Appendix O - Conceptual Closure Plan

Conceptual Report
Closure Plan
Kings Mountain Mining Project
Rev03
Report Date: April 19, 2024
Report Prepared for
AALBEMARLE"
Albemarle Corporation
4250 Congress Street,
Charlotte, NC 28209
Report Prepared by
srk consulting
SRK Consulting (U.S.), Inc.
999 17th Street, Suite 400
Denver, CO 80202
SRK Project Number: USPR000576
Albemarle Document Number: KM60-EN-PN-9082
Authored by:
Jeff Parshley, C.P.G, Corporate Consultant (Mine Closure)
Reviewed by:
Mark Willow, M.Sc., SME-RM, Principal (Environmental & Permitting)

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page ii
Table of Contents
ExecutiveSummary ......................................................................................................... ix
Environmental Considerations for Closure ..................................................................................................x
SpatialConstraints..............................................................................................................................x
LandUse.............................................................................................................................................x
Waste Rock Geochemistry .................................................................................................................x
OreGeochemistry...............................................................................................................................x
GrowthRegime..................................................................................................................................A
PitLake Formation.............................................................................................................................A
WaterTreatment................................................................................................................................xi
WaterBalance...................................................................................................................................xii
Wetlands...........................................................................................................................................xii
Climate..............................................................................................................................................xii
ClimateChange ................................................................................................................................xii
Engineering Considerations for Closure...........................................................................................xii
Design Storm Event for Closure .......................................................................................................xii
Rock Storage Facility Configuration..................................................................................................xii
Surface Water Diversions .................................................................................................................xii
GeotechnicalStability........................................................................................................................xiii
Socioeconomic Considerations for Closure......................................................................................xiii
Stakeholders Impacted by Closure...................................................................................................xiii
Macroeconomic and Socioeconomic Impact of Closure...................................................................xiii
Kings Mountain Community Planning...............................................................................................xiii
AttractiveNuisances .........................................................................................................................xiii
ClosureStrategy ........................................................................................................................................xiii
Revegetation....................................................................................................................................xiv
Stormwater Management.................................................................................................................xiv
OpenPit...........................................................................................................................................xiv
WasteRock......................................................................................................................................xiv
Archdale Tailings Storage Facility.....................................................................................................xv
TSF Non-process Infrastructure........................................................................................................xv
WaterStorage Basin 1 ......................................................................................................................xv
Infrastructure....................................................................................................................................xvi
ProcessFacilities.............................................................................................................................xvi
Non-Process Infrastructure..............................................................................................................xvi
Power Lines and Power Distribution................................................................................................xvi
J V P/M W KingsMountai n_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx Ap ri 1 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page iii
WaterSupply System.......................................................................................................................xvi
Roads xvi
Ponds xvii
YardAreas .......................................................................................................................................xvii
Industrial and Hazardous Waste......................................................................................................xvii
Fencing ............................................................................................................................................xvii
WellAbandonment...........................................................................................................................xvii
ProgressiveClosure.........................................................................................................................xvii
TemporaryClosure ..........................................................................................................................xvii
UnplannedClosure ..........................................................................................................................xvii
Post-Closure Management Plan......................................................................................................xvii
Socioeconomic Transitioning ...................................................................................................................xviii
Post-Closure Visioning....................................................................................................................xviii
Socioeconomic Transitioning Actions.............................................................................................xviii
ClosureMonitoring....................................................................................................................................xix
Preliminary Mine Closure Schedule...........................................................................................................xx
1 Introduction.................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Project Location ..................................................................................................................................1
1.2 Regulatory Framework and Operating Approvals...............................................................................2
2 Project Description...................................................................................................... 3
2.1 Land Tenure........................................................................................................................................3
2.2 Mining History .....................................................................................................................................3
2.3 Project Overview.................................................................................................................................4
2.4 Project Layout.....................................................................................................................................4
2.5 Mining Schedule..................................................................................................................................6
2.6 Infrastructure.......................................................................................................................................6
2.7 Open Pit..............................................................................................................................................6
2.8 Mine Support Infrastructure ................................................................................................................7
2.9 Rock Storage Facilities .......................................................................................................................7
2.10 Tailings Storage Facility......................................................................................................................7
2.11 Process Facilities................................................................................................................................8
2.12 Water Storage Basin 1 ......................................................................................................................10
2.13 Water Management...........................................................................................................................10
2.14 Waste Management..........................................................................................................................11
2.14.1 Non-Hazardous.....................................................................................................................11
2.14.2 Recyclable or Reusable Waste.............................................................................................11
2.14.3 Hazardous Waste..................................................................................................................11
J V P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx Ap ri 1 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page iv
2.14.4 Special Waste .......................................................................................................................11
2.14.5 Demolition Waste ..................................................................................................................11
3 Project Environmental and Social Setting............................................................... 12
3.1 Meteorology ......................................................................................................................................12
3.1.1 Temperature..........................................................................................................................12
3.1.2 Solar Radiation......................................................................................................................12
3.1.3 Precipitation...........................................................................................................................12
3.1.4 Storm Frequency...................................................................................................................13
3.1.5 Evaporation ...........................................................................................................................14
3.2 Air Quality..........................................................................................................................................15
3.3 Land Use...........................................................................................................................................15
3.3.1 Historic Land Use..................................................................................................................15
3.4 Geological Setting.............................................................................................................................16
3.5 Geochemistry....................................................................................................................................16
3.5.1 Waste Rock and Ore Characterization..................................................................................17
3.5.2 Tailings Geochemistry...........................................................................................................19
3.5.3 Cover Material Characterization............................................................................................20
3.6 Soils 20
3.7 Groundwater.....................................................................................................................................21
3.7.1 Groundwater Chemistry........................................................................................................22
3.8 Surface Water...................................................................................................................................23
3.8.1 Surface Flow Regime............................................................................................................23
3.8.2 Surface Water Chemistry......................................................................................................27
3.9 Seismology........................................................................................................................................28
3.10 Biodiversity........................................................................................................................................29
3.11 Natural Protected Areas....................................................................................................................30
3.12 Recreational Areas............................................................................................................................30
3.13 Socioeconomic Setting .....................................................................................................................32
3.13.1 Social Area of Influence ........................................................................................................32
3.13.2 Stakeholders .........................................................................................................................34
3.13.3 Government...........................................................................................................................34
3.13.4 Demographics.......................................................................................................................34
3.13.5 Education ..............................................................................................................................36
3.13.6 Economy and Industry...........................................................................................................36
3.13.7 Employment and Household Income ....................................................................................36
3.13.8 Economic Vulnerability..........................................................................................................37
3.13.9 Environmental Justice and Vulnerable Communities............................................................37
J V P/M W KingsMountai n_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx Ap ri 1 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page v
3.13.10 Community Health and Safety..........................................................................................38
3.13.11 Social Infrastructure..........................................................................................................39
3.13.12 Cultural Heritage...............................................................................................................40
4 Design Basis .............................................................................................................. 41
4.1 Legal Requirements..........................................................................................................................41
4.2 Closure Objectives............................................................................................................................41
4.3 Future Use ........................................................................................................................................41
4.3.1 Further Mining Activities........................................................................................................41
4.4 Design Standards..............................................................................................................................41
4.4.1 Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management..............................................................41
4.4.2 Canadian Dam Association...................................................................................................42
4.5 Environmental Considerations Affecting Closure .............................................................................42
4.5.1 Spatial Constraints ................................................................................................................42
4.5.2 Land Use...............................................................................................................................42
4.5.3 Waste Rock Geochemistry....................................................................................................42
4.5.4 Ore Geochemistry.................................................................................................................43
4.5.5 Growth Regime .....................................................................................................................43
4.5.6 Pit Lake..................................................................................................................................43
4.6 Water Treatment...............................................................................................................................46
4.6.1 Water Balance.......................................................................................................................46
4.6.2 Wetlands................................................................................................................................47
4.6.3 Climate ..................................................................................................................................48
4.6.4 Climate Change.....................................................................................................................48
4.7 Engineering Considerations Affecting Closure .................................................................................48
4.7.1 Design Storm Event for Closure............................................................................................48
4.7.2 Rock Storage Configuration..................................................................................................48
4.7.3 Surface Water Diversions......................................................................................................48
4.7.4 Geotechnical Stability............................................................................................................49
4.8 Socioeconomic Considerations Affecting Closure............................................................................49
4.8.1 Stakeholders Impacted by Closure .......................................................................................49
4.8.2 Macroeconomic and Socioeconomic Impact of Closure.......................................................50
4.8.3 Kings Mountain Community Planning ...................................................................................50
4.8.4 Attractive Nuisances..............................................................................................................51
4.9 Closure Assumptions and Design Criteria........................................................................................52
4.9.1 Design Criteria.......................................................................................................................52
4.10 Closure Materials..............................................................................................................................52
4.10.1 Available Materials ................................................................................................................52
J V P/M W KingsMountai n_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx Ap ri 1 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page vi
4.10.2 Material Salvage....................................................................................................................53
4.10.3 Materials Balance..................................................................................................................53
4.11 Revegetation Test Program..............................................................................................................54
4.11.1 Progressive Closure..............................................................................................................55
4.12 Worker Health and Safety.................................................................................................................56
4.13 Relinquishment .................................................................................................................................56
5 Closure Strategy ........................................................................................................ 58
5.1 Revegetation.....................................................................................................................................58
5.2 Stormwater Management..................................................................................................................58
5.3 Open Pit............................................................................................................................................60
5.3.1 Public Safety .........................................................................................................................63
5.4 Waste Rock.......................................................................................................................................65
5.4.1 RSF-A....................................................................................................................................65
5.4.2 RSF-X....................................................................................................................................67
5.5 Archdale Tailings Storage Facility.....................................................................................................68
5.5.1 TSF........................................................................................................................................68
5.5.2 TSF Drainage and Surface Water Management...................................................................69
5.5.3 TSF Non-process Infrastructure............................................................................................71
5.6 Water Storage Basin 1 ......................................................................................................................72
5.7 Infrastructure.....................................................................................................................................74
5.7.1 Process Facilities ..................................................................................................................74
5.7.2 Non-Process Infrastructure ...................................................................................................74
5.7.3 Power Lines and Power Distribution .....................................................................................75
5.7.4 Water Supply System............................................................................................................75
5.8 Roads ...............................................................................................................................................75
5.9 Ponds ...............................................................................................................................................76
5.10 Yard Areas ........................................................................................................................................77
5.11 Industrial and Hazardous Waste.......................................................................................................77
5.12 Fencing .............................................................................................................................................77
5.13 Well Abandonment............................................................................................................................77
5.14 Progressive Closure..........................................................................................................................77
5.15 Temporary Closure ...........................................................................................................................78
5.16 Unplanned Closure ...........................................................................................................................79
5.17 Post-Closure Management Plan.......................................................................................................79
6 Socioeconomic Transitioning................................................................................... 80
6.1 Post-Closure Visioning......................................................................................................................80
6.2 Socioeconomic Transitioning Actions...............................................................................................80
J V P/M W KingsM ountai n_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx Ap ri 1 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page vii
7 Closure Monitoring .................................................................................................... 82
8 Preliminary Mine Closure Schedule ......................................................................... 83
9 References.................................................................................................................. 84
List of Tables
Table 2-1: Production Facilities and Supplies ....................................................................................................6
Table 3-1: Key Stakeholder Groups.................................................................................................................34
Table 3-2: Population Growth in the Social Area of Influence..........................................................................35
Table 3-3: Racial Breakdown in the Social Area of Influence ..........................................................................35
Table 3-4: Potential EJ Communities in the EJA Study Area (USEPA and NCDEQ)......................................38
Table 4-1: Reclamation Quantities ...................................................................................................................54
List of Figures
Figure 1-1: Project Location Map .......................................................................................................................1
Figure 2-1: Preliminary Kings Mountain Mining Project .....................................................................................5
Figure2-2: Archdale TSF Layout .......................................................................................................................5
Figure 2-3: Archdale TSF Non-Process Infrastructure Area ..............................................................................8
Figure 24: Kings Mtn Project (End of Operations) ............................................................................................9
Figure 3-1: Annual Precipitation and Distribution of Monthly Precipitation ......................................................13
Figure 3-2 Average Monthly Evaporation.........................................................................................................15
Figure 3-3: Existing Streamflow Network .........................................................................................................24
Figure 3-4: Location of Kings Creek Watershed ..............................................................................................26
Figure 3-5: Archdale Surface Water Sample Locations...................................................................................28
Figure3-6: Gateway Trails Map .......................................................................................................................31
Figure 3-7: Social Area of Influence .................................................................................................................33
Figure 4-1: Probabilistic Time Series of the Pit Lake Water Elevation.............................................................44
Figure 4-2: Land Use Map (City of Kings Mountain) ........................................................................................51
Figure 4-3: Volunteer Revegetation on Historic Waste Rock...........................................................................55
Figure 5-1: Post Closure Site Facilities ............................................................................................................59
Figure 5-2: Archdale TSF Post-Closure Stormwater Flows .............................................................................60
Figure 5-3: Pit Cross Section Showing Backfill ................................................................................................62
Figure 5-4: Pit Surface Outfall Structure...........................................................................................................64
Figure 5-5: RSF-A Slope Cross-section...........................................................................................................65
Figure 5-6: Rock Storage Facilities After Closure ............................................................................................66
Figure 5-7: Typical Section RSF-A Closure Perimeter Road Configuration.....................................................67
J V P/M W KingsMountai n_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx Ap ri 1 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page viii
Figure5-8: RSF-X Cross-section .....................................................................................................................67
Figure 5-9: Archdale TSF (end of operations)..................................................................................................68
Figure 5-10: Archdale TSF Section C...............................................................................................................69
Figure 5-11: Typical Section TSF Embankment Regrading.............................................................................69
Figure 5-12: TSF Closure Perimeter Channel..................................................................................................70
Figure 5-13: TSF Stormwater and Seepage Collection Detail Plan (Operations)............................................70
Figure 5-14: TSF Stormwater and Seepage Collection Detail Plan (Closure).................................................71
Figure 5-15: WSB-1 Closure Configuration......................................................................................................73
Figure 5-16: WSB-1 Closure Section ...............................................................................................................73
Figure 5-17: Sediment Pond 1 Closure ............................................................................................................76
Figure 5-18: RSF-A Potential Progressive Closure..........................................................................................78
Figure 8-1: Preliminary Closure Schedule........................................................................................................83
Appendices
Appendix A: Recommended Revegetation Plan
Appendix B: Technical Memorandum: Surface Hydrology of Kings Mountain Open Pit Overflow, Post-Closure
Appendix C: Technical Memorandum: Conceptual Closure Surface Water Management Plan for Kings
Mountain RSF-A
Appendix D: Technical Memorandum: Conceptual Closure Surface Water Management Plan for Kings
Mountain TSF
Appendix E: Closure Drawing Package
J V P/M W KingsMountai n_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx Ap ri 1 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page ix
Executive Summary
SRK developed a site-specific conceptual closure plan for both the Kings Mountain and Archdale
properties predicated on the currently proposed mine designs as well as the various studies that have
been completed in support of those designs. For purposes of brevity, neither a summary description
of the Project (as designed) nor findings from the individual studies will be reiterated herein, as they
are provided elsewhere in this document. Rather, this section will focus on information from the other
sources that is deemed essential or relevant to the understanding of closure of the Project, as
proposed in this plan.
The overall objectives used to inform the closure strategy include:
• Ensure legal and other obligations are met.
• Manage reputational impacts.
• Relinquish a safe and secure site where remaining infrastructure is chemically and physically
stable.
• Implement closure actions that minimize impact on remaining mineral resources.
• Protect and preserve remaining environment, including limiting impact on community water
sources.
• Implement socioeconomic transitioning measures to assist community sustainability and
future development.
The Project is subject to applicable regulations of the North Carolina Department of Environmental
Quality (DEQ). Any mining must be carried out in accordance with the North Carolina Mining Act of
1971, G.S. 74, Article 7, and NCAC Title 15A, Chapter 5. Anyone operating a mine that affects more
than one acre of surface area must obtain a permit, post a bond, and develop a reclamation program.
This conceptual closure plan describes preliminary methods to close the proposed mine facilities in
accordance with these legal requirements. The principal facilities considered during closure include:
• Open Pit,
• Rock Storage Facilities (RSFs),
• Archdale Tailings Storage Facility (TSF),
• Process Plant,
• Mine Support Infrastructure,
• Water Storage Basin 1 (WSB-1)
• Water Diversions,
• Water Supply,
• Waste Management, and
• Electricity Supply.
The Project environmental and social setting, as described in the various supporting documents,were
reviewed and considered during development of the conceptual closure plan. These included:
• Meteorology
o Temperature
o Solar Radiation
o Precipitation
o Storm Frequency
JVP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page x
o Evaporation
• Air Quality
• Land Use (Historic and Current)
• Geology and Geochemistry
• Site Soils
• Hydrogeology and Surface Hydrology
• Water Quality
• Seismology
• Biodiversity
• Natural Protected Areas
• Recreation
• Socioeconomical Setting (incl. Environmental Justice)
• Cultural Heritage
• Health and Safety
Environmental Considerations for Closure
Based on the regulatory requirements, as well as the information developed within each of the
aforementioned resource areas, a number of environmental considerations were identified having the
potential to affect closure of the Project.
Spatial Constraints
The Project is spatially limited due to other development and property ownership in the surrounding
areas. This presents some challenges for operational development, planning for closure reclamation
slopes, and storage of reclamation materials.
Land Use
During preliminary meetings, local stakeholders indicated the desire to include redevelopment of the
Gateway Trail system after closure.
Due to the urbanization of the city and housing shortage, the land adjacent to Kings Mountain in
Cleveland County is in high demand to meet the housing needs.
Waste Rock Geochemistry
The majority of the waste rock associated with the Project has a low potential for ARDML. Material
that shows a higher potential ARDML is being segregated and managed during operations, and at
closure, will be backfilled into the pit. Saturation of the PAG material within the base of the pit will
preclude continued oxidation and metal leaching from this material.
Waste rock in the King Mountain mine area has been exposed to atmospheric oxidation for over 35
years, and acid rock drainage conditions have not developed.
Ore Geochemistry
Based on geochemical characterization results, the Kings Mountain ore material is benign and
contains only minor sulfide content.
JVP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page xi
Geochemical characterization and modeling work indicates that groundwater underlying the proposed
TSF is predicted to be circum-neutral (pH 6.7 to 7.3), with the majority of parameters predicted to be
below North Carolina Groundwater Quality Standards. The only exceptions are iron and manganese,
which are elevated in existing (i.e., baseline) groundwater at Archdale.
Growth Regime
The climate of the region, as well as soil characteristics, have a positive impact on vegetative growth
in the Project area, as evidenced by self-sustaining volunteer revegetation in previously disturbed
areas from former operations.
Pit Lake Formation
The pit will remain as a permanent feature after closure. During the last two years of operations, PAG
material from RSF-X will be relocated into the bottom of the pit. Water balance modeling indicates that
the pit lake will form quickly and continue to fill until the surface water discharge point is reached. The
model predicts that the pit lake would inundate the pit backfill during the two years of backfill
placement.
Pit Lake Chemistry
Based on this modeling effort, the quality of the future pit lake water is anticipated to be similar to the
existing pit lake.
Pit Lake Stratification and Turnover
The pit lake will ultimately be deep enough to form a meromictic(layered) lake,with at least two layers.
Some mixing of the two layers is likely to occur, but the chemistry of each will be different and evolve
over time.
Pit Lake Discharge
During the initial pit filling, the pit lake will be a hydrologic sink, and there will be no outflow to
groundwater. After approximately 50 years, the shallow pit water will outflow via groundwater to the
east when water levels reach the weathered bedrock zone with higher transmissivity. This shallow
groundwater zone will then discharge into Kings Creek. The rate of groundwater outflow from the pit
lake will be about 20 gpm at equilibrium. Groundwater outflow from deeper portions of the pit lake are
not anticipated.
Once the water level in the open pit reaches the lowest elevation in the pit rim at 855 ft amsl, it will
discharge to surface water, and report to Kings Creek. This is expected to occur within 60 years after
closure. Discharge from the pit will flow into an existing drainage via a designed channel, which will
then flow into Kings Creek.
Water Treatment
During operations,Albemarle will operate a water treatment plant on site to manage any contact water
that requires treatment. Water treatment will continue while the rock from RSF-X is being backfilled
into the pit. During this time, PAG seepage will be collected and treated in the operational water
treatment plant. Once backfilling is completed,treatment will no longer be required.Treatment facilities
will then be dismantled and disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations.
JVP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page xii
Water Balance
Water balance simulations conducted for the site indicate that the overall water balance of the Project
is strongly positive, generating excess water from pit dewatering activities,waste rock seepage, waste
rock runoff, and undiverted run-on to the facilities.
Wetlands
Anticipated impacts to aquatic resources (including jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional wetlands) will
require mitigation, and current mitigation calculations are based on ratios defined in the Piedmont
Lithium Mine USACE 404 Application, permit and NCDEQ 404/401 certification.
Climate
The Project site can receive between 40 to 70 inches of rain on an annual basis. This precipitation is
relatively evenly distributed throughout the year but occurs with the greatest intensity during the
summer growing season in the form of thunderstorms. Hurricanes can cause periods of intense rainfall
throughout the fall and winter.
Climate Change
A climate change analysis suggests that the region will likely become warmer and wetter as a result
of climate change; however,the study predicts that this will not be reflected in the more extreme rainfall
events that control PMP depths.
Engineering Considerations for Closure
In addition to environmental considerations potentially affecting closure, several engineering
considerations were also considered:
Design Storm Event for Closure
All operational channels were designed to safely convey the peak flow from the 100-year, 24-hour
storm event from the maximum area that will contribute to them. Any channels that will remain after
closure will be reconfigured to safely convey a PMP storm event.
Rock Storage Facility Configuration
Based on a review of runout potential, the occurrence of a runout event is considered very low
probability, and, in the unlikely event of a runout, the material is modeled to be maintained within the
100 ft setback distance to the property boundary.
Surface Water Diversions
At closure, all facilities will be covered with growth media and revegetated. Therefore, all runoff from
the facilities will become non-contact water. Most of the surface water diversions will be removed and
sediment ponds will be breached or removed. Any remaining channels will be reconfigured to safely
convey a PMP storm event.
JVP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page xiii
Geotechnical Stability
Based on preliminary design reports for RSF-A, WSB-1, and the TSF, these facilities are
geotechnically stable, as designed at their final overall slope angles. This applies to post-closure
conditions as well.
Socioeconomic Considerations for Closure
A number of socioeconomic considerations also influenced the closure strategy for the Kings Mountain
Project:
Stakeholders Impacted by Closure
Stakeholders will be affected by closure in differing ways, depending on their relationship to the mine.
• Employees and their dependents
• Suppliers to the Project and their employees
• Shared value partners
• Local, State and Federal Governments
• The Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians and the Catawba Nation
• Residents of Kings Mountain and surrounding areas
• Vulnerable groups
Macroeconomic and Socioeconomic Impact of Closure
Albemarle is in the preliminary phase of assessing macro and socioeconomic impacts from the Project
and closure. There will be positive and negative direct and indirect impacts associated with closure.
Albemarle is working with stakeholders to optimize positive impacts, explore partnerships to develop
employment opportunities and community investment programs, and identify appropriate mitigation
strategies for negative impacts.
Kings Mountain Community Planning
Future use planning for the Project site could influence the future uses selected for the site and will be
considered during development of the socioeconomic transitioning plan.
Attractive Nuisances
During closure and post-closure, there is the potential that conditions on the mine may attract
trespassers who do not understand risks associated with accessing the areas where there are
perceived attractive conditions.
Closure Strategy
The closure strategy involves implementation of best management strategies to bring the site to the
agreed upon post-mining land use and established closure goals. Financial planning and provisioning
will be provided at a later stage as mine planning progresses, but financial assurance mechanisms for
closure will be in place throughout the entirety of the mine closure phase.
JVP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page xiv
Revegetation
The proposed revegetation plan including seeding methods, species, and any amendments in
described in the Recommended Revegetation Plan (ERM, 2024a) and provided in Appendix A of the
Conceptual Closure Plan (SRK, 2023a).
Stormwater Management
At closure, all surface water will be directed toward original flow paths to the degree possible. All of
the sediment ponds constructed for operations will be breached or removed during closure.All culverts
installed during construction or operations will be removed at closure and fill above the culverts will be
removed and/or regraded to allow unimpeded flow toward original water courses. Remaining channels
will be modified to allow them to safety pass a PMP storm event. Riprap will be placed along channels
where high velocities could result in erosion.
The final surface of the tailings in the TSF will be deposited, with minimal regrading, to create a
mounded surface that sheds water after closure. At closure stormwater from the TSF will be managed
in the diversion channels constructed at the toe of the embankment and reconfigured at closure to
safely convey a PMP storm event.
Once contact water flows are no longer being pumped to the WSB-1,the embankment will be breached
back to original channel elevation and the pond will be allowed to free drain. The wetlands that were
established during operations will be reestablished at the new water level.
Open Pit
During the last two years of operations, the open pit will be partially backfilled with PAG material from
RSF-X. The backfill will be placed in level lifts at the bottom of the pit to speed the time needed to
inundate the PAG waste. Additional backfilling is not necessary or economically viable.
The open pit will recharge primarily with groundwater, which will eventually discharge as shallow
groundwater outflow and surface water outflow that both report to Kings Creek. Pit lake water quality
predictions indicate that the shallow pit lake water chemistry will meet all applicable surface water
quality standards. The open pit will not be stocked with fish upon closure and is currently not being
considered for recreational use.
For public safety, a berm will be constructed from rock and/or soil materials along the edge of the pit.
The purpose of this berm is to prevent inadvertent vehicle access to the pit rim. The ramp into the pit
will be blocked by a constructed rock berm with a locking gate to allow vehicle access to the pit lake
for monitoring during the post-closure period.
Waste Rock
RSF-A will be constructed in lifts from the bottom of the facility to the top with an overall slope of
2.5H:1 V and will remain after closure. The slopes of the facility will be regraded between lifts to 2H:1 V
and 16-foot slope breaks will remain at the top of each lift.
Following regrading, the slopes and slope breaks will be covered with one foot of cover and then one
foot of growth media. The facility will be seeded with the approved seed mix, and tree seedlings will
be planted in accordance with the revegetation plan.
JVP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page xv
The PAG material deposited in RSF-X during operations will be removed during the last two years of
operations. At closure, the only features of RSF-X remaining will be the liner system and the contact
water collection pond at the southern corner of the facility.
The facility liner, including that in the contact water pond,will be cut into strips and removed for disposal
either in an on-site void created by the removal of other structures or hauled to a licensed landfill. Any
soil with leachable metal concentrations identified beneath the liner will be excavated and removed for
disposal in an appropriate facility.
Once the liner has been removed and the underlying soils tested, the area will be ripped and graded
to flow to the west or south into South Creek. The contact water pond berm will be breached to allow
surface water from the facility to flow south into South Creek. The entire regraded area will receive
one foot of growth media and be seeded in accordance with the revegetation plan.
Archdale Tailings Storage Facility
Because the tailings in the TSF will be dry stacked,the final surface of the facility will be created during
deposition, and no significant regrading of the tailings surface is expected. Both the tailings surface
and the embankment will be covered with two feet of growth material. The final TSF embankment
slope will have an overall slope of 2.5H:1V with slope breaks approximately every 30 vertical feet.
These slope breaks are designed to reduce erosion from surface flows while vegetation is established.
The surface of the tailings and the embankment will be seeded with an approved seed mix. Tree
seedlings will be planted on the tailings surface, but no trees will be planted on the embankment in
accordance with state dam safety regulations.
TSF Non-process Infrastructure
The Archdale NPI area, at the southwest corner of the TSF area, contains the contact water pond,
truck shop,truck parking,office,and various support buildings and Iaydown areas needed for operation
of the TSF. This area will be completely reclaimed during closure and all buildings and structures will
be removed.
Concrete foundations and floor slabs will be broken and placed in the contact water transfer pond void
or removed from site to a licensed landfill. The soils under buildings and all disturbed areas will be
inspected to identify any areas where oils or liquids may have seeped into the ground. Any areas
where impacted soils are found will be sampled and tested. As needed, any impact soils will be
excavated and removed to an appropriate disposal facility. Any compacted areas will be ripped.
The surface of the entire Archdale NPI area will be regraded to convey surface flows toward culverts
under 1-85. One foot of growth media will be placed and the area revegetated using an approved seed
mix. Some tree seedlings will be planted.
Water Storage Basin 1
Closure of WSB-1 will restore discharge from the reservoir to the current stream configuration. To
accomplish this, the section of the embankment raise over the natural channel will be removed. The
side slopes of the cut will be constructed at 3HAV and covered with one foot of growth media and
reseeded. Riprap will be placed in portions of the restored drainage that have a channel grade slope
of greater 5%.
JVP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page xvi
Infrastructure
At closure, all infrastructure and buildings will be decommissioned and demolished. Usable and
recyclable materials will be repurposed, and demolition debris will placed in voids remaining from
demolition or removed from the site. Potentially impacted soils will be tested and managed according
to appropriate practices based on the results of testing. Once infrastructure and buildings are removed,
the areas will be reclaimed.
Process Facilities
The process area at closure will comprise the crusher and tailings loadout areas north of 1-85 and all
process facilities south of the highway. At closure, these areas will be reclaimed and restored to a
configuration that approximates pre-disturbance conditions to the extent practicable. One foot of
growth media will be placed, and the areas revegetated using an approved seed mix. Some tree
seedlings will be planted.
Non-Process Infrastructure
The NPI area at KMMP includes the mine office, security, parking, truck shop, truck wash, ready line,
storage and laydown areas, the rail concentrate loadout and support infrastructure, and other
structures and disturbed areas. At closure, this entire area will be reclaimed and restored to a
configuration that approximates pre-disturbance conditions to the extent practicable. One foot of
growth media will be placed, and the area revegetated using an approved seed mix. Some tree
seedlings will be planted.
Power Lines and Power Distribution
Power lines and distribution systems may be required to supply energy to structures remaining to
support post-closure land use. However, for purposes of this strategy, any temporary infrastructure
that was installed to support operations will be decommissioned and demolished. This infrastructure
will be among the last items decommissioned, with decommissioning occurring once there is no need
for energy on site. Some power infrastructure will remain permanently as part of the larger City of
Kings Mountain electrical utilities supply.
The 230/24.9KV electrical substation southwest of WSB-1 and the existing transmission line adjacent
to WSB-1, belongs to Duke Energy. This infrastructure will not be removed at closure, and Duke
Energy will be responsible for maintaining this infrastructure and access to it.
Water Supply System
All water used on site will be supplied internally. Once operations and processing cease, and water
supply to the Project is no longer needed, pipes and pumps will be dismantled and removed from the
site.
Roads
All roads that are not needed for post-closure access for monitoring and maintenance, or potential
future use, will be removed during closure. All roads that will remain after closure will be narrowed to
15 feet, which should allow access by small trucks or bulldozers. The only exception to this is the final
haul road up to the top of RSF-A, which will be narrowed to 20 feet.
JVP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page xvii
Ponds
After closure cover is placed, all collection and sediment ponds will be breached and discharges
conveyed to drainages at Kings Mtn and Archdale.
Yard Areas
After regrading to direct water generally into original water courses, the areas will be covered with one
foot of growth media and reseeded according to the revegetation plan.
Industrial and Hazardous Waste
Industrial and Hazardous waste will be identified in accordance with RCRA and applicable waste
regulations and disposed of off-site at an approved third-party facility.
Fencing
Fencing will be removed and sent to a scrap metal facility or an appropriate waste disposal facility
once closure is complete and appropriate exclusionary berms have been placed at the site.
Well Abandonment
Water supply wells will remain for future use at closure. Any monitor wells not needed for post-closure
monitoring will be closed in accordance with state regulations.
Progressive Closure
Progressive closure is reclamation activities that take place during operations to accelerate closure of
facilities for which closure can begin during operation or are no longer needed for the current operation.
By performing progressive closure on areas no longer needed for operations, the proposed closure
methods can be tested at field scale. Temporary revegetation of the closure material stockpiles will
also provide information on the proposed revegetation approach.
Temporary Closure
In the event of temporary closure, the site will be placed into care and maintenance in accordance with
a temporary closure plan prepared to preserve the assets at the site while maintaining compliance
with all legal obligations.
Unplanned Closure
If the operation is closed prior to the currently planned closure date, some of the actions included in
this plan may require modification appropriate to the conditions that exist at the time of closure. These
modifications would be documented in a final closure plan prepared at that time.
Post-Closure Management Plan
The post-closure management plan will be developed at a later date, but typically include post-closure
monitoring activities and vegetation monitoring and maintenance activities.
JVP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page xviii
Socioeconomic Transitioning
In March 2023, Albemarle began community engagement regarding planning for socioeconomic
transitioning at closure with a series of four initial workshops with key stakeholders to develop a vision
for the future of the site. These meetings were designed to obtain stakeholder input to the closure
planning process to ensure that the closure plan would be consistent with potential future uses.
Continued engagement will occur throughout the mine life cycle, as the mine plan evolves and
additional information is gathered.
Post-Closure Visioning
The post-closure visioning meetings were conducted as facilitated brainstorming sessions designed
to encourage open dialog and ensure that the opinions of all those present were represented in the
meeting. The specific topics included: possible desirable future uses, repurposing opportunities, types
of undesirable future uses, and criteria to include or exclude future uses.
A number of different ideas for future uses of the site,or portions of the site,were introduced by various
stakeholders and discussed by the group. Common themes in these uses were:
• Areas for unorganized recreation (e.g., trails, natural areas)
• Organized recreation areas (e.g., ball fields)
• Access to the pit lake for a water recreation area
• Possible commercial use of the plant area
• Outdoor event space
• Potential use of some buildings for community (e.g., youth) programs
• Accessibility for all the public
Large-scale industrial,warehousing, and commercial development were the only future uses that were
generally deemed unfavorable, but deemed acceptable in portions of the site, provided that they did
not conflict with surrounding land uses or the post-closure vision.
Socioeconomic Transitioning Actions
At this time, Albemarle plans to implement the following actions related to socioeconomic transitioning
for the site after closure as part of this plan:
1) Albemarle will continue to engage with the community and key stakeholders on issues relating
to post-closure vision for the site and socioeconomic transitioning with the intent of developing
a comprehensive socioeconomic transitioning plan for the site during operations.
2) Develop a detailed post-closure land use plan in consultation with stakeholders to ensure that
the final closure activities on the site are consistent with those land uses. This would include
a land use viability assessment that defines criteria for inclusion and/or exclusion of possible
future uses with the intent of developing a comprehensive plan that meets legal requirements
and considers input from stakeholders.
3) Albemarle continues to participate in planning discussions with the Gateway Trail Board of
Directors, the City of Kings Mountain, and Cleveland County to develop a plan for a new
section of the Gateway Trail that aligns with the city's Master Plan for parks and recreation
facilities, and stays committed to both preserve and enhance recreation opportunities for our
JVP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page xix
community. Albemarle will continue to support engagement with the local community to gain
input and ensure the best vision for the future of the trail can be realized. Currently, there is
no timetable for the trail to be affected by potential mining operations at the Kings Mountain
site, and the trail will continue to remain open to the public across Albemarle's property.
Closure Monitoring
The objective of the closure and post-closure monitoring program will be to track the recovery of the
site toward the long-term post-closure land use goals, in accordance with the overall closure
objectives. The monitoring program will be designed to collect information to demonstrate that the
closure criteria have been achieved, revegetation and restoration objectives are met, and the site is
stable.
The strategy is to adopt monitoring requirements for specific environmental aspects and adapt these
for closure.These activities will then be implemented through the closure and post-closure period. The
monitoring that is typically required during the closure and post-closure period includes:
• Surface Water — Quality monitoring of surface water, including Kings Creek to detect any
changes to baseline water quality conditions, for a period that meets regulatory requirements.
• Groundwater — Quality monitoring of both the shallow and deep aquifers. Aquifer recovery
also typically monitored via collection of water samples to detect any changes to baseline
water quality conditions, for a time that meets regulatory requirements.
• Pit lake—Water level and water quality will be monitored in the pit lake. This may include pit
lake stratification data. Monitoring shall continue for a period post-closure.
• Air Quality—Air quality monitoring is typically limited to the period in which significant dust is
potentially generated. Once these areas have been closed, the air quality network will be
decreased or totally removed.
• Reclamation Performance Monitoring — reclamation performance monitoring consists of
comparing the reclaimed areas to analogue sites where vegetation performance and soil
chemical and physical properties are measured.
• Biological Monitoring of aquatic and terrestrial resources in accordance with local
requirements.
Annual reports will be prepared to document the results of the monitoring during the closure and post-
closure phases. These reports will provide important information required to manage the on-going
closure activities, with the data and reports being used to:
• Provide recommendations for improving subsequent reclamation activities.
• Indicate where reclamation and closure activities have not been successful, requiring a
potential change in design criteria.
• Provide information where care and maintenance are required during the post-closure period.
• Indicate if relinquishment criteria have been achieved.
During closure, a phased approach in the reduction of monitoring frequency and locations typically
occurs.
JVP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page xx
Preliminary Mine Closure Schedule
Some mine closure activities can occur concurrently as the mine operations allow. However, the
availability of those areas for closure will depend on the mining schedule and availability of equipment
and staff resources. Areas that could be closed concurrently include some of the initial lifts on RSF-A
and the embankment of the Archdale TSF could be ready for closure as early as Year 6 of operations.
The majority of closure actions would be implemented once mining ceases in Year 9, but some post-
closure monitoring and maintenance activities would continue for another 10 years. As monitoring
demonstrates that the closure goals are met, monitoring requirements should decrease, and
groundwater wells can be progressively abandoned. Maintenance activities could include overseeding
areas where vegetation has not performed to expectations, or covers have experience localize erosion
JVP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.),Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan-Kings Mountain Page xxi
List of Abbreviations
The following abbreviations may be used in this report.
Abbreviation Unit or Term
ABA acid base accounting
AGP acid generation potential
AJD approved jurisdictional determination
AWA Applied Weather Associates
amsl above mean sea level
ANP acid neutralization potential
ARDML acid rock drainage and metal leaching
BCMWRORC BC Mine Waste Rock Pile Research Committee
CDA Canadian Dam Association
Chemetall Chemetall Foote Corp.
CEUS Central and Eastern United States
MID corrugated metal pipe
Cyprus Cyprus Specialty Metals Co.
Cyprus Amax Cvorus Amax Minerals Co.
Cyprus Foote Cyprus Foote Mineral Co.
DEQ Department of Environmental Quality
DEHNR Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources Division of Land Resources
DHHS North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services
DMS dense media separation
EJ environmental justice
ESA Endangered Species Act
Foote Foote Mineral Company Inc.
FoS factor of safety
ft feet
GARD global acid rock drainage
GISTM Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management
m gallons per minute
HCT humidity cell test
HDPE high density polyethylene
KM Kings Mountain
KMMP Kings Mountain Mining Project
L liter
LEAF leaching environmental assessment framework
Mg Milligrams
Mst million short tons
NAG net acid generating
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NNP net neutralization potential
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NPI non processing infrastructure
NPR neutralization potential ratio
OSA overall slope angle
PAG potentially acid generating
cf per cubic foot
PET Polyethylene tere hthalate
PJD preliminary jurisdictional determination
PMF peak design flood
PMP probable maximum precipitation
Project Kings Mountain Mining Project
PSD prevention of significant deterioration
QAQC quality assurance/quality control
JVP/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx Ap ri 12024

