraction point). To be assessed.

Possible augmentation of river flows in summer from groundwater in the Strumica Plain.

-

7 Increased cost of treatment of ‘contaminated’ Ilovica reservoir water. n/a Financial compensation of Water Utility Co.

for increased cost incurred (capex+opex).

8

Increased temperatures and variability in dissolved oxygen concentrations. Raised risk of eutrophication in Ilovica reservoir in summer.

n/a Night time abstraction from Turija/Strumica rivers.

9 Any legal transboundary agreement between Macedonia and Bulgaria governing the Strumica River.

n/a Water management to ensure no unacceptable transboundary effects.

10 Temporary abstraction from Shtuka River at Coffer Dam site (to enable constr. of Shtuka concrete diversion works).

Reduction in flow in Shtuka River downstream of abstraction point.

None considered necessary from hydrological standpoint. -

11

Diversion of Shtuka River (to enable construction of coffer and tailings dams).

Severe reduction in flow in Shtuka River between diversion and re-entry point. -

Water management to ensure no unacceptable effects on communities and ecology.

12 Increase in flood risk in Shtuka River downstream of re-entry point during construction of TMF.

No structural flood defences in Shtuka village proposed owing to relatively short construction period of TMF (1-2 years).

Flood risk assessments to be carried out in Shtuka village and at Sekirnik road culvert, including assessment of channel instability on alluvial fan.

13

Increased risk of Shtuka River channel erosion downstream of diversion re-entry point, through village and channel instability during major floods on alluvial fan between Shtuka village and Sekirnik road.

Hydraulics of Shtuka River diversion to ensure transport of sediment discharged into diversion channel to reduce capacity for erosion of Shtuka River channel downstream. Re-entry point to include a stilling basin, but no sediment capture works.

-

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 47



14

Ground disturbance (by road constr., mechanised stripping of forest, stripping of overburden, site construction works).

Increased flood risk in Jazga and Shtuka Rivers.

Sediment control works on both catchments and watercourses).

Managed, un-mechanised removal of forest by the forestry authorities, minimising soil disturbance.

15

Increased erosion and sediment transport in Jazga River causing increased reservoir sedimentation/loss of storage/supply reliability.

Sediment control works. Sediment Management Plan.

16 Increased turbidity in Ilovica reservoir, causing increased treatment cost for Water Utility Co.

- Financial compensation of Water Utility Co. if treatment cost rises (capex+opex).

17

Increased erosion and sediment transport in Shtuka River causing channel aggradation and increased risk of flooding (until outlet in tailings dam is closed).

Sediment control works.

18 Discharge of treated sewage effluent from construction camp.

Minor increase in nutrient concentrations in Jazga/Turija or Shtuka/Strumica rivers.

Project Sewage treatment plant with acceptable effluent discharge (to meet the Environmental Design Criteria – Appendix A) and appropriate discharge location downstream of village. Landfill design to meet landfill directive and Environmental Design Criteria for discharge.

Monitoring of effluent to ensure correct functioning of sewage treatment plant.

19 Construction Phase – groundwater

20

Advanced dewatering abstraction (if dewatering started during construction phase).

None (springs of minor significance). None. None. Biological action plan for any receptors identified as vulnerable.

21 Possible reduction in flow in Jazga River/inflows to Ilovica reservoir.

Possible need for Jazga diversion channel or canalisation. Augment reservoir inflows by abstraction from Turija canal/Turija River/Strumica River/groundwater in Strumica plain.


July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 48



22 Possible minor reduction in flow in Shtuka River.

None considered necessary from hydrological standpoint, dependant on scale of reduction and water quality assessment.

Discharge portion of pumped water into Shtuka River subject to water quality compatibility.

23 Optional temporary abstraction from Strumica Plain (if decision made to use SP groundwater).

Reduction in availability of groundwater for irrigation on Strumica Plain in short term.

Abstraction system to be designed to minimise drawdown.

Divert portion of discharge to farmers as necessary.

24 Potential water quality incompatibility to be assessed.

Abstraction system to be designed to minimise drawdown. -

25 Construction Phase – geochemistry

26 Stripping of soils and overburden on deposit.

Water quality issues (interaction between sediment and water).

Water/sediment control works around pit, roads, other infrastructure. Water to be pumped to plant water storage facility to avoid overflows.

-

27 Material used for construction (avoid using acid-generating and metal-leaching material).

Potential for generation of acidic water and elevated metals concentrations in runoff and seepage.

Assessment and classification of materials and design of appropriate management/use strategies.

-

28 Operation Phase – surface water

29

Optional abstraction from Ilovica reservoir (probably in tandem with Turija canal abstraction or groundwater in Strumica plain or abstraction from Turija River or Strumica River).

As for construction. As for construction. As for construction.

30 Optional abstraction from Turija canal (if decision is made to use TC water). As for construction. As for construction. As for construction.

31 Abstraction from coffer dam. Reduction in diverted flow in Shtuka River. - Water management to make sure diverted

environmental flow is acceptable.

32 Optional abstraction from Turija River or Strumica River (to Ilovica reservoir). As for construction. As for construction. As for construction.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 49



33 Diversion of Shtuka River around tailings dam.

Reduction in flows. Reduction in flood risk in Shtuka River. downstream of re-entry point.

- Water management to ensure no unacceptable effects on communities and ecology.

34 Excavation of open pit. Reduction in flows. Reduction in flood risk in Jazga River downstream of pit.

- Water management to ensure no unacceptable effects on communities and ecology.

35 Pumping of in-pit rainfall-runoff to storage pond at processing plant.

In-pit water is likely to be turbid, high in suspended sediment, acidic and metalliferous (precluding discharge to the environment).

Sufficient storage to be provided at processing plant. Alternatively, treatment to meet discharge standards. In-pit water management structures to separate clean/dirty runoff. Engineers need to decide on the risk level to be designed. Sump design for level of risk and contingency and management to appropriate design storms. (IFC Guidelines For Mining [2007], plus see Section 3 of this report).

Use of in-pit water for dust suppression, if suitable for use, and drainage management required on areas where this is to be used.

36

Land cover change from forest to open ground in vicinity of site (peripheral to pit).

Increased flood risk in Jazga River. (net change in flood risk to be assessed)

Drainage designs and consideration for attenuation within the catchment (rainfall – runoff management). IFC mining guidelines 2007 for return periods, plus see section 3. Progressive afforestation of unused stripped areas.

Closure plan.

37

Increased erosion and sediment transport in Jazga River causing increased reservoir sedimentation/loss of storage/supply reliability.

Sediment control work and maintenance.

Periodic bathymetric surveys (approx. every 5 years).

38 Increased turbidity in Ilovica reservoir, causing increased treatment cost for Water Utility Co.

- Financial compensation of Water Utility Co. if treatment cost rises (capex + opex).

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 50



39 Operation Phase – groundwater

40

Dewatering abstraction.

Potential cross-flow from TMF to pit, increasing pumped flow.

Possible need for lining of west side of TMF. Measures in-pit to capture flow-through and control pit slope stability.

-

41 Progressive reduction in quality of pumped water (to be assessed using groundwater model).

Use pumped water for process water supply, as planned. If a positive water balance out of the pit (compared with process water requirements, how to deal with this, potential storage within the TMF or evaporation of excess water). SWS water balance to provide guidelines for design.

-

42 In-pit seepage from groundwater. Potentially low quality water.

Possible need for horizontal drains to assist drainage of pit walls. Water to be collected by in-pit water management structures (channels, sumps) and pumped to plant water storage facility.

-

43 Optional abstraction from Strumica Plain (if decision made to use SP groundwater).

Reduction in availability of groundwater for irrigation on Strumica Plain in medium to long term.

Abstraction system to be designed to minimise drawdown. SWS groundwater model to provide guidelines for design.

-

44 Potential water quality incompatibility to be assessed.

Abstraction system to be designed to minimise drawdown.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 51



45 Operation Phase – geochemistry

46 In-pit water seepage and runoff. See Groundwater – Potentially low quality in-pit seepage water.

Possible need for horizontal drains to assist drainage of pit walls. Water to be collected by in-pit water management structures (channels, sumps) and pumped to plant water storage facility.

-

47 Dewatering water quality. See Groundwater - Progressive reduction in quality of pumped water.

SWS groundwater model to provide guidelines for design. -

48 Runoff and seepage water from waste rock on external face of tailings dam.

Generation of poor quality water (possibly elevated iron).

Ditching to direct runoff and seepage to TMF seepage pond, to be pumped to TMF. Well planned placement of waste rock within the tailings dam and buttress.

-

49 Tailings water quality, seepage and water management. Poor quality water.

Tailings drainage system to direct seepage to seepage pond, to be pumped back to TMF. Consideration of lining. The upstream face will be lined. Compaction of base.

-

50 ROM pad. Poor quality runoff/seepage. Drainage system to capture and store runoff, to be pumped to plant water storage facility.

-

51 Oxide stockpile. Poor quality runoff/seepage.

Drainage system to capture and store runoff, to be pumped to plant water storage facility. Use an engineered cover to reduce infiltration and hence seepage/runoff. Use of oxide stockpile as soil storage areas.

-

52 Landfill. Poor quality runoff/seepage. Siting and design of seepage and runoff management. Lining. -

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 52



53 Closure Phase – surface water

54

Cessation of (optional) abstraction from Ilovica reservoir (probably in tandem with Turija canal abstraction or groundwater in Strumica plain or abstraction from Turija River or Strumica River).

Change in reliability of supply to other users (public w/s, local ag.) -


55 Cessation of (optional) abstraction from Turija canal (if decision is made to use TC water).

Changes to reliability and temperatures of water. -


56 Cessation of abstraction from coffer dam All of Shtuka River flow to be diverted. To be taken account of at design stage. -

57 Cessation of (optional) abstraction from Turija River or Strumica River (to Ilovica reservoir).

Changes to reliability and temperatures of water. -


58 Continued diversion of Shtuka River around tailings dam.

Maintenance of diversion channel integrity and free of sediment.

Hydraulics of Shtuka River diversion to ensure transport of sediment discharged into diversion channel to reduce capacity for erosion of Shtuka River channel downstream. Re-entry point to include a stilling basin, but no sediment capture works. Design must maintain channel integrity (perhaps excavate channel in fresh granite).

Afforestation of slopes above diversion channel to maximise slope stability. Road for maintenance maintained along the diversion channel.

59 Site rehabilitation and afforestation. - Afforestation of landfill, TMF stockpiles and waste dumps.

Closure and Water management to ensure no unacceptable effects on communities and ecology.

60 Road drainage and site drainage. Legacy of drainage and water management - to be incorporated into closure plan.

- Ownership of site and drainage infrastructure at closure.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 53



61

Closure of open pit and development of pit lake.

Pit lake water level in relation to overflow point as yet unknown.

Possible need for engineering of overflow point. Passive treatment (in short to medium term) of overflow by reed bed system or alternative (needs assessment). Trial passive treatment to be developed during construction.

Legacy of ownership to be covered in the closure plan.

62 Pit lake water quality as yet unknown.

Backfill covering of high risk material with inert waste. Enhanced flooding of pit by temporary stream diversion (Jazga River or coffer dam). Liming during flooding, subject to need and availability of materials.

Closure and water management to ensure no unacceptable effects on communities and ecology.

63 Possible seepage of poor quality water into Jazga River increasing cost of water treatment for Water Utility Co.

Passive treatment (in short to medium term) of overflow by reed bed system or alternative (needs assessment). Trial passive treatment to be developed during construction.

Handing over the operational groundwater source as an alternative water supply for the water management company. Closure and Water management to ensure no unacceptable effects on communities and ecology.

64

Seepage of poor quality water into reservoir. Seepage of poor quality water into the intakes. Seepage of poor quality water into the springs.

Passive treatment (in short to medium term) of overflow by reed bed system or alternative (needs assessment). Trial passive treatment to be developed during construction.

Bonds/guarantee on water supplies during operation and in closure. Renewal of water infrastructure, possibly financed by EBRD. Payment of water bills for households during operations. Reservoir above the site in the Jazga valley, Coffer dam upstream of the pit as a new water supply reservoir. Groundwater supply in the Jazga valley upstream of a pit discharge.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 54



65 Closure Phase – groundwater

66 Cessation of dewatering abstraction.

Re-bound of groundwater levels forming pit lake (above). Possible change in water quality of springs.

Possible need for engineering of overflow point. Passive treatment (in short to medium term) of overflow by reed bed system or alternative (needs assessment). Trial passive treatment to be developed during construction.


67 Cessation of (optional) abstraction from Strumica Plain.

Need for planned hand-over of boreholes to community / WMCo. -


68 Closure Phase – geochemistry

69

Closure of TMF.

Need to provide drainage of runoff entering and generated on the TMF. Flood risk may be higher compared to pre-mine condition.

Spillway on TMF (PMF). (possible need for flood defence through Shtuka village). Drainage around TMF engineered as permanent drainage structures which require no further maintenance.

Engagement with Water Management Co. w.r.t. maintenance of coffer dam and Shtuka diversion channel and water supply (avoids run on to TMF).

70 Poor quality flood runoff.

Cover TMF, tailings dam and waste rock abutment with ~impermeable cap and revegetate to minimise erosion and solute mobilisation.

-

71 Decommissioning of seepage pond. TMF drain-down yielding poor quality seepage water.

Conversion of seepage pond into passive downstream treatment system.

(Impact on groundwater and surface water to be assessed by groundwater model and geochemistry).

72 Rehabilitation of ROM and oxide stockpile areas.

Possible poor quality seepage from subsurface.

Removal of residual materials, placement of topsoil and re-vegetation.

Appropriate land use restoration. Final couple of years of oxide processing will fund/help to manage some of the closure options.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 55


9.0 SUMMARY OF ENGINEERING MEASURE FOR EARLY CONSIDERATION

The following provides a summary of key considerations for early consideration in the design.

9.1 Erosion Control and Sediment Management Erosion control measures, including the development of stable embankment slopes, installation of

erosion control features, and prompt revegetation.

Installation of physical erosion control features such as silt fences, ditches and berms, rock check dams, sediment ponds/sumps/traps, mulches, mats or netting to control erosion prior to the establishment of a protective vegetative cover.

As soon as practicable, temporarily disturbed areas will be graded, revegetated and reclaimed so that surface water run-off from these areas will be similar to natural or pre-mining conditions.

Roads, stockpiles and other features will be designed and constructed so that natural drainage patterns and catchments are changed as little as possible.

Vegetation clearance should be minimised and areas only cleared immediately before work takes place, as far as possible.

9.2 Dust/Air Quality Management Dust

Dust suppression through spraying with a water truck and/or fixed sprinklers on roads, stockpiles, crusher, conveyor, material transfer points.

Reduce dust from transport by sealing roads with high traffic volumes, establishing speed limits around the site and near villages, and covering dusty loads where possible and when required.

Minimise drop heights and have sprayers/dust control at material transfer points (conveyors, dumping of waste rock).

Design the blasting of ore and waste rock to ensure that dust is minimised.

Use best available technology for all plant and vehicles to minimise dust and air emissions.

Air Quality

Use recent model vehicles and best available technology for emissions reduction/capture for generators, processing plant, boilers/furnaces, and other facilities.

Regular schedule of vehicle and generator maintenance.

9.3 Water Management From analyses carried out by SWS to date, it appears unlikely that an overall positive water balance will

result (see also the PFS). In the event of periods of positive water balance then water should be temporarily stored in the TMF prior to treatment and discharge or recirculation to the plant

Clean and dirty surface water will be segregated though use of berms, cut-off trenches, diversion channels, oil/water separators, culverts and other feasible measures.

