1. The question must be directed to the Department of Environmental Affairs as the custodian of NEMPA.
2. The Department considered comments and authorisation to be issued by other organs of state in that potential impacts will be constantly monitored and managed in concurrence with other organs of state through prescribed conditions of authorisations and monthly, quarterly to annual reporting by the right holder.
3. a)
• None
NB: If the recommendations suggest that the proposed operation will pose unacceptable pollution, ecological degradation or damage to the environment. such a right will not be issued.
4. Not yet commenced, in terms of section 25(b) of the MPRDA Act 28 of 2008, the holder must commence with mining operations within one year from the date on which the mining right becomes effective in terms of section 23 (5) or such extended period as the Minister may authorise.
Mr MJ Zwane, MP
Minister of Mineral Resources
Date Submitted:-..... . ........ ... ./. ... .... ......... ./2016
QUESTION NUMBER: 1808
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 09 September 2016
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NUMBER:
1808. Adv H C Schmidt (DA) to ask the Minister of Mineral Resources:
(1) Whether Atha-Africa Ventures has been issued with (a) a prospecting and/or (b) mining right and/or permit in Mabola, a proclaimed protected environment area close to Wakkerstroom in the Dr Pixley Ka lsaka Seme Local Municipality in Mpumalanga; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so,
(2) whether the relevant (a) Environmental Impact Assessment and/or (b) Environmental Management Programme was undertaken before the specified rights and/or permits were issued; if not, why not; if so, what were the (i) results of the assessments and/or programmes undertaken and (ii) details of the public participation process followed ;
(3) whether the public participation process, as required in terms of the Minerals and Petroleum Resource Development Act, Act 28 of 2002, as amended, and its regulations were complied with in this regard; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW2116E
REPLY
1) A Mining Right issued on 28th June 2016.
2) (b) Environment Management Progrmme (EMP) was undertaken.
i) The EMP provided an assessment on the potential impacts of the proposed mining activities, which therefore also provided measures to modify, remedy, control or stop any actions, or process which may cause pollution or degradation to the environment. Measures were informed by recommendations of the specialist reports undertaken amongst others, Floral assessment specialist report, Fauna assessment specialist report, Wetland assessment specialist report, Air quality assessment specialist report, Hydrological assessment specialist studies (Ground and surface water).
ii) Public participation was undertaken with land owners, Organs of State, Interested and affected parties, through newspaper advertisement, site notices, meetings, distribution of Background Information Documents (BID) to both interested and affected parties.
3) Details of public participation undertaken with land owners, Organs of State, interested and affected parties, through newspaper advertisement, site notices, meetings with minutes, distribution of Background Information Documents (BID) to both interested and affected parties. All interested and affected parties, land owners, were provided with opportunity to comment or raise concerns or objections.
All comments, concerns and objection were addressed in the EMP in the form of mitigation measures.