SRK Consulting(U.S.),Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page xxii
Abbreviation Unit or Term
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
Rockwood Lithium Rockwood Holdings Inc
RSF rock storage facility
SAol Social Area of Influence
SEM scanning electron microscopy
SMU soil map units
Solvay Solvay Process Co.
SPLP s nthetic precipitation leaching procedure
S.U. standard units H
TSF tailings storage facility
USFWS US Fish and Wildlife Service
UT unnamed tributary
WSB-1 Water Storage Basin No. 1
XRD x-ray diffraction
JVP/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx Ap ri 12024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 1
1 Introduction
Kings Mountain Mining Project (KMMP or Project) is a open pit lithium mining operation located in
the city of Kings Mountain, North Carolina, in the southeastern United States. The Project is a
lithium pegmatite deposit that is currently being investigated for redevelopment by
Albemarle Corporation (Albemarle) as part of a prefeasibility-level analysis. The purpose of this
conceptual closure plan is to give a general overview of closure for the Project.
Activities proposed as part of mining at the Project include an open pit mine, tailings storage facility
(TSF), rock storage facilities (RSF), processing plant, and related infrastructure.
The Kings Mountain (KM) Property consists of privately held land, either owned in fee simple or
leased by Albemarle or one of its wholly-owned subsidiaries.
1.1 Project Location
Situated in Cleveland County,the mine is approximately 35 miles west of Charlotte, North Carolina.
Located amidst rolling hills of the Piedmont Plateau, the Project is in a predominantly rural setting
within the city of Kings Mountain. The mine site covers a significant land area, which includes both
the proposed extraction areas and associated processing infrastructure. Figure 1-1 shows the
location and extent of the mine. The nearby Archdale site is the location of the project TSF.
play
va�Nwaya
Kin s M•untain Project
S
slaleniae
Asheville
SouxM1 Maolerville
Game edaM
North CdV61ina
Green Rve ShNby
came a..i G—Onia
oChadatte
wade wm o partanWrg park Hill Gq
pton �.
Greenville Q¢a
° South Carolina
Source:Google Earth,2023(modified by SRK)
Figure 1-1: Project Location Map
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 2
1.2 Regulatory Framework and Operating Approvals
The Project is subject to applicable regulations of the North Carolina Department of Environmental
Quality(DEQ).Any mining must be carried out in accordance with the North Carolina Mining Act of
1971, G.S. 74, Article 7, and NCAC Title 15A, Chapter 5. Anyone operating a mine that affects
more than one acre of surface area must obtain a permit, post a bond, and develop a reclamation
program.
The plan identifies proposed mining and processing components and describes preliminary
methods to close these facilities in accordance with the DEQ, formerly the Department of
Environment, Health and Natural Resources Division of Land Resources (DEHNR) Surface Mining
Manual.
This conceptual closure plan includes the following information:
• Description of facilities present at closure and associated plans for closure
• Description of stormwater management practices and closure objectives
• Description of stability objectives at closure
• Public safety and access during closure and post-closure
• Closure and post-closure water management
• Post-mining land use
• Regrading and revegetation plan
• Waste disposal at closure
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 3
2 Project Description
The Project ore deposit is a lithium-bearing, rare-metal pegmatite intrusion that has penetrated
along the Kings Mountain shear zone, a regional structural feature known to host multiple lithium
bearing pegmatites along its trend. The pegmatite field at Kings Mountain is approximately
1,500 feet (ft) wide at its widest point in the legacy pit area and narrows to approximately 400 to
500 ft in width at its narrowest point south of the legacy pit. The field has a lithium mineralization
strike length of approximately 7,500 ft and is predominantly contained in the mineral spodumene.
The spodumene pegmatite bodies exhibit a texture-based variation in lithium grade, spodumene
grain size, mineral alteration, and rock hardness.
2.1 Land Tenure
The KM property consists of privately held land either owned in fee simple or leased by Albemarle
or one of its wholly-owned subsidiaries. There are 20 fee simple parcels, totaling 1,296.65 acres,
owned directly by Albemarle or one of its wholly-owned subsidiaries which grant both surface
access and mineral rights. There are two parcels, 12849 and 12854, totaling 20.06 acres under
lease for surface access only, and one additional parcel, 47136,totaling 40.3 acres, which is under
lease for both surface access and mineral rights.
The Project area is located within the footprint of historic mining activity, and is adjacent to urban
land used for recreation, businesses, and residential homes.
2.2 Mining History
Exploration activities on the KM property started in the 1800's, with limited documentation prior to
the 1950's. The 1940's provided the first records of mining activities, operated by Solvay Process
Co. (Solvay)initially, and then by Foote Mineral Company Inc. (Foote).All active mining operations
ceased in 1984, but no reclamation work was required or performed following cessation of mining.
The Property has maintained the onsite conversion plant for converting lithium carbonate sourced
from Clayton Valley and Salar de Atacama, to other lithium compounds and lithium metal to the
present date. Current exploration programs include historical geological compilation, surface and
bench mapping, and a multi-year exploration drilling program.
Mining at KM began in 1883 with the discovery of cassiterite, a tin-bearing mineral, within the
outcropping pegmatites. Subsequently, open-pit mining for tin occurred sporadically between 1903
and 1937 (ERM, 1981). Between 1943 and 1945, under the sponsorship of the US Government,
Solvay established a processing plant and mined for spodumene from the outcropping pegmatites
at KM (ERM, 2004). A summary of the post-1940 property history and Property operators' is as
follows:
• In the early 1950s, Foote, a subsidiary of Newmont Mining Corporation, purchased the
property and began mining and extracting lithium from the spodumene.
• In 1988, Cyprus Specialty Metals Co. (Cyprus), a subsidiary of Cyprus Mineral Co.,
acquired Foote and became Cyprus Foote Mineral Co. (Cyprus Foote).Which then merged
with Amax Inc. in 1993 to become Cyprus Amax Minerals Co. (Cyprus Amax)
(Ebensperger et al., 2005).
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 4
• In 1998, Chemetall GmbH, a subsidiary of Metallgesellschaft A.G., purchased Cyprus
Foote from Cyprus Amax, and renamed the subsidiary Chemetall Foote Corp. (Chemetall).
• In 2004, Rockwood Specialties Group, Inc., a subsidiary of Rockwood Holdings Inc.
(Rockwood Lithium), acquired Chemetall. In 2010, Chemetall expanded operations at KM
with the construction of a lithium hydroxide plant and a technical center.
• In 2015, Albemarle acquired Rockwood Lithium and conducted advanced exploration
programs and economic evaluations at KM during 2017 and 2018.
2.3 Project Overview
After dewatering the legacy pit,the lithium deposit is to be mined using conventional open pit mining
techniques. Blasting will fragment the ore and waste rock where it will be loaded and hauled to
either the processing facilities (ore) or the rock storage facilities (overburden). The current plan
includes mining in the existing pit and expanding the pit to the southwest (Figure 2-1). Ore would
be drilled, blasted, loaded, and transported by haul truck to a new processing plant at a rate of
—2.98 million tons per annum of ore (-8,150 tons per day) and processed to produce 380 to
420 thousand tons per annum of spodumene concentrate. The concentrate will be filtered to
approximately 11% moisture by weight and transported off site for further refinement into lithium
hydroxide monohydrate at a separate facility.
Tailings from the spodumene concentrate process will be filtered to approximately 10 to 15%
moisture content by weight and transported off site to a nearby facility for disposal. A portion of the
waste rock with economic value as aggregate will also be transported off site for sale.
2.4 Project Layout
Figure 2-1 presents the Project layout, showing the relative locations of the major components of
the Project. The Project is bisected northeast to southwest by Interstate 85 (I-85). The headwaters
of Kings Creek are located immediately northeast of the site, and the creek leaves the Project area
to the south. The Phase 1 open pit outline is shown in the northeast area of the Project along with
the ultimate (Phase 4) pit extents. Haul roads are shown connecting the pit to the RSFs: RSF-X,
located south-centrally for potentially acid generating (PAG)waste rock, and RSF-A, located in the
southwest for non-PAG waste rock. The haul roads will also connect to the non-processing
infrastructure (NPI) (located in the northwest portion of the site) and the ore sorting area and
stockpiles (located on the east side of the Project,just north of 1-85).A bridge over 1-85 will connect
the ore stockpile area to the processing area, located immediately south of 1-85. South of the
processing area, Water Storage Basin (WSB)-1 will collect all contact water produced within the
Project area before being discharged from the site.
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 5
— ——HE—RE
- -"'P-H-
— —sa FT PI aNFFER
oNTRo All f Op e
LL 00
RoAa o en
RAU o- "r7, Pit �t�a
o PI <
0 IN `
RR N�,<MA,E
N
RAC R" ��
\ 5°
K NMaREE � � �t°i�`�p�/jey�`c� /
c,
RSF-X
�
RSF-A ��� 1NS6;1
Figure 2-1: Preliminary Kings Mountain Mining Project
Tailings from the spodumene concentrate process will be filtered to approximately 10 to 15%
moisture content by weight and transported off site to the nearby Archdale TSF facility for disposal
(Figure 2-2). A portion of the waste rock with economic value as aggregate will also be transported
off site for sale.
I _
Fr PERMEIER - -'�/ RICH POINT
LfGRr uErfkIE�ITRwce / :i -- //,
+ IEMBNIKM CRE%HBBE CREST ELEV a 1
1 ICEPA EINTERCIDT NC N
ACCE5 ROP
—ER AND MAR
LlcNr vERlae A<;cEss A000 \-�,��,; �� �
EXISTING cULVEFIS ITYP.I
PRaPoseD cNLVERT rrvP,
��� � SEDIMENT BPSMS
EUELPAU
SEEPAaE—EETmr,TANK
MQINIENAN{E 54iaP /
CULVERT AaLE T6 PA55 PMP
V0.Q..RTV EOIJRDARY � � /
-HACTWATERPaNO
RRown+MEoIA Y.
9TOCNPISE I-2oaK CY's1 / —AREA
AHE0.
TRUCK PARKING
/ PMNINC
Figure 2-2: Archdale TSF Layout
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan-Kings Mountain Page 6
2.5 Mining Schedule
Once operational, mining from the open pit is anticipated to last for approximately 8.5 years. During
the last year of mining, and a portion of the following year, some of the waste rock extracted during
operations will be backfilled into the bottom of the open pit.
2.6 Infrastructure
The proposed facilities are summarized in Table 2-1 and are discussed in the following sections.
Table 2-1: Production Facilities and Supplies
Facility Description Type
Open Pit The KM open pit is a permanent facility of the project. Permanent
Rock Storage RSF-A is a permanent facility of the Project. RSF-X contains PAG Permanent/
Facilities and will be segregated in a lined facility to be used as in-pit Temporary
backfill.
Tailings Storage The Archdale TSF will be built off site as a dry-stack tailings Permanent
Facility facility and will remain after closure.
Water Built to prevent natural water from inflowing to the Project Temporary/
Diversions facilities. Some will remain after closure. Permanent
Process Plant Process facilities are where ore will be crushed, milled, and Temporary
processed for lithium ore concentrate.
Water Supply The water for the process will be obtained from either site water Temporary
supply or surface water locations within the Project boundary.
Electricity Electricity to the site is provided by transmission lines to the Temporary/
supply ro ert . Some installments may be permanent. Permanent
Source:SRK,2023b
2.7 Open Pit
Mining will occur from a single existing open pit on site, that currently has a developed pit lake.
Prior to mining, the pit lake will be evacuated at a nominal rate of 2,000 gallons per minute (gpm)
over several months to remove the pit lake. During operations, dewatering will occur at a typical
rate of 100 to 300 gpm, although a pumping capacity of 5,000 gpm is designed in the dewatering
system to address peak flows during extreme storm events. Water from the pumping system will
be sent to WSBA via pipeline.
The proposed pit is to be developed in five phases, PHO to PH4 Pits. The early pit phases advance
the depth of the historic open pit to about 450 feet above mean sea level (amsl) (PHO-PH3), and
pushback the East Wall toward its final position. The final PH4 pit phase comprises a push-back to
form the West Wall crest and advances the pit floor to an elevation of 285 ft amsl. The overall slope
heights range from 650 ft (East Wall) to 705 ft (West Wall). The proposed pit is to be excavated
across an 8.5 year period.
A pit lake has formed within the historic open pit with a current pit lake elevation at 785 ft amsl with
two to three benches exposed above the water level. The West Wall has an overall slope angle
(OSA)of about 500 and the East Wall about 400. The exposed benches are vegetated and show a
higher degree of fracturing than the underlying fresh rock recovered during the drilling programs.
The current ground elevation is approximately 975 ft and 850 ft amsl on the west and east sides of
the historic pit, respectively. The historic pit depth is 660 ft.
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 7
2.8 Mine Support Infrastructure
In addition to the open pit, mine facilities include infrastructure such as a mine office, a truck shop,
a truck wash, workshops, warehouses, and ancillary facilities that will be temporarily located in the
NPI area in the northwest portion of the site during the life of the operation and removed from site
during closure (Figure 2-3).
2.9 Rock Storage Facilities
Waste rock from the KM open pit will be placed on two RSF, located on site: RSF-A and RSF-X.
RSF-A will be comprised of coarse rock material and has a capacity of 23.39 million short tons
(Mst)of waste rock material (pers comm David Thompson, March 18, 2024). RSF-A will be located
in the southwest area of the property and will be for non-PAG material. RSF-X will be a lined facility
to store PAG material. RSF-X will be constructed south centrally,with a capacity of 15.85 Mst(pers
comm David Thompson, March 18, 2024).
2.10 Tailings Storage Facility
The Archdale TSF will be located at the site of a former mica mine. Tailings from the spodumene
concentrate process at KM will be filtered to approximately 10 to 15% moisture content by weight
and transported off site to the proposed Archdale TSF for disposal. A portion of the waste rock
mined at KM will be transported to Archdale for construction of the TSF embankment.
An initial TSF embankment (i.e., starter dam) will be constructed on site to hold approximately
1 year of filtered tailings. The filtered tailings material will be placed and compacted within the TSF
with mobile equipment. Over the 10-year life of the Project, the TSF embankment will be raised
annually using downstream construction methods with run-of-mine (ROM)waste rock. The filtered
tailings will continue to be placed until the facility reaches its full capacity.At final build-out,the TSF
will contain 9.2 Mst of tailings (Albemarle, 2023a), after which it will be closed and reclaimed.
Figure 2-2 shows the Archdale TSF layout. The TSF is bounded by 1-85 on the southeast and
Highway 24 on the northwest. Access to the TSF will be off Highway 24 with a truck entrance and
a light vehicle entrance. The site will include minor office and maintenance facilities, parking, water
storage facilities, and a TSF perimeter access road (Figure 2-3). A small road base stockpile and
growth media storage area are included in the site plan.
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 8
Ir�
------ LL_
F,,.. m® ao
w
J
` - PLANTSITEG�ING PLAN
Figure 2-3: Archdale TSF Non-Process Infrastructure Area
2.11 Process Facilities
North of 1-85 the ore will go through 3 crushing and screening stages (Figure 2-1). After secondary
crushing, it will feed an ore sorting step, where high iron content waste material will be rejected.
The rejects will then be hauled to RSF-X.The ore sorter product then goes through tertiary crushing
and screening prior to being transported via conveyor to the south side of 1-85, where it will be
temporarily stored at a covered ore storage barn.
Ore will be retrieved from the ore storage barn and fed via conveyor to two parallel Dense Media
Separation (DMS) modules, at each, an initial separation at a low specific gravity(SG)(2.65-2.70)
will allow removal of the light waste material, which will be transported back to the north side of I-
85 and temporarily stored in bins so that they can be hauled and comingled with waste rock and
stored at RSF-A.
The heavier material will then go through a second separation at a SG between 2.85 and 2.9, with
the material heavier than 2.85-2.90 will be the enriched spodumene concentrate. This concentrate
will need to be dried so that it can be fed to a dry magnetic stage for removal of the iron bearing
waste.The magnetic concentrate will be mixed with the ore sorter rejects and sent to the north side
of 1-85. The intermediate density material together with tertiary crushing/screening fines will then
feed a grinding circuit, followed by desliming, magnetic separation and mica flotation, the waste
streams generated during these stages will be combined and directed to a thickener and filter
combination to recover process water. The pre concentrated spodumene ore will then go through
a spodumene flotation stage where a final fine spodumene concentrate is produced, together with
spodumene tails.
Each of these two streams will be thickened and filtered separately. The spodumene tails after
being filtered will be combined with the prior filters waste stream (called mica tails)for transport via
conveyors back to the north side of 1-85. The fine spodumene concentrate will also be conveyed
back to the north side of 1-85 after being combined with the coarse DMS spodumene concentrate.
The combined spodumene concentrate will go to concentrate storage silos prior to via taken from
site via railroad.
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure—Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRIK Consulting
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 9
ML
rv,
F== OPERATIONS
Figure3-4: Kings Mtn Project (End ofOperations)
JP/ww m"gsw" "*/" Closure Report JSPR000576_R wuu°= *pn12024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 10
2.12 Water Storage Basin 1
WSB-1 will be constructed in the location of the original Foote Minerals Chem tailings impoundment
embankment south of Highway 85, which was constructed to a crest elevation of 850 ft amsl with
compacted fill (Figure 2-1). A concrete-lined trapezoidal spillway was constructed to exit the
impoundment area at elevation 845 ft amsl, which was the original control on pool elevation during
operations. A portion of the embankment at the original flowline was removed in the early 2000's
down to 820 ft amsl and collected stormwater flows were allowed to flow through the original
impoundment footprint. The elevation of the current exit at 820 ft amsl allows for storage of several
feet of water and the area has been more recently referred to as Executive Club Lake.
A portion of the original tailings is still present in the southwest corner of the site against the original
embankment. The original concrete-lined spillway is still in place and in most areas is in fairly good
condition, though there are a few sections where the original concrete has been undercut and
broken.
To convert the existing configuration, Albemarle proposes to implement the following modifications
to enable the future use of the impoundment as a water storage basin.
1. Reinstate the original embankment by placing and compacting suitable general fill in the
embankment breach, including the formation of a lower permeability internal core and
compacted fill or rockfill outer zones.
2. Install low-level outlet works to facilitate decanting the pool to a predetermined elevation such
that normal pool operations allow for both sediment retention and storm storage.
3. Replace the existing concrete-lined spillway, providing for an outlet at the northwestern corner
of the new WSB-1 impoundment at 843 ft amsl and including energy dissipation measures as
required at the downstream end to prevent undue erosion.
4. Construct a gravel blanket drain along the downstream face of the embankment and under the
proposed downstream embankment buttress. The top of the blanket drain will extend to 845 ft
amsl and be covered with compact general fill to widen the embankment crest and improve
access conditions (final crest width to be determined).
5. Construct a compacted fill buttress to improve the predicted stability of the embankment and
anchor the new blanket drain section on the downstream embankment face.
The design details described in Select Phase Preliminary Engineering Design Report for Water
Storage Basin 1 (SRK, 2024a).
2.13 Water Management
The mine facilities are designed with runoff water management systems to reduce the amount of
water that contacts the waste rock, and to collect any contact water that does occur.
The open pit is on the northeast end of the Project footprint and surface runoff will be diverted
during operations around the northern edge. The eastern edge of the pit has a ridge that will
naturally impede stormwater. Diversions will be placed around the open pit and RSFs, and TSF to
capture stormwater, and will be designed to convey the probable maximum precipitation (PMP)
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 11
storm event. Contact water will be collected and conveyed through pipelines to WBS-1. Non-
contact water will be routed to Kings Creek or South Creek via diversions, drainage channels,
and/or culverts.
2.14 Waste Management
Waste material generated at the Project(excluding sewage effluents) is classified as:
2.14.1 Non-Hazardous
Solid urban and industrial wastes:this is waste that does not contain any type of dangerous material
and is generated mainly in lunchrooms and offices, among others. Domestic waste consists of
organic and inorganic waste (e.g., food waste, paper, bags, plastics, etc.). Domestic waste will be
sent to an off-site landfill designated to accept domestic waste.
2.14.2 Recyclable or Reusable Waste
Consisting of materials which, depending on their nature, can be reused in Kings Mountain or
recycled outside the mine by authorized companies. This is a subgroup of non-hazardous waste
which includes wood, metallic items in general, wear material, scraps, tinplate, cardboard, paper,
polyethylene terephthalate (PET) packages, tires, and other related items.
2.14.3 Hazardous Waste
Domestic and industrial waste considered hazardous in accordance with federal Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulations. This term refers to all those waste materials
that may cause direct or indirect damage to the environment.This waste type may be liquid or solid.
Hazardous wastes will be identified and disposed of off-site in accordance with RCRA regulations.
2.14.4 Special Waste
This is waste that, according to its characteristics, requires special handling and disposal (e.g.,
radioactive wastes). Special wastes will be disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations
at facilities designated to receive such waste.
2.14.5 Demolition Waste
This is waste generated by the demolition of site facilities and will be recycled to the extent possible,
and typically hauled away by the demolition contractor or stored onsite temporarily and hauled to
a disposal facility that is approved to accept demolition waste.
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 12
3 Project Environmental and Social Setting
3.1 Meteorology
The Project is located within the Kings Mountain basin, which is a region of active weather
throughout the year. The Project area is classified as Koppen climate Cfa, humid subtropical
climate, which is characterized by the coldest month averaging above 32o Fahrenheit (F), at least
one month's average temperature above 71.6o F, and at least four months averaging above 50' F,
with no significant precipitation differences between seasons and no dry summer months. The
region receives moisture from its proximity to the Atlantic Ocean, as well as being in the path of
frequent jet streams, allowing fronts and areas of low pressure into the region. This can be
enhanced by the warm Gulf Stream current just offshore of the North Carolina coast. The area is
also topographically within the Appalachian Mountains, which can create a wide variety of climates
and precipitation events within the region (Applied Weather Associates, 2022).
3.1.1 Temperature
The climate of the Project vicinity is humid subtropical with hot summers and mild winters. The
monthly temperature ranges from a minimum of around 3°F in January to a maximum of around
104°F in August,with an average temperature of around 60°F. Legacy data show that temperatures
in the area have been increasing, with an average rise of 0.3°F per decade since 1970, or roughly
1.7°F from 1895 to 2020. Climate change is expected to further contribute to this warming trend,
potentially impacting surface water conditions, such as increased evaporation rates and altered
streamflow patterns. Predictive climate models suggest further warming in the future, potentially
resulting in more frequent and severe heatwaves and droughts.
3.1.2 Solar Radiation
The nearby city of Gastonia, North Carolina has an average annual solar radiation value of
5.37 kilowatt hours per square meter per day. Solar radiation is lowest in the months of December
and January highest in June and August. (Gastonia, NC Utilities - Electricity, Natural Gas, Solar I
Utilities Local).
3.1.3 Precipitation
Kings Mountain experiences varying precipitation levels throughout the year. On average, the area
receives between 46 to 52 inches of rainfall annually(Figure 3-1), with the wettest months typically
being May through August and the driest months occurring between October and February.
Precipitation is distributed relatively evenly throughout the year, without a clear wet or dry season.
The region is susceptible to extreme precipitation events, such as tropical storms and hurricanes,
which can bring heavy rainfall and cause flooding. Legacy data suggest that precipitation patterns
may become more variable in the future, with an increase in both droughts and floods.
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 13
Distribution of Precipitation
12 80
70
t m
� -5w
— s
o c 50
a 6 a40
v J`
a 30
� 9 -
c
20 -
O 2 4
10 -
D 0
January February March April May June July August September October November December Annual Total
2.5%SK 5%-10% ■10%-25% 025%-50% ■Median ■50%-75% 075%-90% 90%-95% 95%-97.5%
Annual Precipitation
a0
70
r 6D
5D
4D
i 30
1D I I
0
1925 1,20 1935 134D 1345 1550 1555 1%0 1%5 1970 1975 19 0 1%5 1590 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Source:SRK,2023a
Figure 3-1: Annual Precipitation and Distribution of Monthly Precipitation
3.1.4 Storm Frequency
Storms encountered at the Project vary in frequency and intensity throughout the year. For
example, a 100-year, 24-hour storm event produces, on average, 7.96 inches of precipitation
(National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 2023). The region experiences
thunderstorms, tropical storms, and hurricanes, which can bring heavy rainfall and high winds.
Thunderstorms,which are the most common type of storm in the area, see peak activity in July and
August. Factors such as temperature, humidity, wind patterns, and topography influence storm
occurrence. These storms can impact surface water availability and quality by causing flooding,
erosion, and sedimentation. Climate change could increase the frequency and intensity of storms
in the future, posing higher risks of flooding and erosion.
Applied Weather Associates (AWA) completed the Site-Specific Probable Maximum Precipitation
Study for Kings Mountain Mining Operations, North Carolina (AWA, 2022) for the Kings Mountain
basin in North Carolina. AWA utilized a storm-based approach to derive the site-specific probable
maximum precipitation (PMP) depths to update the PMP depths originally developed in
hydrometeorological reports developed by the National Weather Service. Table 3-2Table 4-1
shows Tables 10.4 and 10.5 excerpted from AWA(2022),which show the results of the site-specific
study with annual return intervals to 1:10,000 years and beyond.
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan-Kings Mountain Page 14
Table 3-2 Precipitation Frequency Estimates
Table 10.4: Kings Mountain basin AEP for 6-,24,stud 72-hour PMP
Dings Mountain AEP
Estimate PM (in) AEP ARI
6hr 28.5 2.51's 39,929,769
24hr 32.4 1.09'1 9,144,104
72hr 32.4 3.93'7 2,540,551
Tahle]0.5: Kings Mountain basin overall frequenry anal"k form-,24-,and 72-huur
1�275
Frequency Analysis 6-hour 24-hour 72-hour
AEP AEP 50% 5% 95% 50% 5% 95% 50% 5% 95%
1 0.99010 9.91 1.0 0.9 1.1 2.0 1.8 2.2 2.4 2.2 2.6
2 ❑_50000 5.0' 2.1 2.1 2.5 3.6 3.4 3.9 4.3 4.0 4.6
0.20000 2.0' 3.2 2,9 3.4 4.8 4.4 5.1 5.7 5.2 6.1
10 0.10000 1.0' 3.8 3.5 4.1 5.5 5.1 6.0 6.6 6.1 7.1
25 0.04000 4.0' 4.7 4,3 5.0 6.6 6.1 7.2 7.9 7.3 8.5
50 0.02000 2.0' 5.3 4.9 5.8 7.5 6.9 8.2 8.9 8.2 9.7
100 0.01000 1.01 6.0 5.5 6.7 8.4 7.7 9.2 9.9 9.1 10.9
200 0.00500 5.01 6.8 6.2 7.6 9.3 8.5 10.4 11.0 10.1 123
50.0 0.00200 2.0 3 7.9 7.1 8.9 10.6 9.6 12.1 12.6 11.4 14.3
1,000 0.00100 1.03 8.7 7.9 10.1 11.7 10.4 13.5 11.9 12.4 16,0
5,000 0.00020 2.0° 10.9 9.5 13.1 14.4 12.5 17.2 17.1 14.9 20.4
10,000 0.00010 1.01 11.9 10.3 14.5 15.7 13.5 19.1 12.6 16.0 22.6
100,000 0.00001 1.0' 15.8 13.1 20.5 20.4 16.9 26.5 24.2 20.0 31.3
1,000,000 0.000001 1.01 20.5 16.3 28.3 26.2 20.7 36.1 31.0 24.5 42.7
10,000,000 0.0000001 1.0 26.2 19.9 35.7 33.1 25.0 48.8 39.1 29.7 57A
100,000,000 0.00000001 1.O g 33.1 24.0 52.5 41.3 29.9 65.5 42.9 35.4 77.6
1,000,000,000 0.000000001 1.09 41.4 29.6 70.7 51.2 35.3 87.4 60.6 41.9 103.5
10,000,000,000 0.0000000001 1,0 in 51.4 33.9 94.7 1 63.1 41.5 116.1 1 74.7 49.2 137.5
Source:AWA,2022
3.1.5 Evaporation
Evaporation rates at the Project vary based on temperature, humidity levels,wind speed, and solar
radiation. Legacy data from regional climate stations provided by NOAA (NOAA, 2023) (Clemson
University, SC GHCND:USC00381770, Chesnee 7 WSW, SC GHCND:USC00381625, and
Chapel Hill 2 W, NC GHCND:USC00311677), shows that evaporation rates are highest in summer,
averaging around 6 to 7 inches per month, and lowest in winter, with around 2 to 3 inches per
month (Figure 3-2). Overall, average annual potential evaporation ranges from 55 to 65 inches.
Evaporation impacts surface water availability by contributing to water loss from lakes, rivers, and
streams. Factors such as vegetation cover, land use practices, and soil moisture levels influence
evaporation variability. Climate models predict that evaporation rates will continue to increase in
the future due to warming temperatures and changes in precipitation patterns.
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 15
S
7
�6
0 5
o
4
w
7-
t 3
9
o i
2
1
0
January February March April May June July August September October November December
Clemson Univ Chesnee 7 WSW Chapel Hill 2 W —— —Average GoldSim
Figure 3-2 Average Monthly Evaporation
3.2 Air Quality
Albemarle has contracted with SWCA Environmental Consultants to install and operate two PM10
stations at the Kings Mountain facility. Albemarle is currently monitoring and collecting baseline
data for future air quality dispersion modeling in support of an air permit and for federal National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) planning purposes.
The current PM10 monitoring stations were located based on several criteria. These criteria include:
the location with respect to air quality emissions sources and prevailing wind direction, an on-site
meeting with Albemarle and follow-up communications with NC DEQ, US Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA-required siting criteria for Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) ambient
monitoring, and site security and safe access.
The specific equipment specified for this site is standard within the air monitoring industry and has
been approved by federal, state, and local governments nationwide for data collection. Data
collected meets procedural and data output requirements for EPA and NC DEQ air quality
networks.
3.3 Land Use
The current land package consists primarily of historic mining features including an open pit, waste
rock, and tailings facilities on both sides of 1-85. The land package also consists of some
recreational, residential, and commercial development property.
3.3.1 Historic Land Use
The site has been mined sporadically starting in 1903 for cassiterite, a tin bearing mineral, and in
1942 for lithium in support of World War 11. Production continued until low demand for lithium
resulted in the shutdown of the mining operation and eventual dismantling of the processing
facilities in 1994.
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 16
3.4 Geological Setting
Elevation in the Project area ranges from approximately 755 to 1,074 ft above mean sea level
(amsl). Lower elevations occur to the south of the Project area and higher elevations surround the
remaining Project area, including two peaks at Crowders Mountain State Park, at approximately
1,700 ft amsl.
The Project area is located within the Piedmont physiographic province which extends between the
Blue Ridge Mountains to the west and the Coastal Plain to the east. The Fall Line, located east of
the Project area, is a boundary between the Coastal Plain region and the Piedmont region. Initially,
the Piedmont was a gently sloping plain until uplift raised the region to its present elevation. Bedrock
geology consists of metamorphic rocks including biotite gneiss, schist, slate, quartzite, phyllite, and
amphibolite that has been physically and chemically weathered forming a reddish soil at the
surface, which is underlain by soft, weathered bed rock. The geologic units run parallel along an
approximate northeast-southwest strike.
The Piedmont province is characterized by rolling to hilly uplands with well-defined drainage
networks consisting of well-established streams and creeks along with erosional channels that have
incised the Piedmont plateau. Erosion and gullying have left narrow to fairly broad upland ridgetops
and steep slopes adjacent to the major streams. Soils are formed from weathered bedrock (i.e.,
residuum), and most are classified as Udorthents with a soil horizon profile typical of a C horizon
to 80 inches below surface with a texture of sandy clay loam (SWCA, 2023a).
3.5 Geochemistry
Albemarle has conducted a geochemical characterization investigation to provide an understanding
of the geochemical characteristics of geological materials specific to the Kings Mountain Project
and to define the potential for future mining wastes, including waste rock (including DMS and ore
sorting rejects),ore and pit wall rock and tailings,to generate acid or leach deleterious constituents.
Representative samples have been collected and characterized following guidelines set forth in the
Global Acid Rock Drainage(GARD)Guide(INAP,2014),the MEND Prediction Manual for Drainage
Chemistry from Sulfidic Geologic Materials (MEND, 2009) and the Bureau of Land Management
Instruction Memorandum NV-2010-014, Nevada Bureau of Land Management Rock
Characterization Resources and Water Analysis Guidance for Mining Activities.
The approach for a purpose-built characterization focuses on the following aspects..
• Assessment of waste rock geochemistry to provide a prediction of the potential
geochemical reactivity and stability of future waste rock (including DMS and ore sorting
rejects) in addition to construction material for the project, and to determine potential
contact water (runoff and seepage) chemistry associated with the future rock storage
facilities.
• Evaluation of tailings material geochemistry to provide a prediction of contact water
chemistry that may change over time and would influence the design, operation, and
closure of the TSF.
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 17
• Determination of final pit wall geochemistry to define the control that the pit wall rocks would
have on the chemistry of water removed from the pit during operation and pit lake that will
form after closure.
• Define the geochemical properties of overburden materials that will be used as reclamation
cover material including alluvium and saprolite.
The results of the geochemical characterization test work provide a basis for the assessment of
acid rock drainage and metal leaching (ARDML)potential and supports predictions of future contact
water quality (i.e., runoff and groundwater that contacts waste rock or pit walls). In turn, these
results have been used to inform decisions on engineering designs, mine planning, and waste rock
and tailings management.
The program approach and results are detailed in the Kings Mountain Geochemical
Characterization Work Plan (SRK, 2022) and the results of the program have been incorporated
into the Baseline Geochemistry Characterization, Kings Mountain Report (SRK, 2024b). The
geochemical characterization program is currently ongoing, and the information provided herein
regarding geochemistry may change as additional data are received.
3.5.1 Waste Rock and Ore Characterization
As part of the program, samples representative of future waste rock and ore have been collected
from exploration drill core for geochemical characterization testing (SRK, 2022). In addition,
samples of waste rock were collected from existing (legacy) waste rock piles from previous
operations. The geochemical test methods include both static and kinetic testing that are designed
to address the bulk geochemical characteristics of the samples, and to assess the potential of
waste rock and ore materials to generate acid or release metals into solution. "Static testing" is a
general term describing those analytical methods applied to characterize acid generation and metal
leaching characteristics of material at the time of testing and does not account for temporal changes
that may occur in the material as chemical weathering proceeds. Static tests provide a balance of
acid generating and acid consuming reactions at an end point and may be used to determine the
potential magnitude of metals leaching from a given material.
Static testing is distinguished from "kinetic tests", which evaluate the rate of sulfide oxidation and
metal release over time. Static testing provides a conservative approximation of acid generation
and trace metal release potential,which is used to determine whether more comprehensive kinetic
testing is warranted. Materials that exhibit uncertain or highly variable geochemical behavior in the
static tests may require further characterization using kinetic test methods to determine the rates
and character of longer-term leaching.
The geochemical test methods for the Project have been selected to determine the total acid
generating or neutralizing potential of the samples and assess the concentration of constituents in
leachates that could be derived from the material. Static and kinetic testing methodologies include
the following:
• Multi-element analysis using four-acid digestion followed by Inductively Coupled Plasma
Mass Spectroscopy (ALS Chemex Method ME-MS61 m).
• Measurements of paste pH.
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 18
• Acid Base Accounting (ABA) using the modified Sobek method (Sobek et al., 1978) with
sulfur speciation by hydrochloric acid or sodium carbonate (NaCO3).
• Net Acid Generating (NAG)testing that reports the final NAG pH and final NAG value after
a two-stage hydrogen peroxide (H2O2)digest (Miller et al., 1997).
• Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure (SPLP) testing (US EPA, 1994) and analysis
of leachate.
• Leaching Environmental Assessment Framework (LEAF) testing using the EPA 1313,
1314 and 1316 methodologies (US EPA, 2012a;b; US EPA, 2017a).
• Mineralogical analysis, including optical microscopy, Scanning Electron Microscopy
(SEM), X-Ray Diffraction (XRD), QEMSCAN and TIMA.
A subset of samples was selected for the humidity cell test (HCT) Procedure (ASTM D5744-96)
designed to simulate water-rock interactions to evaluate the rate of sulfide mineral oxidation and
thereby predict acid generation and metals mobility.
The potential for waste rock and ore material to generate acid is defined by the balance of acid
generation potential (AGP) to acid neutralization potential (ANP). Determining if a material has a
potential to generate acid is typically done by looking at the ratio of ANP to AGP, which is referred
to as the neutralization potential ratio (NPR), or the difference of ANP and AGP, which is referred
to as the net neutralization potential (NNP). For the Kings Mountain waste rock, the potential for
metal leaching is typically pH dependent where material with a potential to generate acid has a
higher potential to leach metals.
The initial results of the baseline geochemical characterization demonstrate that the ore material
has a low potential for ARDML. However, some of the waste rock associated with the Project has
a potential to generate acid and leach metals and will need to be segregated and managed during
operations and closure. The main waste rock lithology (amphibole gneiss schist) comprises over
45 percent (%) of the total waste rock and shows a low potential for ARDML. The other lithologic
units that will be encountered during mining show a range of behavior and do not fall into a single
ARDML category. Mineralogy data and HCT data indicate that waste rock can be classified as
having a potential for acid generation and metal leaching potential using the NNP value where
material with an NNP <-1 is considered to have a higher potential for ARDML.
An approach for estimating the quantity of PAG waste rock from the Kings Mountain block model
using total sulfur and total calcium was developed. Initial estimates indicate that approximately 13%
of the waste rock is PAG using an NNP cut-off of-1 (SRK, 2022).
Albemarle has developed quantitative geochemical predictions (SRK, 2024f) based on the
geochemical test work program in order to:
• Identify the factors influencing future waste rock chemistry and assess the potential
controls on constituent mobilization and transport from the rock storage facilities.
• Draw upon the conceptual model to develop a numerical model that quantitatively
predicts the possible concentrations of solutes in potential runoff and seepage waters
associated with the rock storage facilities.
• Quantitatively assess potential impacts to groundwater downgradient of the rock storage
facilities.
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 19
Predictions of seepage and runoff water quality from the PAG RSF was used to inform water
management requirements and the design of the water treatment plant. Based on the results of
this modeling effort, the risk of groundwater degradation resulting from storage facility recharge
from RSF-A is considered low.
3.5.2 Tailings Geochemistry
Static testing was completed on samples representative of future tailings material and process
waste streams to assess the balance of acid generating and acid neutralizing minerals for these
materials (SRK, 2022). The ABA results indicate that overall, the sulfide sulfur content was low or
below detection for the flotation tailings and DMS rejects. In comparison, the OSR and MSR
samples have higher sulfide sulfur content than other waste streams and as such higher potential
for acid generation, with some samples indicating a potential for net acid generation despite the
generally low sulfide contents (<1%).
Despite the presence of sulfides within the OSR and MSR material, these materials still show an
overall low potential for acid generation. Based on the current HCT data, the two OSR HCTs have
maintained neutral conditions throughout the test despite the ABA and NAG results that indicated
these samples have a potential for acid generation. The two HCTs representative of flotation tails
have also maintained neutral conditions as predicted by the static test data. Metal(loid)s chemistry
shows enrichment is associated with the higher sulfide contents in the OSR, but overall
concentrations are still relatively limited by comparison to crustal abundance.
TSF porewater samples obtained from lysimeters installed in the historical TSFs are circum-neutral,
which is consistent with the static and kinetic test program. Metals concentrations are also low in
the porewater, with many parameters below analytical detection limits. The results showed
concentrations of a few parameters that were higher in comparison to the leach test results of future
tailings (e.g., copper and manganese).
SRK has undertaken water quality predictions to assess future contact water quality associated
with the Archdale TSF (SRK, 2024f).
The base-case water quality predictions use a mass balanced approach, whereby the tailings,
waste rock, and groundwater source terms are mixed in the proportions provided in the water
balance to provide a mass balanced chemistry at the various water quality prediction points. This
is considered a conservative approach, as mineral precipitation and trace element sorption
processes (i.e., processes that may remove trace elements from solution) are not accounted for
that will likely occur in nature. A sensitivity analysis has been undertaken to evaluate the effect of
incorporating mineral equilibration and sorption on the resulting water chemistry.
The results show that predicted water quality in the contact water pond and upper tributary of Dixon
Branch (herein referred to as Archdale Creek) is circum-neutral (pH 6.7 to 7.4 s.u.), with all
parameters predicted to be below North Carolina Surface Water Standards. Post-closure, the
contact water pond will no longer be operational. Groundwater underlying the proposed TSF is also
predicted to be circum-neutral (pH 6.7 to 7.3 sm.), with the majority of parameters predicted to be
below North Carolina Groundwater Quality Standards. The only exceptions are iron and
manganese, which are elevated in existing (i.e., baseline)groundwater at Archdale.
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 20
The results of the equilibration sensitivity analysis show that the equilibrated chemistry is similar to
the mass balanced chemistry; however predicted concentrations of iron, manganese, aluminum
and antimony are slightly lower for the equilibrium chemistry sensitivity, reflecting the precipitation
of ferrihydrite, alunite, MnHPO4 and SbO2, with the latter including additional sorption processes
onto iron oxides.
3.5.3 Cover Material Characterization
Static geochemical laboratory testing has been conducted on eight samples of alluvium/overburden
and 10 samples of saprolite to assess the potential for acid generation and metal leaching from the
future cover material (SRK, 2024f). A suite of static tests was completed on the samples, including
ABA, NAG and multi-element analysis. These results have been supplemented with multi-element
data from the Albemarle exploration database. The results can be summarized as follows:
• Most of the alluvium and saprolite samples are characterized by low sulfur contents (<0.01
wt%) and are classified as non-PAG based ABA and NAG test results.
• Paste pH of the 10 saprolite samples is circum-neutral (ranging between pH 5.2 and 7.9),
with three samples that were less than pH 6.The paste pH results for the alluvium samples
are similar to the saprolite samples.
The alluvium and saprolite samples are typically characterized by lower paste pH values compared
to the waste rock(core) samples from the geochemical characterization program. These lower pH
values relate to the removal of primary neutralizing minerals by weathering processes, leaving
behind iron and aluminum oxide minerals. SPLP testing was initiated on three samples of alluvium
and three samples of saprolite to assess the leaching behavior of potential future cover materials.
For the alluvium and saprolite samples, the leachate pH was neutral to alkaline (pH 5 to 8.3). For
the majority of the alluvium and saprolite samples, element release was low or at the limit of
detection under neutral conditions.
One sample of alluvium has been included in the HCT program. This cell has exhibited slightly
acidic conditions but overall low metal release. No parameters have been leached at concentrations
that exceed the surface water or groundwater standards.
The results of the characterization program indicate that there are no significant geochemical
differences between the alluvium and saprolite material. Both the alluvium and saprolite material
are considered suitable for use as cover material and can be used interchangeably for reclamation
purposes
3.6 Soils
Most of the soils within the Project area are classified as well drained, and none of the major
components of soil map units (SMU)s are considered hydric soils. Two of the minor components of
SMUs(the Chewacla soil series and the Dorian soil series)are classified as hydric. Hydric soils are
soils that are saturated or inundated with water long enough to have a higher likelihood of
supporting wetland conditions. Many of these soils have water table depths that allow the soil
component to range from hydric to nonhydric depending on the location of the soil within the
landscape as described in the map unit. Therefore, caution must be used when comparing the list
of hydric components with soil survey maps.
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 21
Soil profiles were remarkably similar regardless of SMU, geology, or slope position. The following
horizons were generally present at Kings Mountain:
• A: Mineral soil with organic matter accumulation, loss of iron, aluminum, clay. This horizon
was poorly developed across the Project area, being generally 1 to 2 inches thick.
• B: Subsurface accumulation of clay, iron, aluminum, humus. This horizon was marked by
the accumulation of organic matter and a blocky structure, and generally thin.
• C: Little pedogenic alteration. In the case of Kings Mountain soils, this horizon is marked
by greater clay components and the accumulation of iron oxides.
• Cr: Weathered bedrock.
In many locations, both the A and B horizons were generally thin and present as an A/B horizon,
with dominantly A horizon characteristics but with some B horizon characteristics. The weathered
bedrock (C horizon)was consistent regardless of the parent material, as these were mostly felsic
(i.e., igneous rocks that are relatively rich in silicon, aluminum, calcium, and sodium that form
feldspars and quartz) and weathered very similarly.
Soil characteristics in relation to revegetation and reclamation are discussed in Section 4.10.1.
3.7 Groundwater
The conceptual hydrogeological model for the site subdivides the groundwater system around the
pit into two main components, namely, surficial deposits, and bedrock system.
Surficial deposits are made up of a mix of overburden rock, saprolite, and weathered bedrock.
These units have relatively higher hydraulic conductivities than the deeper bedrock. Groundwater
inflow to the pit through the surficial deposits is believed to be substantial in the current condition
and expected to be a major contributor during the initial stages of mining. However, their relative
contribution to pit inflow and pore pressure is expected to decrease rapidly in time, as the surficial
units become dewatered through pit excavation and in-pit sump dewatering.
In contrast, the underlying bedrock groundwater system is expected to be the most important
component in terms of pit inflow and pore pressure distribution during mining. This system is
understood as bedrock units with low hydraulic conductivity and storage parameters decreasing
with depth. The main flow pathways in this system occur through fracturing and weathering of the
bedrock, which is more pronounced in the upper parts of the system,just underneath the surficial
deposits. Saturated fracture networks and faults in the bedrock will be the main source of pit inflow
and could control pore pressures through compartmentalization of different blocks, as
discontinuities could act as either flow conduits or barriers at the local scale.
Additional to these components, hydraulic testing in the area indicates that there are two major
water-bearing corridors in the bedrock, at geological contacts east and west of the Kings Mountain
pit. The contact between amphibole gneiss-schist and upper mica schist on the western side, as
well as the contact between silica mica schist and schist-marble on the eastern side have been
identified as major water-bearing features when intercepted by drillholes. Packer testing along
these contacts also indicates higher hydraulic conductivities, even at depths approximately
between 200 and 600 ft below ground surface. These corridors have been labeled as "Shear
Contacts" in corresponding hydrogeological reports. Even though they are expected to affect the
regional groundwater system, the current pit shells do not intercept these contacts at depth, and
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 22
thus they are not anticipated to be a direct contributor to inflow or pore pressures distribution at the
pit slopes. This, however, might change if pit shells are re-designed in the future.
Groundwater inflow to the system occurs mainly through recharge from precipitation. As it reaches
the surface, a fraction of the precipitation infiltrates the surficial deposits, and percolates through
the different units until it recharges the groundwater system. In the bedrock system, this occurs
mainly through fractures and the weathered areas among the intact rock. By regional and local
estimates, the amount of groundwater recharge around the Kings Mountain pit area is expected to
be between 10% and 20% of mean annual precipitation, depending on the local soil conditions and
level of urbanization.
The main groundwater outflow from the system occurs through regional flow and as discharge to
the creeks and streams. In the area of pit lake, groundwater generally flows from the northwest to
the southeast. Around the Kings Mountain and Martin Marietta pits, groundwater contours have
been affected by historical mining, forming a concentric flow towards the excavations. In terms of
the Kings Mountain pit, it currently holds a pit lake that has been increasing in lake elevation through
the past decade (recorded), by direct precipitation and groundwater flow. The following sections
describe current water levels and the flow regime around this pit in more detail (SRK, 2023a).
3.7.1 Groundwater Chemistry
A total of 96 groundwater samples (including two duplicates) were collected from the site during
pumping tests and regular quarterly sampling events during May 2022 and June 2023 and were
submitted to ACZ Laboratories in Steamboat Springs, Colorado. Typical quality assurance/quality
control (QA/QC) checks were performed, including the following:
• Calculation of cation-anion balances
• Comparison of total versus dissolved measurements
• Comparison of duplicate sample results
• Evaluation of blank sample results
The water quality data have been assessed against three different sets of water quality standards:
• North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Groundwater Standards
• North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Surface Water Quality Standards for
Class C Waters
Based on this assessment, groundwater within the Project area does not meet the North Carolina
groundwater standards for iron and manganese, which exceed the standards in most of the wells.
Other constituents that are elevated above groundwater standards for one or more wells include
antimony(five wells), arsenic(six wells), lead (2 wells), nickel (1 well), sulfate(three wells)and zinc
(2 wells).
Manganese is also commonly elevated in groundwater above the most restrictive surface water
standards. Other constituents that are elevated in groundwater above the Class C surface water
standards in one or more wells include arsenic(two wells),cadmium (one well), copper(four wells),
mercury (three wells), and zinc (three wells).
Radioactive elements (gross alpha and gross beta, radon 222, radium 226/radium 228, and
uranium) are detected in a few of the wells, but at low concentrations that are below the water
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 23
quality standards. The only exceptions to this are gross alpha and gross beta concentrations for
seven wells (SNKM22-420, SNKM22-438, RTKM22-399, RTKM22-401, RTKM22-403 and
RTKM22-412)that exceed the North Carolina groundwater standard. The highest gross alpha and
gross beta concentrations are observed for KMMW-001, which are an order of magnitude higher
than observed for the other wells with elevated gross alpha and gross beta concentrations.All other
groundwater locations have gross alpha and beta, radium 226 and 228, and uranium below the
water quality standards (SRK, 2023b).
At Archdale, a total of 11 groundwater samples (including one duplicate and one field blank) were
collected from Archdale site during the quarterly sampling event in December 2023. Monthly
groundwater water quality monitoring has continued since this initial sampling.
The groundwater in the Archdale area is mainly characterized by a neutral pH and
sodium/potassium-bicarbonate type geochemical signature. Groundwater water quality data have
been compared to groundwater standards. Based on this assessment, the groundwater within the
Archdale area meets the water quality standards with the exception of iron and manganese that
are above the groundwater standards in all nine wells. Lead was also slightly above the
groundwater standard in one well (SNKM23-531A). The Dixon Branch water samples meet all
groundwater water quality standards.
Radioactive elements (gross alpha and gross beta, radium-226/radium-228, and uranium) were
detected in most wells, but did not exceed North Carolina groundwater standards with the exception
of well SNKM23-531A. This well had gross alpha levels elevated above groundwater standards.
SNKM23-531A also contained the highest levels of gross beta, along with radium 226 and 228.
This well also exhibited the highest amount of Total Suspended Solids (TSS).
3.8 Surface Water
3.8.1 Surface Flow Regime
The natural drainage network in the vicinity of the Project is heavily influenced by historical and
active mining activities. The contributing watersheds to the Project area are roughly defined by
Battleground Avenue to the north, Tin Mine Road to the west, Church Road to the south and east,
and Cardiac Hill, a legacy waste dump,to the northeast. The drainage network consists of two main
drainages and several constructed water bodies, as shown in Figure 3-3.
Kings Creek passes through the Project area from northeast to southwest but is intercepted by the
Marin Marietta Quarry Pit (a.k.a., Kings Mountain Mica Company Lake) upstream of the Project
area. Water intercepted by the Martin Marietta Quarry Pit is pumped out on a regular basis and
discharged into Kings Creek. The pumping system was recently upgraded to 2,500 gpm capacity.
As Kings Creek enters the Project area, it is routed under the current Albemarle Research Building
in a 620 ft, 4 ft diameter corrugated metal pipe (CMP) culvert. Discharging from the culvert, King
Creek flows to the southwest and joins with the discharge from the South Creek Reservoir before
crossing under 1-85 in three, 7 ft wide x 10 ft high concrete box culverts. Flowing south, Kings Creek
joins with the discharge from WSB-1 before flowing off the Project area to the southwest.
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 24
A pit lake is formed in the historical Kings Mountain Pit and does not discharge to the stream
network. The current pit lake elevation is approximately 800 ft amsl and will need to rise at least 50
ft before discharging into Kings Creek.
There are several small, man-made ponds in the Project area which generally contribute to the
Kings Creek drainage system. The most notable of these ponds is Mill Pond #1, a legacy water
management structure used by the existing industrial activities to manage stormwater runoff from
the Project area. Mill Pond #1 collects water from the site and infrequently discharges through a
culvert under the railroad spur into Kings Creek Reservoir.
WSB-1 is formed by the historical South Legacy Tailings Impoundment south of 1-85. Post-mining,
the embankment was breached down to elevation approximately 820 ft amsl, and the lake freely
discharges over a rock spillway,joining with Kings Creek approximately 1,500 ft downstream of the
lake.
i
c
I
Source: USGS 2023 and SRK 2023b
Figure 3-3: Existing Streamflow Network
The Archdale site sits immediately south of a surface water divide roughly defined by South
Battleground Avenue. On the site, surface water drains south to Archdale Creek. Dixon Branch
joins with Kings Creek approximately two miles south of the site in South Carolina (Figure 3-4). To
the north of the site (on the H1 property), surface water flows north into an unnamed tributary of
Long Branch.
The site is heavily influenced by the legacy mining activities of the former mica mine. Existing
conditions result in local surface water collection in the open pits, which is pumped as part of
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 25
operations to an upper pond (shallow open pits)where it is allowed to flow through a rock filter dam
before leaving the property and flowing south under 1-85 in a 60-inch-diameter concrete culvert.
Additional culverts crossing under 1-85 are located at 500-to 800-ft intervals,with diameters ranging
from 18 to 60 inches, discharging the drainage swale collecting runoff against the northern side of
the highway or drainages bypassing the legacy pits. These culverts typically discharge 20 to 35 ft
below the highway surface into Archdale Creek.
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 26
122— 124-- 12600 128-0 130—
N
l
•
`% •� AT
I
AdopR`� 1 F ll Kin
i I
• Mou to
White Plains I
•
IZ �
0 U `
t t ) I
iF
0 7 "1500 22,60 300 3710; Y� Ar e a
Feel
r
ainr
— -- Grover !
_-----_—__—_—_ __ I
85 l
AntEoch �
i
Kings'M ntain
'Nat! al
t
�Milli Park
Sr¢ I
Easterly
Heights I
I _
I 55
L I
-P
a I
Cash n
Cross ads
erokee Ave-- <
I
o I
K
C I
I
kee ❑5
J
l�
fIr
1
OProposed TSF Boundary 0 5000 10000 16000 20000 25000
l
—� Streams I
g Feet e
Kings Creek Watershed 774ft
�1 ff��II}} Y1 DRAFT LOCATION OF
Y srk con s U 4 L i n g KINGS CREEK WATERSHED
er:GE
��ALBEMARLE REPORT.
nwry er:pT BASELINE GEOCHEMICAL
CHARACTERIZATION REPORT
souR SRK 2023 TE 03.06.2024 KINGS MOUNTAIN MINING PROJECT 2.1
FILE mnE Fig 2-1 Kmgs Creek Wet.,Phed sRk PFOJEET ry o..USPR#0000576
sE,�. . .,e a e,. u,d„is+noo-avwoneaieeeonemwonm.,
Source:SRK,2024c
Figure 3-4: Location of Kings Creek Watershed
The site has no well-defined drainage due to legacy mining activities, but discharges from the site
would flow into the Dixon Branch drainage, as shown in Figure 3-4.
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 27
3.8.2 Surface Water Chemistry
Surface water chemistry is being collected onsite and compiled into quarterly reports for review and
analysis to determine background conditions.
Surface water samples are collected quarterly from a number of facilities on the site and a few
locations on the pit lake at varying depths. Each sampling event monitors field parameters and
includes field blanks sent to the laboratory. Samples are submitted to either Waypoint Analytical or
ACZ Laboratories in Steamboat Springs, Colorado, depending on analytical hold times. Typical
QA/QC checks were performed, including the following:
• Calculation of cation-anion balances.
• Comparison of total versus dissolved measurements.
• Comparison of duplicate sample results.
• Evaluation of blank sample results.
The water quality data have been assessed against three different sets of water quality standards:
• North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Groundwater Standards.
• North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Surface Water Quality Standards for
Class C Waters.
Preliminary results show that water quality is generally below Class C surface water quality
standards with the following exceptions:
• Residual chlorine for most surface water samples and pit lake samples.
• Dissolved oxygen in several surface water and pit lake samples were below standard.
• A few samples had pH outside of the standard range.
At Archdale, six surface water samples(including one duplicate and one field blank)were collected
during the quarterly sampling event in December 2023. Monthly surface water quality monitoring
has continued since this initial sampling. In addition, surface water samples were collected from
four locations in the Dixon Creek watershed located south of the TSF. Surface water and locations
are shown in Figure 3-5:
The groundwater in the Archdale area is mainly characterized by a neutral pH and
sodium/potassium-bicarbonate type geochemical signature. Surface water samples at the Archdale
site generally display a similar major ion geochemical signature and are characterized as
sodium/potassium-bicarbonate type waters. Sample ADSW-3 shows slightly different major ion
signature with mixed anions (i.e., bicarbonate/chloride). Surface water samples from Dixon Branch
are characterized as calcium+sodium-potassium/bicarbonate type waters.
Based on current assessment, the surface water within the Archdale area meets the Class C
surface water quality standards with the exception of iron and manganese that are above the
standards in all four surface water sample locations. The Dixon Branch water samples meet all
Class C surface water quality standards.
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 28
ADSW-1-2D231241
• ADSW-2-2D 31 1
ADSW-4 20291211• •ADSW-3-20231 11
UT-Dixon-�20240118
ti
US-i3ixon-2D24D118
Eonfluense-2D248118
DS- ixon-2D24D118 SURFACE WATER SAMPLING LOCATIONS
2023 SurFare Water
0 300 600 900 1200 1500 Samples
Property Boundaries
Feet Q Dixoncreek
Figure 3-5: Archdale Surface Water Sample Locations
3.9 Seismology
The Central and Eastern United States (CEUS) is part of a broad mid-plate compressive stress
province that also includes most of Canada. Over this large region, the stress field is orientated
with a relatively uniform east-northeast direction of maximum horizontal compression. This
compression direction corresponds well to the direction of absolute plate motion of the North
American Plate, which suggests that a far-field tectonic source such as ridge-push or basal drag at
the Mid-Atlantic Ridge may be the primary source of stress in the mid-plate region. This stress
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 29
regime, along with the structural features developed through the geologic history described above
controls the occurrence and localization of seismicity in the region. Seismicity and consequent
hazard in the CEUS is largely controlled by pre-existing zones of weakness that are favorably
orientated in the modern stress field.
Earthquakes in the region are rare but can be significant. The most significant earthquake near the
site occurred in 1886 in Charleston, South Carolina, which was a 7.1 magnitude earthquake. More
recently a M 5.1 event occurred in 2020 near Sparta, North Carolina. The New Madrid earthquake
sequence of 1811-1812 in southeastern Missouri/northeastern Arkansas are also significant at
long-period ground motions. This sequence, which was felt as far away as the East Coast,
consisted of three principal events on 16 December 1811, 23 January 1812, and 7 February 1812
—referred to as NM1, NM2, and NM3. The magnitudes of the New Madrid earthquakes are highly
uncertain but appear to range from M 7.0 to 7.6 (GeoVision, 2023).
For a 2,475-year return period (2% exceedance probability in 50 years), the latest 2018 NSHMs
indicate hard rock PGA and 1.0 sec SA of 0.118 and 0.068 g, respectively, for the site(Petersen et
a/., 2020). The site-specific hard rock PGA and 1.0 sec SA computed in this study are 0.088 g and
0.059 g for the 2,475-year return period. The differences 35% and 15%, respectively, and may be
due to differences in GMMs and possibly in the characterization of the Charleston RLME. Which
is not considered to be significant (Lettis, 2023).
3.10 Biodiversity
The Project area lies within the Piedmont EPA Level III Ecoregion. This ecoregion consists of a
transitional area between the mostly mountainous ecoregions of the Appalachians to the northwest
and the relatively flat coastal plain to the southeast.
Once largely cultivated, much of this region is planted pine or has reverted to successional pine
and hardwood woodlands. The historical oak-hickory-pine forest was dominated by white oak,
southern red oak, post oak, and hickory,with shortleaf pine, loblolly pine, and to the north and west,
Virginia pine (SWCA, 2023a).
The Project area is dominated by forested upland vegetation (69.3%), and 13.5% is
disturbed/developed. Jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional wetlands and streams are present and
detailed in the Wetland and Waterbody Delineation Report for the Albemarle Kings Mountain
Lithium Mining Project, Cleveland County, North Carolina (ERM, 2022). SWCA submitted both an
Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) and Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD)
request to the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) in February 2023. This will determine the
final wetland acreage and linear feet of streams that are jurisdictional.
No federally listed species have been identified within the Project area. The northern long-eared
bat was not detected during acoustic surveys, and the site is on the extreme southeastern edge of
its range.Although suitable habitat is present,the dwarf-flowered heartleaf was not identified during
presence/absence surveys.The potential monarch butterfly habitat within the Project area is mostly
low quality, and there is very little milkweed present to support this species. Tricolored bat was
detected throughout the Project area during acoustic surveys. This bat is not state or federally
listed, but the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has proposed listing this species as
endangered under the Endangered Species Act(ESA).
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 30
Timber rattlesnake, American bittersweet, and smooth sunflower are state-listed species that have
potential to occur based on suitable habitat. However, American bittersweet and smooth sunflower
were not present during biological surveys. Surveys were not conducted for timber rattlesnake due
to the lack of predictive survey areas within the Project area (e.g., rock outcrops)and the secretive
nature of the species. However, numerous biological surveys were conducted throughout a
diversity of habitats (e.g., forests, floodplains) in the Project area and no timber rattlesnakes were
observed. All other state-listed species have a low or very low potential to occur, primarily due to
lack of suitable habitat (SWCA, 2023b).
3.11 Natural Protected Areas
Site redevelopment will impact the Gateway Trail system that was put into place in 2009. However,
the features on this trail consist of mining components, such as a rock storage facility, and are
therefore not considered natural protected areas.
The Project is within close proximity to the Crowders Mountain State Park boundary to the south.
Some visual impacts may be anticipated by visitors to the park during active operations; however
after reclamation and closure, visual impacts will be minimized to the extent practical.
Foote Trail currently traverses the Project area. Figure 3-6 shows a map of the Gateway Trail
system.
3.12 Recreational Areas
The Gateway Trail system is heavily utilized by the community.The Project will impact the Gateway
Trail system, as it is located adjacent to, and within the current plan boundary. The trail was built
in coordination with the National Park Service, Cleveland County, the City of Kings Mountain, and
the State of North Carolina, and was created as a public-private partnership between Cleveland
County and the Kings Mountain Gateway Trails non-profit. The Gateway Trail has received grants
from a variety of organizations, including NC Adopt-A-Trail, the North Carolina Parks and
Recreation Trust Fund, the Carolina Thread Trail, and more.
Trail construction began in 2001 and was completed in 2009, and consists of 85 acres of trails, and
other recreational activities, including a butterfly garden, park, restroom, and other public facilities
(kmgatewaytrails.org).
The Rail Trail Loop, Plateau Loop, and Cardio Hill trails are constructed on, and adjacent to, the
historic rock storage facilities and outside the area that will be disturbed by the Project.
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 31
c NC 216;
—-- _
BATTLEGROUND AVENUE
i
TRAIL HEAD 1 RESTROOM
d
�F 4�
ms �
P4
flUARRY
❑RAIL TRAIL LOOP 0.7 nn
--— --- — — ■PLATEAU LOOP 0.8 M i
„m ECARDIO HILL 0.4 M
FOOTE TRAIL 4.5 m
O QUARTER MILE MARKERS
PED AN DRUDGE
BOARDWALK
._NCI
// �m
GALILEE CHURCH ROAD
—..--__—.— TRAIL HEAD
. U A it
Source:kmgatewaytrails.org
Figure 3-6: Gateway Trails Map
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure—Report_USPR000576—Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 32
3.13 Socioeconomic Setting
The Project is located within the United States of America, in the State of North Carolina. Within
North Carolina, there are 100 counties, each of which are governed by county commissioners that
make up a county board. The Project is located in two different counties: Cleveland County and
Gaston County, though the majority of the Project area is located in Cleveland County
(Albemarle, 2023).
Key informants were identified by ERM as part of baseline data collection and consisted of
23 community members from Kings Mountain and surrounding areas. The key informants were
made up of residents, City Councilmembers, recreational representatives, business owners,
School and Social Services Administrators and Chiefs, as well as other strategic development
partners in the area.
3.13.1 Social Area of Influence
A Social Area of Influence (SAoI) is established to facilitate the understanding of current
socioeconomic conditions in the Project area, including conditions of the economy, local
communities, social infrastructure, recreational activities, cultural heritage, and community health.
The Project's SAoI is further divided into a Direct Social Area of Influence (Direct SAoI)' and an
Indirect Social Area of Influence (Indirect SAol)2 to guide the understanding of baseline
socioeconomic conditions in relationship to the Project (Figure 3-7).
For this Project, the Direct SAoI has been defined as the city of Kings Mountain, associated
residential areas,3 and areas near the TSF (see purple polygon on Figure 3-4). This includes the
mine and related facilities, which are located within the city of Kings Mountain.
The Indirect SAoI includes the cities of Shelby, Gastonia, and Bessemer City (Figure 3-7).
The Direct SAoI and Indirect SAoI together encompass the full SAoI. The definition of the SAoI is
based on the current understanding of the Project and the socioeconomic context of the area. The
SAoI may be refined or updated as more information on the Project becomes available. Data on
Cleveland County and Gaston County have been included in this report where relevant for
additional context.
t The Direct SAoI encompasses the geographic area where the Project is located (in this case,the city of Kings
Mountain and TSF), as well as those areas reasonably expected to experience primary impacts because of the
Project.
2 The Indirect SAoI encompasses areas that could experience secondary impacts from Project activities (for example,
housing Project workers in nearby communities outside of Kings Mountain).
3 A small number of residential areas in the eastern portion of Kings Mountain fall within Gaston County, rather than
Cleveland County. While these residential areas have a Kings Mountain address,they are technically not part of the
city of Kings Mountain, nor Cleveland County, and are therefore not eligible to attend schools in Kings Mountain.
However,for the purposes of this baseline,they are considered part of the Direct SAoI, as they may still experience
direct impacts because of the Project.
JP/MW KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 33
Nertei
A� �ea�2 woiad�o:wmn leigh
a o hadede
wy h
a `e p'ac
• - '%G danra sown .
A carol)na G'es
+ * Site Location
0 Direct Social Area of Influence(Direct SAoI)
Lincoln County O Indired Social A—of Influence(Indirect
Gaston County SAolj
QCoenty Boundary
II=Slate Boundary
nQP°�o Roads
°o�n —Inlers�z�e
—us.Route
Rule
� t
0
-Shelby `--
- Bessemer it"
T
o c v
Kings Gastonia
Mountain L
1>' ��`YYYfff
%19, rna=
_ North Carolina 1 inch-2.5 mi rwhen printed 11x17
r soottl carohna Social Area of Influence
Kings Mountain lithium Mine
Albemarle
Kings Mountain
•r Cleveland County.
North Carolina
Source:ERM,2023
Figure 3-7: Social Area of Influence
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 34
3.13.2 Stakeholders
Several stakeholder groups have been identified with the Project. Table 3-1 identifies these
stakeholder groups.
Table 3-1: Key Stakeholder Groups
Stakeholder Role
Employees and their dependents Employees working at the mine and their dependents.
Suppliers to the Project and their Contractors/suppliers who supply the mine with good and
employees services.
This includes stakeholders that have been part of Albemarle's
Shared value partners Benefit Sharing Projects, or who may have received funding or
support from Albemarle during operations.
Local, state, and federal Government officials and regulators in Kings Mountain and
governments surrounding areas.
Indigenous peoples who have lived on their ancestral lands in
The Eastern Band of Cherokee this area of North Carolina. The Catawba Nation owns a casino
Indians and the Catawba Nation adjacent to the mine, and the Project is located in the historical
territory of the Cherokee.
Residents of the City of Kings Residents in the surrounding community including immediate
Mountain and surrounding areas neighbors of the mine,who will presumably continue to live in
that location post-closure.
This stakeholder group includes vulnerable people who may be
Vulnerable groups more adversely affected by, or less able to adapt to the adverse
im acts from the Project compared to other stakeholder groups.
3.13.3 Government
Cleveland County has several citizens' boards and committees. Individuals can complete an
application for selection by the commissioners. Members of the board and various committees serve
to guide county decision-makers toward choices that reflect the voice of the county residents and
promote resident wellbeing. Kings Mountain is governed by a Manager-Council form of government
with a mayor, two At-Large Councilmembers, and a Ward-Elected Councilmember for each of its five
wards. According to stakeholders, Ward One is a "majority minority ward," which was created in the
1960s to give a voice to minority populations in Kings Mountain. Ward One has expanded since the
1960s to include additional neighborhoods and communities. Much of the Project is located in
Ward One and Ward Three, but it will also extend beyond city limits (Albemarle, 2023).
3.13.4 Demographics
Population
Kings Mountain, also referred to in this report as "the city", spans two counties. The eastern-most
portion is in Gaston County, and the larger, western portion of the city is in Cleveland County (UNC
Chapel Hill, 2022).
The population of Kings Mountain was 11,409 in 2021, with a population density of approximately 830
people per square mile (U.S. Census Bureau, 2021). The population in Kings Mountain grew from
10,296 in 2010 to 11,409 in 2021, representing a 10.8 percent increase. In 2021, the total population
in Cleveland County was 100,359, with a population density of 214.7 people per square mile. Both
Cleveland and Gaston counties are located west of the Charlotte metropolitan area, and, according to
the North Carolina Rural Center, Cleveland County is considered a rural county, while Gaston County
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan-Kings Mountain Page 35
is considered a regional city and suburban county (NC Rural Center, 2022). Population growth in the
SAol is shown in Table 3-2.
Table 3-2: Population Growth in the Social Area of Influence
Percent Population Females
Area 2010 20a Growth Density(People Males °
Population Population Since 2010 per Square Mile (�O� (�°)
Kings Mountain 10,296 11,409 10.8 830.4 46.1 53.9
Shelby 20,323 21,947 8.0 982.3 43.9 56.1
Gastonia 71,741 81,161 13.1 1,555.9 47.0 53.0
Bessemer City 5,340 5,507 3.1 1,038.9 54.8 54.2
Charlotte 731,424 879,709 20.3 2,836.9 48.0 52.0
Cleveland County 98,078 100,359 2.3 214.4 48.9 51.1
Gaston County 206,089 230,856 12.0 640.71 48.41 51.6
North Carolina 9,535,483 10,551,162 10.7 214.71 49.91 51.1
Source: U.S.Census Bureau,2021
In Kings Mountain, approximately 56.8 percent of the population is of working age, or between ages
16 and 64 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2021). Almost 30 percent of the population in Kings Mountain is over
60 years of age. Of the cities in the SAol, Bessemer City has the youngest median age of 35.3 years
and a mode age between ages 25-29 (10.6 percent of the population).
Race and Ethnicity
Most residents in Kings Mountain identify as either White (65.2 percent) or Black/African American
(27.3 percent). Approximately 3.7 percent of Kings Mountain residents identify as two or more races,
1.6 percent identify as Asian, and 2 percent as Hispanic/Latino.
Within the full SAol, most residents identify as White, followed by Black/African American and
Hispanic. Gastonia has the highest proportion of individuals who identify as Hispanic/Latino at 10
percent. The full breakdown is shown in Table 3-3 (below).
Table 3-3: Racial Breakdown in the Social Area of Influence
Kings Bessemer Cleveland Gaston
Race Mountain Shelby Gastonia City County County
White alone 65.2% 57.8% 55.6% 75.9% 71.8% 70.4%
Black or African American alone 27.3% 31.7% 29.4% 12.4% 20.2% 16.9%
American Indian and Alaska Native alone 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 0•2%
Asian alone 1.6% 0.9% 1.3% 0.0% 0.9% 1.7%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific 0.0% 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1%
Islander alone
Some other race alone 0.1% 0.0% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2%
Two or more races 3.7% 5.2% 3.3% 1.9% 2.8% 2•9%
Hispanic or Latino 2.0% 4.2% 10.0% 9.6% 3.9% 7.7%
Source: ERM,2021a
In Kings Mountain, English is the most widely spoken language among residents ages 5 years and
older (ERM, 2021a). Ninety-seven percent of the population in Kings Mountain speak English, while
1.6 percent speak Spanish, and 1.7 percent speak Asian and Pacific languages. Within the SAol,
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 36
English is also the most widely spoken language; however, both Bessemer City and Gastonia have
sizable Spanish speaking populations at 8.8 percent and 8.3 percent, respectively.
3.13.5 Education
Within Kings Mountain, there are four elementary schools, one intermediate school (fifth and sixth
grade), one middle school, and one high school. During the 2020-2021 school year, Kings Mountain
High School was ranked first in Cleveland County high schools and Kings Mountain High School is
ranked 145/686 for all North Carolina high schools (U.S. News, 2023). Approximately 42 percent of
the students enrolled in Kings Mountain High School are economically disadvantaged (ERM, 2022b).
There are two community colleges within the SAol: Gaston College and Cleveland Community
College. Cleveland Community College is tightly aligned with workforce development and invests in
vocational programs including manufacturing trades, industrial systems, mechanical drafting,
plumbing, information technology(IT),and electric systems (ERM,2018).The College recently opened
a new Advanced Technology Center which includes 45,000 square feet of space, high-bay training
spaces, and a crane for industry training (ERM, 2021 b). Gardner-Webb is the closest four-year college
to Kings Mountain, less than 20 miles west of the city(ERM, 2022c).
3.13.6 Economy and Industry
According to stakeholders, the economy in Kings Mountain stalled after the loss of the textile
manufacturing industry during the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement
(NAFTA) in 1994, as manufacturers began to relocate their factories to Mexico in the mid-1990s
(ERM, 2022d). This resulted in the loss of an entire sector of jobs within Kings Mountain, and
stakeholders reported that family members who lost factory jobs had difficulty being re-skilled for other
lines of work. However, businesses and other industries are starting to return to the area, including
Utz, Coca-Cola, and Walmart. In Kings Mountain, 59.2 percent of the population ages 16 years and
older are in the labor force, compared to 62.4 percent statewide in North Carolina (ERM, 2021 a).
Within the SAol, labor force participation is lower in Shelby(55.9 percent)and Cleveland County(56.7
percent), but higher in Gastonia(64.3 percent), Bessemer City(60.5 percent)and Gaston County(62.4
percent).
Over 31 percent of Kings Mountain residents are employed in production, transportation, and material
moving occupations (U.S. Census Bureau, 2021d). In both Cleveland and Gaston counties, most
residents are employed in management, business, science, and arts occupations. The largest
industries in Kings Mountain are manufacturing (24 percent),educational services and health care and
social assistance (18 percent), and retail trade.
3.13.7 Employment and Household Income
The median household income in Kings Mountain is $42,336 (ERM, 2021a). The median household
income in Gastonia is the highest out of all the towns in the Project's SAol at $52,990, though this is
still lower when compared to the Gaston County median income ($56,819) and the state median
income($60,516).The mean household income in Kings Mountain is$56,360, substantially lower than
the Gaston County median of$75,999 and the state's median of$84,888.
The unemployment rate in Cleveland County (7.1 percent) is higher than both North Carolina
(5.3 percent) and the national average (5.3 percent). The percentage of people whose income from
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 37
2020 to 2021 is below the poverty level in Cleveland County is 14.6 percent, higher than the state
average of 12.9 percent. Cleveland County's average per capita income of$24,505 is lower than the
North Carolina income per capita average of$34,209; however, Gaston County's average per capita
income of $30,607 is more closely aligned with the state average. The Cleveland County median
household income at $45,646 is also lower than the North Carolina ($60,516) and U.S. averages
($64,994) (ERM, 2021 a).
There are stark differences in per capita income by race in the SAol. On average, individuals who live
in Kings Mountain and identify as White have a per capita income of$25,074, nearly 80 percent higher
than individuals who identify as Black or African American, with a per capita income of$14,010 (U.S.
Census Bureau, 2020). In Shelby, individuals who are White have a per capita income of $31,677,
1.5 times more than individuals who are Black or African American, with a per capita income of
$12,963. Individuals who live in Kings Mountain and identify as "some other race" have the lowest per
capita income at $11,743, followed by individuals in Shelby who identify as Asian at $11,896
(ERM, 2021 a).
3.13.8 Economic Vulnerability
Kings Mountain and Shelby have the highest poverty rates in the SAol, at 20.7 percent and 19 percent,
respectively(ERM, 2021 a). Kings Mountain also has the highest unemployment rate in the SAol at 8.1
percent, followed by Bessemer City at 6.4 percent. The poverty rate and unemployment rate for
Cleveland County is 14.6 percent and 7.1 percent, respectively. In Cleveland County, the poverty rate
of all people is 18 percent,and 17.2 percent of households are receiving Food Stamps or Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance Program(SNAP)benefits.Within the SAol,the percentage of individuals receiving
Food Stamps or SNAP benefits ranges from 19.5 percent in Bessemer City to 22.9 percent in Kings
Mountain (ERM, 2021 a).
Over 47 percent of children in Kings Mountain are in single parent families, and 11.4 percent of people
are uninsured. According to stakeholders, two of the most common barriers to employment are
transportation and childcare (ERM, 2022). There are no public transit options in the SAol, and many
individuals lack reliable transportation to get to work, particularly if they do not own cars. Community
members told ERM that childcare is insufficient both at the regional level and within the city of Kings
Mountain. These barriers with transportation and childcare force many parents to stay home and take
care of children rather than having the opportunity to join the workforce (ERM, 2022).
3.13.9 Environmental Justice and Vulnerable Communities
ERM identified potential communities with Environmental Justice(EJ)concerns,or communities which
may disproportionately feel impacts from Albemarle's operations. According to the USEPA, EJ is the
"fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or
income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies" (USEPA, 2013).
In 2021, approximately 13.3 percent of households in North Carolina were in poverty (ERM, 2021 a).
In Kings Mountain, 21.1 percent of households were below the poverty level in 2021, a higher
proportion than those below the poverty level statewide in North Carolina (ERM, 2021a). Most
individuals in Kings Mountain identify as White alone (65.2 percent), followed by those who identify as
Black of African American (27.3 percent)and two or more races(3.7 percent). The unemployment rate
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan-Kings Mountain Page 38
in Kings Mountain in 2020 was 8.1 percent, higher than the Cleveland County rate of 7.1 percent (U.S.
Census Bureau, 2021 da.
Most of the census block groups (CBGs) surrounding the Project are potential EJ communities
because of the prevalence of low-income populations. Most of these low-income communities identify
as white, low-income, minority populations, and linguistically isolated homes in the EJ Study Area.
Potential Communities with EJ Concerns
ERM identified potential communities with EJ concerns using the USEPA EJScreen Tool, the NCDEQ
Community Mapping tool, and the U.S. Census Bureau. The following CBGs were identified as
potential communities with EJ concerns as shown in Table 3-4 (below).
Table 3-4: Potential EJ Communities in the EJA Study Area (USEPA and NCDEQ)
Census Block Group(CBG) Total Minority Percent Below Poverty Linguistically Isolated
CT 9504 BG 1 45.7% 12.4% 1.5%
CT 9504 BG 2 38.1% 25.5% 0.0%
CT 9504 BG 3 14.3% 29.7% 0.5%
CT 9504 BG 4 21.7% 20.3% 0.0%
CT 9504 BG 6 47.8% 2.7% 1.4%
CT 9505 BG 1 53.9% 15.4% 0.0%
CT 9505 BG 3 27.0% 38.0% 0.0%
CT 9506.01 BG 1 27.6% 18.4% 4.2%
CT 9506.01 BG 2 39.4% 14.5% 0.0%
CT 9506.01 BG 3 19.6% 38.1% 0.0%
CT 9506.04 BG 1 5.4% 30.9% 0.6%
CT 316 BG 2 41.4% 10.4% 0.0%
CT 317.05 BG 2 23.2% 15.2% 0.0%
CT 317.06 BG 1 37.5% 15.8% 0.0%
Source: ERM,2021a, U.S.Census Bureau,2021a
Note:Percentages indicative of potential EJ concerns are highlighted in gray
These CBGs have been identified as potential communities with EJ concerns, but should not be
considered "EJ Communities."The communities highlighted in this section provide a starting point for
further discussion on potential vulnerable communities and will be discussed at later stages of the
Project.
3.13.10 Community Health and Safety
Health data in North Carolina is available at the state and county levels. This section relies on health
data from the following public health sources:
• North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS)
• Cleveland County Public Health Department
• County Health Rankings and Roadmaps
Where baseline data were not available at the community level, data at the county level were used to
determine health indicators within the SAol.The data are used to understand health status in the SAol
at the most local level possible. To understand the health rankings of each county, health outcomes'
' Health outcomes are calculated based on data about the length of life and quality of life. Source:
https://www.countVhealthrankings.org/sites/default/files/media/document/CHR2022 INC O.pdf
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan-Kings Mountain Page 39
are calculated using data on quality of life and length of life. Health factors2 are calculated considering
data on health behaviors and physical environment.
Cleveland County falls in the 0 to 25th percentile for health outcomes and ranks in the lower-middle
range of counties for health factors, scoring in the 25th to 50th percentile (ERM, 2022b). Conversely,
Gaston County ranks in the higher-middle range of counties in North Carolina for health outcomes,
falling between the 50th and 75th percentile. For health factors, Gaston County is ranked in the lower-
middle range of counties, falling between the 25th and 50th percentile (ERM, 2022b)
Cleveland and Gaston County both have a higher percentage of the population who experience poor
or fair health (23 percent and 21 percent, respectively) than the state average (18 percent for North
Carolina) (ERM, 2022b) Cleveland County and Gaston County have fewer healthcare professionals
and hospital beds per person than the state of North Carolina. When compared to state-level data,
Cleveland County has higher rates of diseases of the heart (260.2 vs. 181.9 per 100,000), cancer of
all types (252 vs. 191.6 per 100,000), and chronic lower respiratory diseases (84.6 vs. 52.1 per
100,000). The leading causes of death in Cleveland County include diseases of the heart, cancer(all
types), chronic lower respiratory diseases, and cerebrovascular disease (ERM, 2022b),
Emergency Services
Currently, the fire department responds to approximately four to five calls per day, with calls ranging
from minor to serious events (ERM, 2022). According to stakeholders, the Kings Mountain Fire
Department has a good relationship with both Shelby and Gastonia Fire Departments, both of which
will respond to Kings Mountain, if needed. There is a general lack of infrastructure and overall capacity
in terms of fire response for Kings Mountain, as key informants said they did not believe the fire
department would be able to adequately respond to an increase in emergencies (ERM, 2022).
3.13.11 Social Infrastructure
Housing Market
In recent years, Kings Mountain has experienced a growth in population as the Charlotte metro area
continues to expand further west toward Cleveland County. Kings Mountain has proposed plans for
new subdivisions that are currently undergoing an approval process. The City Council established a
Housing Committee to evaluate housing inventory to address the growing demand. One development
goal identified by the city is to continue to diversify housing options. Currently, all apartments in
Kings Mountain are either Section 8 or tax credit housing. For this reason,the Housing Committee will
also consider Fair Housing Act concerns, minimum housing standards, and code enforcement to meet
the city's housing goals (ERM, 2022c). Like the housing market at the national level, housing prices in
Kings Mountain have increased dramatically in 2021 and 2022.
2 Health factors are calculated taking using weighted averages of health behaviors(30 percent), clinical care(20
percent),social and economic factors(40 percent)and physical environment(10 percent). Source:
https://www.countVhealthrankings.org/sites/default/files/media/document/CHR2022 NC O.pdf
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 40
Transportation
Airports
Air service to North Carolina is provided by three international airports: Charlotte/Douglas International
Airport (CLT), Raleigh-Durham International Airport (RDU), and Piedmont Triad International Airport
(GSO).
Road Networks
Kings Mountain aims to create a City Transportation Plan that is aligned with the city's overall strategic
plan and economic development plan. The City Transportation Plan would include development of
pedestrian and biking transportation and connectivity with trails and downtown. The Plan is to be
developed over a 3-to-5-year period and would pull from nearby Morganton and Burke County's pilot
bus transportation program as a best practice (City of Kings Mountain, 2018). During fieldwork, ERM
found that the exit off 1-85 into Kings Mountain (towards town) presented a complex intersection, with
a high volume of traffic and multiple types of vehicles, including heavy construction vehicles (ERM,
2022). In addition, the exit off Highway 74 into town presented some complexities, such as left turns
into fast-moving traffic (ERM, 2022).
3.13.12 Cultural Heritage
Protect Based Archaeological Survey Information
Albemarle completed a National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) compliant phase I archaeological
and geoarchaeological survey for the Project area in consultation with the North Carolina State Historic
Preservation Office(SHPO).The survey was conducted between June 6 and August 22, 2022 (SWCA,
2023).A total of 24 archaeological sites were recorded; however,only two sites on the eastern property
(31 CL180 and 31 CL185)were determined to be potentially eligible for inclusion on the NRHP. SWCA
has recommended avoidance of these site locations from subsurface disturbance, but if they cannot
be avoided, the sites will require further study to determine their potential cultural value. In addition,
some floodplain areas could possibly have deeply buried archaeological sites. If those areas are
disturbed, additional testing is recommended. The North Carolina SHPO issued full concurrence on
SWCA's report.
Historic Places and Cemeteries
Cleveland County has 22 historical landmarks listed on the NRHP, some of which are located in or
near the SAol. Some landmarks are listed because of architectural and engineering significance,while
others are areas where an important event took place and are used today for educational purposes
(Cleveland County North Carolina, 2018).
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 41
4 Design Basis
4.1 Legal Requirements