Clean surface water run-off will be directed around the plant, mine site, and other infrastructure and all other disturbed areas to natural drainage paths.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 56


Rainwater and dewatered groundwater pumped from the pits will be stored and attenuated before treatment and controlled discharge to the watercourses.

Reduce disturbance to natural ground cover as much as possible. During construction and operation, increased runoff due to vegetation clearance will be stored and attenuated before controlled discharge to the watercourses.

Discharges to the environment will be managed to replicate natural variability associated with high and low flows.

Polluted water should not be discharged from the site but stored, treated and re-used as process make-up water wherever possible.

Adequate sedimentation and flow control measures must be applied for all ditches on slopes.

Installation of physical erosion control features such as silt fences, ditches and berms, rock check dams, sediment ponds/sumps/traps, mulches, mats or netting to control erosion prior to the establishment of a protective vegetative cover.

Energy dissipaters will be installed to prevent the carriage of sediment with fast flowing water. Examples of these would be diversion channels, sedimentation ponds, rock filters, plastic water dams and concrete energy dissipaters.

All ponds containing process, contact, or waste water will be maintained at a level to allow sufficient freeboard to prevent spills. Freeboard should be at least one metre, and will take into account wave action and attenuation requirements.

Any new river crossings (roads) will be constructed so that natural flow regimes are not adversely affected and substantial scour does not occur by providing sufficient conveyance capacity through culverts or bridge section of the watercourse.

Install an underdrainage system on the TMF to facilitate seepage monitoring.

Reclamation will be designed so that the site has runoff characteristics similar to pre-development runoff conditions.

The sewage treatment plant will be located at a safe distance from permanent places of work and residences.

Effluent from the sewage treatment plant will only be discharged to surface watercourses if the effluent quality meets effluent guidelines (at a minimum the IFC General EHS Guidelines 2007) prior to dilution.

Sterilised sewage sludge may be disposed of by land application or mixed with shredded plant material, composted and used as fertiliser for the revegetation programme, although metals content must be determined prior to such action.

Avoid removing vegetation adjacent to lakes, rivers and streams unless the waterway is to be removed or diverted.

Protect stream channel stability by limiting in-stream and bank disturbance, and employ appropriate setbacks from riparian zones.

Protect storm water drains, ditches and stream channels against erosion through a combination of appropriate measures such as adequate dimensions, slope limitation techniques, synthetic liners or the use of energy dissipaters, such as rip rap or brushwood.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 57


9.4 Hazardous Materials Areas Fuel and chemical storage and usage areas will be demarcated, sealed and bunded, with stormwater

directed around these areas.

Project facilities will be designed with secondary containment which can hold any accidental contaminant spills.

Adequate storage facilities with secondary containment structures (to 110 % capacity) and bunding will be provided for the storage of oils, grease, fuels, chemicals and any other hazardous materials to be provided through all stages of the Project.

Provision for firewater storage on site will be required.

Fuel to be stored in a secure area in a steel tank, preferably supplied and maintained by the fuel suppliers. Secondary containment to 110 % of the volume of the largest tank in the area for fuel tanks.

Any fuel or storage tanks to be bunded and stored on hardstanding to prevent any spills from infiltrating to the underlying soil.

Install and maintain oil and grease traps or sumps at refuelling facilities, workshops and fuel storage depots. Use drip trays in the plant and workshops.

9.5 Visual Impacts Vegetation clearance will be minimised. Natural vegetation will be left intact as far as possible,

particularly where it serves to provide a screening effect for operations. Additional screening vegetation will be planted where required.

Place facilities out of line of sight from villages where possible. The design of the process plant and buildings should make use of earth colours, and avoid any bright or reflective colours.

Reclamation will take place progressively where feasible. This includes ripping of compacted areas and revegetation as soon as disturbed areas are no longer in use. Revegetation will use vegetation representative of natural vegetation in the area using locally procured seeds as far as possible.

Directional lighting of site (away from receptors)

9.6 Noise Management Locate noise generating activities as far from sensitive receptors as possible.

Introduce speed limits through all settlements in the vicinity of the mine for company vehicles and contractor vehicles on company business to reduce noise and disturbance.

Reduced operations at night (export of concentrate only during daytime hours; no blasting at night; transportation to be planned for daylight hours).

Earth berms to be constructed if necessary to meet guidelines to create barriers to noise.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0 58


Report Signature Page

GOLDER ASSOCIATES (UK) LTD

Michaela Simms Andrew Morsley ESIA Practitioner, Assistant Project Manager Associate

MS/AM/ss

Company Registered in England No.1125149 At Attenborough House, Browns Lane Business Park, Stanton-on-the-Wolds, Nottinghamshire NG12 5BL

VAT No. 209 0084 92 Golder, Golder Associates and the GA globe design are trademarks of Golder Associates Corporation.

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0


APPENDIX A Figures

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0

Data Source: Hydrometeorological Service, Skopje

Annual rainfall series, Ilovica Village, hydrological years 1960/61 to 2010/11

CLIENT: Euromax Resources Ltd PROJECT: Ilovica Engineering Considerations PROJECT NO: 55459 DRAWN: PBe CHECKED: PB DATE: June 2015 FIGURE: 3.1.1

\\US1137INF01\Marketing\Marketing Projects\templates\2013 version - draft\20130502\figure blocks\Letter\2013 11x17P figure block.docx

Mean annual rainfall, 1960s: 578 mm 1970s: 593 mm 1980s: 535 mm 1990s: 472 mm 2000s: 545 mm


Frequency Analysis of Annual Rainfalls at Ilovica Village, 1960/61-2010/11

CLIENT: Euromax Resources Ltd PROJECT: Ilovica Engineering Considerations PROJECT NO: 55459 DRAWN:DH CHECKED: PB DATE: June 2015 FIGURE: 3.1.2


0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

-4.00 -3.00 -2.00 -1.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00

Rain

fall (

mm

)

Normal variate z

Data

Model

Probability of values less than ordinate value (%)

Probability of values greater than ordinate value (%)

0.01 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 95 98 99 99.5 99.8 99.9 99.95 99.99

99.99 99.95 99.9 99.8 99.5 99 98 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05 0.01

2 5 10 20 50 100 200 500

Return period, years

500 200 100 50 20 10 5 2

Return period, years


Ilovica monthly rainfall percentiles,1960/61-2010/11



0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

150

Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep

Rai

nfa

ll (m

m) 90%

75%

50%

25%

10%


Annual rainfall series, Plant Site, hydrological years 1960/61-2013/14

CLIENT: Euromax Resources Ltd PROJECT: Ilovitza Engineering Considerations PROJECT NO: 55459 DRAWN: PBe CHECKED: PB DATE: June 2015 FIGURE: 3.1.4


R

ain

fall (

mm

)

0.0

100.0

200.0

300.0

400.0

500.0

600.0

700.0

800.0

900.0

1000.0

1100.0

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

3-Jun-2015Euromax Resources

Mean annual rainfall: 1960s: 745 mm 1970s: 768 mm 1980s: 690 mm 1990s: 580 mm 2000s: 775 mm


Frequency Analysis of Annual Rainfalls at Plant Site, 1960/61-2013/14

CLIENT: Euromax Resources Ltd PROJECT: Ilovitza Engineering Considerations PROJECT NO: 55459 DRAWN:DH CHECKED: PB DATE: June 2015 FIGURE: 3.1.5


100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

1400

-4.00 -3.00 -2.00 -1.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00

Rain

fall (

mm

)

Normal variate z

Data

Model

Probability of values less than ordinate value (%)

Probability of values greater than ordinate value (%)

0.01 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 95 98 99 99.5 99.8 99.9 99.95 99.99

99.99 99.95 99.9 99.8 99.5 99 98 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05 0.01

2 5 10 20 50 100 200 500 Return period, years

500 200 100 50 20 10 5 2 Return period, years


Plant site monthly rainfall percentiles,1960/61-2013/14



0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

150


Rai

nfa

ll (m

m) 90%

75%

50%

25%

10%

CLIENT: Euromax Resources Ltd PROJECT:

PROJ. NO: 55459 DRAWN: APu CHECKED: PBDATE: June 2015 FIGURE:

P:\55018_Euromax_MKD_ Ilovitza_SupportToDFS\600_Deliverables\620_Documents\20150528_Engineering Considerations Doc_v2\3.1 Climate summary\Master Figures\project site extreme ppt analysis (updated).xlsx

Dat source: EOXDepth duration frequency curves for design rainfalls at the plant site

Ilovitza Engineering Considerations

3.1.7

10

100

1000

0.1 1 10 100

Rai

nfa

ll P

(m

m)

Strom Duration D (hours)

2-yr 5-yr 10-yr 20-yr 25-yr 50-yr 100-yr 200-yr 500-yr 1000-yr

P1000 = 54.073D0.2987 P500 = 50.338D0.300

P200 = 45.454D0.3018 P100 = 41.783D0.3032

P50 = 38.11D0.3048

P25 = 34.404D0.3066

P20 = 33.197D0.3072

P10 = 29.365D0.3094

P5 = 25.313D0.312

P2= 19.053D0.3169


PROJ. NO: 55459 DRAWN: APu CHECKED: PBDATE: April 2015 FIGURE:

P:\55018_Euromax_MKD_ Ilovitza_SupportToDFS\600_Deliverables\620_Documents\20150528_Engineering Considerations Doc_v2\3.1 Climate summary\Master Figures\project site extreme ppt analysis (updated).xlsx

Data source: EOXDesign rainfall intensity duration frequency curves at the plant site

Ilovitza Engineering Considerations

3.1.8

1

10

100

0.1 1 10 100

Rai

nfa

ll in

ten

sity

I (

mm

/hr)

Strom Duration D (hours)

2-yr 5-yr 10-yr 20-yr 25-yr 50-yr 100-yr 200-yr 500-yr 1000-yr

I1000 = 54.073D-0.701 I500 = 50.338D-0.700

I200 = 45.454D-0.698 I100 = 41.783D-0.697

I50 = 38.11D-0.695

I25 = 34.404D--0.693

I20 = 33.197D-0.693

I10 = 29.365D-0.691

I5 = 25.313D-0.688

I2= 19.053D-0.683

Data Source: Hydrometeorological Service, Skopje and EOX

Plant site average monthly precipitation and evaporation



0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

150

160

170

180


Rai

nfa

ll /

Sno

w w

ate

r e

qu

ival

en

t /

Evap

ora

tio

n

(mm

) Snow Water Equivalent

Rainfall

Open water evaporation, Eo

Reference cropevapotranspiration, ETo

Consultant

DESIGN

PREPARED

REVIEW

APPROVED

YYYY-MM-DD Sheet Title

Project No Drawing

ProjectClient

13514150363Control

0001-X-0001Rev

2015-05-05

AD

EA

AM

AM

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS DOCUMENT

EUROMAX RESOURCES LTD

A

MONTHLY AVERAGE AND DAILY WIND SPEEDS, EOX METEOROLOGICAL STATION

3.5.1

Consultant

DESIGN

PREPARED

REVIEW

APPROVED


Project No Drawing

ProjectClient

13514150363Control

0001-X-0002Rev

2015-05-05

AD

EA

AM

AM



A

WINDROSE PLOT, FROM EOX METEOROLOGICAL STATION14 MAY 2013 - 8 APRIL 2015

3.5.2

Consultant

DESIGN

PREPARED

REVIEW

APPROVED


Project No Drawing

ProjectClient

13514150363Control

0001-X-0003Rev

2015-05-05

AD

EA

AM

AM



A

MONTHLY AND DAILY TEMPERATURE DATA FROM EOX METEOROLOGICAL STATION

3.6.1

T°C

T°C

Consultant

DESIGN

PREPARED

REVIEW

APPROVED


Project No Drawing

ProjectClient

13514150363Control

0001-X-0004Rev

2015-05-05

AD

EA

AM

AM



A

DAILY SOLAR RADIATION DATA FROM EOX METEOROLOGICAL STATION

3.7.1

Daily totals by month (Dec 2013 to Aug 2014)

Daily totals by month (Sept 2014 to Apr 2015)

Daily totals (Dec 2013 to Aug 2014)

Daily totals (Sept 2014 to Apr 2015)

Consultant

DESIGN

PREPARED

REVIEW

APPROVED


Project No Drawing

ProjectClient

13514150363Control

0001-X-0005Rev

2015-05-05

AD

EA

AM

AM



A

DAILY RELATIVE HUMIDITY DATA FROM EOX METEOROLOGICAL STATION

3.8.1

Oxide Catchment

Area (km²) 2.0

Calibration CN 58

100-year design storm CN 62

Lag Time (mins) 120

Comments

Design storm CN of 62 based on 18%

of oxide catchment being stripped for

oxide stockpiling and assigned a CN of

81 Lower Catchment

Area (km²) 6.0

Calibration CN 58


Lag Time (mins) 120

Comments

Design storm CN of 62 based on 19%

of lower catchment being stripped for pit

development and assigned a CN of 81

Upper Catchment

Area (km²) 17.9

Calibration CN 58


Lag Time (mins) 120

Comments Unaffected by mining

HEC-HMS model of the Ilovica reservoir catchment



Ilovica Reservoir Spillway elevation: 353.74 masl


PROJ. NO: 55018 DRAWN: PBe CHECKED: PBDATE: June 2015 FIGURE:

P:\55018_Euromax_MKD_ Ilovitza_SupportToDFS\600_Deliverables\620_Documents\20150528_Engineering Considerations Doc_v2\Flood study\Figure 4.2.2.xlsx

HEC-HMS model calibration results (5th June 2004 event) and predicted reservoir

response to a 100yr return, 24hr design storm

Ilovica Engineering Considerations

4.2.2

353.70

353.72

353.74

353.76

353.78

353.80

353.82

353.84

353.86

353.88

353.900

2-J

un

-20

04

03

-Ju

n-2

00

4

04

-Ju

n-2

00

4

05

-Ju

n-2

00

4

06

-Ju

n-2

00

4

07

-Ju

n-2

00

4

08

-Ju

n-2

00

4

09

-Ju

n-2

00

4

10

-Ju

n-2

00

4

11

-Ju

n-2

00

4

12

-Ju

n-2

00

4

Re

serv

oir

leve

l (m

asl)

Modelled vs observed reservoir level - June 2004 20yr return storm

Observed reservoir level

Modelled reservoir level

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

02-

Jun

-20

04

03

-Ju

n-2

00

4

04-

Jun

-20

04

05-

Jun

-20

04

06

-Ju

n-2

00

4

07-

Jun

-20

04

08-

Jun

-20

04

09

-Ju

n-2

00

4

10-

Jun

-20

04

11

-Ju

n-2

00

4

12

-Ju

n-2

00

4

Res

ervo

ir o

utf

low

(m

³/s)

Modelled vs observed reservoir outflow - June 2004 20yr return storm

WMC estimated reservoir outflow

Modelled reservoir outflow

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

100yr return

, 24hr d

esign sto

rm rain

fall (mm

)

Mo

del

led

res

ervo

ir o

utf

low

(m

³/s)

Time (hours)

Modelled reservoir outflow (100yr return, 24hr design storm)

100yr return, 24hr design storm

Modelled reservoir outflow

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

353.70

353.80

353.90

354.00

354.10

354.20

354.30

354.40

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

10

0yr re

turn

, 24

hr d

esign sto

rm ra

infa

ll (mm

)

Mo

del

led

re

serv

oir

leve

l (m

asl

)

Time (hours)

Modelled reservoir level (100yr return, 24hr design storm)

100yr return, 24hr design stormModelled reservoir level

Document Path: P:\55018_Euromax_MKD_ Ilovitza_SupportToDFS\500_Processed\540_Models\004_HEC-RAS_Jazga\Figure flood map.mxd

