EIA-REP-325d-12 _BB_ - 201.09.14.pdf - SAHRA

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 3: Land capability classes of different management units Soil Management Unit Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 Unit 4 Unit 5 Soil Types Avalon, Glencoe Avalon, Glencoe, Glencoe, Dresden Westleigh, Longlands, Rensburg Katspruit Average soil depth 60-90cm 30-60cm 0-30 0-60cm Limiting Factors Wetness, Depth Depth, wetness Depth, rock Wetness, Agricultural potential Medium to high Low to medium Marginal Marginal Land capability 1 2 4 5-6 6 Recommended Land use Arable, crop production EIA-REP-325d-11 October 2012 Arable crop production xxvii Disturbed Areas Grazing Wetlands Wilderness/ Grazing % of Area 126.1 (27.7%) 209.4 (46%) 28 (6.2%) 91.9 (20.2%) 6.6 (1.5%) Special measures must be implemented in the soil stripping and rehabilitation process to restore the soils to an arable and grazing potential. The soils associated with wetlands are marginal for crop production but are very important from a wetland perspective. These soils should not be disturbed.
EIA-REP-325d-11 October 2012 1 CONTENTS KEY PROJECT INFORMATION .............................................................................................................................. i SYNOPSIS .............................................................................................................................................................. iii INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................................. III PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................................................... III PROJECT MOTIVATION (NEED AND DESIRABILITY) ......................................................................................................XIII APPROACH TO THE PROJECT ........................................................................................................................................ XIV PROCESS IN TERMS OF THE MPRDA, MPRDA AMENDMENT ACT AND NEMA REGULATIONS ................................. XV PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS ................................................................................................................................ XVI ALTERNATIVES ................................................................................................................................................................ XVII TABLES .............................................................................................................................................................. xxxi FIGURES ........................................................................................................................................................... xxxii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................................................... xxxiii GLOSSARY OF TERMS ....................................................................................................................................... 35 1. ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS (Reg 31(2)(m)) .............................................................................. 41 2. KNOWLEDGE GAPS (Reg 31(2)(m)) ...................................................................................................... 41 3. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTIVITY ............................................................................................ 42 3.1 UNDERGROUND MINING ........................................................................................................................................... 44 3.2 ROLLOVER MINING AND REHABILITATION METHOD ...................................................................................................... 46 3.3 CLOSURE PROCESSES ............................................................................................................................................ 49 3.4 STORAGE OF ORE ................................................................................................................................................... 50 3.5 WASTE ROCK DUMP ................................................................................................................................................ 50 4. LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ........................................................... 50 4.1 NEMA AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REGULATIONS ............................................................................ 51 4.2 NATIONAL HERITAGE RESOURCE ACT, 1999 (ACT NO. 25 OF 1999) .......................................................................... 54 4.3 NATIONAL WATER ACT, 1998 (ACT NO.36 OF 1998) ................................................................................................ 56 4.4 INTEGRATED ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ........................................................................................................... 57 4.5 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT: AIR QUALITY ACT (ACT NO 39 OF 2004) ................................................. 58 4.6 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT: WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT (ACT NO 58 OF 2009) ................................... 58 4.7 MINERAL AND PETROLEUM RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT (ACT 28 OF 2002)[MPRDA] .......................................... 58 4.8 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY ACT (ACT 85 OF 1993)[OSHACT] ................................................................... 59 4.9 MINE HEALTH AND SAFETY ACT (ACT 29 OF 1996) ................................................................................................... 60 4.10 EXPLOSIVES ACT (ACT 26 OF 1956) ........................................................................................................................ 