The Project site will be subject to mining regulations in accordance with the North Carolina Mining Act
of 1971 —G.S. 74, Article 7 and NCAC Title 15A, Chapter 5: Mining: Mineral Resources.
4.2 Closure Objectives
Overall objectives that have informed the closure strategy include:
• Ensure legal and other obligations are met.
• Manage reputational impacts.
• Relinquish a safe and secure site where remaining infrastructure is chemically and physically
stable.
• Implement closure actions that minimize impact on remaining mineral resources.
• Protect and preserve remaining environment, including limiting impact on community water
sources.
• Implement socioeconomic transitioning measures to assist community sustainability and
future development.
4.3 Future Use
Upon closure of the Project,the site would be available for further mining activities or recreational use.
The post-closure land use(s) has yet to be fully determined.
4.3.1 Further Mining Activities
The current mine life is anticipated for 8.3 years.At the end of mine life,there may be additional mineral
resources which could lead to future mining activities in the Project area.
4.4 Design Standards
4.4.1 Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management
The Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management (GISTM) strives to achieve the ultimate goal
of zero harm to people and the environment with zero tolerance for human fatality. It requires operators
to take responsibility and prioritize the safety of tailings facilities, through all phases of a facility's
lifecycle, including closure and post-closure. It also requires the disclosure of relevant information to
support public accountability.
GISTM provides a framework for safe tailings facility management while affording operators flexibility
as to how best to achieve this goal. For auditing and certification purposes, the standard includes the
Preamble, the Requirements, the Glossary, and Annexes. Unless otherwise specified, the
Requirements of the Standard are directed to the operator. The Requirements apply to individual
facilities and are all intended to apply and be auditable. Conformance with the standard does not
displace the requirements of any specific national, state, and/or local governmental statutes, laws,
regulations, ordinances, or other government directives. Operators are expected to conform with the
Requirements of the Standard not in conflict with other provisions of law.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 42
4.4.2 Canadian Dam Association
The Canadian Dam Association (CDA) established a set of design Guidelines specifically for mining
dams (CDA, 2014). This guide establishes the design earthquake to be considered according to the
consequences of dam failure and the stage of the project(construction, operation, closure, or passive
care). Since the criterion is developed according to the consequences of failure on society and the
environment, it can be generalized to waste rock storage facilities and slopes.
4.5 Environmental Considerations Affecting Closure
4.5.1 Spatial Constraints
The Project is spatially limited due to other development and property ownership in the surrounding
areas. This presents some challenges for operational development, planning for closure reclamation
slopes, and storage of reclamation materials.
4.5.2 Land Use
Portions of the Gateway Trail system currently traverse the Project site. It is utilized by many residents
and serves as a local source of recreation in the area. During preliminary meetings, local stakeholders
indicated the desire to include redevelopment of the trail system after closure.
Currently,the extreme growth of the city poses a problem from a housing perspective; as of 2019, only
10.9% of people who worked in Kings Mountain also lived there. Due to the urbanization of the city
and housing shortage, the land adjacent to Kings Mountain in Cleveland County is in high demand to
meet the housing needs (Albemarle, 2023).
4.5.3 Waste Rock Geochemistry
The majority of the waste rock associated with the Project has a low potential for ARDML. Material
that shows a higher potential ARDML is being segregated and managed during operations, and at
closure, will be backfilled into the pit. Saturation of the PAG material within the base of the pit will
preclude continued oxidation and metal leaching from this material.
Waste rock in the King Mountain mine area has been exposed to atmospheric oxidation for over
35 years, and acid rock drainage conditions have not developed. Previous operations encountered the
same lithologies and mineralization as the future pit and, as a result, the existing waste rock storage
facilities are anticipated to contain some PAG material. Despite this fact, acidic conditions have not
been observed throughout the mine site. Segregating and managing the PAG material during
operation will further reduce the risk associated with future RSFs to surface water and groundwater.
A cover will be placed on the non-PAG RSF at closure, which will reduce long-term contact with waste
rock and aid in the rapid revegetation of the facility. The purpose of the cover is to aid in the rapid
revegetation of the facilities at closure, not to reduce infiltration of meteoric water through the facility.
The GoldSim model predicts that a small portion of the infiltration through the non-PAG rock storage
facility will report as toe seepage (1 to 5 gpm) and flow to surface water during closure (SRK, 2024d).
Flow rates predicted on Kings Creek were used along with the estimated seepage rates from RSF-A
to determine the predicted future water chemistry. This was done for the four climate scenarios (P25,
P50, P75, and P90 precipitation). The predicted chemistry below WSB-1 as Kings Creek leaves the
property, taking into account the capture of seepage from RSF-A, shows that all parameters are
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 43
predicted to be below North Carolina Class C Surface Water Quality Standards for all climate scenarios
throughout the operational and post-closure periods. (SRK, 2023e).
4.5.4 Ore Geochemistry
Based on geochemical characterization results, the Kings Mountain ore material is benign and
contains only minor sulfide content. Ore stockpiles used during operations will be removed at closure
and do not represent a risk to groundwater or surface water resources during closure. Other waste
streams from the lithium extraction process,such as DMS, magnetic separation rejects,and ore sorting
rejects will be handled as waste rock and incorporated into the closure of the RSFs. The DMS and
magnetic separation material will be placed in the non-PAG RSF (RSF-A) and ore sorting rejects will
be managed as PAG (RSF-X).
Based on geochemical characterization and modeling work, SRK determined that groundwater
underlying the proposed TSF is also predicted to be circum-neutral (pH 6.7 to 7.3), with the majority
of parameters predicted to be below North Carolina Groundwater Quality Standards. The only
exceptions are iron and manganese, which are elevated in existing (i.e., baseline) groundwater at
Archdale (SRK, 2024f).
4.5.5 Growth Regime
The climate of the region, as well as soil characteristics, have a positive impact on vegetative growth
in the Project area, as evidenced by self-sustaining volunteer revegetation in previously disturbed
areas from former operations. Revegetation of the site will be achievable with available materials, with
few exceptions, such as alluvial and wetland materials (SWCA, 2023a).
4.5.6 Pit Lake
The pit will remain as a permanent feature after closure. The final pit bottom will be at an elevation of
about 286 ft amsl. During the last two years of operations, approximately 15.5 million tons of PAG
material that placed in RSF-X during mining will be relocated into the bottom of the pit (Figure 4-1),
thus bringing the base of the pit up to about 570 feet amsl (Shafer,2023).The current model developed
using the commercial software package GoldSim indicates that the pit lake would quickly form and
continue to fill until the surface water discharge point is reached, which is assigned to elevation 855 ft
amsl.The model predicted the pit lake would inundate the pit backfill during the two years when backfill
is place and a lake would form in the following year(SRK, 2024f).
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 44
Soo Soo
o
2
> Moves
w 700 —ado 700
v
Y
J
a 600 0000 600
� frr
0 500 Soo
Y
0
d
400 400
2035 2040 2045 2050 2055 2060 2065 2070 2075 2080 2085 2090 2095 2100
Time
Statistics for Post-Closure Pit Lake Elevation
1%„5%/95%..99% 5%..15%/85%..95% 15%..25%/75%„85% 25%,.35%/65%„75%
35% 45%/55%.,65% 45%..55% 50%
Source:SRK,2023d
Figure 4-1: Probabilistic Time Series of the Pit Lake Water Elevation
Pit Lake Chemistry
Predictive modeling has been completed to provide an estimate of pit lake water chemistry at closure.
In addition, a pit lake calibration model based on the historic pit lake chemistry, has also been
developed (Schafer, 2023). Based on this modeling effort, the quality of the future pit lake water is
anticipated to be similar to the existing pit lake.
Current pit lake chemistry from the ongoing monitoring program indicates that the pit lake will have a
neutral to alkaline pH and will be dominated by calcium,sulfate and bicarbonate ions. Based on current
conditions and model results, the post-closure lake is predicted to be stratified, with low oxygen and
elevated sulfide levels below a depth of about 30 ft.
Two scenarios were simulated to predict pit lake chemistry at closure. The first (Scenario 1 — lower
reactive mass backfill) considers backfilling with PAG waste rock material that assumes 0.4% of the
rock is chemically reactive. All other source water quality assumptions are based on the historic pit
lake calibration model. A second scenario (Scenario 2 — upper reactive mass backfill) considers 4%
reactive rock.
The pH in all layers of the lake are neutral to alkaline for scenarios 1 and 2. Minor differences in pH
for the mixed, upper and lower layers of the lake are attributed to differences in the assumed partial
pressure of carbon dioxide, and to differences in the balance of major ions.
Predicted salinity (based on Total Dissolved Solids or TDS) is higher at depth, with the difference
between shallow and deep layers increasing though time. The higher salinity in the deep layer will
restrict lake turnover because a less saline surface layer has lower density than the deeper layer
unless very low temperatures occur in the shallow lake. Salinity for the upper reactive mass backfill,
Scenario 2, is much higher than Scenario 1 at all lake depths.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 45
Predicted sulfate is less than 200 mg/L at all depths for Scenario 1 and decreases through time,
especially at depth, due to sulfate reduction and iron monosulfide precipitation. Most sulfate in the
deeper lake is converted to sulfide when stable stratification prevails. Some iron monosulfide will form
at depth. Predicted sulfate levels for the future pit lake are less than sulfate levels in the historic pit
lake. Owing to an expected appreciable contribution of sulfate from backfilled PAG material, this
outcome is unlikely. It may indicate that the predicted sulfate in water contacting backfill is
underpredicted for the lower reactive mass Scenario 1. For the lower reactive mass case, sulfate
loading occurs at nearly equal proportions from backfill, runoff and other groundwater inputs.
Predicted sulfate is much higher in Scenario 2 that considers upper reactive mass backfill. Initial sulfate
in the deep layer, dominated by backfill groundwater input, is above 2,500 mg/L in early filling and
decreases to about 700 mg/L by the year 2100. These levels are much higher than are present in the
current pit lake and probably represent an upper bound of water quality. The gradual reduction in
simulated Scenario 2 sulfate is due to sulfide reduction, iron monosulfide precipitation, and gradually
decreasing sulfate concentration in the mixed inputs over time. Surface sulfate levels are much lower
in comparison to the deeper levels, owing to lower sulfate in pit wall and basin runoff. For Scenario 2
(upper reactive mass backfill), sulfate loading is nearly 10 times higher than in the lower reactive mass
backfill, and nearly all sulfate comes from the PAG backfill.
Most major ions and several trace constituents, such as fluoride, lithium, and thallium, are retained in
solution, so the predicted concentrations for the mass load and the geochemical equilibrium cases are
similar. In general,the surface layer is more dilute than the deeper layer, and concentrations of soluble
ions tend to decrease through time, as weathering by-products in rock are rinsed out of bedrock in the
highwall.
Most jurisdictions classify pit lakes as contact water and do not apply water quality criteria to their
chemistry. Many states, instead, use ecological risk benchmarks to identify potential hazards to avian
or mammal receptors. After successful mine closure, the mining permit would be phased out and the
pit lake water might be reclassified as a Waters of the State. The criteria do not account for mixing
zones that may be granted to outflows from the pit lake under a National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) discharge permit. Pit lake water quality in both scenarios 1 and 2 meet
applicable water quality standards in the surface layer by the time that surface outflow may occur
(approximately 60 years post closure) (Schafer, 2023).
Pit Lake Stratification and Turnover
The pit lake will ultimately be deep enough to form a meromictic(layered)lake,with at least two layers.
The conceptual model used for long-term geochemical predictions of pit lake water quality assumes
that once the depth of the pit lake reaches approximately 30 feet, a deeper layer will form. As the pit
fills, this layer will increase in thickness, while the thickness of the upper layer is expected to only
minimally increase over time. Some mixing of the two layers is likely to occur, but the chemistry of
each will be different and evolve over time (Shafer, 2023).
Predicted salinity (based on TDS) is higher at depth with the difference between shallow and deep
layers increasing though time. The higher salinity in the deep layer will restrict lake turnover because
a less saline surface layer has lower density than the deeper layer unless very low temperatures occur
in the shallow lake. Salinity for the upper reactive mass backfill Scenario 2 is much higher than
Scenario 1 at all lake depths.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 46
There are a few unique characteristics of lakes that do not mix on an annual basis. Flite(2006)showed
that studies of 13 meromictic lakes compiled in the journal Limnology and Oceanography all had a
similar bathymetric feature, a single deep zone. In addition, most of them had a sloping topography to
that deep zone. Kings Mountain Lake has a single deep zone in the northwest corner and, instead of
a sloping topography seen in natural lakes, Kings Mountain Lake has several sharp plateaus. These
plateaus act as strong energy dissipators for wind-induced mixing, and are important for the overall
long-term stability of the lake.
In the process of dewatering the lake for future mining, stability of the lake and resistance to wind
mixing will increase. According to the Wedderburn Number calculation, decreasing lake level will
decrease overall lake fetch, which means that wind energy will have less distance to apply to the lake
surface. Increase in stability will also result from wind sheltering from the highwalls, this again
decreases the overall wind forcing to the lake surface. The complex bathymetry of the lake will also
act to dissipate wind energy imparted to the lake by breaking the energy on vertical walls of the pit
(Limnos, 2023).
Pit Lake Discharge
During the initial pit filling, the pit lake will be a hydrologic sink, and there will be no outflow to
groundwater. After approximately 50 years, the shallow pit water will outflow via groundwater to the
east when water levels reach the weathered bedrock zone with higher transmissivity. This shallow
groundwater zone will then discharge into Kings Creek. The rate of groundwater outflow from the pit
lake will be about 20 gpm at equilibrium. Groundwater outflow from deeper portions of the pit lake are
not anticipated.
Once the water level in the open pit reaches the lowest elevation in the pit rim at 855 ft amsl, it will
discharge to surface water, and report to Kings Creek. This is expected to occur within 60 years after
closure(SRK,2023d). Discharge from the pit will flow into an existing drainage via a designed channel,
which will then flow into Kings Creek.
4.6 Water Treatment
During operations,Albemarle will operate a water treatment plant on site to manage any contact water
that requires treatment. Water treatment will continue while the rock from RSF-X is being backfilled
into the pit. During this time, PAG seepage will be collected and treated in the operational water
treatment plant. Once backfilling is completed,treatment will no longer be required.Treatment facilities
will then be dismantled and disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations.
4.6.1 Water Balance
The water balance model (SRK, 2024d) is a simulation of the mine water management system that
incorporates dynamic aspects of the mining activities, specifically:
• Pre-development simulation of the existing stream flows and pit lake filling to establish
baseline conditions.
• Simulation of the mine development, including dewatering the existing pit lake, development
mine activities, facility construction, and diversion and management of water around the site
in anticipation of mine activities.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 47
• Simulation of active mining, including processing rates,facility growth, demand, consumption,
and discharge of treated and untreated water from the mine process, rock storage facilities,
and water management ponds and infrastructure.
• Simulation of mine closure activities, including remining of PAG waste rock for pit backfill,
removal and decommissioning of ponds and diversions, and filling of the pit lake leading to
eventual pit lake discharge to the adjacent natural channels.
The model simulates climate using values based on legacy climate records from the nearby long-term
climate station of Shelby 2 NW (NOAA, 2023). The climate record was infilled with values from the
Daymet gridded climate dataset (NASA, 2023) and was used to develop deterministic climate
scenarios that include constructed time series for climate forcing. The data set was also used to
develop a synthetic climate generator based on the WGEN climate model (Richardson, 1984). This
model produces stochastic daily climate time series that allow the model to perform probabilistic
modeling simulations using the Monte Carlo simulation approach. The model includes climate change
predictions.
The model simulates runoff, evaporation, direct precipitation, infiltration, seepage, moisture uptake in
the waste rock, and consumption in processes to estimate gains and losses to the system. Water is
transferred between facilities and stored in the ponds, reservoirs and lakes to simulate the
management of water in the Project and predict the excess or shortfall of water for the Project.
Model simulations, both forced (synthetic series designed to stress the system)and probabilistic,were
performed to examine the model response to climate variability and mining activities. The simulations
indicate that the overall water balance of the Project is strongly positive, generating excess water from
pit dewatering activities, waste rock seepage,waste rock runoff, and undiverted run-on to the facilities.
4.6.2 Wetlands
Aquatic resource delineation was performed by SWCA in 2022 and reviewed in 2023 (SWCA, 2023b).
SWCA believes that the following are the extent of on-site resources, which could be updated:
• Wetlands (404 jurisdictional): 55.89 acres
• Wetlands (NCDEQ jurisdictional): 3.63 acres
• Lakes/ponds (404 jurisdictional): 20.45 acres
• Lakes/ponds (NCDEQ jurisdictional): 57.35 acres
• Waterways (streams) (404 jurisdictional): 64,426.8 linear feet
• Waterways (streams) (NCDEQ jurisdictional): 2,219.7 linear feet
• Waterway (streams) (non-jurisdictional): 1,294.0 linear feet
Total impacts to aquatic resources are estimated to be 12.96 acres of wetlands, 24.58 acres of
lakes/ponds, 154.4 linear feet of surface flows,4,011.5 linear feet of ephemeral streams, 1,730.2 linear
feet of intermittent streams, and 3,517.5 linear feet of perennial streams. These impacts will require
mitigation, and current mitigation calculations are based on rations defined in the Piedmont Lithium
Mine USACE 404 Application, permit and NCDEQ 404/401 certification.
The use of WSB-1 during the life of the Project will impact downstream wetlands during operations, by
ceasing a majority of flow to the area. During closure, the dam will be breached and flow to the area
will be re-established, allowing wetlands to reoccur in the area downstream.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 48
4.6.3 Climate
The Project site can receive between 40 to 70 inches of rain on an annual basis. This precipitation is
relatively evenly distributed throughout the year but occurs with the greatest intensity during the
summer growing season in the form of thunderstorms. Hurricanes can cause periods of intense rainfall
throughout the fall and winter. Average annual temperatures vary within a relatively narrow range for
a temperate climate, between 540 and 650 Fahrenheit per year. An average of 230 frost-free days can
be expected per year, ranging between 185 and 275 days in any particular year. North-south latitude
is the primary determinant of climate in this region and the secondary determinant is elevation (SCWA,
2023a).
4.6.4 Climate Change
A climate change analysis was performed for the site (AWA, 2022) based on the AR6 climate change
projections(IPCC, 2023)and incorporates the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
Earth Exchange Global Daily Downscaled Projections (NEX-GDDP)data set(NCEP 2023), to provide
site-specific climate change projections. Median climate change predictions were incorporated for both
the reasonable expected Shared Socioeconomic Pathway(SSP)4.5 as well as the more conservative
SSP8.5.
The projections indicate that while the precipitation frequency is largely variable due to modeling
projections, overall, the median of the 26 models used for the Kings Mountain basin show an increase
in mean annual temperature and mean annual precipitation. These results indicate that, most likely,
the region will likely become warmer and wetter as a result of climate change; however, the study
predicts that this will not be reflected in the more extreme rainfall events that control PMP depths.
4.7 Engineering Considerations Affecting Closure
4.7.1 Design Storm Event for Closure
All operational channels were designed to safely convey the peak flow from the 100-year, 24-hour
storm event from the maximum area that will contribute to them. Any channels that will remain after
closure will be reconfigured to safely convey a PMP storm event.
4.7.2 Rock Storage Configuration
Albemarle conducted stability analysis of proposed RSF facilities at the Project, including a
consolidated facility consisting of a proposed RSF overlying an existing historic TSF. Based on SRK's
review of runout potential, the occurrence of a runout event is considered very low probability, and, in
the unlikely event of a runout, the material is modeled to be maintained within the 100 ft setback
distance to the property boundary (SRK, 2024d).
4.7.3 Surface Water Diversions
The conceptual surface water management drainage plan during operations consists of a number of
non-contact water channels designed to divert run-on to the site around and through the Project area
to one of three sediment ponds around the site before discharging to Kings Creek (SRK, 2024g).
Contact water channels are designed to intercept runoff from the active facilities and route contact
water flows into the contact water management infrastructure.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 49
The water balance model for the closure/post-closure period shows a minor increase in flows at Weir
#7 at the property boundary below WSB-1, as significant closed basins upstream of the weir (e.g.,
Kings Mountain Mine Tailings Basin)have been graded to drain into the stream network(SRK, 2024g).
At closure, all facilities will be covered with growth media and revegetated. Therefore, all runoff from
the facilities will become non-contact water. Most of the surface water diversions will be removed and
sediment ponds will be breached or removed. Any remaining channels will be reconfigured to safely
convey a PMP storm event.
4.7.4 Geotechnical Stability
Based on the preliminary design reports for RSF-A(SRK, 2024e), WSB-1 (SRK, 2024a), and the TSF
(SRK, 2024f), these facilities are geotechnically stable, as designed. Because each of these facilities
was designed and the stability analyzed at their final overall slope angles, this applies to post-closure
conditions as well.
4.8 Socioeconomic Considerations Affecting Closure
4.8.1 Stakeholders Impacted by Closure
Stakeholders will be affected by closure in differing ways, depending on their relationship to the mine.
A brief description of stakeholders that will be impacted by closure is provided below. Albemarle will
continue to add to, update, and refine this stakeholder list throughout the lifecycle of the Project.
Employees and their dependents: Employees working at the mine will be directly affected by
closure, as most contracts will be terminated when mining activity declines and ultimately ceases.
Their dependents may also be impacted by the closure. Cessation in pay and benefits may cause a
greater level of unemployment in the area, or cause workers to move from the area in search of other
employment opportunities.
Suppliers to the Project and their employees: Contractors/suppliers will lose their contracts as
mining operations cease. This may cause an economic downturn in the area, since there would be a
reduction in demand for local goods and services, which will impact local and regional businesses and
employees.
Shared value partners: Groups or stakeholders who may have received funding or support from
Albemarle during operations will receive a reduction or cessation of funding may occur as a result of
mine closure.
Local, State and Federal Governments: Government officials and regulators are integral to closure
planning and may assume certain responsibilities post-closure, as agreed during closure planning.
This may cause an additional burden on government resources. During development of the
socioeconomic transitioning strategy, the capacity of the government to support future use of the site
during post-closure would be evaluated.
The Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians and the Catawba Nation: Indigenous peoples will be
impacted by closure of the mine which may result in decreased traffic to the Casino, as contractors
and employees leave the area.
Residents of Kings Mountain and surrounding areas: Residents in the surrounding community will
be affected by closure in positive and/or negative ways. Impacts may include changes to resources,
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 50
visual impacts, and loss of jobs or economic benefits to the community post-closure. Redevelopment
of portions of the Gateway Trail system during closure will provide ongoing recreational opportunities
for the community and allow continuation and expansion of the currently successful trail system.
Vulnerable groups: Vulnerable people may be more adversely affected by closure, or less able to
adapt to the adverse impacts from closure compared to other stakeholder groups. These groups may
be adversely affected economically from loss of jobs, benefits, or access to community services.
4.8.2 Macroeconomic and Socioeconomic Impact of Closure
Albemarle is in the preliminary phase of assessing macro and socioeconomic impacts from the Project
and closure. There will be positive and negative direct and indirect impacts associated with closure.
Albemarle is working with stakeholders to optimize positive impacts, explore partnerships to develop
employment opportunities and community investment programs, and identify appropriate mitigation
strategies for negative impacts.
4.8.3 Kings Mountain Community Planning
Future use planning for the Project site could influence the future uses selected for the site and will be
considered during development of the socioeconomic transitioning plan.
Figure 4-2 shows pattern of uses anticipated and/or desired in the years ahead, and the character
contexts in which uses occur as defined in the City of Kings Mountain Comprehensive Plan 2040.3 The
plan indicates the use that is expected to predominate in areas where land is currently undeveloped
or, in previously developed areas, based on what is already on the ground and will likely remain or
possibly evolve. Transitions in use could occur through redevelopment of previously built sites, "infill"
construction on a vacant parcel amid existing built sites or repurposing of an existing structure for
another use without significant site changes.
3 https://www.cityofkm.com/617/Comprehensive-Plan-2040
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 51
KM Land Use With Parcels
May 24, 2022 (Iteration 5)
Q
Legend
city umim
Cat—ba Indian Nation
otrtli­
R, - - Ite anon S
'AUt,a 6an(AU)
oRe atxi l Community
dl Ru)
oSem-Urban(Sll)
oN 6an{l1R)
•' mall (UR)alues>
-- c
Figure 4-2: Land Use Map (City of Kings Mountain)
The City of Kings Mountain Land Use Map (Figure 4-2) is a graphical representation of the policies
and goals in this plan. These designations and their placement are specifically designed to promote
the ideals of character found in each district (ERM, 2022c).
4.8.4 Attractive Nuisances
During closure and post-closure, there is the potential that conditions on the mine may attract
trespassers who do not understand risks associated with accessing the areas where there are
perceived attractive conditions. Attractive nuisance conditions may include the following at the Kings
Mountain Project.
• Recreational users seeking to use the pit lake for swimming and/or fishing.
• Trespassers perceiving that there is economic value in the various residue deposits and
damaging covers to access the remaining minerals.
In situations where pit lakes exist, the attractiveness of these kinds of areas may result in large
numbers of trespassers on the mining site. While preventing access in a context such as exists at the
mine is not feasible, measures will be required to at least make access difficult and limit inadvertent
access, such as fencing and berms. While having limited effectiveness, these measures can be
supplemented with education programs to inform the communities of the dangers of accessing mining
areas.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 52
4.9 Closure Assumptions and Design Criteria
This closure strategy has been developed based on preliminary available information including
environmental data. A number of assumptions were made about general conditions, and closure and
rehabilitation of the facilities at the mine to develop the proposed closure actions. As additional
information is collected, these assumptions will be reviewed and revised as appropriate.
4.9.1 Design Criteria
Assumed design criteria for closure stormwater management are preliminary and may include the
following:
• PMP design storm for critical infrastructure (SRK calculated a 6-hr PMP storm depth of
28.5 inches for the site using site-specific analysis (AWA, 2022).
• Erosion of closure stormwater controls will be minimized through placement of protective liners
(i.e., riprap),where appropriate.
• Sediment remobilized during establishment of vegetation will be managed through sediment
ponds, rock check dams, and other management practices.
4.10 Closure Materials
Various cover materials are required during the closure process. This includes:
• Growth medium which in this context is the final layer of materials placed onto a facility during
reclamation or closure and refers to the material that will provide a growth medium for the
vegetation established.
• Cover material which refers to the material placed onto a facility to act as a lower permeability
layer as distinct from soil which acts as clay layer.
4.10.1 Available Materials
Soil properties are consistent across the property regardless of SMU, geology, topography, and land
use. Of the soil forming processes, climate appears to have the greatest influence, leaching nutrients
and base cations (i.e., calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium) out of the A/B horizons and
accumulating in the C horizon. As such, all soils across the Project area, including those identified as
either fill or mine waste, can be generally handled similarly for reclamation. This is made evident by
good regrowth and revegetation on mine waste associated with the former operations, indicating that
revegetation at the Project area will be achievable with the available soil medium and plant growth
material. The areas to be avoided for salvaging include areas identified as alluvial or delineated as
wetland. The materials on-site can be divided into the following units for the purpose of reclamation:
• The A/B horizon, despite having a poorly defined A horizon, still maintains decent nutrient
value and can be salvaged as plant growth medium for reclamation.
• The C horizon is strongly acid from a soils perspective and would require amendments such
as lime and/or organic matter if it were to be used as plant growth medium. Additionally, the
presence of iron oxides will likely bind nutrients such as phosphorus and may require
additional fertilization for successful plant growth. The clay loam texture of this horizon may
make it suitable as cover material during reclamation. Further geotechnical analysis is required
to assess the value of this horizon as cover material.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 53
• The weathered bedrock (horizon Cr) has generally low soil fertility, although phosphorus and
potassium values are acceptable likely from the weathering of minerals that contain these
elements. Fine grained micas were common in these materials and a likely source of
potassium. Apatite mineral is the likely source of phosphorus, although none was observed
during sampling. This material is suitable for general fill material (SWCA, 2023a).
The A and B horizons form a combined A/B horizon with dominantly A horizon characteristics and
generally thin, with some thicker areas locally. The C horizon was fairly consistent regardless of the
underlying bedrock. All of the horizons are slightly acidic, with pH values from 5.4 to 6.5 s.u.
The A/B horizon, although poorly defined with a broad range of pH, has decent nutrient value. It should
function as a suitable plant growth medium but will be difficult to salvage independently with the large
mechanical equipment available for soil salvage.
The C horizon is at the lower end of the pH range and may require amendments such as lime and/or
organic matter if used alone as a growth media. Also, iron oxides could complex with nutrients such
as phosphorus. However, the clay loam texture should make it a suitable cover material for
reclamation.
4.10.2 Material Salvage
The A/B and a portion of the C horizons will be salvaged and stockpiled during construction for future
use in reclamation. Because salvage will be performed using larger earthmoving equipment such as
scrapers, one foot is the minimum layer thickness that can be reliably salvaged. Therefore,the top one
foot of material will be removed and stockpiled separately. This material will comprise the A/B horizon
and a variable amount of the C horizon. At least two additional feet of C horizon will be removed from
beneath the major facilities and other areas where additional excavation is required for geotechnical
stability purposes.
Because space for reclamation material storage is limited at the site, the stockpiles may be thicker
than optimal and require amendments when used during closure. The need for and types and quantity
of plant growth amendments will be assessed during progressive closure of some facilities. However,
given the pervasive voluntary revegetation present on historic mine facilities at the site, only minimum,
if any, amendments may be required.
At Archdale,during construction of the TSF,the mica stockpile will be removed from the site for storage
during operations and returned as a cover/growth media material for the TSF during closure.
Growth media and cover stockpiles will be reseeded temporarily during operations to stabilize them
and enhance the nutrient content.There will be two growth media stockpiles for the project,one located
near the northwest corner of the pit at Kings Mountain (Figure 2-4) and one west of the TSF NPI at
Archdale (Figure 2-2).
4.10.3 Materials Balance
There is an appropriate amount of suitable material available for growth media at the site. There are
approximately 0.9M cubic yards (cy) of growth media (including the 0.45M cy of mica stockpile at
Archdale) and at least 0.35M cy saprolite (C-horizon) material available for reclamation material.
Additional saprolite material may also be excavated during construct. These quantities are adequate
for currently estimated growth media and cover requirements for closure. Sufficient rock can be
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 54
acquired from RSF-A for all riprap needs during closure. These quantities Volumes estimated for
reclamation are listed in Table 4-1.
Table 4-1: Reclamation Quantities
Approximate Growth Approximate Cover Growth Media Cover Required for Riprap for Channels
Description Media Salvage Salvage Required for Closure Closure (CY)
(CY) (CY) (CY) (CY)
RSF-A 115,000 172,500 125,000 125,000 15,100
RSF-X 103.199 154,799 110,000 110,000
TSF(incl.mica stockpile) 663.000 280,000 14,400
wSB-1 14,100 21.150
Roads
Yards 15,000
Building Areas 225,000
Diversion Ditches
Ponds 3,000 -
TOTALS 895,299 348,449 758,0001 235,000 29,500
4.11 Revegetation Test Program
Observations of the current site conditions demonstrate that the area will not be difficult to revegetate
at closure. Following historic mining operations at the site, no planned reclamation occurred. Despite
this lack of intentional reclamation, nearly every area disturbed by the previous operation has
revegetated without human intervention (Figure 4-3). Therefore, the ability of Albemarle to revegetate
the site is not in question. Instead, reclamation of the site will focus on accelerating the process and
better managing the types of vegetation and ecosystems to be consistent with the final uses of the
site. This is likely to require varied vegetation across the site.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_ReporL_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 55
Na
- a
A
`S I
P HL 4T•
Figure 4-3: Volunteer Revegetation on Historic Waste Rock
4.11.1 Progressive Closure
Albemarle will use the opportunity to progressively close some portions of the site during operations
to test the effectiveness of the proposed methods and types of closure activities, specifically cover and
growth media, surface water management, and revegetation performance. By performing progressive
closure on areas no longer needed for operations,the proposed closure methods can be tested at field
scale. Temporary revegetation of the closure material stockpiles will also provide information on the
proposed revegetation approach.
The lower lifts of RSF-A constructed earlier in the mine life should be available for reclamation and
closure when they are completed to their final configuration. Depending on availability of equipment
and staff, progressive closure would occur on these areas during operation. If monitoring of the
progressive closure indicates alternatives to currently proposed methods are required, those
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 56
approaches could be tested and modifications to the plan made, as needed. The other area upon
which progressive closure could occur are the embankments of the TSF, albeit only in the last years
of operation.
4.12 Worker Health and Safety
The closure health and safety hazards are likely to be similar to those encountered during operations.
Typical hazards associated with mining operations, such as heavy vehicle traffic, highwall, falls,
electrical, chemical, air quality, and water hazards, will also exist during the closure and post-closure
periods because many of the same activities will continue after operations.
During closure, some additional hazards from closure-specific activities will be present. These include
material handling hazards associated with demolition activities, such as suspended overhead loads,
and movement of processing chemicals and hazardous wastes.
The presence of a pit lake will represent additional water bodies that will require monitoring and access
restriction. The operational health and safety program may require modification to identify these
hazards and train remaining site staff accordingly.
During the post-closure period, the types of activities that represent health and safety hazards will be
similar to some of those present during operations. These include ongoing rockfall hazards in the pits
or falling on slopes on waste rock for anyone accessing these after closure.
4.13 Relinquishment
Mine closure is the result of all activities required to attain site relinquishment/surrender. This includes
reclamation, closure, and decommissioning works.A completed mine has progressed to a state where
mining lease ownership can be relinquished, and responsibility accepted by the next land user. Final
relinquishment will depend on all stakeholders being comfortable that rehabilitation will not fail at some
time after mine closure and that rehabilitation performance is aligned to the agreed criteria across the
entire Project area.
In order to demonstrate to authorities and other stakeholders that the closure objectives have been
achieved, and the mine has undertaken closure actions satisfactorily, relinquishment criteria are
developed. Relinquishment criteria are a combination of specifications, measurements, or other
requirements,which are used to assess whether the closure activities have been successful in meeting
the closure objective.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 57
During the development of the closure plan for the mine, once further studies have been completed,
data gaps filled and detailed engineering undertaken, it will be necessary for Albemarle to develop a
suite of relinquishment criteria that can be used to demonstrate the success of the closure actions.
Typical items included in relinquishment criteria include:
• Surface Water& Groundwater
• Stormwater Controls
• Air Quality
• Soil Quality
• Land Productivity
• Erosion
• Slope Stability
• Vegetation
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 58
5 Closure Strategy
The closure strategy involves implementation of management strategies to bring the site to the agreed
upon post-mining land use and established closure goals. Financial planning and provisioning will be
provided at a later stage as mine planning progresses, but financial assurance mechanisms for closure
will be in place throughout the entirety of the mine closure phase.
5.1 Revegetation
In accordance with the North Carolina Application for a Mining Permit, the reclamation plan must
include plans for year-round seeding, including the time of seeding and the amount of seed, type of
seed, fertilizer, lime, and mulch per acre. The recommendations must include general seeding
instructions for both permanent and temporary revegetation. Selection of any tree species is
recommended to be similar to existing tree species occurring on the Project area or adjacent to the
Project area.
The proposed revegetation plan including seeding methods, species, and any amendments in
described in the Recommended Revegetation Plan (SWCA, 2024a) and provided by in Appendix A.
Any amendment recommendations will consider the previous success of volunteer regrowth observed
on the site. Seed would be procured from Ernst Conservation Seeding or other approved seeding
contractor.
Wildlife habitat is typically established by creating ecosystems of native species, and reshaping
landscapes to create suitable habitat. Monitoring and measurement criteria for vegetation and wildlife
success will be developed as mine plans progress.
5.2 Stormwater Management
At closure, all surface water will be directed toward original flow paths to the degree possible (Figure
5-1). Because all stormwater from surface facilities will be non-contact water after cover and/or growth
media has been placed on all disturbed areas, and revegetated surfaces should generate minimal
sediment, all of the sediment ponds constructed for operations will be breached or removed during
closure.
All culverts installed during construction or operations will be removed at closure and fill above the
culverts will be removed and/or regraded to allow unimpeded flow toward original water courses.
Where practicable, surface grading will be performed to direct flows to natural water courses without
engineered channels. Remaining channels will be modified to allow them to safety pass a PMP storm
event. Coarse riprap will be placed along channels where high velocities could result in erosion.
As closure covers are placed over the RSFs, contact water diversion channels will be removed to allow
runoff from the reclaimed surfaces to flow into the non-contact water diversion channels. Flow in the
non-contact diversions will be routed through sediment ponds or in-line sediment controls, such as
rock check dams, to control sediment as the vegetation is being established. The sediment ponds will
release flow to Kings Creek.
As active surfaces are reclaimed, runoff contributions will be eliminated, and seepage flows reporting
to the collection sumps are expected to be minimal. Once flows have decreased sufficiently, the NAG
collection sump will be breached and allowed to discharge into the non-contact perimeter channels.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 59
LEGEND
m=,ow,lo / —/ �meanwma,nm�ces } tvr�nne�oosTaos�uleewccess uo,n
niaweazni.aro.� %T � �
1 �
/ I I
1 =
° j
/
*I
+�wk consulting „�,. YrlVil:aL
FINfLL RECI.A1dATION
�,aru satxn[xruwur eu.redeunene rtn +. JSPIi5Y6 s'IO o.�.�
Ov—
K,NGS MOUNTANJ
Y AALBEMARLE :��oJECI FIHG' ASINGNSITEIMAPS ECT
FIGURE 176
Figure 5-1: Post Closure Site Facilities
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 60
The PAG collections sump associated with RSF-X will be removed once the PAG waste has been
relocated to the pit as backfill.
The final surface of the tailings in the TSF will be deposited, with minimal regrading, to create a
mounded surface that sheds water after closure (Figure 5-2). At closure stormwater from the TSF will
be managed in the diversion channels constructed at the toe of the embankment and reconfigured at
closure to safely convey a PMP storm event.
Figure 5-2: Archdale TSF Post-Closure Stormwater Flows
Diversion channels along the north and eastern portions of the pit will be removed to allow runoff from
the surrounding watersheds to flow into the open pit to speed pit lake level recovery.
Once contact water flows are no longer being pumped to the WSB-1,the embankment will be breached
back to original channel elevation of 820 ft amsl and the pond will be allowed to free drain. The
wetlands that were established during operations, based on a water level of 830 ft amsl, will be
reestablished at the new water level of 820 ft amsl (Figure 5-2).
5.3 Open Pit
During the last two years of operations, the open pit will be partially backfilled with PAG material from
RSF-X, which will occupy the lower 280 feet of the pit (Figure 5-3). The backfill will be placed in level
lifts at the bottom of the pit to speed the time needed to inundate the PAG waste.Additional backfilling
is not necessary or economically viable.
The open pit will recharge primarily with groundwater, which will eventually discharge as shallow
groundwater outflow and surface water outflow that both report to Kings Creek. The rate of pit lake
level rise is initially quite rapid due to the constrained nature of the pit bottom. In order to maintain the
level of the pit backfill above the pit lake level, SRK iteratively adjusted the rate at which waste rock is
excavated from RSF-X to keep the top of the waste rock above the pit lake level, arriving at a value of
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 61
50,000 tpd. This will allow Albemarle to maintain a dry and safe working platform onto which additional
backfill can be hauled, placed, and manipulated.
A surface outflow channel connecting the open pit to Kings Creek has been designed at the lowest
elevation in the pit rim at an elevation of 855 feet amsl (Figure 5-4) (Appendix B). Pit lake water quality
predictions indicate that the shallow pit lake water chemistry will meet all Class C surface water quality
standards.The open pit will not be stocked with fish upon closure and is currently not being considered
for recreational use.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 62
A
1040 1040
1020 1020
1000 1000
980 _ ___ 980
960 EXISTING GROUND 960
940 940
920 920
90o L 900
Sao aeo
860 _ 860
840 — 840
820 --- --- -------- --- —�,__ 820
800 800
p 780 ULTIMATE PIT 780
F 760 760
LL 746 740
ZO l7 726 720
r 700 7U0
a W 680 680
m 6s6 860
w u 640 640
620 BACKFILL TO 620
a 600 EL.570 FT 600
580 580
560 560
540 540
520 520
500 500
480 480
460 460
440 440
420 420
400 400
380 380
-2+DO 0+00 2+00 4+00 8+00 8+00 1D+00 12+00 14+00 16+00 18+00 20+00 22+00 24+00 26+00 28+00 30+00 32+00
STATION(FT.)
W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL
EXPLANATION GENERAL NOTES
—— EXISTING GROUND 1.FUTURE GROUND CONTOURS BASED ON
FUTURE GROUND CONTOURS FROM PHASE4 DESIGN AND EXISTING 0 126.00032150.000S
GROUND.
FEET
awe M. -0-=*consulting w CLOSUREPLAN FOR ULTIMATE PIT—
CRO55 SECTION A{LOOKING NORTH EAST}
rc srNCBSF ccr.
AALBEMARLE
FIGURE 02
ICINGS MOUNTAIN MINING PROJECT USPR000578
vcY-n 7 exinpaµ
Figure 5-3: Pit Cross Section Showing Backfill
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 63
5.3.1 Public Safety
At closure, a pit safety berm will be constructed from rock and/or soil materials. The purpose of this
berm is to prevent inadvertent vehicle access to the pit rim. Construction using available rock and soil
materials will limit the need for future maintenance.
The ramp into the pit will be blocked by a constructed rock berm with a locking gate.The gate will allow
vehicle access to the pit lake for monitoring during the post-closure period.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 64
� xl
FEET
r' l
855'WSEL NATURAL SPILL LOC.A7I0N
r +
EL S54.97f
FLOW UHECiH]N�
r
1 EXLTIING CONDRION SPILL LOCATION
I ti.
L
20 0'
SPLLWAY ENTRANCE
EL 851' W
I�1 C
211
-PIT SPILLWAY CHANNEL ALIGNMENT
/.. r 4
49
�0
n�
Bi
2 CONCEPTUAL OPEN PR SPILLWAY-PLAN NEW
FINISHED GROUND
SPILLWAYCHANNEL
GRADE BREAK STA=6*Do-oD GRADE BREAK STA=0+77.64
ELEV=849.000 B ELEV=847.451 EJSISTING GROUND
906 BCB 2-off
e8u B810
MI) BM
—- - Er
4 '
84p g46 FINISHED GROUND
w —6213- Bzu
SPILLWAY ENTRANCE Op
w 3'K 3'GABIONS "
1+00 1+no 2+Q1
ygna dy.yt 1-5 THICK GABION MAT
tueeuriai ew�wi.n STATION(FF.) r'wnrsnwm arxeeer:rRnoxi [OR SUITABLE EGUNALENT}
B'PRSPILLWAY CHANNEL-PROFILE PIT SPILLWAY ENTRANCE-PROFILE.AND
SPILLWAY CHANNEL-TYP.SECTION
Figure 5-4: Pit Surface Outfall Structure
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_RevO3.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 65
5.4 Waste Rock
During closure, PAG waste rock that was segregated during operations and stored in RSF-X will be
backfilled into the open pit, which will eventually be submerged as the pit fills with water. Remaining
waste rock in RSF-A will consist of non-PAG waste rock from the pit and the rock and tailings from the
legacy TSF.
Based on preliminary predictive modeling results, the risk of groundwater degradation resulting from
RSF-A is considered low. This will be monitored during operations.
5.4.1 RSF-A
RSF-A will be constructed in lifts from the bottom of the facility to the top with an overall slope of
2.5H:1 V and will remain after closure. The slopes of the facility will be regraded between lifts to 2H:1 V
and 16-foot slope breaks will remain at the top of each lift (Figure 5-5). These slope breaks are
designed to reduce erosion from surface flows while vegetation is established (Appendix C). The haul
road to the top of RSF-A will remain after being narrowed to 15 to 20 feet (Figure 5-6).
2 FT.THK CLOSURE COVER LAYER
(1 FT.OF GROWTH MEDIA OVER 1 FT.OF COVER MATERIAL)
TYPICAL CLOSURE COVER 2
100
30 FT. 36 FT. OPERATIONAL
15 FT ANGLE OF REPOSE SLOPE(TYP.)
REGRADED SLOPE(TYP-?
RUNOFF INTERCEPTION BENCH(TYP,)
CLOSURE REGRADING DETAIL
SCALE:1"=4P
Figure 5-5: RSF-A Slope Cross-section
Following regrading, the slopes and slope breaks will be covered with one foot of cover and then one
foot of growth media. The facility will be seeded with the approved seed mix, and tree seedlings will
be planted in accordance with the revegetation plan.
The surface water collection channel constructed at the toe of the facility will be enlarged to convey a
PMP storm event by widening the channel, extending the outer edge into the perimeter road (Figure
5-7). Riprap will be placed in segments of the channel with higher flows (Figure 5-6).
The remaining road will be narrowed to 15 feet wide by ripping the outer portion of the road to break
up the compacted road (Figure 5-7). One foot of growth media will be placed on the road and reseeded
with the approved seed mix. The reclaimed portion of the road will also be planted with tree samplings.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 66
r.:
�x..�
- - -----J �. x....�.� ,
�..n.....RE.eR
------- --�� s— _
��...I�ERII.R,aI GIRR..L.GG,IOII nn�
U�
RSFASECTION AA
r .�.
Ems. , •,:
---- ---
�- I`yl�i �•.� � � _r�r�!/�IH - __�..�,.K�..o uxm.r..0 `\-�_f
—V m X.
..77rd.
�. �� _ �. �� •.• -- - �.I- ..umxn.�A .i.o..m.x.ncxrxcx�r., ��.. ,.,sae
LEGEHq
""'"""'� '"'� x"�'m"• '"" PRELIMINARY
-#-ark consulting RSF-A&RSFXRECL TIONYAP
SITE PLAN AND SECTIONS r5�'��•
�ruut�.er�nc wu,ur •-•••w A
— .w,wo..uco.� rwwxornrn,.rcu, . .�ALBEMARLE.fIN65MdJNlAIM MINE�� �.......
hm.sdtr RECLAIARTION PLAN
KIN(.S MOUNTAIN MINE PROJECT 1 0
Figure 5-6: Rock Storage Facilities After Closure
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 67
2 FT.THK.RIPRAP LAYER WITH 12-IN.
DIA.D50,(PLACED AS SHOWN BY
HATCHING IN PLAN VIEW)
POST-CLOSURE
RSF-A CLOSURE ROAD
COVER CLOSURE RIPPED SURFACE WITH
PERIMETER 1 FT.GROWTH MEDIA
CHANNEL
4 FT. 15'MIN.
2.5
__- - PERIMETER ROAD
0 OCK FILL
EXISTING GROUND
CLOSURE PERIMETER CHANNEL SECTION (TYP.)
0
SCALE:1"=20'
Figure 5-7: Typical Section RSF-A Closure Perimeter Road Configuration
Because the facility will be constructed from the bottom up,there will be an opportunity to progressively
reclaim the slopes of the facility.This will accelerate the closure of the facility, as well as an opportunity
to test the proposed closure approach on a field scale.
5.4.2 RSF-X
The PAG material deposited in RSF-X during operations will be removed during the last two years of
operations (Figure 5-8). At closure, the only features of RSF-X remaining will be the liner system and
the contact water collection pond at the southern corner of the facility (Figure 5-6).
--------- - - -
RSF-X SECTION B-B
Figure 5-8: RSF-X Cross-section
The facility liner, including that in the contact water pond,will be cut into strips and removed for disposal
either in an on-site void created by the removal of other structures or hauled to a licensed landfill. The
soil under the liner will be inspected for evidence of any contact water seepage from the PAG material
stored during operations. Although unlikely, any areas of suspected seepage will be sampled and
tested for the presence of leachable metals. Any soil with leachable metal concentrations will be
excavated and removed for disposal in an appropriate facility.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 68
Once the liner has been removed and the underlying soils tested, the area will be ripped with a
bulldozer or grader to break up the compacted subbase material. Although the surface under the liner
should be graded to properly drain to the south (Figure 5-6), additional grading may be performed, as
needed. The water from the regraded area will flow to the west or south into South Creek.
The contact water pond will no longer be needed after closure.The pond berm will be breached(Figure
5-6)to allow surface water from the facility to flow south into South Creek.
The perimeter road on the west and south sides of RSF-X will be removed during regrading. The
perimeter road on the north side will remain for access to the RSF-A area after closure (Figure 5-6).
The entire regraded area will receive one foot of growth media and be seeded in accordance with the
revegetation plan. The area will also be planted with tree saplings.
5.5 Archdale Tailings Storage Facility
The Archdale TSF embankment will be constructed with downstream raises at a final slope of 2.5H:1 V
(Figure 5-9). The last raise will be constructed during the fifth year of operations.
— e` LEa ND
/ i `I i \ ~ caxrwn s rexsr�c,
/ Jr y I ` � ccxrwiRei..a�eFno
uan vENec,wo uu.
vcxrce xP•w•rrc«ercwn i.mnEn.wi�„....,..^.^in10"""••"ww«w..rw„ni .-------..-, aavEnwuwc,E
' � imm,mmr^�.� �a rcuE�sa no.e ",^n, v wasaw[
(-L"
:ro[JGVERr 5e9cVLVEKt
{�
— -
--
EwE�E.rvEA7P . I_ ,�sEE
EouE.re+sE. .iu xar Eos,.ioruwE.*e rtw., ,- -
rvv,sraa•ee ua�ms•ea ww .eawerex nc:ess no.0 win rv«r
FINAL TSF GRADING PLAN
­1--
Figure 5-9: Archdale TSF (end of operations)
5.5.1 TSF
Because the tailings in the TSF will be dry stacked,the final surface of the facility will be created during
deposition (Figure 5-9), and no significant regrading of the tailings surface is expected.
Both the tailings surface and the embankment will be covered with two feet of growth material, probably
originating from the stockpile of material currently located on the north side of the area that will be
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_ReporL_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 69
removed during construction (Figure 5-10). This stockpile has been naturally revegetated without any
intentional revegetation efforts and should function as an acceptable growth medium.
1150 - - 4 - I- - - - - - - 1150
1100 I STOCKPI TOBEREMOV E. 2FT OF GROWrHMLDIA lice
1050 ,_ 1050
i EL.991,' FINALTSF SVRFACE
r`-1DOD Y 4 SEEPAGE 1000
Z INTERCEPTION
950 ——^_ 500 DRAIN 950
w900 —�— _----_---- �\ — 900
w 850 p RIMET R ACC SS RO AND TARTS EMBANKMENT r 850
800 EXISTING GROUND 800
I I I i . �j
0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5+00 5+00 7+00 8+00 940 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+OC 15+00 17+00 18+00 19+00 20+00 21+00
STATION(FT.)
Figure 5-10: Archdale TSF Section C
The final TSF embankment slope will have an overall slope of 2.5H:1 V with slope breaks approximately
every 30 vertical feet (Figure 5-11).These slope breaks are designed to reduce erosion from surface
flows while vegetation is established (Appendix D).
2 FT.THK CLOSURE COVER LAYER
(1 FT.OF GROWTH MEDIA OVER 1 FT.OF COVER MATERIAL)
TYPICAL CLOSURE COVER 2
100
25
r
16 FT.
30 FT.
GLOBAL SLOPE OF TSF
REGRADED (BEFORE CLOSURE COVER LAYER)
SLOPE(TYP.)
r RUNOFF INTERCEPTION BENCH(TYP.)
i
CLOSURE REGRADING DETAIL
SCALE:1'=40'
Figure 5-11: Typical Section TSF Embankment Regrading
The surface of the tailings and the embankment will be seeded with an approved seed mix. Tree
seedlings will be planted on the tailings surface, but no trees will be planted on the embankment in
accordance with state dam safety regulations.
5.5.2 TSF Drainage and Surface Water Management
The channel along the toe of the embankment will be widened to accommodate a PMP storm event
(Figure 5-12). Riprap will be placed in the channel where flows or velocities could result in erosion of
the channel such as the northwest corner of the channel where velocity and the change of direction
could result in erosion of the channel.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.dou April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 70
2 FT.THK.RIPRAP LAYER WITH 12-IN.
DIA.D50,(PLACED AS SHOWN BY
HATCHING IN PLAN VIEW)
—POST-CLOSURE
TSFCLOSURE ROAD
COVER CLOSURE RIPPED SURFACE WITH
PERIMETER 1 FT.GROWTH MEDIA
CHANNEL
__________________ 5 FT. 15'MIN.
_ 2.5
PERIMETER ROAD
5 OCK FILL
EXISTING GROUND
CLOSURE PERIMETER CHANNEL SECTION (TYP.)
SCALE: 1"=20'
Figure 5-12: TSF Closure Perimeter Channel
The beehive drop inlet and the four culverts (Figure 5-13) will be removed and replaced with a swale
that allows vehicular access after closure. The adjacent sediment pond will be breached to allow
surface water to flow to the culvert that conveys water under 1-85 (Figure 5-14).
z ELE
LIGHT VHIC ROAD— _ �
I I I it
I g
� �� II Sou SUMP ORNN-�
6qy i IMCULVER t
- 25' 8
BEEHIVE
500 CROP INLET 000�SEEPAGE
---- i
04TERCEFTION
DRAM_ 500
CONTACTWATER \ - —-—- --
EMERGENCY
30"0 CULVERT P
SEEPA59E COLLECTION TANK
11.. E7(1$TING CULVERT
-� SEDM
iMENT`BA$INS
~- -- PMPEMEREN
- - - - - _ 2(Syr STORAGE AND ABLE TO PASS PMP) _ G��
SPILLWAY
I NG PLAN BD"m EXISTING CULVERT
Figure 5-13: TSF Stormwater and Seepage Collection Detail Plan (Operations)
J P/M VV KingsMountain_Closure—ReporL—USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 71
PRDPERTY
I
FILLMCONTACT WM1TER NO
wiGwALE cui hwTENI
� I
1 L
---------- -------------- -
c
_ SEDINENTPpq � I
---
\\
\� PLANT SITE GRADING PLAN -- I -- __ _sveExlsrWCULERT
--
Figure 5-14: TSF Stormwater and Seepage Collection Detail Plan (Closure)
The seepage collection tank that collects shallow groundwater from the seepage interception drain
during operations will be removed at closure (Figure 5-13). The void will be backfilled with rock, and
the surface of the area graded to direct flow to the culvert that conveys water under 1-85.
The perimeter road will be narrowed to 15 feet by ripping the outer portion of the road. The reclaimed
portion of the road will be covered with one foot of growth media (Figure 5-12).
5.5.3 TSF Non-process Infrastructure
The Archdale NPI area, at the southwest corner of the TSF area, contains the contact water pond,
truck shop,truck parking,office,and various support buildings and Iaydown areas needed for operation
of the TSF (Figure 2-3). This area will be completely reclaimed during closure and all buildings and
structures will be removed.
As closure approaches, inventories of any materials used in the area will be managed to minimize
quantities at closure. Any remaining consumables will be sold or returned to suppliers. All equipment
will be removed from the buildings for resale or recycling. Buried pipelines will be capped and left in
place. Power transmission infrastructure will be removed. Buildings will be demolished. and any
recyclable materials removed from site.
Concrete foundations and floor slabs will be broken and placed in the contact water transfer pond void
or removed from site to a licensed landfill. The soils under buildings and all disturbed areas will be
inspected to identify any areas where oils or liquids may have seeped into the ground. Any areas
where impacted soils are found will be sampled and tested. As needed, any impact soils will be
excavated and removed to an appropriate disposal facility. Any compacted areas will be ripped.
Once the covers have been placed on the TSF and revegetated, and the stormwater channels have
been reconfigured for closure, the contact water pond will no longer be needed and will be reclaimed.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_ReporL_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 72
The pond liner will be removed. The pond void will be backfilled, and the culverts located east and
west of the contact water transfer pond will be removed, along with the fill above the culverts, to re-
establish the original surface water flow paths toward 1-85 (Figure 5-14). Removed fill may be used to
fill the pond void or used to regrade the surface of the area to convey water to original flow paths. The
surface of the entire Archdale NPI area will be regraded to convey surface flows toward culverts under
1-85. One foot of growth media will be placed and the area revegetated using an approved seed mix.
Some tree seedlings will be planted.
5.6 Water Storage Basin 1
WSB-1 will be constructed by extending and raising the embankment the area formerly known as
Executive Club Lake. Closure of WSB-1 will restore discharge from the reservoir to the current stream
configuration. To accomplish this, the section of the embankment raise over the natural channel will
be removed (Figure 5-15).
The water level in WSB-1 will be lowered to allow removal of 15,000 cubic yards of fill material used
to raise the embankment in this area. The side slopes of the cut will be constructed at 3H:1 V and
covered with one foot of growth media and reseeded (Figure 5-16). Riprap will be placed in portions
of the restored drainage that have a channel grade slope of greater 5%.
The spillway channel will be left in place, along with the stilling basin at the bottom of the spillway.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 73
/ T EMBANKMENTFILLTOBEREMOVEB
EXISTEG
l `r
� 1
f 1 OVERHEAD
- � ELECTRIC
WATER STORAGE BASIN
/ BUTTRESS E%TBJTS ''•.. E%IGTIBG E%E IVE
•F CLUB L E E%TENTS
� 3PILL4YAV
R
EMBPNKMENT�, ''•'•S
TOE BUTTRESS
4
E%ISTIHG OVERHEAD "r
POWER TOWER(TYP.)BTRLING BASIN
N
Figure 5-15: WS13-1 Closure Configuration
sqq
FINA EMBANKMENT CREST=850 FT.—\
0
w -1q0'MIN.VEMBANKMENT
EXISTING EMBANKMENT
J FILL
TO BE REMOVED
q+qq 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5+00 6+00 6+24
STATION(FT.)
WSB-1 SECTION B-B
Figure 5-16: WSB-1 Closure Section
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Report_LISPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 74
5.7 Infrastructure
At closure, all infrastructure and buildings will be decommissioned and demolished. Usable and
recyclable materials will be repurposed, and demolition debris will placed in voids remaining from
demolition or removed from the site. Potentially impacted soils will be tested and managed according
to appropriate practices based on the results of testing. Once infrastructure and buildings are removed,
the areas will be reclaimed.
5.7.1 Process Facilities
The process area at closure will comprise the crusher and tailings loadout areas north of 1-85 and all
process facilities south of the highway (Figure 2-4). At closure, these areas will be reclaimed and
restored to a configuration that approximates pre-disturbance conditions to the extent practicable.
As closure approaches, inventories of any consumables used in the NPI will be managed to minimize
quantities at closure. Any remaining consumables will be sold or returned to suppliers.
The crushers and conveyors will be dismantled and removed from the site for resale or recycling. All
equipment will be removed from the buildings for resale or recycling. Buried pipelines will be capped
and left in place. Power transmission infrastructure will be removed. Buildings will be demolished, and
any recyclable materials removed from site. Concrete foundations and floor slabs will be broken and
placed in one of the voids created by cut in one of the ponds or removed from site to a licensed landfill.
The soil under buildings and all disturbed areas will be inspected to identify any areas where oils or
liquids may have seeped into the ground. Any areas where impacted soils are found will be sampled
and tested. As needed, any impacted soils be will excavated and removed to a licensed disposal
facility.
After removal of all building structures,the entire area will be regraded to convey water toward original
flow paths (Figure 5-1). Any compacted areas will be ripped. All sediment ponds will be breached or
removed.
One foot of growth media will be placed, and the areas revegetated using an approved seed mix.
Some tree seedlings will be planted.
5.7.2 Non-Process Infrastructure
The NPI area at KMMP includes the mine office, security, parking, truck shop, truck wash, ready line,
storage and Iaydown areas, the rail concentrate loadout and support infrastructure, and other
structures and disturbed areas (Figure 2-4). At closure, this entire area will be reclaimed and restored
to a configuration that approximates pre-disturbance conditions to the extent practicable.
The truck shop, truck wash, and fueling areas will remain operational until all material movement
operations are complete. The security office will remain until all closure work at the site is complete.
As closure approaches, inventories of any consumables used in the NPI will be managed to minimize
quantities at closure. Any remaining consumables will be sold or returned to suppliers. All equipment
will be removed from the buildings for resale or recycling. Buried pipelines will be capped and left in
place. Power transmission infrastructure will be removed. Buildings will be demolished, and any
recyclable materials removed from site.Concrete foundations and floor slabs will be broken and placed
in one of the voids created by cut in one of the ponds or removed from site to a licensed landfill.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 75
The soil under buildings and all disturbed areas will be inspected to identify any areas where oils or
liquids may have seeped into the ground. Any areas where impacted soils are found will be sampled
and tested.As needed, any impacted soil will be excavated and removed to a licensed disposal facility.
After removal of all building structures,the entire area will be regraded to convey water toward original
flow paths (Figure 5-1). Any compacted areas will be ripped. All sediment ponds will be breached or
removed.
One foot of growth media will be placed, and the area revegetated using an approved seed mix. Some
tree seedlings will be planted.
5.7.3 Power Lines and Power Distribution
Power lines and distribution systems may be required to supply energy to structures remaining to
support post-closure land use. However, for purposes of this strategy, any temporary infrastructure
that was installed to support operations will be decommissioned and demolished. This infrastructure
will be among the last items decommissioned, with decommissioning occurring once there is no need
for energy on site. Some power infrastructure will remain permanently as part of the larger City of
Kings Mountain electrical utilities supply.
The 230/24.9KV electrical substation southwest of WSB-1 (Figure 2-4), and the existing transmission
line adjacent to WSB-1, belongs to Duke Energy. This infrastructure will not be removed at closure,
and Duke Energy will be responsible for maintaining this infrastructure and access to it.
5.7.4 Water Supply System
All water used on site will be supplied internally. Once operations and processing cease, and water
supply to the Project is no longer needed, pipes and pumps will be dismantled and removed from the
site.
5.8 Roads
All roads that are not needed for post-closure access for monitoring and maintenance, or potential
future use, will be removed during closure. All roads that will remain after closure will be narrowed to
15 feet, which should allow access by small trucks or bulldozers. The only exception to this is the final
haul road up to the top of RSF-A, which will be narrowed to 20 feet. Figure 5-1 shows the roads that
will be removed, and those that will remain, after closure.
Roads to be removed will be regraded or ripped and, depending on the substrate material, one foot of
growth media will be placed. Remaining roads will be narrowed by ripping the excess road width. The
perimeter roads around RSF-A and the TSF will be narrowed along the toe of the facilities, as the
surface water channels are widened to permit conveyance of a PMP storm event and ripping the outer
side of the road (Figure 5-7).
All culverts conveying water under roads will be removed, and road fill material removed and/or
regraded down to the original water courses. Culverts in roads that will remain will be replaced with a
swale to allow vehicles to cross the water course.
Reclaimed road segments will be reseeded with an approved seed mix and some areas will be planted
with tree seedlings.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 76
The timing of road abandonment during closure activities will be determined based on access
requirements during closure, and the schedule of other closure activities adjacent to the roads.
5.9 Ponds
After closure cover is placed, all collection and sediment ponds will be breached and discharges
conveyed to drainages at Kings Mtn and Archdale as shown on Figure 5-1 and Figure 5-2, respectively.
Breaching of Sediment Pond 1 will require removal of a portion of the railroad embankment and the
existing culvert (Figure 5-17). Once the breach is completed, all water from that area north of the
railroad embankment will flow to Kings Creek.
N
n
0 100 200
FEET
RoMti'�v
<,Q
0
CULVERT TO BE
\ REMOVED AT CLOSURE
�1 e7s DURING EXCAVATION OF
\ OUTLET SPILLWAY
SEDIMENT POND 1 \
\F /
lip,
I
O ra1 a�
NP�4ROP %.
KIN( CREEK
v
r
Figure 5-17: Sediment Pond 1 Closure
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 77
5.10 Yard Areas
Yards and laydown areas are generally flat areas used to store mine materials or the pad areas
remaining after buildings are removed. These flat areas will require a minimal amount of grading to
blend them into the surrounding topography.
After regrading to direct water generally into original water courses, the areas will be covered with one
foot of growth media and reseeded according to the revegetation plan.
5.11 Industrial and Hazardous Waste
Industrial and Hazardous waste will be identified in accordance with RCRA and applicable waste
regulations and disposed of off-site at an approved third-party facility.
5.12 Fencing
Fencing will be removed and sent to a scrap metal facility or an appropriate waste disposal facility
once closure is complete and appropriate exclusionary berms have been placed at the site.
5.13 Well Abandonment
Water supply wells will remain for future use at closure. Any monitor wells not needed for post-closure
monitoring will be closed in accordance with state regulations (15A NCAC 02C.0113). The wells will
be permanently abandoned by filling portions of the holes in bedrock with cuttings or gravel ending
10 feet below the top of the bedrock and then grouted to the surface. Any holes constructed in
unconsolidated material or broken bedrock will be permanently abandoned by filling the entire length
with grout. All holes will have a minimum five-foot top plug of cement-type grout.
5.14 Progressive Closure
Progressive closure is reclamation activities that take place during operations to accelerate closure of
facilities for which closure can begin during operation or are no longer needed for the current operation.
Observations of the current site conditions demonstrate that the area will not be difficult to revegetate
at closure. Following historic mining operations at the site, no planned reclamation occurred at the site.
Despite this lack of intentional reclamation, nearly every area disturbed by the previous operation has
revegetated without human intervention. Therefore, the ability of Albemarle to revegetate the site is
not in question. Instead, reclamation of the site will focus on accelerating the process and better
managing the types of vegetation and ecosystems to be consistent with the final uses of the site. This
is likely to require varied vegetation across the site.
To test the effectiveness of the proposed methods and types of closure activities, specifically cover
and growth media, surface water management, and revegetation performance. By performing
progressive closure on areas no longer needed for operations, the proposed closure methods can be
tested at field scale. Temporary revegetation of the closure material stockpiles will also provide
information on the proposed revegetation approach.
The lower lifts of RSF-A constructed earlier in the mine life should be available for reclamation and
closure when they are completed to their final configuration (Figure 5-18). Depending on resource
availability, progressive closure would occur on these areas during operation. If monitoring of the
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 78
progressive closure indicates alternatives to currently proposed methods, those approaches could be
tested and modifications to the plan made as needed. Other areas on which progressive closure could
occur are the embankment of the TSF, albeit only in the last years of operation.
.: TYPICAL CLOSURE COVER
{ + (REFER TO DETAIL 1)
++ rfr - �\ SOLrrH CI
f
R
AF
7 1
RSF-A
FINAL
k CONFIG.300!]_ fil
HATCHED AREA AVAILABLE FOR ,
f l POTENTIAL CLOSURE AFTER
i .OPERATION YEAR 5
/ f J/ '
'ti y
%A-S
Figure 5-18: RSF-A Potential Progressive Closure
5.15 Temporary Closure
In the event of temporary closure,the site will be placed into care and maintenance in accordance with
a temporary closure plan prepared to preserve the assets at the site while maintaining compliance with
all legal obligations.
The content of any temporary closure plan depends on the objective of the plan. If temporary closure
is contemplated primarily in response to depressed commodity prices, then the closure period is likely
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure—Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 79
to be longer than if the objective is to shut down for a short time to optimize an operation, implement
productivity improvements, address legal or license issues, or provide a basis for re-evaluating
contracts and resourcing requirements.
As future price movements cannot be predicted with certainty, temporary closure planning due to
reduced commodity prices must take into account the uncertain (i.e., indefinite)period for closure. The
overarching objective of the closure plan is to preserve the future value of the asset for all stakeholders.
The difference between the long-term and mid-term plans is that the mid-term plans utilize a strategy
that assumes that prices will recover reasonably quickly (i.e., within a year or two). However, as
mentioned above, commodity price movements cannot be accurately predicted with any certainty.
Therefore, even with the mid-term closure scenario, it is prudent to plan for the possibility that prices
do not quickly recover and that long-term closure may eventually be the best option going forward.
While some temporary closure actions may be similar to life-of-mine(LOM)closure actions, others will
be different based on the objective of maintaining the mine operation in a state suitable for resumptions
of operations at a later date.
5.16 Unplanned Closure
If the operation is closed prior to the currently planned closure date, some of the actions included in
this plan may require modification appropriate to the conditions that exist at the time of closure. These
modifications would be documented in a final closure plan prepared at that time.
5.17 Post-Closure Management Plan
The post-closure management plan will be developed at a later date, but typically include post-closure
monitoring activities and vegetation monitoring and maintenance activities.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 80
6 Socioeconomic Transitioning
In March 2023, Albemarle began community engagement regarding planning for socioeconomic
transitioning at closure with a series of four initial workshops with key stakeholders to develop a vision
for the future of the site. Albemarle conducted two workshops with community members (March and
June 2023), one with employees (May 2023), and with Kings Mountain High School students
(May 2023). These meetings were designed to obtain stakeholder input to the closure planning
process to ensure that the closure plan would be consistent with potential future uses. Continued
engagement will occur throughout the mine life cycle, as the mine plan evolves and additional
information is gathered.
6.1 Post-Closure Visioning
The post-closure visioning meetings were conducted as facilitated brainstorming sessions designed
to encourage open dialog and ensure that the opinions of all those present were represented in the
meeting.The specific topics included: possible desirable future uses, repurposing opportunities,types
of undesirable future uses, and criteria to include or exclude future uses.
A number of different ideas for future uses of the site,or portions of the site,were introduced by various
stakeholders and discussed by the group. Common themes in these uses were:
• Areas for unorganized recreation (e.g., trails, natural areas)
• Organized recreation areas (e.g., ball fields)
• Access to the pit lake for a water recreation area
• Possible commercial use of the plant area
• Outdoor event space
• Potential use of some buildings for community (e.g., youth) programs
• Accessibility for all the public
Large-scale industrial,warehousing, and commercial development were the only future uses that were
generally deemed unfavorable, but deemed acceptable in portions of the site, provided that they did
not conflict with surrounding land uses or the post-closure vision.
6.2 Socioeconomic Transitioning Actions
At this time, Albemarle plans to implement the following actions related to socioeconomic transitioning
for the site after closure as part of this plan:
1) Albemarle will continue to engage with the community and key stakeholders on issues relating to
post-closure vision for the site and socioeconomic transitioning with the intent of developing a
comprehensive socioeconomic transitioning plan for the site during operations.
2) Develop a detailed post-closure land use plan in consultation with stakeholders to ensure that the
final closure activities on the site are consistent with those land uses. This would include a land
use viability assessment that defines criteria for inclusion and/or exclusion of possible future uses
with the intent of developing a comprehensive plan that meets legal requirements and considers
input from stakeholders.
3) Albemarle continues to participate in planning discussions with the Gateway Trail Board of
Directors, the City of Kings Mountain, and Cleveland County to develop a plan for a new section
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 81
of the Gateway Trail that aligns with the city's Master Plan for parks and recreation facilities, and
stays committed to both preserve and enhance recreation opportunities for our community.
Albemarle will continue to support engagement with the local community to gain input and ensure
the best vision for the future of the trail can be realized. Currently, there is no timetable for the trail
to be affected by potential mining operations at the Kings Mountain site, and the trail will continue
to remain open to the public across Albemarle's property.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 82
7 Closure Monitoring
The objective of the closure and post-closure monitoring program will be to track the recovery of the
site toward the long-term post-closure land use goals, in accordance with the overall closure
objectives. The monitoring program will be designed to collect information to demonstrate that the
closure criteria have been achieved, revegetation and restoration objectives are met, and the site is
stable.
The strategy is to adopt monitoring requirements for specific environmental aspects and adapt these
for closure.These activities will then be implemented through the closure and post-closure period.The
monitoring that is typically required during the closure and post-closure period is summarized below:
• Surface Water — Quality monitoring of surface water, including Kings Creek to detect any
changes to baseline water quality conditions, for a period that meets regulatory requirements.
• Groundwater — Quality monitoring of both the shallow and deep aquifers. Aquifer recovery
also typically monitored via collection of water samples to detect any changes to baseline
water quality conditions, for a time that meets regulatory requirements.
• Pit lake —Water level and water quality will be monitored in the pit lake. This may include pit
lake stratification data. Monitoring shall continue for a period post-closure.
• Air Quality—Air quality monitoring is typically limited to the period in which significant dust is
potentially generated. Once these areas have been closed, the air quality network will be
decreased or totally removed.
• Reclamation Performance Monitoring — reclamation performance monitoring consists of
comparing the reclaimed areas to analogue sites where vegetation performance and soil
chemical and physical properties are measured.
• Biological Monitoring of aquatic and terrestrial resources in accordance with local
requirements.
Annual reports will be prepared to document the results of the monitoring during the closure and post-
closure phases. These reports will provide important information required to manage the on-going
closure activities, with the data and reports being used to:
• Provide recommendations for improving subsequent reclamation activities.
• Indicate where reclamation and closure activities have not been successful, requiring a
potential change in design criteria/
• Provide information where care and maintenance are required during the post-closure period.
• Indicate if relinquishment criteria have been achieved.
During closure, a phased approach in the reduction of monitoring frequency and locations typically
occurs.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 83
8 Preliminary Mine Closure Schedule
Some mine closure activities can occur concurrently as the mine operations allow. However, the
availability of those areas for closure will depend on the mining schedule and availability of equipment
and staff resources. Areas that could be closed concurrently include some of the initial lifts on RSF-A
and the embankment of the Archdale TSF could be ready for closure as early as Year 6 of operations.
Figure 8-1 shows a schedule of closure activities by facility in accordance with the current schedule.
Fedlity Year
Operations/Concurrent Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15 Year 16 Year 17 Year 18 Year 19 Year 20
RSF-A Could begin in Year 6
RSF-H
Arcbdele TSF Could begin in Year 5
Open Pit
Roads
Yards
Process FadlMas
Buildings
Ponds
W 56-1
Water Supply
Weil Abandonment
Waste Disposal
Moriftoring and Maintenance
Figure 8-1: Preliminary Closure Schedule
The majority of closure actions would be implemented once mining ceases in Year 9, but some post-
closure monitoring and maintenance activities would continue for another 10 years. As monitoring
demonstrates that the closure goals are met, monitoring requirements should decrease, and
groundwater wells can be progressively abandoned. Maintenance activities could include overseeding
areas where vegetation has not performed to expectations,or covers have experience localize erosion.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 84
9 References
Albemarle, (2023). Socioeconomic Baseline. Environmental Review and Permitting Support
Document. Kings Mountain Project. May 2023.
Albemarle, (202a). Phase 1 Base Case Infill PAG Mine Plan. Kings Mountain Project. September 11,
2023. Version 02.2.
Applied Weather Associates (AWA), (2022). Site-Specific Probable Maximum Precipitation Study for
Kings Mountain Mining Operations, North Carolina, Applied Weather Associates, September
2021, KM60-EN-RP-9431.
BC Mine Waste Rock Pile Research Committee, (1991). Guidelines for Mine Waste Dump and
Stockpile Design.
CDA, (2013). Dam Safety Guidelines 2007 (2013 Edition).
ERM, (1981) Horton and Butler, 1981
ERM, (2004) Garrett, 2004
ERM, (2005) Ebensperger et al., 2005
ERM, (2018) Cleveland County North Carolina, 2018
ERM (2021a) U.S. Census Bureau, 2021
ERM (2021 b) The Star, 2021
ERM, (2022)
ERM, (2022a) NC Rural Center, 2022
ERM, (2022c) City of Kings Mountain, 2022
ERM, (2022b) County Health Rankings & Roadmaps, 2022
ERM (2022d) UNC Chapel Hill, 2022
ERM (2024a) SWCA, (2024). Recommended Revegetation Plan, (In preparation).
GeoVision, (2023). Seismic Investigation Kings Mountain Mine. Kings Mountain, North Carolina.
Prepared for SRK Consulting. Prepared By GEOVision Geophysical Services. Corona,
California. January 2023.
GoldSim, (2021). GoldSim, Version 14.0. GoldSim Technology Group, November 2021.
INAP. (2014) GARD Guide Global Acid Rock Drainage Guide. Mine Water and the Environment.
Lettis, (2023). Development of Site-Specific Seismic Design Ground Motions for the Kings Mountain
Mine Development, North Carolina. Prepared by Lettis Consultants International. Concord,
California. 24 April 2023.
Limnos LLC. (2023) Ablemarle Kings Mountain Lake in North Carolina Memo, 2023.
MEND, (2009). Prediction Manual for Drainage Chemistry from Sulphidic Geologic Materials.
December 01, 2009.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 85
NASA, (2023). Daymet: Daily Surface Weather Data on a 10km Grid for North America, Version 4 R1
from their website at https:Hdoi.org/l0.3334/ORBLDAAC/2129
NOAA. (2023). NOAA Atlas 14 Point Precipitation Frequency Estimates: North Carolina. National
Weather Service, 2023.
Richardson, C.W., (1984).WGEN : a model for generating daily weather variables. [Washington, D.C.]
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service.
Schafer (2023). Albemarle Pit Lake Water Quality Predication Addendum 1. Prepared by Schafer
Limited LLC., September 20, 2023.
SRK, (2022). Kings Mountain Geochemical Characterization Work Plan. Prepared for Albemarle U.S.,
by U.S., by SRK Consulting (U.S.), Denver, Colorado.
SRK, (2023a). Conceptual Report Closure Plan Kings Mountain Mining Project, prepared for
Albemarle Corporation, by SRK Consulting (U.S.) Inc., September 15, 2023.
SRK, (2023b). Pit Stability and Modeling Kings Mountain Mining Project North Carolina, USA. prepared
for Albemarle U.S., by SRK Consulting (U.S.),Inc. Michael Bierwagen, Fei Wang, Denver,
Colorado, April 2023.
SRK, (2023c). Kings Mountain Groundwater Quality Memo.
SRK, (2023d). Draft Technical Report Prefeasibility Study Hydrogeologic Characterization Kings
Mountain Mining Project. Prepared for Albemarle Corporation by SRK Consulting (U.S.) Inc.
Chad Bearor, Amy Pritt. Denver, Colorado. May 12, 2023.
SRK, (2023e). Technical Report 2022 Prefeasibility Study Surface Water: Water Balance
Development Report Kings Mountain Mining Project. Prepared for Albemarle Corporation by
SRK Consulting (U.S.) Inc. David Hoekstra, Mark Willow. Denver, Colorado. May 17, 2023.
SRK, (2023f). Draft Prefeasibility Geotechnical Report- Waste Rock Design and Stability Kings
Mountain Mining Project North Carolina, USA. Prepared for Albemarle Corporation by SRK
Consulting (U.S.) Inc. Michael Bierwagen, Fei Wang. Denver, Colorado. May 9, 2023.
SRK, (2024a). Select Phase Preliminary Engineering Design Report for Water Storage Basin 1 Kings
Mountain Mining Project, prepared for Albemarle Corporation, by SRK Consulting (U.S.) Inc.,
SRK, (2024b). Technical Report 2022 Prefeasibility Study Baseline Geochemical Characterization
Kings Mountain Mining Project, prepared for Albemarle Corporation, by SRK Consulting (U.S.)
Inc., February 19, 2024.
SRK, (2024c). Technical Report 2022 Prefeasibility Study, Geochemistry Water Quality Predictions
Kings Mountain Mining Project, prepared for Albemarle Corporation, by SRK Consulting(U.S.)
Inc., April 15, 2024.
SRK, (2024d). Technical Report 2023 Prefeasibility Study Surface Water: Water Balance
Development Report Kings Mountain Mining Project, prepared for Albemarle Corporation, by
SRK Consulting (U.S.) Inc., April 12, 2024.
SRK, (2024e). Technical Report Select Phase Rock Storage Facilities A and X Preliminary
Engineering Design Report Kings Mountain Mining Project, prepared for Albemarle
Corporation, by SRK Consulting (U.S.) Inc., April 3, 2024.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Page 86
SRK, (2024f). SRK, (2024). Archdale Filtered Tailings Storage Facility DRAFT Select Phase
Preliminary Engineering Design Report Kings Mountain Mining Project, prepared for
Albemarle Corporation, by SRK Consulting (U.S.) Inc., March 29, 2024.
SRK, (2024g). Archdale Storm Water Management Report Kings Mountain Mining Project North
Carolina, prepared for Albemarle Corporation, by SRK Consulting (U.S.) Inc., April 15, 2024.
Surface MINING Manual (1996). State of North Carolina, Department of Environment, Health and
Natural Resources, February 1996.
SWCA, (2023a). Baseline Soil Sampling and Analysis for the Albemarle Kings Mountain Lithium Mining
Project Cleveland County, North Carolina, prepared for Albemarle U.S., by SWCA
Environmental Consultants, Kelley House, Andrew Harley Broomfield, Colorado, April 2023.
SWCA, (2023b). Biological Resources Summary Report for the Kings Mountain Lithium Mine,
Cleveland County, North Carolina Interim Draft, prepared for Albemarle U.S., by SWCA
Environmental Consultants, Colorado, April 2023.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Appendices
Appendices
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Appendices
Appendix A: Recommended Revegetation Plan
Appendix A was not available at the time of this report's finalization.
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Appendices
Appendix B: Technical Memorandum: Surface Hydrology of
Kings Mountain Open Pit Overflow, Post-Closure
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SIR
=p srk consulting 999 Consulting Suite,Inc.
99 Consulting
Street,Suite 400
Denver,CO 80202
T:[phone]
F:[phone]
[e-mail]
www.srk.com
Technical Memorandum
To: Claudio Andrade and Morgan Warren, Date: April 18, 2024
Albemarle Corporation
Company: Albemarle Corporation From: Gary Hurban, Jeff
Parshley, Breese Burnley
Copy to: Jeff Osborn, SRK Reviewed by: N/A
Subject: Surface Hydrology of Kings Mountain Open Project#: USPR000576
Pit Overflow, Post-Closure
Albemarle TBD Revision#: 01
Document Number:
1. Introduction
SRK Consulting U.S. Inc (SRK) has prepared this memo for Albemarle Corporation (Albemarle) to present the
results of a conceptual hydrologic and hydraulic analysis of open pit overflow following mine closure, at the Kings
Mountain Project(Project), located in North Carolina, USA.
This memo summarizes the assumption, methods and conceptual design of a spillway from the open pit during
long-term closure. The results presented herein include a 20-foot wide entrance weir that drops 2 feet into a 20-
foot wide spillway channel that transition flows to the natural drainage.
2. Design Basis
The basis for the conceptual level design includes the following:
1) The design storm is the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF); assumed to be generated by the Probable
Maximum Precipitation Event (PMP) of 28.5 inches per the site-specific PMP study by Applied Weather
Associates (AWA, 2022).
Note: North Carolina does not have prescribed design-storm criteria specifically for mine closure.The Global
Industry Standard Tailings Management (GISTM) Guidelines (2020) provides design-storm guidance for
mine closure. The 1 in 10,000-year storm (or PMF/PMP) is recommended for facilities in "Passive Care" —
the post-closure condition where facilities have been configured into their final form. For operating facilities
or those in transition to passive care, i.e., Active Care, the design-storm is assessed based on incremental
downstream consequences. This assessment assumes the PMF for Passive Care.
2) SCS Type II storm distribution.
3) Catchment area of 273.11 acres, including the proposed open pit as shown on Figure 1.
4) Curve Number of 98 for precipitation losses.
5) Lag Time of 11 minutes (calculations provided in Attachment 1).
GH/JP/RBB USPR000576_KM_PitClosureOverflowHyd rology_Memo_Rev02.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc. Page 2
III %
ti
V "
4.0
coo
INVERT OF SPILLWAY R
MEL 051'AM;L �-- .- CLCGLI RE OPEN PIT CATCHMENT
P7. 1 AC) Of
L -
r LOWE,STGPILLL3E1EIk71OK, {I
WFAWL
Fil_LAREA' s' } f
9av iREK VEDAT :KINGS CREEK
'f r\AL r-'-
fe
R^,F-X
Figure 1: Closure Watershed Map for Open Pit
GH/JP/RBB USPR000576_KM_PitClosureOverflowHydrology_Memo_Rev02.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
3. Hydrology
A rainfall-runoff model using HEC-HMS was developed to simulate the volume and timing of inflow to
the open pit per the catchment shown on Figure 1. HEC-HMS model inputs and results are provided
in Attachment 1.
With the model parameters noted in Section 2, the peak flow into the open pit is estimated to be 6,794
cfs.
The peak outflow from the pit was estimated using hydrologic routing through a reservoir element
representing the open pit. A stage-storage curve was developed above the natural spill elevation of
855 feet amsl assuming a natural spillway width of 20 feet. The area above the natural spill elevation
was estimated assuming the proposed pit slope angle of 1.2(H):1(V). This configuration results in a
peak outflow from a 20-foot wide spillway of 367 cfs and 3.6 feet of storm surcharge.
4. Spillway Design
To maintain a peak water surface elevation in the open pit below the 855-foot elevation, the invert
elevation of the spillway entrance was set to 851 feet amsl.The "Spillway Entrance" consists of a 20-
foot-wide horizontal weir cut into native ground for a length of 100 feet (Details 2 and C, Figure 2).
From the weir, flow drops into the "Pit Spillway Channel" over a 2-foot drop structure into a 20-foot-
wide channel with a 2% bed slope that transitions to native ground (Details 2 and B, Figure 2). The
channel will be armored with a 1.5-thick gabion mat or suitable equivalent for erosion protection. The
2-foot drop structure will be constructed of 3' x 3' Gabions. The dense vegetation in the existing
channel is assumed adequate for erosion protection downstream of the Pit Spillway Channel.
5. Downstream Consequences
In a separate study, SRK performed a hydraulic culvert assessment for the section of Kings Creek
immediately downstream of the natural spill location. The study evaluated the hydraulic impacts of
extending the existing 4-foot diameter culvert under a mine building located 1,200 feet downstream of
the natural spill location.The study found that the 1,000-year storm event peak flow of 400 cfs(179,600
gpm) is contained in the 60 foot deep Kings Creek ravine with approximately 20 feet of headwater
upstream of the culvert inlet.
The peak outflow from the open pit of 367 cfs(refer Section 3) is therefore contained in the existing 4-
foot diameter RCP under the mine building. Thus, there are no downstream impacts to existing mine
infrastructure with the 20-foot wide Pit Spillway Entrance and Pit Spillway Channel from the open pit.
GH/JP/RBB USPR000576_KM_PitClosureOverflowHydrology_Memo_Rev02.docx April 2024