PROJECT NO: CLIENT:

DATE: FIGURE:DRAWN:PROJECT:

CHECKED:

32

33

39

27A

34

30

31

26B

38

25

21

29

26A

27B

28

22

37

23

36

35

24

465

460

495

490

485

480

475470

550

510

505

500

525

520515

535

530

545

540

7653500

7653500

7653600

7653600

7653700

7653700

459540

0

459540

0

459550

0

459550

0

459560

0

459560

0

459570

0

459570

0

Datum:HermannskogelScale 1:2,000 at A4

¯

LegendProposed pit outlineInundation areaSurveyed section linesRiverContour 5mContour 1m 0 0.05 0.1

Kilometres

P:\55018_Euromax_MKD_ Ilovitza_SupportToDFS\500_Processed\540_Models\004_HEC-RAS_Jazga\Figure flood map.mxd 55018

Euromax Resources Ltd.55018 DH

4.3.1June 2015

Ilovica Engineering ConsiderationsPB

Preliminary 100-year flood inundation map, Jazga River and oxide tributary

Oxide tributary

Jazga River

100-year flood profile developed in HEC-RAS

Preliminary 100-year flood profile, Jazga River and oxide tributary

CLIENT: Euromax Resources Ltd. PROJECT: Ilovica Engineering Considerations PROJECT NO: 55018 DRAWN: DH CHECKED: PB DATE: June 2015 FIGURE: 4.3.2


Ele

vatio

n (m

asl)

Channel Distance (m)

Ilovica operations network diagram, including current water source options

CLIENT: Euromax Resources Ltd. PROJECT: Ilovica Engineering PROJECT NO: 55018 DRAWN: PBe CHECKED: PB DATE: June 2015 FIGURE: 7.1.1



PROJ. NO: 55018 DRAWN: SS CHECKED: PBDATE: June 2015 FIGURE:

P:\55018_Euromax_MKD_ Ilovitza_SupportToDFS\600_Deliverables\620_Documents\20150528_Engineering Considerations Doc_v2\7 Water supply\WaterBalance_Figures.xlsx

Probilistic projection of total annual raw water requirement


7.2.1

5

5.5

6

6.5

7

7.5

8A

nnua

l raw

wat

er re

quire

men

t (M

m³)

10% | 90% 50%



P:\55018_Euromax_MKD_ Ilovitza_SupportToDFS\600_Deliverables\620_Documents\20150528_Engineering Considerations Doc_v2\7 Water supply\WaterBalance_Figures.xlsx

Probilistic projection of TMF pond volume


7.2.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0T

MF

Pon

d V

olum

e (M

m³)

10% | 90% 50%



P:\55018_Euromax_MKD_ Ilovitza_SupportToDFS\600_Deliverables\620_Documents\20150528_Engineering Considerations Doc_v2\7 Water supply\IlovicaReservoir_Figures.xlsx

Ilovica Reservoir: Storage yield return period of supply failure without additional inputs


7.3.1

50020010050201052

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

-1.00 -0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00

Sto

rag

e vo

lum

e re

qu

ired

(m

³)

Reduced variate (yi)

Projected frequency distribution of annual maximum storage requirement: no EOX abstraction

Projected frequency distribution of annual maximum storage requirement: 25m³/hr EOX abstraction

Projected frequency distribution of annual maximum storage requirement: 50m³/hr EOX abstraction

Projected frequency distribution of annual maximum storage requirement: 75 m³/hr EOX abstraction

Current frequency distribution of annual maximum storage requirement

Return period (years)

Projected maximum storage requirement (no EOX abstraction),return period of supply failure: 1 in 34 years

Projected maximum storage requirement withEOX abstraction of 25m³/hr (0.2Mm³/yr)and no additional inputs, return period ofsupply failure: 1 in 5 years

Current maximum storage requirementreturn period of supply failure: 1 in >90 years

Maximum reservoir capacity



P:\55018_Euromax_MKD_ Ilovitza_SupportToDFS\600_Deliverables\620_Documents\20150528_Engineering Considerations Doc_v2\7 Water supply\IlovicaReservoir_Figures.xlsx

Ilovica Reservoir: Storage yield return period of supply failure with additional inputs


7.3.2

50020010050201052

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

-1.00 -0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00

Sto

rag

e vo

lum

e re

qu

ired

(m

³)


Projected frequency distribution of annual maximum storagerequirement: 3Mm³/yr EOX abstraction and 3.1Mm³/yraddition



Current frequency distribution of annual maximum storagerequirement


Maximum reservoir capacity



P:\55018_Euromax_MKD_ Ilovitza_SupportToDFS\600_Deliverables\620_Documents\20150528_Engineering Considerations Doc_v2\7 Water supply\CofferDam_Figures.xlsx

Coffer dam: Storage yield curve assuming a 10m³/hr constant abstraction


7.4.1

50020010050201052

1,000

10,000

100,000

-1.00 -0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00

Sto

rag

e vo

lum

e re

qu

ired

(m

³)


5m dam

10m dam

12.5m dam

15m dam

20m dam


Design storage-return period relationship

9.0

Return period (years)Return period (years)Return period (years)

Dam

hei

gh

t (m

)

11.5

13.5

15.0



P:\55018_Euromax_MKD_ Ilovitza_SupportToDFS\600_Deliverables\620_Documents\20150528_Engineering Considerations Doc_v2\7 Water supply\CofferDam_Figures.xlsx

Coffer dam: Storage yield curve assuming a 20m³/hr constant abstraction


7.4.2

50020010050201052

10,000

100,000

-1.00 -0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00

Sto

rag

e vo

lum

e re

qu

ired

(m

³)


10m dam

15m dam

17.5m dam

20m dam

25m dam


Design storage-return period relationship

9.0

Dam

hei

gh

t (m

)

11.5

13.5

15.0

16.5

17.5

18.7

19.7



July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0


Table 5.1 Deposit groundwater quality results, spring JZSP22

Parameter Units No Samples Min Average Max StDev

Silver, Filtered as Ag mg/l 5 0.00035 0.00035 0.00035 0.0 Silver , Total as Ag mg/l 5 0.00035 0.00035 0.00035 0.0 Aluminium, Filtered as Al mg/l 5 0.05 0.08 0.2 0.1 Alkalinity as CaCO3 field mg/l 5 2 9.4 18 7.3 Alkalinity as CaCO3 mg/l 5 10.2 19.2 28.1 7.4 Aluminium,Total as Al mg/l 5 0.05 0.35 0.7 0.3 Arsenic, Filtered as As mg/l 3 0.0007 0.0007 0.0007 0.0 Arsenic, Total as As mg/l 3 0.0007 0.0007 0.0007 0.0 Barium, Filtered as Ba mg/l 5 0.0776 0.103 0.126 0.0 Barium, Total as Ba mg/l 5 0.0813 0.108 0.128 0.0 Bismuth, Filtered as Bi mg/l 5 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.0 Bismuth, Total as Bi mg/l 5 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.0 Calcium, Filtered as Ca mg/l 5 9.11 10.7 12.1 1.2 Calcium , Total as Ca mg/l 5 8.9 10.8 12.1 1.2 Cadmium, Filtered as Cd mg/l 5 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0 Cadmium , Total as Cd mg/l 5 0.0003 0.00036 0.0006 0.0 Chloride as Cl mg/l 5 7.98 9.38 10.8 1.1 Cyanide, Free as CN mg/l 5 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.0 Cyanide, Total as CN mg/l 5 0.0045 0.0045 0.0045 0.0 Cyanide, Free (WAD) mg/l 5 0.0025 0.003 0.005 0.0 COD (Total) mg/l 5 5.5 22.5 33 11.0 Cobalt, Filtered as Co mg/l 5 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.0 Electrical conductivity µS/cm 16 165 186 208 12.4 Conductivity- Electrical 20C µS/cm 5 139 150 161 8.7 Cobalt , Total as Co mg/l 5 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.0 Chromium, Filtered as Cr mg/l 5 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.0 Chromium , Total as Cr mg/l 5 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.0 Chromium Hexavalent, Filtered mg/l 5 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0 Chromium Hexavalent, Total mg/l 5 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0 Copper, Filtered as Cu mg/l 5 0.058 0.112 0.158 0.0 Copper, Total as Cu mg/l 5 0.064 0.126 0.174 0.0 Iron, Filtered as Fe mg/l 5 0.115 0.115 0.115 0.0 Iron , Total as Fe mg/l 5 0.115 0.209 0.36 0.1 Fluoride as F mg/l 5 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 Mercury, Filtered as Hg mg/l 5 0.00005 0.00005 0.00005 0.0 Mercury, Total as Hg mg/l 5 0.00005 0.00005 0.00005 0.0 Potassium, Filtered as K mg/l 5 2.04 2.24 2.53 0.2

June 2015 Project No. 13514150363.526/B.1 1/9



Potassium , Total as K mg/l 5 2.16 2.29 2.48 0.1 Magnesium, Filtered as Mg mg/l 5 3.14 3.71 4 0.4 Magnesium, Total as Mg mg/l 5 3.11 3.8 4.1 0.4 Manganese, Filtered as Mn mg/l 5 0.01 0.0328 0.066 0.0 Manganese , Total as Mn mg/l 5 0.01 0.0352 0.068 0.0 Molybdenum, Filtered as Mo mg/l 5 0.0015 0.0018 0.003 0.0 Molybdenum , Total as Mo mg/l 5 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015 0.0 Sodium, Filtered as Na mg/l 5 7.81 9.79 11.9 1.5 Sodium , Total as Na mg/l 5 8.47 9.89 11.4 1.1 Ammonium as NH4 (Calc) mg/l 5 0.175 0.175 0.175 0.0 Nickel, Filtered as Ni mg/l 5 0.0015 0.0021 0.003 0.0 Nickel, Total as Ni mg/l 5 0.0015 0.0034 0.006 0.0 Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N mg/l 5 0.135 0.135 0.135 0.0 Nitrite as N mg/l 5 0.0125 0.0125 0.0125 0.0 Nitrite as N02 mg/l 4 0.0415 0.0415 0.0415 0.0 Nitrate as NO3 mg/l 5 4.7 7.5 9.3 2.0 Oil and Grease mg/l 5 0.3 0.378 0.69 0.2 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 16 4.84 6.21 8.05 1.0 Oxidation reduction potential mV 16 106 208 295 38.8 Phosphate, Ortho as P mg/l 5 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.0 Lead, Filtered as Pb mg/l 5 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.0 Lead , Total as Pb mg/l 5 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.0 Phenols Mono (Phenol Index) mg/l 5 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.0 pH, field pH Units 16 5.3 5.93 6.41 0.3 pH pH units 5 6 6.2 6.5 0.2 Phosphorus , Total as P mg/l 5 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.0 Sulphide as S mg/l 5 0.0145 0.0145 0.0145 0.0 Antimony, Filtered as Sb mg/l 3 0.0008 0.0008 0.0008 0.0 Antimony, Total as Sb mg/l 3 0.0008 0.0008 0.0008 0.0 Sulphur, calculated mg/l 5 7.4 10.1 11.5 1.6 Selenium, Filtered as Se mg/l 3 0.0008 0.0008 0.0008 0.0 Selenium, Total as Se mg/l 3 0.0008 0.0008 0.0008 0.0 Silicon, Low Level Total mg/l 3 9.94 9.94 10.3 0.9 Sulphate as SO4 mg/l 5 22.3 30.3 34.5 4.7 Strontium, Filtered mg/l 5 0.067 0.083 0.093 0.0 Strontium , Total as Sr mg/l 5 0.068 0.083 0.094 0.0 Solids, Tot Dissolved 180 DegC mg/l 5 102 124 140 14.9

June 2015 Project No. 13514150363.526/B.1 2/9



Temperature, field C 16 6.2 12.1 18.2 3.6 Total Suspended Solids mg/l 5 2 4.4 8 2.6 Turbidity, field NTU 5 1.39 9.64 13 4.7 Uranium, filtered as U mg/l 3 0.00016 0.00016 0.00016 0.0 Uranium, Total as U mg/l 3 0.00016 0.00016 0.00016 0.0 Vanadium, Filtered as V mg/l 5 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.0 Vanadium , Total as V mg/l 5 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.0 Zinc, Filtered as Zn mg/l 5 0.009 0.021 0.03 0.0 Zinc, Total as Zn mg/l 5 0.009 0.022 0.03 0.0

June 2015 Project No. 13514150363.526/B.1 3/9


Table 5.2 Water quality results, Shtuka River at STGS03 (coffer dam)

Parameter Units No. of Samples Min Average Max StDev

Silver, Filtered as Ag mg/l 8 0.00035 0.00035 0.00035 0.0 Silver , Total as Ag mg/l 8 0.00035 0.00035 0.00035 0.0 Aluminium, Filtered as Al mg/l 8 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.0 Alkalinity as CaCO3 field mg/l 8 41 52 63 10.5 Alkalinity as CaCO3 mg/l 8 45 60 87 17.1 Aluminium,Total as Al mg/l 8 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.0 Arsenic, Filtered as As mg/l 6 0.0007 0.0007 0.0007 0.0 Arsenic, Total as As mg/l 6 0.0007 0.0007 0.0007 0.0 Barium, Filtered as Ba mg/l 8 0.0035 0.0035 0.0035 0.0 Barium, Total as Ba mg/l 8 0.0035 0.0035 0.0035 0.0 Bismuth, Filtered as Bi mg/l 8 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.0 Bismuth, Total as Bi mg/l 8 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.0 Calcium, Filtered as Ca mg/l 8 12 16 22 3.9 Calcium , Total as Ca mg/l 8 12 15 22 4.1 Cadmium, Filtered as Cd mg/l 8 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0 Cadmium , Total as Cd mg/l 8 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0 Chloride as Cl mg/l 8 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.0 Cyanide, Free as CN mg/l 8 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.0 Cyanide, Total as CN mg/l 8 0.0045 0.0045 0.0045 0.0 Cyanide, Free (WAD) mg/l 8 0.0025 0.0038 0.0075 0.0 COD (Total) mg/l 8 5.5 13 34 9.9 Cobalt, Filtered as Co mg/l 8 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.0 Electrical conductivity µS/cm 25 99 160 210 31.2 Conductivity- Electrical 20C µS/cm 8 110 130 170 24.5 Cobalt , Total as Co mg/l 8 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.0 Chromium, Filtered as Cr mg/l 8 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.0 Chromium , Total as Cr mg/l 8 0.001 0.0011 0.002 0.0 Chromium Hexavalent, Filtered mg/l 8 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0 Chromium Hexavalent, Total mg/l 8 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.0 Copper, Filtered as Cu mg/l 8 0.0045 0.0045 0.0045 0.0 Copper, Total as Cu mg/l 8 0.0045 0.0045 0.0045 0.0 Iron, Filtered as Fe mg/l 8 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.0 Iron , Total as Fe mg/l 8 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.0 Fluoride as F mg/l 8 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 Mercury, Filtered as Hg mg/l 8 0.00005 0.00005 0.00005 0.0 Mercury, Total as Hg mg/l 8 0.00005 0.00005 0.00005 0.0

