Technical Report Summary of the material Tailings Storage Facilities i  Technical Report Summary  of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities  Effective Date: 30 June 2023  Qualified Persons:  Mpfariseni Mudau Pr.Sci.Nat.  Steven Rupprecht HFSAIMM  Prepared for:  Exhibit 96.2
 Technical Report Summary of the material Tailings Storage Facilities ii  Date and Signature Page  This report entitled ‘Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities’, with an effective  date of 30 June 2023 was prepared for Ergo Mining Proprietary Limited by the Qualified Persons:  Mr. Mpfariseni Mudau and Professor Steven Rupprecht.  Dated at Johannesburg, 30 October 2023.  /s/ Mpfariseni Mudau  Mpfariseni Mudau (Pr.Sci.Nat.)  Resource Geology Manager  The RVN Group    /s/ Steven Rupprecht  Steven Rupprecht (HFSAIMM)  Associate Principal Mining Engineer  The RVN Group
 Technical Report Summary of the material Tailings Storage Facilities iii    1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1  1.1 INTRODUCTION 1  1.2 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 1  1.3 MINERAL RIGHTS AND OWNERSHIP 1  1.4 GEOLOGY AND MINERALIZATION 2  1.5 EVALUATION DRILLING AND SAMPLING 2  1.6 SAMPLE PREPARATION 3  1.7 ASSAYS 3  1.8 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL 4  1.9 METALLURGICAL SAMPLING AND TESTING 4  1.10 MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE 5  1.11 MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATE 6  1.12 PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS 8  1.13 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 8  2 INTRODUCTION 10  2.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND 10  2.2 TERMS OF REFERENCE AND PURPOSE OF THE TECHNICAL REPORT 11  2.3 PARTICIPANTS AND AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITIES 11  2.4 SOURCES OF INFORMATION 12  2.5 SITE INSPECTION 12  2.6 UNITS, CURRENCIES AND SURVEY COORDINATE SYSTEM 13  2.7 INDEPENDENCE 15  3 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 16  3.1 LOCATION AND OPERATIONS OVERVIEW 16  3.2 MINERAL RIGHTS CONDITIONS 20  3.3 MINERAL TITLE 20  3.4 VIOLATION AND FINES 22  3.5 ROYALTIES 22  3.6 LEGAL PROCEEDINGS AND SIGNIFICANT ENCUMBRANCES TO THE PROPERTY 22  4 ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE AND PHYSIOGRAPHY 23  4.1 TOPOGRAPHY, ELEVATION AND VEGETATION 23  4.2 ACCESS, TOWNS AND REGIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE 23  4.3 CLIMATE 24  4.4 INFRASTRUCTURE AND BULK SERVICE SUPPLIES 24  4.5 PERSONNEL SOURCES 24  5 HISTORY 26  5.1 OWNERSHIP 26  5.1.1 Crown Complex 26  5.1.2 City Deep complex 26  5.1.3 Knight Complex 26  5.1.4 Ergo Complex 26
 Technical Report Summary of the material Tailings Storage Facilities iv  5.1.5 Marievale Complex 27  5.1.6 Grootvlei Complex 27  5.1.7 5A10/5L27 27  5.1.8 Daggafontein TSF 27  5.2 CONSTRUCTION OF THE TSFS AND SAND DUMPS 27  5.3 PREVIOUS EXPLORATION AND MINE DEVELOPMENT 28  5.3.1 Previous Evaluation Drilling 28  5.3.2 Previous Development 28  6 GEOLOGICAL SETTING, MINERALIZATION AND DEPOSIT 30  6.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGY 30  6.2 MINERALIZATION, LOCAL AND PROPERTY GEOLOGY 30  6.3 STRATIGRAPHY AND CROSS-SECTIONS 31  6.4 DEPOSIT TYPE 33  7 EXPLORATION 34  7.1 EXPLORATION 34  7.2 TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEYS 34  7.3 EVALUATION DRILLING 34  7.4 DRILLING METHODOLOGY 34  7.4.1 Auger Drilling 35  7.4.2 Reverse Circulation 36  7.5 CROWN 37  7.6 CITY DEEP 38  7.7 KNIGHTS 39  7.8 ERGO 40  7.8.1 7L15 40  7.8.2 Rooikraal 41  7.9 MARIEVALE 42  7.10 GROOTVLEI COMPLEX 43  7.11 5A10/5L27 46  7.12 DAGGAFONTEIN TSF 47  7.13 LOGGING AND SAMPLING 47  7.13.1 Logging 48  7.13.2 Sampling 48  7.14 SAMPLE RECOVERY 48  7.15 ON-SITE SECURITY MEASURES 48  7.16 COLLAR SURVEY DATA 48  7.17 DENSITY DETERMINATION 49  7.18 HYDROGEOLOGICAL DRILLING AND TEST WORK 51  7.18.1 Crown Complex 51  7.18.2 City Deep Complex 52  7.18.3 Knights Complex 52  7.18.4 Ergo Complex 53  7.18.5 Marievale Complex 53  7.18.6 Grootvlei Complex 54
 Technical Report Summary of the material Tailings Storage Facilities v  7.18.7 5A10/5L27 55  7.18.8 Daggafontein TSF 55  7.19 GEOTECHNICAL DATA, TESTING AND ANALYSIS 55  8 SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSES AND SECURITY 57  8.1 SAMPLING GOVERNANCE AND QUALITY ASSURANCE 57  8.2 SAMPLE PREPARATION AND ANALYSIS 57  8.2.1 On-site Sample Preparation 57  8.2.2 Laboratories, Sample Preparation and Analyses 58  8.2.3 QP Opinion 59  8.3 ANALYTICAL QUALITY CONTROL 59  8.3.1 Nature and Extent of the Quality Control Procedures 59  8.3.2 Quality Control Results 60  8.3.3 QP Opinion 60  8.4 SAMPLE STORAGE AND SECURITY 60  8.5 DATA STORAGE AND DATABASE MANAGEMENT 61  9 DATA VERIFICATION 62  10 MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING 63  10.1 NATURE AND EXTENT OF THE METALLURGICAL TESTING METHOD 63  10.2 PROCEDURE 63  10.2.1 Slime Material 63  10.2.2 Sand Material 63  10.3 REPRESENTATIVE OF THE SAMPLES 64  10.4 DETAILS OF THE LABORATORIES 64  10.5 RESULTS 64  10.6 INTERPRETATION OF THE RESULTS 65  10.7 QP OPINION 66  11 MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES 67  11.1 VOLUME MODELLING 68  11.2 BULK DRY DENSITY 68  11.3 EXPLORATORY DATA ANALYSIS 68  11.4 ESTIMATION TECHNIQUES 68  11.5 MODELLING AND ESTIMATION PARAMETERS 69  11.6 MODEL VALIDATION 69  11.7 TECHNICAL AND FINANCIAL PARAMETERS 70  11.8 UNCERTAINTIES AND CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA 72  11.9 CROWN COMPLEX 72  11.9.1 Exploratory Data Analysis 72  11.9.2 Modelling and Estimation Parameters 77  11.9.3 Technical and Economic Factors 78  11.9.4 Mineral Resource Classification Criteria 79  11.9.5 Mineral Resource Statement 80  11.9.6 Mineral Resource Changes 80  11.9.7 Mineral Resource Risks and Uncertainty 80
 Technical Report Summary of the material Tailings Storage Facilities vi  11.10 CITY DEEP COMPLEX 81  11.10.1 Exploratory Data Analysis 81  11.10.2 Modelling and Estimation Parameters 84  11.10.3 Technical and Economic Factors 85  11.10.4 Mineral Resource Classification Criteria 85  11.10.5 Mineral Resource Statement 86  11.10.6 Mineral Resource Changes 86  11.10.7 Mineral Resource Risks and Uncertainty 86  11.11 KNIGHTS COMPLEX 87  11.11.1 Exploratory Data Analysis 87  11.11.2 Modelling and Estimation Parameters 91  11.11.3 Technical and Economic Factors 92  11.11.4 Mineral Resource Classification Criteria 92  11.11.5 Mineral Resource Statement 93  11.11.6 Mineral Resource Changes 93  11.11.7 Mineral Resource Risks and Uncertainty 93  11.12 ERGO COMPLEX 94  11.12.1 Exploratory Data Analysis 94  11.12.2 Modelling and Estimation Parameters 101  11.12.3 Technical and Economic Factors 101  11.12.4 Mineral Resource Classification Criteria 102  11.12.5 Mineral Resource Statement 103  11.12.6 Mineral Resource Changes 103  11.12.7 Mineral Resource Risks and Uncertainty 103  11.13 MARIEVALE COMPLEX 104  11.13.1 Exploratory Data Analysis 104  11.13.2 Modelling and Estimation Parameters 108  11.13.3 Technical and Economic Factors 108  11.13.4 Mineral Resource Classification Criteria 109  11.13.5 Mineral Resource Statement 109  11.13.6 Mineral Resource Changes 110  11.13.7 Mineral Resource Risks and Uncertainty 111  11.14 GROOTVLEI COMPLEX 111  11.14.1 Exploratory Data Analysis 111  11.14.2 Modelling and Estimation Parameters 115  11.14.3 Technical and Economic Factors 115  11.14.4 Mineral Resource Classification Criteria 116  11.14.5 Mineral Resource Statement 117  11.14.6 Mineral Resource Changes 118  11.14.7 Mineral Resource Risks and Uncertainty 118  11.15 5A10/5L27 SAND DUMPS 118  11.15.1 Exploratory Data Analysis 118  11.15.2 Modelling and Estimation Parameters 119  11.15.3 Technical and Economic Factors 119  11.15.4 Mineral Resource Classification Criteria 120  11.15.5 Mineral Resource Statement 121
 Technical Report Summary of the material Tailings Storage Facilities vii  11.15.6 Mineral Resource Changes 121  11.15.7 Mineral Resource Risks and Uncertainty 122  11.16 DAGGAFONTEIN TSF 122  11.16.1 Exploratory Data Analysis 122  11.16.2 Modelling and Estimation Parameters 123  11.16.3 Technical and Economic Factors 124  11.16.4 Mineral Resource Classification Criteria 124  11.16.5 Mineral Resource Statement 125  11.16.6 Mineral Resource Changes 126  11.16.7 Mineral Resource Risks and Uncertainty 126  11.17 SUMMARY MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES 127  11.18 QP’S OPINION 130  12 MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATES 131  12.1 GRADE CONTROL AND RECONCILIATION 131  12.2 CUT-OFF GRADE ESTIMATION 132  12.3 ESTIMATION AND MODELLING TECHNIQUES 132  12.4 MINERAL RESERVE CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA 133  12.5 MINERAL RESERVES STATEMENT 133  12.6 QP STATEMENT ON THE MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATION 134  13 MINING METHODS 135  13.1 MINING METHOD 135  13.1.1 Hydraulic Mining 136  13.1.2 Conventional Load, Haul and Slurry 139  13.2 MINING SECTIONS 142  13.2.1 West Rand 144  13.2.2 Central Rand Section – City Section 144  13.2.3 East Rand Section 144  13.3 MINE DESIGN AND SCHEDULE 144  13.4 GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOHYDROLOGY 147  13.5 REQUIREMENTS FOR STRIPPING 148  13.6 MINING EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS 148  13.7 MINE PLANS 149  13.7.1 Introduction 149  13.7.2 Central Rand 149  13.7.3 East Rand (Ergo) 149  14 PROCESSING AND RECOVERY METHODS 152  14.1 INTRODUCTION 152  14.2 PLANT FEED GRADE AND METALLURGICAL TEST WORK 152  14.3 MINERAL PROCESS AND EQUIPMENT CHARACTERISTICS 155  14.3.1 Reception 155  14.3.2 De-sanding Section 155  14.3.3 Carbon-in-Leach 155  14.3.4 Carbon Treatment 156
 Technical Report Summary of the material Tailings Storage Facilities viii  14.3.5 Plant Services 156  14.4 PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS 156  14.5 ENERGY AND WATER REQUIREMENTS 156  14.6 PROCESS MATERIALS REQUIREMENTS 157  15 INFRASTRUCTURE 158  15.1 ROADS 158  15.2 SITE OFFICES AND WORKSHOPS 158  15.3 POWER 158  15.4 PUMPS AND PIPELINES 159  15.5 WATER 160  15.6 INFRASTRUCTURE 160  15.7 TAILINGS DISPOSAL 162  15.8 CONCLUSION 162  16 MARKET STUDIES 163  16.1 MARKETS 163  16.2 GOLD PRICE 163  16.3 EXCHANGE RATE TRENDS 164  16.4 GLOBAL DEMAND 165  16.5 GLOBAL SUPPLY 165  16.6 CONCLUDING COMMENTS 166  17 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES 168  17.1 RESULTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES 168  17.2 REQUIREMENTS FOR TAILINGS DISPOSAL, SITE MONITORING AND WATER MANAGEMENT 168  17.2.1 Site Monitoring 169  17.2.2 Water Management 169  17.2.3 Vegetation Monitoring 169  17.2.4 Vegetation Maintenance 169  17.2.5 Water Monitoring 170  17.2.6 Legal and Permitting 170  17.3 PLAN NEGOTIATIONS, OR AGREEMENTS WITH LOCAL INDIVIDUALS OR GROUPS 170  17.4 MINE CLOSURE PLANS REMEDIATION PLANS, AND ASSOCIATED COSTS 171  17.5 QP STATEMENT ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, PERMITTING, PLANS, NEGOTIATIONS, WITH LOCAL INDIVIDUALS OR  GROUPS 172  18 CAPITAL AND OPERATION COSTS 173  18.1 CAPITAL EXPENDITURE 173  18.1.1 Ergo Section Capital Expenditure 174  18.1.2 QP commentary 175  18.2 OPERATING COSTS 175  19 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS 177  19.1 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS 177  19.2 SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS 179  19.3 RISK ASSESSMENT 179
 Technical Report Summary of the material Tailings Storage Facilities ix  19.3.1 Limited Tailings Storage Capacity 179  19.3.2 Country Risk 180  19.3.3 Security Issues 180  19.3.4 Eskom Electricity Supply 180  19.3.5 Climate Change Impact 180  19.3.6 Threat to Social and Operating Licenses or other permits 181  19.3.7 Social-political Instability and Social Unrest 181  19.3.8 Complexity of Legal/Regulatory Compliance 181  19.3.9 Capital Projects Progress Risk 182  19.3.10 Supply Chain Risk 182  19.3.11 Depletion of Ergo Mining’s Mineral Reserves 182  20 ADJACENT PROPERTIES 182  21 OTHER RELEVANT DATA AND INFORMATION 182  22 INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS 184  23 RECOMMENDATIONS 184  24 REFERENCES 185  25 RELIANCE ON INFORMATION PROVIDED BY REGISTRANT 185  26 QUALIFIED PERSONS DISCLOSURE CONSENT 186
 Technical Report Summary of the material Tailings Storage Facilities  x   Figure 3.1:  Location of the Material TSFs and Infrastructure (the material properties  of Ergo) ....................................................................................................................... 18  Figure 3.2:  Location of the Material Properties in Relation to the Smaller TSFs and  Clean-up Operations................................................................................................. 19  Figure 6.1:  A Typical Stratigraphy for Ergo’s TSFs .................................................................. 32  Figure 6.2:  Grootvlei Complex (6L17) Map showing Location of Cross-section ............. 32  Figure 6.3:  Cross-section of the Grootvlei Complex (6L17) .................................................. 33  Figure 7.1:  Crown Complex: Map showing drill hole Locations .......................................... 37  Figure 7.2:   City Deep Complex: Map showing Drill Hole Locations ................................... 38  Figure 7.3:  Knights Complex - 4L14: Map showing Drill Hole Locations .............................. 39  Figure 7.4:  Ergo Complex - 7L15: Map showing Drill Hole Locations ................................... 40  Figure 7.5:  Ergo Complex - Rooikraal: Map showing Drill Hole Locations ........................... 41  Figure 7.6:  Marievale Complex: Map showing Drill Hole Locations .................................... 42  Figure 7.7:  Grootvlei Complex - 6L16: Map showing Drill Hole Locations ........................... 43  Figure 7.8:  Grootvlei Complex - 6L17: Map showing Drill Hole Locations ........................... 44  Figure 7.9:  Grootvlei Complex - 6L17A: Map showing Drill Hole Locations ........................ 45  Figure 7.10:  5A10/5L27: Map showing Drill Hole Locations ................................................. 46  Figure 7.11:  Daggafontein Complex - Daggafontein TSF: Map showing Drill Hole  Locations .................................................................................................................... 47  Figure 8.1:  Cone and Quartering Method ............................................................................ 57  Figure 11.1:  3L7 (Mooifontein): Distribution of Raw Gold Capped Data .......................... 73  Figure 11.2:  3L7 (Mooifontein): Distribution of Composited Gold Data ............................ 74  Figure 11.3:  3L8 (GMTS): Distribution of Raw Gold Capped Data ..................................... 74  Figure 11.4:  3L8 (GMTS): Distribution of Composited Gold Data ....................................... 75  Figure 11.5: 3L5 (Diepkloof: Diepkloof): Distribution of Raw Gold Capped Data ............ 75  Figure 11.6: 3L5 (Diepkloof: Diepkloof): Distribution of Composited Gold Data ............... 76  Figure 11.7:  3L5 (Diepkloof: Homestead): Distribution of Raw Gold Capped Data ......... 76  Figure 11.8:  3L5 (Diepkloof: Homestead): Distribution of Composited Gold Data ........... 77  Figure 11.9: 4L3: Distribution of Raw Gold Capped Data .................................................. 81  Figure 11.10: 4L3: Distribution of Composited Gold Data..................................................... 82  Figure 11.11: 4L4: Distribution of Raw Gold Capped Data .................................................. 82  Figure 11.12: 4L4: Distribution of Composited Gold Data..................................................... 83  Figure 11.13: 4L6: Distribution of Raw Gold Capped Data ......................................................... 83  Figure 11.14: 4L6: Distribution of Composited Gold Data..................................................... 84
 Technical Report Summary of the material Tailings Storage Facilities  xi   Figure 11.15: 4L14: Distribution of Slime Raw Data ................................................................ 87  Figure 11.16: 4L14: Log Distribution of Slime Raw Data ......................................................... 88  Figure 11.17: 4L14: Distribution of Slime 6m Composited Data ............................................ 88  Figure 11.18: 4L14: Log Distribution of Slime 6m Composited Data ..................................... 89  Figure 11.19: 4L14: Distribution of Soil Raw Data ................................................................... 89  Figure 11.20: 4L14: Log Distribution of Soil Raw Data ............................................................ 90  Figure 11.21: 4L14: Distribution of Soil Raw Capped Data.................................................... 90  Figure 11.22: 4L14: Log Distribution of Soil Raw Capped Data ............................................ 91  Figure 11.23: Rooikraal: Distribution of Raw Gold Data ........................................................ 94  Figure 11.24: Rooikraal: Log Distribution of Composited Gold Data ................................... 95  Figure 11.25: 7L15: Plan showing North and South Domains ................................................ 96  Figure 11.26: 7L15: Distribution of 2015 Raw Data - North Domain ...................................... 97  Figure 11.27: 7L15: Log Distribution of 2016 Raw Data - North Domain ............................... 97  Figure 11.28: 7L15: Distribution of 2015 Raw Data - South Domain ...................................... 98  Figure 11.29: 7L15: Log Distribution of 2016 Raw Data - South Domain............................... 98  Figure 11.30: 7L15: Distribution of 3m Composited Slime Data - South Domain ................. 99  Figure 11.31: 7L15: Log Distribution of 3m Composited Slime Data - South Domain .......... 99  Figure 11.32: 7L15: Distribution of 3m Composited Slime Data - North Domain ............... 100  Figure 11.33: 7L15: Log Distribution of 3m Composited Slime Data - North Domain ........ 100  Figure 11.34:   7L4: Distribution of Capped Raw Gold Data ............................................... 104  Figure 11.35:   Distribution of Composited Raw Gold Data ................................................. 105  Figure 11.36: 7L5: Distribution of Raw Gold Data ................................................................ 105  Figure 11.37: 7L5: Distribution of Composited Gold Data................................................... 106  Figure 11.38:  7L6: Distribution of Raw Gold Data ................................................................ 106  Figure 11.39:  7L6: Distribution of Composited Gold Data................................................... 107  Figure 11.40:  7L7: Distribution of Raw Capped Gold Data ................................................ 107  Figure 11.41:  7L7: Distribution of Composited Capped Gold Data ................................... 108  Figure 11.42:  6L16: Distribution of Raw Capped Gold Data .............................................. 112  Figure 11.43:  6L16: Distribution of Composited Gold Data ................................................. 112  Figure 11.44:  6L17: Distribution of Raw Capped Gold Data .............................................. 113  Figure 11.45:  6L17: Distribution of Composited Gold Data ................................................. 113  Figure 11.46:   6L17A: Distribution of Raw Capped Gold Data ........................................... 114  Figure 11.47:   6L17A: Distribution of Composited Gold Data ............................................. 114
 Technical Report Summary of the material Tailings Storage Facilities  xii   Figure 11.48:  5A10/5l27: Distribution of Raw Gold Data ..................................................... 118  Figure 11.49:  5A10/5l27: Distribution of Composited Gold Data ....................................... 119  Figure 11.50: Boxplots for the Different Drilling Campaigns ................................................ 122  Figure 11.51: Log Probability Plot .......................................................................................... 123  Figure 11.52: Mineral Resource Classification...................................................................... 125  Figure 11.53: Mineral Resource Reconciliation (Inclusive) ................................................. 130  Figure 11.54: Total Mineral Resource Reconciliation (Inclusive) ............................................ 130  Figure 13.1:  Typical Tailing Storage Facility ........................................................................ 136  Figure 13.2:  Example of Hydraulic Mining .......................................................................... 137  Figure 13.3: Hydraulic Mining Process Diagram ................................................................ 138  Figure 13.4: Typical Mining Method for a TSF ..................................................................... 139  Figure 13.5: Example of Loading with a FEL ....................................................................... 140  Figure 13.6: Example of Loading with a FEL into a Hopper .............................................. 140  Figure 13.7: Example of Material on Conveyor ................................................................. 141  Figure 13.8: Slurry Point for Loading .................................................................................... 141  Figure 13.9: Ergo Sections .................................................................................................... 143  Figure 13.10: Hydraulic Mining with Monitor showing Distance and Angle ...................... 148  Figure 13.11: Daggafontein TSF Top Cut Mining Sequence ............................................... 150  Figure 13.12: Daggafontein TSF Middle Cut Mining Sequence ......................................... 150  Figure 13.13: Daggafontein TSF Bottom Cut Mining Sequence ......................................... 151  Figure 14.1: Process Flow Diagram ..................................................................................... 154  Figure 15.1: Above Ground Pipeline System ..................................................................... 159  Figure 15.2: Rooikraal General Arrangement - Site Layout .............................................. 161  Figure 16.1: Gold Price Historical Trendline ........................................................................ 164  Figure 16.2: Exchange Rate Trendline ................................................................................ 164  Figure 16.3: Global Gold Demand from 2013 to 2022 ...................................................... 165  Figure 16.4: Global Gold Supply from 2013 to 2022 .......................................................... 166  Figure 19.1: Global Gold Supply from 2013 to 2022 .......................................................... 179
 Technical Report Summary of the material Tailings Storage Facilities  xiii   Table 1.1:  Ergo’s Mineral Resource Statement as at 30 June 2023 (Inclusive) ......................... 5  Table 1.2:  Ergo’s Mineral Resource Statement as at 30 June 2023 (Exclusive) ........................ 6  Table 1.3:  Ergo’s Mineral Reserve Statement as at 30 June 2023 ............................................. 6  Table 2.1:  List of QPs and their Responsibilities .......................................................................... 12  Table 2.2:  List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................... 13  Table 3.1:  Footprint Areas of the Material TSFs.......................................................................... 17  Table 3.2:  Mineral Rights Information as at 30 June 2023 ........................................................ 21  Table 3.3:  Land Tenure Information ........................................................................................... 21  Table 5.1:  History and Status of the TSFs and Sand Dump ....................................................... 28  Table 5.2:  Ergo Production History ............................................................................................. 29  Table 6.1:  Origin of the TSF and Sand Dump Material ............................................................. 31  Table 7.1:  Survey Details of the TSFs and Sand Dumps ............................................................ 35  Table 7.2:  Bulk Density Information and Statistics ..................................................................... 50  Table 7.3: GMTS (3L8) Moisture Content ................................................................................... 51  Table 7.4: Diepkloof (3L5) Moisture Content ............................................................................. 51  Table 7.5:  Mooifontein (3L7) Moisture Content ......................................................................... 51  Table 7.6:  4L3 Moisture Content ................................................................................................. 52  Table 7.7:  4L4 Moisture Content ................................................................................................. 52  Table 7.8:  4L6 Moisture Content ................................................................................................. 52  Table 7.9:  4L14 Moisture Content ............................................................................................... 52  Table 7.10: Rooikraal Moisture Content ..................................................................................... 53  Table 7.11: 7L15 Moisture Content ............................................................................................. 53  Table 7.12: 7L4: Moisture Content .............................................................................................. 53  Table 7.13: 7L5: Moisture Content .............................................................................................. 53  Table 7.14: 7L6: Moisture Content .............................................................................................. 54  Table 7.15: 7L7: Moisture Content .............................................................................................. 54  Table 7.16: 6L16 Moisture Content ............................................................................................. 54  Table 7.17: 6L17 Moisture Content ............................................................................................. 54  Table 7.18: 6L17A Moisture Content .......................................................................................... 55  Table 7.19: 5A10/5L27 Moisture Content ................................................................................... 55  Table 7.20: Daggafontein Moisture Content ............................................................................ 55  Table 8.1: Laboratories Used ...................................................................................................... 58  Table 10.1: Summary of Predicted Ergo Processing Plant Performance ................................ 65
 Technical Report Summary of the material Tailings Storage Facilities  xiv   Table 11.1: Financial and Technical Data considered for Mineral Resource ........................ 70  Table 11.2: Mineral Resource Estimate Cut-off Grades ............................................................ 71  Table 11.3: Search Parameters: Inverse Distance Estimation Method .................................... 77  Table 11.4: Confidence Levels for Key Criteria for Mineral Resource Classification .............. 79  Table 11.5: Crown Complex Mineral Resource Estimate (Exclusive) ....................................... 80  Table 11.6: Search Parameters: Inverse Distance Estimation Method .................................... 84  Table 11.7: Confidence Levels of Key Criteria for Classification of the TSFs Mineral  Resources ................................................................................................................... 85  Table 11.8: City Deep Complex Mineral Resource Estimates (Inclusive) ................................ 86  Table 11.9: City Deep Complex Mineral Resource Estimates (Exclusive) ............................... 86  Table 11.10: 4L14: Search Parameters: Inverse Distance Estimation Method .................... 91  Table 11.11: Confidence Levels of Key Criteria for Classification of the 4L14 TSF Mineral  Resources ................................................................................................................... 92  Table 11.12: Knights Complex Mineral Resource Estimates (Inclusive) ................................... 93  Table 11.13: Knights Complex Mineral Resource Estimates (Exclusive) ................................... 93  Table 11.14: Rooikraal: Search Parameters: Inverse Distance Estimation Method .............. 101  Table 11.15: 7L15: Search Parameters: Inverse Distance Estimation Method ...................... 101  Table 11.16: Ergo: Confidence Levels for Key Criteria for Mineral Resource Classification  ................................................................................................................................... 102  Table 11.17: Ergo Mineral Resource Estimates (Inclusive) ...................................................... 103  Table 11.18: Ergo Mineral Resource Estimates (Exclusive) ..................................................... 103  Table 11.19: Search Parameters: Inverse Distance Estimation Method ................................ 108  Table 11.20: Confidence Levels for Key Criteria for Mineral Resource Classification .......... 109  Table 11.21: Marievale Mineral Resource Estimates (Inclusive) ............................................. 110  Table 11.22: Marievale Resource Estimates (Exclusive) .......................................................... 110  Table 11.23: Search Parameters: Inverse Distance Estimation Method ................................ 115  Table 11.24: Confidence Levels for Key Criteria for Mineral Resource Classification .......... 116  Table 11.25: Grootvlei Complex Mineral Resource Estimates (Exclusive) ............................. 117  Table 11.26: Search Parameters: Inverse Distance Estimation Method ................................ 119  Table 11.27: Confidence Levels for Key Criteria for Mineral Resource Classification .......... 120  Table 11.28: 5A10/5L27 Mineral Resource Estimates (Inclusive) ............................................ 121  Table 11.29: 5A10/5L27 Mineral Resource Estimates (Exclusive) ............................................ 121  Table 11.30: Search Parameters: Inverse Distance Estimation Method ................................ 124  Table 11.31: Confidence Levels for Key Criteria for Mineral Resource Classification .......... 124
 Technical Report Summary of the material Tailings Storage Facilities  xv   Table 11.32: Daggafontein TSF Mineral Resource Estimate (Inclusive) ................................. 125  Table 11.33: Daggafontein TSF Mineral Resource Estimate (Exclusive) ................................ 126  Table 11.34: Inclusive Mineral Resources of the 18 Material Properties as at 30 June 2023  ................................................................................................................................... 127  Table 11.35: Exclusive Mineral Resources of the 18 Material Properties as at 30 June  2023 ........................................................................................................................... 128  Table 11.36: Ergo Inclusive Mineral Resources Statement as at 30 June 2023 ..................... 129  Table 11.37: Ergo Exclusive Mineral Resources Statement as at 30 June 2023 .................... 129  Table 12.1: Reconciliation of RoM Head Grade (Au) ............................................................ 131  Table 12.2: Reconciliation of RoM Tonnage ........................................................................... 131  Table 12.3: LoM Cut-off Grade and Mineral Reserve Grades ............................................... 132  Table 12.4: Ergo TSF Mineral Reserves Statement as at 30 June 2023 ................................... 133  Table 12.5: Mineral Reserve Reconciliation............................................................................. 134  Table 13.1: Historical Ergo Operational Results ....................................................................... 135  Table 13.2: Central Rand (City Section) .................................................................................. 144  Table 13.3: Central Rand (Knights Section) ............................................................................. 144  Table 13.4: East Rand Section (Ergo Section) ......................................................................... 144  Table 13.5: Summary of Modifying Factors for LoM Plan ....................................................... 145  Table 13.6: Ergo Forecast Production from July 2023 to June 2042 ...................................... 146  Table 14.1: Ergo Process Recoveries ........................................................................................ 155  Table 16.1: Above Ground Gold Stocks in 2023 ..................................................................... 163  Table 16.2: Long Term Consensus Forecasts in Nominal Terms .............................................. 165  Table 16.3: Global Gold Production ........................................................................................ 166  Table 17.1: Ergo Water Consumption ...................................................................................... 170  Table 17.2: SLP Financial Provision Summary ........................................................................... 171  Table 17.3: Ergo Rehabilitation Financial Provision Summary ................................................ 172  Table 18.1: Capital Expenditure Summary .............................................................................. 174  Table 18.2: Ergo Capital Expenditure Estimate ....................................................................... 174  Table 18.3: City Total Capital Expenditure Summary ............................................................. 174  Table 18.4: Average LoM Operating Cost for Ergo ................................................................ 175  Table 19.1: Economic Analysis ................................................................................................. 178  Table 26.1: Qualified Person’s Details ...................................................................................... 186