0 30 60
FE T-
CO
855'WSEL NATURAL SPILL LOCATION
EL: 854.92'/
FLOW DIR TIO
61
5)C 0
0
Do
Ln 0
C6
EXISTING CONDITION SPILL LOCATION
11. 60'
SPILLWAY ENTRANCE 20.0'
EL. 851'
C
1960
20.0(Y'
ce>
PIT SPILLWAY CHANNEL ALIGNMENT
----------
85.
61
Z�
0
C) CP,
CONCEPTUAL OPEN PIT SPILLWAY PLAN VIEW
V=60'
FINISHED GROUND
SPILLWAYCHANNEL
GRADE BREAK STA 0+00.00 GRADE BREAK STA=0+77.64
900 ELEV 849.000 B r ELEV 847.451 900 EXISTING GROUND- 2.00'
----f EXISTING —- I - - 104.55'--��
!L1 880-- GROUND - 880 El:851'
z
0 860- 0 -- 860
1-- 840- -- 840 FINISHED GROUND 20.00,
§ - FINISHED GROUND - SPILLWAY ENTRANCE
LU 820 - 820
LU Tx TGABIONS-
-11+00 0+00 1+00 2+00
15THICK GABION MAT—/ NATIVE CHANNEL 1.5'THICK GABION MAT-
(OR SUITABLE EQUILVALENT) STATION (FT.) (ARMORED WITH DENSE VEGETATION) (OR SUITABLE EQUIVALENT)
PIT SPILLWAY CHANNEL -PROFILE PIT SPILLWAY ENTRANCE-PROFILE,AND
1-100, SPILLWAY CHANNEL-TYP.SECTION
1.1=40'
REVISIONS DESIGN:XXX REVIEWED:XXX PREPARED BY: DRAWING TITLE:
REV. DESCRIPTION DATE DRAWN:XXX APPROVED:XXX =$wsrk consulting EXISTING AND PROPOSED PIT SPILLWAY
COORDINATE SYSTEM: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN
SYSTEM PROJECT:
DATE: DRAWING NO.:
KINGS MOUNTAIN MINE PROJECT 2/23/2021
IF THE ABOVE BAR — 17; 1
DOES NOT MEASURE 1 INCH, CONCEPUTAL CLOSURE HYDROLOGY rRK PPROJECT NO.: F GURE 2
FILE�NAME:CLOSURE HYDRO WKG BK.dwg THE DRAWING SCALE IS ALTERED US R000576
C:\Users\ghurban\SRK Consulting\NA USPR000576 Albemarle Corporation Kings Mountain 2022 Pre Feasibility Study-Internal\0800-TSF\040-Drafting\Task-600-RSF-A-RSF-X-Haul-Rds\Working\BK\CLOSURE_HYDRO-WKG-BK.dwg