June 2015 Project No. 13514150363.526/B.1 4/9



Potassium, Filtered as K mg/l 8 1.1 1.4 1.7 0.3 Potassium , Total as K mg/l 8 1 1.4 1.9 0.3 Magnesium, Filtered as Mg mg/l 8 2.8 3.8 5.1 0.9 Magnesium, Total as Mg mg/l 8 2.8 3.8 5.1 0.9 Manganese, Filtered as Mn mg/l 8 0.0035 0.0048 0.014 0.0 Manganese , Total as Mn mg/l 8 0.0035 0.0065 0.01 0.0 Molybdenum, Filtered as Mo mg/l 8 0.0015 0.002 0.004 0.0 Molybdenum , Total as Mo mg/l 8 0.0015 0.0071 0.021 0.0 Sodium, Filtered as Na mg/l 8 5 6 7.4 0.8 Sodium , Total as Na mg/l 8 5.1 6 7.5 0.9 Ammonium as NH4 (Calc) mg/l 8 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.0 Nickel, Filtered as Ni mg/l 8 0.0015 0.0018 0.004 0.0 Nickel, Total as Ni mg/l 8 0.0015 0.0018 0.004 0.0 Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N mg/l 8 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.0 Nitrite as N mg/l 8 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.0 Nitrite as N02 mg/l 6 0.042 0.042 0.042 0.0 Nitrate as NO3 mg/l 8 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.0 Oil and Grease mg/l 8 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.0 Dissolved Oxygen mg/l 25 5.5 8 11 1.6 Oxidation reduction potential mV 25 150 180 230 23.5 Phosphate, Ortho as P mg/l 8 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.0 Lead, Filtered as Pb mg/l 8 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.0 Lead , Total as Pb mg/l 8 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.0 Phenols Mono (Phenol Index) mg/l 8 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.0 pH, field pH Units 25 6.6 7.4 8.1 0.4 pH pH units 8 7.8 7.9 8.1 0.1 Phosphorus , Total as P mg/l 8 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.0 Sulphide as S mg/l 8 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.0 Antimony, Filtered as Sb mg/l 6 0.0008 0.0008 0.0008 0.0 Antimony, Total as Sb mg/l 6 0.0008 0.0008 0.0008 0.0 Sulphur, calculated mg/l 8 1.9 2.4 2.9 0.5 Selenium, Filtered as Se mg/l 6 0.0008 0.0008 0.0008 0.0 Selenium, Total as Se mg/l 6 0.0008 0.0008 0.0008 0.0 Silicon, Low Level Total mg/l 6 9 11 12 1.5 Sulphate as SO4 mg/l 8 5.8 7.3 8.8 1.4 Strontium, Filtered mg/l 8 0.044 0.054 0.069 0.0 Strontium , Total as Sr mg/l 8 0.045 0.055 0.072 0.0

June 2015 Project No. 13514150363.526/B.1 5/9



Solids, Tot Dissolved 180 DegC mg/l 8 51 98 120 29.0 Temperature, field C 25 2.2 10 15 4.5 Total Suspended Solids mg/l 8 1 3.8 7 2.1 Turbidity, field NTU 8 2 2.7 3.9 0.8 Uranium, filtered as U mg/l 6 0.0013 0.0019 0.0033 0.0 Uranium, Total as U mg/l 6 0.0014 0.0022 0.0039 0.0 Vanadium, Filtered as V mg/l 8 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.0 Vanadium , Total as V mg/l 8 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.0 Zinc, Filtered as Zn mg/l 8 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.0 Zinc, Total as Zn mg/l 8 0.009 0.012 0.03 0.0

June 2015 Project No. 13514150363.526/B.1 6/9


Table 5.3 Water quality results, Turija canal (TCGS01), Ilovica reservoir sampled at Ilovica water treatment works (ILWT01) and Suchica water supply borehole (SUB02) (groundwater from Strumica plain)

Parameter Units TCGS01 ILWT01 SUB02

Silver, Filtered as Ag mg/l 0.00035 0.00035 0.00035 Silver , Total as Ag mg/l 0.00035 0.00035 0.00035 Aluminium, Filtered as Al mg/l 0.05 0.05 0.05 Alkalinity as CaCO3 field mg/l 48 27 141 Alkalinity as CaCO3 mg/l 59.5 44.4 175 Aluminium,Total as Al mg/l 0.2 0.5 0.05 Arsenic, Filtered as As mg/l 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 Arsenic, Total as As mg/l 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 Barium, Filtered as Ba mg/l 0.026 0.011 0.033 Barium, Total as Ba mg/l 0.027 0.015 0.033 Bismuth, Filtered as Bi mg/l 0.005 0.005 0.005 Bismuth, Total as Bi mg/l 0.005 0.005 0.005 Calcium, Filtered as Ca mg/l 12.3 11.4 21.7 Calcium , Total as Ca mg/l 12.3 11.6 21.6 Cadmium, Filtered as Cd mg/l 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 Cadmium , Total as Cd mg/l 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 Chloride as Cl mg/l 1.5 1.5 6.39 Cyanide, Free as CN mg/l 0.004 0.004 0.004 Cyanide, Total as CN mg/l 0.0045 0.0045 0.0045 Cyanide, Free (WAD) mg/l 0.005 0.005 0.005 COD (Total) mg/l 23 17 5.5 Cobalt, Filtered as Co mg/l 0.001 0.001 0.001 Electrical conductivity µS/cm 158 148.3 433.6 Conductivity- Electrical 20C µS/cm 128 122 401 Cobalt , Total as Co mg/l 0.001 0.001 0.001 Chromium, Filtered as Cr mg/l 0.001 0.001 0.001 Chromium , Total as Cr mg/l 0.001 0.001 0.001 Chromium Hexavalent, Filtered mg/l 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 Chromium Hexavalent, Total mg/l 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 Copper, Filtered as Cu mg/l 0.0045 0.0045 0.0045 Copper, Total as Cu mg/l 0.0045 0.0045 0.0045 Iron, Filtered as Fe mg/l 0.115 0.115 0.115 Iron , Total as Fe mg/l 0.115 1.01 0.115 Fluoride as F mg/l 0.1 0.1 0.6 Mercury, Filtered as Hg mg/l 0.00005 0.00005 0.00005

June 2015 Project No. 13514150363.526/B.1 7/9



Mercury, Total as Hg mg/l 0.00005 0.00005 0.00005 Potassium, Filtered as K mg/l 1.6 2.28 2.22 Potassium , Total as K mg/l 1.49 1.68 1.94 Magnesium, Filtered as Mg mg/l 4.4 2.3 5.5 Magnesium, Total as Mg mg/l 4.5 2.5 5.4 Manganese, Filtered as Mn mg/l 0.0035 0.153 0.093 Manganese , Total as Mn mg/l 0.009 0.181 0.094 Molybdenum, Filtered as Mo mg/l 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015 Molybdenum , Total as Mo mg/l 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015 Sodium, Filtered as Na mg/l 4.16 5.38 54.5 Sodium , Total as Na mg/l 4.28 5.48 53.8 Ammonium as NH4 (Calc) mg/l 0.175 0.175 0.69 Nickel, Filtered as Ni mg/l 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015 Nickel, Total as Ni mg/l 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015 Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N mg/l 0.135 0.135 0.53 Nitrite as N mg/l 0.0125 0.0125 0.0125 Nitrite as N02 mg/l 0.0415 0.0415 0.0415 Nitrate as NO3 mg/l 0.95 0.95 13.2 Oil and Grease mg/l 0.3 0.3 0.3 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 9.12 7.75 1.55 Oxidation reduction potential mV 115 136.3 -90.1 Phosphate, Ortho as P mg/l 0.6 0.6 0.6 Lead, Filtered as Pb mg/l 0.003 0.003 0.003 Lead , Total as Pb mg/l 0.003 0.003 0.003 Phenols Mono (Phenol Index) mg/l 0.075 0.075 0.075 pH, field pH Units 8.54 7.48 7.18 pH pH units 9.2 7.3 7.5 Phosphorus , Total as P mg/l 0.06 0.06 0.37 Sulphide as S mg/l 0.0145 0.0145 0.0145 Antimony, Filtered as Sb mg/l 0.0006 0.0006 0.0006 Antimony, Total as Sb mg/l 0.0006 0.0006 0.0006 Sulphur, calculated mg/l 4.6 5.1 9.2 Selenium, Filtered as Se mg/l 0.0004 0.0004 0.0004 Selenium, Total as Se mg/l 0.0004 0.0004 0.0004 Silicon, Low Level Total mg/l 6.92 10.2 13.4 Sulphate as SO4 mg/l 13.7 15.3 27.5 Strontium, Filtered mg/l 0.061 0.047 0.124

June 2015 Project No. 13514150363.526/B.1 8/9



Strontium , Total as Sr mg/l 0.062 0.047 0.123 Solids, Tot Dissolved 180 DegC mg/l 107 90 263 Temperature, field C 11.3 7.3 16.1 Total Suspended Solids mg/l 4 20 1 Turbidity, field NTU 3.47 21.1 0.6 Uranium, filtered as U mg/l 0.00031 0.00016 0.00095 Uranium, Total as U mg/l 0.00033 0.00043 0.00095 Vanadium, Filtered as V mg/l 0.002 0.002 0.002 Vanadium , Total as V mg/l 0.002 0.002 0.002 Zinc, Filtered as Zn mg/l 0.009 0.009 0.009 Zinc, Total as Zn mg/l 0.009 0.009 0.009

June 2015 Project No. 13514150363.526/B.1 9/9


APPENDIX C Constraints Maps

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0

!

!

Ново С елоNovo Selo

ИловицаIlovic a

РадовоRa d ovo

С екирникSekirnikТурново

TurnovoС уш ицаSushic a

ДрвошDrvosh

Бориево

Ш тукаShtuka С тиникБарбарево

IlovitzaReservoir

Ad it /Tunnel

Old Mill

Sourc e: Esri, Digita lGlob e, GeoEye, i-cub ed , Ea rthsta r Geogra p hic s, CNES/Airb us DS, USDA, USGS, AEX,

7650000

7650000

7655000

7655000

7660000

7660000

4590000

4590000

4595000

4595000

4600000

4600000

CLIENTEUROMAX RESOURCES

LEGEND! Cultura l Herita ge Fea ture

P rop osed Ac c ess Roa dP rop osed Ha ul Roa dP rop osed P it Roa dExisting Roa dConc ession Bound a ryP la nned Footp rint Of Mine Infra struc tureSettlem ent Extent

NOTES

REFERENCE

1. BASE DATA © OP ENSTREETMAP CONTRIBUTORS2. P ROJECT AND TOP OGRAP HIC DATA © EUROMAX

COORDINATE SYSTEM: HK 3 DEGREE GK ZONE 7 9 BASE

P ROJECTILOVITZA ESIA BASELINE STUDYTITLECULTURAL HERITAGE CONSTRAINT MAP

13514150363 0044 B.1 1

08 JUN 2015LDMSMSAM

Path: E:\Data\Euromax\Strumica\99_PROJECTS\1351415063_ESIA\13514115063_526_Constraint_maps\02_PRODUCTION\MXD\B.1\13514150363-Appendix-CM-044.mxd

IF THIS MEASUREMENT DOES NOT MATCH WHAT IS SHOWN, THE SHEET SIZE HAS BEEN MODIFIED FROM:

CONSULTANT

P ROJECT No. CONTROL REV DRAWING

YYYY-MM-DDP REP AREDDESIGNREVIEWAP P ROVED

25mm

0

1:50,000

2 0 21

Kilom etres

³

"

4

4

")

")")

")

")

Н ово СелоN ovo Selo

И ловиц аIlovica

РадовоRa dovo

СекирникSekirn ikТурново

Turn ovoСушиц аSushica

ДрвошDrvosh

Бориево

Ш тукаShtuka С тиникБарбарево

IlovitzaReservoir

7650000

7650000

7655000

7655000

7660000

7660000

4592000

4592000

4596000

4596000

4600000

4600000

CLIEN TEUROMAX RESOURCES

LEGEND" Adit/Tun n el (Poten tia l Ba t Roost)

Animal Sighting") W ildca t4 Golden Ja cka l

Aqua tic Ha b ita tProposed Access Roa dProposed Ha ul Roa dProposed Pit Roa dExistin g Roa dOgra zden Prim e Butterfly Area Ripa ria n Zon e Fea ture of Ecologica l In terest 10m b uffer from either b a n kCon cession Boun da ryProposed Developm en t AreaSettlem en t Exten t

NOTES

REFERENCE

1. BASE DATA © OPEN STREETMAP CON TRIBUTORS2. PROJECT AN D TOPOGRAPHIC DATA © EUROMAX

COORDIN ATE SYSTEM: HK 3 DEGREE GK ZON E 7 9 BASE

PROJECTILOVITZA ESIA BASELIN E STUDYTITLEECOLOGY CONSTRAINTS AND FEATURE MAP

13514150363 0045 B.1 1

08 JUN 2015LDFBMSAM

Path: E:\Data\Euromax\Strumica\99_PROJECTS\1351415063_ESIA\13514115063_526_Constraint_maps\02_PRODUCTION\MXD\B.1\13514150363-Appendix-CM-046.mxd

IF THIS MEASUREMENT DOES NOT MATCH WHAT IS SHOWN, THE SHEET SIZE HAS BEEN MODIFIED FROM:

CON SULTAN T

PROJECT N o. CON TROL REV DRAW IN G

YYYY-MM-DDPREPAREDDESIGNREVIEWAPPROVED

25mm

0

1:50,000

2 0 21

Kilom etres

³


APPENDIX D Environmental Design Criteria

July 2015 Report No. 13514150363.526/A.0

February 2016

ILOVICA GOLD-COPPER PROJECT

Environmental Design Criteria

REPO

RT

Report Number 13514150363.545/B.1

Distribution:Euromax Resources - 1 copy (pdf) Golder Associates (UK) Ltd - 1 copy

Submitted to:Euromax Resources (Macedonia) UK Ltd Fifth Floor, 12 Berkeley Street London United Kingdom W1J 8DT

ILOVICA ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN CRITERIA

February 2016 Report No. 13514150363.545/B.1 i

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................ 1

2.0 AIR EMISSIONS ........................................................................................................................................................ 1

2.1 Standards Considered .................................................................................................................................. 1

2.2 Project Standards to be Applied ................................................................................................................... 2

2.2.1 Ambient Air Quality ................................................................................................................................. 2

2.2.2 Air Emissions from Combustion Facilities ............................................................................................... 3

2.2.3 Air Emissions from Non-Road Mobile Machinery .................................................................................... 1

2.2.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................................................... 1

3.0 WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY ......................................................................................................................... 1


3.1.1 Drinking Water Standards ....................................................................................................................... 1

3.1.2 Discharge and Effluent Standards .......................................................................................................... 2

3.1.3 Groundwater Standards .......................................................................................................................... 2

3.1.4 Environmental (Surface Water) Quality Standards ................................................................................. 2


3.2.1 Drinking Water Standards ....................................................................................................................... 3

3.2.2 Discharge and Effluent Standards .......................................................................................................... 4

3.2.3 Environmental (Surface Water) Quality Standards ................................................................................. 5

4.0 NOISE AND VIBRATION ........................................................................................................................................... 6



4.2.1 Noise ....................................................................................................................................................... 7

4.2.2 Vibration .................................................................................................................................................. 8

5.0 SOILS AND SEDIMENT ............................................................................................................................................ 9



6.0 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................................................... 11

TABLES Table 1: Recommended ambient air quality EDC to be applied for the protection of human health for the Ilovica

Gold-Copper Project ........................................................................................................................................... 2


February 2016 Report No. 13514150363.545/B.1 ii

Table 2: Recommended ambient air quality standards to be applied for the protection of vegetation for the Ilovica Gold-Copper Project ........................................................................................................................................... 3

Table 3: Recommended deposited dust standards to be applied for the Ilovica Gold-Copper Project ................................ 3

Table 4: Small combustion facilities emissions guidelines for the Ilovica Gold-Copper Project (IFC Environmental, Health, and Safety Guidelines) ........................................................................................................................... 4

Table 5: Recommended emission standards for non-road diesel engines (k/kWh) ............................................................. 1

Table 6: Recommended drinking water standards to be applied for the Ilovica Gold-Copper Project ................................. 3

Table 7: Recommended discharge and effluent standards to be applied for the Ilovica Gold-Copper Project .................... 4

Table 8: Recommended environmental quality standards to be applied for the Ilovica Gold-Copper Project ..................... 5

Table 9: Recommended noise level guidelines for the Ilovica Gold-Copper Project ........................................................... 7

Table 10: Recommended vibration level guidelines for the Ilovica Gold-Copper Project .................................................... 8

Table 11: Recommended soil and sediment quality standards to be applied for the Ilovica Gold-Copper Project .............. 9

FIGURES

No table of figures entries found.