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 1  1 Executive Summary  1.1 Introduction  Ergo Mining (Proprietary) Limited (Ergo) is a wholly owned subsidiary of DRDGOLD Limited (DRDGOLD).  DRDGOLD is domiciled in South Africa and listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE: DRD) and  the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE: DRD). DRDGOLD, a South African-based gold mining company,  has a 100% share in Ergo. DRDGOLD is a Tailings Storage Facilities (TSFs) retreatment company.  The TSFs Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve estimates declared in this Technical Report Summary  (this Report) are 100% attributable to DRDGOLD. The TSFs covered are Crown, City Deep, Knights, Ergo,  Marievale and Grootvlei Complexes, 5A10/5L27 sand dump and Daggafontein TSF.  The Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve estimates contained in this Technical Report Summary were  compiled and reported by the independent Qualified Persons (QPs) for DRDGOLD in accordance with  Items 601(b)(96) and 1300 through 1305 of Regulation S-K (Title 17, Part 229, Items 601(b)(96) and 1300  through 1305 of the Code of Federal Regulations) promulgated by the Securities and Exchange  Commission (SEC).  This document is the second submission of a Technical Report Summary under Regulations S-K. During  the current financial year, DRDGOLD made a decision to build future tailings storage facilities with a  synthetic water containment for ground water protection. This led to revisions in the capital estimates  used to examine the viability of the estimated Mineral Reserves.  This Technical Report Summary is based on information available until 30 June 2023. There were no  material changes between the effective and reporting dates.  1.2 Property Description  Ergo is reclaiming TSFs and sand dumps in the City of Johannesburg and the City of Ekurhuleni, Gauteng,  South Africa. The Crown and City Deep Complexes are located in the City of Johannesburg, while all  other TSFs are in the City of Ekurhuleni.  The TSFs covered in the report are from the Crown, City Deep, Knights, Ergo, Marievale and Grootvlei  Complexes, 5A10/5L27 sand dump and Daggafontein TSF. Ergo identified a total of 17 TSFs and one  sand dump to be material properties.  1.3 Mineral Rights and Ownership  Ergo’s Mineral title associated to its Mineral Resources include ownership through common law,  contractual arrangements, Prospecting Rights, and various Mining Rights and/or Prospecting Rights  issued in terms of the provisions of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002 (Act  No. 28 of 2002) (MPRDA) as well as required Environmental Permitting. Ergo has applied to renew and  consolidate all their Mining Rights into a single Mining Right; this application is receiving attention from  the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy (DMRE). Renewal applications have been submitted  to the DMRE for each expired Mining Right. Ergo has applied to extend the consolidated Mining Right  for 30 years, which is the maximum allowable renewal period as detailed in the MPRDA.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 2  This report has considered section 24(5) of the MPRDA, as amended:  “A mining right in respect of which an application for renewal has been lodged shall despite its expiry  date remain in force until such time as such application has been granted or refused.”  The same applies to the Prospecting Rights through section 18(5) of the MPRDA.  1.4 Geology and Mineralization  The TSFs are man-made features comprising materials that have been processed through metallurgical  plants that generate residue (tailings), which are relatively uniform in comparison with the natural  deposit from which the material is derived. The variation between grades is small as the process residue  TSFs were constructed in layers. Grade variation primarily follows variations in the processing and, to a  lesser extent, the primary deposit’s characteristic.  The TSFs are the waste product of the mineral recovery process. They took the form of a liquid slurry  made of fine mineral particles - created when mined ore was crushed, milled and processed. The tailings  were pumped to TSFs which were constructed using the Upstream Deposition Methodology. Water  contained within the slurry was removed via various drainage systems and then re-used in the process  whilst the TSF was in operation. Once a TSF is decommissioned and declared dormant, water is still  drained and recovered but evaporation and seepage are the main reasons for water loss.  Rehabilitation of the side slopes and top surface of the TSF, by way of vegetation and irrigation, was  previously only implemented once the TSF was declared dormant.  1.5 Evaluation Drilling and Sampling  A qualified surveyor surveyed evaluation drill hole positions. Holes were drilled into the TSFs and samples  were taken at 1.5m intervals to determine grade distributions. The number of samples (at 1.5 m intervals),  correlated with surveying data, provided the height of the TSF and tonnage based on a bulk solid’s  density of 1.42t/m3.  The typical exploration programs (geophysics, trenching, mapping, and soil sampling) were not  undertaken on the TSFs. Evaluation drilling programs were conducted on the TSFs and sand dumps. No  exploration is required to locate TSFs, as their locations are known and established above natural ground  level.  Two drilling techniques were followed by specialized drilling contractors on the TSFs. The Reverse  Circulation (RC) method was used where auger drilling techniques could not drill to the base of the TSFs,  mainly due to the drill hole length and moisture content of the TSFs towards their bases.  With auger drilling, the rotation of a helical screw causes the blade of the screw to lift the sample to the  surface. This drilling method does not require heavy machinery to drill to the desired depth. The auger  method can be used for shallow environmental drilling, geotechnical drilling, soil engineering and  mineral deposits where the formation is soft and the hole does not collapse. This is done by pressing the  spiral rods into the ground using a drilling head machine, which can drill up to a depth of approximately  55m.  Samples were collected through the spiral at 1.5m intervals, and the spiral was cleaned with water and  brushed after every run.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 3  The RC drilling technique was chosen in preference to auger drilling in certain locations because RC  drilling could drill deeper than auger drilling. In addition, because of its higher power, RC can drill  through wet material and has better recovery percentages than auger drilling, which loses wet samples  through its spiral.  The RVN Group (Proprietary) Limited (The RVN Group) monitored the drilling and sampling process. The  methods were to an acceptable industry standard, and the results were considered appropriate for  further evaluation.  Logging was carried out as per the Ergo protocols and the QP considered it appropriate for the deposit  under consideration. Drill holes were logged on-site by the RVN Geologist. Samples of 1.5m length  intervals were taken for the entire length of the drill holes. Samples were classified, based on visual  inspection, according to whether they were slimes or soil, moist or wet and on color. All drill hole data  was provided to Ergo in electronic and hardcopy formats as drill hole logs, sample logs and assay  certificates.  1.6 Sample Preparation  As the samples were moist to wet, all samples were split on-site using the cone and quartering method.  One set was prepared for routine exploration analysis for use in the Mineral Resource estimation and the  other set for metallurgical process test work. All the samples were presented to the laboratory in a well- organized and sorted manner with easily understandable documentation, including fully completed  Sample Submission Forms.  The samples were sent to the following three laboratories for further preparation and assaying:  • MAED Metallurgical Laboratories (Proprietary) Limited (MAED) is located at Ergo’s processing  plant in Brakpan. The facility is not accredited; however is used by Ergo for its grade control and  daily sampling. Although MAED is not owned by Ergo, it is situated in the Ergo processing plant  and was supplied with all routine exploration samples.  • SGS South Africa (Proprietary) Limited (SGS) is located in Randfontein. SGS is an accredited  facility (T0265) by the South African National Accreditation System (SANAS) for the selected  analytical method. Randomly selected check samples (approximately 10% of total samples per  TSF) from MAED were sent to SGS for confirmation. SGS is independent of Ergo; and  • AngloGold Ashanti Limited Chemical Laboratory (Anglo Lab), located in Carletonville, analyzed  some check samples for 7L15 TSF in 2016/2017 as a secondary laboratory to MAED. The  laboratory no longer exists and was not SANAS accredited. The laboratory was independent of  Ergo.  The slime material has been previously processed and sample preparation only requires weighing,  drying, screening, splitting, and milling before assaying. Screening removes potentially carbonaceous  and other oversized materials to represent the material to be processed through the metallurgical plant.  1.7 Assays  The laboratories weighed the samples on receipt before dry screening to remove foreign material. The  samples were then dried at 105 ̊C, crushed (80% passing 2mm), before being riffle split and pulverized  to 75μm. The samples were then analyzed to determine the gold content by fire assay with gravimetric  finish by MAED and Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy (AAS) finish by SGS. The lower detection limit for  these methods is 0.01g/t, with no upper detection limit for the gravimetric method and a 10g/t upper
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 4  limit for AAS. The lower limit is relevant to the current project as the TSFs and sand dumps consist of  processed materials and are generally low-grade, with grades slightly higher than 10 to 20 times the  detection limit.  The laboratories were instructed to use a 100g aliquot to analyze for gold. Through the experience of  the QPs, it is known that analyzing gold in low-grade slimes, anything less than a 100g aliquot may report  inaccurate results.  1.8 Quality Assurance and Quality Control  The laboratories used in analyzing the samples have robust internal quality control checks. They routinely  insert reference material (standards and blanks) and create duplicates to internally check the accuracy  and precision of their assaying techniques. A batch is re-assayed if the quality control samples do not  perform as expected. The results of the quality control checks were provided with the sample assays  and were all found to be acceptable by the QP.  The RVN Group inserted certified quality control samples as an additional check for contamination,  precision and accuracy. The RVN Group quality control samples results were satisfactory as they  generally reported values within the expected ranges.  1.9 Metallurgical Sampling and Testing  The TSFs were portioned into logical sections for metallurgical testing based either on area, shape or  elevation. The selected intervals for compositing into the metallurgical test work samples were taken at  different elevations within the TSF to provide sufficient material for the test work.  The “as received” material was blended and divided into 2kg portions using cone and quarter  splitting.  Leaching of “as received” material was done using the following parameters, which simulates the  existing Ergo leach plant:  • pH = or > 10.5;  • precondition with lime for 1 hour or more to maintain pH at a minimum of 10.5;  • Carbon-in-Leach (CIL) with 20g/l carbon;  • NaCN addition 0,35kg/t;  • No oxygen is added in the form of hydrogen peroxide/buddled air. It is assumed that because  the bottles are unsealed, the solution will be aerated adequately;  • Leach time of seven hours;  • all samples (washed solids, carbon, solution) are submitted to MAED for gold analysis and  • Titrations are done to determine the free cyanide and lime in the solution after the seven-hour  leach. This is to determine the lime and cyanide consumption.  The metallurgical test work confirms that the material tested can be processed via the current Ergo  metallurgical plant process to recover residual gold from the TSFs assessed.  Predicted recoveries from the TSFs tested vary between 30% and 60% and are dependent on head  grade and the nature of the material. These values are typical for gold TSF processing.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 5  1.10 Mineral Resource Estimate  The Mineral Resource Estimates for the TSFs and sand dumps were adjusted for depletion as at  30 June 2023. The Mineral Resource estimate for all the TSFs and sand dumps are declared as follows:  • the point of reference is in situ for all TSFs and sand dumps. The TSFs or sand dumps themselves  are the reference points;  • no geological or other losses were applied as all material is accessible and there are no  geological structures.  • the Mineral Resource Estimates are stated as both inclusive and exclusive of Mineral Reserves as  defined in Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K; and  • Mineral Resource is 100% attributable to DRDGOLD.   • Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves as they have not demonstrated economic viability.  The total Mineral Resource Estimate for Ergo is presented in Table 1.1 to Table 1.2. The changes in the  Mineral Resource from June 2022 to June 2023 are due to the depletion of 15.98Mt at 0.34g/t Au and a  positive survey adjustment of 4.75Mt at 0.33g/t Au. The depletion includes the mining of Mineral  Resources that were not included in the LoM plan, i.e., the mining of Mineral Resources not converted  into Mineral Reserves.  Table 1.1:  Ergo’s Mineral Resource Statement as at 30 June 2023 (Inclusive)  Mineral Resource  Classification  Mineral Resource as at 30 June 2022  (Inclusive)  Mineral Resource as at 30 June 2023  (Inclusive)  Tonnes  (Mt)  Au  (g/t)  Contents  (Moz)  Tonnes  (Mt)  Au  (g/t)  Contents  (Moz)  Measured Mineral Resource 266.25 0.31 2.64 251.75 0.30 2.41  Indicated Mineral Resource 568.21 0.25 4.55 571.47 0.25 4.65  Sub-total Measured and  Indicated Mineral Resource  834.45 0.27 7.19 823.22 0.27 7.07  Inferred Mineral Resource 21.32 0.24 0.16 21.32 0.24 0.16  Notes:  1. Tonnes and grades were rounded and this may result in minor discrepancies.  2. Mineral Resources are reported inclusive of Mineral Reserves.  3. Mineral Resources have been reported in accordance with the classification criteria of Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K.  4. Mineral Resources were estimated using the $1 934/oz, R17.39 and R1 081 261/kg financial parameters and recoveries in Table 11.2.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 6  Table 1.2:  Ergo’s Mineral Resource Statement as at 30 June 2023 (Exclusive)  Mineral Resource  Classification  Mineral Resource as at 30 June 2022  (Exclusive)  Mineral Resource as at 30 June 2023  (Exclusive)  Tonnes  (Mt)  Au  (g/t)  Contents  (Moz)  Tonnes  (Mt)  Au  (g/t)  Contents  (Moz)  Measured Mineral Resource 66.04 0.26 0.55 66.45 0.26 0.56  Indicated Mineral Resource 375.41 0.25 3.06 375.30 0.25 3.06  Total Measured and  Indicated Mineral Resource  441.45 0.25 3.61 441.75 0.25 3.61  Inferred Mineral Resource 21.32 0.24 0.16 21.32 0.24 0.16  Notes:  1. Tonnes and grades were rounded and this may result in minor discrepancies.  2. Mineral Resources are reported exclusive of Mineral Reserves.  3. Mineral Resources have been reported in accordance with the classification criteria of Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K.  4. Mineral Resources were estimated using the $1 934/oz, R17.39 and R1 081 261/kg financial parameters and recoveries in Table 11.2.  1.11 Mineral Reserve Estimate  The total Mineral Reserve estimate for Ergo is presented in Table 1.3. The changes in the Mineral Reserve  from 30 June 2022 to 30 June 2023 are due to the depletion of 15.05Mt at 0.33g/t Au and a survey  adjustment of 3.50Mt at 0.30g/t Au.  Table 1.3:  Ergo’s Mineral Reserve Statement as at 30 June 2023  Mineral Reserve  Classification  Mineral Reserve as at 30 June 2022 Mineral Reserve as at 30 June 2023  Tonnes  (Mt)  Au  (g/t)  Contents  (Moz)  Tonne  (Mt)  Au  (g/t)  Contents  (Moz)  Proven Mineral Reserve 200.21 0.33 2.09 185.29 0.31 1.85  Probable Mineral Reserve 192.79 0.24 1.49 196.17 0.25 1.60  Total Mineral Reserves 393.00 0.28 3.58 381.46 0.28 3.45  Notes:  1. Tonnes and grades were rounded and this may result in minor adding discrepancies.  2. Mineral Reserve has been reported in accordance with the classification criteria of Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K.  3. Mineral Reserve is estimated using the $1 934/oz, R17.39 and R1 081 261/kg financial parameters.  4. The LoM plan cut-off grade of 0.23g/t has been applied.  5. No mining losses or dilution has been applied in the conversion process nor has a mine call factor been applied.   6. Tonnes and grade Run-of-Mine (RoM) as delivered to the plant.  7. Attributable Mineral Reserve is 100% of the total Mineral Reserve.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 7  The various modifying factors, i.e., mining, metallurgical, processing, infrastructure, economic,  marketing, legal, environmental, social, and governmental factors, are discussed in this report.  The 30 June 2023 Life-of-Mine (LoM) plan was developed for the Ergo operations and is based on the  Mineral Resource Estimate as at 30 June 2023 together with a set of modifying factors based on recent  historical results and economic inputs provided by Ergo. The assumptions applied in determining the  modifying factors and economic inputs are reasonable and appropriate. The LoM plan is sufficiently  detailed to ensure achievability and is based on historical achievements. All the inputs used in the  estimation of the Mineral Reserve have been thoroughly reviewed and can be considered technically  robust.  The current mining methods applied by Ergo are suitable for all TSFs. No selective mining will occur with  the entire TSF being processed (including Inferred Mineral Resources).  The Ergo processing plant targets a Run-of-Mine (RoM) throughput up to 1.8Mtpm. The City Deep plant  has been reconfigured to operate as a milling and pumping station to feed the Ergo processing plant  via a 50km pipeline. The City Deep plant processes material from mining areas of the Central Rand  areas of Johannesburg and is scheduled to close in 2027. Mining areas of Germiston, and some areas  of Boksburg are treated via the Knights plant, with mining operations scheduled to close in June 2024.  An average processing plant recovery of 41% has been estimated over the 19-year LoM. The recoveries  are based on metallurgical test work for the various TSFs, slimes and silted wetland areas that are  scheduled to be mined over the 19-year LoM plan.  The QP is of the opinion that all significant infrastructure and logistical requirements have been  considered and costed. It is notable that Ergo has been operating for more than 20 years and has a  very good understanding of infrastructural and logistical requirements.  A gold price of ZAR1,081,261/kg is used to support the 30 June 2023 Mineral Resource and Mineral  Reserve statements. A gold price of USD1,934/oz and an exchange rate of ZAR17.39:1USD was used in  the estimation process.  The gold price and exchange rates were considered reasonable by the QPs to support the Mineral  Resource and Mineral Reserve estimates as at 30 June 2023.  Mining Rights, Environmental Approvals and Prospecting Rights held are listed under the Ergo subsidiary.   Ergo’s Environmental Management Plans (EMPs) encompass all the activities of Ergo’s operations and  assess the environmental impacts of mining at reclamation sites, processing plants, TSFs and sand  dumps. It also outlines the closure process, including financial provisions.  There is a competing title claim to the Grootvlei Complex, as detailed in Item 3.6. On other TSFs, there  are no legal challenges to Ergo’s title at the date of the filing of this report that would prevent operations  of any of the current mineral rights or mining operations.  A closure cost of ZAR706 million has been estimated as at 30 June 2023 for the Ergo operations. The QP  is satisfied that funding for rehabilitation and mine closure is adequate. The QP is satisfied that all material  issues relating to Environmental, Social and Governance have been addressed in this document.  A total capital cost of ZAR5.106 billion is scheduled to support the 19-LoM plan, as depicted. The  breakdown of capital expenditure indicates that the majority of the capital, ZAR5.019 billion, is allocated  to the Ergo operation over the duration of the LoM plan with an additional ZAR87.7 million allocated for  the City Deep Complex. As the mining at the Knights section is scheduled to be completed in FY2025
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 8  there is no allocation of capital. The level of accuracy for the capital expenditure is at least to a  preliminary feasibility study (PFS) level (i.e., +/-25%) with a maximum level of contingency of 15%.  The planned average operating cost for the Ergo budget over the 19-year operations is estimated at a  PFS level of accuracy (i.e., +/-25%) and a total working cost of ZAR101.99/t.  The 30 June 2023 19-year LoM plan, which is the basis of the Mineral Reserve estimate, is scheduled to  mine a total of 396.102Mt at 0.28g/t and produce 48,391kg of gold over the same period. The LoM plan  includes 14.6Mt of material not included in the Mineral Reserve. The economic analysis is based on a  LoM plan that is designed to a PFS level of accuracy (i.e., +/-25%). The economic analysis conducted  by the QP indicates a net present value (NPV) of ZAR2.313 billion after capital expenditure and tax  utilizing a discount rate of 10.96%. As the Ergo operations are an on-going operation with an annual  positive cashflow, the internal rate of return (IRR) and payback period are not applicable.  The sensitivity analysis indicates that the Ergo operations are very sensitive to revenue parameters such  as gold price, exchange rate, grade, and recovery. In addition, the LoM is also very sensitive to changes  in operating costs. The sensitivity analysis indicates that the LoM is not overly sensitive to capital and  therefore, capital expenditure should be considered if the expenditure will reduce operating costs or  increase revenue. The sensitivity analysis indicates that the achievement of the LoM Plan in terms of  tonnage is critical in realizing the planned operating costs and being able to mine the individual TSFs at  the planned cut-off grade.  1.12 Permitting Requirements  Ergo is one of only a few surface operators that hold Mining Rights under the MPRDA over a large portion  of its reserves. The provisions of the MPRDA, and the definition of ‘mineral’ had inadvertently created a  gap in the Act placing the ‘minerals’ in certain TSFs beyond the regulatory reach of the MPRDA and  limiting its competency to issue rights upon application.   However, in terms of the transitional arrangements of the MPRDA, which were peremptory upon the  DMRE in the event that the petitioner met the conditions for conversion from ‘old order’ to ‘new order’,  Ergo was able to convert its old order rights, thus extending its “license to mine” into the dispensation  introduced by the MPRDA. Ergo has also submitted applications to renew all its Mining and Prospecting  Rights with the DMRE. The current Mining and Prospecting Rights have expired but remain in force until  such time that the renewal applications have been granted or refused by the DMRE. Water Use Licenses  are applied for as and when required to remain compliant with relevant legislation.  Ergo complies with all the conditions for renewal and has no reason to believe that the submitted  renewals would not be granted. Ergo is in constant communication with the DMRE and is submitting the  required information as per their requests to finalize these renewal applications.  There are conflicting title claims to Grootvlei TSFs which are detailed in Item 3.6.  1.13 Conclusion and Recommendations  The QP concludes that the protocols for drilling, sampling preparation and analysis, verification, and  security meet industry standard practices and are appropriate for the purposes of a Mineral Resource  estimate. The studies have found that the Ergo TSFs have reasonable prospects for economic extraction.  The QP is satisfied with the Quality Assurance (QA) developed by The RVN Group and the Quality Control  (QC) programs implemented, as there was no significant bias in reporting data.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 9  The QP contends that the assumptions, parameters, and methodology used for the Mineral Resource  estimates are appropriate for the style of mineralization and deposit type.  There is sufficient information to allow for decision-making in the future. The QPs recommended no  additional work.  The QP considers the conversion of Mineral Resources to Mineral Reserves to be appropriate. TSFs  reported in this document have sufficient information to be used in Mineral Reserve estimates and  demonstrate economic viability. The modifying factors applied are considered appropriate as they  contain sufficient detail to support at least a PFS level of accuracy (i.e., +/-25%), with a maximum level  of contingency of 15%.  The significant risks that could affect the Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve are:  • Limited tailings storage capacity;  • Country/Political risk;  • Security issues;  • Eskom electricity supply;  • Climate change impact;  • Threat to social and operating licenses;  • Socio-political instability or social unrest;  • Complexity of legal/regulatory compliance;  • Capital projects progress;   • Supply chain risks  and  • Depletion of Ergo Mining’s Mineral Reserves.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 10  2 Introduction  2.1 Project Background  Ergo is a subsidiary of DRDGOLD. DRDGOLD is domiciled in South Africa and listed on the Johannesburg  Stock Exchange (JSE:DRD)and the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE: DRD). DRDGOLD, a South African- based gold mining company, has a 100% share in Ergo.  TSFs’ Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve estimates declared in this Technical Report Summary (this  Report/TRS) are owned by Ergo and are 100% attributable to DRDGOLD. The TSFs covered in the report  are from the Crown, City Deep, Knights, Ergo, Marievale and Grootvlei Complexes, and 5A10/5L27 sand  dumps and Daggafontein TSF. Ergo identified a total of 17 TSFs and one sand dump to be material  properties and have been described extensively in this report. Ergo has a total of 98 TSFs, inclusive of 80  smaller TSFs and clean-up sites.  The Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve estimates contained in this Technical Report Summary were  compiled and reported by the QPs for DRDGOLD in accordance with Items 601(b)(96) and 1300 through  1305 of Regulation S-K (Title 17, Part 229, Items 601(b)(96) and 1300 through 1305 of the Code of Federal  Regulations) promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).  This document is the second submission of a Technical Report Summary under Subpart 1300 of  Regulation S-K. The Report is based on scientific and technical information for the properties and known  to the QPs as at the effective date.  The material TSFs are at different mining stages as presented below:  • Crown (3L5, 3L7 and 3L8): The TSFs are at an advanced exploration stage, with all TSFs classified  as Indicated Mineral Resources.  • City Deep (4L3, 4L4 and 4L6): The Complex is at a development stage, with all TSFs declared as  Measured Mineral Resources and Proven Mineral Reserves.  • Knights (4L14): The Complex is at a development stage, with TSFs reported as Measured Mineral  Resources and Proven Mineral Reserves.  • Ergo (Rooikraal and 7L15): The Rooikraal is at the production stage and 7L15 is at the  development stage with Measured/Indicated Mineral Resources and Proven/Probable Mineral  Reserves declared.  • Marievale (7L4, 7L5, 7L6 and 7L7): The Complex is at a development stage with TSFs reported as  Measured Mineral Resources and Proven Mineral Reserves.  • Grootvlei (6L16, 6L17 and 6L17A): The Complex is at an advanced exploration stage with two  TSFs reported as Measured Mineral Resources and one TSF reported as Indicated Mineral  Resources.  • 5A10/5L27 Sand Dumps: The two sand dumps are joined. Measured Mineral Resource and  Proven Mineral Reserve were declared. The sand dump is at the production stage through  trucking to the Ergo Plant.  • Daggafontein TSF: The TSF is at a development stage, with a significant amount (192.79Mt)  declared as Indicated Mineral Resource and Probable Mineral Reserve. A smaller amount  (21.32Mt) of the material is reported as Inferred Mineral Resource due to inaccessibility because  of the presence of surface water.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 11  2.2 Terms of Reference and Purpose of the Technical Report  Ergo commissioned the QPs from The RVN Group to update the Technical Report Summary to report  their Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve estimates.  This report details the results of the evaluation drilling, sampling, assaying, bulk density determination,  surveying and metallurgical test work and the resultant Mineral Resource, modifying factors and Mineral  Reserve estimations.  This document reports the Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve estimates for the material TSFs. The TSFs  in this report are clustered into complexes, except for the 5A10/5L27 sand dumps and Daggafontein  TSF, which are reported separately due to their size and location:  • Crown;  • City Deep;  • Knights;  • Ergo;  • Grootvlei;  • Marievale;  • 5A10/5L27; and  • Daggafontein.  This report is the second Technical Report Summary for DRDGOLD prepared under the SEC's Subpart  1300 of Regulation S-K disclosure requirements. During the current financial year, DRDGOLD made a  decision to build future tailings storage facilities with a synthetic water containment for ground water  protection. This led to revisions in the capital estimates used to examine the viability of the estimated  Mineral Reserves. This report is an updated version of the first Technical Report Summary entitled  “Technical Report Summary of the material Tailings Storage Facilities”, with an effective date of 30 June  2022. The same QPs were retained.  The effective date of the Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve estimates for the TSFs is 30 June 2023.  The QPs noted that there had been no material change to the information between the effective date  and the signature date of the Report.  Ergo is a South African gold producer, recovering gold from the retreatment of surface TSFs located in  the Central and Eastern areas of the Gauteng Province.  The RVN Group is a South African-based mining consulting firm that provides services and advice to the  local and international mineral industries. Ergo has retained The RVN Group since 2016 to manage  drilling activities, estimate Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves and compile technical reports. The  QPs from The RVN Group prepared this Technical Report Summary.  2.3 Participants and Areas of Responsibilities  The following personnel were nominated to the project team, and their specific areas of responsibility  are shown in Table 2.1. The qualifications and appropriate experience of the authors are summarized in  Table 2.1.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 12  Table 2.1:  List of QPs and their Responsibilities  Personnel Company Qualifications Responsibility  Mpfariseni Mudau,  Pr.Sci.Nat.  The RVN Group  B.Sc. (Hons) Geology,  Graduate Diploma in Mining Engineering,  M.Sc. Mining Engineering,  B.Sc. Applied Mathematics and Statistics,  SACNASP Registration No.: 400305/12  Item  1 to 11 and  20 to 25  Steven Rupprecht,  HFSAIMM  The RVN Group  B.Sc. Mining Engineering,  Ph.D. Mechanical Engineering  SAIMM Registration No.: 701013   Item  12 to 19    The QP responsible for reporting and signing off on the exploration activities and Mineral Resource  estimates is Mr Mpfariseni Mudau. Mr Mudau is a Professional Natural Scientist (with registration number  400305/12) registered with the South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions (SACNASP) with  more than five years of experience relevant to the drilling, estimation and reporting of TSF Mineral  Resources. Mr Mudau works for The RVN Group and is independent of Ergo and DRDGOLD.  The QP with responsibility for reporting and signing off on the Mineral Reserve estimates is Professor  Steven Rupprecht. Professor Rupprecht is an Honorary Fellow of the Southern African Institute of Mining  and Metallurgy (SAIMM with registration number 701013) with more than five years of experience  relevant to the estimation and reporting of TSF Mineral Reserves. Professor Rupprecht is an associate of  The RVN Group and is independent of Ergo and DRDGOLD.  2.4 Sources of Information  Most of the technical information utilized for the preparation of this report was obtained from the drilling  campaigns that The RVN Group supervised. Other technical information and engineering data were  sourced from Ergo, their contractors and third-party reports available in the public domain. These  sources are acknowledged in the body of the report, and some are listed in Item 24.  Information provided by the registrant upon which the QPs relied is listed in Item 25. The QPs also had  discussions with the management and consultants of Ergo.  In preparing the report, the QPs have relied upon contributions from a range of technical, financial,  environmental and engineering specialists for the disciplines outside their expertise. Based on the  support and advice from the specialists, the QPs consider it reasonable to rely upon the  information/advice provided.  2.5 Site Inspection  Mr Mpfariseni Mudau visited the drilling projects on commencement, during, and completion of the  drilling campaigns. These visits were conducted in 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022 and 2023.  Mr Mudau further visited the sample sorting and storage facilities at the Ergo processing plant in Brakpan.  On several occasions, Mr Mudau also visited MAED and SGS where the samples were prepared and  analyzed. Mr Mudau also visited the mining sites on several occasions.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 13  The objectives of the site visits were to:  • familiarize the QP with the TSFs and the general infrastructure;  • inspect the drilling and sampling sites;  • conduct assessment of sampling methodologies, quality control processes and data validation;  • provide training and conduct planned task observations;  • validate the geological logging;  • inspect the sample storage area and the sample preparation methods;  • discuss and agree on the analytical method with the laboratories; and  • collection of database and additional technical information.  Steven Rupprecht conducted site visits to the TSFs in 2020, 2021, 2022 and 2023.  2.6 Units, Currencies and Survey Coordinate System  Unless otherwise stated, all figures in this report are expressed in metric units. All geographic coordinates  are UTM WGS84 system or LO29 Meridian. The elevation Datum is the mean sea level.  All monetary figures expressed in this report are in South African Rand (ZAR) and United States Dollar  (USD).  A point is used as the decimal marker, and the comma is used for the thousand’s separator (for numbers  larger than 999).  Unless otherwise stated, the word ‘tonnes’ denotes a metric ton (1,000kg). Table 2.2 presents the  abbreviations used in the report.  Table 2.2:  List of Abbreviations  Units Description  % percentage   ̊ degrees   ̊C Degrees Centigrade  ‘ minutes  “ seconds   μm Micron  3D three-dimensional  AAS Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy  AMD acid mine drainage  AMIS African Mineral Standards  amsl above mean sea level  Anglo Lab AngloGold Ashanti Limited Chemical Laboratory  Au gold  CIL Carbon-in-Leach  cm centimeter(s)  CoV Coefficient of Variation  CRM Certified Reference Material  Crown Mines Crown Mines Limited  DMRE Department of Mineral Resources and Energy  DRDGOLD DRDGOLD Limited  EIA Environmental Impact Assessment
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 14  Units Description  EMP Environmental Management Plan  EMPr Environmental Management Program  Ergo Ergo Mining (Proprietary) Limited  ERPM East Rand Proprietary Mines Limited  Eskom Electricity Supply Commission  g gram(s)  g/l grams per liter  g/t grade grams per ton  Geografix Geografix Surveys CC  GPS Global Positioning System  ha hectares = 100m-by-100m  HRD Human Resource Development  IDW Inverse Distance Weighting  InSAR Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar  IRR internal rate of return  ISO International Organization for Standardization  JSE Johannesburg Stock Exchange  kg kilograms = 1,000 grams  kg/t kilograms per ton  km kilometer(s) = 1,000 meters  km2 square kilometers  koz kilo ounces= 1,000 ounces (troy)  kt kilotons  ktpm kilotons per month  LED Local Economic Development  liter Metric unit of volume = 1,000cm3  LoM Life-of-Mine  m meter(s)  m2 square meters  MAED MAED Metallurgical Laboratories (Proprietary) Limited  mamsl meters above mean sea level  mm millimeter(s) = meter/1000  Moz Million ounces (troy)  MR Mining Right  Mt Million metric tons  Mtpa Million tons per annum  MWP Mining Works Program  NaCN sodium cyanide  NERSA National Energy Regulator of South Africa  NN Nearest Neighbor  NNR National Nuclear Regulator  NPV net present value  NYSE New York Stock Exchange  oz Troy ounces = 31.1034768 grams  pH quantitative measure of the acidity or basicity of a solution  ppm parts per million  PR Prospecting Right  PWP Prospecting Work Program
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 15  Units Description  QA Quality Assurance  QC Quality Control  QP Qualified Persons  RC Reverse Circulation  RoM Run-of-Mine  SANAS South African National Accreditation System  SCADA supervisory control and data acquisition  SEC Securities and Exchange Commission  SGS SGS South Africa (Proprietary) Limited  S-K 1300 Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K under the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934  SLP Social and Labor Plan  t metric tonne = 1,000 kilograms  t/m3 density - tonne per cubic meter  TCTA Trans-Caledon Tunnel Authority  The RVN Group The RVN Group (Proprietary) Limited  this Report Technical Report Summary  tonnes metric tonnes = 1,000 kilograms   TPMS Tailings Performance Management System  USD United States Dollars  WGS84 World Geographic System 1984  WUL Water Use License  ZAR South African Rand    2.7 Independence  The QPs or The RVN Group received a fee for preparing this Technical Report Summary in accordance  with standard professional consulting practice. The QPs or The RVN Group will receive no other benefit  for the preparation of this report. Neither QPs, The RVN Group, nor any of its employees and associates  employed in the preparation of this report has any pecuniary or beneficial interest in Ergo, DRDGOLD,  or their associates.  The QPs consider themselves independent.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 16  3 Property Description  3.1 Location and Operations Overview  Ergo is reclaiming TSFs in the City of Johannesburg and the City of Ekurhuleni, Gauteng, South Africa.  The Crown and City Deep Complexes are located in the City of Johannesburg while all other TSFs and  the sand dumps are located in the City of Ekurhuleni, as shown in Figure 3.1.  This TRS covers a total of 17 material TSFs of varying sizes and one sand dump. The smaller TSFs or clean- up sites (79 in total) are not extensively covered in this report for various reasons: they are not material  as most are too small, while others are not part of an immediate plan to be included in the Life-of-Mine   (LoM) plan by Ergo (e.g., Fleurhof Complex). The total of 17 TSFs and one sand dump contribute  approximately 90% of the total Mineral Resource, while the remaining 80 smaller TSFs and clean-up sites  only contribute 10% to the total Ergo Mineral Resource estimates. Of the total Ergo Mineral Reserve  declared, 93% of the contribution by tonnage is from the material properties. Thus, Ergo considers the  80 smaller TSFs and clean-up sites not material (Figure 3.2).  The sand dumps (5A10 and 5L27) are combined to form one elongated structure of varying heights. The  two small dumps on the north and east are known as 5L27 and the center sand dump is 5A10. These  dumps are joined and have similar properties. They were modelled as 5A10/5L27 but then separated for  reporting Mineral Resource estimates.  Of the total material properties, 17 are slime TSFs and one is a sand dump (5A10/5L27). Slime is a very  fine material, while sand is course-grained.  The areas occupied by the 17 material TSFs and a sand dump are shown in Table 3.1. Engineering  parameters and topography determined the size and shapes of the properties at the time of deposition  of the waste products from the respective processing plants.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 17  Table 3.1:  Footprint Areas of the Material TSFs  TSF Centre Coordinates  Area  (ha)  Maximum Height  (m)  Crown  3L5 (Diepkloof) 26013’34.95”S, 27057’09.70”E 130.00 67.50  3L7 (Mooifontein) 26013’35.85”S, 27013’35.85”E 87.00 88.50  3L8 (GMTS) 26014’23.75”S, 27058’07.91”E 147.00 94.50  City Deep  4L3 26°13'51.72"S, 28° 5’50.63”E 36.61 40.50  4L4 26°13’59.91”S, 28° 6’9.99”E 23.81 16.50  4L6 26°13’59.56”S, 28° 7’15.02”E 27.15 19.50  Knights   4L14 26°12'23.76"S, 28° 8'54.38"E 10.27 37.50  Ergo  Rooikraal 26021’48.16” S, 28017’40.88”E 141.04 47.50  7L15 26°19'49.59"S, 28°24'46.01"E 73.28 37.50  Marievale  7L4  26°19'30.94"S, 28°30'5.07"E 133.48 25.00  7L5 26°19'55.08"S, 28°30'3.08"E 26.91 22.50  7L6 26°19'56.20"S, 28°30'22.96"E 46.73 34.50  7L7 26°20'51.49"S, 28°30'5.43"E 47.00 13.50  Grootvlei  6L16 26°14'31.94"S, 28°28'55.51"E 112.13 31.50  6L17 26°13'18.99"S, 28°29'23.20"E 110.02 40.50  6L17A 26°14'0.25"S, 28°29'42.67"E 85.05 25.50  5A10/5L27  5A10/5L27 26°13'9.79"S, 28°23'51.84"E 202.00 68.00*  Daggafontein  Daggafontein TSF 26017’56.48” S, 28031’55.10”E 462.21 64.50  Total Area (ha)  1,901.69   Note: *estimated height as drilling could not reach the base of the sand dump, only drilled up to 52.5m.  .