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
6. Summary
As part of mine closure planning for the Kings Mountain Project in North Carolina, a conceptual
hydrologic and hydraulic analysis was performed by SRK to assess surface water conditions and
potential consequences of a storm event occurring when the open pit is overflowing. The open pit is
predicted to overflow in future per recent groundwater studies for the Project.
This memo summarizes the assumption, methods and conceptual design of a spillway from the open
pit during long-term closure. The results presented herein include a 20-foot wide Entrance Channel
simulated as a weir, that drops 2 feet into a 20-foot wide Spillway Channel that transition flows to the
natural drainage.
This conceptual design will maintain a water surface elevation (WSEL) during a PIMP storm that is
below the natural spill elevation of 855 feet amsl, while managing the outflow to the natural drainage.
Because the peak flow of 367 cfs through the proposed open pit spillway is less than the 400 cfs
simulated in a previous hydraulic study by SRK that showed containment of storm flows, there are no
downstream consequences to closure of the open pit.
7. References
Applied Weather Associates (AWA), 2022. Site-Specific Probable Maximum Precipitation Study for
Kings Mountain Mining Operations, North Carolina, Applied Weather Associates, September 2021,
KM60-EN-RP-9431.
GH/JP/RBB USPR000576_KM_PitClosureOverflowHydrology_Memo_Rev02.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
Attachments
GH/JP/RBB USPR000576_KM_PitClosureOverflowHydrology_Memo_Rev02.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
Attachment 1 :
Supporting Calculations and HEC-HMS Data
GH/JP/RBB USPR000576_KM_PitClosureOverflowHydrology_Memo_Rev02.docx April 2024