APPENDICES

No table of contents entries found.


February 2016 Report No. 13514150363.545/B.1 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION The primary aim of this document is to present the project Environmental Design Criteria (EDC) to inform the DFS. This document has been generated based on the assumption that Euromax intends to develop, operate and close the Ilovica Gold-Copper Project in accordance with the following guidelines and standards:

All relevant Macedonian legislation;

All relevant European Union (EU) requirements (Macedonia is in the process of accession into the EU);

Good international environmental and social practice for mining projects, specifically IFC Performance Standards (PS) as referenced in the Equator Principles;

The requirements of the International Cyanide Management Code (ICMC) for purchasing, transporting and managing cyanide, as referenced in the IFC PS;

The Environmental Performance Requirements (PRs) developed by the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) as an equity partner in the project;

The International Council for Metals and Minerals (ICMM) 10 Principles; and

World Gold Council’s Conflict Free Gold Standard as Royal Gold, who have provided a streaming facility to the project, is a member of the World Gold Council.

In the following sections, Golder and Schlumberger Water Services (SWS) have selected the most relevant standards or guidelines from the aforementioned sources for each technical discipline where numerical standards and guidelines are available. Each of the following sections presents which standards have been considered and provides a justification for the project EDC selected for each parameter.

These EDC will be considered, along with the baseline data gathered, in the ESIA to help define the significance of the impacts in the ESIA, but should also be considered in the selection of equipment, plant and planning during project design.

2.0 AIR EMISSIONS 2.1 Standards Considered To inform the development of the EDC the following standards, regulations and guidelines were considered:

Law on the Quality of Ambient Air (Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia no. 67/04, 92/07, 35/10, 47/11, 59/12, 100/12);

Regulation on the Maximum Permitted Concentrations and Quantities and on other Harmful Substances Released in the Air from Particular Pollution Sources (Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia 02/90);

Regulation on Limit Values for the Levels and Types of Pollutants in the Ambient Air and on Alarm Thresholds, Time Limits for Achieving the Limit Values, Limit Values Tolerance Margins, Target Values and Long-Term Goals (Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia no. 50/05);

Regulation on the limit values of permitted levels of emissions and types of pollutant substances in waste gases and fumes emitted in the air by stationary sources (Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia 141/10);

EU 2008 Directive 2998/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on Ambient Air Quality and Cleaner Air for Europe;

EU Directive 97/68/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 1997 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to measures against the emission of gaseous



and particulate pollutants from internal combustion engines to be installed in non-road mobile machinery (and later amendments);

International Finance Corporation. EHS Guidelines: Environmental – Air Emissions and Ambient Air Quality, 2007;

International Finance Corporation. IFC Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability, 2012; and

Technical Instructions on Air Quality Control - TA Luft, 2002.

2.2 Project Standards to be Applied Project standards have been derived based upon review of the regulations and standards listed above and consideration of the baseline environmental setting, as understood through baseline studies for the ESIA (conducted between 2013 and 2015). The following tables set out the Project standards that are recommended.

2.2.1 Ambient Air Quality Ambient air quality standards are recommended for the protection of human health as well as the protection of vegetation. The standards are set out in Table 1 (human health) and Table 2 (vegetation). The standards apply outside the facility boundary and at locations of relevant public exposure or sensitive habitat.

Table 1: Recommended ambient air quality EDC to be applied for the protection of human health for the Ilovica Gold-Copper Project

Parameter Unit Recommended Project EDC

Conditions of application of limit

Source of Project EDC

Rationale for Selection of EDC

Sulphur dioxide (SO2)

µg/m3 350 One hour average not to be exceeded more than 24 times a calendar year

Macedonian and EU limit value

EDC complies with both local Macedonian legislation and EU limit values.

EDC is at least in accordance with WHO Interim target values as specified in IFC EHS Guidelines.

Most applicable to project location.

µg/m3 125 Daily average not to be exceeded more than 3 times a calendar year


Nitrogen dioxide (NO2)

µg/m3 200 One hour average not to be exceeded more than 18 times a calendar year


µg/m3 40 Applied as annual average (over calendar year)


Particulate matter (PM10)

µg/m3 50 24-hour average not to be exceeded more than 35 times a calendar year


Particulate Matter (PM10)



Ozone µg/m3 120 Maximum daily 8-hour average in calendar year

Macedonian and EU long-term objective

Particulate matter (PM2.5)


EU limit value

In the absence of local Macedonian legislation limit, complies with EU limit value.

EDC is at least in accordance with WHO interim target values as specified in IFC EHS Guidelines.






Rationale for Selection of EDC

Carbon Monoxide (CO)

µg/m3 10,000 (maximum daily eight hour)

n/a Macedonian and EU limit value

EDC complies with both local Macedonian legislation and EU limit values.

Lead µg/m3 0.5 Applied as annual average (over calendar year)


Benzene µg/m3 5 Applied as annual average (over calendar year)


Table 2: Recommended ambient air quality standards to be applied for the protection of vegetation for the Ilovica Gold-Copper Project




Rationale for selection of EDC

Sulphur dioxide (SO2)

µg/m3 20

Applied both as annual average (over calendar year) and winter period average (from 1 October to 31 March)


Standard complies with both local Macedonian legislation and EU Limit Values. Oxides of

nitrogen (NOx)



The guideline in Table 3 should drive the design standards to avoid loss of amenity for residential properties in the nearby villages, including Ilovica and Shtuka.

Table 3: Recommended deposited dust standards to be applied for the Ilovica Gold-Copper Project


Conditions of application of EDC

Source of limit / standard Rationale for selection of EDC

Deposited dust

mg/m2/day 350 (annual mean)

n/a TA Luft

In the absence of Macedonian or European standard, TA Luft provides a recognised reference standard, applicable in Europe, to characterise nuisance.

2.2.2 Air Emissions from Combustion Facilities The following air emission standards are recommended for combustion process installations operating more than 500 hours per year, and those with an annual capacity utilization of more than 30 percent, according to IFC Environmental, Health, and Safety Guidelines.



Table 4: Small combustion facilities emissions guidelines for the Ilovica Gold-Copper Project (IFC Environmental, Health, and Safety Guidelines)

Combustion Technology/Fuel Recommended EDC for Particulate Matter (PM)

Recommended EDC for Sulphur Dioxide (SO2)

Recommended EDC for Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)

Recommended EDC for Dry Gas, Excess O2 Content (%)

Engine

Gas N/A(a) N/A(a) 200 mg/Nm3 (spark Ignition) 400 mg/Nm3 (dual fuel) 1,600 mg/Nm3 (compression ignition)

15

Liquid

50 mg/Nm3 or up to 100 mg/Nm3 if justified by project specific considerations (e.g., economic feasibility of using lower ash content fuel, or adding secondary treatment to meet 50, and available environmental capacity of the site).

1.5 % sulphur or up to 3.0 % sulphur if justified by project specific considerations (e.g. economic feasibility of using lower S content fuel, or adding secondary treatment to meet level of using 1.5 % sulphur, and available environmental capacity of the site).

If bore size diameter < 400 mm use 1,460 mg/Nm3 or up to 1,600 mg/Nm3 if justified to maintain high energy efficiency. If bore size diameter > or = 400 mm, use1,850 mg/Nm3

15

Turbine

Natural Gas = 3 MWth(b) to <15 MWth

N/A(a) N/A(a) 42 ppm (Electric generation) 100 ppm (Mechanical drive)

15

Natural Gas = 15 MWth to <50 MWth

N/A(a) N/A(a) 25 ppm 15

Fuels other than Natural Gas = 3 MWth to < 15 MWth

N/A(a)

0.5 % sulphur (lower percent sulphur (e.g., 0.2 % sulphur) if commercially available without significant excess fuel cost.)

96 ppm (Electric generation) 150 ppm (Mechanical drive)

15

Fuels other than Natural Gas = 15 MWth to < 50 MWth

N/A(a)

0.5% sulphur (lower % sulphur (0.2% sulphur) is commercially available without significant excess fuel cost.)

74 ppm 15



Combustion Technology/Fuel Recommended EDC for Particulate Matter (PM)

Recommended EDC for Sulphur Dioxide (SO2)

Recommended EDC for Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)

Recommended EDC for Dry Gas, Excess O2 Content (%)

Boiler

Gas N/A(a) N/A(a) 320 mg/Nm3 3

Liquid

50 mg/Nm3 or up to 150 mg/Nm3 if justified by environmental assessment.

2,000 mg/Nm3 460 mg/Nm3 3

Solid(c)

50 mg/Nm3 or up to 150 mg/Nm3 if justified by environmental assessment.

2,000 mg/Nm3 650 mg/Nm3 6

Notes: (a) N/A – no emissions guideline; higher performance levels than these in the table should be applicable to facilities located in urban/industrial areas with degraded airsheds or close to ecologically sensitive

areas where more stringent emissions controls may be needed. (b) MWth (thermal megawatt) is heat input on higher heating value (HHV) basis. MWth category applies to the entire facility consisting of multiple units reasonably considered to be emitted from a common

stack except for NOx and PM limits for turbines and boilers. Guideline values apply to facilities operating more than 500 hours per year with an annual capacity utilisation factor of more than 30%. (c) Solid fuels include biomass.

mg/Nm3 is milligrammes per normal cubic meter; Nm3 is at one atmospheric pressure, 0oC

ppm is parts per million



2.2.3 Air Emissions from Non-Road Mobile Machinery European emissions standards for engines used in new non-road mobile machinery have been structured as gradually more stringent tiers and are specified by Directive 97/68/EC and five amending Directives adopted from 2002 to 2012. The following emission standards are expected to be applicable by the time Ilovica commences production and are recommended for non-road diesel engines employed during the mining operations.

Table 5: Recommended emission standards for non-road diesel engines (k/kWh) Net Power (kW) Date CO HC NMHC+NOx NOx PM

Stage III A

130 ≤ P ≤ 560 2006.01 3.5 - 4 - 0.2

75 ≤ P < 130 2007.01 5 - 4 - 0.3

37 ≤ P < 75 2008.01 5 - 4.7 - 0.4

19 ≤ P < 37 2007.01 5.5 - 7.5 - 0.6

Stage III B

130 ≤ P ≤ 560 2011.01 3.5 0.19 - 2 0.025

75 ≤ P < 130 2012.01 5 0.19 - 3.3 0.025

56 ≤ P < 75 2012.01 5 0.19 - 3.3 0.025

37 ≤ P < 56 2013.01 5 - 4.7 - 0.025

Stage IV

130 ≤ P ≤ 560 2014.01 3.5 0.19 0.4 0.025

56 ≤ P < 130 2014.1 5 0.19 0.4 0.025

2.2.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions For projects that are expected to produce more than 25,000 tonnes of CO2-equivalent annually, IFC recommends that direct emissions from the facility are quantified within the physical project boundary as well as indirect emissions associated with the off-site production of energy used by the project. The quantification of GHG emissions will be completed in the ESIA and, during construction and operation, should be conducted annually in accordance with internationally recognised methodologies and good practice.

3.0 WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY The rationale behind the selection of water EDC is that if an applicable national standard is lower than EU or international standards, it is selected. However generally it was found that there are few numerical standards in Macedonian laws.

All guidance in EBRD documents suggests following EU regulations and international best practice in relation to water quality standards, where appropriate EU regulations have been selected.

3.1 Standards Considered 3.1.1 Drinking Water Standards These standards apply to any source which is designated as a public drinking water supply, whether it is surface water or groundwater. At Ilovica, this mainly includes village springs and wells, intakes from the Jazga and Shtuka rivers, and water sampled downstream of discharge from any water treatment works. Drinking water standards tend to apply at the point of use, so would normally refer to a household tap or piped spring collection point.



Standards considered:

WHO drinking water guidelines (2011);

EU drinking water guidelines (98/83/EC); and

Macedonian Law on Water and relevant directives.

3.1.2 Discharge and Effluent Standards These standards will apply to any discharges location from the mine into local surface or groundwater bodies, mainly sewage discharge and facility mine water discharge.


IFC EH&S Guidelines for Mining (2007);

Macedonian Regulation on hazardous and harmful substances and their emission standards that can be discharged into the sewer or the drainage system into surface or groundwater bodies and coastal land and wetlands (2011);

EU Mine Waste Directive (2006/21/EC);

EU Dangerous Substances Directive (2006/11/EC); and

EU Urban Waste Water Directive (91/271/EEC & 98/15/EC).

3.1.3 Groundwater Standards The aim of EU regulations is to prevent deterioration in the quality of water bodies and thus deterioration in the quality of water feeding to groundwater-dependent ecosystems and water supply for human consumption (and in the case at Ilovica, irrigation water supply on the plains).

There is no numerical value in the EU regulations (except nitrate, which is equal to the drinking water standard). Therefore, for the key parameters required for consideration in groundwater (nitrates, ammonium, arsenic, cadmium, chloride, electric conductivity, lead, mercury and sulphate), for all groundwater receptors, the drinking water EDC (Table 6) will apply.


EU Groundwater Directive (2006/118/EC); and


3.1.4 Environmental (Surface Water) Quality Standards These standards apply to surface water bodies (rivers, streams and canals) to prevent the deterioration of water quality to protect aquatic ecosystems.


EU Environmental Quality Standards (2008/105/EC);

US EPA CMC (acute) guidelines 2013;

US EPA CCC (chronic) guidelines 2013; and


3.2 Project Standards to be Applied Project standards have been derived based upon review of the regulations and standards listed above and consideration of the baseline environmental setting, as understood through baseline studies for the ESIA (conducted between 2013 and 2015).



3.2.1 Drinking Water Standards Project drinking water guidelines are to be applied for any water supply sources that are designated as drinking water within the water baseline survey. The standards apply at the point of use, for example household or garden taps and piped springs. In addition, drinking water standards also apply to non-potable groundwater for the indicator parameters presented in Section 3.1.3.

Table 6: Recommended drinking water standards to be applied for the Ilovica Gold-Copper Project



Source of EDC Rationale for selection of EDC

pH SU 6.5-9.5

Sampled at the point of use.

EU 98/83/EC

Most stringent of guidelines following review of all standards in Section 3.1.1 and 3.1.3.

Colour TCU Acceptable to consumers

EU 98/83/EC

Turbidity TCU Acceptable to consumers

EU 98/83/EC

Odour - Acceptable to consumers

EU 98/83/EC

Conductivity uS/cm 2500 EU 98/83/EC

Ammonium as NH4

mg/l 0.5 EU 98/83/EC

Bromate mg/l 0.01 EU 98/83/EC

Chlorate mg/l 0.7 WHO DWG (2011)

Chloride mg/l 250 EU 98/83/EC

Cyanide (total) mg/l 0.05 EU 98/83/EC

Fluoride mg/l 1.5 EU 98/83/EC

Nitrate mg/l 50 EU 98/83/EC

Nitrite mg/l 3 WHO DWG (2011)

Sodium mg/l 200 EU 98/83/EC

Sulphate mg/l 250 EU 98/83/EC

Aluminium mg/l 0.2

Sampled at the point of use, dissolved.