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 18    Figure 3.1:  Location of the Material TSFs and Infrastructure (the material properties of Ergo)
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 19    Figure 3.2:  Location of the Material Properties in Relation to the Smaller TSFs and Clean-up Operations
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 20  Other material properties of Ergo include:  • Knights Plant;  • Ergo Plant;  • Brakpan/Withok TSF;  • pump stations;  • a network of pipelines;  • City Milling Plant;  • Central Water Facility; and  • solar power project.  3.2 Mineral Rights Conditions  TSFs, in most instances, are considered movable and capable of being owned under the common law  separately from land. As such, they are distinguishable from underground minerals, which can no longer  be individually owned in South African but in respect of which the Department of Mineral Resources  and Energy (DMRE) may issue Mining Rights in terms of the MPRDA of 2002 (MPRDA), as amended. The  construct of the MPRDA caused the minerals in certain TSFs to therefore fall outside the regulatory reach  of the MPRDA. The transitional arrangements of the MPRDA provided for existing operations, however,  to convert old order rights (Mining Licenses held under the previous dispensation) to new order rights.  Ergo successfully converted its old order licenses to Mining Rights and is seeking to consolidate them  into a single mining right. In terms of reserves in TSFs which are owned by common law and are not  covered by a Mining right, Environmental and Waste Management Approvals are obtained from the  DMRE for the retreatment of such TSFs.  For an exploration project, a Prospecting Right (PR), valid for five years, is issued, and for a mining  operation, a Mining Right (MR) valid for up to 30 years, is issued. The PR, which is conducted in terms of  a Prospecting Work Program (PWP), is renewable for a further three years. The MR is undertaken in terms  of the Mining Works Program (MWP), Social and Labor Plan (SLP), and an approved Environmental  Management Program (EMPr), which can be renewed for a further 30 years. A PR or MR may be  cancelled or suspended subject to Section 47 of the MPRDA.  The MPRDA contains provisions relating to the ownership and Broad-Based Socio-Economic  Empowerment Charter. A shareholding, equity, interest or participation in the mining right or joint  venture, or a controlling interest in a company/joint venture may not be encumbered, ceded,  transferred, mortgaged, let, sublet, assigned, alienated, or otherwise disposed of without the written  consent of the Minister, except in the case of a change of controlling interest in listed companies.  The SLP is submitted to the DMRE every five years for approval, while the SLP’s annual progress report is  submitted annually to the DMRE.  The Environmental Management Plan (EMP) and Water Use License (WUL) are assessed for compliance  annually.  3.3 Mineral Title  Ergo’s title in its TSFs is vested in either common law ownership Mining and Prospecting Rights and third- party agreements as presented in Table 3.2, including Environmental Approvals in respect of the same.  Ergo has submitted applications for the renewal of its mining rights and prospecting rights. The renewal
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 21  applications were made to the DMRE on different dates per mining right. Ergo is in the process of a  consolidation of its mining rights and as such has applied to extend the mining period for a further 30  years through its consolidated MWP. The period of 30 years is the maximum period allowable for a Mining  Right renewal as detailed in the MPRDA, as amended.  This report has considered Section 24(5) of the MPRDA, as amended:  “A mining right in respect of which an application for renewal has been lodged shall despite its expiry  date remain in force until such time as such application has been granted or refused.”  The same applies to the prospecting right (section 18 (5) of the mentioned Act).  Freehold landowners are presented in Table 3.3. Ergo owns a significant portion of the freehold where  the TSFs and sand dumps are located. Where Ergo does not own the property, use and access  agreements are in place with third-party landowners. Access to the TSFs for Prospecting Right purposes  is enabled through the provisions in the MPRDA.  Table 3.2:  Mineral Rights Information as at 30 June 2023  Complex  Permit  Holder  Permit Type  Reference  Number with  the DMRE  Expiry Date  Renewal  Submission  Application  Date  Renewal  Reference  Number with  the DMRE  Crown Ergo Mining Right GP184MR 20/06/2014 24/03/2014 GP 10022 MR  City Deep Ergo Mining Right GP185MR 20/06/2014 24/03/2014 GP 10023 MR  Knights Ergo Mining Right GP187MR 20/06/2018 13/03/2018 GP 10067 MR  Ergo Ergo Mining Right GP158MR 27/10/2021 23/07/2021 GP 10097 MR  Marievale (7L4) Ergo Prospecting Right GP10348 19/02/2022 18/03/2022 GP10348PR  Marievale (7L5,  7L6 and 7L7)  Ergo  Common Law  Ownership  Not  applicable  Not  applicable  Not  applicable  Not  applicable  Grootvlei Ergo Prospecting Right GP10044PR 13/10/2025  Not  applicable  GP 10592 PR  5A10/5L27 Ergo Mining Right GP158MR 27/10/2021 23/07/2021 GP 10097 MR  Daggafontein TSF Ergo Mining Right GP158MR 27/10/2021 23/07/2021 GP 10097 MR      Table 3.3:  Land Tenure Information  Reclamation Sites Surface Rights Owner  Crown Complex Ergo and Innovative Property Solutions (iPROP)  City Deep Complex Ergo and iPROP  Knights Complex Ergo, Abland, Living Africa and EMM  Ergo Complex Ergo and Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality  Marievale Complex Ergo, Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality, Scarlet Sun and STI Consulting  Grootvlei Complex Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality and various private owners  5A10/5L27 Sand Dump Marcon Group  Daggafontein TSF Ergo
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 22  3.4 Violation and Fines  Ergo has no fines resulting from violating the mineral rights conditions.  3.5 Royalties  Ergo is not required to pay royalties to the State, nor does it receive royalties from any other operation.  Royalties in South Africa are guided by the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Royalty Act, 2002 (Act  No. 28 of 2008) (MPRRA).  Ergo does not pay royalty on the retreatment of TSFs and sand dumps, as the treatment of TSFs and  sand dumps does not trigger the requirement to pay royalties.  3.6 Legal Proceedings and Significant Encumbrances to the Property  The QP was advised by Ergo that there are no material legal challenges concerning its Mineral Resource  and Mineral Reserve, except for the Grootvlei complex. Legal challenges related to the ownership of  the 7L5, 7L6 and 7L7 Marievale dumps, as disclosed in the prior year’s Technical Report Summary, have  been resolved through a settlement agreement with the landowners. The QPs find it reasonable to rely  on the legal opinion provided by Ergo.   From the documentation reviewed and input by the relevant Technical Specialists, the QPs could not  identify any significant factors or risks with regard to title permitting, surface ownership, environmental  and community factors that would prevent the evaluation or economic extraction of the TSFs. The QPs  were assured that Ergo Mining complies with all title and environmental permitting requirements. The  QPs were informed by Ergo Mining that no significant factors or risks might affect access, title, or the  right or ability to perform work on the TSFs, except for the Grootvlei complex.  Grootvlei Complex: Ergo was granted prospecting rights by DMRE over Grootvlei dumps 6L16, 6L17 and  6L17A in July 2022. During the 2022 financial year, an external party raised a conflicting claim of common  law ownership of 6L16, 6L17 and 6L17A TSFs. Although the claim was based on common law ownership  and no attempt has been made to set aside the prospecting rights over the TSFs, the Grootvlei TSFs have  been excluded since 2022 from the Mineral Reserves statement and the Life-of-Mine (LoM) plan but  included in the Mineral Resources statement.  Marievale Complex: Ergo has submitted a renewal application to the DMRE for the prospecting right it  holds over 7L4 TSF, which is still being considered by the DMRE. EBM Projects, the landowner of the  majority of the freehold under the 7L4 TSF and the common law owner of the TSF, has been placed into  liquidation. Prior to liquidation, a draft agreement was in progress for the sale of the TSF to Ergo, where  it would undertake to:  • Make a nominal payment;  • Assume all liability for the facility;  • Obtain all permitting required;  • Suitably remove the TSF and  • Rehabilitate the land.  Ergo is continuing the discussions with the administration responsible for the EBM Projects liquidation and  has no reason to believe that this agreement will not be concluded in Erg’s favour in due course. Ergo
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 23  believes that the sale of 7L4 TSF will still take place due to the long-term environmental liability associated  with the TSF if not reclaimed and processed.  Ergo acquired the Marievale TSFs 7L5, 7L6 and 7L7 – in terms of a written notarial executed deed of sale  during 2019 and took possession of the TSFs on 8 April 2019. It has since also obtained the requisite  National Environmental Management Act, 1998 regulatory approvals to retreat the said TSFs. During the  2022 financial year, the owner of the land on which 7L5, 7L6 and 7L7 are situated – an estimated 36.5  million tonnes out of the total 54.1 million tonnes comprising the Marievale cluster – notified Ergo that in  its view, the said TSFs had acceded to the land, and that it had become the owner of the TSFs. Ergo  disputed the claim of legal title and referred the matter to arbitration as all ownership requirements were  met when the TSFs were purchased by Ergo. Following the lodging of legal proceedings, the parties  settled the dispute and Ergo entered into a commercial arrangement with the land-owner whereby the  landowner has renounced its entire right, title and interest in and to the TSFs in the favour of Ergo against  payment of an agreed sum. The 7L4, 7L5, 7L6 and 7L7 TSFs have been classified as Mineral Reserves in  FY2022 and FY2023  4 Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography  4.1 Topography, Elevation and Vegetation  The project areas fall in the Grassland Biome of South Africa. The Grassland Biome is found on the high  central plateau of South Africa and the inland areas of Kwazulu-Natal and the Eastern Cape.  The topography is mainly flat and elevation ranges between 1,560mamsl and 1,700mamsl.  Natural vegetation for the project is limited to areas outside the urban footprint. Within the urban  environment where most of the TSFs are to be reclaimed, little vegetation occurs in its natural state.  The TSFs and sand dumps are situated in highly urbanized and industrialized areas with limited fauna  and flora. The TSFs are man-made and the trees and grasses on the TSFs have been planted to prevent  dust and erosion from the TSFs.  4.2 Access, Towns and Regional Infrastructure  The TSFs and sand dumps are situated in the Gauteng Province of South Africa. Gauteng is the most  industrialized province in South Africa and has adequate infrastructure. All the regional and on-site  infrastructure that is required for mining is well established. There is a good supply chain for all necessary  consumables and equipment in or near the mine sites.  The areas surrounding the mine sites have good health facilities (i.e., public and private hospitals) and  education facilities (i.e., ranging from pre-primary to secondary and tertiary education levels).  A good road transportation system can be found in the area. The TSFs and sand dumps are well serviced  by highways, paved regional roads and a network of dirt tracks that the Ergo utilized to access mining  and project visits. The QPs consider access to the TSFs to be in good condition. For international supplies  or travel, the OR Tambo and Lanseria International Airports, in Kempton Park and Lanseria, respectively,  are well-positioned to service Ergo.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 24  Tele-communication on the TSFs and sand dumps is good for all major network providers. Most parts of  the project areas are fully covered by the third or fourth-generation (3G or 4G) wireless mobile  telecommunications technology. Other areas are now covered by high-end 5G technology.  Item 15 presents the infrastructure in more detail.  4.3 Climate  A summer rainfall climate prevails in the areas. Summer rain occurs mainly as thunderstorms with a mean  annual precipitation of approximately 680mm, and evaporation is about 1,800mm per year. Winds are  generally light and blow predominantly from the northwest. Winters are cold and dry. Extreme weather  conditions occur in the form of frost (2 to 20 occurrences per annum) and the occasional hailstorm.  The average annual temperature for the year is approximately 19 ̊C, with average maximum  temperatures ranging between 22 ̊C and 32 ̊C and average minimum temperatures ranging between  2 ̊C and 18 ̊C. The hottest months are from December to February. During April and May, there is a  noticeable drop in temperature, which signals the commencement of winter. The coldest months are  June and July. Rains and temperature have minimal effects on operations.  The area generally has a high evaporation rate in the summer months from November to January. This  gives rise to high relative humidity. Evaporation is greater in summer than in winter due to higher ambient  temperatures.  There are no long-term associated climatic risks other than those associated with climate change and  global warming, and the operating season is year-round with minor interruptions.  4.4 Infrastructure and Bulk Service Supplies  The TSFs and sand dumps are situated in the well-developed province of Gauteng and have the most  major supplies. All the regional and on-site infrastructure that is required for mining and processing is well  established. There is a good supply chain for all necessary consumables and equipment in or near the  mine sites. Item 15 of this report details the infrastructure relevant to Ergo.  The TSFs and sand dumps are located near hospitals offering basic and advanced medical care.  The project areas are supplied with bulk electricity from the regional grid supplied by Eskom, the national  power supplier, or by the local municipality. Like most parts of South Africa, the operations are affected  by occasional load shedding implemented by Eskom during periods of constrained power generation.  Potable water is supplied by Rand Water, process water is recycled from the Brakpan/Withok TSF (65%)  with the balance of the water make-up by permitted abstraction from natural water courses and the  balance from the dewatering of the mining void (AMD)r. Ergo recycles most of the water.  4.5 Personnel Sources  Where mining activities take place, Ergo has commissioned contractors to conduct mining and secure  the TSFs. Where there are no mining activities, Ergo has employed contractors to maintain the TSFs (to  minimize dust and monitor water levels on the TSFs and sand dumps) and security companies to secure  the properties.  Ergo employees conduct site inspections on a regular basis of the project TSFs and sand dumps.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 25  Should additional employees be required, the surrounding areas have a large semi-skilled and skilled  workforce. The cities of Johannesburg and Ekurhuleni have a large source of talent for trades and  technical management.  The majority of employees hired by Ergo are sourced from Gauteng Province, where all the properties  are situated. Contractors and specialist consultants are also predominantly based in Gauteng Province.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 26  5 History  5.1 Ownership  Anglo American Corporation commissioned the Ergo facility (processing plant) on the East Rand in 1977.  The objective was to recover gold and uranium and produce sulfuric acid from surface tailings material  via a metallurgical flotation process. In 1985, a carbon in leach (CIL) plant was added. In 1990, when  the uranium market collapsed, the uranium plant and the larger of the two acid plants were closed. In  1998, Ergo became part of Anglo Gold Limited (later Anglo Gold Ashanti Limited). In 2005, Ergo was  closed.  In 2007, Ergo Mining (Pty) Limited was formed as a joint venture between DRDGOLD and Mintails to re- establish the tailings treatment operations. A year later (2008), re-commissioning of the plant started,  and Ergo acquired the Mintails’ stake in the gold recovery phase of the project. In 2009 a second feed  line was brought into the Ergo plant from the Elsburg TSFs and the plant capacity doubled to 1.2 Mt per  month. In 2010, DRDGOLD acquired the balance of Mintails’ interest.  5.1.1 Crown Complex  Crown Mines Limited (Crown Mines), previously known as Rand Mines (Milling and Mining) Limited,  belonged to Rand Mining Proprietary Group, which commenced retreatment operations in 1982. At  least 90% of the Crown Complex material was deposited onto the Crown TSF Complex Facility by Crown  Gold Recoveries, which retreated processed material originally mined from the historical mines in the  area. The Crown complex is situated on the farm Mooifontein 225-IQ.  5.1.2 City Deep complex  City Deep belonged to Rand Mines (Milling and Mining) Limited and fell under the same group as Crown  Gold Recovery. Records indicate that in 1986, City Deep Complex belonged to City Deep Rand Mines.  Most of City Deep TSFs are located on the farms Elandsfontein 107-IR, Kliprivierfontein 106-IR and  Doornfontein 92-IR.  5.1.3 Knight Complex  Most of the TSFs in the Knights complex were previously owned by Simmer and Jack, dating back to  1986. Witwatersrand Gold Mine owned other TSFs.  The Knights complex is situated on the farms  Elandsfontein 90 IR, Driefontein 87 IR and Driefontein 85 IR.  5.1.4 Ergo Complex  The Ergo Complex was created by East Rand Proprietary Mines Limited (ERPM) around 1958. ERPM in  Boksburg was established more than 125 years ago as an underground gold mining operation and  produced gold from 1896 to 2008. ERPM had approximately 15 shafts in the Elsburg area, which were  the primary sources of the tailings material deposited onto TSFs 4L47/48/49 and 50. The Ergo complex is  situated on the farms Klippoortje 110-IR and 112-IR.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 27  5.1.5 Marievale Complex  Marievale Complex was previously owned by General Mining Union Corporation (Gencor) and  operated by Marievale Consolidated Mines. The primary commodity was gold, and the secondary  commodity was silver. The first year of production was 1939. Mining stopped in 1998. The Marievale  complex is located on the farm Vlakfontein 281-IR.  5.1.6 Grootvlei Complex  Grootvlei was previously owned by Gencor and operated by Grootvlei Proprietary Mines Limited from  1967 to 1981 at an average grade of 5g/t of gold. The registered owner in 1986 was DUMPCO Limited.  Mining stopped in 2005. Grootvlei is located on the farm Grootvlei 124-IR.  5.1.7 5A10/5L27  The Consolidated Modderfontein Mine deposited mine tailings on the 5A10/5L27 sand dump during the  1980s. Before then, the sand dump was owned by the Government Gold Mine. The property is located  on Modderfontein 76 IR.  5.1.8 Daggafontein TSF  Daggafontein TSF was previously owned by Daggafontein Mines. Tailings deposition onto the TSF  commenced around 1982 and ceased around 2002 when the mine ceased operations. Currently, the  TSF is owned by Ergo. The TSF is located on farm Rietfontein 276-IR.  5.2 Construction of the TSFs and Sand Dumps  The TSFs were constructed in accordance with the then Chamber of Mines guidelines and best practices  at the time. The guidelines provided for a starter wall, toe drain and blanket drain. Gravity penstocks  were provided on all TSFs, which were subsequently replaced with elevated penstocks during their  operations. The final design heights for a ‘typical’ TSF operated using day-walls were generally between  30m and 100m.  All the TSFs were constructed as upstream TSFs. Upstream TSFs need to be raised slowly to allow the solid  tailings time to dry and consolidate enough to support a new level of the TSF.  The sand dump material was deposited by trucks or cocopans.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 28  Table 5.1 presents the history and status of TSFs and the sand dump. The TSFs and the sand dump are  considered old, and the properties have been dormant for a considerable number of years.  Table 5.1:  History and Status of the TSFs and Sand Dump  TSF/Sand Dump  Commissioned  Date  Decommissioned  Date  Status as at  30 June 2023  Age since becoming  Dormant (Years)  Crown  3L5  +/-1920 2009  Dormant  13 3L7 Dormant  3L8 Dormant  City Deep  4L3  1965 1984  Development  38 4L4 Development  4L6 Development  Knights  4L14 1960 2000 Development 22  Ergo  Rooikraal 1985 2012 Development 10  7L15 1964 1986 Dormant 36  Marievale  7L4 1964 1998 Dormant 24  7L5 1964 1998 Dormant 24  7L6 1964 1998 Dormant 24  7L7 1964 1998 Dormant 24  Grootvlei  6L16  1964  2005 Dormant 17  6L17 2005 Dormant 17  6L17A 2005 Dormant 17  5A10/5L27  5A10/5L27 1960 1986 Mining NA  Daggafontein  Daggafontein 1970 2003 Dormant 18    5.3 Previous Exploration and Mine Development  5.3.1 Previous Evaluation Drilling  Previous evaluation drilling was completed on the TSFs in the 1970s by Anglo-American and from 2006  to 2008 by Ergo and Mintails SA (Proprietary) Limited. The QP was made aware of these activities;  however, the QP did not use data acquired before 2008 in this report as the QP could not locate some  of the data and or perform data quality assessment and validation satisfactorily.  5.3.2 Previous Development  In 1976, the construction of the processing plant and associated infrastructure commenced and Ergo  formally came into production on 25 February 1978.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 29  Table 5.2 presents Ergo’s production data over the last five years.  Table 5.2:  Ergo Production History  Date  Tonnes Processed  (Mt)  Yield Au  (g/t)  Gold Produced  (kg)  Gold Produced  (koz)  30 June 2019 23.2 0.19 4,493 144  30 June 2020* 20.2 0.20 3,989 128  30 June 2021 23.0 0.19 4,263 137  30 June 2022 22.1 0.19 4,156 134  30 June 2023 17.3** 0.23*** 3,931 127  Note: *production was affected by COVID-19 national lockdown.    ** The reduction in tonnage was due to significant load shedding at the beginning of the financial year, the depletion of high-volume  reclamation sites and delays experienced in obtaining the necessary authorizations to commence the reclamation of a major reclamation site,  Rooikraal.  ***The yield increased by 21% to 0.227g/t (FY2022: 0.19g/t) as a result of higher-grade material encountered during the final stages of reclamation  and the reclamation of high-grade sand material.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 30  6 Geological Setting, Mineralization and Deposit  6.1 Regional Geology  Gold was discovered in the conglomerates of the Witwatersrand sedimentary basin in about 1886.  The Witwatersrand Supergroup is aerially and structurally related to the underlying Dominion Reef System  and the overlying Ventersdorp System. The Supergroup is an elongated sedimentary basin stretching  some 320km in a north-easterly direction and 160km in a north-westerly direction. The upper portions of  the Witwatersrand Supergroup contain quartz conglomerates that have been mined for their gold and  uranium contents.  The Transvaal Supergroup is a stratigraphic unit consisting of clastic sediments, carbonates, banded iron  formations and volcanics younger than the Witwatersrand Supergroup. It occasionally directly overlies  the gold-bearing conglomerates of the Witwatersrand Supergroup where the Ventersdorp Volcanics  have been eroded or were not developed. At the base of the Transvaal Supergroup is a conglomerate  layer, the Black Reef, that has been mined for gold.  The operations are situated in the Witwatersrand Central Rand and East Goldfields. The East Goldfield is  linked to the Central basin across a large monoclinal structure, the Springs Monocline. The major  economic horizons mined were the South Reef together with Main Reef, Main Reef Leader and the  Elsburg and Kimberley Reefs. The Black Reef, where mineralized, was also mined in the area.  The TSFs are man-made features, and mineral distribution reflects the artificial nature of the deposit. The  materials are the waste products (tailings) of the mining and metallurgical process recovery from the  Witwatersrand and Transvaal Supergroups gold deposits.  These tailings consist predominantly of quartz, lesser amounts of mica, chlorite, chloritoid, pyrite  (1% to 2%) and low concentrations of gold, uranium and sulfur.  6.2 Mineralization, Local and Property Geology  The TSFs have been processed through metallurgical plants that eject a residue (tailings), which is  relatively uniform in terms of gold mineralization when compared with the natural deposit from which  the material is derived. The variation between gold grades is small as the process residue dump was  constructed in layers/benches. Grade variation primarily follows variations in the processing and, to a  lesser extent, primary deposit characteristics.   The gold mineralization is fairly well distributed throughout the TSFs and sand dumps.  The TSFs are the by-product of the mineral recovery process. They took the form of a liquid slurry made  of fine mineral particles – created when mined ore was crushed, milled and processed. The tailings were  pumped to the TSFs, which were constructed using earth dams. As the residue of the tailings gradually  drained and became compacted, grass and other vegetation were planted to rehabilitate the  environment.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 31  The TSFs and sand dumps evaluated in this report originated from different sources or processing plants,  as shown in Table 6.1.  Table 6.1:  Origin of the TSF and Sand Dump Material  TSF/Sand Dump Source Mine Mined and Processed Reef  Crown Complex  3L5 Crown Mines Main Reef  3L7 Crown Mines Main Reef  3L8 Crown Mines Main Reef  City Deep Complex  4L3 City Deep Gold Mine (Proprietary) Limited Kimberley Reef  4L5 City Deep Gold Mine (Proprietary) Limited Kimberley Reef  4L6 City Deep Gold Mine (Proprietary) Limited Kimberley Reef  Knights Complex  4L14 Simmer and Jack Gold Mine Black Reef  Ergo Complex  Rooikraal Knights Plant Residue from Knights Plant  7L15 Vlakfontein Mine Black Reef  Marievale Complex  7L4  Marievale Consolidated Mine Kimberley Reef, Nigel Reef and Main  7L5 Marievale Consolidated Mine Kimberley Reef, Nigel Reef and Main  7L6 Marievale Consolidated Mine Kimberley Reef, Nigel Reef and Main  7L7 Marievale Consolidated Mine Kimberley Reef, Nigel Reef and Main  Grootvlei Complex  6L16 Grootvlei Proprietary Mines Limited Kimberley Reef  6L17 Grootvlei Proprietary Mines Limited Kimberley Reef  6L17A Grootvlei Proprietary Mines Limited Kimberley Reef  5A10/5L27 Sand Dumps  5A10/5L27 Modderfontein East Mine Main Reef Leader  Daggafontein TSF  Daggafontein  Daggafontein Mine Main Reef    6.3 Stratigraphy and Cross-sections  Unlike the stratigraphy of the in situ mineral deposit, the stratigraphy of a TSF or sand dump is man-made.  A typical stratigraphy is presented in Figure 6.1. Slime was deposited on soil (original ground level). The  color of topsoil ranges from red to black. In some cases, soil is mineralized or enriched.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 32  Figure 6.1:  A Typical Stratigraphy for Ergo’s TSFs    Source: The RVN Group, 2022    A typical cross-section of a TSF is shown in Figure 6.2 and  Figure 6.3.  Figure 6.2:  Grootvlei Complex (6L17) Map showing Location of Cross-section    Source: The RVD Group, 2022
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 33   Figure 6.3:  Cross-section of the Grootvlei Complex (6L17)    Source: The RVN Group, 2022  6.4 Deposit Type  The deposits under consideration are man-made features that are sometimes referred to as dumps,  tailing dams, or simply mine dams.  The TSF or sand dump generally lies above the prevailing ground level and there is no host rock. No  geological or mineralization controls are relevant to the TSFs or sand dumps as they are man-made  features.  The engineering design parameters determine the size and shape of the TSF or sand dump at the time  of the deposition of the waste products from the respective processing plants.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 34  7 Exploration  7.1 Exploration  The TSFs are man-made engineering features and typical exploration programs (geophysics, trenching,  mapping and soil sampling) were not undertaken on the TSFs. An evaluation drilling program was  conducted on the TSFs. No exploration work was required to locate the TSFs, as their locations are well  known, rising well above ground level. The QP considered non-drilling exploration not to be material to  the Ergo properties.  7.2 Topographic Surveys  The topographic surfaces of the TSFs were surveyed by Jaco van Staden, a qualified surveyor from  Geografix Surveys CC (Geografix), using a differential Global Positioning System (GPS) unit. The method  has an accuracy in the range of 10cm. The conventional survey equipment (total stations, prisms and  related equipment) and GPS Real Time Kinetic systems were used to accurately determine the  coordinated positions of the surface features as required to create a digital terrain model.  Daily calibration through transformation was completed to ensure the instruments reported accurate  results. This standard procedure was performed daily before surveying. After surveying was conducted  or when the day’s work was completed, the calibration was rechecked through measurements of the  benchmark points to confirm that the instruments measured the correct values. Data from survey  measurements were checked through repeated measurements of selected points. No bias was  identified.  Surveys were undertaken on a 10m grid and measurements were also taken on all breaker lines. An  additional 10m to 20m outside the footprint of each TSF and sand dump was also surveyed.  No additional tailings material was deposited on the TSFs after the surveys were conducted. For the TSFs  where mining is taking place (e.g. 5A10/5L27), monthly surveys are completed, and the tonnage was  depleted from the Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves up to 30 June 2023. The details of the survey  information are presented in Table 7.1.  The QP was satisfied to rely on the survey measurements as an accurate representation of the TSFs and  sand dumps.  7.3 Evaluation Drilling  Evaluation drilling campaigns were completed on the TSFs and sand dumps. The drilling grid was not  always regular due to access issues and TSF shapes; however, the QP noted that drill holes were well  spread. The well-spread drill holes ensured that the samples collected were representative of the  respective TSFs and sand dump.  7.4 Drilling Methodology  Two drilling techniques (Reverse Circulation (RC) and Auger drilling methods) were followed by  specialized independent drilling contractors on the TSFs. The RC method was implemented where the  auger drilling technique could not drill to the base of the TSF due to drill hole length exceeding 55m or  areas of high moisture content at the base of the TSF.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 35  The QP was satisfied that all measures were taken to ensure that drilling, sampling and recoveries were  acceptable and would not affect the accuracy and reliability of the results. The experienced geologists  from The RVN Group monitored the drilling process. The QP made ad-hoc site visits during drilling and  sampling. In the opinion of the QP, the processes followed were adequate for collecting quality samples  and information for use in the interpretation of results and in the Mineral Resource estimation.  Table 7.1:  Survey Details of the TSFs and Sand Dumps  TSF/Sand Dump  Area   (ha)*  Date Surveyed** Coordinate System, Datum  Crown  3L5 (Diepkloof) 158.5 02/09/2013 WGS84 LO27, amsl***  3L7 (Mooifontein) 108.4 15/08/2013 WGS84 LO27, amsl  3L8 (GMTS) 159.3 20/09/2013 WGS84 LO27, amsl  City Deep  4L3 33.9 15/05/2017 WGS84 LO29, amsl  4L4 20.6 08/06/2017 WGS84 LO29, amsl  4L6 44.2 15/06/2017 WGS84 LO29, amsl  Knights  4L14 22.4 13/11/2015 WGS84 LO29, amsl  Ergo  Rooikraal 136.8 23/05/2018 WGS84 LO29, amsl  7L15 97.6 23/05/2008 WGS84 LO29, amsl  Marievale  7L4  116.3 19/01/2009 WGS84 LO29, amsl  7L5 31.1 08/01/2009 WGS84 LO29, amsl  7L6 62.0 20/01/2009 WGS84 LO29, amsl  7L7 69.1 22/01/2009 WGS84 LO29, amsl  Grootvlei  6L16 127.9 15/05/2015 WGS84 LO29, amsl  6L17 130.7 15/05/2015 WGS84 LO29, amsl  6L17A 85.7 15/05/2015 WGS84 LO29, amsl  5A10/5L27  5A10/5L27 56.7 26/02/2008 WGS84 LO29, amsl  Daggafontein  Daggafontein TSF 476.9 12/08/2016 WGS84 LO29, amsl  Note:  *area includes 10m outside the TSF footprint  **date before mining (5A10/5L27 sand dump are surveyed monthly for production purposes)  ***amsl is the abbreviation for above mean sea level    7.4.1 Auger Drilling  Auger drilling, a cost-effective method, was commissioned by Ergo on most of their TSFs for holes less  than 55m and located within areas of lower moisture content.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 36  With auger drilling, the rotation of a helical screw causes the blade of the screw to lift the sample to the  surface. This drilling method does not require heavy machinery in order to drill to the desired depth. This  auger method can be used for shallow environmental drilling, geotechnical drilling, soil engineering and  mineral deposits where the formation is soft and the hole does not collapse. This is done by pressing the  spiral rods into the ground using a drilling head machine which can drill up to a depth of 55m.  Samples were collected through the spiral at every 1.5m interval and the spiral was cleaned with water  and brushed clean after every run.  7.4.2 Reverse Circulation  RC drilling, with better sample recovery than auger drilling, is a method of drilling which uses dual wall  drill rods consisting of an outer drill rod with an inner tube. These hollow inner tubes allow the drill cuttings  to be transported back to the surface in a continuous, steady flow.  The drilling mechanism is often a pneumatic reciprocating piston called a hammer, which in turn drives  a clay cutter, specifically made to cut soft material such as tailings and soil.  The clay cutter is used to remove samples that are pushed through the machine with compressed air.  When air is blown down the annulus (ring-shaped structure) of the rod, the pressure shift creates a  reverse circulation, bringing the tailings up the inner tube. When the tailings reach a deflector box at  the top of the rig, the material is moved through a hose attached to the top of the cyclone.  The drill cuttings will travel around the cyclone until they fall through the bottom opening into a sample  bag. These bags are sorted and marked with the location and depth where the sample was collected.  RC drilling technique can drill up to 1,500m deep. The other benefits of RC drilling include:  • more reliable and less contaminated samples than those from auger drilling;  • a high drill penetration rate;  • a larger sample size; and  • a more cost-effective method than diamond or sonic drilling.  Samples were collected through the cyclone at 1.5m intervals and the rods and cyclone were cleaned  with compressed air after every run.  The RC drilling technique was chosen because RC drilling could drill deeper holes than auger drilling. In  addition, because of its higher power, RC drilling can drill through wet material and has a better  recovery percentage than auger drilling, which is prone to losing wet samples through its spiral.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 37  7.5 Crown  A total of 44 RC drill holes at approximately 200m-by-200m average grid were completed in 2017 on  Crown Complex as shown in Figure 7.1.  Figure 7.1:  Crown Complex: Map showing drill hole Locations
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 38  7.6 City Deep  A total of 27 auger drill holes between 100m and 200m spacing were completed in 2017 on the City  Deep Complex, as shown in Figure 7.2.  Figure 7.2:   City Deep Complex: Map showing Drill Hole Locations
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 39  7.7 Knights  A total of 17 auger drill holes were completed on 4L14. The average drill hole spacing was 100m. Drill  holes are well spread throughout the TSF, as presented in Figure 7.3. The TSF has a maximum height of  37.5m. The intersected soil reported higher gold values; thus, the soil was modelled as a separate  domain and added to the TSF’s Mineral Resource.  Figure 7.3:  Knights Complex - 4L14: Map showing Drill Hole Locations
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 40  7.8 Ergo  7.8.1 7L15  A total of 22 auger drill holes were completed on 7L15. Some holes were twin holes to confirm the results  obtained in previous drilling campaigns. The drill hole pattern has an irregular spacing averaging less  than 100m (Figure 7.4).  Figure 7.4:  Ergo Complex - 7L15: Map showing Drill Hole Locations
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 41  7.8.2 Rooikraal  A total of 64 RC drill holes were completed on Rooikraal. Irregular drill hole spacing was due to access  challenges (Figure 7.5). An average drill hole spacing of less than 100m was achieved.  Figure 7.5:  Ergo Complex - Rooikraal: Map showing Drill Hole Locations
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 42  7.9  Marievale  A drill hole map for the Marievale complex is presented in Figure 7.6. An average spacing of 100m was  followed. Auger drilling was done in 2020.  Figure 7.6:  Marievale Complex: Map showing Drill Hole Locations
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 43  7.10 Grootvlei Complex  A total of 34, 31 and 39 drill holes were completed on 6L16, 6L17 and 6L17A, respectively, as shown in  Figure 7.7, Figure 7.8 and Figure 7.9. Drill holes completed in 2016 were a combination of auger and RC  techniques. All previous campaigns (2008 and 2015) used the auger drilling technique. The grid spacing  for 6L16 is approximately 200m-by-200m, while 6L17 and 6L17A have a closer drill hole spacing of  approximately 100m-by-100m.  Figure 7.7:  Grootvlei Complex - 6L16: Map showing Drill Hole Locations
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 44  Figure 7.8:  Grootvlei Complex - 6L17: Map showing Drill Hole Locations
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 45  Figure 7.9:  Grootvlei Complex - 6L17A: Map showing Drill Hole Locations
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 46  7.11 5A10/5L27  A total of 30 drill holes were completed on the 5A10/5L27 sand dumps in 2017. All drill holes were drilled  using the auger drilling technique. An irregular spacing of between 50m and 100m was followed. Due  to the high height of the sand dump, all holes drilled on top of the middle dump did not intersect the  base of the TSF (red color in Figure 7.10). Mining is ongoing on this sand dump.  Figure 7.10:  5A10/5L27: Map showing Drill Hole Locations      The deepest drilled hole was 52.5m. This drill hole did not intersect the base or soil. The auger drill machine  could not drill deeper because the holes collapse at depths due to auger drilling constraints. The RVN  Group geologists stopped drilling once they noticed that the hole had collapsed to ensure that only  good-quality representative samples were obtained.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 47  7.12 Daggafontein TSF  A total of 55 drill holes were drilled on Daggafontein TSF from 2017 to 2021, as shown in Figure 7.11. The  center of the TSF (outlined with a dotted line) could not be accessed for drilling due to the presence of  surface water. Figure 7.11 presents the evaluation drilling information for the different drilling campaigns.  Only two drill holes were completed in 2017, which were drilled far apart. Drilling campaigns completed  from 2018 to 2021 were drilled to infill the drill space to confirm the continuity of mineralization. On  average, the drill holes were spaced at a nominal grid of 200m-by-200m and were well spread to ensure  that the samples were representative of the TSF.  Figure 7.11:  Daggafontein Complex - Daggafontein TSF: Map showing Drill Hole Locations      7.13 Logging and Sampling  The RVN Group used comprehensive logging and sampling standard procedures, including extensive  Quality Assurance (QA) and Quality Control (QC) procedures. In addition, the geologist and drilling  supervisor counted the rods after each hole had intersected the soil to confirm the borehole depths.  Where samples were split, quartering was done by the geologist on-site to ensure the representativity of  these samples.  The samples were assigned unique sample identification numbers and tagged before being submitted  to the laboratory. In addition, for each sample batch, QC samples were submitted to the laboratory.  The RVN Group geologists prepared sample submission sheets that accompanied the samples. Records  of the sample data were captured in a database.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 48  The RVN Group monitored the drilling and sampling process. Logging was qualitative in nature, except  for sample intervals. All drill holes were logged in entirety from top to bottom on-site.  As drilling progressed, the spiral for auger and rods for RC drilling were cleaned after every drilling run to  prevent sample contamination.  7.13.1 Logging  Drill holes were logged on-site by The RVN Group geologist using the individual 1.5m samples taken  throughout the drill hole. Samples were classified according to whether they were slimes or soil, moist or  wet and on color.  Logging was done on-site and then captured electronically into a secured database.  7.13.2 Sampling  Every drill hole was sampled at 1.5m intervals for the entire length of the hole. The samples were  immediately bagged and tagged on site. Sampling (plastic) bags were labelled and tagged with a  sample book tag. The drill log and sample book were regularly checked against the drill hole depth as  drilling proceeded to ensure compatibility.  Samples were noted as “dry”, “moist” or “wet” in the drill log and sample book.  The responsible geologist planned sample numbers and the QC samples in a Microsoft Excel  spreadsheet and assigned them to the appropriate sample interval.  The RVN Group safely and carefully collected, secured and transported the samples from the site to  avoid contamination and sample loss.  All the samples were presented to the laboratory in an organized and sorted manner with easily  understandable documentation, including a fully completed Sample Submission Form.  7.14 Sample Recovery  Samples recovered from the TSFs and sand dump material were mostly moist and fine-grained. The  sample size was visually checked on-site to ensure they were of a similar size and sufficient quantity. The  gold grade did not show a definable relationship with sample weights. The QP considered the recovery  and sample quality satisfactory for further evaluation.  7.15 On-site Security Measures  Access to the drill sites was restricted to the drilling and The RVN Group teams. Any unauthorized access  to the drill sites was prohibited. Drilling sites were demarcated by danger tape and no visitors could cross  the demarcated area unless authorized by the QP. Once samples were packed and the bags sealed,  no one was allowed to open the bags.  7.16 Collar Survey Data  A qualified surveyor from Geografix surveyed the drill hole collar positions using total station surveying  equipment and differential GPS instruments. The accuracy of the method was within a 10cm range.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 49  Collar positions were plotted on satellite images to verify positions and collars plots were inspected.  Elevations were compared to the topographic survey. Collar positions were verified to be accurate.  The QP is satisfied with the surveying methodology followed. The surveys were performed by a qualified  surveyor who has sufficient experience to undertake the task. The surveys were considered by the QP  to be of adequate quality for use in the evaluations of the TSFs.  No downhole survey measurements were taken as the drill holes were shallow and vertical, and the QP  anticipated no deviations.  7.17 Density Determination  Bulk densities on the TSFs were measured in situ by Letsatsi Materials Engineering (Proprietary) Limited (a  South African National Accreditation System (SANAS) accredited institution for engineering materials  testing) using a Troxler densitometer between September 2020 and January 2021. The bulk density  measurements included compaction rates and moisture content. The use of densitometers on TSFs and  sand dumps is common practice, as TSFs and sand dumps are engineered features with consistent  physical properties. The density of the TSF is directly proportional to the compaction rate and material  property. As the moisture content increases, density decreases and vice versa. The compaction rate  and material property do not vary significantly with depth (TSFs and sand dumps are largely  homogeneous); thus, measurements taken at any depth (>10cm) are representative of the TSF and  sand dump compartments.  Density measurement points were prepared, and measurements were taken per TSF or sand dump. The  points were well spread. Preparation of points involved removing the topmost 5cm to 10cm of loose  material and flattening (levelling) the surface. Measurements were taken at 150mm and 300mm depths  per point. As part of quality control, some points are measured more than once.  The statistics of the density measurements are presented in Table 7.2.  The average bulk densities determined for the TSFs or sand dump were slightly higher than the 1.42t/m3  that Ergo uses for the TSFs or sand dump they are mining.  The mean tests showed that the density is more than 1.42t/m3 with a 95% confidence level. Confidence  intervals for the densities indicated, with a 95% confidence level, that the mean density applied at Ergo  is within the range. The QP decided to continue using a lower mean density of 1.42t/m3 as it is within the  95% confidence and prediction intervals and passed the mean test. In addition, Ergo has been  successfully applying 1.42t/m3 in their mining production reconciliation for more than 15 years.  The QP is satisfied using a 1.42t/m3 mean dry bulk density for all the TSFs and sand dumps with the  understanding of the upside potential if the mean density is later determined to be higher.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 50    Table 7.2:  Bulk Density Information and Statistics  Reclamation Site TSF/Sand Dump  Number  of  Samples  Mean Density  (t/m3)  Standard Deviation  (t/m3)  Minimum  (t/m3)  Maximum  (t/m3)  CoV***  Crown Complex  3L5 60 1.479 0.044 1.353 1.567 0.03  3L7 60 1.443 0.020 1.381 1.485 0.01  3L8 32 1.397 0.028 1.331 1.440 0.02  City Deep Complex  4L3 20 1.419 0.078 1.214 1.560 0.05  4L4 20 1.456 0.031 1.410 1.522 0.02  4L6* - - - - - -  Knights Complex 4L14* - - - - - -  Ergo Complex  7L15 30 1.513 0.035 1.443 1.591 0.02  Rooikraal 90 1.457 0.051 1.350 1.602 0.04  Marievale Complex  7L4 60 1.457 0.033 1.405 1.526 0.02  7L5 30 1.434 0.047 1.360 1.520 0.03  7L6 60 1.453 0.060 1.335 1.595 0.04  7L7 60 1.461 0.032 1.374 1.548 0.02  Grootvlei Complex  6L16 60 1.543 0.060 1.384 1.643 0.04  6L17 59 1.499 0.038 1.420 1.592 0.03  6L17A 58 1.490 0.044 1.402 1.606 0.03  5A10/5L27 Sand  Dumps  5A10/5L27 30 1.529 0.037 1.468 1.596 0.02  Daggafontein TSF Daggafontein 58 1.511 0.058 1.394 1.687 0.04  Total 817 1.480** 0.043 1.214 1.687 0.03  Notes:   *no measurements were taken due to access problems  **weighted average  ***CoV is the abbreviation for Coefficient of Variation