3/24/24, 1:09 PM Standard Report
Project: KM_PitSpillway_USR 576
Simulation Run: PMP
Simulation Start: 31 December 2022, 24:00
Simulation End: 3 January 2023, 01:00
HMS Version: 4.10
Executed: 24 March 2024, 20:06
Global Parameter Summary - Subbasin
Area(MI2)
Element Name Area(MI2)
Catchment 0.43
Downstream
Element Name Downstream
Catchment Open Pit
Loss Rate:Scs
Element Name Percent Impervious Area Curve Number
Catchment o 98
Transform:Scs
Element Name Lag Unitgraph Type
Catchment 11 Standard
Global Results Summary
Hydrologic Element Drainage Area(MI2) Peak Discharge(CFS) Time of Peak Volume(IN)
Catchment 0.43 6794•11 oiJan2o23, 12:o6 28.26
Open Pit 0.43 367.42 oiJan2o23,13:48 23.77
file:///C:/Users/ghurban/SRK Consulting/NA USPR000576 Albemarle Corporation Kings Mountain 2022 Pre Feasibility Study-Deliverables/20240323... 1/6

3/24/24, 1:09 PM Standard Report
Subbasin: Catchment
Area(MI2):0.43
Downstream:Open Pit
Loss Rate:Scs
Percent Impervious Area 0
Curve Number 98
Transform:Scs
Lag H
Unitgraph Type Standard
Results:Catchment
Peak Discharge(CFS) 6794.11
Time of Peak Discharge oiJan2o23,12:o6
Volume(IN) 28.26
Precipitation Volume(AC-FT) 648.58
Loss Volume(AC-FT) 5.54
Excess Volume(AC-FT) 643.04
Direct R noff Volume(AC-FT) 643.04
Baseflow Volume(AC-FT) 0
Precipitation and Outflow
r, 0
z Precipitation
1 Excess Precipitation
U
z Outflow
2
a
U 3
w
a
4
,1 6000
U)
u-
4000
0 2000
u-
0
06:00 12:00 18:00 00:00 06:00 12:00 18:00 00:00
Jan 1, 2023 Jan 2, 2023 Jan 3, 2023
file:NC:/Users/ghurban/SRK Consulting/NA USPR000576 Albemarle Corporation Kings Mountain 2022 Pre Feasibility Study-Deliverables/20240323... 2/6