EU 98/83/EC

Antimony mg/l 0.005 EU 98/83/EC

Arsenic mg/l 0.01 EU 98/83/EC

Barium mg/l 0.7 WHO DWG (2011)

Boron mg/l 2.4 WHO DWG (2011)

Cadmium mg/l 0.003 WHO DWG (2011)

Chromium (total)

mg/l 0.05 EU 98/83/EC

Copper mg/l 2 EU 98/83/EC

Iron mg/l 0.2 EU 98/83/EC

Lead mg/l 0.01 EU 98/83/EC

Manganese mg/l 0.05 EU 98/83/EC

Mercury mg/l 0.001 EU 98/83/EC

Nickel mg/l 0.02 EU 98/83/EC

Selenium mg/l 0.01 EU 98/83/EC

Uranium mg/l 0.03 WHO DWG (2011)

Faecal coliform bacteria

MPN/100ml

0 Sampled at the point of use.

EU 98/83/EC

Cyanobacteria toxins

mg/l 0.001 WHO DWG (2011)



3.2.2 Discharge and Effluent Standards Effluent standards are applied to three main discharges that are likely to occur in the project:

Sewage discharges emanating from the temporary mine camp or mine buildings;

Mine facility (pit dewatering etc.) discharges to surface and groundwater bodies; and

Processing plant tailings discharge to the TMF.

The mine design should use the EDC as a guideline for any potential discharges within the project design.

Table 7: Recommended discharge and effluent standards to be applied for the Ilovica Gold-Copper Project

Parameter Unit Recommended Project EDC Water type Conditions of application of EDC Source of

EDC

Total phosphorous*

mg/l 2

Urban sewage discharge (e.g. sewage discharge from temporary camp)

Treatment should remove at least 80% of the original load. Assumes 10,000 – 100,000 population equivalent (p.e) ( if over 100,000, then 1 mg/l). Discharge draining to an area sensitive to eutrophication.

Urban waste water directive 91/271/EEC

Total nitrogen*

mg/l 15

Treatment should remove at least 70 - 80% of the original load. Assumes 10,000 – 100,000 p.e. (if over 100,000 p.e. then standard is 10 mg/l). Discharge draining to an area sensitive to eutrophication.

BOD at 20°C* mg/l 25 Treatment should remove at least 70 - 90 % of the original load.

COD* mg/l 125 Treatment should remove at least 75% of the original load.

TSS* mg/l 35 Treatment should remove at least 90% of the original load.

WAD cyanide ppm 10

Processing plant tailings discharge to TMF

At point that the tailings are discharged from the plant and sent to the TMF.

Mine waste directive 2004/35/EC

TSS mg/l 50

Mine facility discharges

To be achieved 95 percent, calculated as a proportion of annual operating hours.

IFC EH&S Guidelines for Mining (2007)

pH pH 6 - 9

COD mg/l 150

BOD 5 mg/l 50

Oil and Grease

mg/l 10

Arsenic mg/l 0.1

Cadmium mg/l 0.05

Chromium (VI)

mg/l 0.1

Copper mg/l 0.3

Cyanide Total mg/l 1

Cyanide Free mg/l 0.1

Cyanide WAD mg/l 0.5

Iron Total mg/l 2

Total metals. Lead mg/l 0.2

Mercury mg/l 0.002



Parameter Unit Recommended Project EDC Water type Conditions of application of EDC Source of

EDC

Nickel mg/l 0.5 To be achieved 95 percent, calculated as a proportion of annual operating hours.

Phenols mg/l 0.5

Zinc mg/l 0.5

Temperature °C <3 degree differential

To be achieved 95 percent, calculated as a proportion of annual operating hours

* Applies to sanitary waste discharges from the mine project to water bodies in Shtuka and Jazga catchments

3.2.3 Environmental (Surface Water) Quality Standards Environmental quality standards (surface water) should be applied to any monitored surface water bodies in the project area, mainly rivers, streams, canals and reservoirs, which are not considered potable.

Where regulations or standards are not available for certain parameters, the baseline data gathered during 2013-2015 has been used to present a reasonable EDC for the project.

Table 8: Recommended environmental quality standards to be applied for the Ilovica Gold-Copper Project

Parameter* Unit Recommended Project EDC

Conditions of application of EDC Source of EDC Rationale for

selection of EDC

Lead mg/l 0.0072 Annual average EU Annual average EQS (2008/105/EC)

Most stringent of guidelines following review of all standards in Section 3.1.4.

Mercury mg/l 0.00005 Annual average EU Annual average EQS (2008/105/EC)

Mercury mg/l 0.00007 Maximum allowable concentration

EU Annual MAC (2008/105/EC)

Nickel mg/l 0.02 Annual average EU Annual average EQS (2008/105/EC)

Cadmium

mg/l 0.00008 If hardness <40 mg CaCO3 / l. Annual average.

EU Annual average EQS (2008/105/EC)

mg/l 0.00008 If hardness 40 - 50 mg CaCO3 / l. Annual average.



mg/l 0.00025 If hardness > or = 200 mg CaCO3 / l. Annual average.

mg/l 0.00045

If hardness <40 mg CaCO3 / l. Maximum allowable concentration.

EU Annual MAC (2008/105/EC)

mg/l 0.00045 If hardness 40 - 50 mg CaCO3 / l.



Parameter* Unit Recommended Project EDC

Conditions of application of EDC Source of EDC Rationale for

selection of EDC

Maximum allowable concentration.

mg/l 0.0006

If hardness 50 - 100 mg CaCO3 / l. Maximum allowable concentration.

mg/l 0.0009

If hardness 100 - 200 mg CaCO3 / l. Maximum allowable concentration.

mg/l 0.0015

If hardness > or = 200 mg CaCO3 / l. Maximum allowable concentration.

Arsenic mg/l 0.0097

Baseline data

No direct EU or international standards that are relevant for the baseline data collected. Standard is 5% above the current maximum concentration measured in surface water.

Total cyanide mg/l 0.015

COD mg/l 73.5

TDS mg/l 481.95

Hexavalent chromium

mg/l 0.35 Total species

Copper mg/l 0.1 Total species

Iron mg/l 4.22 Total species

Manganese mg/l 0.72 Total species

Molybdenum mg/l 0.024 Total species

Ammonia, unionised (NH3 as N)

mg/l 8.79

Nitrate (as NO3)

mg/l 22.37

Oils and grease mg/l 1.62

Orthophosphate (PO4 as P)

mg/l 2.21

pH SU 5.94 - 8.97

Total phosphorous

mg/l 1.68

Selenium mg/l 0.00168 Total species

TSS mg/l 69.3

Zinc mg/l 0.074 Total species

*All metals are as total metals.

4.0 NOISE AND VIBRATION The Environmental Design Criteria (EDC) for the project with respect to noise and vibration, and the reasoning for selection of these criteria are set out in the following sections.

4.1 Standards Considered To inform the development of the EDC the following noise standards, regulations and guidelines were considered:

The Law on Protection against Environmental Noise (Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia No 79/07 and 124/10);



Rulebook for limit values of noise in the environment (translated) (Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia No 147/08);

Rulebook for locations of measurement stations and measurement points (Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia No 120/08);

International Finance Corporation. EHS Guidelines: Environmental – Noise Management, 2007;

International Finance Corporation. IFC Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability, 2012; and

World Health Organization WHO), Guidelines for Community Noise, 1999.

To inform the development of the EDC the following vibration standards, regulations and guidelines were considered:

Ontario Provincial Standard OPSS 120 2008;

US Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement OSM Blasting Performance Standards 1983;

ANZECC Technical Basis for guidelines for blasting and air overpressure 1990; and

UK BS 6472 Blasting induced vibration and BS 5228 Code of practice for noise and vibration control

4.2 Project Standards to be Applied 4.2.1 Noise Project standards have been derived based upon review of the regulations and standards listed above and consideration of the baseline environmental setting, as understood through baseline studies for the ESIA. The following table sets out the Project standards that are recommended.

Table 9: Recommended noise level guidelines for the Ilovica Gold-Copper Project

Receptor Unit Recommended Project EDC

Conditions of application of EDC Rationale for selection of EDC

Rural areas not exposed to intensive road traffic noise (>100 m from major roads)

Residential Institutional Educational

dB LAeq 1 hour 40 Daytime (07:00 – 19:00) Noise limit corresponds to IFC EHS

averaging period (LAeq 1 hr) and adopts Macedonian day/evening/night periods and guideline values for rural areas outside of agglomerations

dB LAeq 1 hour 35 Evening (19:00 – 23:00)

dB LAeq 1 hour 35 Night-time (23:00 – 07:00)

Rural areas exposed to traffic noise (<100 m from major roads)


dB LAeq 1 hour 60 Daytime (07:00 – 19:00)

Noise limit corresponds to IFC EHS averaging period (LAeq 1 hr) and adopts Macedonian day/evening/night periods and guideline values for areas outside of agglomerations exposed to intensive road traffic noise



Mixed residential and commercial areas


dB LAeq 1 hour 60 Daytime (07:00 – 19:00)

Noise limit corresponds to IFC EHS averaging period (LAeq 1 hr) and adopts Macedonian day/evening/night periods and guideline values for mixed commercial and residential areas (third level of noise protection)



Worker accommodation (WHO)



Receptor Unit Recommended Project EDC

Conditions of application of EDC Rationale for selection of EDC

Residential dB LAeq 1 hour 45 Night-time (23:00 – 07:00)

Limit corresponds to WHO guidelines for avoidance of sleep disturbance

The IFC guidelines specify a one hour averaging period for the LAeq split between daytime (07:00 – 22:00) and night-time (22:00 – 07:00) periods. The Macedonian guidance does not specify a reference period, however, it is assumed that the guidance refers to the period-averaged LAeq (i.e. daytime, evening, night-time). The criteria adopted are based on a one-hour reference period of the IFC guidance and the assessment periods of the Macedonian guidance (daytime, evening and night-time). This is a conservative approach, as a one-hour LAeq will typically be lower than a period-averaged LAeq.

In terms of background noise levels, the smallest noise level change that can be detected by the human ear is approximately 3 dB and an increase of 10 dB is roughly equivalent to a doubling of the perceived sound level. Under free-field conditions, where there are no reflections or additional attenuation, sound levels typically decrease at a rate of 6 dB for each doubling of distance. IFC General EHS Guidelines also state that noise impacts should result in a maximum increase above the background (baseline) level of 3 dB at the nearest receptor location off-site.

4.2.2 Vibration Project standards have been derived based upon review of the regulations and standards listed above. The following table sets out the Project EDC that are recommended.

Table 10: Recommended vibration level guidelines for the Ilovica Gold-Copper Project Parameter Unit Recommended

Project EDC Conditions of application of EDC Rationale for selection of EDC

Air overpressure

dB Linear

150

Residential properties

Poorly-mounted pre-stressed window may crack

120

In absence of local or international standard, limit corresponds to BS6472 and is most stringent of national standards

115 Safe limit for 95% of blasts for protection of communities from adverse blast effects

Ground vibration

PPV mm/s

10 Continuous level

Vibrations are likely to be intolerable for any more than a very brief exposure to this level in most building environments(a). The USBM threshold for the onset of structural damage arising from ground-borne vibration is 50 mm/s PPV. No such damage has been recorded in vibration studies at levels of less than 12.7 mm/s PPV

1.0 Continuous level

It is likely that vibrations of this level in residential environments will cause complaint, but can be tolerated if prior warning and explanation has been given to residents

0.3 Blasting residential daytime

Vibrations might be just perceptible in residential environments

(a) In absence of local or international standard, limit corresponds to BS5228/BS6472. Limits are amongst the strictest national standards and provide referenceable European standards.

The main concerns from blasting vibration expressed by local communities are disturbance and possible damage to buildings, although the PPV (peak particle velocity) threshold for human perception can be as low as 0.5mm/s, well below the PPV levels at which cosmetic or structural damage occurs (10 mm/s and 18 mm/s).



Some familiarisation and reduction in anxiety may take place over time, but ongoing communication about blasting times and frequency is essential.

5.0 SOILS AND SEDIMENT 5.1 Standards Considered Macedonia’s Law on Environment, Article 13 requires that the precautionary principle be applied with regards to the avoidance of negative impacts to soil quality. Article 12 in the Law on Nature Protection prohibits the use of a natural land use in a way that leads to negative impacts to soil quality, and Article 11 restricts changes to land use (without authorization). The Law on Agricultural Land requires the protection of agricultural land from contamination that may negatively affect food production, human health, and natural ecosystem functions. Macedonia does not yet have specific soil contaminant threshold levels that may be referenced for the Project; instead, the following guidelines were considered to generate an EDC:

Environmental Assessment of Soil for Monitoring Volume I: Indicators and Criteria (EC JRC 2008);

Dutch Soil Remediation Circulars (Rijkswaterstaat Environment 2009);

Land Contamination: Soil Guideline Values (United Kingdom Environmental Agency 2009);

Contaminated Sites Management Series: Assessment levels for Soil, Sediment and Water (Government of Western Australia 2014); and

Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines (CCME 2001);

5.2 Project Standards to be Applied EDC for soils and sediment have been derived based upon review of the regulations and standards listed above and consideration of the baseline environmental setting, as understood through baseline studies for the ESIA. The following tables set out the EDC that are recommended and the rationale behind their selection.

Where different threshold values were available for varying land uses, the threshold value for “Agricultural Land” was used. If Agricultural Land was not provided in the selected guideline, the most appropriate value was applied (typically Residential Land Use), with preference given to guidelines that account for toxicity-influencing factors including soil texture and pH.

Table 11: Recommended soil and sediment quality standards to be applied for the Ilovica Gold-Copper Project




Antimony mg/kg 22 Generic Land Use Dutch Soil

Remediation Circulars

Most geographically relevant guideline among those referenced. Arsenic mg/kg 76

Generic Land Use

Cadmium mg/kg 0.4 Generic Land Use

European Union Joint Research Centre

Guideline specific to sandy and low pH soils, the most common surface soil type in the Project area.

Chromium mg/kg 30 Generic Land Use

Copper mg/kg 20 Generic Land Use

Lead mg/kg 40 Generic Land Use

Mercury mg/kg 0.1 Generic Land Use






Nickel mg/kg 15 Generic Land Use

Zinc mg/kg 60 Generic Land Use

C6-C10 Hydrocarbons

mg/kg 100 Generic Land Use

Australia Assessment Levels for Soil Sediment and Water (Australia)

Accounts for potential gasoline spills due to project activities.

C10-C16 Hydrocarbons

mg/kg 500 Generic Land Use

Accounts for potential diesel fuel spills due to project activities.

Ethylene glycol mg/kg 960 Agricultural land use

Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines (CCME)

Only guideline that reports a limit for this parameter. Accounts for potential coolant spills due to project activities.

Cyanide mg/kg 0.9 Agricultural land use

CCME Was the only guideline that reported a guideline for cyanide specific to Agricultural land uses.

Sulphur (elemental)

mg/kg 500 Agricultural land use

Only guideline that reports a limit for this parameter.

Sulfate, SO4 mg/kg 2000 Generic Land Use

Australia Assessment Levels for Soil Sediment and Water (Australia)

Only guideline that reports a limit for this parameter.

pH SU 3.5-5.5

Agricultural land use, revised from CCME to include range of natural variability in baseline chemistry results

None – based on natural variability of baseline conditions.

pH of surface and subsurface soils must be maintained to promote adequate availability of nutrients, and avoid leaching of heavy metals.