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 51  7.18 Hydrogeological Drilling and Test Work  No hydrogeological studies were completed to acquire data on surface and groundwater  parameters.  However, some relevant hydrological data was captured during drilling and logging by The RVN  Group. The RVN Group logs have moisture content recorded based on visual inspection (i.e., dry,  moist, wet or watery). Additionally, Ergo installed piezometers in some larger TSFs (Crown Complex  and Daggafontein TSF) to monitor water levels. Smaller TSFs are considered low risks as they are  dormant and mostly moist to dry; thus, no piezometers were installed.  7.18.1 Crown Complex  The QP has classified the GMTS (3L8) TSF as moist to wet and Diepkloof (3L5)and Mooifontein (3L7)  TSFs are classified as dry to moist (Table 7.3, Table 7.4 and Table 7.5).  Table 7.3: GMTS (3L8) Moisture Content  Average Depth  Moisture Content Commentary From  (m)  To  (m)  0.0 27.0 Dry  27.0 54.0 Moist  54.0 58.5 Wet  58.5 61.5 Watery  61.5 64.5 Wet  64.5 67.5 Watery  67.5 The Base of the TSF Wet  The Base of the TSF Soil Moist    Table 7.4: Diepkloof (3L5) Moisture Content  Average Depth  Moisture Content Commentary From  (m)  To  (m)  0.0 21.0 Dry  21.0 45.0 Moist  45.0 The Base of the TSF Wet  The Base of the TSF Soil Moist    Table 7.5:  Mooifontein (3L7) Moisture Content  Average Depth  Moisture Content Commentary From  (m)  To  (m)  0.0 30.5 Dry  30.5 36.0 Moist  36.0 The Base of the TSF Wet  The Base of the TSF Soil Moist
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 52  7.18.2 City Deep Complex  The QP classified the City Deep Complex as moist (Table 7.6, Table 7.7 and Table 7.8).  Table 7.6:  4L3 Moisture Content  Average Depth  Moisture Content Commentary  From (m) To (m)  0.0 31.5 Moist  31.5 The Base of the TSF Wet  The Base of the TSF Soil Moist    Table 7.7:  4L4 Moisture Content  Average Depth  Moisture Content Commentary From  (m)  To  (m)  0.0 The Base of the TSF Moist  The Base of the TSF Soil Moist    Table 7.8:  4L6 Moisture Content  Average Depth  Moisture Content Commentary From  (m)  To  (m)  0.0 13.5 Moist  13.5 The Base of the TSF Wet  The Base of the TSF Soil Moist    7.18.3 Knights Complex  The QP classified the Knights TSFs as moist (Table 7.9).  Table 7.9:  4L14 Moisture Content  Average Depth  Moisture Content Commentary From  (m)  To  (m)  0.0 4.5 Dry  4.5 12.0 Moist   12.0 25.0 Wet  25.0 30.0 Moist  30.0 The Base of the TSF Wet  The Base of the TSF Soil Moist
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 53  7.18.4 Ergo Complex  The QP classified the Rooikraal TSF as moist to wet (Table 7.10 to Table 7.11). The TSF is moist to wet  because it is situated closer to the wetland. The 7L15 TSF is moist.  Table 7.10: Rooikraal Moisture Content  Average Depth  Moisture Content Commentary From  (m)  To  (m)  0.0 12.0 Moist   12.0 13.5 Dry  13.5 22.5 Wet  22.5 The Base of the TSF  Watery  The Base of the TSF Soil Moist    Table 7.11: 7L15 Moisture Content  Average Depth  Moisture Content Commentary From  (m)  To  (m)  0.0 19.5 Moist  19.5 The Base of the TSF Wet  The Base of the TSF Soil Moist    7.18.5 Marievale Complex  The QP classified the Marievale TSFs as moist to wet (Table 7.12, Table 7.13, Table 7.14 and Table 7.15).  The TSF is moist to wet because it is situated closer to the Blesbokspruit stream. All TSFs are east of the  Blesbokspruit stream.  Table 7.12: 7L4: Moisture Content  Average Depth Moisture Content Commentary  From  (m)  To  (m)    0.0 6.0 Moist  6.0 10.5 Wet  10.5 The Base of the TSF Watery  The Base of the TSF Soil Moist      Table 7.13: 7L5: Moisture Content  Average Depth  Moisture Content Commentary From  (m)  To  (m)  0.0 1.5 Dry  1.5 12.0 Moist  12.0 The Base of the TSF Wet  The Base of the TSF Soil Moist
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 54  Table 7.14: 7L6: Moisture Content  Average Depth  Moisture Content Commentary From  (m)  To  (m)  0.0 4.5 Dry  4.5 15.0 Moist  15.0 The Base of the TSF Wet  The Base of the TSF Soil Moist    Table 7.15: 7L7: Moisture Content  Average Depth  Moisture Content Commentary From  (m)  To  (m)  0.0 6.0 Dry  6.0 10.5 Moist  10.5 The Base of the TSF Wet  The Base of the TSF Soil Moist    7.18.6 Grootvlei Complex  The QP classified the Grootvlei TSFs as wet (Table 7.16, Table 7.17 and Table 7.18). The TSFs are wet  because they are situated closer to the Blesbokspruit wetland area. The 6L17 and 6L17A TSFs are east  of the Blesbokspruit stream, while the 6L16 TSF is located to the west.  Table 7.16: 6L16 Moisture Content  Average Depth  Moisture Content Commentary From  (m)  To  (m)  0.0 7.5 Moist   7.5 24.5 Wet  24.5 The Base of the TSF  Watery  The Base of the TSF Soil Moist    Table 7.17: 6L17 Moisture Content  Average Depth  Moisture Content Commentary From  (m)  To  (m)  0.0 4.5 Dry  4.5 18.0 Moist  18.0 The Base of the TSF Wet  The Base of the TSF Soil Moist
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 55  Table 7.18: 6L17A Moisture Content  Average Depth  Moisture Content Commentary From  (m)  To  (m)  0.0 13.5 Dry  13.5 The Base of the TSF Wet  The Base of the TSF Soil Moist    7.18.7 5A10/5L27  The QP classified the 5A10/5L27 sand dumps as moist to dry sand dumps. This is because courser  grained sand does not trap water like the finer grained tailings slime (Table 7.19).  Table 7.19: 5A10/5L27 Moisture Content  Average Depth  Moisture Content Commentary From  (m)  To  (m)  0.0 The Base of the TSF Moist  The Base of the TSF Soil Moist    7.18.8 Daggafontein TSF  Daggafontein TSF has water on the surface. The QP classified it as wet. It was estimated that at least  one million cubic metres of water are on top of Daggafontein TSF (Table 7.20).  Table 7.20: Daggafontein Moisture Content  Average Depth  Moisture Content Commentary From  (m)  To  (m)  0.0 12.0 Dry  12.0 16.0 Moist  16.0 19.5 Wet  19.5 30.0 Watery  30.0 The Base of the TSF  Wet  The Base of the TSF Soil Moist      7.19 Geotechnical Data, Testing and Analysis  No geotechnical testing and sampling were completed on the TSFs and sand dumps.  However, stability assessment studies were completed on the TSFs with a greater than 60Mt of  Mineral  Resource material. In 2022, stability assessments were conducted on Daggafontein TSF and Crown  Complex TSFs by Lutails Engineering (Proprietary) Limited. No studies were completed on the other  TSFs or sand dumps as they are small, dormant) and pose a low geotechnical stability risk.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 56  The following were observed on the Daggafontein TSF:  • The facility was well-maintained;  • The rehabilitation, care and maintenance work has not only kept the TSF in good condition  but has improved it over the years and   • there was water visible on the top surface.    On the Crown Complex TSFs, the following conclusions were made:  • There are adequate controls on the dams to prevent stormwater damage, with no significant  spillages having occurred over the past few years.;  • Vegetation has been established and is thriving on most side slopes, reducing water and wind  erosion.  • There have been no reports of significant spillages from the Complex over the past few years.;  • The basin capacity prevailing on the dams is more than adequate to contain the 1:50 as well  as a 1:10 000 probable maximum storm.;  • There has been a notable increase in drain flows after the jet-rodding took place.  • There is no concern with the phreatic surface on any of the 17 piezometric sections.  • Considering the filter drain performance and current piezometric data, the geotechnical  stability of the Tailings Dams has been assessed to be satisfactory with all Factors of Safety  above 1,5 and most above 1,7. Given the circumstances prevailing on the facility 20 years  ago that did cause slope failure at the time and those prevailing today, the probability of  failure is now virtually zero.  A geotechnical assessment of the Crown and Daggafontein TSFs found that their stability is  acceptable and satisfactory.  Hydrogeological advice is obtained prior to mining activities as the combination of high moisture  content and fine particles could, during mining activities, result in liquefaction and mud rush  conditions.  A comprehensive risk assessment is undertaken before commencing mining of a TSFs or sand dump  to avoid slope failures. Ergo and their mining contractors have procedures to ensure the safe mining  of TSFs and sand dumps.  Ergo has not reported any significant slope failures associated with the retreatment operations of  their TSFs or sand dumps in the past 15 years.  The QP is satisfied that the stability studies of the TSFs are sufficient and meet the requirements for the  intended purpose.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 57  8 Sample Preparation, Analyses and Security  8.1 Sampling Governance and Quality Assurance  The RVN Group used its standard procedures for data collection, analysis, validation and storage. In  addition, regular planned task observations of procedures and their implementations are undertaken  to ensure compliance and appropriateness for the drilling program. Training and planned task  observations are provided by the QP.  The sample chain of custody is managed by experienced geologists from The RVN Group.  The QP is satisfied with the QA and QC protocols in place.  8.2 Sample Preparation and Analysis  8.2.1 On-site Sample Preparation  All samples were halved on-site by a geologist through the coning and quartering method as the  samples were too moist or wet to use a riffle splitter, which has the potential to introduce cross- contamination and bias. The cone and quartering method does not introduce a systematic bias as  it involves pouring each sample on a clean, flattened bag (1.0m-by-0.5m).  The quartering method is considered appropriate for the TSF material as TSF samples are  homogeneous due to the deposition procedure. Figure 8.1 shows the cone and quartering  methodology followed. One half is for the metallurgical test and the other half is for a routine  exploration sample.  Figure 8.1:  Cone and Quartering Method    Source: Modified after Alakangas, 2015
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 58  Sorting of samples took place on the TSFs and at the storage site at Ergo.  Where a field duplicate was required, a selected routine exploration sample underwent a further  coning and quartering process.  To maintain the validity and integrity of samples and as part of security measures, only geologists  worked on the samples, and samples were sealed immediately after preparation.  8.2.2 Laboratories, Sample Preparation and Analyses  The samples were sent to the following three reputable laboratories for further preparation and  assaying:  • MAED at Ergo’s Plant in Brakpan: The facility is not accredited but it is the laboratory used by  Ergo for its grade control and daily plant samples. MAED is independent of Ergo, although it  is situated in the Ergo Plant. MAED was supplied with all routine exploration samples for  analysis;  • SGS in Randfontein: SGS is a SANAS accredited facility (T0265) and has been used for the  selected analytical method. Randomly selected check samples (approximately 10% of the  total samples) from MAED were sent to SGS for confirmation. SGS is independent of Ergo; and  • Anglo Lab in Carletonville: Anglo Lab analyzed some check samples for 7L15 TSF in 2016 and  2017 as a secondary laboratory to MAED. The laboratory no longer exists, and it was not  SANAS accredited. The laboratory was independent of Ergo.  Table 8.1 presents information about where the samples were analyzed.  Table 8.1: Laboratories Used  TSF/Sand Dump Primary Laboratory Secondary Laboratory  Crown Complex  3L5 MAED   3L7 MAED   3L8 MAED   City Deep Complex  4L3 MAED SGS  4L5 MAED   4L6 MAED   Knights Complex  4L14 MAED SGS  Ergo Complex  Rooikraal MAED SGS  7L15 MAED SGS and Anglo Lab  Marievale Complex  7L4 MAED   7L5 MAED   7L6 MAED   7L7 MAED   Grootvlei Complex  6L16 MAED SGS  6L17 MAED SGS  6L17A MAED SGS
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 59  TSF/Sand Dump Primary Laboratory Secondary Laboratory  5A10/5L27 Sand Dump  5A10/5L27 MAED   Daggafontein Complex  Daggafontein MAED SGS    The laboratories sorted and weighed samples on receipts and conducted dry screening to remove  foreign material and to ensure no coarse material which would not be treated at the plant was  removed. Subsequently, the samples were dried at 105 ̊C, then crushed to 80% passing 2mm, riffle  split and finally pulverized to 75μm before being analyzed.  The selected laboratories follow analytical procedures that are conventional industry practice.  The samples were analyzed for gold by fire assay with a gravimetric finish by MAED and Atomic  Absorption Spectroscopy (AAS) finish by SGS and Anglo Lab. These methods are conventional and  have been used for more than 50 years with minor adjustments. The methods have a lower detection  limit of 0.01g/t Au and there is no upper detection limit for gravimetric finish. The AAS has a 10g/t Au  upper limit. The lower limit is relevant to the TSFs and sand dumps. The TSFs and sand dumps are  processed materials and are generally low-grade materials with slightly higher grades than ten times  the detection limit.  The laboratories were instructed to use a 100g aliquot to analyze for gold. Through experience, it is  known that to analyze for gold in low-grade slimes, anything less than a 100g aliquot may report less  accurate results.  8.2.3 QP Opinion  The QP is satisfied with the sample preparation, analytical methods and level of cleanliness at the  analytical laboratories. The analytical techniques employed are suited to the mineralization style and  expected grades. The techniques meet the requirements for the intended use.  8.3 Analytical Quality Control  8.3.1 Nature and Extent of the Quality Control Procedures  A comprehensive QC program comprising reference material, duplicates and commercially  sourced certified blanks was followed. QC samples were inserted by The RVN Group in a random but  stratified manner, at frequencies targeting ±10% coverage of all samples. The QC program identifies  various aspects of the results that could negatively influence the subsequent evaluation processes.  The QC samples were used to monitor the sampling, sample preparation and analytical processes.  Analysis of QC data is performed to assess the reliability of all sample assay data and the confidence  in the data used for Mineral Resource estimation.  All QC sample insertions maintained consecutive numerical order. These control samples were  inserted as part of a continuous sample number sequence and the QC samples were not obviously  different from routine samples when the milled material was prepared and analyzed. Applying the  QC process, it was possible to identify samples that have been swapped, gone missing or incorrectly  labelled, amongst other aspects.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 60  QC samples were sourced from African Mineral Standards (AMIS) based in Modderfontein,  Johannesburg.  The RVN Group ensured that all standards and blanks were stored in sealed containers and  considerable care was taken to ensure that they were not contaminated in any manner (i.e., through  storage in a dusty environment or being placed in a contaminated sample bag, etc.).  Field duplicates were prepared on-site as the TSF material was already loose and fine-grained.  The QC set of samples consisted of:  • the certified silica blanks (AMIS0484) from AMIS;  • certified reference materials (CRMs) (AMIS0647 with 0.17g/t Au, AMIS0299 with 0.36g/t Au,  AMIS0515 with 0.51g/t Au) from AMIS;  • standard reference material L-AU015 and L-AU16 with an average value of 0.20g/t Au and  0.30g/t Au, respectively. Standard reference materials with averages of 0.22g/t Au, 0.33g/t  Au and 0.74g/t Au were also used; and  • field duplicates (prepared through the cone and quartering technique discussed in Item  8.2.1).  From 2021, only CRMs were used and the use of in-house standard reference material was  discontinued as in-house standards performance was not always consistent. The QP noted that this  does not imply that the previous results were of low quality as rigorous quality control assessments  were implemented. The new procedure of using only CRM with a matched matrix was implemented  because the CRMs come with defined certified values and are easier to monitor.  8.3.2 Quality Control Results  Analytical results for the blank and standards are analyzed graphically on control charts to facilitate  the identification of anomalous data points. A sufficient number of standards and blanks were  inserted into the sample stream. If the standard result was reported outside three standard deviations  of the certificate value, a re-assay would be requested for the whole batch from the laboratory.  8.3.3 QP Opinion  In the QP’s opinion, the QC samples covered a reasonable range of grades with respect to the  overall resource grades and no significant bias was observed. The laboratories’ analytical data  indicates overall acceptable precision and accuracy and no evidence of overwhelming  contamination by the laboratory that would affect the integrity of the data. As a result, the analytical  data from the laboratories is of acceptable integrity and can be relied upon for TSF and sand dump  grade estimation.  8.4 Sample Storage and Security  Samples were stored at the Archive Store at Ergo’s processing plant in Brakpan. The storage facility  is always locked and has an electric fence to prevent unauthorized entry. Sample rejects and pulps  are stored for six months after all assays are received from the laboratory and then discarded.  In the QP’s opinion, the sample storage and security measures are adequate.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 61  8.5 Data Storage and Database Management  Procedures are in place to ensure the accuracy and security of the databases.  Laboratories reported results in Microsoft Excel and *.pdf formats. Information was obtained by RVN  Group and captured into a database. Spot checks were randomly performed to identify  transcriptional errors.  The RVN Group created and validated the database on behalf of Ergo. The database was  developed and validated in Microsoft Excel. The database was sent to Ergo for further use and  storage.  The RVN Group compiled the following key digital databases:  • a drill hole database that includes collar location, assay and geology data;  • assay quality control data;  • density data; and  • process samples information.  The QP is satisfied with data storage and validation. Database management practices adhere to  best practices. The QP is of the opinion that the databases are a fair and accurate record of all drill  hole and assay data.  The RVN Group has saved the information, including the databases, in the cloud-based storage  service as a backup, in line with the latest technological developments. Additionally, data is stored  on external hard drives placed in different locations. The RVN Group has provided sufficient provisions  to ensure the security and integrity of the data stored in the databases.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 62  9 Data Verification  Post-2016: The QP performed verifications of the data collected. The QP experienced no limitations  to the review, analysis and verification of data.  The QP did compare a selection of the hardcopy logs with the drill holes database and the logs and  database match. The collars were checked by comparing the collars with the topography surface  from the surveyor. Collars were also plotted on Google Earth Pro for confirmation. The collars were  found to be accurate.  Logging, surveying and sampling were monitored by the exploration geologists and verified routinely  for consistency. The RVN Group geologists regularly maintain and validate the databases using  validation routines and regularly check the drill hole data visually on-screen. A first check consists of  identifying duplicate sample numbers or lack of sample information. Paper records are stored in a  safe location at Ergo’s Offices.  The QP is of the opinion that the data collection, import and validation workflows are consistent with  industry standards and are of sufficient quality to support the Mineral Resource estimation.  The QP has taken a number of steps to verify the Mineral Resource estimates, including assumptions  and inputs into the estimate and the estimation process itself. The QP checked the volume, density  and grade, noting that based on historical information, no dilution or mining loss is applied to the  Mineral Reserve.  The QP conducts quarterly reconciliations of Run-of-Mine (RoM) grade, tonnage, recovery  (metallurgical assumptions) and other modifying factors from the ongoing mining operations to  demonstrate that the modifying factors applied to the mine plan are as predicted by the geological  block model.  Actual performance for operational mining areas provides a high level of confidence where similar  performance can be expected from future mining areas. The current Mineral Reserves have not  demonstrated any material differences in the planned and actual modifying factors. The QP is of the  opinion that the data used to estimate the Mineral Reserve is adequate.  Historical: Sampling and assaying of the TSFs and sand dumps prior to 2016 is essentially the same as  the current work. The only real change noted by the QP is that the sieve size was reduced to 850μm  in 2016, where it was 1,000μm previously. Currently, there is no apparent difference between the  results using these different sieve sizes.  The analytical method is fire assay, a well-established technique used in South African gold mines.  The methods differed slightly over time and between laboratories, but the results are consistent within  a TSF. Aliquot sizes have been either 100g or 125g, depending on the laboratory used.  Quality control systems are in place in laboratories to monitor accuracy and precision.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 63  10 Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing  10.1 Nature and Extent of the Metallurgical Testing Method  Samples were received from the various drilling exercises in 1.5m increments per hole. Composites  were made over a 15m horizon, as this corresponds with the monitoring/mining depth. The TSFs and  sand dumps were generally divided into a top, middle and bottom horizon, depending on the height  of the TSF or sand dump.  The TSFs were also divided in plan into domains,  providing distinct samples  for metallurgical test work.  10.2 Procedure  10.2.1 Slime Material  The individual samples were split in two using a blending mat and cone and quartering methods.  One half of the sample was returned to the sample bag for possible future use and for reference. The  other half was composited as per the areas/horizons or domains alluded to earlier. The composite  was well mixed and sub-samples were taken for test work at Ergo Metallurgical Research laboratory  or at the Maelgwyn South Africa (Proprietary) Limited’s laboratory.  The proposed processing route for all TSF and sand dump material is hydraulic mining, cyaniding in a  Carbon-in-Leach (CIL) circuit and then carbon eluted for gold recovery before it is recycled back to  the leach circuit.  The eluate (gold bearing solution from the elution circuit) is sent to the zinc  precipitation process, where gold is recovered from the solution on zinc dust. The zinc is filtered before  it is calcined. The calcine cake is then smelted to produce gold bullion.  A standard bottle roll test was done on each composite using the following leaching parameters:  • samples slurried to a density of 1.45t/m3;  • screened to remove +850μm discard material;  • head sample was taken for triplicate fire assay;  • pre-conditioning with lime for one hour to a stable pH of 10.5;  • cyanide added at 0.35kg/t;  • activated carbon added at 20g/l;  • leach terminated after seven hours;  • solids filtered and washed twice and solutions tested for residual reagents and gold content;  • residue assays done in triplicate.  10.2.2 Sand Material  Metallurgical test work was conducted on 5A10/5L27 sand dump drilling samples. The objective of  the test work was to validate the gold grades received from the Mineral Resource Management  (MRM) Department, assess the milling requirements and evaluate the leach kinetics/characteristics  of the material. The dump was partitioned into four sections. The average gold grade received from  the MRM Department for Section 1 was 0.62g/t, Section 2 was 0.30g/t, Section 3 was 0.51g/t and  Section 4 was 0.41g/t. The average gold grade obtained from metallurgical research test work for  Section 1 was 0.62g/t, Section 2 was 0.30g/t, Section 3 was 0.51g/t and Section 4 was 0.39g/t.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 64  The samples were milled over varying durations and milling curves plotted to determine the optimum  milling time. The milling curves indicate that the optimum milling duration achieving at least 60% - 75μm is 2.5 hours for Section 1 and two hours for Sections 2, 3 and 4. Leach tests were then conducted  on the milled product and the results confirm that gold yield increases with increased milling time.  The respective 5A10 material responds well to cyanide leach as desired dissolution of 60% was  attained for all Sections at the above milling durations. Preg-robbing tests were also conducted on  material from Sections 1 and 3 and the results indicate that there is no significant preg-robbing  material.  10.3 Representative of the Samples  Drill holes were drilled on a defined grid down to the soil. The samples received were correctly split  and composited and are considered to be representative of the various volumes within the TSFs.  10.4 Details of the Laboratories  The Ergo Metallurgical Research Laboratory, located in Brakpan inside the Ergo processing plant, is  geared to perform bottle roll testing on a routine basis with skilled technicians. Internal accounting  checks are undertaken to ensure the accuracy of the work done. The laboratory is not accredited  and is the internal test facility for Ergo. The laboratory is not independent of Ergo. Gold analysis is  performed at MAED laboratory, an independent, unaccredited laboratory located in the Ergo  processing plant.   The Maelgwyn South Africa (Proprietary) Limited (Maelgwyn) laboratory, situated in Northriding, is  accredited for International Organization for Standardization (ISO 9001:2025) to perform gold  leaching test work with their assays analysis conducted by the SGS laboratory, in Randfontein. SGS is  an SANAS accredited facility (T0265) for gold analysis.  Both the Maelgwyn and SGS laboratories are independent of Ergo.  10.5 Results  The main assumption was that the laboratory procedure emulates the processing plant and historical  test work has shown to be a fair assumption. To accommodate the dissolved loss encountered in the  processing plant, an allowance of 0.008g/t Au is made to estimate the predicted recovery in the  plant.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 65  Table 10.1 presents the results of metallurgical test work.  Table 10.1: Summary of Predicted Ergo Processing Plant Performance  TSF/Sand Dump  Head Au  (g/t)  Washed  Residue Au  (g/t)  Dissolution  Loss Au  (g/t)  Recovery  (%)  Analysis Laboratory  Crown Complex  3L8 (GMTS) 0.25 0.14 0.008 41 Ergo  3L7 (Mooifontein) 0.23 0.13 0.008 40 Ergo  3L5 (Diepkloof ) 0.23 0.14 0.008 36 Ergo  City Deep Complex  4L3 0.32 0.12 0.008 60 Ergo  4L4 0.37 0.21 0.008 41 Ergo  4L6 0.31 0.12 0.008 58 Ergo  Knights Complex  4L14 0.28 0.15 0.008 44 Maelgwyn/Ergo  Ergo Complex  Rooikraal 0.25 0.17 0.008 36 Ergo  7L15 0.28 0.14 0.008 47 Maelgwyn/Ergo  Marievale Complex  7L4 0.29 0.13 0.008 52 Ergo  7L5 0.30 0.19 0.008 34 Ergo  7L6 0.24 0.16 0.008 30 Ergo  7L7 0.34 0.2 0.008 39 Ergo  Grootvlei Complex  6L16 0.25 0.17 0.008 33 Maelgwyn/Ergo  6L17 0.26 0.13 0.008 47 Maelgwyn/Ergo  6L17A 0.26 0.15 0.008 39 Maelgwyn/Ergo  5A10/5L27 Sand Dumps  5A10/5L27 0.49 0.21 0.008 60 Ergo  Daggafontein TSF  Daggafontein 0.25 0.16 0.008 35 Ergo  Note:  The head grades reported are from composites analyzed and may slightly differ from the average grades reported for the Mineral Resource  and Mineral Reserves. The QP considers the difference immaterial and the disclosure of head grades a best practice.  10.6 Interpretation of the Results  Table 10.1 summarizes the metallurgical test work that has been done on the various TSFs and sand  dumps. In the table under the ‘comments’ column, an indication as to which laboratories carried  out the test work is given. The head grade and washed residue are the results achieved in the  laboratory. In order to predict how the material would respond to treatment in the Ergo processing  plant, a dissolved gold loss of 0.008g/t Au has been applied. In general, the head grades vary  between 0.25g/t Au and 0.32g/t Au. The response to cyanidation is varied which could be due to  numerous factors such as different mineralogy from different sites.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 66  10.7 QP Opinion  In the opinion of the QP, data derived from metallurgical test work is adequate for designing  processing facilities and techniques and provides suitable grade and recovery predictions for use in  the LoM plans.  Confidence is further increased by processing plant performance demonstrated through  reconciliation for over 15 years.  The metallurgical process is well-tested and utilized by numerous tailings retreatment operators in  South Africa and elsewhere. There were no processing factors or deleterious elements that could  significantly affect reasonable prospects of economic extraction.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 67  11 Mineral Resource Estimates  The gold grade estimation was completed using two modelling techniques: Inverse Distance  Weighting (IDW) to the power of 2 and validation using the Nearest Neighbor (NN) technique. The  techniques reported a similar average global gold grade with no significant conditional bias. The  Mineral Resource estimation was declared using the IDW to the power of 2. The estimation approach  was considered appropriate based on the review of several factors, including the quantity and  spacing of available data, the interpreted control on mineralization, the style and geometry of the  mineralization as well as geological logging and additional information recorded from the drill holes.  TSFs and sand dumps are man-made engineering features which was considered in the estimation  process. Ordinary Kriging was considered unnecessary for TSF and sand dump evaluation as the main  aim was to obtain global averages rather than local variations considering the envisaged or applied  mining method.  Mineral Resources were estimated for all the TSFs, and the estimation procedures are similar in  approach for all the TSFs and sand dumps. However, each TSF and sand dump is treated as a  separate entity as each has differences due to location, data distribution and characteristics of the  material. Estimation procedures and parameters are given individually per TSF or sand dump.  All tailings material is above the current land surface and continuity of grade within the TSFs is defined  based on +/-100m drill hole spacing. The tailings material has been processed through a  metallurgical treatment plant that ejects a waste residue that is relatively uniform when compared  with the natural deposit from which the material is derived. The variation between samples in drill  hole is small (0.1g/t to 1.0g/t) in comparison to in situ gold deposits. However, the percentage  difference may be huge as is the case with trace elements.  Datamine’s Studio RM, a geological modelling software, was used as the modelling tool. Most of the  statistical and geostatistical study was completed using SAS JMP Pro and the RStudio, an open- source integrated development environment for “R”, a programming language for advanced  statistical computing and graphics.  Mineral Resource estimates are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic  viability. There is no certainty that all or any part of the Mineral Resource will be converted into a  Mineral Reserve.  The Mineral Resource estimates for all the TSFs and a sand dump are declared as follows:  • the point of reference is in situ. The TSFs or sand dumps themselves are the reference points;  • no geological or other losses were applied as all material is accessible and there are no  geological structures;  • Mineral Resource estimates are stated as both inclusive and exclusive of Mineral Reserves as  defined in Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K; and  • the Mineral Resource is 100% attributable to Ergo. DRDGOLD, the registrant, owns 100% of  Ergo.  Item 11.1 to Item 11.7 present the methodology followed a similar methodology for all the TSFs and  sand dumps. Item 11.9 to Item 11.16 provides details for each complex, TSF or sand dump.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 68  The 80 smaller TSFs and clean-up material contribute about 10% of the total Mineral Resource  estimates by tonnage. The Mineral Resource estimates in these smaller dumps pose a less than  material risk to Ergo. Their Mineral Resource was estimated from survey information, production  and/or historical data, applying straight arithmetic averages as the TSFs or clean-up sites are too  small to be evaluated by 3D modelling. The QP considered the inclusion of the TSFs and clean-up  operations as appropriate and has conducted verification checks to support their inclusion. The  Mineral Resource estimates of these TSFs and clean-up operations are not discussed individually but  are part of the total Mineral Resource for Ergo.  11.1 Volume Modelling  For all material TSFs, three-dimensional (3D) modelling was completed using drill hole information and  survey data. Volumes were estimated using a top surface defined by a ground survey and  associated digital terrain model. The bases of the TSFs were defined by the drill hole data and the  edges of the TSFs. All drill holes, where possible, were drilled to intersect soil at the base of the TSFs.  The block models were constructed inside of this volume. Tonnages and grades were then extracted  from the block models.  11.2 Bulk Dry Density  An average dry bulk density of 1.42t/m3, described in Item 7.17, was applied to all the TSFs and the  sand dumps. The tonnes were reported as dry tonnes.  11.3 Exploratory Data Analysis   Exploratory data analysis was done on raw and composited gold data. Samples were collected at  1.5m intervals. For the IDW estimation method, the sample lengths were adequate. The samples were  further composited to 6m to allow for NN estimation, as the modelled blocks were 6m high to  represent bench height. Samples were composited based on mean sea level to mimic deposition.  This allowed for estimations to be carried out based on the levels.  The requirement for high-grade capping was assessed to ascertain the reliability and spatial  clustering of the high-grade data. The steps completed as part of the high-grade capping  assessment are summarized below:  • review of the data to identify any data that deviates from the general data distribution. This  was completed using histograms and log probability plots;  • review of plots comparing the contribution to the mean and standard deviation of the  highest-grade data; and  • visual review in 3D to allow assessment of the clustering of the higher-grade data.  11.4 Estimation Techniques  The estimation was constrained by the mineralization interpretations. The statistical characteristics of  the available sample information and the spatial distribution aided the definition of the estimation  parameters, such as search volume and orientation of the search ellipses.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 69  The IDW (to the power of 2) and NN method of estimation were chosen as the most appropriate  methods for evaluation of TSFs and sand dumps, as the dataset for each TSF and sand dump is  generally homogeneous (laterally), grade variations are small due to deposition technique and the  drill holes are well spread and spacing is moderately wide. The methods, when applied  appropriately, retain the grade variation of the deposit, as opposed to an arithmetic average, and  is simpler and more appropriate for TSF or sand dump evaluation than other advanced estimation  techniques such as Ordinary Kriging.   These estimation techniques have been found to be reliable by Ergo over the last 15 years of mining  TSFs and sand dumps.  Hard domain boundaries were used throughout, preventing samples lying outside the domain from  being used for the estimation meaning slime and soil samples were separated during the estimation  process. A three-pass estimation strategy was applied to each zone, applying an expanded and less  restrictive sample search to the second and subsequent estimation passes and only considering  blocks not previously assigned an estimate. However, over 80% of the estimates were completed in  the first pass. A record was kept of the number of samples used to estimate the grade into a block.  The variance of each block and the search volume that satisfied the criteria used to select samples  for use in the estimation of each block are also recorded.  Estimation and reporting of metal equivalents was deemed irrelevant; estimation is only done for  gold.  11.5 Modelling and Estimation Parameters  The parent block size for all the TSFs and sand dumps was largely based on the average drill spacing  and sample compositing interval. The height of the original dump benches is approximately 5m to  6m. The parent block size is selected to estimate the deposit approximates half the drill hole spacing  and maps the bench height. Sub-blocking was allowed for a good volume definition.  11.6 Model Validation  A routine validation process was followed for all the TSFs and sand dumps. All relevant statistical  information was recorded to enable validation and review of the estimates.  The recorded information included:  • the number of samples used per block estimate;  • average distance to a sample per block estimate;  • estimation flag to determine in which estimation pass a block was estimated; and  • the number of drill holes from which composite data were used to complete the block  estimate.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 70  The estimates were reviewed visually and statistically prior to being accepted. The review included  the following activities:  • comparison of volume estimates between the block model, the 3D wireframe model and the  surveyor's report;  • check for global bias through comparison of the estimate versus the mean of the composite  dataset, including weighting where appropriate to account for data clustering;  • histogram comparison of grade block distribution versus composite grade distribution;  • visual checks of cross-sections, long-sections and plans; and  • where production data was available, reconciliation was carried out as part of the model  validation process.  Alternative estimates were also completed to test the sensitivity of the reported model to the  selected interpolation parameters. An insignificant amount of variation in overall grade was noted  in the alternate estimations. The results were satisfactory for the level of accuracy anticipated for TSF  evaluation.  11.7 Technical and Financial Parameters  In determining the cut-off grades of the Mineral Resources, the QP applied the data presented in  Table 11.1.  The QP considered the gold price, exchange rate and working cost per tonne (long-term prices as  at 30 June 2023), as applied, reasonable for use in declaring the Mineral Resources. Justification for  the financial parameters used is detailed in Item 16, in particular Item 16.2. Additional technical  parameters per TSF or sand dump are presented in the relevant items. The QP considered both  technical and financial parameters (infrastructure, mine design and planning, processing plant,  environmental compliance and permitting) to justify the reasonable prospects for economic  extraction. All complexes except Crown and Grootvlei Complexes have studies conducted to a PFS  level of accuracy (i.e., +/- 25%). For the Crown and Grootvlei Complexes, initial assessments were  completed.  Table 11.1: Financial and Technical Data considered for Mineral Resource  Element Unit Value  Mineral Resource Gold Price USD/oz 1,934  Mineral Resource Gold Price ZAR/kg 1,081,261  Exchange Projection ZAR/USD 17.39  Working Costs per Tonne (slimes) ZAR/t 85.12  Working Costs per Tonne (sand) ZAR/t 223.38  Note: The average working cost for the Ergo Processing Plant over the 19-year LoM plan is used to estimate cut-offs.  The QP has considered that Ergo does not selectively mine a TSF. The average grade of the TSF is  used to determine whether or not a TSF is mined in its entirety. Where the average grade of the TSF is  above the cut-off grade, all the material in the TSF or sand dump is considered to be mined. The QP  applied no block cut-off.  A cut-off grade is also determined per Complex. A TSF may report an average gold grade below a  cut-off grade, but when included in a complex, the total complex should be above the cut-off  grade. See Table 11.2 for the cut-off information. The QP determined cut-off grades using the formula  presented in Item 12.2.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 71  Table 11.2: Mineral Resource Estimate Cut-off Grades  TSF/Sand Dump  Recovery Cut-off Grade  (%) (g/t)  Crown Complex  3L8 (GMTS) 41  0.192   3L7 (Mooifontein) 40  0.197   3L5 (Diepkloof) 36  0.219   City Deep Complex  4L3 60  0.131   4L4 41  0.192   4L6 58  0.136   Knights Complex  4L14 44 0.179  Ergo Complex  Rooikraal 36 0.239  7L15 47 0.167  Marievale Complex  7L4 52  0.151   7L5 34  0.232   7L6 30  0.262   7L7 39  0.202   Grootvlei Complex  6L16 33  0.239   6L17 47  0.167   6L17A 39  0.202   5A10/5L27 Sand Dump  5A10/5L27 60 0.344  Daggafontein TSF  Daggafontein 35 0.225      The following statements apply to all Mineral Resources tables:  • Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves;  • Mineral Resources are reported inclusive and exclusive of Mineral Reserves;  • Mineral Resources have been reported in accordance with Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K;  • Mineral Resources were estimated using the $1 934/oz, R17.39 and R1 081 261/kg financial  parameters;  • the recovery information is presented in Table 11.2;  • the reference point is in situ;  • a troy ounce = 31.1034768g; and  • quantities and grades were rounded to reflect the accuracy of the estimates; any apparent  errors are insignificant.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 72  11.8 Uncertainties and Classification Criteria  Definitions for Mineral Resource categories used in this report are those defined by the Security and  Exchange Commission in Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K. Mineral Resource Estimates are classified to  reflect the increased level of geological confidence into Inferred, Indicated and Measured Mineral  Resource categories.  By their nature, all Mineral Resource estimates carry inherent risk and uncertainty depending on  various factors, including interpretation of data, drilling data quality, uncertainty in the survey and  metallurgical test work data collected and the modelling process. However, Ergo has been in  operation for more than 15 years, treating TSFs and sand dumps and has sufficiently mitigated Mineral  Resource risks through obtaining sufficient sampling information. Some uncertainties were resolved  through reconciliations, process improvement and the use of experienced personnel in data  collection and interpretation.  The QP based the Mineral Resource categorization on the robustness of the various data sources  available, the confidence of the geological interpretation and various estimation parameters (e.g.,  distance to data, number of data, maximum search radii etc.) and reconciliation data where it is  available. The QP considers the Mineral Resource classification as a function of the confidence of  the whole process from drilling, sampling, geological understanding and variables relationships. TSFs  and sand dumps are evaluated individually and there are no blanket classification parameters as  TSFs and sand dumps are different. However, drill hole spacing and data quality contribute  significantly to the classification confidence.  Each TSF or sand dump has its classification criteria discussed separately.  The Mineral Resource confidence is assessed via internal peer reviews, with no material issues  identified.  Mineral Resources have reasonable prospects for economic extraction and the QP considered a  range of mining, processing, infrastructural, social, environmental and permitting factors.    11.9 Crown Complex  11.9.1 Exploratory Data Analysis  Statistical analysis of data was completed as presented in Figure 11.1 to Figure 11.8. Data was  analyzed as raw, capped and composites. There was no material changed between the data sets.  The data sets show a positively skewed distribution.   Based on the high-grade cap investigations, high-grade caps were selected and applied to the raw  dataset:  • 3L7 (Mooifontein): gold grades were capped at 0.60g/t;  • 3L8 (GMTS): gold grades were capped at 0.60g/t; and  • 3L5 (Diepkloof): two domains (compartments) were modelled and gold grades were also  capped at 0.60g/t.  Capping was only applied to raw data and its impact on the mean was immaterial.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 73  3L5 (Diepkloof TSF) was domained into two areas because of physical separation between the two  compartments (Homestead and Diepkloof).  Figure 11.1:  3L7 (Mooifontein): Distribution of Raw Gold Capped Data