3/24/24, 1:09 PM Standard Report
Reservoir: Open Pit
Results:Open Pit
Peak Discharge(CFS) 367.42
Time of Peak Discharge oiJan2o23,13:48
Volume(IN) 23.77
Peak Inflow(CFS) 6794.11
Time of Peak Inflow o1Jan2o23,12:o6
Inflow Volume(AC-FT) 643.04
Maximum Storage(AC-FT) 441.64
Peak Elevation(FT) 854.63
Discharge Volume(AC-FT) 540.98
file:///C:/Users/ghurban/SRK Consulting/NA USPR000576 Albemarle Corporation Kings Mountain 2022 Pre Feasibility Study-Deliverables/20240323... 3/6

3/24/24, 1:09 PM Standard Report
Combined Inflow
7000
6000
U) 5000
LL
\/
z 4000
z
m
O 3000
U
O 2000
u_
1000
0
00:00 06:00 12:00 18:00 00:00 06:00 12:00 18:00 00:00
Jan 1, 2023 Jan 2, 2023 Jan 3, 2023
Time
Pool Elevation
854.5
854
1-- 853.5
u_
z853
0
> 852.5
w
J
w
852
851.5
851
00:00 06:00 12:00 18:00 00:00 06:00 12:00 18:00 00:00
Jan 1, 2023 Jan 2, 2023 Jan 3, 2023
Time
file:///C:/Users/ghurban/SRK Consulting/NA USPR000576 Albemarle Corporation Kings Mountain 2022 Pre Feasibility Study-Deliverables/20240323... 4/6

3/24/24, 1:09 PM Standard Report
Outflow
350
300
250
U)
LL
U 200
0 150
u_
100
50
0
00:00 06:00 12:00 18:00 00:00 06:00 12:00 18:00 00:00
Jan 1, 2023 Jan 2, 2023 Jan 3, 2023
Time
file:///C:/Users/ghurban/SRK Consulting/NA USPR000576 Albemarle Corporation Kings Mountain 2022 Pre Feasibility Study-Deliverables/20240323... 5/6

3/24/24, 1:09 PM Standard Report
file:///C:/Users/ghurban/SRK Consulting/NA USPR000576 Albemarle Corporation Kings Mountain 2022 Pre Feasibility Study-Deliverables/20240323... 6/6

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Appendices
Appendix C: Technical Memorandum: Conceptual Closure
Surface Water Management Plan for Kings Mountain RSF-A
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SIR
srk consulting 999 Consulting Suite,
99 Consulting
Street,Suite 400
Denver,CO 80202
T:[phone]
F:[phone]
[e-mail]
www.srk.com
Technical Memorandum
To: Claudio Andrade and Morgan Warren, Date: April 17, 2024
Albemarle Corporation
Company: Albemarle Corporation From: Gary Hurban, David
Hoekstra, Jeff Parshley
Copy to: Jeff Osborn, SRK Reviewed by: N/A
Subject: Conceptual Closure Surface Water Project#: USPR000576
Management Plan for Kings Mountain RSF-A
Albemarle TBD Revision#: 01
Document Number:
1. Introduction
SRK Consulting U.S. Inc(SRK)has prepared this memo for Albemarle Corporation (Albemarle)to document the
closure surface water management plan for the Rock Storage Facility A(RSF-A), as part of the Kings Mountain
Pre-feasibility Study(Project), located in Clevleland County, North Carolina. The objective of this assessment is
to identify conceptual level designs and/or stormwater management measures to mitigate the potential for
erosion from the RSF-A slopes in mine closure.
Following cessation of original mining activity in the 1950s, reclamation, regrading and revegetation were not
performed on the original TSF and rock storage facilities. The benched configurations of these facilities were
retained and a closure cover layer was not placed on the surface. Currently, diversion and dense vegetation now
cover the original faciltiies and nominal erosion has been observed. This is interpreted due in large part to the
operational benches of the facilities which intercepted runoff before erosive velocities of were generated.
2. Design Criteria
Through coordination between Albermarle and SRK, the design criteria for closure surface water management
from the slopes of the RSF-A are listed below.
a) Maintain the designed overall slope of 2.5H:1V.
b) Control erosion on the reclaimed slopes of RSF-A.
c) Provide a natural looking landscape similar to native slopes.
To meet the above criteria, the plan for surface water management on the reclaimed RSF-A includes a
combination of regrading and placement of robust best management practices (BMPs) to stabilize the soil until
robust vegetation is established.
GH/DH/JP USPR000576_KM_ClosureSurfWtr RSFA_Memo_Draft01.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc. Page 2
For this pre-feasibility study, a 2-foot-thick closure cover layer is proposed to be placed on the regraded surface
and consists of 1 foot of growth media and 1 foot of"closure cover",. The "closure cover"will be designed in the
next phase of study to have the optimal properties for evaporation/transpiration and vegetation growth.
3. Closure Slope Regrading
The proposed approach is to use partially regraded slopes and a small bench to interecept sheet flow before
shallow concentrated flow is generated.
The operational geometry of the RSF-A slopes generally consists 30-foot-high slopes at angle of repose
separated by 36-foot-wide benches, with an overall slope of 2.5H:1V. To intercept sheet flow before shallow
concentrated flow develops and results in erosion, regrading of the angle of repose slopes to 2H:1V and leaving
a 16' flat "runoff interception bench" is proposed (Figure 1). The bench will be parallel to contour with no
longitudinal slope. Slope lengths from toe to crest of the 2H:1 V slopes will be approximately 67 feet which is less
then the estimated maximum sheet flow distance of 100 feet (National Engineering Handbook (NEH), Chapter
15, 2010).
2'THK CLOSURE COVER LAYER
(1'OF GROWTH MEDIA OVER 1.OF COVER)
t
�1
25
OPERATIONAL
ANGLE OF REPOSE SLOPE(TYP)
13 s
1 -
RUNOFF INTERCEPTION BENCH(TYP)
3001
96-0'
REGRADED SLOPE(TYP) �
GLOBAL SLOPE(BEFORE
CLOSURE COVER LAYER)
2
1 -. 36-C)'
Figure 1: RSF-A Typical Closure Slope Regrading Section
4. Discussion of Approach
The climate at the site is humid subtropical with hot summers and mild winters.The monthly temperature ranges
from a minimum of around 3°F in January to a maximum of around 104°F in August,with an average temperature
of around 60°F. Average monthly precipitation varies between 3 and 5 inches. Average annual precipitation is
42 inches, with an even distribution of rainfall throughout the year and an average annual snowfall of 4 inches.
Surface soils are fertile (high in organic content) and the vegetation is robust and dense. The vegetation is the
primary factor that controls erosion on native slopes.
As noted in the Erosion and Sediment Control Design and Planning Manual for North Carolina (NCSCC, 2013)
"Appropriate vegetation cover affords excellent erosion protection.... is relatively inexpensive, and is typically
the only practical, long-term solution to erosion control of disturbed sites in North Carolina". For these reasons,
vegetation is the proposed primary erosion control measure in mine closure.
GH/DH/JP USPR000576_KM_ClosureSurMtr RSFA_Memo_Draft0l.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc. Page 3
Establishing robust vegetation as quickly as possible will be the key to successful erosion control of the RSF-A
slopes. The soil is most susceptible to erosion immediately following grading activities and BMPs provide a
"bridge"to establishment of mature vegetation and is discussed further below.
4.1 Revegetation and BMPs
Once the cover layer is placed it will be cast seeded with an appropriate seed mix and seedlings will be planted
at an appropriate spacing, both to be determined in future phases of study.
Robust BMPs will be installed immediately following closure regrading and placement of the closure cover layer.
This will include hydro-seeding and coir matting (aka coconut blankets) coupled with straw wattles across the
slope.
4.2 Observation and Monitoring
Observation and monitoring of slope revegetation and performance of BMPs will be employed to identify areas
that require repair or modification before erosion deteriorates. Areas not performing will be addressed with
additional BMPs.
GH/DH/JP USPR000576_KM_ClosureSurWr RSFA_Memo_Draft01.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Appendices
Appendix D: Technical Memorandum: Conceptual Closure
Surface Water Management Plan for Kings Mountain TSF
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Report_USPR000576_Rev03.docx April 2024

SIR
srk consulting 999 Suite Consulting ,Inc.
999 17th Street,Suite 400
Denver,CO 80202
T:[phone]
F:[phone]
[e-mail]
www.srk.com
Technical Memorandum
To: Claudio Andrade and Morgan Warren, Date: April 17, 2024
Albemarle Corporation
Company: Albemarle Corporation From: Gary Hurban, David
Hoekstra, Jeff Parshley
Copy to: Jeff Osborn, SRK Reviewed by: N/A
Subject: Conceptual Closure Surface Water Project#: USPR000576
Management Plan for Kings Mountain TSF
Albemarle TBD Revision#: 01
Document Number:
1. Introduction
SRK Consulting U.S. Inc(SRK)has prepared this memo for Albemarle Corporation (Albemarle)to document the
closure surface water management plan for the Tailings Storage (TSF), as part of the Kings Mountain Pre-
feasibility Study (Project), located in Clevleland County, North Carolina. The objective of this assessment is to
identify conceptual level designs and/or stormwater management measures to mitigate the potential for erosion
from the TSF slopes in mine closure.
Following cessation of original mining activity in the 1950s, reclamation, regrading and revegetation were not
performed on the original TSF and rock storage facilities. The benched configurations of these facilities were
retained and a closure cover layer was not placed on the surface. Currently, diversion and dense vegetation now
cover the original faciltiies and nominal erosion has been observed. This is interpreted due in large part to the
operational benches of the facilities which intercepted runoff before erosive velocities of were generated.
2. Design Criteria
Through coordination between Albermarle and SRK, the design criteria for closure surface water management
from the slopes of the TSF are listed below.
a) Maintain the designed overall slope of 2.5H:1V.
b) Control erosion on the reclaimed slopes of TSF.
c) Provide a natural looking landscape similar to native slopes.
To meet the above criteria,the plan for surface water management on the reclaimed TSF includes a combination
of regrading and placement of robust best management practices (BMPs) to stabilize the soil until robust
vegetation is established.
GH/DH/JP USPR000576_KM_ClosureSurfWtr TSF_Memo_Draft01.docx
April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc. Page 2
For this pre-feasibility study, a 2-foot-thick closure cover layer is proposed to be placed on the regraded surface
and consists of 1 foot of growth media and 1 foot of"closure cover",. The "closure cover"will be designed in the
next phase of study to have the optimal properties for evaporation/transpiration and vegetation growth.
3. Closure Slope Regrading
The proposed approach is to include a small bench to interecept sheet flow before shallow concentrated flow is
generated.
The TSF will be constructed with a perimeter embankment constructed of waste rock. It will be constructed in
lifts with continuous slopes (not benched) and will be revegetated following construction of the final lift (i.e.,
concurrent reclamation). To intercept sheet flow before shallow concentrated flow develops and and rilling
erosion begins, a 16' flat "runoff interception bench" is proposed (Figure 1) for each 30-foot of height of
embankment. The bench will be parallel to contour with no longitudinal slope. Slope lengths from toe to crest of
the 2H:1 V slopes will be approximately 67 feet which is less then the estimated maximum sheet flow distance of
100 feet(National Engineering Handbook(NEH), Chapter 15, 2010).
Over time, sediment will work its way down the slope and deposit at the toe of the 2H:1V regraded slope. A
positive draining slope will develop outward across the bench and more runoff and less infiltration of precipitation
over the TSF slope will occur over time. This coupled with dense vegetation will make the benches blend with
the slopes over time. Thus,the runoff interception bench approach will meet design criteria"C" (refer Section 2).
2'THK CLOSURE COVER LAYER
('I'OF GROWTH MEDIA OVER 1-OF COVER)
2-5
RUNOFF INTERCEPTION BENCH(TYP) GLOBAL SLOPE OF WASTE ROCK
30.0' EMBANKMENT(BEFORE CLOSURE
18-0' 1 COVER LAYER)
REGRADED SLOPE(TYP)
2
Figure 1: TSF Typical Closure Slope Regrading Section
4. Discussion of Approach
The climate at the site is humid subtropical with hot summers and mild winters.The monthly temperature ranges
from a minimum of around YF in January to a maximum of around 104°F in August,with an average temperature
of around 60°F. Average monthly precipitation varies between 3 and 5 inches. Average annual precipitation is
42 inches, with an even distribution of rainfall throughout the year and an average annual snowfall of 4 inches.
Surface soils are fertile (high in organic content) and the vegetation is robust and dense. The vegetation is the
primary factor that controls erosion on native slopes.
As noted in the Erosion and Sediment Control Design and Planning Manual for North Carolina (NCSCC, 2013)
"Appropriate vegetation cover affords excellent erosion protection.... is relatively inexpensive, and is typically
GH/DH/JP USPR000576_KM_ClosureSurfWtr TSF_Memo_Draft01.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc. Page 3
the only practical, long-term solution to erosion control of disturbed sites in North Carolina". For these reasons,
vegetation is the proposed primary erosion control measure in mine closure.
Establishing robust vegetation as quickly as possible will be the key to successful erosion control of the TSF
slopes. The soil is most susceptible to erosion immediately following grading activities and BMPs provide a
"bridge"to establishment of mature vegetation and is discussed further below.
4.1 Revegetation and BMPs
Once the cover layer is placed it will be cast seeded with an appropriate seed mix and seedlings will be planted
at an appropriate spacing, both to be determined in future phases of study.
Robust BMPs will be installed immediately following closure regrading and placement of the closure cover layer.
This will include hydro-seeding and coir matting (aka coconut blankets) coupled with straw wattles across the
slope.
4.2 Observation and Monitoring
Observation and monitoring of slope revegetation and performance of BMPs will be employed to identify areas
that require repair or modification before erosion deteriorates. Areas not performing will be addressed with
additional BMPs.
GH/DH/JP USPR000576_KM_ClosureSurfWtr TSF_Memo_Draft01.docx April 2024

SRK Consulting(U.S.), Inc.
2024 Conceptual Closure Plan—Kings Mountain Appendices
Appendix E: Closure Drawing Package
J P/M W KingsMountain_Closure_Repor[_USPR000576_Rev03.dou April 2024

uxs-svone,adom su3 JM ass w+sI WII s000szoz\ M10-Awns MIMq aja ZZuII sauN wo odp ayEI 9s00oadsn VNT)uwosuoo„ummAw,s mo
6mp'suo0eiad0 to pug den 84IS Peseyd :3WVN 311d
wnlylll-apewagly 038311tl 51 n1 ONIMVHO3H1
SAOU
so �� neij SdVW 311S JNISVHd :fgpaeradp HONHVGAA WAHI I
�1NdV TH91V \\� Ntl°3A0°tl3Hljl 133d
103f021d JNINIW Nlb'1Nn0W SJNI�i 133road °JNINIw v y � a �/ �� _
ON ONIMtlNO NIV1Nn0W SONIN
OOOL OOS OSZ 0
Z 0099LSadsn IDAMUd SNOI1V'd3d0 ONIJna AJVA IIIM N0I1VO0110VX33H1
NOISI H _ON 10AMMIJ NHS BOA a38tld38d BE80N SV 31VWIXOJddv a3J301SN0O 39 a-inOHS SJOOINOO I1d 31ON
VZOVOWPID ONIJ11WJ3d BOA 03nesi Z
4ZOZ/8l/4 (6 21`d3A MINIM W31SAS Al"laa000 6ZOZ/S0/60 M31A3J 1N3I10 BOA 03nesi L
tl° SN0UVbOd0300N3 builinsuoo ilia �L
Of-03AOJddtl l3 NMtlHa 31V0 NOI1dIJOS30 'A3J
d11H 91 A9a3Jtld38d Of-awAi1 J ornAN91SAal SN0ISIAAH
AVM11IdS
H1noS 8 MON
NOI1V1S8nS 'NOIIVIS land AVa '
WMI10313 AN6'6Z/0£Z �\ (ZZ 310N)XOVHS
dOHS NMOOAVI -
- 3J
30NVN31NIVW 00 AO0103O� A I
NOIVHIN30N0O (AH3AII3019 0NIXonui)
(ISWtl ld S66) SS3m-L n8 ✓ NISVS ONI11I1S 30V?JO1S 31SVM - _ S301jd0 Aiiun03S
1N3A3dNd
13A31 J31VM XVW OJVA NMOOAVI
301 � ;y / Sf103NVll3OSIW 1nOOVOI SONIIIVl
�
3SnOH32iVM / )IOV813S
JO1VNIN30NO0
V3JV ONVl13M 3
1N3WJINVSW3
3OVJ01S N31VM `%% ONimina
lnOOV01
dWnd H31VMMH SONIIIVl - -
JV30HOAMS
. 1 J01VJ3N3O IVOIN10313
AON30NM10 -
30VJO1S1N3OV3J �� 19ONOd 08M
Miming NOUVIOIJ
'13Wd0I J30N Al1N3dnO (3O
NOlV001 N01V19n5 MIN 3H1 ONnOdV SOV SS:100V ONV 3OVNIVda 'SZ NISVO
3OVJO1S J31VM -
XIN
'NOISI GNA
3H1 NI 1O3d X3 3JV S31VOdf1 30Vd?J31N1 HO1VH-NJS 3H1 1V M31A3J \\
Al1N3dJn0 OSIV W31SA5 30VNIVda IIVd3A0 'NJS A9 NOISIA3H
a3 J30Nn 1NVld A Iiv �
AI1Nddno SI 11 SV NMOHS lON X 3Sd ONnOdV NOU31700 3OVNIVd0 bZ V I� \ lON
1N3W1t92LL J31VM \
JOIVJIN3ON0O \ i� W 19 ONOd OJM 06
SONISSOdO a3NNVld IIV 30 NOIS3a nZZ'' p
1JOddns 01 (INV '3I91SV33 SI 1N31N3SV3 SWVnTM O1N1 1N3HOVOdON3 V38V ONIN3)IOIH-L
O]H1?Jnd 31 31VnIVA3 01 a3aNIMN003d SI SINn 3H1 30 NOIIVOOI A i J 9� VAlIl10Vd dy
ONI011nB NOIlV211l1d %` �/�p'� '>i �G
1OVX3 3H1 30 A3Adns OVAOJOAH IVN011100V 1NIAISV3 SWVIHHIM V i v -D 3OVJOIS NOOJ
3SO0H 3ONVH0/ N331NV0
30 A3AJnS ONION3d d01Vd1N30N0O 30 H1n05 S3IJVONn08 add £Z
/301dd0 JOIVJIN3ONO0
y O
'AINO N011VIIVISNI ONIaIIna HOSS3HMOO %
M3N 530nIONI X3dVO *3ALVI1INI ONIAVS 1SOO V SV OVd IdN / % V 1 �%
H1dON :]Hi NO ONIOIInB ONIISIX3 30 3Sn 0NI1VN1S3ANI Wb91 AOOI03O ZZ ONISN3dSla 1N3Ot9J �' \ Q i s �� I
- \ ZL310N _ 31 N
M31A3d
V1V0 OId13WAH1V9 ONION3d dWnd J31VM MVd 3Hl 30 N011VOOI IVNI3 ' lZ - g .,
3OVJ0 S NOOJ
NI O ( llnB SWO (3Jnlnd) 1
� .. _
'0313I3a VO)103H0'OZ W111d)IO0J EL 31ON VJ1N30N00
/ � .
6113
�. /
'03ZnVNl3 SI 103I3S a03 a3131d W00 SI NVId ONIaVdO V3d NI V OOIInS SWO 1 S )�A a O O NIaIInS OI - X33JO H1n0S
s '-� >iomi 31VJ1N30N30N00 /
3ON0 03Wdd N0O 3 nl 8 01 NMOHS SV A181 Sd33 1N3 1V d WOf0A3AN00 '6l - ' � - ;� / NOVSI3S
NOI1VJVd3S OII3NOVW ��� J133JO S ONIX �_ �_ V3JV aNVl13M
'b O3a Sdn01NOO INV d3Sndd10 dVJd1d
SNVIde SaVOd 1AVH (INV WId3d V-ASV (INV SA3d dVW 3115 WA OMO J3AJ0 AHV1OJ \� ONIa11ne EMIJ-HOS
ON11InSNOO NJS NO a3SV9 NOISda 3dn1OnJ1SVd3NI ONINIW 'L L �� `i> A/ ` �- _ -_- o 1J3Aim HONE
/!� )133JO H1n0S
"NI-3111SV3 `£0-d1 AEI t, dOd 03Ad3S3d � � - C� _ '�/ A (�- � 6l'1310N o'-
OVOJ aNV 11Wn ALJ3d Odd N33M139 V3aV 'AVM 30 1HOId A�Ibb �� �� =1J 3yJdNIS
�
H11M SIHSV-10 dV31O 01 adNOIW-3d ATIVOOI 38 01 aVOII NNI AVO110H 9L -� <. / q c
N0I1V1S ONI13nd
'X3dVO 3H1 NI V3JV 311dX001S 9131ON a JVO llV21
a03 03MOIIV N339 SVH V3dV a01Vd1N3ONOO 3H1 NIH11M 3Nn3dId SVO 033d1NVld (/ �� � lnoavol llVJ
NIV1NnOW SONIN AO A11O , 9 30 NOIIVOOI3?J 031O3dX3 SI 1NW3SV3 / . � d0HS ONV V38V ------ 31VJ1N30NOO
ONIlOO1 J3HSnJ0 _
NIV1NnOW SONIN 30 A110 HlIM HSVIO OVOd 30nIONl 01 03131a0W 38 (8310N)AVS j J3HSnJ0 _ @1VA 3JI1
01 3JV S11Wn ALd3d Odd 1VH1 SI N011dWnSSV 'V3dV S,J01VJ1NONOO J3ddn83dVOSONVI HSVM 3101H3A 1HO11 AJVI1J31 1, ONOd a3S _
3H1 NIH11M "d0 IVId1SnONI 9NINOZ-3J 30 N0UMNIdNOO ONION3d '91 / ,
301dd0 J3HSnJO ���� _ NOLLVIS
'0313I3a *17 ;� AlIJnOM131VO J AJVON003S 131 Id V38V NOLLV1nOJ103J
JOIVJINMN0O -sr;, s`„ OVOJ InVH H31VM/M AVS HSVM
'3bn10nJ1SVd3NI M3N INV N33J0 SONIN N3M138 3I8VIIVAV J3HSnHo AJVWIJd ��'s- o / 1N3Wd1f1O3 M'd3H
10N SI dVO 31VnO30V 3?J3HM 03dIn03d 38 AVW IIVM ONINIV13d ^ V '�
ISM '3Nn1n0 3H1 30 1SOW NOd 03Sn SI 3d0IS G1 Al NMOHS SV 3I01SV33 V3d CM ON a0N '(S1InS3d IVOINH031030 ONIO (AJ3AI13aN3d) NOIS3a - rd / � S)IMdl J31VM Sdvynd ONV
IIAIO ON18n0 03NI33J aNV 031VOnVA 38 Ol SOVd IIAIO ]IV 30 3NII1n0 '£ L 'B ONIXom-L) 301ddO
' � -IV0Ia3VY
301dd0 AlIJn03 N
Ol
0d3V81 AI 3ivo Hinos SVO NO N WOO
AVM-3N0 ONV NVIJ1S3a3d ONIWf5SV AI1N3JanO M31A3J ALIOVdVO OVOI A13VS
3NI1 AOV38
ONIISIX3 NO 03SV8 03W813NOO 38 01 300188 LLN ONIISIX3 30 3Sn ZL
a81 # ONIMVNN Ol d3338 SINECI 300188 99-1 M3N 803 ' Ll pO�� n0
1 V3uv lno-llnd XonJl
ViSd� - S301dd0 AlIJ3S
SNO
ONIOdVHO dVO OId1O313 HlIM 0301A08d 38 01 Sl0l ONIN2iVd NIVW IIV 'Ol p .-aO� avd WOJ � �� � 4 ,. ,.. �� 31V0 H1JON 31ON , ` c0
'V38V 3H1 NI AVM 30 301dd0 /( L __ �Od�
1HOIN 3I8V11NS 30 N0SIn0OV ONVI N nOM
ONIOd 31nOJ 1d N3O 3ONOO MXZ '6 y ,\O 111 S30UJO �- n0H3JVM
103fOJd
o rdO\ J H031 // i' �/�
3S
3115 ONIAV3I 01 JOIJd ❑3HSVM ♦ 031VJO31NI� ` i � -- S301dd03NIW
38 INNS 031IVHdSV 10N 3JV 1VH1 SOVOd NO ONIAI80 S3IOIH3A HIS N� AVS HSVM ,' ✓ li�l ,V �\
IIV 1VH1 SI NOIld WNSSV iNidN O ' -t1NnAno3 3H1 01 S1NW11WWOO '�O /i( ! \ '� 3sn0H
31OIH3A 1HOIl WOOD //// r� / A A _
103f`02id 2i0/aNV SNOIlVIn038 IVOOI NO a3SVe 3I8VW2i38IV � �, � � � A A � � 3ONVH03NIW
A8 03MIUN00 38 01 S1N3W381nO38 AV8 HSVM 3IOIH3A 1H0n '8 IOJIN0O 3NIW % �--- _
a31VJO31Nl li i i _ - - d0HS d8M
OVd I3n3 IVN0111a0V SIHl d03 X3dV0 3Hl �� ��4 �i - N331NV0
NI 1NVW N38 SVH 30NVMOIIV ON S1dV1S SNOIIVN1dO NIHM 03N1Ar)1d AJ0IVJ0SVl
SV a3W330 Al 30Vd01S I3n3 IVN0111a0V d03 803 a3MOIIV N338 SVH WOOD 1001
30Vd5 IVNOI1VG �3OVJ01S NNV1 ❑ A-3IjS 3H1 idOcid3c]O S O1 a3?JIn03J /VBO- S39n-iHS
38 alnOM AVO d3 H10 Ad3A3 ONM3-3d 'SNOIlVd3d0 ONINIW 1dOddnS SJO0lN00lld 3OVJOlS 39nl
01 d03 O3MOIIV N338 3AVH SNNV1 031NnOW a1NS IVO000'OL (Z)OM1 'L SNOI1VJ3dO dO aN3 /
HIS SSOdOV 031O3dX3 3aV SNOIIVOOI 3IIdNO01S IVN0111a(IV 30NVN3-LNIVVY monJl
'M31A3IN NIONn ),ININJnO SiN1VGN1AO:1N 3OVd01S VIa3W H1MO?10 '9 -
'OI33VNi SN011VNIdO NO 30VH01S
NOuond1SNOO d03 030NWW003d lON 3ONVd1N3 3IOJIO N3AVd 30 3Sn 'S V103W HIMOJO
'X3IdWOO 3H1 SSOKOV (3Jnlnd)
JOOPJJOO ON11OINNOOd31NI J03 MOIIV 01 SdOHS ONV 3SnOH3INVM 'b N0UV1S ONIOJVHO
'3Nn❑ /L8 M31A3a a30Nn ),IiN3]Ndno ON11nOd mtv IVn1d3ONOO '£ O1H10313 AAV3H ON V38V
O
ZL aNOd NMOOAVI
£0 L00-IO-l9WN „ � -� 3dO1SNlSXOV8 lid lId J313i/I
'OOL00-I3- L9WN 01 d333d 'SONOd aNV NVId 30VNIVda SOVd IdN a03 Z
SJnO1NnOo
'330-Nnd OVOdiwd 30nIONI 01 S3ZIS 3H1 01 HO110 OVOd 3dO1SXOV8 lid V3JV
InVH 'N011VAIIl 3WVS 3H1 1V ONn03 NIHM LALL 01 03SV3dONI 38 NMOGAVI
01 OVOdI1Vd 0NV Wd39/HO110 OVOd InVH N33M139 3ONV1SIa WNWINIW ' L 7i N
\ 3OV21O1S
J3ddn83dVOSONVI 1LaN0d ONIJ31VM3a
H313VIJ3d

bey w, jo lsud dew ajis o seumde"euiseud s040VZDnGV000\519J-AW1 41NBeaj aid MZ uiqunoN s6uq WWJe op GWe IV 9L9000adsn WbuNnsuno ms\uMG�m:0
6mp'amsolO Lsod den a4IS Peseyd :3WVN 311d
wnlyLll-apewagly 038311tl 51 n1 ONW1VH03H1
so 3� neij SdVW 311S JNISVHd :Agpaleradp H�NHVGAAtl3W 10JI
�T\dV TH91V \\� Ntl03A08tl3Hljl 133d
103f021d JNINIW Nlb'1NnOW SJNI�i 133road �Nwlw v y � a �/ �� _
ON ONIMtlNO NIV1NnOW SE)NIN
OOOL OOS OSZ 0
Z 0099LSadsn io3foad SNOI1V83dO ONimn0 A8VA 11IM N01IVO01 IOVX33H1
NOISI H _ON 13AMHd N8S BOA 038tld38d d£80N SV 31VWIXONddV O3H30ISNOO 38 O1nOHS SilnO1NOO I1d 310N
4ZOZ/8l/4 bZOZ/BL/60 ONI111W213d 210d 03nSSl z
N O UVA V�0321 1 V N 13 W31SAS AIVNIGHOOD bzOZ/LL/60 MMA38 1N3110 BOA 03nssi L
tl9 uilinsuoo ilas
df-03AONddtl l3 NMtlHO 31V0 NOI1dOlOS30 'A321
3lLH ONIMWa A9 O3NVd38d df-03M31A3N l3 N9IS3O SNOISIAAH
NOIlVlsens AVM11IdS
1VOINIO313 AN6'bZ/OEZ
J3M3SdJV11NVS
/ NISVS 0N11111S DMISIX3
HlVd 0NINTVM / I \ V3HV ONV113M
30IM li-Ol 0NUSIX3 `
13NNVHO I /'
VZOZ 0103AOW3H 11Id / / y \• . (N33HO H1nos O1NI
.�� MO Id Ol O3H0V3?JB)
l9 ONOd 0?JM _
AI / \'
� Y /
l3NNVH0
/ ^ • Y5'a / < \• 1N3W30VNVW
1N3W3N011V / d <� \ ?J31VM V-dSil
I1J AM 3N3MOd OEZ �, y��
l NISVB /. /
r 1N3WN0
21 11V
. 30VJO1S 31VM � lntM 213W210d SNOW
.�• /� _ OVON 301M 1d91.
CO
O� RYy
060
G9'Zd03d01S » d-
LO / �5� 1V8o10 V 0103OVH03H
i
\ Iova VunloVd3ovaolsNooa
NIVli Ol O31YO0131NV1H3lVd
ONV lid Ol O31V0o1321 lb'IJ31VW
X A11110tld 30"O1S NOON � -
N33HOHlnos
N0V813S
S�V3HV ONV113M
M33J0SONIN
OVOI SS300V
ONISSONO 3Hns0101SOd 3OIM 1d9 L JOd
M01d1 l/3lVMS S11WI1 0NIOVB0 O3SOdONd
H0V3?J8 d0 � •� I // �\
6133NO SONIN O1NI `
/• ,� /, J Mold 01(13HOV3H8) 1 OvouliVH
�' /' •�' / L ONOd 03S
/ ('dA1)3N11 MOId
^
�\...\ ill 1VM 321nSO10
N31N30 A001ONH031
\�Y NIV1NnOW SONIN 312NW381V \\17 ('dAl)OVOU SS300V I
-a0^d NV 31tl0 SS300V 3NnsoiolSOd 30IM 1dSL
(N33210 SONIN 3NNVH0 LF
302MH0S10IO 3NVl lld - • - / �/ �' O�O
d0\^O NOIlV00-1 / (N011VA3l3 �' �0��
1Tddlno 3NV111d / 1dOLS 0111LINOV8)
lid 31VW111n
// �/ /� /•��� � 31V0 SS300V
1 /
1 ' /
IlVMH01H d0 3003 ONO-TV
----- �� 030VId SNOTS ON1NHVM
MinsmoH31JV \� .` � � --- / 0 ONV WJ38 A13JVS lid
SHV3A 09A131VWIX06ddV
13A31 3NV1 lid O31VWIlS3 ✓ ��
(lid 01NI MOId 01 O3HOVM19)
3dO1SNOV81Id ONINIW-3Hd ,� �\ �,.),C ZL ONOd J313WIJ3d
OVON ssAoov 3NnSOlO 1SOd 3OIM 1dSl AUVONnos
ANI-1 MOId N31VM 3Nns= — < — A-MdOHd
J i'
G N 3 J3l (lid O1NI MOld 0103HOV3HEI) N
,\i' LL ONOd H313WMd