6.0 REFERENCES ANZECC (Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council). 1990. Technical Basis for Guidelines to Minimise Annoyance due to Blasting Overpressure and Ground Vibration

BSI (British Standards Institute). 2008. Guide to Evaluation of Human Exposure to Vibration in Buildings. Blast-induced vibration. BS6472–2:2008. British Standards Institute. London, UK.

BSI. 2009. Code of Practice for Noise and Vibration Control on Construction and Open Sites. BS5228. British Standards Institute. London, UK.

CCME (Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment). 2001. Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines. Available online at: http://www.ccme.ca/en/resources/canadian_environmental_quality_ guidelines/index.html. Accessed June 22, 2015

EC JRC (European Commission Joint Research Centre). 2008. Environmental Assessment of Soil for Monitoring Volume I: Indicators and Criteria. Available online at: http://eusoils.jrc.ec.europa.eu/projects/ envasso/documents/ENV_Vol-I_Final2_web.pdf. Accessed June 22, 2015

EU (European Union). 1991. Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 Concerning Urban Waste-Water Treatment (Urban Waste Water Directive). Official Journal of the European Union

EU. 1997. Directive 97/68/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 1997 on the Approximation of the Laws of the Member States Relating to Measures Against the Emission of Gaseous and Particulate Pollutants from Internal Combustion Engines to be Installed in Non-Road Mobile Machinery (and later amendments). Official Journal of the European Union

EU. 1998a. Council Directive 98/83/EC of 3 November 1998 on the Quality of Water Intended for Human Consumption (Drinking Water Directive). Official Journal of the European Union

EU. 1998b. Commission Directive 98/15/EC of 27 February 1998 amending Council Directive 91/271/EEC with Respect to Certain Requirements Established in Annex I Thereof (Text with EEA relevance) (Urban Waste Water Directive). Official Journal of the European Union

EU. 2006a. Directive 2006/11/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 February 2006 on Pollution Caused by Certain Dangerous Substances Discharged into the Aquatic Environment of the Community (Dangerous Substances Directive). Official Journal of the European Union

EU. 2006b. Directive 2006/118/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on the Protection of Groundwater Against Pollution and Deterioration (Groundwater Directive). Official Journal of the European Union

EU. 2006c. Directive 2006/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the Management of Waste from Extractive Industries (Mine Waste Directive). Official Journal of the European Union

EU. 2008a. Directive 2008/105/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on Environmental Quality Standards in the Field of Water Policy (Environmental Quality Standards). Official Journal of the European Union

EU. 2008b. Directive 2998/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on Ambient Air Quality and Cleaner Air for Europe. Official Journal of the European Union

Federal Republic of Germany. 2002. First General Administrative Regulation Pertaining to the Federal Emission Control Act (Technical Instructions on Air Quality Control – TA Luft)

Government of Western Australia. 2014. Assessment and Management of Contaminated Sites: Contaminated sites guidelines. Department of Environment Regulation. December 2014. Available online at: http://www.der.wa.gov.au/images/documents/your-environment/contaminated-sites/guidelines/Assessment_and_management_of_contaminated_sites.pdf. Accessed June 22, 2015



IFC (International Finance Corporation). 2007a. Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines: Mining. International Finance Corporation, World Bank Group, Washington DC

IFC. 2007b. EHS Guidelines: Environmental – Air Emissions and Ambient Air Quality. International Finance Corporation, World Bank Group, Washington DC

IFC. 2007c. EHS Guidelines: Environmental – Noise Management. International Finance Corporation, World Bank Group, Washington DC

IFC. 2012. IFC Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability. International Finance Corporation, World Bank Group, Washington DC

Ontario Ministry of Transportation. 2008. Ontario Provincial Standard Specification: OPSS 120 - General Specification for Use of Explosives (Rev. 04/2008)

Republic of Macedonia. 1990. Regulation on the Maximum Permitted Concentrations and Quantities and on other Harmful Substances Released in the Air from Particular Pollution Sources (Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia 02/90). Skopje, Macedonia

Republic of Macedonia. 2004. Law on the Quality of Ambient Air (Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia no. 67/04, 92/07, 35/10, 47/11, 59/12, 100/12). Skopje, Macedonia

Republic of Macedonia. 2005. Regulation on Limit Values for the Levels and Types of Pollutants in the Ambient Air and on Alarm Thresholds, Time Limits for Achieving the Limit Values, Limit Values Tolerance Margins, Target Values and Long-Term Goals (Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia no. 50/05). Skopje, Macedonia

Republic of Macedonia. 2007. The Law on Protection against Environmental Noise (Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia No 79/07 and 124/10). Skopje, Macedonia

Republic of Macedonia. 2008. Law On Water (Official Gazette of Republic of Macedonia, no. 87/2008, 6/09, 161/09, 83/10, 51/11, 44/12 and 23/13). Skopje, Macedonia

Republic of Macedonia. 2008. Rulebook for Limit Values of Noise in the Environment (translated) (Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia No 147/08). Skopje, Macedonia

Republic of Macedonia. 2008. Rulebook for Locations of Measurement stations and Measurement Points (Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia No 120/08). Skopje, Macedonia

Republic of Macedonia. 2010. Regulation on the Limit Values of Permitted Levels of Emissions and Types of Pollutant Substances in Waste Gases and Fumes Emitted in the Air by Stationary Sources (Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia 141/10). Skopje, Macedonia

Republic of Macedonia. 2011. Regulation on Hazardous and Harmful Substances and their Emission Standards that can be Discharged into the Sewer or the Drainage System into Surface or Groundwater Bodies and Coastal Land and Wetlands (Official Gazette of Republic of Macedonia, 07-5762/6). Skopje, Macedonia

Rijkswaterstaat Environment. 2009. Soil Remediation Circulars. Soil Protection Act. Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment. Available online at: http://rwsenvironment.eu/subjects/soil/legislation-and/. Accessed June 22, 2015

United Kingdom Environment Agency. 2009. Land Contamination: Soil Guideline Values. Available online at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/land-contamination-soil-guideline-values-sgvs. Accessed June 22,2015

US EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2015. Regions 3,6,9 Regional Screening Levels. Available online at: http://www.epa.gov/earth1r6/6pd/rcra_c/pd-n/screen.htm. Accessed June 22, 2015

US EPA. 2013a. National Recommended Water Quality Criteria: Aquatic Life Criterion Continuous Concentration (CCC) Guidelines. Washington, 2013



US EPA. 2013b. National Recommended Water Quality Criteria: Aquatic Life Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) Guidelines. Washington, 2013

US Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM). 1983. Blasting Performance Standards. US Department of the Interior

WHO (World Health Organization). 1999. Guidelines for Community Noise. WHO, Geneva, Switzerland

WHO. 2011. Guideline for Drinking Water Quality. Fourth Edition. WHO, Geneva, Switzerland


February 2016 Report No. 13514150363.545/B.1

Report Signature Page

GOLDER ASSOCIATES (UK) LTD

Michaela Simms Andrew Morsley ESIA Practitioner, Assistant Project Manager Principal

25 February 2016

MS/AM/es

Company Registered in England No.1125149

At Attenborough House, Browns Lane Business Park, Stanton-on-the-Wolds, Nottinghamshire NG12 5BL

VAT No. 209 0084 92

Golder, Golder Associates and the GA globe design are trademarks of Golder Associates Corporation.

ILOVICA EIA

March 2016 Report No. 13514150363.702/B.1

Annex 1E: Secondary Legislation Relevant to the Ilovica EIA

ANNEX 1E Secondary Legislation Relevant to the EIA

March 2016 Project No. 13514150363.702/B.1 Annex 1E - 1/10

Law on Environment

National book of environmental parameters (Official Gazette of RM no. 189/2015).

Decision on establishment of State network for environmental monitoring (Official Gazette of RM no.

122/2011).

Decision on establishment of Inter-ministerial body for prevention and control of hazards involving

dangerous substances (Official Gazette of RM no. 190/2015).

Rulebook on the types and amount of costs for conducting an environmental impact assessment of the

project, which are covered by the investor (Official Gazette of RM no. 116/2009).

Rulebook on the amount of costs for conducting an environmental impact assessment of the project which

are covered by the investor (Official Gazette of RM no. 33/2006).

Rulebook on the information that need to be included in the notification on the intention to carry out the

project and procedure for determining the need for environmental impact assessment of the project

(Official Gazette of RM no. 33/2006).

Rulebook on remediation measures for environmental damage occurred (*)(Official Gazette of RM no.

31/2011).

Rulebook on the manner and procedure for providing access to information about the environment


Rulebook on the manner of collection, recovery and recycling of substances that deplete the ozone layer

(*)(Official Gazette of RM no. 85/2013).

Rulebook on the manner of conducting of transboundary consultations (Official Gazette of RM no.

110/2010).

Rulebook on hazardous substances, limit values (thresholds) for presence of hazardous substances and

the criteria or properties by which a substance is classified as hazardous (Official Gazette of RM no.

25/2010).

Rulebook on detailed conditions that need to be met by the members of the Scientific and Technical

Commission for best available techniques (Official Gazette of RM no. 71/2006).

Rulebook on professional activities which may lead to liability for environmental damage, the criteria for

determining the existence of environmental damage, as well as cases in which no liability for

environmental damage occurs (*)(Official Gazette of RM no. 31/2011).

Rulebook on the content of the requirements that need to be met by the environmental impact assessment

study of the project (Official Gazette of RM no. 33/2006).

Rulebook on internal and external emergency plans, and the way of their approval (Official Gazette of

RM no. 50/2009).

Rulebook on the content of the report for security measures (*)(Official Gazette of RM no. 57/2003).

Rulebook on the content of the information for safety measures, as well as manner of treating people who

are likely to be affected by major accident caused by the system (*)(Official Gazette of RM no. 22/2011).

Rulebook on the content of the plan for prevention of major accidents * (Official Gazette of RM no.

60/2013).

Rulebook on substances for which are prescribed mandatory emission limit values in A - integrated

environmental permit (*)(Official Gazette of RM no. 72/2010).



Rulebook on substances that deplete the ozone layer as well as products that contain substances that

deplete the ozone layer* (Official Gazette of RM no. 85/2013).

Rulebook on the form, content, methodology and manner of keeping the register of release and transfer

of pollutants* (Official Gazette of RM no. 27/2011).

Rulebook on the form, content, procedure and manner of preparation of the report on the adequacy of

environmental impact assessment study of the project, as well as the procedure for authorization of

people from the list of experts for environmental impact assessment that will prepare the report (Official

Gazette of RM no. 33/2006).

Rulebook on the form, content, purpose, method of production and type and sources of data used for the

preparation of the Report as well as the assessment of the Report (Official Gazette of RM no. 81/2010).

Rulebook on the form, content and manner of submission of the report on imported and / or exported

substances that deplete the ozone layer, as well as products containing substances that deplete the

ozone layer (*)(Official Gazette of RM no. 85/2013, 11/2015).

Rulebook on the form and content of the decision for implementation or non-implementation of strategic

assessment and the forms for the need for implementation or non-implementation of strategic

assessment (Official Gazette of RM no. 122/2011).

Rulebook on the form and content of the request for failure of adopting a decision for approval or rejection

of the request for the project implementation (Official Gazette of RM no. 130/2011).

Rulebook on the form and content of the environmental protection elaborate in accordance with the type

of activities that require an elaborate, and according to the providers of the service and the scope of

activities carried out by legal and natural persons, the procedure for approval and the manner of keeping

the register of approved elaborates (Official Gazette of RM no. 44/2013).

Environmental investment programme for 2016 (Official Gazette of RM no. 2/2016).

Regulation on the activities for which an elaborate must be prepared, and approved by the Mayor of the

municipality, the Mayor of Skopje and the Mayors of the municipalities in Skopje (Official Gazette of RM

no. 80/2009, 32/2012).

Regulation on the activities for which an elaborate must be prepared, and approved by the competent

body for carrying out expert activities in the field of environment (Official Gazette of RM no. 80/2009,

36/2012).

Regulation on determining the projects and criteria on the basis of which the need for conducting the

environmental impact assessment is determined (Official Gazette of RM no. 74/2005, 109/2009,

167/2012).

Regulation on the content of the strategic environmental assessment report (Official Gazette of RM no.

153/2007).

Regulation on the strategies, plans and programs, including amendments to those strategies, plans and

programs for which a mandatory assessment procedure of their impact on the environment and human

health shall be conducted (Official Gazette of RM no. 153/2007, 45/2011).

Regulation on public participation during the preparation of regulations and other acts, as well as plans

and programs related to the environment (Official Gazette of RM no. 147/2008, 45/2011).



Law on Waters

Amendment of the water resources management basis of the Republic of Macedonia in 1968 for the

Buchin Reservoir (Official Gazette of RM no. 188/2013).

List of polluting matters and substances (*)(Official Gazette of RM no. 122/2011).

National water strategy (2012-2042) (Official Gazette of RM no. 122/2012).

Decision on determining the boundaries of the river basins (Official Gazette of RM no. 107/2012).

Decision on establishing a Public water utility company (Official Gazette of RM no. 22/1998, 66/2001,

90/2001, 39/2002, 63/2002).

Rulebook on the criteria for determining the areas that are sensitive on urban waste waters discharge

(*)(Official Gazette of RM no. 130/2011).

Rulebook on the methodology, referent measurement methods, the manner and monitoring parameters

of wastewater, including sludge from the urban waste water treatment (*)(Official Gazette of RM no.

108/2011).

Rulebook on the methodology for river basins assessment (Official Gazette of RM no. 148/2009).

Rulebook on the minimum required activities and measures for technical monitoring of the dams (Official


Rulebook on the manner and procedure for the use of sludge, the maximum values of concentrations of

heavy metals in the soil in which the sludge is used, values of concentrations of heavy metals in the

sludge in accordance with its purpose and the maximum annual quantities of heavy metals that may be

entered into the soil (*)(Official Gazette of RM no. 73/2011).

Rulebook on determination and maintenance of protection zones around sources of drinking water

(Official Gazette of SRM no. 17/1983, 15/1989).

Rulebook on monitoring of the sediment in the reservoirs (Official Gazette of RM no. 4/1999).

Rulebook for hazardous and harmful substances and their emission standards that can be discharged

into the sewer or drainage system, in surface or groundwater bodies as well as in coastal areas and

wetlands (*)(*)(Official Gazette of RM no. 108/2011).

Rulebook on the closer conditions, method and maximum allowed values and parameter concentrations

of treated wastewaters for their re-use (*)(Official Gazette of RM no. 73/2011).

Rulebook on the closer conditions for collection, drainage and treatment, the manner and conditions for

design, construction and exploitation of the systems and stations for urban waste water treatment, as well

as technical standards, parameters, emission standards and quality norms for pre-treatment, disposal

and waste water treatment, taking into account the load and the method of treatment of urban waste

waters discharged into areas sensitive to urban waste water discharge (*)(Official Gazette of RM no.

73/2011).

Rulebook on criteria establishment for determining the areas sensitive to nitrates (*)(Official Gazette of

RM no. 131/2011).

Rulebook on the content and manner of keeping records of water management facilities and plants


Rulebook on the content and manner of preparation of elaborate for determining the boundaries of

protected areas, protective measures and other requirements for water intended for consumption by

humans (Official Gazette of RM no. 29/2014).



Rulebook on the content and manner of preparation of the management plans for river basins (Official


Rulebook on the content and manner of preparation of the Measures programme (Official Gazette of RM

no. 148/2009).

Rulebook on technical and other requirements relating to the installation and operation of plants that are

dealing with dangerous substances and the manner of plants testing by experts prior to commencing and

in regular intervals during operation (*) (Official Gazette of RM no. 123/2011).