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 74  Figure 11.2:  3L7 (Mooifontein): Distribution of Composited Gold Data      Figure 11.3:  3L8 (GMTS): Distribution of Raw Gold Capped Data
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 75  Figure 11.4:  3L8 (GMTS): Distribution of Composited Gold Data      Figure 11.5: 3L5 (Diepkloof: Diepkloof): Distribution of Raw Gold Capped Data
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 76  Figure 11.6: 3L5 (Diepkloof: Diepkloof): Distribution of Composited Gold Data      Figure 11.7:  3L5 (Diepkloof: Homestead): Distribution of Raw Gold Capped Data
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 77  Figure 11.8:  3L5 (Diepkloof: Homestead): Distribution of Composited Gold Data      11.9.2 Modelling and Estimation Parameters  Half the drill hole spacing was chosen as the block size. Block size of 100m-by-100m-by-6m was  chosen for the TSFs. Sub-celling was allowed for better volume definition.  The sample search parameters are supplied in Table 11.3.  Table 11.3: Search Parameters: Inverse Distance Estimation Method  TSF Domain  Estimation  Pass  Search Distance Minimum  Number of  Composites  Maximum  Number of  Composites  X  (m)  Y  (m)  Z  (m)  3L7 (Mooifontein) Mooifontein  1 300 300 6 5 20  2 600 600 12 5 20  3 900 900 18 5 20  3L8 (GMTS) GMTS  1 400 400 10 4 10  2 800 800 20 4 10  3 1,200 1,200 30 4 10  3L5 (Diepkloof)  Homestead  1 400 400 10 4 10  2 800 800 20 4 10  3 1,200 1,200 30 4 10  Diepkloof  1 400 400 10 4 10  2 800 800 20 4 10  3 1,200 1,200 30 4 10
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 78  11.9.3 Technical and Economic Factors  11.9.3.1 Site Infrastructure  Crown Complex is located in a well-developed area (Johannesburg) with most mining infrastructure  in place. Johannesburg is a megacity and is one of the 100th largest urban cities in the world.  Johannesburg was established in the 1880s following the discovery of gold.  Roads: Access to the Crown Complex is via the N1 highway and a network of well-maintained paved  road systems.  Power: Power requirements are primarily for the operation of pumps and site offices. Power is sourced  from the national supplier, the Electricity Supply Commission (Eskom). There is a power supply from  the 17# Shaft substation to the surrounding areas and the TSFs.   Site Offices and Workshop: Site offices are typically established by mining contractors as part of the  mining contract. Workshops for maintenance of roads, pumps and pipelines are based at the Ergo  processing plant and no additional infrastructure is required.  Crown Complex is situated in the City of Johannesburg, so other specialized services could be  sourced from the private workshops.  Pumps and Pipelines: Before mining could start, the pump station and pipeline to the Ergo processing  plant in Brakpan need to be completed. A pipeline of approximately 20km will be required to supply  slime to City Deep. There is already a pipeline infrastructure to transport slime to Ergo Plant from City  Deep; this may need to be upgraded along with a water supply pipeline at a later stage.  Water: Water is required during mining as the hydraulic mining method is suitable for Crown Complex.  A Mining Right renewal application has been launched. Crown Complex has the majority of the  water uses authorized and would only require minor amendments, but this would only be 100%  defined when the entire scope and design of the project is finalized. Ergo is confident that it could  meet the formal requirements for a water use license to be issued.  Tailings Deposition Site: Ergo expects permits for a Crown Complex deposition site to be granted  closer to reclamation once it is eventually included in the future LoM plan. Refer to Item 15.7 for more  detail on deposition plans.  11.9.3.2 Mine Design and Planning  Hydraulic mining is suitable for the Crown Complex. Hydraulic mining can loosely be defined as the  excavation of material from its in situ state using water. A stream of water is directed at the tailings  material with the purpose of mechanically breaking and/or softening the material so that it can be  carried away by the water flow. The application or effectiveness of the method is a function of a  variety of factors ranging from the size, velocity and pressure of the water stream to the location,  hardness, particle size and moisture content of the material to be mined.  Hydraulic mining is typically undertaken using 100mm or 150mm monitor guns, with increased  production achieved by the inclusion of additional units. This provides a high degree of flexibility that  allows simultaneous mining at a number of points over a wide range of production rates.  Consequently, grade blending is readily achievable.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 79  A production rate of 3 x 600ktpm is assumed from Crown Complex due to pipeline capacity.  11.9.3.3 Processing Plant  Crown Complex material could be processed at Ergo’s processing plant as discussed in Item 10 and  the results presented in Table 10.1. The slime material is not significantly different to the tailings  material processed at the Ergo processing plant. The Ergo processing plant details are in Item 14.  11.9.3.4 Environmental Compliance and Permitting  A Mining Right renewal application was launched with the DMRE. Compliance and permitting are  discussed in Item 3.2 and 17.  11.9.3.5 Initial Assessment Results  The QP’s opinion is that there is a reasonable prospect for economic extraction based on the total  mix of technical and financial factors discussed. A cut-off grade is discussed in Item 12.2.11.7.    11.9.4 Mineral Resource Classification Criteria  A list of the criteria used to classify the Mineral Resources is given in Table 11.4. Applying these  confidence levels, Mineral Resource classification codes were assigned to the block model. A low  confidence in one of the listed items will mean classification is downgraded to Inferred, a moderate  confidence in at least one item will mean a property is Indicated while all highs mean the property  is in the Measured Mineral Resource category.  Table 11.4: Confidence Levels for Key Criteria for Mineral Resource Classification  Items Discussion Confidence  Drilling Techniques RC drilling technique to international standards High  Logging Detailed logging throughout High  Drill Sample Recovery  The sample recovery was considered satisfactory and was  acceptable for mineral resource estimation  High  Sub-sampling Techniques  and Sample Preparation  Material has previously been processed and quartering was  applied  High  Quality of Assay Data  Available data is of robust quality however there is a relatively high  variability in the lowest grade assays  High  Verification of Sampling  and Assaying  A comprehensive QC program implemented during exploration High  Location of Sampling  Points  Survey of all collars and TSFs surfaces High  Data Density and  Distribution  Data points were well spread, though widely spaced.  Approximately 200m-by-200m spacing was followed  Moderate  Database Integrity Errors identified and rectified High  Geological Interpretation Geometry is known accurately High  Bulk Density A mean density of 1.42t/m3 was considered reasonable High  Mineralization Type Mineralization is well known from processing High  Estimation and Modelling  Techniques  NN and Inverse Distance High
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 80    The drill hole spacing was approximately 200-by-200m on all the TSFs. With this grid, the grade, floor  elevation and TSF geometry were estimated with sufficient confidence to allow the application of  modifying factors in sufficient detail to support mine planning and evaluation of the economic  viability of the TSFs. All TSFs’ material was classified as Indicated Mineral Resources. No Measured  Mineral Resource was declared as the drill space is still too wide to conclusively define grade  continuity and volume. No Inferred Mineral Resource was declared as drilling provided sufficient  information.  The data or supporting information is derived from adequately detailed and reliable exploration,  sampling and testing and is sufficient to assume geological and grade or quality continuity between  points of observation.  11.9.5 Mineral Resource Statement  As no Mineral Reserve was declared, inclusive is equal to exclusive Mineral Resource for the Crown  Complex (Table 11.5).  Table 11.5: Crown Complex Mineral Resource Estimate (Exclusive)  TSF  Mineral  Resource  Category  Mineral Resources as at 30 June  2022 (Exclusive)  Mineral Resources as at 30 June  2023 (Exclusive)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  Measured Mineral Resources - - - - - -  Mooifontein (3L7) Indicated 67,559 0.23 499,577 67,559 0.23 499,577  GMTS (3L8) Indicated 107,450 0.25 863,649 107,450 0.25 863,649  Diepkloof (3L5) Indicated 97,988 0.23 724,589 97,988 0.23 724,589  Sub-total Indicated Mineral  Resources  272,997 0.24 2,087,815 272,997 0.24 2,087,815  Sub-total Measured and  Indicated Mineral Resources  272,997 0.24 2,087,815 272,997 0.24 2,087,815  Inferred Mineral Resources - - - - - -  Total Mineral Resource 272,997 0.24 2,087,815 272,997 0.24 2,087,815    11.9.6 Mineral Resource Changes  There was no change in Mineral Resource as no drilling, mining or additional deposition was done on  Crown Complex.  11.9.7 Mineral Resource Risks and Uncertainty  The application to renew the Mining Right was launched in 2014 and Ergo has since been constantly  engaging with the DMRE. This report has considered section 24(5) of the MPRDA, as amended; as  quoted below:  “A mining right in respect of which an application for renewal has been lodged shall despite its  expiry date remain in force until such time as such application has been granted or refused.”  The QP classified the overall Mineral Resource risk as medium due to the lower grades of the Crown  Complex.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 81  In the opinion of the QP, no further technical work is required as the drilling program provided  sufficient data to define grade and tonnage.  11.10 City Deep Complex  11.10.1 Exploratory Data Analysis  Figure 11.9 to Figure 11.14 show the frequency distributions of the gold grades on 4L3, 4L4 and 4L6.  Data was analyzed as raw, capped and composites. There was no material change between the  data sets. The data sets show a positively skewed distribution.  Based on the high-grade cap investigations, high-grade caps were selected and applied to the raw  dataset. A little/insignificant reduction in the available metal is noted.  • 4L3: capped at 0.65g/t Au;  • 4L4: capped at 0.65g/t Au; and  • 4L6: capped at 0.50g/t Au.  Figure 11.9: 4L3: Distribution of Raw Gold Capped Data
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 82  Figure 11.10: 4L3: Distribution of Composited Gold Data      Figure 11.11: 4L4: Distribution of Raw Gold Capped Data
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 83  Figure 11.12: 4L4: Distribution of Composited Gold Data      Figure 11.13: 4L6: Distribution of Raw Gold Capped Data
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 84  Figure 11.14: 4L6: Distribution of Composited Gold Data      11.10.2 Modelling and Estimation Parameters  A block model with 100m-by-100m blocks was constructed for 4L3, 4L4 and 4L6 inside the respective  volumes. Tonnages and grades were estimated into the block model. The parent block sizes selected  to estimate the deposit approximate the drill hole spacing. The tailings bench heights are 5m to 8m  high. The QP selected 6m in the Z direction for the City Deep Complex to correspond with the  average bench height.  The sample search parameters are supplied in Table 11.6.  Table 11.6: Search Parameters: Inverse Distance Estimation Method  TSF Estimation Pass  Search Distance Minimum  Number of  Composites  Maximum  Number of  Composites  X  (m)  Y  (m)  Z  (m)  4L3  1 400 400 10 4 10  2 800 800 20 4 10  3 1,200 1,200 30 4 10  4L4  1 400 400 10 4 10  2 800 800 20 4 10  3 1,200 1,200 30 4 10  4L6  1 400 400 10 4 10  2 800 800 20 4 10  3 1,200 1,200 30 4 10
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 85  11.10.3 Technical and Economic Factors  Item 13 to Item 19 were considered in declaring the Mineral Resource estimates.  11.10.4 Mineral Resource Classification Criteria  An additional list of the criteria used by the QP to classify the Mineral Resource estimates in addition  to the statistical parameters is given in Table 11.7. Applying these confidence levels, Mineral Resource  classification codes were assigned to the block model. A low confidence in one of the listed items  will mean classification is downgraded to Inferred, a moderate confidence in at least one item will  mean a property is Indicated while all highs mean the property is in the Measured Mineral Resource  category.  Table 11.7: Confidence Levels of Key Criteria for Classification of the TSFs Mineral Resources  Items Discussion Confidence  Drilling Techniques Auger to industry standards High  Logging Detailed logging throughout High  Drill Sample Recovery  The sample recovery is estimated as >90% and was considered  acceptable for Mineral Resource estimation  High  Sub-sampling  Techniques and  Sample Preparation  Material has previously been processed and was submitted directly  for sampling  High  Quality of Assay Data Available data is of robust quality High  Verification of  Sampling and  Assaying  A comprehensive QC program was implemented High  Location of Sampling  Points  Survey of all collars and TSF surfaces High  Data Density and  Distribution  Approximately 100m-by-100m spacing was followed High  Geological  Interpretation  Geometry is known accurately High  Mineralization Type Mineralization is well known from processing High  Estimation and  Modelling Techniques  Inverse distance used for resource declaration. NN used for validation High    The QP classified the Mineral Resources into the Measured Mineral Resource Category as the drill  hole spacing was tight enough (approximately 100m apart) to provide sufficient evidence of grade  continuity and estimate tons with high confidence. No Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resources  were declared.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 86  11.10.5 Mineral Resource Statement  Table 11.8 to Table 11.9 present Mineral Resources for 4L3, 4L4 and 4L6 as at 30 June 2023.  Table 11.8: City Deep Complex Mineral Resource Estimates (Inclusive)  TSF  Mineral Resource  Category  Mineral Resources as at 30 June 2022  (Inclusive)  Mineral Resources as at 30 June 2023  (Inclusive)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  4L3 Measured 13,134 0.32 135,126 13,134 0.32 135,126  4L4 Measured 4,738 0.32 48,746 4,738 0.32 48,746  4L6 Measured 2,410 0.31 24,020 2,410 0.31 24,020  Sub-total Measured Mineral  Resources  20,282 0.32 207,891 20,282 0.32 207,891  Indicated Mineral Resources - - - - - -  Sub-total Measured and  Indicated Mineral Resources  20,282 0.32 207,891 20,282 0.32 207,891  Inferred Mineral Resources - - - - - -  Total Mineral Resource 20,282 0.32 207,891 20,282 0.32 207,891    Table 11.9: City Deep Complex Mineral Resource Estimates (Exclusive)  TSF  Mineral  Resource  Category  Mineral Resources as at 30 June 2022  (Exclusive)  Mineral Resources as at 30 June 2023  (Exclusive)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  4L3 Measured - - - - - -  4L4 Measured - - - - - -  4L6 Measured - - - - - -  Sub-total Measured  Mineral Resources  - - - - - -  Indicated Mineral  Resources  - - - - - -  Sub-total Measured and  Indicated Mineral  Resources  - - - - - -  Inferred Mineral  Resources  - - - - - -  Total Mineral Resource - - - - - -    11.10.6 Mineral Resource Changes  There was no change in Mineral Resources as no drilling, mining or additional deposition was done  on 4L3, 4L4 and 4L6 TSFs.  11.10.7 Mineral Resource Risks and Uncertainty  The QP’s opinion is that the overall grade and tonnage estimates are reasonable for mine planning  based on the drill hole data and assay statistics.  The gold price fluctuations present the main risk to the declared Mineral Resource estimates.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 87  Risks of grade, continuity of mineralization and tonnes were mitigated through a reasonable drilling  space, validation procedures, metallurgical testing, advanced statistical analyses and the use of  robust modelling techniques.  The QP classified the overall Mineral Resource risk as low. In the opinion of the QP, no further technical  work is required as the drilling program provided enough data to define continuity.  11.11 Knights Complex  11.11.1 Exploratory Data Analysis  Statistics of the sample population from raw, capped and composited data are given in Figure 11.15.  At 4L14, both slime and soil were mineralized, with soil having a maximum grade of 1.96g/t Au. The  spread of both the slimes and soil data is not large which indicates that the grade variability is low.  The gold grades for soil were capped at 0.94g/t to reduce the over-estimation of soil gold resources.  Capping reduced the mean by about 10%; however, this is due to a lack of data rather than a large  volume of high-grade material. The slimes grades were composited into 6m intervals. The soil domain  was not composited as there was not enough data. The 6m composites were based on numerous  statistical tests and bench height. The bench height is 5m to 6m high.  Figure 11.15: 4L14: Distribution of Slime Raw Data
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 88  Figure 11.16: 4L14: Log Distribution of Slime Raw Data      Figure 11.17: 4L14: Distribution of Slime 6m Composited Data
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 89  Figure 11.18: 4L14: Log Distribution of Slime 6m Composited Data      Figure 11.19: 4L14: Distribution of Soil Raw Data
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 90  Figure 11.20: 4L14: Log Distribution of Soil Raw Data      Figure 11.21: 4L14: Distribution of Soil Raw Capped Data
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 91  Figure 11.22: 4L14: Log Distribution of Soil Raw Capped Data          11.11.2 Modelling and Estimation Parameters  4L14: The parent block size for the TSF was based on the average drill spacing and compositing  interval. The height of the dump benches is around 5m to 6m. The parent block size selected to  estimate the deposit approximates half the drill hole spacing. Sub-blocking was allowed for good  volume definition. The soil was modelled as a separate domain. The soil was modelled because it  had high gold values; the QP attributed this high gold value to gold remobilization from the TSF.  Estimation Parameters for 4L14 are given in Table 11.10.  Table 11.10: 4L14: Search Parameters: Inverse Distance Estimation Method  Domain  Estimation  Pass  Search Distance  Minimum  Number of  Composites  Maximum  Number of  Composites  Maximum  Number of  Composites  per Drill Hole  X  (m)  Y  (m)  Z  (m)  Slime  1 500 500 12 5 10 2  2 1,000 1,000 24 5 10 2  3 1,500 1,500 36 5 10 2  Soil  - - - - - - -  - - - - - - -  - - - - - - -
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 92    A number of search parameters were tested; optimum parameters were chosen by the QP.  11.11.3 Technical and Economic Factors  Item 13 to Item 19 were considered in declaring the Mineral Resource Estimates. The technical studies  were done at a PFS level. As at 30 June 2023, there were no mining activities on 4L14.  11.11.4 Mineral Resource Classification Criteria  The 4L14 TSF was classified using a number of criteria including data density, estimation statistics and  TSF knowledge and interpretation. For classification purposes, blocks estimated within the first search  radius were classified as Measured Mineral Resources. The TSFs were classified as Measured Mineral  Resources.  A list of the criteria used to classify the Mineral Resources in addition to the statistical parameters, is  given in Table 11.11. Applying these confidence levels, Mineral Resource classification codes were  assigned to the block model. A low confidence in one of the listed items will mean classification is  downgraded to Inferred, a moderate confidence in at least one item will mean a property is  Indicated while all highs mean the property is in the Measured Mineral Resource category.  Table 11.11: Confidence Levels of Key Criteria for Classification of the 4L14 TSF Mineral  Resources  Items Discussion Confidence  Drilling Techniques Auger to international standards High  Logging Detailed logging throughout High  Drill Sample Recovery  The sample recovery is estimated as >90% and is considered  acceptable for Mineral Resource estimation  High  Sub-sampling Techniques  and Sample Preparation  Material has previously been processed and can be submitted  directly for sampling  High  Quality of Assay Data  Available data is of robust quality however there is a relatively  high variability in the lowest grade assays  High  Verification of Sampling and  Assaying  A comprehensive QC program implemented during exploration High  Location of Sampling Points Survey of all collars and TSFs surfaces High  Data Density and  Distribution  Drilled with auger drill holes at 100m-by-100m High  Database Integrity Errors identified and rectified High  Geological Interpretation Geometry is known accurately High  Mineralization Type Mineralization is well known from processing High  Estimation and Modelling  Techniques  NN and Inverse Distance Squared High    The TSF was classified as Measured due to a tight drill hole spacing of <100m and high data quality.  This spacing enabled the QP to estimate tonnage and grade continuity with high confidence.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 93  11.11.5 Mineral Resource Statement  Table 11.12 present the Mineral Resource for 4L14.  Table 11.12: Knights Complex Mineral Resource Estimates (Inclusive)  TSF  Mineral  Resource  Category  Mineral Resources as at 30 June 2022  (Inclusive)  Mineral Resources as at 30 June 2023  (Inclusive)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  4L14 Measured 6,638 0.29 61,891 6,638 0.29 60,824  Sub-total Measured  Mineral Resources  6,638 0.29 61,891 6,638 0.29 60,824  Indicated Mineral  Resources  - - - - - -  Sub-total Measured and  Indicated Mineral  Resources  6,638 0.29 61,891 6,638 0.29 60,824  Inferred Mineral  Resources  - - - - - -  Total Mineral Resource 6,638 0.29 61,891 6,638 0.29 60,824    Table 11.13: Knights Complex Mineral Resource Estimates (Exclusive)  TSF  Mineral  Resource  Category  Mineral Resources as at 30 June 2022  (Inclusive)  Mineral Resources as at 30 June 2023  (Inclusive)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  4L14 Measured - - - - - -  Sub-total Measured  Mineral Resource  - - - - - -  Indicated Mineral  Resource  - - - - - -  Sub-total Measured and  Indicated Mineral  Resources  - - - - - -  Inferred Mineral Resource - - - - - -  Total Mineral Resources - - - - - -    11.11.6 Mineral Resource Changes  No mining has taken place on 4L14 TSF.  11.11.7 Mineral Resource Risks and Uncertainty  The QP’s opinion is that the overall grade and tonnage estimates are reasonable for mine planning  based on the drill hole data and assay statistics.  The gold price fluctuations present the main risk to the declared Mineral Resource estimates.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 94  Risks of grade, continuity of mineralization and tonnage were mitigated through a reasonable drilling  spacing, validation procedures, metallurgical testing, advanced statistical analyses and the use of  robust modelling techniques.  The QP classified the overall Mineral Resource risk as low. In the opinion of the QP, no further technical  work is required as the drilling program provided enough data to define continuity.  11.12 Ergo Complex  11.12.1 Exploratory Data Analysis  11.12.1.1 Rooikraal  Exploratory data analysis was done on raw and composited gold data (Figure 11.23 and  Figure 11.24). The distribution of the raw and composite is symmetrical with similar coefficient of  variation and a low standard deviation.   Based on the high-grade cap investigations, the QP decided not to apply high-grade capping as  no extreme values were noted.  Figure 11.23: Rooikraal: Distribution of Raw Gold Data
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 95  Figure 11.24: Rooikraal: Log Distribution of Composited Gold Data        11.12.1.2 7L15  A comprehensive study on the 2015 versus the 2016 to 2017 datasets was performed. The 2015  dataset has higher grades than the 2016 to 2017 dataset. The 2015 dataset reported an average  gold grade of 0.34g/t and the 2016 to 2017 dataset has an average gold grade of 0.26g/t.  A decision was made to re-drill three drill holes and compare the 2015 samples against the 2016  samples in the same horizon. The 2016 samples were split on-site into three subsamples and were sent  to two different laboratories. One batch was sent to the local mine laboratory (MAED at Ergo plant)  and two batches of the same sample sets were sent to the Anglo Lab with completely different  sample numbers to avoid the laboratory identifying that the samples were from the same drillholes.  The results of the re-drilling showed that the old 7L15 data (2015) analyzed by the MAED (Crown)  laboratory were over-reported and should not be used in the Mineral Resource evaluation. Only the  2016 to 2017 drilling campaign dataset could be used for the estimation. The MAED laboratory  analyzing the 2016 samples is a new laboratory at the Ergo processing plant and not the old  laboratory at the Crown processing plant, which analyzed the 2015 samples.  Domaining: 7L15 has two physically visible TSFs and the grades of the TSFs are different (Figure 11.25).  The layering in each domain did not continue into the other. The South and North domains were  separated for Mineral Resource evaluation. The North TSF (Figure 11.26 and Figure 11.27) has lower  grades than the South TSF (Figure 11.28 and Figure 11.29). The North domain has an average grade  of  0.23g/t Au and the South domain reported an average grade of 0.30g/t Au.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 96  Figure 11.25: 7L15: Plan showing North and South Domains
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 97  Figure 11.26: 7L15: Distribution of 2015 Raw Data - North Domain      Figure 11.27: 7L15: Log Distribution of 2016 Raw Data - North Domain
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 98  Figure 11.28: 7L15: Distribution of 2015 Raw Data - South Domain      Figure 11.29: 7L15: Log Distribution of 2016 Raw Data - South Domain
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 99  The statistical characteristics of the North and South domains are shown in Figure 11.30 to  Figure 11.33. Compositing was completed at 3m interval.  Figure 11.30: 7L15: Distribution of 3m Composited Slime Data - South Domain      Figure 11.31: 7L15: Log Distribution of 3m Composited Slime Data - South Domain
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 100  Figure 11.32: 7L15: Distribution of 3m Composited Slime Data - North Domain      Figure 11.33: 7L15: Log Distribution of 3m Composited Slime Data - North Domain
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 101  11.12.2 Modelling and Estimation Parameters  11.12.2.1 Rooikraal  The height of the original dump benches is approximately 5m to 6m. The parent block sizes selected  to estimate the deposit approximate the drill hole spacing (at least a drill hole in a block) and map  the bench height.  A number of search parameters were tested and optimum parameters were chosen by the QP. The  sample search parameters are supplied in Table 11.14.  Table 11.14: Rooikraal: Search Parameters: Inverse Distance Estimation Method  Domain  Estimation  Pass  Search Distance  Minimum  Number of  Samples  Maximum  Number of  Samples  Maximum  Number of  Samples per  Drill Hole  X  (m)  Y  (m)  Z  (m)  Rooikraal  1 600 600 12 6 18 5  2 1,200 1,200 24 6 18 5  3 1,800 1,800 36 6 18 5    11.12.2.2 7L15  The parent block sizes for the 7L15 TSFs were based on the average drill spacing and compositing  interval. The parent block sizes selected to estimate the deposit approximate half the borehole  spacing. Sub-blocking was allowed for good volume definition. The search parameters are  presented in Table 11.15.  Table 11.15: 7L15: Search Parameters: Inverse Distance Estimation Method  Domain  Estimation  Pass  Search Distance  Minimum  Number of  Composites  Maximum  Number of  Composites  Maximum  Number of  Composites  per Drill Hole  X  (m)  Y  (m)  Z  (m)  North  1 400 400 6 2 5 -  2 800 800 12 2 5 -  3 1,200 1,200 24 2 5 -  South  1 400 400 6 2 5 -  2 800 800 12 2 5 -  3 1,200 1,200 24 2 5 -    11.12.3 Technical and Economic Factors  The QP used the PFS information (Item 13 to Item 19) to declare that the Rooikraal and 7L15 TSFs have  reasonable prospects for economic extraction.  The QP opinion is that there is a reasonable prospect for economic extraction based on the total mix  of technical and economic factors discussed.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 102  11.12.4 Mineral Resource Classification Criteria  A list of the criteria used to classify the Mineral Resources, in addition to the statistical parameters, is  given in Table 11.16. Applying these confidence levels, Mineral Resource classification codes were  assigned to the block model. A low confidence in one of the listed items will mean classification is  downgraded to Inferred, a moderate confidence in at least one item will mean a property is  Indicated while all highs mean the property is in the Measured Mineral Resource category.  Table 11.16: Ergo: Confidence Levels for Key Criteria for Mineral Resource Classification  Items Discussion Confidence  Drilling Techniques  Auger for 7L15 and for Rooikraal TSF, RC and auger drilling  techniques were used. These methods are industry standard for  drilling TSFs  High  Logging Detailed logging throughout High  Drill Sample Recovery  The sample recovery was considered satisfactory and was  acceptable for Mineral Resource estimation  High  Sub-sampling Techniques  and Sample Preparation  Material has previously been processed and quartering was  applied  High  Quality of Assay Data  Available data is of robust quality however there is a relatively high  variability in the lowest grade assays  High  Verification of Sampling  and Assaying  A comprehensive QC program implemented during exploration High  Location of Sampling  Points  Survey of all collars and TSFs surfaces High  Data Density and  Distribution  Data points were well spread. Approximately 100m-by-100m  spacing was followed  High  Database Integrity Errors identified and rectified High  Geological Interpretation Geometry is known accurately. High  Bulk Density  A mean density of 1.42t/m3 was considered reasonable with a  potential upside  High  Mineralization Type Mineralization is well known from processing High  Estimation and Modelling  Techniques  NN and Inverse Distance High    The drillhole spacing was approximately 100m-by-100m. With this grid, the grade, floor elevation and  TSF geometry were estimated with sufficient confidence to allow the application of modifying factors  in sufficient detail to support mine planning and evaluation of the economic viability of the TSF. Some  auger drill holes that did not intersect the floor, had the floor defined by the RC drill holes. All the RC  drill holes intersected the floor or the base. The TSF material was classified as a Measured Mineral  Resource.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 103  11.12.5 Mineral Resource Statement  The Mineral Resource in Table 11.17 to Table 11.18 is 100% attributable to DRDGOLD.  Table 11.17: Ergo Mineral Resource Estimates (Inclusive)  TSF  Mineral  Resource  Category  Mineral Resources as at 30 June 2022  (Inclusive)  Mineral Resources as at 30 June 2023  (Inclusive)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  7L15 Measured 17,646 0.26 147,506  17,646 0.26 147,506   Rooikraal Measured 56,763 0.26 474,493  56,763 0.26 474,493   Sub-total Measured  Mineral Resources  74,409 0.26 621,999 74,409 0.26 621,999  Indicated Mineral  Resources  - - - - - -  Sub-total Measured and  Indicated Mineral  Resources  74,409 0.26 621,999 74,409 0.26 621,999  Inferred Mineral  Resources  - - - - - -  Total Mineral Resource 74,409 0.26 621,999 74,409 0.26 621,999    Table 11.18: Ergo Mineral Resource Estimates (Exclusive)  TSF  Mineral  Resource  Category  Mineral Resources as at 30 June 2022  (Exclusive)  Mineral Resources as at 30 June 2023  (Exclusive)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  7L15 Measured - - - - - -  Rooikraal Measured - - - - - -  Sub-total Measured  Mineral Resources  - - - - - -  Indicated Mineral  Resources  - - - - - -  Sub-total Measured and  Indicated Mineral  Resources  - - - - - -  Inferred Mineral  Resources  - - - - - -  Total Mineral Resource - - - - - -    11.12.6 Mineral Resource Changes  There was no change in the Mineral Resource as no mining or additional deposition was done on the  Rooikraal and 7L15 TSFs.  11.12.7 Mineral Resource Risks and Uncertainty  The QP classified the overall Mineral Resource risk for both the Rooikraal and 7L15 TSFs as medium  due to the low-grade margin, gold price, recovery and working costs.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 104  In the opinion of the QP, no further technical work is required as the drilling program provided  sufficient data to define continuity.  11.13 Marievale Complex  11.13.1 Exploratory Data Analysis  Exploratory data analysis was done on raw and composited gold data (Figure 11.34 to Figure 11.41).  Data was analyzed as raw, capped and composites. There was no material change between the  data sets. The data sets distribution is symmetrical.  Based on the investigation, cutting or capping of the extreme values was considered. Lower extreme  grades were noted and visualized in 3D space. They were considered part of the population:  • 7L4: capping was applied at 0.45g/t Au. All gold grades greater than 0.45g/t were set as  0.45g/t;  • 7L5: no capping was applied as no outliers were noted;  • 7L6: no capping was applied as no outliers were noted; and  • 7L7: capping was applied at 0.70g/t Au to minimize the impact of extremely high values.  A study on domaining was conducted. The TSFs were not domained laterally or vertically; however,  the QP noted the vertical stratification. This stratification aided in defining the search volume  (estimation parameter) in a vertical direction.  The gold distributions are symmetrical and the variability is low, typical for a TSF.    Figure 11.34:   7L4: Distribution of Capped Raw Gold Data
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 105    Figure 11.35:   Distribution of Composited Raw Gold Data        Figure 11.36: 7L5: Distribution of Raw Gold Data
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 106  Figure 11.37: 7L5: Distribution of Composited Gold Data        Figure 11.38:  7L6: Distribution of Raw Gold Data
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 107  Figure 11.39:  7L6: Distribution of Composited Gold Data        Figure 11.40:  7L7: Distribution of Raw Capped Gold Data
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 108  Figure 11.41:  7L7: Distribution of Composited Capped Gold Data        11.13.2 Modelling and Estimation Parameters  The height of the original dump benches is approximately 5m to 6m. The parent block size selected  to estimate the deposit approximates half the drill hole spacing and corresponds to the bench height  or multiple thereof. Sub-blocking was allowed for good volume definition.  The sample search parameters are supplied in Table 11.19.  Table 11.19: Search Parameters: Inverse Distance Estimation Method  Domain Estimation Pass  Search Distance  Minimum  Number of  Composites  Maximum  Number of  Composites  Maximum  Number of  Samples Per  Drill Hole  X  (m)  Y  (m)  Z  (m)  Slime  1 400 400 6 3 10 2  2 800 800 12 3 10 2  3 1,200 1,200 18 3 10 2    11.13.3 Technical and Economic Factors  The technical and financial studies completed for the Marievale Complex were at the preliminary  feasibility study (PFS) level of accuracy (i.e., +/-25%) as presented in Item 13 to Item 19. The QP  concluded that there are reasonable prospects for economic extraction.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 109  11.13.4 Mineral Resource Classification Criteria  A list of the criteria used to classify the Mineral Resources is given in Table 11.20. Applying these  confidence levels, Mineral Resource classification codes were assigned to the block model. A low  confidence in one of the listed items will mean classification is downgraded to Inferred, a moderate  confidence in at least one item will mean a property is Indicated while all highs mean the property  is in the Measured Mineral Resource category.  Table 11.20: Confidence Levels for Key Criteria for Mineral Resource Classification  Items Discussion Confidence  Drilling Techniques Auger drilling technique to international standards High  Logging Detailed logging throughout High  Sub-sampling Techniques  and Sample Preparation  Material has previously been processed and quartering was  applied  High  Quality of Assay Data  Available data is of robust quality however there is a relatively  high variability in the lowest grade assays  High  Verification of Sampling  and Assaying  A comprehensive QC program implemented during exploration High  Location of Sampling Points Survey of all collars and TSFs surfaces High  Data Density and  Distribution  Data points were well spread High  Database Integrity Errors identified and rectified High  Geological Interpretation Geometry is known accurately High  Bulk Density A mean density of 1.42t/m3 was considered reasonable High  Mineralization Type Mineralization is well known from processing High  Estimation and Modelling  Techniques  NN, and Inverse Distance High      The material was classified as a Measured Mineral Resource as drill hole spacing was approximately  100m-by-100m. No Indicated or Inferred Mineral Resources were declared as the geological  confidence derived from exploration, test work and Mineral Resource estimation work was  conclusive, and the defined Mineral Resource can be used for mine planning studies.  11.13.5 Mineral Resource Statement  The Mineral Resource Estimates are stated as both an inclusive and exclusive of Mineral Reserve  (Table 11.21 to Table 11.22).