60 5. DETAILS OF THE APPLICANT ............................................................................................................... 60 6. NEED AND DESIRABILITY (Reg 31(2)(f) &(g)) ....................................................................................... 61 7. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT (Reg 31(2)(b) ............................................................. 62 7.1 REGIONAL CONTEXT (REG 31(2)(C)) ......................................................................................................................... 62 7.2 SURROUNDING LAND USES ...................................................................................................................................... 63 7.2.1 RAILWAY LINES ....................................................................................................................................................... 63 7.2.2 POWER LINES ......................................................................................................................................................... 63 7.2.3 PIPELINES .............................................................................................................................................................. 63 xxviii
Page 1 and 2: November 2012 VUNENE COLLIERY (PTY)
Page 3 and 4: Photograph of site: EIA-REP-325d-11
Page 5 and 6: town of Ermelo. The area falls unde
Page 7 and 8: Figure 1: The Regulation 2(2) map o
Page 9 and 10: Figure 3: Cross section 2 from west
Page 11 and 12: There are increased demands for coa
Page 13 and 14: • All pillars in the panel are un
Page 15 and 16: • Potential reduction in crime be
Page 17 and 18: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS A comp
Page 19 and 20: The Scoping exercise concluded that
Page 21 and 22: effect on the environment will be m
Page 23 and 24: • Choose an appropriate lining to
Page 25 and 26: were caused by extensive anthropolo
Page 27: Land capability Assessment Accordin
Page 31 and 32: 10.4.1.2 DURATION .................
Page 33 and 34: Table 33: Assessment of the possibl
Page 35 and 36: PHRA - Provincial Heritage Resource
Page 37 and 38: The "Equator Principles": A financi
Page 39 and 40: INTRODUCTION Environmental Assuranc
Page 41 and 42: iii) The undertaking of a linear ac
Page 43 and 44: Due to the nature of the existing e
Page 45 and 46: The typical sequence of mining will
Page 47 and 48: Sub-surface erosions (Potholes): Po
Page 49 and 50: • Characterise the topsoil and re
Page 51 and 52: 3.4 Storage of ore The Run of Mine
Page 53 and 54: • Development must be sustainable
Page 55 and 56: Item 13: The clearance of an area o
Page 57 and 58: If a Phase 1 report finds that cert
Page 59 and 60: aims to achieve a desirable balance
Page 61 and 62: precautionary measures contemplated
Page 63 and 64: EIA-REP-325d-11 October 2012 2008 8
Page 65 and 66: 7.3.2 Electricity Numerous main dis
Page 67 and 68: The water management will be undert
Page 69 and 70: No housing facilities will be provi
Page 71 and 72: Figure 7: Mining layout plan for op
Page 73 and 74: the present day erosional surface h
Page 75 and 76: Table 7: The Usutu opencast extract
Page 77 and 78: Figure 8: Witpuntspruit catchment a
Page 79 and 80:
Figure 9: Tertiary and quaternary d
Page 81 and 82:
HGM units encompass three key eleme
Page 83 and 84:
Thunderstorms occurring frequently
Page 85 and 86:
Table 12: Mean monthly evaporation
Page 87 and 88:
Taphozous mauritianus Tomb Bat Witl
Page 89 and 90:
The major economic activities and s
Page 91 and 92:
8.1.10 Heritage Resources Based on
Page 93 and 94:
Dust suppression Dust suppression m
Page 95 and 96:
EIA-REP-325d-11 October 2012 Enviro
Page 97 and 98:
from Interested and Affected Partie
Page 99 and 100:
In addition, the Draft Scoping Repo
Page 101 and 102:
their properties and how the mining
Page 103 and 104:
• Determination of Significance -
Page 105 and 106:
The impact will be relevant through
Page 107 and 108:
10.4.1.7 Determination of significa
Page 109 and 110:
. Significance Following Mitigation
Page 111 and 112:
location is the most suitable due t
Page 113 and 114:
11.6.2 Contour Mining The contour m
Page 115 and 116:
Figure 14: Underground coal mining
Page 117 and 118:
12.3 Pollution control dam design r
Page 119 and 120:
sensitive to flow and habitat modif
Page 121 and 122:
for the project. Shift changes time
Page 123 and 124:
EIA-REP-325d-11 October 2012 13. DE
Page 125 and 126:
Source of impact Seepage from the s
Page 127 and 128:
Description of impact: Construction
Page 129 and 130:
Source of impact: Mining activities
Page 131 and 132:
• Dust Deposition The predicted m
Page 133 and 134:
• Construction vehicles should re
Page 135 and 136:
Destruction of faunal habitat and t
Page 137 and 138:
Significance With Mitigation (WM) E
Page 139 and 140:
• All construction areas should b
Page 141 and 142:
• Affected communities must be no
Page 143 and 144:
• Dust from heavy vehicles; • O
Page 145 and 146:
• The illumination of Vunene Coll
Page 147 and 148:
Erosion may be accelerated where wa
Page 149 and 150:
areas can also transfer pollutants
Page 151 and 152:
• Stockpiles can be used as a bar
Page 153 and 154:
Weighting factor (WF) Mitigation Ef
Page 155 and 156:
The impact is considered to have a
Page 157 and 158:
Significance of impact: The transpo
Page 159 and 160:
Mitigation measures • The areas c
Page 161 and 162:
Description of impact: The most sen
Page 163 and 164:
EIA-REP-325d-11 October 2012 15. AU
Page 165 and 166:
• The cumulative impact on wetlan
Page 167 and 168:
• Labour guidelines should be dra
Page 169 and 170:
Surface water impacts: Surface wate
Page 171 and 172:
• Number of human inhabitants loc
Page 173 and 174:
Table 43: Land capability classes o
show all

EIA-REP-325d-12 _BB_ - 201.09.14.pdf - SAHRA

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?