Rulebook on the conditions, manner and emission limit values for discharge of waste waters after their

treatment, the method of their calculation, taking into account the specific requirements for protection of

protected areas (*)(Official Gazette of RM no. 81/2011).

Rulebook on the form, content, and manner of submission of data and type of information on the use of

sludge from the urban waste water treatment in accordance with its purpose, treatment, composition and

location of its use (*)(Official Gazette of RM no. 60/2011).

Rulebook on the form and content of the request and permit for treated waste water reuse, as well as the

manner of issuing the permit (Official Gazette of RM no. 60/2011).

Rulebook on the form and content of the Register of protected zones in areas designated as protected

natural heritage where the maintenance and improvement of the water status is an important factor


Resolution for determining the basic facilities of the hydro-systems (Official Gazette of RM no.11/1999).

Regulation for categorising of water courses, lakes, reservoirs and ground waters (Official Gazette of RM

no.18/1999, 71/1999).

Regulation for water classification (Official Gazette of RM no.18/1999).

Law on Forests

Decision for establishment of Public enterprise for forests management (Official Gazette of RM

no.65/1997, 60/2011).

Rulebook on the fees for forest damages (Official Gazette of RM no.75/2010)

Rulebook on the manner for keeping records of forest areas in state ownership (Official Gazette of RM

no.54/2000).

Rulebook on the form, content and the manner of keeping a Cadastre of forest and forest land (Official

Gazette of RM no.75/2010).

Programme for increased reproduction of the forests for 2016 (Official Gazette of RM no.2/2016).

Resolution for determining rare type of trees in the forest (Official Gazette of RM no.23/1998).

Law on Protection of Environment Noise

Rulebook on the thresholds for level of environmental noise (Official Gazette of RM no.147/2008).

Rulebook on the locations of the measurement stations and measurement locations (Official Gazette of

RM no.120/2008).



Rulebook on the manner, conditions and procedure for establishing and operation of networks,

methodology and manner of monitoring, as well as conditions, manner and procedure for delivering of

information and data obtained from monitoring the situation in the field of noise (Official Gazette of RM

no.123/2009).

Rulebook on regulating closer the content of the strategic maps for noise and action plans for noise,

manner for preparation and manner for collection of data for preparation of strategic maps for noise and

action plans for noise, as well as manner of collecting, storing and recording the same (Official Gazette

of RM no.133/2010).

Rulebook on application of noise indicators, additional noise indicators, manner of measuring of noise

and methods of assessing of the indicators of noise in the environment (Official Gazette of RM

no.107/2008).

Rulebook on regulating closer the types of specific sources of noise, as well as conditions that need to

be met by plants, equipment, installations and devices used in open areas in respect of emission of noise

and standards for noise protection (Official Gazette of RM no.142/2013).

Law on Cultural Heritage

Decision for adopting national classification of cultural heritage (Official Gazette of RM no.37/2006).

Rulebook on archaeological exploration (Official Gazette of RM no.111/2005).

Rulebook on valorisation, categorisation and revalorisation of cultural heritage (Official Gazette of RM

no.111/2005).

Rulebook on National Register for cultural heritage (Official Gazette of RM no.25/2005).

Rulebook on content and manner of maintaining evidence for protection of cultural heritage and goods

that are reasonable considered as cultural heritage, of dispersed and foreign cultural heritage, as well as

manner of performing review (Official Gazette of RM no.10/2008).

Rulebook on the form and content of the request for obtaining permit for archaeological exploration and

form and content of the request for issuing permit for archaeological exploration for not adopting

resolution on rejecting the request (Official Gazette of RM no.4/2012).

Law on Protection of Nature

Lists for determining highly protected and protected wild species (Official Gazette of RM no.139/2011).

List of affected and protected wild species of plants, fungi, animals and their parts (Official Gazette of RM

no.15/2012).

Rulebook on records for protection of nature (Official Gazette of RM no.102/2012).

Rulebook on measures and activities for protection of the nature park (Official Gazette of RM

no.126/2010).

Rulebook on measures and activities for protection of natural monuments, form and content of the permit

for performing specific measures and activities for protection and recovery of natural monuments (Official

Gazette of RM no.126/2010).

Rulebook on the content of the study for valorisation or revalorisation of protected area (Official Gazette

of RM no.26/2012).



Rulebook on the content of the plans for managing of protected areas and annual programmes for

protection of nature (Official Gazette of RM no.26/2012).

Law on Ambient Air Quality

List of zones and agglomerations for ambient air quality (Official Gazette of RM no.23/2009).

National plan for protection of ambient air in Republic of Macedonia for the period from 2013 to 2018

(Official Gazette of RM no.170/2012).

National programme for gradual reduction of emissions quantities for certain polluted substances on the

level of Republic of Macedonia (Official Gazette of RM no.106/2012).

Rulebook on thresholds for the allowed levels of emissions and type of polluted substances in waste

gases and steams released by the stationary sources into the air (Official Gazette of RM no.141/2010).

Rulebook on the detailed content and the manner for preparation of the Action plan for protection of

ambient air (Official Gazette of RM no.108/2009).

Rulebook on detailed content and the manner for preparation of short-term action plans for protection of


Rulebook on the detailed content and the manner for preparation of the National plan for protection of


Rulebook on the detailed content and the manner for preparation of the Plan for improving the quality of

the ambient air (Official Gazette of RM no.148/2014).

Rulebook on classification of facilities that through emitting of harmful matters may pollute the air in

populated areas and establishing zones for sanitary protection (Official Gazette of RM no.13/1976).

Rulebook on quantities of thresholds - highest level of emissions of polluting substances for the purpose

of projections for limited time periods related to annual reduction of the quantity of the polluting

substances emissions (Official Gazette of RM no.2/2010).

Rulebook on criteria, methods and procedures for assessing of the ambient air quality (Official Gazette

of RM no.169/2013).

Rulebook on the maximum allowed concentration and quantity and for other polluting materials that might

be emitted into the air by specific sources of pollution (Official Gazette of RM no.3/1990).

Rulebook on the methodology, manners, procedures, methods and means for measurement of emissions

from stationary sources (Official Gazette of RM no.11/2012).

Rulebook on methodology for inventory and determination of the level of emissions of polluting

substances into the atmosphere annually per tonne for all type of activities, as well as other data for

delivering the programme for monitoring of the air over Europe (EMEP) (Official Gazette of RM

no.142/2007).

Rulebook on the methodology for monitoring of the ambient air quality (Official Gazette of RM

no.138/2009).

Rulebook on the methodology for monitoring and determining harmful matters in the air (Official Gazette

of SRM no.9/1976).

Rulebook on the manner and deadlines for delivering reports for performed measurements, control and

recording the measurement of released harmful matters into the air (Official Gazette of SRM no.9/1976).



Rulebook on the manner and deadlines for measuring, control and recording of the measurement of

released harmful matters into the air by the facilities, plants and equipment that may pollute the air above

the maximum allowed concentration (Official Gazette of SRM no.9/1976).

Rulebook on the content and the manner for transferring of data and information on the conditions for

managing of ambient air quality (Official Gazette of RM no.138/2009).

Rulebook on the form, methodology and manner of keeping and maintaining of Cadastre of air polluters

(Official Gazette of RM no.92/2010).

Rulebook on the form and content of the forms for delivering data of emissions into the ambient air by

stationary sources, manner and time period for delivery according to the capacity of the installation,

content and manner for maintaining reports for emissions into the ambient air (Official Gazette of RM

no.79/2011).

Regulation on thresholds for the level and types of the polluting substances into the ambient air and

thresholds for alarming, deadlines for reaching of the thresholds, tolerance margin for the thresholds,

target values and long term goals (Official Gazette of RM no.50/2005, 4/2013).

32008L001 Directive on Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Pollution.

Law on Waste Management

List of waste types (Official Gazette of RM no.100/2005)

National plan for waste management (2009 – 2015) of Republic of Macedonia (Official Gazette of RM

no.77/2009)

Rulebook on marginal values for emission by burning a waste and the conditions and the manner of

working of the installations for burning (Official Gazette of RM no.123/2009).

Rulebook on the amount of biodegradable compounds in the waste that may be disposed (Official Gazette

of RM no. 108/2009, 142/2009).

Rulebook on the minimum technical conditions for performing activity storage, treatment and /or

processing of waste, form and content of the request for obtaining, amending or renewing of permit for

processing, treatment and/or storage of waste, as well as form and content of the permit (Official Gazette

of RM no. 197/2014).

Rulebook on the minimum technical conditions and conditions in respect of environmental protection that

must be met by waste transfer stations, the conditions that must be met by the locations where waste

transfer stations are being build or placed, as well as the deadlines for keeping waste in waste transfer

station depending on the type of waste (Official Gazette of RM no. 39/2007).

Rulebook on the minimum hygiene-technical conditions of business premises, devices and equipment for

collecting, use, processing and operations with waste materials used as secondary resources (Official

Gazette of SRM no. 19/1984).

Rulebook on the manner and procedure for operation, monitoring and control over landfill during

operation, monitoring and control over landfill in the closing phase and furthermore after closing, as well

as the manner and conditions for treatment of landfills after they stop working (Official Gazette of RM no.

156/2007).

Rulebook on the manner and conditions for storage of waste, as well as the conditions that need to be

met in terms of location where the waste is being stored (Official Gazette of RM no. 29/2007).



Rulebook on the manner and conditions for operation of the integrated network for removal of waste


Rulebook on the general terms for treatment of municipal and other types of non-hazardous waste


Rulebook on the specific conditions for treatment of hazardous waste and manner of packaging and

marking of hazardous waste (Official Gazette of RM no. 15/2008).

Rulebook on the content and the manner of keeping and maintaining records in the Waste Registry


Rulebook on the content of the regional plan for waste management (Official Gazette of RM no. 63/2013).

Rulebook on the conditions that need to be met by landfills (Official Gazette of RM no. 78/2009).

Rulebook on the form and content of the register for recording the treatment of waste, form and content

of the forms for identification and transport of waste and form and content of the forms for annual reports

on waste treatment (Official Gazette of RM no. 7/2006).

Rulebook on the form and content of the permit for collecting and transporting hazardous waste (Official


Strategy on waste management of the Republic of Macedonia (2008-2020) (Official Gazette of RM no.

39/2008).

Law on Protection of Radiation and Radiation Safety

Rulebook on categorization of sources of radiation and categorization of radioactive and nuclear material


Rulebook on categorization of radiation and nuclear threats (Official Gazette of RM no. 162/2009).

Rulebook on the maximum thresholds for radioactive contamination of the human environment and for

performing decontamination (Official Gazette of SFRJ no. 8/1987).

Rulebook on the maximum allowed thresholds for release of radioactive matters in the environment,

manner of performing monitoring, keeping records and submitting reports Official (Gazette of RM no.

162/2009).

Rulebook on the maximum allowed quantities of radionuclides in metals, construction materials,

fertilizers, ash from power stations and waste material from mines and smelters (Official Gazette of RM

no. 98/2010).

Rulebook on the maximum allowed quantities of radionuclides in food, water, air, land, products and raw

materials from animal or herbal origin and general use objects (Official Gazette of RM no. 163/2009).

Rulebook on the manner and measurement of exposure of population, keeping records and submitting

reports (Official Gazette of RM no. 126/2010).

Rulebook on the manner of handling waste, that is, collecting, keeping, conditioning, transporting and

disposing radioactive waste (Official Gazette of RM no. 130/2010).

Rulebook on the content of the Program for radiation protection, the plan for extraordinary radiation

situations and the program for securing quality and control of safety (Official Gazette of RM no. 157/2009).



Law on Transportation of Hazardous Substances in the Road and Rail Traffic

Decision for accession of the Republic of Macedonia to the European Agreement concerning the

International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road (ADR) from 1957 (Official Gazette of RM no.

8/1994).

Decision for accession of the Republic of Macedonia to the Protocol for amendment of article 1(a) article

14(1) and article 14(3)(b) to the European Agreement concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous

Goods by Road (ADR) from 1957 (Official Gazette of RM no. 190/2015).

Rulebook on the form and content of the form for keeping database for performed controls of the

transportation of hazardous waste (Official Gazette of RM no. 122/2007).

Rulebook on the obligations, responsibilities and expert training of the drivers for transportation of

hazardous substances, closer conditions for the legal entities who performed expert training and condition

and form of the certificate and confirmation for expert training of drivers (Official Gazette of RM no.

10/2008).

Rulebook on the obligations, responsibilities and expert training of the safety counsellor for transportation

of non-hazardous substances, closer conditions for the legal entities who performed expert training and

condition and form of the certificate and confirmation for expert training of the counsellor (Official Gazette

of RM no. 19/2008).

Rulebook on the specifications of the vehicles-tanks that transport petrol and/or organic solvents (Official


Law on Occupational Safety and Health

Decision for establishing a Council for occupational safety and health (Official Gazette of RM no.

131/2009).

Rulebook on occupational safety and health of employees that are exposed to risk of noise (Official


Rulebook on occupational safety and health of employees exposed to risk of mechanical vibrations


Rulebook on occupational safety and health during manual transportation of load (Official Gazette of RM

no. 135/2007).

Rulebook on occupational safety and health during use of working equipment (Official Gazette of RM no.

116/2007).

Rulebook on work protection during loading load on truck motor vehicles and unloading load from such

vehicles (Official Gazette of SFRJ no. 17/1966).

Rulebook on work protection while maintaining motor vehicles and transportation with motor vehicles

(Official Gazette of SFRJ no. 55/1965).

Rulebook on work protection during manufacturing and processing of ferrous metals (Official Gazette of

RM no. 18/1993).

Rulebook on work protection during loading and unloading of load (Official Gazette of SRM no.11/1988).

Rulebook on signs for occupational safety and health (Official Gazette of RM no. 127/2007).

Rulebook on personal protective equipment that the employees must at work (Official Gazette of RM no.

116/2007).



Rulebook on the minimum requirements for occupational safety and health of young workers (Official


Rulebook on the minimum requirements for occupational safety and health of employees that are

potentially exposed to risk of explosive atmospheres (Official Gazette of RM no. 74/2009).

Rulebook on the minimum requirements for occupational safety and health of employees at the working

premises (Official Gazette of RM no. 154/2008).

Rulebook on the minimum requirements for occupational safety and health of pregnant employees,

employees that recently gave birth or are nursing (Official Gazette of RM no. 119/2011).

Rulebook on the minimum requirements for occupational safety and health of employees in the industry

for extraction of minerals with drilling (Official Gazette of RM no. 163/2011).

Rulebook on the minimum requirements for occupational safety and health of employees in mining for

surface and underground exploitation of minerals (Official Gazette of RM no. 64/2012).

Rulebook on the minimum requirements for occupational safety and health of employees from risks

related to exposure to carcinogens, mutagens or substances toxic to the reproductive system (Official



related to exposure to physical agents (Official Gazette of RM no. 132/2012).


related to exposure to physical agents (electromagnetic fields) (Official Gazette of RM no. 40/2014).


related to exposure to chemical substances (Official Gazette of RM no. 46/2010).

Rulebook on the minimum requirements for occupational safety and health on temporary and mobile

construction sites (Official Gazette of RM no. 105/2008).

Rulebook on the manner of keeping records in the area of occupational safety and health (Official Gazette

of RM no. 136/2007).

Rulebook on the manner of preparation of a safety statement, its content, as well as the data based on

which the risk assessments is based (Official Gazette of RM no.2/2009).

Rulebook on the general measures and norms for protection during work with cranes (Official Gazette of

SFRJ no. 30/1969, 41/1969).