Reo
4 /
n � "
\ mo
850
0
/ULTIMATE PIT
(BACKFILL TO /ppppp�
EL.570Fr) s U
}
Q
� Q
o
o a
� o
h
,
d
o ;J'
d %
m
n
EXPLANATION GENERAL NOTES REFERENCES
ft FUTURE GROUND CONTOURS L FUTURE GROUND CONTOURS BASED ON L MAP PROJECTED TO NAD83 NORTH CAROLINA
^� (MAIORIMINOR)10 FEET INTERVAL CONTOURS FROM PHASE 4 DESIGN AND EXISTING STATE PLANE(US FOOT)_
— --- PROPERTY BOUNDARY GROUND_
DRAINAGES
PONDS
REVISIONS aaan MNGn
SPA[ consulting CLOSURE PLAN FOR ULTIMATE PIT
NC&'iF ,scr.
.� ALBEMARLE 4/170024 B� � MNa n
FIGURE u I
_ __ _�� s...MnNGsar_isu7 D KINGS MOUNTAIN MINING PROJECT eUSPR0011576
ClUmmlRga RKC0w14Mg USPRW 76MM aRCwpamOngMsMw r20IIPm Feaslbilll�SNJy ClOsure0rawings\USFRN0576 W UKP" JROwg

A
1040 104a
1020 1020
1000 1000
980 ,! 980
960 EXISTING GROUND 960
94a 940
924 920
944 L 900
88Q 880
860 860
840 - 840
820 — — L 820
80a 800
z D 780 ULTIMATE PIT 780
¢H 760 760
�i 740 740
O (D 720 720
0 d 700 700
w 68a 680
�
¢ 664 660
W U 640 640
620 i BACKFILL TO 620
} 600 EL. 570 FT 600
58a 580
56a 560
54a 540
520 520
50a 500
480 480
460 460
440 440
42a 420
404 400
380 380
-2+00 0+00 2+00 4+00 6+00 8+00 10+00 12+00 14+00 16+00 18+00 20+00 22+00 24+00 26+00 28+00 30+00 32+00
STATION (FT.)
rri rri O S O O O G a o 0 5 0 O O O O m co 9 9 Co o m �
_ _ _ _ _ _ a _ rn of Oi Gi V v r vi
aC7 CG br _ _ cr!
m m 0 m f� r� m tv � ? co CID CID N [V N N
d3 � � Q7 � Q7 QS OS Cp aP C9 aD Ip Ca CO CO Cp 09 m aP +� � CO CID CC CO 06 CIO
L7 C7 L7 u- L7 L7 L7 L9 Lu u- L7 L7 L7 u- LL L7 L7 L9 L7 u- C7 la L7 u- Lu ILL L7 u- C� u- L7 L7
W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL u.I LL W LL
EXPLANATION GENERAL NOTES
EXISTING GROUND 1. FUTURE GROUND CONTOURS BASED ON
FUTURE GROUND CONTOURS FROM PHASE 4 DESIGN AND EXISTING 0 125.0003 250.0005
GROUND.
FEET
REVISIONS DESIGN:EUJO REVIEWED:DH PREPARED BY: DRAWING TrFLE
REV. DESCRIPTION DATE DRAWN:J6 APPROVED:JO ��� t+�11^f L+1 1 I}I 1^f ry CLOSURE PLAN FOR ULTIMATE PIT-
A INTERNAL REVIEW "'N2D24 COORDINATE SYSTEM: consulting
1 1 v?u.1 ` 1 1 y
e INTERNAL REVIEW W7F21324 CROSS SECTION A(LOOKING NORTH EAST)
NMF PROJECT:
AA L B E M A R L E D 4117I2024 ATE: REVISION:B DRAVANG NO.
}'�II ''p (}�]
IF THE ABOVE BAR SRN PROJECT NO.: F I G U R E O 2 DOES NOT MEASURE 1 INCH,
FILE IJIWE:❑SPRJOB57B IW ❑rPd Clot JB.dwg
THE❑ROWING SCALE IS ALTERED KINGS MOUNTAIN MINING PROJECT USPR000576
CmsersybegaylSRK ConsultingANA USPR000576 Albemarle Corporation Kings Mountain 7022 Pre Feasibility Study-IntemaR1600_Clasure0rawings%USPR000576_KM_UltPit_Clas_JB.dwg

B
100a 1000
980 980
96a 960
940 r, — EXISTING 940
- 920
900 _ _ GROUND 900
880 l 880
86a 860
840 840
820 —— — — —— 820
80a 800
�
780 780
760 ULTIMATE PIT 76a
z 74d 740
_O 720 720
70a 70a
680 BACKFILL TO 6 660
p (D 640 EL.570 FT 640
62a 62a
¢ 600 600
w 58d 580
w 56a 560
w U 540 540
� 52a 52a
a 50a 500
w 48a 480
46a 460
440 440
42d 420
40a 400
38a 380
360 360
34a 340
320 320
300 300
280 280
260 260
-2+00 0+00 2+00 4+00 6+00 8+00 10+00 12+00 14+00 16+00 18+00 20+00 22+00 24+00 26+00 28+00 30+00 32+00 34+013 36+00 38+00 40+00 42+00
STATION (FT.)
IDS u`ri r; m m Vn C4 8 8 8 g S S 2 2 o a v � a o v o o c c � f' r' v o o o n M CID 00
cri n^i t v In 0 r i chi G' W _ v_ v v y _ _ a v v v v v ,° chi chi(L 13 Im (11 O Do (Y T T T T T T T T r r T T T T r r
``nn r^ 'dnn] rr^^ 'Q^] ,^ r^ rr^^ rr nn r n 'Qn] ,�Qn ram^ ram^ ran ran 'fin ran ram^ ,�^^ ram^^ ram^ '�R 'fin 'fin ,fin ram^^ ,0�5yy `CO^^ `fin 'fin 'o^^ ram^ rann rCO^ ram^/� ran rQn7 ,�n1
V V V V V V V V V V V V l'J C7 C7 V V V V t;a C! V V V 0 V V t;a V tJ VJ V V t;a V V V V tJ y V M
W LL W LL W LL W u- W LL W LL W u- W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W u- W u- W u- W LL w LL w LL W u-
EXPLANATION GENERAL NOTES
EXISTING GROUND 1. FUTURE GROUND CONTOURS BASED ON
FUTURE GROUND CONTOURS FROM PHASE 4 DESIGN AND EXISTING 0 175.0004 350.0007
GROUND.
FEET
REVISIONS DESIGN:EUJO REVIEWED:DH PREPARED BY: DRAWINGTirIF-
REV. DESCRIPTION DATE DRAWN:J6 APPROVED:JO ��� t+�11^f L+1 1 I}I 1^f ry CLOSURE PLAN FOR ULTIMATE PIT-
A INTERNAL REVIEW D9H5r2D24 COORDINATE SYSTEM: consulting
1 1 v?u.1 ` 1 1 y
e INTERNAL REVIEW 34e17F21324 CROSS SECTION B(LOOKING NORTHWEST)
NMF PROJECT:
�� A L B E M A R L E DATE: REVISION: DRAINING NO
4117I2024 B } ��}}�/J�
IF THE ABOVE BAR
SRN PROJECT NO.: FIGURE 03 DOES NOT MEASURE 1 INCH,
FILE IJIWE:❑SPRJOo57B IW ❑rPd Clot JB.dwg
THE❑RAWING SCALE IS ALTERED KINGS MOUNTAIN MINING PROJECT USPR000576
CmsersybegaylSRK ConsultingLNA USPRD00576 Albemarle Corporation Kings Mountain 7022 Pre Feasibility Study-IntemaR160D_Clasure0rawings%USPR000576_KM_UltPit_Clas_JB.dwg

fWPp M0l3Isud y ASH 40'J3a-9LS 00?JdSMWR nenail 0o MSEl%fuW0 OPo Sj Wgo-FDnIS AVI"sedj a{+ Z uie unoN s5ulN t I Oo OO GPEu W9LgDWHdsnVNXbuwm mHmuuNaS n�o
03H311tl SI 3ltlOS ONW1VHa 3H1 6mp'wnsolo Lmd X8V-dS2 L003a-9LS000adSn :3WtlN 3lld IVANBINI lOOd SZ(aONIWRIorm)
'HONI L 3HOstl3W ION S3Oa San0lNO3 ONnoms ONIISIX3 OBZS 3NI1 a3M3S 0NI1SIX3
OM 103M0 ld 3NIW NIV1Nf10W SONIN wmg8rj-opewoq(y �7V7�T `�/' ``(^ HVg3AOgtl3HIdI
NV-ld NOUVWV-10321 :Aq pW7 odo Ig' Q V Y � [ qj V `` ANVONnoe ),Lniotla a3S0d0ad 3NI1 SV00NI1SIX3 —^—^---
ON ONIMtlHO 3NIW NItl1Nnow SONIN sV3NV aNVl13M 3NI130NDa 0NI1SIX3
V 9LS000Hdsn IDAMUd
:NOISIA3H ON IDAMHd NHS BOA a3HVd3Hd AVMIIVa OIN1O3l3 ON00a0N3aNn
ld EHOVN 3NVld 31tl1S ON bZOZ'60'6L A111191SV3a Dad BOA a3nSSI H aVON aDAVd OIHI0913 C1V3Ha3A0
, —, —
4ZOZ4061 SN0103S 4NV NVId 311S /�\ WISASAIVNIaH000 bZOZ'60'60 M3IA3a1N3110 BOA aD11lWgns VIISIX3 —
31tla dVW NOUVWVl032i X-dS21 '8 V-d S2l b u i1 I n S u Oo ills ggH 43AOHddtl W �4 31V0 NOI1dwOs3a A3a 3lOHNVW a3M3S ON 15aX3 3anlOnalSVa;NI�0aN3doad
.l?�`dNIWIl3bdS1 3lLLLONIMVHa ANUAWd3Hd 9M OAM31A3H gowsf N9IS3a SNOISIA38
GN3O3l
a
/I > a1OAH3S3H `
X33HO H1nos
.b=d3NOS Ob=d3NOS z lJOJl31 1tl3O JNIO293 nM3A 2 m -
b P --
aNnomo
r
N3AOO ' CL
ld L ONIlS X3 ('dAl)HON39 NOLWDON311Nl aaONna
(E lIV1310 O1 a3a3a) � ��-
('dAl) 3dOlS 030Va03N
ONINII 13NNVH0 dVNdIN V
L ♦J
('dAl)3dOlS 3SOd3N a0 310NV JuA O 91 '\ J13NOO ltlNld d �
IVN0llVa3d0 'ld 9£ ld OH (OVd)X-dSN O -
VIa3W HIMOaO 1A L / &a
� aDAOO IVOIdAl
(1VIN31VW a3AOO a0 d aDAO VI031N! HLMOaO a0.0
N3AVl aDA0O 3N0S0W JIHI.Z
(.OUL =.d :31VOS) I 'OI3NOO ltlNld
8-8 N01103S X-dSb v-dsa „
OH+u 00+9L 00+bL 00+ZL Oo+oi, (1a) NOLLVls 00+8 00+9 00+b 00+Z 00+0 �� OV0a3ansolo
1SOd 3OIM'1dSL
lIIaXOVg NOON=1SVM OVN aNV (VIa3W HLNOa
OOB
a NOIIVAVOX3 NOL VaNnOd dO lIWII 'XONddV a0 '1d1, N3AO M=lA03 a0'1d1)
N3 3WIa3d 00H \
OSH ` / _ _ _ _ — OSH j J z�a / sru S
\ 30VdNns SONIIIVI Nnomo 0NI1SIX3 J } A \ i
- -006 OOfi
� a
a '
��\ - - - - - - - - - - - - - . / S300V
—
avoas
3NnSOlo 1SOd \ �,
096 OVON OSfi < BOA S1I1/4I1 ONIOVNO
a313W1a3d � � 1;_ � � V�• � � '°�e ® '
OOOL ---- Z 1 HOaV
X-dSa LnOS 3
X33aO H00S AOW3a �—
HO11030MJIV21aa3Nll
OlS 71VN3A0
X33aO HLOOS
OSOL 3d OSOL � (£11V130 N3d3N) asn
S'Z 1DNNVHO a313Wla3d ONV
OOLL OwL aVOa 3anSOlO-1SOd 'NIW1d SL a3Atlla O 3ansolO
OSLL 3ansolO lV a31VA OX3 30 01 USL L , -��� & \ .
(dko 11 mia MOIa
1VIN31VW XOOa 3 SVM X-dSa
i N0O3
oozL aazL
(.001, =.d 31VOS) 133d
V-V N0I103S V-=Ml 009 Doc 09L 0
( id) NOIIVIS
98+61 00+9L 00+9L 00+bL 00+ZL 00+OL 00+8 00+9 00+b 00+Z 00+0
099 NOLLVAVOX3 NOI1VONnOa 099 ,OZ-..L :31VOS
a0 IWII 'XONddV
L
aNnoaO ONusIx3
('dAl) NOI103S l3NNVH0 21313WRI3d =lMn n10
006 — �— � 006
\ - - - - - -� _ -- - ON00N00NIlSIX3� _
096 � — — -- - -- - - — _ _ _ — 096
NOON 3LSVM18 jNVS 0NI1SIX30310NIW00 / m
m
00L 11I3 IND
OVON N313WIa3d =----
C ON aVOa 3anSOlO-1SOd O
SZ OSOL / I 19NNVHOa313 Ia3d WlL 090E 'NIW.S b
zi
L .JAJ
aNV AVON 3Nnsi 1SOd S — 1DNNVHO
(VIa31NHLMOaO Oda3AO a3A0O aO.L) V-dsa Vw3W HLMOaO '1dL N313WIa3d
DOLL a3Atll 3AOO 3N0SOlO XHl�Z DOLL 3ansolO N3AOO
L w H-LIM DOVaans a3ddla GVOa 3NnSOlo V-dSN
L L 1IV13a 0NI0VN03N 3anSOl 3ansoi3-1SOd
OS L L S Z S.Z OSL L
(M31A Nb"ld NI ONIHOlVH
3dOlS lltla3 O Ag NMOHS SV a3OVld) 'OSa 'VIa
OOZE 3dOlS llVN3AO OOZE AG
HIM a3AVl dVNdIN 'XHl'ld Z
OSZ1 OSZI.

e
0 1m zoo
q FEET
RAM
�G�R
0
CULVERT TO BE
\ REMOVED AT CLOSURE
DURING EXCAVATION OF
\ ns OUTLET SPILLWAY
SEDIMENT POND 1 \
n\
00
P�51
KINGS CREEK
O f
EXPLANATION GENERAL NOTES
ggo FUTURE GROUND CONTOURS L FUTURE GROUND CONTOURS BASED ON MERGED
-�—� (MNORIMINOR)2 FEET INTERVAL CONTOURS FROM PHASE 4 DESIGN AND EXISTING
CULVERT GROUND-
- DRAINAGES REFERENCES
PONDS 1- MAPPROJECTEDTONAD83NORTHCAROLINA
STATE PLANE(US FOOT)-
FLOW PATH
I
�iH,, JIT— � Srk consulting vnNamTE
CLOSURE OF SEDIMENT POND
WITH OUTLET SPILLWAY
NC& Er?
AALBEMARLE DATE
/021 °n�'- °""""`�-
FIGURE 01
THE"HwvnNas muTEII KINGS MOUNTAIN MINING PROJECT USPRm05]6
C WsamjIONa RK Conw%N%A USPR000576 Almmabe Coryomtlon nNs 1112022 Pre Feasibility SNdy-II NO Closure0rawmgSUSPRWN7 KM_Se0Pnb1_ClI JB My

a) �1
CD r`
9
+
ul) +
u u
U)
r,ry to
LLaJ b Ilyyd]] ~
co Ce]
111)m CIDm 03
Lu } Lu II
W Lu
W
C7W C13W
A
940 9
920 - FUTURE GROUND 20
900 SEDIMENT POND 1 (HAUL ROAD 51) 900
880 KINO'S CREEK 880
z 860 -2. % 860
840 840
w ��� SEDIMENT POND 1 800
w 780 OUTLET SPILLWAY 800
760 760
-1+00 0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5+00 6+00 7+00 8+00 9+00 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 16+DD
STATION (FT.)
[D co 0 o 0 o 0 0 0 000 Cp [D co o o r r+ CD u7 V R u7 In V R V R
v rr 0 0 0 o rn 6i rr o 0 0 0 r _ _
) m rn CD o o un I r rr LQ In r) m o 0
N N N N CO oo CO GD CO CO CO CO CO CO OD CO IC) In O) 0) OD CO r) C r r N N rr rr
O) d7 r r In In LC) If) II) In II) In II) In r r II) Uf r) C') ') I(7 In LC) In CD to
OD m 00 m 00 m CO m CO m CO cc CO cc CO cc M m 00 m 00 m M m 00 m CO cc CO ca CO 00
W LL. W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL W LL
EXPLANATION GENERAL NOTES
EXISTING GROUND 1. FUTURE GROUND CONTOURS BASED ON
FUTURE GROUND CONTOURS FROM PHASE 4 DESIGN AND EXISTING 0 6D 120
GROUND.
FEET
REVISIONS DESIGN:EIJJ0 REVIEWED:DH PREPARED BY: DRAVANG TrFLE
REV. DESCRIPTION DATE DRAWN:J6 APPROVED:JO ��� t+�11^fL+l I I}I1^fry CLOSURE PLAN FOR SEDIMENT POND 1 -
A INTERNAL REVIEW "15r1[24 GOORDINATE SYSTEM: consulting 1 1 v?u.1 ` 1 1 y
CROSS SECTION A
NMF PROJECT:
AA L B E M A R L E 2/23/2021 REV S`ION: }D�RIAH'7NpG NO.(}�]
IF THE ABOVE BAR SRN PROJECT NO.: A F I G U R E 0 L DOES NOT MEASURE 1 INCH,
FILE IJIWE:US-_ Cos JH.dwg
THE DRAWING SCALE IS ALTERED KINGS MOUNTAIN MINING PROJECT USPR00D576
C:1UsersybegaylSRK ConsultingANA USPR000576 Albemarle Corporation Kings Mountain 2022 Pre Feasibility Study-IntemaR1600_Clasure0rawingslUSPR000576_KM_SedPndl_Clos_JB.dwg

6rc Hoomen"wAo 3si OLOOMdSMWR Me ooarsel%lmy oom aoeo-fm 41"s iaidz Z uie,unow sbuir u Imodo aue�lyy[s000adsn V 5mmre MMuuN�s mO
03H311V SI3 SONIMVHO 3H1 6/M'000L4LZnbN00d0-d EO Sl O3a-9LS000adSn :3W d VN 3ll
'HONI L 3anstl3W lON S3Oa
Doc 103fObd 3NIW NIV1Nf10W S`JNDi wn!yl!l-ap9waq!y atle3noetl3Hldl .oz=,d :3lvos
NVId N011VWV103b 'Aq P� a 1 Q y y �l g q 1 y `` ('dAl� NOIlJ3S l3NNVHD 21313WR13d 3mnso-i
ON ONIMtlaa 3NIW NItl1Nf10W SONIN 9NIN
8 9LS000Hdsn IDAMUd
:NOISIA3H _ON 10310ad NHS BOA 03HVd3Hd / aNnoaO ONIISIX3
ld E90VN 3NVld 31tl1S ON bZOZ'60'61. ALIlISISV3d Sad BOA a3nssl 9 \ \�
4ZOZ"40"6l SN01103S �_A` W31SASAIVNIGH003
31tla ( NV NVId dVW N011VWV103b 3S1 bull lnsuoo ills wlnW f bZOZ'60'60 M31h3a 1N3I10 BOA p3llIW9nS V _
.lbb'NIWI132�d t naH43AOHddtl �a 31VO N0I1clHOS30 A3a
eea a3M3IA3a 99arsr Nals3a SNOISIA3i1 AVON aal_3WIa3d S - - -
-3nSSl 3lLLL ONIMtlHa AN OAHVd3Hd
L
S Z — - - - -
� 'NIW BL I~ 'JA S�
-5 l3NNVHO - - - - - -_-
HI03W H1MOa0 'ld L a313WIa3d
HIM3OVdanS a3ddla 3anSOlO a3A 10
aVOa 3ansmoda
3anSOlO-'SOd
(M3IA NVId NI ONIHOIVH
A9 NMOHS SV 030VId) 'OSa 'VIa
'NI-ZL HIM a3AVl dVadla 'NHI JA Z
(.00Z=.L :3lVOS)
V-V N01103S
('ld)NOI LVIS
00+09 00+64 00+94 OO+Lb 00+94 OO+Sb 00+bb 00+£b OO+Zb OO+Lb 00+04 00+6E 00+9£ 00+L£ 00+9£ 00+5£ 00+b£ 00+££ 00+Z£ 00+L£ 00+OE 00+6Z 00+9Z 00+LZ 00+9Z 00+SZ 00+bZ 00+EZ 00+ZZ 00+LZ 00+OZ 00+61 00+9L OO+LL 00+91, 00+9L 00+bL 00+£L 00+ZL 00+LL OO+OL 00+6 00+9 00+L 00+9 00+9 ODtb 00+E 00+Z 00+L 00+0
09L OSL
009 009
ose aNnoao o IM
NI1sIX3 — _ _ ose
/ - - m
006
006
D
096 — 096 0
OOOL 000L
OSOL 13NNVHO a3'3WIa3d aNV 006 om llV'3a OOC OSOLv
DOLL AVON 3anSOlO-'sod S VIa3W HIMOa0 d0 'JAZ Z a3AOO IVOIdAl ONIaVa03a
3ansoio L 00LL
osu 091.1.
V OM 13NNVHOa3'3WIa3d (INV
S AVON 3anSO10-1SOd
(AOz=.L :3Iyos)
9-9 N01103S
('ld)NOI LVIS (AO£=.L :31VOS)
00+0z 00+61, 00+91, 00+LL 00+91, 00+91, 00+bL 00+£L oo+ZL 00+1,1, 00+01, 00+6 00+9 00+L 00+9 00+9 oo+b oO+E 00+z 00+1, 00+0 NVId ONIOVbO 3S1 IVN13
OSL aVOa SS300V a313WIa3d OSL
OOB pNnoa00NI1SIX3 009
099 — — — — 0s9 <
- -
006 _ `— � — — ' 006 0
13NNVHO a313WIa3d aNV 006 _ Z 3IVMS30IM'lH-0L
096 pVOa 3anSOlO-1SOd S 096 ('dAl)Sla3AlnO ONI LSIX3 A9 03Jtlld3a aNV 03AOW3a
OOOL 0� OooL" S'a3Alno ONV S131NI d0NO
OSOL 1M13a ONIatla03a 3ansolO L OSOL �- - - a3AOW3a la3Aln0
��(E IIV130 a3d3a) s �� "-
aou a 00u \ _ _ _ a3Alndvada
006 IdA' OK l3NNVHO a313WIa3d ONV aPol / _ sfe
a3A0O NO �>
Z 6 aVOa 3anSOlJ-1SOd
(AOz=.L :3Iyos) \ ... n �('&U) H'Vd MOl3 -
0-0 N01103S
('13)NOI LVIS \ <�
Op+LZ 00+OZ 00+61 00+91 00+LL 00+91, 00+91 00+bL 00+£L 00+ZL 00+11 00+01 00+6 00+9 00+L 00+9 00+5 OO+b 00+E 00+Z oo+L 00+0 e sue. \ _ -
c I (
008 aNO0a00NIlSIX3 009 ` \ n (L IIV130 a3d3a)
m --`\ c ('dADHON391VIJ 1=19L
099 - _ _ - _ 099 m AaVONn09 Ala3dOad -
006 006 ti n
l3NNVH0 a313Wla3d ONtl 096 atl0a 31 inSOl3-lS 096 Z ��� � _ - fin•
000E o0c Dom I �� _
BV'309NIOVa03a 3ansoio 03AOW3a la3AlnO
090E osol.
V .ltlIa3LVW 1n0 3IVMS H1IM
OOLL OOLL \ e 13 'XVW
,J � � / aNOd a3'VM lOV'NOO NI llld
006 13NNVHO a313 WIa3d ONV a n00 NOIdAl 4 \ c (dAl) H1Vd MOId 1 `
Z a3A0O NOIdA' 6 aVOa 3ansOlO-1SOd Z � 00'Z66: 03il013a la3Aln0
- / s
-------------
• \ ` > > --6�T
,4=,d :3lVOS .Ob=,d 3lVOs � ---- `-� --V o�_L> 13NNVHnSOlO-lISOd 1d SL m MMWAI�I�UHK-��
Z / H \ SFi HIHN101N0199HnIL9 -,
213AOJ lt101dAl lltll3a 9NIaVM93H minsO10 ( dAl)13NNVHO ,
--
H1VdMOld < < ` °' '-- _ a313 WIa3d 3anSOlO � `� 5 '� --- ---
ra
r
ONIISIX31a3A1n0 _ �iyJLNllilp00g99pIIIIIIHIIH -
aNnomo ('d),') HON39 NONd3Oa31NI ddONna <-i7JL �(
3ON3d213d021d LHONIISIX3dA') 3c0lS N31VM d03O03 \\\ \
7• /
(a3AVl a3A003anSO10 3aOd38) a3aVa03a avoa'al0 133d
� � `.� - --
dSl d0 3d01s 1V9010 �
'1d 03
cc aVOa AVd A �� � - I .', � � 009 ooe OSL a
a
AVMIIV iINH000NH00100i \ P R �����
ANVONnoo Ala3dOad
T sZ (03SOdOad)S anO-LN00
A
VIa3W H1MOa0''dZ � ry ��� (0350dOad).SZ anO1N00
OOL (0NI1SIX3).S anO1N00
A'
( _
a3A00 3anSOlO IVOId t/
Z (0NI-LSIX3).SZ anO-LN00
(V103W H1MOa0 d01dZ)
-
a3Abla3A0O3anSOlONHl'1dZ

------- FLOW PATH (TY P PROPERTY BOUNDARY 15FT WIDE POST < mom < LEGEND
— CLOSURE ROAD (TYP.)
_1000— CONTOUR 25' (EXISTING)
. ........
CONTOUR 5' (EXISTING)
—1000— CONTOUR 25' (PROPOSED)
2.51
CONTOUR 5' (PROPOSED)
HEAQWALL ----------- ------------ --- PROPERTY BOUNDARY
----------
RAILWAY
PAVED ROAD
v DIRT ROAD
1 8 -------- EDGE OF WATER
FILL IN CONTACT WATER OND ------- FENCE
W/SWALE CUT MATERI
—————————— 11 CULVERT EXISTING
——— ————————
�F CULVERT REMOVED
CULVERT RE VIED
W�
--————————— ——————————
<mwm <Emu < amw
on
mom
CULVERT REMOV
BIR CH
J ------- 87
------- SEDIMENT_PrN��
0 50 100 200
. . .............. --------- -
36"0 EXISTING CULVERT
------ a. FEET
Z_
..........
30"0 E TING CULVERT
CULVERTS REMOVED
... -------------
----------
PLANT SITE GRADING PLAN - ........60�0 EXISTING CULVERT
(SCALE: 1" 100')
960- 940-
- FILL IN CONTACT WATER POND -950 920 -
940- -
WISWALE CUT MATERIAL
- 900- 900
920-
LL
z
o - 660-
F- goo .......................... 900 0 -
15, 660-
§ 77 7 7=77�
LU 880-- GRADE SWALEIDITCH
j hi -850
w TO REINSTATE FLOW TO - __j -
860 EXISTING CULVE T Lj 640-
-850 -
820
_0+50 0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00 5+50 6+00 6+50 7+00 7+50 8+00 -
STATION (FT.) _0+50 o�001 0 50 1+00 1�50
SECTION A-A STATION (Fr.)
(SCALE: 1"=60') SECTION C-C
(SCALE: 1" 60')
940-
9BO-
920-
960 - - -
- 950 goo 2 -900
940 - Fm
F-:
z 880-
z 920 -
0 - 0.5%,
goo - - 900 860-
-850
840-
LU 880 _T
w 5.2%
GRADE SWALE/DITCH
860 TO REINSTATE FLOW TO - 820
EXISTING CULVERT - 850
. . . I I I I -0+5D 0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00
_0+50 0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00 5+50 6+00 6+50
STA71ON (FT.) STATION (FT.)
SECTION D-D
SECTION B-B (SCALE: I" = 60')
(SCALE: 1 =60')
REVISIONS DESIGN-JS/RBB REVIEWED-FZBB PREPARED BY- DRAWING TITLE ISSUE-
REV. DESCRIPTION DATE DRAWN- APPROVED-RIBB PRELIMINARY
A SUBMITTED FOR CLIENT REVIEW 09.04.2024 JSIMUNM srk consultinc PLANT SITE RECLAMATION MAP DATE-
B ISSUED FOR PRE FEASIBILITY 19.04.2024 COORDINATE SYSTEM- SITE PLAN AND SECTIONS 19.04.2024
NC STATE PLANE NAD83 FT PREPARED FOR- SRK PROJECT NO-' REVISION'
PROJECT- USPR000576 B
KINGS MOUNTAIN MINI DRAWING NO.
IF THE ABOVE BAR A\ ALBEMARLE Operated by: RECLAMATION PLAN
DOES NOT MEASURE 1 INCH, Albemarle-Lithium KINGS MOUNTAIN MINE PROJECT 400
FILE NAME: LJSPR000576-REC04-PLANT.dwg THE DRAWING SCALE IS ALTERED
L
cAUsersxelynn\SRK ConsutangNA USPR000576 Albemarle Corporation Kings Mountain 2022 Pre Feasibility Study-0800 TSFII Drafting%Task-800 ReclarnationUSPIR000576-REC04 PLANT-dwg

�V"4-eSM ZODAH9LsaaoadsnWooewepatl wwmse1\6wye0 OK1 Rj 0090-MnM Apj"s iab MZ wqunc"s5uip uopeiotl00 auewagly s[s000bdsn WBuOjnsuo mmuuAlels mo
77 a3a311V SI ANDS ONIMVHO AU
5MP'L-SSM Z003B-9LS000BdSn :3WVN 31IA
Do 103MO ld 3NIW NId1NnOW SON1>I wmgE�-apewaglV 'HaNHVGAAv3W loJI
-7�7v 7�� �7 �7 ave3noev3Hldl
NVld NIDUVVYV10321 :AgPajrado I� 1 Q V Y Hq 1 V `v
ON ONIMtlaa 3NIW NIV1NnOW SONIN
8 9LS000Hdsn IDAroad
:NOISIAAH ON IOAroad NbS and a3avdad ld E90VN 3NVld 31ViS ON
4ZOZ4061 SN01103SONdNb1d311S �
bZOZ'bO'61. ALlISISV3A Dad BOA O 3nSSI Aa
WAISASAIVNIGH003 bZOZ'bO'60 M3IA3HIN3110BOAaD11W8ns V
wN rAlva d IN NIDUVVYd10321 L-SSM buIlInSuo^^ ilis v Ba 3A0ad M N0I1dw0S30
A JVNIIN32ds • F 3
B
Aua ONIMvaa I Aa OAHVdAbd gm aAMAIAAa gowsr NOISAa SNOISIA3N
1VAB3114I 100A 9Z(BONIW/aOrVW) --- - i
SBnO1NOO aNnOBO ONIISIX3 deZs 3NIl B3MDS 0NI1SIX3
ABVONnOS AinovA a3SOdOBd 3NIl SV0 0NI1SIX3 — _— _— _— 1 1 133A
SV3BV ONVl13M 3NI13ONDA 0NI1SIX3 �/� 09 09 Ob
AVMIIVB 3IB1O313 ON00B0B3aNn
OVOBODAVd OINIO313 OV3HBDA0 —3Wo 3= —
OVOB 1BIa DBnlOnalSVBANI 0NI1SIX3
D10HNVW B3M3S ONIISIX3 • 3NIl A1B3c0Nd r -=q=
4N3031 O O 1 r
N
Q
I
k dAl1 N3M01 N Od NIStl9 �JNIIIIlS \ /
OV3Ha3AOEJNIISIX3
C-
o°
1
.00'409 :ID 9- \ -
r
s63allna 301
(.09=. 1N3WNNV8W3 / ✓
d 3lVOS) �
8-8 N01103S L-8SM
('lA) NOIIVIS
bZ+9 00+9 00+9 00+b 00+£ 00+Z 00+L 00+0 /J
I
03AOW N3001
11IA-LN30 XNVBW3 � AVMIIIdS
008 S-L AIX3 3>IV1 8n10 — 1
IN3WNNVSW3 E)NIl SIX3 NIW .00L m
< 3A11n03X3 ONIlSIX3 S1N31X3 SS32111n8
_� /1
0 \ NISV9 39VNOIS L131VM /
-098
'1A08=1S3B01N3VINNVBW3 VNI=I
oofi 01HID313
(IV3HH3AO
ONIISIX3 \'
tl
(.0£=.d :31VOS)
V-V N01103S L-8SM ~
('lA) NOIIVIS IX
d Or„O -
66+z os+z ao+z os+L OO+L os+o oo+o
II; �
002
03AOW3B 3S 01 m
llIA 1N3WA W3 O'
03AOW321 38 Ol llld 1N3WHNV8W3 �a°®
a
f /
aNnoaE) E)NIIS X3 0 \\ \\\\ �8
0%) .°