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 110  Table 11.21: Marievale Mineral Resource Estimates (Inclusive)  TSF  Mineral  Resource  Category  Mineral Resources as at 30 June 2022  (Inclusive)  Mineral Resources as at 30 June 2023  (Inclusive)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  7L4 Measured 17,590 0.34 192 281 17,590 0.34 192,281  7L5 Measured 6,980 0.29 65 080 6,980 0.29 65,080  7L6 Measured 12,760 0.26 106 663 12,760 0.26 106,663  7L7 Measured 16,784 0.32 172 678 16,784 0.32 172,678  Sub-total Measured  Mineral Resources  54,114 0.31 536,701 54,114 0.31 536,701  Indicated Mineral  Resources  - - - - - -  Sub-total Measured and  Indicated Mineral  Resources  54,114 0.31 536,701 54,114 0.31 536,701  Inferred Mineral  Resources  - - - - - -  Total Mineral Resource 54,114 0.31 536,701 54,114 0.31 536,701    Table 11.22: Marievale Resource Estimates (Exclusive)  TSF  Mineral  Resource  Category  Mineral Resources as at 30 June 2022  (Exclusive)  Mineral Resources as at 30 June 2023  (Exclusive)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  7L4 Measured - - - - - -  7L5 Measured - - - - - -  7L6 Measured - - - - - -  7L7 Measured - - - - - -  Measured Mineral  Resources  -  -  -  -  -  -   Indicated Mineral Resources - - - - - -  Sub-total Measured and  Indicated Mineral Resources  - - - - - -  Inferred Mineral Resources -  -  -  -  -  -   Total Mineral Resources - - - - - -    Notes:  1. Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves.  2. Mineral Resources are reported exclusive of Mineral Reserves.  3. Mineral Resources have been reported in accordance with Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K.  4. Mineral Resources were estimated using the USD1,934/oz, ZAR17.39/USD and ZAR1,081,261/kgUSD1,934/oz, ZAR17.39/USD and  ZAR1,081,261/kg financial parameters and recoveries in Item 11.13.3.  5. A troy ounce = 31.1034768g  6. The quantities and grades have been rounded to two decimal places; therefore, minor computational errors may occur.  11.13.6 Mineral Resource Changes  There was no change in Mineral Resources as no drilling, mining, or additional deposition was done  on the Marievale Complex since the latest estimate.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 111  11.13.7 Mineral Resource Risks and Uncertainty  The QP’s opinion is that the overall grade and tonnage estimates are reasonable for mine planning  based on the drill hole data and assay statistics. This presents a low risk for preliminary feasibility or  feasibility mine planning work, as only Mineral Resources with the highest level of geoscientific  knowledge are included in an economic assessment.  The gold price fluctuations present the main risk to the declared Mineral Resource.  Risks of grade and continuity of mineralization were mitigated through the closely spaced drilling,  validation procedures, metallurgical testing, advanced statistical analyses and the use of robust  geological modelling techniques.  The QP classified the overall Mineral Resource risk as low to medium. In the opinion of the QP, no  further technical work is required as the drilling program provided enough data to define continuity.  11.14 Grootvlei Complex  11.14.1 Exploratory Data Analysis  Analysis of data from different campaigns was completed to check compatibility. Tools used for this  were box plots, histograms, PP and QQ plots, and ANOVA table. Datasets from different campaigns  were then combined.  Based on the high-grade cap investigations, high-grade caps were selected and applied to the raw  dataset. An insignificant reduction in the available metal was noted.  • 6L16: gold grades were capped at 0.70g/t;  • 6L17: gold grades were capped at 0.69g/t; and  • 6L17A: gold grades were capped at 0.65g/t.  Capping was only applied to raw data and its impact on the mean was immaterial for the 6L17 and  6L17A TSFs. One sample with 16.10g/t skewed the results for the 6L16 TSF. Additional infill drilling is  required on 6L16 TSF to further test the robustness of the high grade intersects, which, if confirmed by  the infill drilling, may support a less aggressive capping strategy.  Figure 11.47 to Figure 11.42 presents the basic statistics data for 6L16, 6L17 and 6L17A. Data was  analyzed as raw, capped and composites. There was no material change between the data sets.  The data sets show positively skewed distributions.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 112  Figure 11.42:  6L16: Distribution of Raw Capped Gold Data      Figure 11.43:  6L16: Distribution of Composited Gold Data
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 113  Figure 11.44:  6L17: Distribution of Raw Capped Gold Data      Figure 11.45:  6L17: Distribution of Composited Gold Data
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 114  Figure 11.46:   6L17A: Distribution of Raw Capped Gold Data      Figure 11.47:   6L17A: Distribution of Composited Gold Data
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 115  11.14.2 Modelling and Estimation Parameters  The parent block size for the TSF was largely based on the average drill spacing and sample  compositing interval. The height of the original dump benches is approximately 5m to 6m. The parent  block size selected to estimate the deposit approximates the drill hole spacing for the 6L17 and 6L17  TSFs, half the drill hole spacing for 6L16 TSFs and maps the bench height. Sub-blocking was allowed  for a good volume definition.  The sample search parameters are supplied in Table 11.23.  Table 11.23: Search Parameters: Inverse Distance Estimation Method  Domain Estimation Pass  Search Distance Minimum  Number of  Composites  Maximum  Number of  Composites  X  (m)  Y  (m)  Z  (m)  Grootvlei  1 400 400 10 5 20  2 800 800 20 5 20  3 1,200 1,200 30 5 20    11.14.3 Technical and Economic Factors  The Mineral Resource Estimates for the 6L16, 6L17 and 6L17A TSFs were declared considering the initial  assessment completed. The Grootvlei TSFs are not included in the LoM plan. The cut-off grade details  are presented in Table 11.2.  11.14.3.1 Site Infrastructure  Roads: Access to the Grootvlei Complex is via the N17 highway and a network of well-maintained  paved road systems. The operation is accessed via gravel roads.  Power: Power requirements are primarily for the operation of pumps and site offices. Power is sourced  from the national supplier, Eskom. There is a power supply near the TSFs.  Site Offices and Workshop: Site offices are typically established by mining contractors as part of the  mining contract. Workshops for the maintenance of roads, pumps and pipelines is based at the Ergo  processing plant and no additional infrastructure is required.  The Grootvlei Complex is situated in the City of Ekurhuleni, so other specialized services could be  sourced from the private workshops.  Pumps and Pipelines: Before mining can start, the pump station and pipeline to the Ergo processing  plant in Brakpan will be required to be completed. As other TSFs in the same vicinity are in the LoM  plan with a detailed pipeline plan, it is the QP’s view that a shorter (less than 5km) pipeline will be  required to connect the Grootvlei TSFs to the other planned pipeline network (for Daggafontein TSF  in the LoM plan done at PFS level).  Tailings Deposition Site: Ergo expects permits for a Grootvlei Complex deposition site to be granted  closer to reclamation once it is eventually included in the future LoM plan. See Item 15.7 for more  information on the deposition plans.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 116  11.14.3.2 Mine Design and Planning  Mine design and planning will be similar to the one in Item 13.1.1. A production rate of between  600ktpm and 900ktpm (200ktpm to 300ktpm per TSF) is assumed due to the pipeline capacity as the  TSFs could be mined together with others in the same vicinity.  11.14.3.3 Processing Plant  The Grootvlei Complex material could be processed at the Ergo processing plant (see Item 10.5.).  11.14.3.4 Environmental Compliance and Permitting  Ergo’s Prospecting Rights covering the Grootvlei Complex are presented in Item 3.3.  Ergo complies with all environmental and social responsibilities as required by the MPRDA, as  amended. No known environmental issues were identified during the site visit and documentation  review. There is an EMP approved by the DMRE. There are no exclusions of material or areas due to  Environmental, Social and Governance considerations.  As discussed in Item 3.6, there is a competing ownership claim over the Grootvlei Complex.  11.14.3.5 Initial Assessment Results  The QP’s opinion is that there is a reasonable prospect for economic extraction based on the total  mix of technical and economic factors discussed.  11.14.4 Mineral Resource Classification Criteria  A list of the criteria used to classify the Mineral Resources, in addition to the statistical parameters, is  given in Table 11.24. Applying these confidence levels, Mineral Resource classification codes were  assigned to the block model. A low confidence in one of the listed items will mean classification is  downgraded to Inferred, a moderate confidence in at least one item will mean a property is  Indicated while all highs mean the property is in the Measured Mineral Resource category.  Table 11.24: Confidence Levels for Key Criteria for Mineral Resource Classification  Items Discussion Confidence  Drilling Techniques Auger and RC drilling technique to international standards High  Logging Detailed logging throughout High  Drill Sample Recovery  The sample recovery was considered satisfactory and was  acceptable for Mineral Resource estimation  High  Sub-sampling  Techniques and  Sample Preparation  Material has previously been processed and quartering was applied High  Quality of Assay Data  Available data is of robust quality however there is a relatively high  variability in the lowest grade assays  High  Verification of  Sampling and  Assaying  Full QC program implemented during exploration High  Location of Sampling  Points  Survey of all collars and TSFs surfaces High
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 117  Data Density and  Distribution  Data points were well spread, though widely spaced. Approximately  100m-by-100m spacing was followed for 6L17 and 6L17A TSFs. 6L16 TSF  has an average drill hole spacing of 200m-by-200m  High (6L17  and 6L17A)  Moderate for  6L16  Database Integrity Errors identified and rectified High  Geological  Interpretation  Geometry is known accurately High  Bulk Density A mean density of 1.42t/m3 was considered reasonable High  Mineralization Type Mineralization is well known from processing High  Estimation and  Modelling  Techniques  NN and Inverse Distance High    The drill hole spacing was approximately 100-by-100m on the 6L17 and 6L17A TSFs. With this grid, the  grade, floor elevation and TSF geometry were estimated with sufficient confidence to allow the  application of modifying factors in sufficient detail to support mine planning and evaluation of the  economic viability of the TSFs. The 6L17 and 6L17A TSFs were classified in the Measured Mineral  Resource category. The 6L16 TSF was declared as Indicated Mineral Resource, as the drill space is  too wide (200m-by-200m).  The data or supporting information is derived from adequately detailed and reliable exploration,  sampling and testing and is sufficient to assume geological and grade or quality continuity between  the points of observation.  11.14.5 Mineral Resource Statement  The Mineral Resource Estimates for the Grootvlei Complex is presented in Table 11.25. No Mineral  Reserve was declared on the Grootvlei TSFs, so exclusive and inclusive are equal.  Table 11.25: Grootvlei Complex Mineral Resource Estimates (Exclusive)  TSF  Mineral  Resource  Category  Mineral Resources as 30 June 2022  (Exclusive)  Mineral Resources as at 30 June 2023  (Exclusive)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  6L17 Measured 49,320 0.26 412,275 49,320 0.26 412,275  6L17A Measured 16,716 0.26 140,807 16,716 0.26 140,807  Sub-total Measured  Mineral Resources  66,036 0.26 553,082 66,036 0.26 553,082  6L16 Indicated 41,619 0.26 347,901 41,619 0.26 347,901  Sub-total Indicated  Mineral Resources  41,619 0.26 347,901 41,619 0.26 347,901  Sub-total Measured and  Indicated Mineral  Resources  107,655 0.26 900,984 107,655 0.26 900,984  Inferred Mineral  Resources  - - - - - -  Total Mineral Resource 107,655 0.26 900,984 107,655 0.26 900,984
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 118  11.14.6 Mineral Resource Changes  There was no change in Mineral Resource as no additional drilling, mining, additional deposition or  study was done on the Grootvlei Complex.  11.14.7 Mineral Resource Risks and Uncertainty  There is an ownership claim as detailed in Item 3.6.  The QP classified the overall Mineral Resource risk as medium due to lower grades and ownership  claim. In the opinion of the QP, no further technical work is required as the drilling program provided  sufficient data to define continuity.  11.15 5A10/5L27 Sand Dumps  11.15.1 Exploratory Data Analysis  Exploratory data analysis was performed on gold grades. No capping was applied as data shows no  extreme values. Samples were composited to 6m interval. The mean did not change materially after  compositing into 6m interval.  Figure 11.48 and Figure 11.49 present the basic statistical data for the 5A10/5L27 sand dumps. Data  was analyzed as raw and composites. There was no material changed between the data sets. The  data sets show positively skewed distribution.  Figure 11.48:  5A10/5l27: Distribution of Raw Gold Data
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 119  Figure 11.49:  5A10/5l27: Distribution of Composited Gold Data      11.15.2 Modelling and Estimation Parameters  The parent block size for the sand dumps was largely based on the average drill spacing and sample  compositing interval. The height of the original sand dump benches is approximately 3m to 6m. The  parent block size selected to estimate the deposit approximates the drill hole spacing and maps the  bench height. Sub-blocking was allowed for a good volume definition.  The sample search parameters are supplied in Table 11.26.  Table 11.26: Search Parameters: Inverse Distance Estimation Method  Domain Estimation Pass  Search Distance Minimum  Number of  Composites  Maximum  Number of  Composites  X  (m)  Y  (m)  Z  (m)  5A10/5l27  1 100 50 4 10 100  2 200 100 4 10 200  3 200 200 4 10 300    11.15.3 Technical and Economic Factors  The QP declared the Mineral Resource estimate for the 5A10/5L27 sand dumps, considering  technical and economic studies in Item 13 to Item 19.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 120  11.15.4 Mineral Resource Classification Criteria  A list of the criteria used to classify the Mineral Resources, in addition to the statistical parameters, is  given in Table 11.27. Applying these confidence levels, the Mineral Resource classification codes  were assigned to the block model.  Table 11.27: Confidence Levels for Key Criteria for Mineral Resource Classification  Items Discussion Confidence  Drilling Techniques Auger and drilling technique to international standards High  Logging Detailed logging throughout High  Drill Sample Recovery  The sample recovery was considered satisfactory and was  acceptable for Mineral Resource estimation  High  Sub-sampling Techniques  and Sample Preparation  Material has previously been processed and quartering was  applied  High  Quality of Assay Data  Available data is of robust quality however there is a relatively  high variability in the lowest grade assays  High  Verification of Sampling  and Assaying  Full QC program implemented during exploration High  Location of Sampling Points Survey of all collars and TSFs surfaces High  Data Density and  Distribution  Data points were well spread, though widely spaced.  Approximately 50m-by-100m spacing was followed. Where drill  holes did not intersect the base, holes were completed on the  edge  High  Database Integrity Errors identified and rectified High  Geological Interpretation Geometry is known accurately High  Bulk Density A mean density of 1.42t/m3 was considered reasonable High  Mineralization Type Mineralization is well known from processing High  Estimation and Modelling  Techniques  NN and Inverse Distance High    The drill hole spacing enabled the QP to define gold grades, floor elevation and sand dump  geometry. This provides the QP conclusive confidence to allow the application of modifying factors  in sufficient detail to support mine planning and evaluation of the economic viability of the sand  dumps. The sand dumps were classified as Measured Mineral Resources. The data or supporting  information is derived from the adequately detailed and reliable exploration, sampling and testing  and is sufficient to assume geological and grade or quality continuity between points of observation.  The resource model and production data reconciled well with less than a 1% grade difference. This  was also considered in classifying the 5A10/5L27 sand dumps as Measured Mineral Resources.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 121  11.15.5 Mineral Resource Statement  The Mineral Resource estimates for the 5A10/5L27 sand dumps are presented in Table 11.25 to Table  11.29.  Table 11.28: 5A10/5L27 Mineral Resource Estimates (Inclusive)  TSF    Mineral  Resource  Category  Mineral Resources as at 30 June  2022 (Inclusive)  Mineral Resources as at 30 June  2023 (Inclusive)   Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  5L27 (East)  Measured 3,979 0.48 62,503 2,999 0.48 46,661  5L27  (North)    Measured 4,288 0.28 38,599 4,288 0.28 38,599  5A10  Measured 1,595 0.61 31,285 650 0.61 12,752   Sub-total Measured  Mineral Resources  9,862 0.42 132,387 7,937 0.38 98,012   Indicated Mineral  Resources  - - - - - -   Sub-total Measured and  Indicated Mineral  Resources  9,862 0.42 132,387 7,937 0.38 98,012   Inferred Mineral  Resources  - - - - - -   Total Mineral Resource 9,862 0.42 132,387 7,937 0.38 98,012    Table 11.29: 5A10/5L27 Mineral Resource Estimates (Exclusive)  TSF  Mineral  Resource  Category  Mineral Resources as 30 June 2022  (Exclusive)  Mineral Resources as at 30 June 2023  (Exclusive)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  5L27 Measured - - - - - -  5A10 Measured - - - - - -  Sub-total Measured Mineral  Resources  - - - - - -  Indicated Mineral  Resources  - - - - - -  Sub-total Measured and  Indicated Mineral  Resources  - - - - - -  Inferred Mineral Resources - - - - - -  Total Mineral Resource - - - - - -    11.15.6 Mineral Resource Changes  Mining took place on the 5A10 sand dump reclaiming 808kt at 0.61g/t Au in the last financial year.  The mined and modelled tonnage and grades reconciled well.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 122  11.15.7 Mineral Resource Risks and Uncertainty  The QP’s opinion is that the overall grade and tonnage estimates are reasonable for mine planning  based on the borehole data and assay statistics. Production data reconciled well with the block  model.  The gold price fluctuations and lower grades of sand material present the main risk to the declared  Mineral Resource.  The QP classified the overall Mineral Resource risk as low to medium. In the opinion of the QP, no  further technical work is required as the drilling program provided enough data to define continuity.  11.16 Daggafontein TSF  11.16.1 Exploratory Data Analysis  The QP tested if there was a material difference in the gold grades from the various drilling  campaigns to ascertain if the datasets from the different campaigns were compatible. Figure 11.50  shows the box plots of the different campaigns. The difference was considered minor by the QP. The  2017 drilling campaign reported slightly higher grades. This campaign, however only comprised two  drill holes (on either side of the TSF – east and west). Analysis of variance and a Tukey (Honest  Significant Differences) HSD plot showed that there is a difference in sample means between 2017  and the other campaigns. The QP investigated the differences and concluded that the difference  is due to the amount of data per campaign and the spatial distribution of the data point.  Accordingly, the QP concluded that data from the campaigns could be combined.  Figure 11.50: Boxplots for the Different Drilling Campaigns
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 123  The drill hole individual sample gold grades are positively skewed. The mean of the gold grades is  0.24g/t.  Based on the statistical investigation, cutting or capping of the extreme values was not considered  (Figure 11.51). Lower extreme grades were noted and visualized in 3D space. They were considered  part of the population.  Figure 11.51: Log Probability Plot      A study on domaining was conducted. This was done through analysis of zones based on TSF  material, color and spatial grade analysis. The TSF was not domained laterally or vertically, however,  the QP noted the vertical stratification. This stratification aided in defining the search volume in the  vertical direction.  No capping was applied.  11.16.2 Modelling and Estimation Parameters  The parent block size for the TSF was largely based on the average drill spacing and sample  compositing interval.  The sample search parameters are supplied in Table 11.30.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 124  Table 11.30: Search Parameters: Inverse Distance Estimation Method  Domain Estimation Pass  Search Distance  Minimum  Number of  Composites  Maximum  Number of  Composites  Maximum  Number of  Samples Per  Drill Hole  X  (m)  Y  (m)  Z  (m)  Slime  1 500 500 6 5 20 4  2 1,000 1,000 12 5 20 4  3 1,500 1,500 18 5 20 4    11.16.3 Technical and Economic Factors  The QP declared the Mineral Resource estimates for the Daggafontein TSF considering technical and  economic studies in Item 13 to Item 19.  The Daggafontein TSF's average gold grade is 0.24g/t, which is above the cut-off grade of 0.225 g/t  presented in Table 11.2. Selective mining of the TSF is not practised by Ergo, therefore a cut-off is not  at the block level but it is for the entire TSF. If a TSF mean grade is above the cut-off, it is considered  for the Mineral Resource.  The QP’s opinion is that there is a reasonable prospect for economic extraction based on the total  mix of technical and economic factors discussed.  11.16.4 Mineral Resource Classification Criteria  A list of the criteria used to classify the Mineral Resources is given in Table 11.31 below. Applying these  confidence levels, Mineral Resource classification codes were assigned to the block model.  Table 11.31: Confidence Levels for Key Criteria for Mineral Resource Classification  Items Discussion Confidence  Drilling Techniques RC drilling technique to international standards High  Logging Detailed logging throughout High  Sub-sampling Techniques and  Sample Preparation  Material has previously been processed and quartering  was applied  High  Quality of Assay Data  Available data is of robust quality however there is a  relatively high variability in the lowest grade assays  High  Verification of Sampling and Assaying Full QC program implemented during exploration High  Location of Sampling Points Survey of all collars and TSFs surfaces High  Data Density and Distribution Data points were well spread. No drilling under water  Moderate  (low for  underwater  material)  Database Integrity Errors identified and rectified High  Geological Interpretation Geometry is known accurately High  Bulk Density A mean density of 1.42t/m3 was considered reasonable High  Mineralization Type Mineralization is well known from processing High  Estimation and Modelling Techniques NN, Inverse Distance and Ordinary Kriging High
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 125  Where drill hole spacing is less than 250m, the material was classified as an Indicated Mineral  Resource (Figure 11.52). An Inferred Mineral Resource was defined for the area under water where  drilling could not be done and grades were estimated on the second pass i.e., up to 1,000m drilling  space.  Figure 11.52: Mineral Resource Classification      11.16.5 Mineral Resource Statement  The Mineral Resource is stated in Table 11.32 and Table 11.33.  Table 11.32: Daggafontein TSF Mineral Resource Estimate (Inclusive)  TSF  Mineral  Resource  Category  Mineral Resources as 30 June 2022  (Inclusive)  Mineral Resources as at 30 June 2023  (Inclusive)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  Measured Mineral Resources - - - - - -  Indicated Mineral Resources 192,793 0.24 1,487,625 192,793 0.24 1,487,625  Sub-total Measured and  Indicated Mineral Resources  192,793 0.24 1,487,625 192,793 0.24 1,487,625  Inferred Mineral Resources 21,318 0.24 164,494 21,318 0.24 164,494
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 126  Table 11.33: Daggafontein TSF Mineral Resource Estimate (Exclusive)  TSF  Mineral  Resource  Category  Mineral Resources as 30 June 2022  (Exclusive)  Mineral Resources as at 30 June 2023  (Exclusive)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  Measured Mineral Resources - - - - - -  Indicated Mineral Resources - - - - - -  Sub-total Measured and  Indicated Mineral Resources  - - - - - -  Inferred Mineral Resources 21,318 0.24 164,494 21,318 0.24 164,494    11.16.6 Mineral Resource Changes  There was no change in the Mineral Resource from June 2022 to June 2023, as no additional drilling  or studies were completed on the Daggafontein TSF.  11.16.7 Mineral Resource Risks and Uncertainty  The QP’s opinion is that the overall grade and tonnage estimates are reasonable for mine planning  based on the drill hole data and assay statistics. The Inferred portion of the Mineral Resource could  not be sufficiently drilled as this portion of the TSF remains saturated and its estimation was based on  extrapolation. This presents a low risk for preliminary feasibility or feasibility mine planning work, as no  Inferred Resource was included in an economic assessment.  The gold price fluctuations and lower grades present the main risk to the declared Mineral Resource.  Risks of grade and continuity of mineralization were mitigated through infill drilling, validation  procedures, metallurgical testing, advanced statistical analyses and the use of robust geological  modelling techniques.  The QP classified the overall Mineral Resource risk as low to medium. In the opinion of the QP, no  further technical work is required as the drilling program provided sufficient data to define continuity.  No drilling in the waterlogged area is recommended.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 127  11.17 Summary Mineral Resource Estimates  Table 11.34 presents the summary of the Mineral Resource estimates (inclusive) for the 18 TSFs and  the one sand dump. The Mineral Resource estimates are reported as inclusive of the Mineral Reserve  and the reference point is in situ.  Table 11.34: Inclusive Mineral Resources of the 18 Material Properties as at 30 June 2023  Complex TSF/Sand Dump Category  Mineral Resources as at 30 June  2022 (Inclusive)  Mineral Resources as at 30  June 2023 (Inclusive)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  City Deep  4L3 Measured 13,134 0.32 135,126 13,134 0.32 135,126  4L4 Measured 4,738 0.32 48,746 4,738 0.32 48,746  4L6 Measured 2,410 0.31 24,020 2,410 0.31 24,020  Knights  4L14 Measured 6,638 0.29 61,891 6,638 0.29 60,824  4L50* Measured 3,418 0.26 27,216     Ergo  7L15 Measured 17,646 0.26 147,506 17,646 0.26 147,506  Rooikraal Measured 56,763 0.26 474,493 56,763 0.26 474,493  Marievale  7L4 Measured 17,590 0.34 192,281 17,590 0.34 192,281  7L5 Measured 6,980 0.29 65,080 6,980 0.29 65,080  7L6 Measured 12,760 0.26 106,663 12,760 0.26 106,663  7L7 Measured 16,784 0.32 172,678 16,784 0.32 172,678  Grootvlei  6L17 Measured 49,320 0.26 412,275 49,320 0.26 412,275  6L17A Measured 16,716 0.26 139,732 16,716 0.26 139,732  5A10/5L27 5A10/5L27 Measured 9,862 0.42 132,387 7,937 0.38 98,012  Sub-total Measured Mineral Resources 234,759 0.28 2,139,027 229,416 0.28 2,077,436  Grootvlei 6L16 Indicated 41,619 0.26 347,901 41,619 0.26 347,901  Daggafontein Daggafontein Indicated 192,793 0.24 1,487,625 192,793 0.24 1,487,625  Crown  Mooifontein (3L7) Indicated 67,559 0.23 499,577 67,559 0.23 499,577  GMTS (3L8) Indicated 107,450 0.25 863,649 107,450 0.25 863,649  Diepkloof (3L5) Indicated 97,988 0.23 724,589 97,988 0.23 724,589  Sub-total Indicated Mineral Resources 507,409 0.24 3,923,341 507,409 0.24 3,923,341  Total Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources 742,168 0.25 6,062,368 736,825 0.25 6,000,777  Daggafontein Daggafontein Inferred 21,318 0.24 164,494 21,318 0.24 164,494  Total Inferred Mineral Resources 21,318 0.24 164,494 21,318 0.24 164,494  *4L50 was a material dump in FY2022, 4L50 is a cleanup site as at 30 June 2023. It is kept in this table for comparison/reconciliation purposes.  Additional Notes:  i. Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves.  ii. Mineral Resources are reported inclusive of Mineral Reserves.  iii. Mineral Resources have been reported in accordance with Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K  iv. Mineral Resources were estimated using the USD1,934/oz, ZAR17.39/USD and ZAR1,081,261/kg financial parameters and  recoveries in Table 11.2  v. Quantities and grades were rounded to reflect the accuracy of the estimates; and if any apparent errors are insignificant
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 128  Table 11.35 presents exclusive Mineral Resource estimates for the material properties.  Table 11.35: Exclusive Mineral Resources of the 18 Material Properties as at 30 June 2023  Complex TSF/Sand Dump Category  Mineral Resources as at 30  June 2022 (Exclusive)  Mineral Resources as at 30  June 2023 (Exclusive)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  Tonnes  (kt)  Au  (g/t)  Content  (oz)  City Deep  4L3 Measured - - - - - -  4L4 Measured - - - - - -  4L6 Measured - - - - - -  Knights  4L14 Measured - - - - - -  4L50 Measured        Ergo  7L15 Measured - - - - - -  Rooikraal Measured - - - - - -  Marievale  7L4 Measured - - - - - -  7L5 Measured - - - - - -  7L6 Measured - - - - - -  7L7 Measured - - - - - -  Grootvlei  6L17 Measured 49,320 0.26 412,275 49,320 0.26 412,275  6L17A Measured 16,716 0.26 140,807 16,716 0.26 140,807  5A10/5L27 5A10/5L27 Measured - - - - - -  Sub-total Measured Mineral Resources 66,036 0.26 553,082 66,036 0.26 553,082  Grootvlei 6L16 Indicated 41,619 0.26 347,901 41,619 0.26 347,901  Daggafontein Daggafontein Indicated    - - -  Crown  Mooifontein (3L7) Indicated 67,559 0.23 499,577 67,559 0.23 499,577  GMTS (3L8) Indicated 107,450 0.25 863,649 107,450 0.25 863,649  Diepkloof (3L5) Indicated 97,988 0.23 724,589 97,988 0.23 724,589  Sub-total Indicated Mineral Resources 314,616 0.24 2,435,716 314,616 0.24 2,435,716  Total Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources 380,652 0.24 2,988,798 380,652 0.24 2,988,798  Daggafontein Daggafontein Inferred 21,318 0.24 164,494 21,318 0.24 164,494  Total Inferred Mineral Resources 21,318 0.24 164,494 21,318 0.24 164,494  *4L50 was a material dump in FY2022, 4L50 is a cleanup site as at 30 June 2023. and is kept in this table for comparison/reconciliation purposes.  Additional Notes:  i. Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves.  ii. Mineral Resources are reported exclusive of Mineral Reserves.  iii. Mineral Resources have been reported in accordance with Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K.  iv. Mineral Resources were estimated using the USD1,934/oz, ZAR17.39/USD and ZAR1,081,261/kg financial parameters and  recoveries in Table 11.2.  vi. Quantities and grades were rounded to reflect the accuracy of the estimates; and if any apparent errors are  insignificant.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 129  The total Mineral Resource Estimates for Ergo are presented in Table 11.36 and Table 11.37. The total  Mineral Resource consisted of 18 material properties and 80 small TSFs and clean-up sites. The  changes in Mineral Resources from June 2022 to June 2023 are due to depletion of 15.98Mt at  0.34g/t Au and a positive survey adjustment of 4.75Mt at 0.33g/t Au, as presented in Figure 11.53 and  Figure 11.54. The depletion included the mining of Mineral Resources that were not included in the  LoM plan, i.e., the mining of Mineral Resources not converted into Mineral Reserves.  Table 11.36: Ergo Inclusive Mineral Resources Statement as at 30 June 2023  Mineral Resource  Classification  Mineral Resource as at 30 June 2022  (Inclusive)  Mineral Resource as at 30 June 2023  (Inclusive)  Tonnes  (Mt)  Au  (g/t)  Contents  (Moz)  Tonnes  (Mt)  Au  (g/t)  Contents  (Moz)  Measured Mineral Resource 266.25 0.31 2.64 251.75 0.30 2.41  Indicated Mineral Resource 568.21 0.25 4.55 571.47 0.25 4.65  Total Measured and  Indicated Mineral Resource  834.45 0.27 7.19 823.22 0.27 7.07  Inferred Mineral Resource 21.32 0.24 0.16 21.32 0.24 0.16    Table 11.37: Ergo Exclusive Mineral Resources Statement as at 30 June 2023  Mineral Resource  Classification  Mineral Resource as at 30 June 2022  (Exclusive)  Mineral Resource as at 30 June 2023  (Exclusive)  Tonnes  (Mt)  Au  (g/t)  Contents  (Moz)  Tonnes  (Mt)  Au  (g/t)  Contents  (Moz)  Measured Mineral Resource 66.04 0.26 0.55 66.45 0.26 0.56  Indicated Mineral Resource 375.41 0.25 3.06 375.30 0.25 3.06  Total Measured and  Indicated Mineral Resource  441.45 0.25 3.61 441.75 0.25 3.61  Inferred Mineral Resource 21.32 0.24 0.16 21.32 0.24 0.16
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 130  Figure 11.53: Mineral Resource Reconciliation (Inclusive)      Figure 11.54: Total Mineral Resource Reconciliation (Inclusive)   Tonnes  (Mt)  Au  (g/t)  Contents  (Moz)  Total Inclusive Mineral Resource as at 30 June 2022 855.77 0.27 7.35  Depletion through Mining (15.98) 0.34 (0.17)  Survey adjustments 4.75 0.33 0.05  Total Inclusive Mineral Resource as at 30 June 2023 844.53 0.27 7.23  1. Quantities and grades have been rounded to two decimal places; therefore minor computational errors may occur.    11.18 QP’s Opinion  In the QP’s opinion, all relevant technical and economic factors that may likely affect the reasonable  prospects of economic extraction were adequately considered for the Mineral Resources reported.  The QP recommended no further work.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 131  12 Mineral Reserve Estimates  This Item includes discussion and comments on the conversion of Mineral Resources to Mineral  Reserves. Specifically, comments are provided on the key assumptions, parameters and methods  (modifying factors) used to estimate the 30 June 2023 Mineral Reserve.  Mineral Reserves estimates are affected by multiple factors that change over time. Fluctuations in  the gold price, exchange rates, legislation in the operating country, other reporting jurisdictions and  a wide range of operating conditions may affect the Mineral Reserve estimates. Estimates of the  Mineral Reserves should be considered best estimates at the time of reporting.  The level of the study conducted to support the declaration of the 30 June 2023 Mineral Reserve is  based on a mine plan and design conducted to a PFS level of accuracy (i.e., +/-25%) with a  maximum level of contingency of 15%. Ergo utilizes Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources  incorporated into the LoM plan. No Inferred Mineral Resources have been used in the LoM plan.  12.1 Grade Control and Reconciliation  The Ergo LoM plan and schedule for the individual TSFs is based on 3-D geological models, which  provides grade, density, and volume for each individual block. The planning department takes this  information and establishes a grade for the proposed mining cut, typically in the order of 15m. The  mine plan accounts for each block, resulting in a tonnage and grade estimate for the entire mining  block or mining cut. The mining cut is then sequenced and scheduled.  Ergo conducts grade and tonnage reconciliations on a quarterly basis with no material difference  between the planned and actual grade and tonnages observed.  Table 12.1: Reconciliation of RoM Head Grade (Au)  Year  Plan RoM Head  Grade  (g/t)  Actual RoM Head  Grade  (g/t)  Head Grade  Difference  (g/t)  Percentage  Difference  (%)  2019/2020 0.358 0.354 -0.003 -1.13%  2020/2021 0.354 0.363 0.009 2.54%  2021/2022 0.347 0.366 0.018 5.19%  2022/2023 0,355 0,383 0.028 7.89%    Table 12.2: Reconciliation of RoM Tonnage  Year  Measured Survey  Tonnage  (kt)  Processing Plant  Tonnage  (kt)  Tonnage  Difference  (kt)  Percentage  Difference  (%)  2019/2020 20 265 20 086 -179 -0.9%  2020/2021 22 884 22 949 66 0.7%  2021/2022 22 810 21 553 -1 527 -6.7%  2022/2023 16 980 17 334 354 2.1%
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 132  The results in Table 12.1 and Table 12.2 indicate no material difference between the planned and  actual grade and planned and actual tonnages for years 2019/20 and 2020/21. However, the  2021/22 reconciliation between planned and actual grade indicates a 5.2% variance and the  2022/23 shows a 7.89% increase in the gold grade. Further, the reconciliation shows a 2.1% increase  in the planned tonnage during for the 2022/23 financial period. The higher grade is associated with  mining high-grade (Third-Party) mineralized material not in the LoM plan nor in the Mineral Reserve.  The increase in the tonnage was due to mining more tonnage than was planned.  12.2 Cut-off Grade Estimation  The cut-off grade, for the purposes of the Mineral Reserve definition, is defined as the grade at which  the value of the contained metal in a unit quantity is equivalent to the cost of its production, i.e., the  breakeven cut-off grade.  Cut-off Grade =  Total On-Mine Production Costs  (Metal Market Price – Off-Mine Costs) x Recovery    The gold price and other operational inputs are discussed in various Items of this Report; plant  recoveries are reviewed in Item 14, Item 16 reports on marketing and pricing, and operating costs  are commented on in Item 18. The cut-off grade and Mineral Reserve grades are provided in Table  12.3. Note that due to the nature of mining TSFs, the cut-off grade is not based on a block value or  individual sections of the TSF but based on the total TSF (i.e., if the entire TSF grade is above the cut- off grade, the TSF will be mined).  Table 12.3: LoM Cut-off Grade and Mineral Reserve Grades  Source Area  Plant Recovery  (%)  LoM Cut-off Au Grade  (g/t)  Mineral Reserve Au Grade  (g/t)  Ergo 41 0.23 0.28    Notes:  1. The LoM cut-off grade provided above is based on the June 2023 LoM plan and used to validate the 30 June 2023 Mineral Resource  and Mineral Reserve estimation.  1. Gold price ZAR1,081,261,488/kg (Item 16).  2. On-mine cost ZAR101.99/t (Item 18).  3. Off-mine cost ZAR0.00/t.  12.3 Estimation and Modelling Techniques  Ergo reports its Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves in accordance with Regulation S-K 1300. In  no case has Measured Mineral Resources been downgraded to a Probable Mineral Reserve  category.  Other than geological modelling, no other modelling or estimation techniques are used in the  selection of Mineral Reserves. Selection for inclusion in the Mineral Reserves is based on the average  grade of the TSF being above the required cut-off grade.  The following comments are relevant in the conversion of Mineral Resources to Mineral Reserves:  • there is no mining dilution, as each of the TSFs is to be mined and processed in their entirety;
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 133  • no allowance has been made for mining losses as each of the TSFs is to be mined and  processed in their entirety; and  • a LoM plan has been generated, reviewed and tested for economic viability in a discounted  cash flow (DCF) model. Cognizance has been taken of the geotechnical considerations  regarding the safety of the operation and long-term stability of the TSF walls, and the working  considerations are based on current and historical operational practices at Ergo.  12.4 Mineral Reserve Classification Criteria  The Mineral Reserve classification of Proven and Probable is a function of the Mineral Resource  classification with due considerations of the minimum criteria for the “modifying factors” as  considered in the S-K1300. In no case has Measured Mineral Resources been downgraded to a  Probable Mineral Reserve Category.  Ergo produces a single commodity, gold, and therefore the reporting of metal equivalents is not  relevant.  Due to the length of approval times for the renewal of permits, some of the Mineral Reserves may be  based on permits (approvals) still in the process of being renewed. At this time, there is no indication  that these renewals will not be granted and therefore have been used in the LoM plan and Mineral  Reserve statement.  12.5 Mineral Reserves Statement  Mineral Reserves are based on the 30 June 2023, LoM plan and schedule. The Ergo Mineral Reserve  statement as at 30 June 2023 is provided in Table 12.4 along with the previous Mineral Reserves as at  30 June 2022.  The QP confirms that the Mineral Reserve statement presented in Table 12.4 is disclosed in  accordance with the S-K1300 guidelines.    Table 12.4: Ergo TSF Mineral Reserves Statement as at 30 June 2023  Mineral Reserve  Classification  Mineral Reserves as at 30 June 2022 Mineral Reserves as at 30 June 2023  Tonnes  (Mt)  Au  (g/t)  Contents  (Moz)  Tonnes  (Mt)  Au  (g/t)  Contents  (Moz)  Proven 200.21 0.33 2.09 185.29 0,31 1.85  Probable 192.79 0.24 1.49 196.17 0.25 1.60  Total Mineral Reserves 393.00 0.28 3.58 381.46 0.28 3.45    Notes:  1. Tonnes and grades were rounded, and this may result in minor adding discrepancies.  2. The Mineral Reserve has been reported in accordance with the classification criteria defined in the Regulation S-K 1300.  3. The Mineral Reserve is estimated using the USD1,934/oz, ZAR17.39/USD and ZAR1,081,261/kg financial parameters.  4. No mining losses or dilution has been applied in the conversion process nor has a mine call factor been applied.  5. Tonnage and grade RoM delivered to the processing plant.  6. The attributable Mineral Reserve is 100% of the total Mineral Reserve.    The QP responsible for the reporting and sign-off of the Mineral Reserve is Professor Steven Rupprecht.  Professor Rupprecht is a Fellow of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (SAIMM)
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 134  with more than five years of experience relevant to the evaluation and reporting of TSF Mineral  Reserves.  Table 12.5 depicts the Mineral Reserve reconciliation between 30 June 2022, and 30 June 2023. Some  15.05Mt was depleted through mining operations; 3.5Mt was added due to survey adjustments,  Based on the above, a total tonnage of 11.49Mt has been subtracted, resulting in a 30 June 2023  Mineral Reserve of 381.46Mt at a grade of 0.28g/t.   Table 12.5: Mineral Reserve Reconciliation  Source  Tonnes  (Mt)  Au Grade  (g/t)  Content  (Moz)  Mineral Reserve as at 30 June 2022 393.00 0.28 3.58  Depletion through Mining Operations 15.05 0,33 0.16  Survey Adjustment 3.50 0.30 0.03  Mineral Reserve as at 30 June 2023 381.46 0.28 3.45    Note: Quantities and grades have been rounded to two decimal places, therefore minor computational errors may occur.    The various modifying factors, i.e., mining, metallurgical, processing, infrastructure, economic,  marketing, legal, environmental, social and governmental factors, are discussed in the following  Items of this Report.  12.6 QP Statement on the Mineral Reserve Estimation  The Mineral Reserves declared are estimated from the 30 June 2023 LoM plan which was developed  for the Ergo operations and is based on the Mineral Resource Estimates as at 30 June 2022, depleted  to 30 June 2023 together with a set of modifying factors based on recent operational results, and  economic inputs provided by Ergo. The assumptions applied in determining the modifying factors  and economic inputs are reasonable and appropriate. The LoM plan is in sufficient detail to ensure  achievability and is based on historical achievements. All the inputs used in the estimation of the  Mineral Reserves have been thoroughly reviewed and can be considered technically robust.  The QP applies a low risk to the Mineral Reserves but acknowledges there are several external factors  that can impact on Mineral Reserves, such as infrastructural, marketing, financial, environmental,  social, and governmental aspects.  Refer to Item 19.3, which discusses risk in more detail, and in  particular Item 19.3.11 that highlights the risk associated with Mineral Reserves.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 135  13 Mining Methods  Ergo’s business is the retreatment of old gold bearing sand dumps and slimes dams (termed TSFs) to  recover gold. Consequently, Ergo has acquired an extensive inventory of gold bearing sand and  slimes TSFs spread across the Central and East Rand goldfields produced from the historical  processing of gold ores of the Witwatersrand Supergroup, by the gold mines that operated across  the gold fields. These mines are now mostly defunct and stretch from the Crown, City Deep and  Knights processing plants in the Central Rand to the south of Johannesburg to the Grootvlei Mine in  the East Rand over some 70km.  The result of Ergo’s retreatment is the creation of a ‘new’ TSF, which tailings are deposited on a mega  TSF (Brakpan/Withok TSF) designed to modern standards. In this way, Ergo plays a dual role in creating  value and cleaning up the environment.  Ergo consists of the processing plant and pipeline infrastructure, the mining rights, licenses and  permits to access a large number of surface Mineral Resources (old tailings, slimes and sand dumps)  and the active Brakpan/Withok TSF.  Table 13.1 indicates Ergo’s historical operation results. The results show that since 2018 Ergo has  declined from nearly 24.3Mtpa to 21.0Mtpa. The 2023 tonnage profile was also lower due to  significant load sheading at the beginning of the year.  A further contributing factor to the reduction  in tonnage was the depletion of high-volume reclamation sites. Delays were also experienced in  obtaining the necessary authorizations to commence mining of the Rooikraal and Valley Silts TSFs.  Although operational tonnage was lower than planned, operational performances were boosted  by a higher gold price received for FY2023 (ZAR1 041,102/kg), reporting robust net cashflows. Ergo  has adjusted the planned RoM tonnage in the 2023 LoM plan targeting about 21Mtpa.  Table 13.1: Historical Ergo Operational Results  Year FY2023 FY2022 FY2021 FY2020 FY2019 FY2018  Mined Tonnes (t) ('000) 16,908 21,111 22,952 20,228 23,162 24,281  Gold Produced (kg) 3,882 4,156 4,263 3,989 4,493 4,679  Yield (g/t) 0,229 0,188 0,186 0,197 0,194 0,193  Note: Mined tonnes are based on survey measurements and may slightly differ with the processed tonnes. The QP considers the difference  immaterial.  13.1 Mining Method  The current mining methods applied by Ergo are suitable for all TSFs (dumps/dams) (Figure 13.1). No  selective mining will occur with the entire TSF being processed. No selective mining is the result of four  conditions inherent in the Ergo’s operation of reclaiming the dumps:  • there is nowhere on the mining sites to dump the below cut-off grade material;  • the mining method is not conducive to selective mining;   • the operation is a rehabilitation exercise, and all mineralized material must be removed from  the site, and it is, therefore, economically beneficial to process all material, even low-grade  material; and  • Concurrent rehabilitation takes place which reduces the environmental impact as well as the  rehabilitation liabilities.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 136  Figure 13.1:  Typical Tailing Storage Facility      13.1.1 Hydraulic Mining  The use of water plus energy to mine unconsolidated material has a long history. Documented and  physical evidence indicates widespread and sophisticated use in the Californian goldfields in the  mid-19th century. Thousands of kilometers of ditches and flumes were constructed to gravitate water  from the mountains to generate sufficient pressure to “flush” the alluvial gravel beds into sluices. In  recent years, however, the most popular techniques have been based on hydraulic mining used to  mine unconsolidated materials, alluvial deposits, freshly blasted ores and for the recovery (or mining)  of dewatered TSFs.  Hydraulic mining is loosely defined as excavating material from its in situ state using water. A stream  of water is directed at the mining face to mechanically break and/or soften the material so that the  water flow can carry it away. The application or effectiveness of the method is a function of various  factors ranging from the size, velocity and pressure of the water stream to the location, hardness,  particle size and moisture content of the material to be mined.  Hydraulic mining is typically undertaken using 100mm or 150mm monitor guns (Figure 13.2), with  increased production achieved by including additional units. Hydraulic mining provides a high  degree of flexibility that allows simultaneous mining at several points over a wide range of production  rates. Consequently, grade blending is readily achievable.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 137  Figure 13.2:  Example of Hydraulic Mining      Hydraulic mining in semi or near-saturated conditions is possible and common and has a clear  advantage over load-and-haul operations. Hydraulic mining does not create, but rather ameliorates  the airborne dust problem often associated with fine TSFs and dry mining techniques. A typical  generic hydraulic mining system is shown in Figure 13.3.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 138  Figure 13.3: Hydraulic Mining Process Diagram    Source: modified after J Engels, No Date  Note: the pumps have been excluded for clarity    The planning of hydraulic mining considers several factors:  • the required production rate;  • the life of the operation;  • the type of material to be mined (including hardness, density, grading, specific gravity,  degree of contamination (vegetation));  • the site topography, shape and form of the TSF;  • the slurry quality requirements;  • the pumping distances and pipeline topography  • water, power, equipment and labor availability.  Considering the abovementioned aspects allows the size and number of monitor guns to be  determined. Essentially, most applications require 1m3 of water per dry ton to be mined aiming for  50% solids. A monitor gun can be fitted with different diameter nozzles (100mm or 150mm) that allows  production rates to be “fine-tuned”.  Before the slurry enters the pumping facilities, it is usually necessary to pass the slurry through a screen  or series of screens depending upon the degree of contamination and oversize. Satellite pumps  pump slime into a thickener or header tank ahead of the processing plant that accommodates  surges in flow, grading or density.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 139  Hydraulic mining provides slurry feedstock to the mineral processing plant continuously. To maintain  production, high pressure water must be ensured. Slurry densities and production rates will not be  achieved if the water pressure is not maintained. Critical to hydraulic mining is consistent high slurry  densities. If densities drop, less tonnage is delivered to the processing plant, thus increasing the mining  cost. Figure 13.4 demonstrates a cross-sectional view of mining a TSF.  Figure 13.4: Typical Mining Method for a TSF      13.1.2 Conventional Load, Haul and Slurry  A second mining method employed by Ergo is the use of front-end loaders (FEL) to load slimes and  sand (Figure 13.5). In these cases, the FELs load from the bottom of the dump and transport the  mineralized material to a feed hopper which feeds a conveyor. The conveyor transports (Figure 13.6  to Figure 13.8) the mineralized material to the satellite pump station where it is mixed with water to  form a slurry then pumped to the processing plant. In other cases, the FELs load directly onto trucks  for transport to the processing plant.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 140  Figure 13.5: Example of Loading with a FEL      Figure 13.6: Example of Loading with a FEL into a Hopper
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 141  Figure 13.7: Example of Material on Conveyor      Figure 13.8: Slurry Point for Loading
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 142  13.2 Mining Sections  Ergo re-treats slimes and sand dumps from three sections, as depicted in Figure 13.9, the West  Section, Central Section, and the East Section.   In terms of the LoM plan and the Mineral Reserve statement, the following TSFs are considered  material for Ergo:  • 4L3 (13.1Mt);  • Rooikraal TSF (56.8Mt);  • 7L15 TSF (17.1Mt);  • Marievale Complex (54.1Mt); and  • Daggafontein TSF (192.8Mt).  The following TSFs, excluding the material TSFs listed above, are reported on an aggregate basis, as  they are included in the LoM plan and cumulatively make the Ergo operation economically viable.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 143  Figure 13.9: Ergo Sections
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 144  13.2.1 West Rand  No Mineral Reserve was declared.  13.2.2 Central Rand Section – City Section  Mining areas located from Soweto to City Deep are planned to be loaded and hauled to the  City Deep Basin or alternatively 4L25. Slurry is pumped from City Deep via a 600ktpm (500mm  NB pipe) pipeline to the Ergo processing plant. Operations from the City Section are planned  to be completed in September 2027 and the Knights Section is estimated to be completed in  December 2024.  Table 13.2 and Table 13.3 depict the working places in the Central Rand that are included in  the LoM plan and in the Mineral Reserve.  Table 13.2: Central Rand (City Section)  Workplace  Tonnage  (kt)  Grade AU  (g/t)  Recovery  (%)  3L1 Sand, 3A1, 3L17, 3L40, 3L43, 4L2, 4L25, 4L3, 4L4, 4L6  and Valley Silts  25,877 0.42 49    Table 13.3: Central Rand (Knights Section)  Workplace  Tonnage  (kt)  Grade AU  (g/t)  Recovery  (%)  4A15 – E and S, 4A18, Rose Slime and Rosherville 3,688  0.97   64     13.2.3 East Rand Section  Table 13.4 indicates the TSF working sites in the LoM Plan and included in the Mineral Reserve.    Table 13.4: East Rand Section (Ergo Section)  Workplace  Tonnage  (kt)  Grade AU  (g/t)  Recovery  (%)  4L13, 4L14, 4L23, 4L30, Cason  4L50, 4L49 Elsburg, 4L47 Elsburg, Benoni,5A10  5L27, 5L29, 6A1, 6L13, 6L14, 7L15, Rooikraal, 7L4, 7L5,  7L6, 7L7, Daggafontein  351,895 0.26 41    13.3 Mine Design and Schedule  The technical work/studies conducted by Ergo to support the conversion of Mineral  Resources to Mineral Reserves and to generate the on-going LoM plan are at least to a PFS  level of accuracy (i.e., +/-25%). The LoM schedule mines approximately 21Mtpa from several  TSF sites.  Table 13.5 provides the modifying factors used to convert the Mineral Resources to a Mineral  Reserve used in the 19-year LoM plan. Due to the nature of mining tailings and slimes TSFs,
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 145  no mining loss or dilution is applied in the conversion process. Recovery factors are based  on actual plant performances, which are reconciled annually.  In addition, as TSFs are man-made deposits placed on top of the original surface, a stripping  ratio is not applied to the mine design, although some vegetation (non-material volume)  may be removed before mining occurs.  Table 13.5: Summary of Modifying Factors for LoM Plan  Source Area/Plant  MCF  (%)  LoM Recovery  (%)  Mining Loss  (%)  Dilution  (%)  Total Ergo Operation 100 41 0 0    Note:  The recovery associated with the Mineral Reserves used in the LoM plan is 41%.             Tailing recoveries vary on a TSF-by-TSF basis    Table 13.6 provides the 30 June 2023 19-year LoM tonnage and recovered gold schedule  used to support the declaration of the Mineral Reserve. The LoM plan has a cut-off grade  of 0.23g/t Au, which is below the planned LoM head grade of 0.28g/t Au. The working cost  of ZAR101.99/t is based on the LoM plan. The current LoM plan is robust. However, it remains  sensitive to RoM grade, gold price, exchange rate, recovery, and operating costs.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 146    Table 13.6: Ergo Forecast Production from July 2023 to June 2042  Years  1 2 3 4 5 6 7  2023 to 2024 2024 to 2025 2025 to 2026 2026 to 2027 2027 to 2028 2028 to 2029 2029 to 2030   Tonnes  (kt)  Recovered  Au  (kg)  Tonnes  (kt)  Recovered  Au  (kg)  Tonnes  (kt)  Recovered  Au  (kg)  Tonnes  (kt)  Recovered  Au  (kg)  Tonnes  (kt)  Recovered  Au  (kg)  Tonnes  (kt)  Recovered  Au  (kg)  Tonnes  (kt)  Recovered  Au  (kg)  Sand 3,823 1,309 3,813 1,191 2,545 702 981 168 837 141      Slime 16,727 2,722 16,567 2,721 16,904 2,986 20,479 3,346 20,910 3,206 21,458 2,910 22,180 2,668  Total 20,550 4,030 20,380 3,913 19,449 3,689 21,460 3,514 21,747 3,346 21,458 2,910 22,180 2,668    Years  8 9 10 11 12 13 14  2030 to 2031 2031 to 2032 2032 to 2033 2033 to 2034 2034 to 2035 2035 to 2036 2036 to 2037   Tonnes  (kt)  Recovered  Au  (kg)  Tonnes  (kt)  Recovered  Au  (kg)  Tonnes  (kt)  Recovered  Au  (kg)  Tonnes  (kt)  Recovered  Au  (kg)  Tonnes  (kt)  Recovered  Au  (kg)  Tonnes  (kt)  Recovered  Au  (kg)  Tonnes  (kt)  Recovered  Au  (kg)  Sand         - - - -    Slime 21,600 2,615 21,600 2,524 21,520 2,709 21,747 2,450 21,574 1,914 21,600 1,874 21,600 1,874  Total 21,600 2,615 21,600 2,524 21,520 2,709 21,747 2,450 21,574 1,914 21,600 1,874 21,600 1,874    Years  15 16 17 18 19   Total  2037 to 2038 2038 to 2039 2039 to 2040 2040 to 2041 2041 to 2042    Tonnes  (kt)  Recovered  Au  (kg)  Tonnes  (kt)  Recovered  Au  (kg)  Tonnes  (kt)  Recovered  Au  (kg)  Tonnes  (kt)  Recovered  Au  (kg)  Tonnes  (kt)  Recovered  Au  (kg)     Tonnes  (kt)  Recovered  Au  (kg)  Sand  - - - - - - - - - -   11,999 3,511  Slime 21,600 1,874 21,600 1,874 21,600 1,874 21,600 1,874 9,598 866   382,464 44,880  Total 21,600 1,874 21,600 1,874 21,600 1,874 21,600 1,874 9,598 866   394,463 48,391
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 147  13.4 Geotechnical and Geohydrology  The Witwatersrand TSFs have been successfully and economically exploited for some time, and the  geotechnical and geohydrology characteristics are well understood from practical experience. A  safe bench height is dependent upon the material being mined and is also influenced by the  phreatic surface within the dump. No geotechnical or hydrological risks surrounding Ergo’s  operations have been identified that would impact the declaration of a Mineral Reserve. As no open  pit mining is taking place, the mine design does not account for slope angles but rather the natural  angle of repose from hydraulic mining. To ensure the competency of the wall, an angle of 45 ̊ is used  for mining.  No geotechnical or hydrological aspects affecting the surface deposits are significant to the  operation and the QP is unaware of any incidents regarding unexpected highwall failure.  Mining bench heights are in the order of 15m.  Hydraulic mining provides slurry feedstock to the processing plant continuously. To maintain  production, high pressure water must be ensured. Slurry densities and production rates will not be  achieved if the water pressure is not maintained. Critical to hydraulic mining is consistent high slurry  densities. If densities drop, less tonnage is delivered to the processing plant, thus increasing the unit  mining cost.  The following series of steps offer an overview of the hydraulic mining process:  • the water monitor washes the slime material of approximately 15m high benches with a  mining width of 15m and a length of 9m or more (“mining cut”);  • monitoring will be conducted from the bench of the TSF (i.e., top-down approach);  • the resulting slurry stream is channeled in the 15m wide mining cut, which forms a trough to  ensure a good flow of the slurry material to the pumps, which will then transport the slurry to  the processing plant; and  • approximately 6,950t/d (316tph) per water monitor is achievable equating to four hydraulic  monitors to produce 600ktpm.  The operating position of the monitor will be on the top of the mining cut and operating at a 45 ̊  angle, as seen in Figure 13.10. The reclamation gun position and bench angles are based on  experience and on-site observations.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 148  Figure 13.10: Hydraulic Mining with Monitor showing Distance and Angle      When FELs are used, care is taken to ensure that there is no undermining of the dump highwall with  operators being cognizant of the risks related to slumping highwalls. Dozers are used to remove over  hanging material where required. No geotechnical or hydrological aspects affecting the surface  deposits are significant to the operation and the QP is unaware of any incidents regarding  unexpected highwall failure.  13.5 Requirements for Stripping  As no underground mining is done, there is no underground development and backfilling required.  Other than minimal precleaning with a dozer of the top of the TSFs no pre-stripping is required at Ergo.    13.6 Mining Equipment and Personnel Requirements  The equipment required for hydraulic mining is as follows:  • Track or pedestal  mounted hydraulic monitors;  • water columns, 250mm diameter pipes to feed water to the hydraulic monitor;
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 149  • grizzly screen to remove debris from slurry;  • satellite pump stations  to pump slurry to main pump station; and  • main transfer pump station.  • Slurry pipeline to pump to the processing plant   For loading of sand, excavators, dozers, FELs, trucks and conveyors are required as shown in  Figure 13.2.2.  Ergo employs 744 full time employees and 1,856 special service providers, with service providers  deployed mostly in security, reclamation, and tailings deposition. The processing plants employ 376  persons.  13.7 Mine Plans  13.7.1 Introduction  The QPs have identified the material TSFs in the Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve.  In terms of the LoM plan and the Mineral Reserve statement, the following TSF are considered material  for Ergo:  • City Deep Complex - 4L3, 4L4 and 4L6 (20.28Mt);    • Rooikraal TSF (56.8Mt);  • 7L15 TSF (17.1Mt);  • Daggafontein (192.8Mt); and  • Marievale Complex – 7L4, 7L5, 7L6 and 7L7 (54.1Mt).  13.7.2 Central Rand  The 4L3, 4L4, and 4L6 (City Deep Complex) TSFs accounts for 20.28Mt and is considered material to  Ergo. The City Deep Complex commences mining operations in 2023 achieving a peak mining rate  of 5.2Mtpa and is completed in 2028.  13.7.3 East Rand (Ergo)  The Rooikraal TSF is scheduled to commence mining in 2023 and completes mining operations in 2034  Rooikraal starts up at 4.6Mt in 2023, with steady state production of 5.4Mt between 2027 and 2033.  The final year produces 4.4Mt as the remnant of the TSF is removed.  Mining of the Marievale Complex is scheduled to commence in 2026, starting with the mining of the  7L4 TSF, in 2027 the 7L5 TSF embarks with 7L6 and 7L7 TSFs begin mining in 2028. The Marievale complex  starts production at 4.7 Mtpa and reaching a steady state mining rate of 9.0Mtpa in 2028 with  production influenced by the various TSFs starting-up or winding down production. 7L15 TSF  commences mining in 2028 (at 2.8Mtpa) and completed in 2034.  Mining of the Daggafontein TSF commences in October 2031. The top cut is mined from 2031 until  2033, the middle cut of the TSF being mined for four years, from 2034 until 2037, and the bottom cut  mined from 2038 to 2041 (Figure 13.11, Figure 13.12 and Figure 13.13). Over the 11-year period the  Daggafontein TSF produces 192.8Mt at a grade of 0.24g/t Au.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 150  Figure 13.11: Daggafontein TSF Top Cut Mining Sequence      Figure 13.12: Daggafontein TSF Middle Cut Mining Sequence
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 151  Figure 13.13: Daggafontein TSF Bottom Cut Mining Sequence
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 152  14 Processing and Recovery Methods  14.1 Introduction  The Ergo processing plant located in Brakpan, is Ergo’s flagship metallurgical plant which currently  targets throughput of 1.75Mtpm to 1.80Mtpm. The City Deep processing plant has been reconfigured  to operate as a milling and pump station and feed the Ergo processing plant via a 50km pipeline.  The City Deep processing plant processes mineralized material from TSFs of the Central Rand areas  (i.e., Johannesburg, Germiston, and Boksburg), with mining operations scheduled to close in 2027.   The Knights Plant has been reconfigured to operate as a milling and pump station and feed the Ergo  processing plant with sand and slime and will operate until 2024.  The Ergo processing plant follows the conventional method of extracting gold. The plant has been in  operation for more than 15 years, with minor improvements conducted on a regular basis.  Ergo retreats historical tailings and the remaining gold in the TSFs is finely disseminated within the  material. The gold does not respond to physical recovery methods. Direct cyanidation has been  used for decades to solubilize the gold and then recover it by hydrometallurgical techniques. The  Carbon in leach (CIL) process is used with elution and final recovery by zinc precipitation which  produces >85% bullion quality.  14.2 Plant Feed Grade and Metallurgical Test Work  The Ergo processing plant is fed from at least 13 different mining sites (including sand and slime) that  are being mined and fed into the plant at any one time. Daily composites are submitted to the assay  laboratory for grade determination to assist with the management of the operations. A sub-sample  is split and composite samples over a week for metallurgical test work. A bottle roll test is conducted  utilizing the same parameters that are used on the full-scale plant. Should any deviations be  reported, further investigations are undertaken.  Prior to commencing reclamation of any mineralized material, a comprehensive drilling exercise is  carried out. As part of the evaluation, sub-samples are sent to Ergo’s in-house metallurgical research  laboratory for testing to assess the amenability of the material to cyanidation and what recoveries  can be expected. Mineralogy work is not carried out on a routine basis but on a needs-basis  associated with the exploration program.  Sand material that is coarse in nature, is first milled prior to cyanidation, while slimes material is  processed without pre-milling. All feed streams are combined before removing extraneous oversize,  which could contaminate the activated carbon, over linear screens. The material is leached with  cyanide at an elevated pH in mechanically agitated tanks. Carbon is then used to adsorb the  dissolved gold. The loaded carbon is removed from the circuit and the gold eluted off the carbon.  The gold is then finally recovered using zinc precipitation and smelting of doré bars.  The tailings are pumped to a large Mega TSF (Brakpan/Withok TSF) located south of the Ergo  processing plant. The Brakpan/Withok TSF as of June 2023 has a remaining capacity of approximately  ~450Mt after implementation of the facility’s final life design. The Ergo plant capacity is limited to  1.8Mtpm in order to maintain tailings in TSF in a stable and safe state, and gold recovery is between  30% and 50%.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 153  A 100% mine call factor is applied at the Ergo processing plant.  For planning purposes, Ergo uses the RoM head grade (i.e., the grade of the RoM material as  delivered to the processing plant) and the anticipated residue grade to estimate the recovery which  is the head grade minus residue grade multiplied by the tonnage treated.  During the life of each TSF, the mined grade is monitored and compared to the estimated Mineral  Reserve grade. Generally, these grades tend to track each other. When the TSF is completely mined,  a final reconciliation is conducted.  Metallurgical test work is carried out routinely using laboratory equipment and leach conditions,  which closely mimic the full-scale operation. The test work is considered representative as historical  results are consistent, and generally minor deviations are seen on numerous tests from the same  source material. The material differs slightly in terms of head grade, particle size and origin, so  different recovery factors are used for each source. Due to the consistency of the exploration and  metallurgical test work, no bulk sampling or pilot scaling test work is conducted.  No specific assumptions or allowances are made for deleterious elements in the material. They are  either screened out before entering the processing plant or if they cannot be removed, the  metallurgical test work results will include the impact. If the impact is too great, the material will not  be treated.  Cyanidation of gold bearing material, with elution of gold from the loaded carbon is a tried and  tested process and there is nothing novel about the process.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 154    Figure 14.1: Process Flow Diagram
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 155    Table 14.1: indicates the process recoveries for the various plants for the past two years, and the  planned average recoveries over the 19-year LoM. The recoveries are based on metallurgical test  work for the various tailings dumps, slimes and silted vleis that are scheduled to be mined over the  19-year LoM plan.  Table 14.1: Ergo Process Recoveries  Description 2020/2021 2021/2022 2022/2023  2023/42 LoM  Average  Total Mine 45.9% 48.9% 49.9% 41.0%    14.3 Mineral Process and Equipment Characteristics  The metallurgical process and equipment used at the Ergo processing plant is well tested and utilized  by numerous tailings retreatment operators in South Africa.  14.3.1 Reception  Material received from the various mining sites is first sampled through two in one slurry samplers and  then thickened in three large thickeners to produce an underflow with an SG of 1.45 for leaching  and for recovery of excess water.  14.3.2 De-sanding Section  Thickened material from the three large thickeners is pumped to a distribution box in the de-sanding  section. Here the tailings can be directed to four linear screens which have an 850μm aperture cloth  for the removal of debris to prevent contamination of the carbon. The undersize from the linear  screens is pumped up to a two-way distribution box ahead of the leach.  14.3.3 Carbon-in-Leach  The CIL section comprises of two streams of 11 tanks per stream. Each tank has a capacity of 2,000m3  and at a throughput of 1.8Mtpm gives a leach residence time of about 11.5 hours, with the first tank  being used for pre-conditioning with lime and oxygen.  Cyanide is added to the second and fourth tank in the leach train. Carbon is present in all but the  first two tanks and is retained by interstage screens. Carbon is moved counter-current up the leach  using recessed impeller pumps. The carbon concentration in the tanks is about 10 - 15g/l. Loaded  carbon is transferred to the four loaded carbon hoppers over vibrating screens. Loaded carbon  values vary between 200g/t and 300g/t.  CIL tailings flow through residue samplers before passing over four safety linear screens. Screened  material reports to a residue sump from where it is pumped to the Brakpan/Withok TSF through three  tailings pipelines using five of six installed D-frame pumps.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 156  14.3.4 Carbon Treatment  Loaded carbon is acid treated in 8.5t batches in four independent acid wash columns. The carbon  then reports to  four elution columns.  Loaded carbon is first screened over 850μm aperture size vibrating screens to remove slurry, before  it is washed with dilute hydrochloric acid to remove acid soluble contaminants. Acid washed carbon  is transferred to the elution column (after a neutralization with caustic) which is operated at elevated  temperatures and pressure (120°C and 120kPa) to strip gold off the carbon using a cyanide/caustic  solution (eluant).  The eluate, which now contains the gold in solution, is contacted with zinc powder to precipitate the  gold. This gold bearing sludge is then filtered in a plate and frame filter to remove precipitation tails.  The zinc precipitation tails pass through a “Policeman Column” filled with virgin carbon to recover  any gold in solution that was not recovered in the zinc precipitation process. The filtered sludge is  removed from the filter press before being calcined at 600 ̊C for 24 hours. The calcine cake is then  smelted in an arc furnace and cast into dorè bars.  Eluted carbon is regenerated in three rotating kilns at about 750 ̊C, two of which are electric kilns,  while the third is a gas kiln. On average about 120 elutions are conducted monthly.  14.3.5 Plant Services  Instrument Air: Instrument air is supplied to the float from one compressor house and the remainder  of the processing plant from a centrally located facility.  Process Water: Process water is made up of thickener overflow and return dam water and is  distributed throughout the processing plant by a network of pumps and pipes.  Fresh Water: Rand Water Board water is received at a reservoir for use in the processing plant and  directly for elution water, fire hydrants and human consumption.  Power: Bulk power is supplied to the Ergo processing plant by Eskom. Ekurhuleni Metropolitan  Municipality claims to supply power and litigation is pending in this regard the relevance being  payment of a surcharge levied by the Municipality in addition to the Eskom rate.  Natural Gas: Natural gas is obtained by a pipeline from Sasol and used for elution heating purposes  as well as for gas kilns used in the regeneration of carbon.  Assay Laboratory: All assays are done by the MAED laboratory which is located on the Ergo  processing plant site but is operated by an independent third-party. The laboratory is not accredited  by SANAS.  14.4 Personnel Requirements  Personnel requirements are stated in Item 13.6.  14.5 Energy and Water Requirements  Energy and water requirements are discussed in Item 15.3 and 15.5.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 157  14.6 Process Materials Requirements  Ergo has access to all required process material required through their local or international suppliers.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 158  15 Infrastructure  Ergo currently mines the existing TSFs and sand dumps in the Johannesburg and Brakpan areas with  slurry pumped via pipelines from the numerous mining operations to the Ergo processing plant  located in Brakpan.  The infrastructure required to support the LoM plan is essentially in place, with future infrastructure  requirements being designed and estimated by Ergo to a PFS level of accuracy (i.e., +/-25%) with a  maximum level of contingency of 15%. Infrastructure requirements and capital costs are based on  current mining operations, as the mining methodology applied to exploit the TSFs and sand dumps  are substantially the same throughout the LoM plan with no significant operational changes  expected between current and planned future operations.  The use of railways, port facilities, dams, leach pads and other infrastructure components are not  discussed below as they are not material infrastructure components of the Ergo operations.  15.1 Roads  Access to the mining sites is via current municipal and regional road networks with no construction  or upgrading of unpaved roads.  15.2 Site Offices and Workshops  The mining contractors establish site offices as part of the mining contract. Workshops for the  maintenance of roads, pumps and pipelines are based at the Ergo processing plant, and no  additional infrastructure is required.  15.3 Power  Bulk power is supplied to Ergo by Eskom, and the Ekurhuleni Municipality. The power grid infrastructure  serving the East Rand is particularly extensive, with electrical power being received through several  alternative substations on the Eskom grid. Mining sites are supplied via several separate feeders.  The Eskom power grid has been negatively affected by poor power availability and subsequently, it  has at times been unable to meet power demand. Some load shedding has taken place during 2022  and 2023, affecting the country and Ergo. Electrical demand is between 50MW and 60MW.  Power supply is viewed as a risk to Ergo operations. A risk-mitigating measure that has been  implemented by Ergo is the provision of back-up power and other engineering upgrades to prevent  plant choke-up/silt-down during power interruptions. These measures have enabled the processing  plant to resume full production without extensive delay after each power interruption. A 7MVA diesel  emergency power plant is also available as backup.  Ergo has a curtailment agreement with Eskom whereby the total consumption is reduced on request  by an agreed percentage during load-shedding hours. This involves reducing the total consumption  by between 4MVA and 8MVA during load-shedding hours. The reduction in the power consumption  results in the operations maintaining an uninterrupted tonnage throughput, but recoveries are lower  due to certain parts of the process plant not operating during the load reduction periods.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 159  15.4 Pumps and Pipelines  Slurry transport is mainly via pipelines that carry it to the Ergo processing plant (Figure 15.1).  Ergo uses  a standard set of pipes and pumps (500mm pipes). Equipment selection is based on the most suitable  sizes from the standard equipment range.  Figure 15.1: Above Ground Pipeline System      The pipelines are mainly installed above ground, providing easy maintenance access and making it  easier to identify and rectify any failures on these pipelines. Where necessary, pipe bridges are used  along the pipeline routes to cross streams and rivers.  The existing pumping and slurry pipeline systems are managed through a supervisory control and  data acquisition (SCADA) system. The SCADA system allows Ergo to operate the equipment remotely.  Thereby, Ergo can monitor the entire pipeline system via a centralized system. For example, pumps  and valves can be used (open/closed or on/off), and readings taken (pressures and flows) from the  centralized site, with no actual human-machine interface on the actual site. As the pumps are  installed with a duty and standby configuration, the operation of the existing and planned pumping  and pipeline systems should be adequate to support the requirements of the LoM plan.  Operations west of the Ergo processing plant are serviced by pipeline and other existing  infrastructure. The Marievale and Daggafontein mining areas east of the processing plant have  pipeline permits/servitudes/surface rights in place. The QP has not identified any impediments that  would prevent the construction of the necessary infrastructure to support the LoM plan.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 160  15.5 Water  The primary uses for water are in the Ergo processing plant and for hydraulic mining of the various  TSFs. Water used for hydraulic mining turns the dry tailings into a slurry, which is then pumped to the  processing plant for processing. Excess water recovered at the thickeners in the processing plant is  then returned to the hydraulic mining sites for re-use. However, the main source of water for  reclamation purposes is derived from the Brakpan/Withok facility as return water in a “close loop”.   In 2017, Ergo completed the construction of a central water reticulation plant to give it the ability to  deliver water to all corners of the operation and return it through a fully integrated closed system.  Currently 60% to 70% of all process water make up at Ergo is drawn from the Brakpan/Withok TSF to  various reclamation sites by way of return water columns. A further 16% of process water  top-up needs are from treated underground acid mine drainage (AMD), drawn from a facility  operated by the Trans-Caledon Tunnel Authority (TCTA) from whom DRDGOLD secured the right to  use up to 30Ml of AMD water per day. Another 14% is from lakes and dams in the region that captures  the inflow of seasonal rain and storm water inflows, harvested in terms of the requisite extraction  licenses. Potable water is used only where the sensitivity of equipment requires it and for certain early  stages of irrigation to settle in newly established vegetation on TSFs.  Given the location of the Ergo operations, the QP does not foresee the likelihood of the operations  being curtailed due to a water shortage.   15.6 Infrastructure  General arrangement drawings are provided for the Rooikraal TSF to demonstrate design work  typical of a mining site (Figure 15.2). The actual construction work will vary slightly to account for  specific site conditions, but generally, the infrastructure is common from site to site, with 52 TSFs  planned to be mined over the 19-year LoM plan.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 161  Figure 15.2: Rooikraal General Arrangement - Site Layout
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 162  15.7 Tailings Disposal  The Brakpan compartment of the Brakpan/Withok is a single large tailings dam that was built by  cycloning the tailings at the point of deposition out with the larger particles from the tailings, forming  the dam wall. The annual rate of rise is between 4m and 5m. The fines from the cyclones run out into  the center of the dam. This generates a more stable wall with the finer material safely stored inside  the TSF. With the deposition rate of up to 1.8Mtpm the use of cycloning is viewed as the most  appropriate method for disposal of the tailings material. 250mm diameter cyclone units are used with  over 300 cyclones connected to the tailings pipeline system. The TSF was originally designed by Knight  Piésold. Operational activities are currently under contract by Fraser Alexander.  Immediately adjacent to the Brakpan TSF footprint lies the former cleared footprint of an area  licensed for tailings storage, spanning approximately 400 hectares. This area, on which a large  portion of the Withok compartment stood, was retreated and cleared by the former owners of Ergo.  The combined Brakpan and Withok footprints make up the Brakpan/Withok TSF. The final design of  the Brakpan/Withok TSF is the engineering design that ultimately brings the TSF to its finality in terms  of extent, operation, rehabilitation and management. The construction of the Withok compartment  of the Brakpan/Withok SF will require an environmental authorization. A Water Use Licence and  license to construct from the Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS) Dam Safety Office. The final  life design is expected to be submitted to the DWS in April 2024. The implemented final design will  result in alignment with the Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management (GISTM) and regulatory  bodies, increase deposition capacity, improve operation/management and bring about the  sustainable closure of the facility. The Brakpan/Withok TSF will provide sufficient storage capacity to  support Ergo’s 19-year LoM plan.   The Brakpan/Withok TSF as of 30 June 2023 has a revised and optimized capacity of 450Mt.   15.8 Conclusion  The QP is of the opinion that all significant infrastructure and logistical requirements have been  considered. It is notable that Ergo has been operating for more than 15 years and has a very good  understanding of infrastructural and logistical requirements.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 163  16 Market Studies  16.1 Markets  All gold produced is delivered to the Rand Refinery for refining with no restrictions on the quantity or  time frame. DRDGOLD has a long-standing off-take agreement with the Rand Refinery that refines  the gold produced by Ergo.   Ergo holds a 1.1% share in Rand Refinery and together with DRDGOLD limited holds a 11.3% share.  Rand Refinery is based in Germiston, South Africa, some 23km from the Ergo operations.  All gold is  sold to the Rand Refinery with no limit to quantity or time frame. DRDGOLD has a long-standing  offtake agreement with the Rand Refinery according to which gold is sold on the prevailing spot in  South African Rands.  Ergo has no other material contracts other than the agreement with Rand  Refinery. When applying the 30 June 2023 spot exchange rate (ZAR18.78/USD) to the associated gold  price of USD1,943/oz Au, a real gold price of ZAR1,173,183.94/kg is computed.  Gold is a precious metal, refined and sold as bullion on the international market. Aside from the gold  holdings of central banks, current uses of gold include jewelry, private investment, dentistry,  medicine, and technology (Table 16 1).  Table 16.1: Above Ground Gold Stocks in 2023  Description  Quantity  (t)  Contribution  (%)  Jewelry 95 547 46%  Private Investment 46 517 22%  Bank Holdings 35 715 17%  Other 31 096 15%  Source: GoldHub, 2023    The largest use of gold is in jewelry, accounting for approximately 46% of the above-ground gold.  Gold does not follow the usual supply and demand logic because it is virtually indestructible and  can easily be recycled. In addition, gold stored in the vaults of banks is relatively illiquid and subject  to the vagaries of global economies. These characteristics of the gold market make it challenging  to forecast the gold price.  16.2 Gold Price  The QP considered five years of historical analysis to form an opinion of the expected gold price and  exchange rate going forward because the QP believes that a five-year period sufficiently covers the  market volatility seen in the international gold market. This is also consistent with the five years of  consensus pricing relied on for the price forecast. The gold price increased in 2020 due to  uncertainties related to the outbreak of Covid-19. It then steadily declined to a spot price of  ~ZAR1,173,183.94/kg (i.e., USD1,943/oz at ZAR18.78/USD) as at 30 June 2023 (Figure 16 1).
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 164  Figure 16.1: Gold Price Historical Trendline       The linear trendline indicates robust gold price potential over the near to medium-term.  16.3 Exchange Rate Trends  The ZAR to USD exchange rate saw record-breaking highs in the second quarter of 2020  (ZAR19.35/USD) but has subsequently dropped back to ZAR18.78/USD as at 30 June 2023. A factor in  the deterioration of the local currency in 2020 was the lockdowns and economic volatility brought  on by Covid-19.  The exchange rate of ZAR17.39/USD compares well with the five-year historical trendline as displayed  in Figure 16.2.  Figure 16.2: Exchange Rate Trendline    Various service providers and financial institutions are consulted to determine consensus forecasts of  the gold price (Table 16.2).
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 165  Table 16.2: Long Term Consensus Forecasts in Nominal Terms  Description  Year 1  (FY2023)  Year 2  (FY2024)  Year 3  (FY2025)  Year 4  (FY2026)  Year 5+  (LT)  USD/oz 1,962 1,917 1,886 1,866 1 600   ZAR/USD 17.65 18.15 18.33 18.48 16,60   ZAR Price/kg 1,112,784 1,118,818 1,111,140 1,109,147 853,923   Source: DRDGOLD, 2023    The economic assessment for the Mineral Reserve estimate relies on a real price of ZAR1,081,261/kg  (i.e., USD1,934/oz at ZAR17.39/USD) as of 30 June 2023 terms as provided by DRDGOLD. The QP has  considered the consensus forecasts supplied by DRDGOLD against linear trends in the demand and  supply of gold as recorded over the period from 2013 to 2022 to examine whether these forecasts  are reasonable.  16.4 Global Demand  Figure 16.3 illustrates the global demand over the past ten years (i.e., 2013 to 2022).  Figure 16.3: Global Gold Demand from 2013 to 2022    Source: GoldHub, 2023    16.5 Global Supply  The global gold supply from mining and recycling activities over the same period is presented in  Figure 16.4.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 166  Figure 16.4: Global Gold Supply from 2013 to 2022    The supply from mining satisfied some 77% of the demand in 2022, with the balance met by recycled  gold.   Below are the top thirteen gold-producing countries in 2022 (Table 16.3).  Table 16.3: Global Gold Production  Rank Country  Production  (t)  2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022  1 China 429 404 383 368 332 375  2 Russia 281 295 330 331 331 325  3 Australia 293 313 325 328 315 314  4 Canada 171 189 183 171 193 194  5 United States 236 225 200 190 187 173  6 Ghana 133 149 142 139 129 127  7 Peru 167 163 143 98 127 126  8 Indonesia 118 153 92 101 118 125  9 Mexico 120 118 109 102 125 124  10 Uzbekistan 91 92 93 100 105 111  11 Mali 74 88 97 92 99 102  12 Burkina Faso 75 78 83 93 103 96  13 South Africa 154 128 111 99 114 93  Source: GoldHub, 2023  16.6 Concluding Comments  The QP notes a short-term up-tick despite the long-term reduction in demand together with an  essentially constant supply over the past six years. These trends are not inconsistent with the forecast
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 167  price trend in Table 16.2. The QP is satisfied that a real 30 June 2023 gold price of ZAR1,081,216/kg is  a reasonable assumption for examining the economic viability of the Mineral Reserve estimate.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 168  17 Environmental Studies  17.1 Results of Environmental Studies  An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) has been conducted over the Ergo operation with the  findings of the EIA showing that the operation would result in certain negative impacts during the  operational phase to the environment, however, none of the specialist studies objected to the  project. During the mining operations, negative impacts are largely Moderate to Insignificant, and  after interventions the impacts are mitigated to a Low significance. During the decommissioning and  post-decommissioning phases, most of the impacts will be positive as the historical TSFs and  associated environmental impacts of the TSFs are removed.  Social and community interaction remains a key focus for Ergo. Stakeholder engagement is reported  annually with the SLP compliant and filed with the proper authorities. Ergo appears to have good  relations with surrounding communities and engages proactively.  The QP is unaware of any material flaws in terms Ergo’s social license to operate, however, it is noted  that in the current South African socio-political issues remain a risk and require constant monitoring.  Rehabilitation is carried out once the reclamation of individual TSF is completed, with rehabilitation  returning the disturbed land to as close to its original landscape as possible.  The principles for proper rehabilitation are:  • preparing a comprehensive rehabilitation plan prior to the commencement of any activities  on site;  • stormwater management must be in place at the site prior to commencing with any  activities;  • landform design (e.g., shaping, re-grassing, etc.);  • maintenance management and eradication of invader species;  • a plan on how waste will be managed on site; and  • an emergency preparedness/response plan.  The objective of the site rehabilitation (in accordance with the NEMA EIA Regulations of 2014) must  be measurable, practical and be feasible to implement through:  • providing the vision, objectives, targets and criteria for final rehabilitation of the project;  • outlining the principles for rehabilitation;  • explaining the risk assessment approach and outcomes and link decommissioning activities  to risk;  • rehabilitation detailing the decommissioning and rehabilitation actions that clearly indicate  the measures that will be taken to mitigate and/ or manage identified risks and describing  the nature of residual risks that will need to be monitored and managed post  decommissioning;  • identifying knowledge gaps and how these will be addressed and filled; and  • outlining monitoring, auditing and reporting requirements.  17.2 Requirements for Tailings Disposal, Site Monitoring and Water Management  The general description of the Brakpan/Withok TSF is covered in Item 15.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 169  17.2.1 Site Monitoring  Site monitoring provides information on whether rehabilitation methods employed are functioning  correctly or not. The purpose of monitoring is to ensure that the objectives of the rehabilitation  program are met, and that the progressive rehabilitation process is followed as planned during the  LoM. Digby Wells conducts environmental audits on an annual basis.  The post closure monitoring period will begin once scheduled decommissioning and rehabilitation  activities for the sites have been completed. The duration of post closure monitoring will be  determined based on environmental performance and until it can be demonstrated that the  rehabilitation work has achieved the agreed outcomes; however, at present, it has been assumed  that post closure monitoring will not continue for more than five years. It is important that the data  obtained during monitoring is used to gauge the success of rehabilitation. Negative monitoring  findings should be clearly linked to specific corrective actions.  Ergo has implemented a Tailings Management Policy. Ergo is committed to aligning itself with the  Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management (GISTM). Geo Tail SA (Pty) Ltd is the appointed  Engineer of Record for the Brakpan-Withok TSF and provides surveillance to ensure that all Ergo’s  residue storage facilities are operated and managed at a controlled level of risk. Daily operational  performance assesment, Quarterly management meetings, annual performance review and Expert  Tailings Review Panel reviews are the main mechanisms for on-going risk management and are  conducted to update the performance for the TSF and to eliminate flaws and address critical factors  (if present) in the structural stability management of the TSF.  The following aspects should be monitored during the post-closure phase.  17.2.2 Water Management  The quality of groundwater and surface water at the various sites will be monitored quarterly for five  years post closure, except for the Knights Mining Right which requires 30 years monitoring at certain  monitoring points as per the approved WULs, to ensure compliance of the various constituents with  the standards. Samples should be analyzed for particulate and soluble contaminants. Water  monitoring will be taking place at 76 different locations.  17.2.3 Vegetation Monitoring  The following vegetation monitoring is recommended:  • vegetation cover;  • species composition;  • erosion; and  • alien invasive plants.  17.2.4 Vegetation Maintenance  Vegetation maintenance will specifically focus on fertilizing the rehabilitated areas annually if  required, controlling alien invasive plants where needed and general maintenance such as in-filling  of erosion gullies. In the case of erosion, the cause should be identified, and rectified.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 170  17.2.5 Water Monitoring  Currently, 61% of all process water make-up at Ergo is drawn from water returned from the Brakpan  TSF as shown in Table 17.1.  Table 17.1: Ergo Water Consumption  Description  Total Consumption 2023 Total Consumption 2022  Ml % Ml %  Potable Water Sources Externally 2,224 9 2,460 9  Rondebult Waste Water - - 27 -  Surface Water Extracted 3,481 14 4,691 18  Water Recycled in Process 14,869 61 16,302 62  TCTA Water (AMD) 3,924 16 2,907 11  Total Water Used 24,498 100 26,360 100    17.2.6 Legal and Permitting  Table 3.2 of the TRS discusses the Mining Rights and Prospecting Rights details for Ergo and the status  thereof.  Ergo’s EMPs encompasses all the activities of Ergo’s operations and assesses the environmental  impacts of mining at reclamation sites, plants and TSFs. It also outlines the closure process, including  financial provisions.  There are currently no legal challenges to Ergo’s title to its reserves other than those discussed below.  The QPs are aware of one issue that could impact on Ergo’s current mining rights or mining  operations.  Grootvlei Complex: Ergo has a Mining Right over Grootvlei TSF 6L14 via Mining Right GP158MR and  has a renewed Prospecting Right over Grootvlei TSFs 6L16, 6L17 and 6L17A. During the 2022 financial  year, an external party raised a conflicting claim of common law ownership of TSFs 6L16, 6L17 and  6L17A. Although the claim was on common law ownership and no challenge has been brought  against the Prospecting Rights over the dumps, the Grootvlei Complex has been excluded from the  Mineral Reserves statement and the LoM plan. However, the Grootvlei Complex has been included  in the Mineral Resources statement as Ergo as a result of the successful renewal of the prospecting  rights during the current financial year.   17.3 Plan Negotiations, or Agreements with Local Individuals or Groups  Social and community interaction remains a key focus for Ergo. Stakeholder engagement is reported  annually against the SLP and any complaint is filed with the proper authorities.  The QP is unaware of any material flaws of Ergo’s social license to operate. However, it is noted that  in the current South African political environment, social and community issues always remain a risk  and require constant monitoring.  The five-year SLP was submitted by Ergo in terms of the requirements of the MPRDA. The  development, submission and implementation of an SLP is a requirement of the MPRDA and the right  to mine. Table 17.2 indicates the budget for the 2023 to 2027 SLP, noting that the SLP plan is  conducted in five-year segments.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 171  The SLP covers three key elements:  • Human Resource Development (HRD): which focuses on the empowerment of historically  disadvantaged South Africans to progress to higher career levels within the industry. Ergo has  various programs to address this aspect, including skills development programs, career  progression and mentorship employment equity targets;  • Local Economic Development (LED): which focuses on the upliftment of both the surrounding  (affected) and labor-providing communities. Ergo has four projects, one agricultural  development, a sewing project and two projects to upgrade facilities at primary schools. A  ZAR10 million budget is allocated to these LED projects; and  • Program for Management of Downscaling and Retrenchment: which focuses on minimizing  negative impact due to either job losses through retrenchment and mine closure in the long- term.  Table 17.2: SLP Financial Provision Summary  Description  5-Year Financial Provision  (ZAR)  Human Resource Development  133 259 888  Local Economic Development  23 200 000  Downscaling and Retrenchment* 17 100 000  SLP Budget 173 559 888  Note: *This amount has already been accrued and is available for reskilling should the mine prematurely be forced to close.  17.4 Mine Closure Plans Remediation Plans, and Associated Costs  In accordance with South African mining legislation, all mining companies are required to  rehabilitate the land on which they work to a determined standard for alternative use. Ergo has spent  ZAR280 million on various environmental rehabilitation activities in the past five financial years  between 2019 and 2023.  A community consortium, consisting of nine local companies that represent  areas including Langlaagte, Diepkloof, Meadowlands, Orlando West, Orlando East, Riverlea,  Pennyville and Ormonde, has been established to conduct certain rehabilitation work for Ergo as  part of its small enterprise development initiatives. Ergo is on track to complete this vegetation  program by 2026.  In 2016, a decision was taken to complete the recovery of mine waste materials from several legacy  reclamation sites and to close the Crown plant. The clean-up of the legacy sites has proven difficult  and costly and requires the use of earthmoving equipment to mechanically lift and move residual  material. Steady progress is being made on the clean-up and closure of these legacy sites.  As clean-up work on former reclamation sites is completed, applications are submitted to the  National Nuclear Regulator (NNR) for land clearance certificates. Between 2019 and 2022,  applications were lodged with the NNR in respect of 274.2ha of rehabilitated land for clearance.  There were no applications lodged with NNR during 2023, but 29.7ha of land clearances were  granted by the NNR. 56ha remains outstanding at 30 June 2023.   Ergo’s decommissioning and restoration liabilities are funded by a combination of funds that have  been set aside for environmental rehabilitation. ZAR141.9 million is currently held in the Guardrisk Cell  Captive under a ring-fenced environmental insurance policy. Further environmental guarantees of
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 172  ZAR377.8 million have been issued by Guardrisk Insurance Company Limited to the DMRE. In total,  Ergo has ZAR519.7 million in environmental rehabilitation and closure cover.  The calculated costs for rehabilitation and closure of the Ergo Operations estimated by Digby Wells  are ZAR702.5 million (Table 17.3). Ergo systematically audits and monitors progress on rehabilitation  and closure and adjusts its provision accordingly. Required audits are undertaken and submitted to  the DMRE annually.  Table 17.3: Ergo Rehabilitation Financial Provision Summary  Area and Mining Right  Closure Cost 2023  (ZAR)  CMR - GP186MR 13,465,611  Crown - GP184MR 139,742,356  City Deep - GP185MR 45,154,525  Knights - GP187MR 53,080,889  Ergo - GP158MR 451,043,119  Total (excluding VAT) 702,486,500  Source: Digby Wells, 2023    17.5 QP Statement on the Environmental Studies, Permitting, Plans, Negotiations, with  Local Individuals or Groups  The QP is satisfied that all material issues relating to Environmental, Social and Governance have  been addressed in this document.  The above statement is borne out by the fact that Ergo incurred no fines of monetary value or  significant non-monetary sanctions for non-compliance with environmental laws and regulations  were imposed over the past five years (2019 to 2023).  The QP finds the funding mechanism appropriate for mine rehabilitation and mine closure, but notes  that there is a shortfall between the reclamation funding and the July 2023 Digby Wells closure cost  estimate.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 173  18 Capital and Operation Costs  The capital expenditure and operating costs provided take cognizance of the requirements to  support the LoM plan. The capital expenditure takes into account the ongoing requirements of  starting new operating sites as current TSFs Mineral Reserves are depleted. This capital expenditure  schedule is based on the LoM production schedule with the capital expenditure based on mining  and engineering designs conducted to a PFS level of accuracy (i.e., +/-25%) with a maximum level  of contingency of 15% being applied.  The operating costs support the planned LoM production profile taking into consideration whether  slimes or sand material is mined and the method and distance in which the mineralized material is  transported (i.e., pumped or trucked). Operating costs are activity-based costs accounting for  surface mining costs (extraction and transportation); processing costs (including tailings disposal  costs), cost of maintaining key mine infrastructure and general and administrative costs. The estimate  of operating costs are based on historical operating cost data, which is well understood as Ergo is a  well-established mining operation. Operating costs are estimated to at least a PFS level of accuracy  with no contingency applied due to the understanding of the cost to mine and process the RoM  material.  18.1 Capital Expenditure  A total capital of ZAR5.106 billion is scheduled to support the Ergo LoM plan. The breakdown of  capital expenditure indicates much of the capital, ZAR5.019 billion, is allocated to the Ergo Section  over the duration of the LoM plan with an additional ZAR87.658 million allocated in 2023 for the City  Section. As the mining at the Knights Section is completed in 2024 there is no allocation of capital.  Included in Ergo’s LoM plan is the estimated capital expenditure of the upgrade of Ergo’s electricity  infrastructure and the development of the 60MW solar farm and 160MWh battery energy storage  system of ZAR2.044 billion. The costs are based on contracts concluded in the name of Ergo, before  30 June 2023. DRDGOLD is currently in the process of finalizing the vehicle in which the solar assets  will be housed within the group and expects this process to be completed by 30 June 2024. In the  event that the solar assets are housed in a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV), this will result in a tariff  being charged to Ergo and other off takers in the wheeling arrangements by the SPV. The full benefit  of the solar project and costs have been included in the economic analysis presented in Item 19.  The capital expenditure summary as proposed in the 30 June 2023 LoM plan is presented in Table  18.1. The level of accuracy for the capital expenditure is to at least a PFS level of accuracy (i.e., +/- 25%) with a maximum level of contingency of 15%.  Ergo has been involved in the reclamation of TSFs over the past 15 years, and as the capital  requirements to establish mining is similar in nature for each TSF, Ergo has a very good understanding  of the capital requirements and therefore places a low risk to the prefeasibility capital expenditure  estimate.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 174    Table 18.1: Capital Expenditure Summary  Area  Budgeted Capital  Expenditure  (ZAR 000)  Ergo Section 5 018 735  City Section 87 658  Knights Section 0  Total (excluding VAT) 5 106 393    18.1.1 Ergo Section Capital Expenditure  This section depicts the capital expenditure estimate for the Ergo Section as indicated in Table 18.2.   Table 18.2: Ergo Capital Expenditure Estimate  Project  Capital Expenditure  (ZAR 000)  4L14 41 757   7L15 64 200   4L39 74 822   5L27 24 197   Daggafontein 285 347   Marievale 7L5 269 775   Marievale 7L7 100 006   Withok TSF 1 325    MV works 13 127   20 MW PV 668 165   Battery energy storage & control system 1 221 541   Power line infrastructure upgrade 141 350   2023/24 capital 279 448   On-going sustaining capital1 510    Total 5 018 735   Note: 1. Sustaining capital equates to ZAR30 million between years 2 to 18.  Table 18.3 indicates the capital expenditure estimate for the City section.Table 18.3  Table 18.3: City Total Capital Expenditure Summary  Area  Budgeted Capital  Expenditure  (ZAR 000)  4/L/4 TSF 20 894  Valley Silts 66 764  Total (excluding VAT) 87 658    Due to the short life of the Knights Section, no capital expenditure has been planned or budgeted.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 175  18.1.2 QP commentary  The QP associates a low risk to the engineering capital expenditure for the mining associated projects  as the design and construction of pump stations and pipelines have been conducted numerous  times by Ergo. The QP notes the level of accuracy for the capital expenditure estimates are to a PFS  level accuracy (i.e., +/-25%). Contingency varies between 0% to 15% with contingency typically  applied to civil work, structural steelwork and electrical and instrumentation. In no case is the  contingency above 15%.  The QP is of the opinion that the risk associated with the Withok compartment capital estimate and  solar plant and storage facility is Low to Medium and typical of a PFS level of accuracy (i.e., +/-25%).  18.2 Operating Costs  Mining related operating costs are assigned to the Ergo processing plant and the mining of the  various TSFs. A different operational cost is applied to each deposit, depending on its composition,  proximity to the processing plant and the reclamation method. Sand dumps have a higher cost than  slimes, as sand must be milled down to 80% less than 75μm while the slime can be treated in the CIL  tanks directly. The electricity operating costs includes the expected saving by Ergo as a result of the  solar project.  Mining related operating expenditures are assigned to the planned TSFs to be mined and the Ergo  processing plant. The planned total operating cost for the Ergo 19-year LoM plan is estimated at a  PFS level of accuracy (i.e., +/-25%) with no contingency applied to the total working cost of  ZAR101.99/t (Table 18.4).  Table 18.4: Total LoM Operating Cost for Ergo  Operating Cost  Total LoM  Operating Cost  (ZAR 000’s)  Labor 7 478 989   Consumables 17 508 396   Electricity 2 690 440   Water 519 173   Contractors 5 041 718   Other 4 810 888  Sub-total Cash Cost 38 049 604   Rehabilitation Cost 642 599   Other Operation Cost 450 935   Retrenchment Cost 123 994   Corporate Cost 963 026   Sub-total Other Cost 2 180 554   Total Working Cost 40 230 157      The development of the annual operating costs is based on historical cost data as Ergo has been  operational for numerous years. The operating costs associated with hydraulic and load and haul  mining to establish mining are similar in nature for each TSF, Ergo has a very good understanding of  the operating costs. The QP associates a Low risk with many of the operating costs, however a
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 176  Medium risk is associated with consumables, electricity and water due to the volatile nature of the  market of these items. Ergo is attempting to mitigate the volatility with the installation of the solar  power project and the reuse of water where possible. Refer to Item 19.3 for more details on risk.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 177  19 Economic Analysis  19.1 Economic Analysis  The 30 June 2023 19-year LoM plan, which is the basis of the Mineral Reserve, is scheduled to mine a  total of 396.10Mt at a ROM grade of 0.28g/t Au and produce 48,529kg of gold over the same period.  The economic analysis is based on a LoM plan that is designed to a PFS level of accuracy (i.e., +/- 25%). The economic analysis indicates a net present value (NPV) of ZAR2.313 billion after capital  expenditure and tax (22%) utilizing a discount rate of 10.96% (real terms). As the Ergo operations are  on-going with an annual positive cashflow, the internal rate of return (IRR) and payback period are  not applicable.  Table 19.1 presents the Ergo cashflow model over the 19-year LoM Plan. The NPV has been  calculated by discounting the positive cashflows at the appropriate rate and subtracting the  required capital expenditure. The QP has made the assumptions listed below to derive a realistic  base case operational cashflow model:  • the production schedule is sourced from the Ergo LoM plan. The mining tonnage schedule  varies between 11.2Mtpa and 22.18Mtpa;  • plant feed grade as per the LoM schedule  with an average grade of 0.28g/t gold;  • the average metallurgical recovery over the LoM schedule is 41.1%;  • total working costs estimated at ZAR101.99/t RoM are inclusive of mining, metallurgical and  general and administration costs (working costs);  • the gold market price is set at ZAR1,081,261kg (see Item 16 for further information for gold  price in USD/oz and exchange rate);  • capital expenditure of ZAR5.106 billion is inclusive of contingency;  • no salvage value of assets has been assumed;  • A forecast long term average tax rate of 22% based on the South African gold rate formula  has been applied and 27% for solar related income;  • a discount rate of 10.96% in real (no inflation) terms;  • benefit and cost of the solar project;  • no royalty payment is applicable to Ergo, as the operation is not subject to royalties on the  retreatment of TSFs;  • capital expenditure was fully written-off against operating profit, with no time constraint; and  • no escalation or inflationary effects have been included in the economic evaluation, which  is based on constant money value (real terms).  The NPV of the Ergo LoM plan as at 30 June 2023 was calculated at ZAR2.313 billion at a discount  rate of 10.96% as shown in Table 19.1.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 178  Table 19.1: Economic Analysis  Note:  Other revenue is based on selling excessive energy produced by the solar plant.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 179  19.2 Sensitivity Analysis  The sensitivity analysis of the Ergo financial model that varies revenue (price and grade); operating cost,  and capital expenditure at 10% increments above and below the base case is shown in Figure 19.1.  Figure 19.1: Global Gold Supply from 2013 to 2022    The sensitivity analysis indicates that the Ergo operations are sensitive to revenue parameters such as  gold price, grade, and recovery. In addition, the LoM plan is also sensitive to changes in operating costs.  The sensitivity analysis indicates that the LoM plan is not as sensitive to capital, and therefore, capital  expenditure should be considered if the expenditure will result in reducing operating costs or increasing  revenue. The sensitivity indicates that achieving the LoM plan in terms of tonnage is critical in realizing  the planned operating costs and being able to mine at the planned cut-off grade. The QP is unaware  of any capital expenditures that, if delayed, would materially affect the LoM plan or cashflow.  19.3 Risk Assessment  The following highlights show the key risks that Ergo has identified as critical to their operations, as well  as comments on mitigation of these risks.  19.3.1 Limited Tailings Storage Capacity  Ergo is a volume-driven business. As a result, Ergo needs to ensure that there is sufficient capacity in its  TSFs to deposit material after processing and extracting gold in the plant. The Ergo operations are  dependent on large TSFs to deposit processed material. New tailings capacity is needed to continue in  future at the required deposition rates. The timing to have the new Withok compartment of the  Brakpan/Withok TSF online is critical as a delay may result in reduced deposition rates or a halt in  deposition which will have an adverse financial impact on the business.  Ergo believes that a license for the Withok compartment will be granted as it will meet the requirements  of current legislation and South African National Standards codes for the TSF construction.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 180  19.3.2 Country Risk  South Africa is exposed to a number of socio-economic challenges such as high unemployment, slow  economic growth, high levels of corruption and crime. In addition, the political environment is uncertain.  These may trigger social unrest due to the lack of service delivery by the governments as well as hardship  as a result from these socio-economic issues.  Ergo participates in forums with local communities, industry, and government to remain abreast of  political matters and to strengthen relationships. Ergo promotes direct engagement with peer businesses  and regulators on issues that have an adverse impact on the business to encourage positive change.  19.3.3 Security Issues  The current security issues (including organized crime, fraud, theft, bribery, corruption) poses a threat to  employees’ safety and may result in operational disruptions.  Deployment of sophisticated security technological solutions and expansion thereof is ongoing. Ergo  forms part of a security network that works closely with other mining houses and various law enforcement  agencies aimed at addressing criminal activities.  The impact of the security risk has reduced as a result  of the continuous investment in technology, surveillance, and training of security personnel.  19.3.4 Eskom Electricity Supply  Eskom is currently in a critical situation and is facing a number of challenges. The issues faced by the  state-owned entity are escalating due to (not limited to) ageing infrastructure, cable theft, financial  and maintenance issues These have resulted in the implementation of higher stages of load shedding  to ration electricity supply and higher annual tariff increases. It is expected that electricity supply issues  will continue for the foreseeable future.  The company has reduced the electricity supply risk from Eskom through implementation of emergency  generators for critical areas of the operations. Furthermore, DRDGOLD approved Phase II of the  construction of the solar power project during the current financial year. The entire solar project will now  comprise 60MW of generating capacity by the solar farm and the installation of a battery energy  storage system which is capable of providing up to 160MWh of power to the Ergo plant and the TSF. The  project is currently under development and is expected to be fully commissioned by the end of October  2024. The project is expected to not only address the electricity supply risk but also the risk associated  with the continued above inflationary increases of the tariffs charged by Eskom and will therefore assist  in reducing future electricity costs. The capacity of the solar assets also allows for the generation of  surplus power to be wheeled back into the grid. The project will also assist with the reduction of Ergo’s  carbon footprint.  19.3.5 Climate Change Impact  The risk of climate change is increasing both locally and globally. There is an increase in the frequency  and intensity of extreme weather events, and the continued emission of greenhouse gases and other  factors increase this risk.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 181  Severe storm events linked to climate change are on the increase and likely to become more severe in  future. Ergo operations, with its extensive reclamation sites and large tailings facilities, are exposed to  severe rainfall events which may cause severe damage and interrupt operational activities.  Ergo is also exposed to a growing number of critical drivers of change and expectations, including new  national and international legislation/ regulations, increased public concerns as well as pressure from  lobby groups, regulators, and investors. Failure to adapt or transition to climate change measures may  negatively impact the business and could lead to reduced investor confidence.  19.3.6 Threat to Social and Operating Licenses or other permits  Failure to operate in a sustainable and responsible manner and increasing pressures and demands on  business by local communities, NGOs and other organizations could negatively impact Ergo’s license to  operate and damage its reputation. Ergo will increasingly be exposed to this risk should social and  economic conditions in the country does not improve.  Ergo is committed to operating in a sustainable and responsible manner and to improving the quality  of life of those residing in the communities around its operations. These commitments are outlined in  Ergo’s social and labor plan and Corporate social investment initiatives and its efforts in this regard are  continuously monitored and reported on. Through ongoing stakeholder engagement with government  structures, local communities and NGOs Ergo strives to strengthen its relationships to promptly and  effectively address concerns raised.  19.3.7 Social-political Instability and Social Unrest  South Africa remains at high risk of social unrest due to its high unemployment, rising inequality and  increased lawlessness. Poor service delivery at all levels of government and political instability add to  the sense of frustration that may increase the potential of violent unrest that could cause damage to  property, harm to people and disrupt operations.   Ergo is continuously assessing its exposure to social challenges and is committed to develop and adapt  strategies to mitigate their effects but more so to improve the quality of life of communities in Ergo’s  areas of operation.  Ergo acknowledges the importance of understanding the dynamics and needs of communities and to  improve its engagement through appropriate communications with affected communities.  Ergo’s SLP initiatives offer opportunities through which Ergo seeks to improve its Local Economic  Enterprise Development Programs.  Ergo’s security strategy/programs have been successfully expanded to include surrounding  communities.  19.3.8 Complexity of Legal/Regulatory Compliance  Complexity and uncertainty within the regulatory environment is an ongoing issue for mining houses.  Lack of communication between government and regulators remains an issue that may increase the  cost of compliance.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 182  Ergo aims to manage this uncertainty through engagement with key stakeholders and industry  associations and by ensuring Ergo has access to specialized knowledge. The Group is currently in the  process of further enhancing the compliance structure to assist with the identification, assessment,  monitoring and reporting on the risk exposure associated with any non-compliance with current  legislation that may be incurred through the activities performed by the Group.  19.3.9 Capital Projects Progress Risk  Regulatory and supply chain challenges as well as pressures from key stakeholders may impact project  delivery and returns. Failure to develop and operate projects in line with expectations and forecasts  could negatively impact business performances.  Robust project governance and processes have been put in place to ensure expected project  deliverables. Stakeholder relationships and rigorous LoM planning forms an essential element of all  projects.  19.3.10 Supply Chain Risk  The global economic environment, geopolitical tensions as well as inflationary pressures worldwide have  highlighted the interdependencies of supply chains. The risk of dependency on key suppliers requires  ongoing focus and proactive management.  The unavailability of critical material such as reagents and critical equipment may affect production  and operating costs resulting in loss of revenue. Delays in supplies, freight costs and higher than  inflationary increases for capital equipment are crucial elements for new projects.   Ergo’s supplier management plan includes constant monitoring of supply chain risks and the  development of future looking mitigation strategies. Ergo has secured key supply demands through  supplier contracts and is continuously seeking diversification of its supplier pool. Ongoing initiatives are  also pursued in the recovering of reagents and the use of alternative sources of reagents.  19.3.11 Depletion of Ergo Mining’s Mineral Reserves  Ergo Mining’s strategy is to maintain its mineral reserve base by improving the robustness of its LoM plan  by increasing production through better extraction efficiencies.  Another risk associated with Ergo  Mining’s mineral reserve is the depletion of higher grade reserves.  The current gold price assists with the  economic viability of lower grade TSFs, however when the gold price drops it will be important to  optimize the LoM plan to enable the mining of lower grade TSFs.  This can be achieved through  optimizing the mining throughput, reducing operating costs and improving mineral recovery.  20 Adjacent Properties  There are no adjacent properties to report.  21 Other Relevant Data and Information  Ergo is committed to improving governance and transparency in the safety and management of TSFs,  a commitment that so far has taken Ergo to implement the following:
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 183  • an internal Tailings Performance Management System (TPMS) was implemented for dedicated  data collection, storage and processing to ensure the integrity of the data for day-to-day  management and oversight purposes and   • quarterly drone surveillance.   An External Tailings Review Panel review panel has been in place since 2018.  The QPs and Ergo have a number of internal controls to manage risk and uncertainty in the Mineral  Resource and Mineral Reserve estimation process. Monthly meetings are held with the QPs, Ergo MRM  Manager and the Ergo/DRDGOLD Finance team to discuss any concerns or areas requiring further work.  The QPs liaise with the relevant specialists on an on-going basis to check on progress of a number of  technical programs.  There is no other known available relevant data or information material to the discussed properties in  this regard.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 184  22 Interpretation and Conclusions  The QP concludes that the protocols for drilling, sampling preparation and analysis, verification, and  security meet industry standard practices and are appropriate for the purposes of a Mineral Resource  estimate. The initial assessments have found that the Ergo TSFs have reasonable prospects for economic  extraction. The QP is satisfied with the QA developed by The RVN Group and the QC program  implemented, as there was no significant bias in reporting data.  The QP contends that the assumptions, parameters and methodology used for the Mineral Resource  estimate are appropriate for the style of mineralization and deposit type.  The tonnage and content of the TSFs are as expected and can be processed in the current Ergo  processing plant. TSFs and sand dumps reported in this document have sufficient information to be used  in the Mineral Reserve estimates and demonstrate economic viability.  The identified risks that could affect the Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves are:  • Limited tailings storage capacity;  • Country/Political risk;  • Security issues;  • Eskom electricity supply and high prices;  • Climate change impact;  • Threat to social and operating licenses;  • Socio-political instability or social unrest;  • Complexity of legal/regulatory compliance;  • Capital projects progress;  • Supply chain risks and   • Depletion of Ergo Mining’s Mineral Reserves.    The QP has highlighted that the Ergo operations are very sensitive to revenue parameters such as gold  price, exchange rate, grade, and recovery. In addition, the LoM plan is also very sensitive to changes  in operating costs, as well as the 11 risks identified that could affect the Mineral Resources and Mineral  Reserves. The sensitivity analysis indicates that the achievement of the LoM Plan in terms of tonnage is  critical in realizing the planned operating costs and being able to mine the individual TSFs at the planned  cut-off grade.  23 Recommendations  There is sufficient information to allow for decision-making in the future. Accordingly, no additional work  is recommended.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 185  24 References  Alakangas, E. (2015). Quality guidelines of wood fuels in Finland VTT-M-04712-15.  10.13140/RG.2.1.3290.3127. Available at:  https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283496833_Quality_guidelines_of_wood_fuels_in_Finland_V TT-M-04712-15. Accessed on 20 July 2023  DRDGold Limited Annual Integrated Report 2022. Sourced https://www.drdgold.com/all- categories?task=download.send&id=271:annual-integrated-report-2022&catid=117. Accessed on 20  July 2023  Engles, J., (n.d.). Tailings Info. Sourced July 2022 - https://www.tailings.info/technical/hydraulic.htm  Mudau, M. and Rupprecht, S.M. (2022). Technical Report of the Material Tailings Storage Facility.  Available at:  https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1023512/000156276222000397/exhibit962.htm. Accessed  on 20 July 2023.   World Gold Council. (2003). https://www.gold.org/goldhub/data/gold-supply-and-demand-statistics.  Accessed on 20 July 2023.  World Gold Council. (2003). https://www.gold.org/goldhub/data/gold-prices. Accessed on 20 July  2023.    25 Reliance on Information Provided by Registrant  The QPs relied on the following information provided by the registrant:  • legal matters about the Mining and Prospecting Rights. The QPs considered it reasonable to rely  on registrant’s legal opinion (legal or permitting matters are discussed in Item 1.3, Item 3.3 to Item  3.6 and Item 17.2.6);  • environmental matters discussed in Item 17.3 relating to Ergo compliance;  • macroeconomic trends, data, and assumptions and interest rates (Item 16); and  • marketing information and plans (Item 16).  The QPs considered it reasonable to rely on the above information as the registrant has the necessary  expertise and has been in operation for more than 20 years of successful and profitable retreatment of  TSFs and sand dumps. The QP also found that the data provided aligns with the industry norms. The QPs  have no reason to believe that any material facts had been withheld or misstated.
 Technical Report Summary of the Material Tailings Storage Facilities 186  26 Qualified Persons Disclosure Consent  We, the signees, in our capacity as Qualified Persons in connection with the Technical Report Summary  of Ergo Mining  Proprietary Limited dated 30 October 2023 (The Technical Report Summary) as required  by Item 601(b)(96) of Regulation S-K and filed as an exhibit to DRDGOLD Limited’s (DRDGOLD) annual  report on Form 20-F for the year ended 30 June 2023 and any amendments or supplements and/or  exhibits thereto (collectively, the “Form 20-F”) pursuant to Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K promulgated  by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (1300 Regulation S-K), each hereby consent to:  • the public filing and use by DRDGOLD of the Technical Report Summary for which I am  responsible as an exhibit to the Form 20-F;  • the use and reference to my name, including my status as an expert or Qualified Person (as  defined by SK-1300) in connection with the Form 20-F and Technical Report Summary for which  I am responsible;  • use of any extracts from, or summary of, the Technical Report Summary in the Form 20-F and the  use of any information derived, summarized, quoted or referenced from the Technical Report  Summary, or portions thereof, that is included or incorporated by reference into the Form 20-F;  and any amendments or supplements thereto.  I am responsible for authoring, and this consent pertains to, the Technical Report Summary (Table 26.1)  for which my name appears below and certify that I have read the 20-F and that it fairly and accurately  represents the information in the Technical Report Summary for which I am responsible.  Table 26.1: Qualified Person’s Details  Property Name  TRS Effective  Date  QP Name  Affiliation to  Registrant  Field or Area of  Responsibility  Signature  Ergo Mining  Proprietary Limited   (A subsidiary of  DRDGOLD Limited)  30 June 2023  Professor Steven  Rupprecht  Independent  Consultant  Item 1 and   12 to 19  /s/ Steven  Rupprecht  Ergo Mining  Proprietary Limited   (A subsidiary of  DRDGOLD Limited)  30 June 2023  Mr Mpfariseni  Mudau  Independent  Consultant   Item 1 to 11 and   20 to 25  /s/ Mpfariseni  Mudau