appendix f soil, land capability and land use assessment · february 2019 18101804-324135-5 iii the...

May 2019 18101804-324364-3 / FS 30/5/1/2/3/2/1 (10050) EM

APPENDIX F

Soil, Land Capability and Land Use Assessment

REPORT

Baselines Soil, Land Use and Land Capability Assessment for the Proposed Metsimaholo Underground Coal Mine Seriti Coal (Pty) Ltd

Submitted to:

Seriti Coal (Pty) Ltd 3 On Glenhove c/o Glenhove and Tottenham Ave Melrose Estate Johannesburg

Submitted by:

Golder Associates Africa (Pty) Ltd. P.O. Box 6001 Halfway House, 1685 Building 1, Maxwell Office Park

Magwa Crescent West Waterfall City Midrand, 1685 South Africa

+27 11 254 4800

18101804-324135-5

February 2019

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

i

Distribution List 1 x electronic copy Seriti Coal (Pty) Limited

1 x electronic copy e-projects library [email protected]

1 x electronic copy Golder project folder

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

ii

Executive Summary

Seriti Coal (Pty) Ltd (Seriti) acquired the remaining Metsimaholo reserves as part of a purchase agreement that involved Seriti taking ownership of several Anglo-American Thermal Coal (AATC) mines supplying thermal coal to Eskom. Seriti plans to access the remaining reserves through the development of Metsimaholo

Colliery. Golder Associates Africa (Pty) Ltd (Golder) is currently engaged in a process to compile and submit

the following:

Application to graduate the prospecting rights (FS30/5/1/1/2/10383PR and FS30/5/1/1/2/10292PR) into a consolidated Mining Right (MR) to the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR) in terms of the Mineral

and Petroleum Resources Development Act No. 28 2002 (MPRDA); and

An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in support of an application for environmental authorisation to the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) in terms of the National Environmental Management

Act, No. 107 of 1998 (NEMA).

As part of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process, a specialist Soil, Land Capability and Land

Use Assessment is required. This specialist report details the findings of the desktop review, the methodology and approach used for the specialist study, the findings of the field survey and resource assessment. This report thus provides an understanding of the baseline soil conditions, prior to the intended mining activities.

The objectives of the study were as follows:

To conduct a detailed soil assessment of the proposed Seriti Metsimaholo mine infrastructure and

classify the observed soils in accordance to the South African Taxonomic Soil Classification System (Section 6.6); Derive respective land capability classes of soils underlying the proposed Seriti mine

infrastructure and the agricultural potential thereof (Section 6.8.1);

Map the current land use on the Seriti Metsimaholo project area in accordance the Spatial Planning and

Land Use Management Act (Act No.16 of 2013) (Section 6.9 ); and

Identify key potential environmental impacts that will be associated with developments of the proposed

mining project (Section 8.3).

Summary of findings:

The Bainsvlei soil form within the project area represents ~37 %, Westleigh soil form represents ~28 %, Clovelly represents ~18 %, Bonheim represents ~ 12 %, Steendal represents ~ 6% and the Etosha form

represents ~ 1.5 % of the total project area surveyed.

The soil textures of representative soil forms are predominantly sandy clay loam to sandy loam. Most of

the analysed soil forms are slightly acidic to slightly alkaline (4.8 < pH < 8. 5). The salinity of all

representative soil forms will have no effect on plant growth as the electrical conductivity (ECsat-paste) is less than 200 mS/m. The cation status of the soils is medium to high for all soils analysed. The concentration of phosphorus (Bray-1) in majority of the soils is low (Bray 1 P < 8 mg/kg) in the subsoils.

The topsoils mostly have medium to high levels of P, typical of cultivated land.

The land capability classes that were identified for the project area fall within class III and IV with a high

to medium agricultural potential. The majority of the project area is currently used for agriculture,

specifically maize cropping.

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

iii

The key soil and land use aspects affected due to the project activities are soil quality degradation, loss

of soil as a resource, land use change, soil contamination, soil compaction and soil erosion. These

impacts have high impact significance and when mitigated have low to moderate impact significance.

An extensive soil quality monitoring programme as per the environmental monitoring programme should

be implemented to minimise and/or eliminate the identified impacts.

The residual impacts include soil degradation due to vegetation clearance and soil disturbances (initial

stripping, and soil placement during rehabilitation phase); and insufficient soil available for surface

rehabilitation at closure.

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

iv

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................ 1

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................................. 1

3.0 SPECIALIST STUDY INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 2

3.1 Study Objectives ................................................................................................................................. 3

4.0 POLICY LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK ............................................................................. 5

5.0 METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................................... 5

5.1 Desktop study ..................................................................................................................................... 5

5.2 Field Survey and Soil Classification .................................................................................................... 6

5.3 Soil Sampling and Analysis ................................................................................................................. 6

5.4 Land Evaluation .................................................................................................................................. 8

5.4.1 Land Capability Classification ......................................................................................................... 8

5.4.2 Agricultural Potential Classification ................................................................................................. 9

5.5 Land Use Mapping ............................................................................................................................ 10

6.0 RESULTS ..................................................................................................................................................... 10

6.1 Environmental context ...................................................................................................................... 10

6.2 Climate ............................................................................................................................................. 10

6.2.1 Temperature ................................................................................................................................. 10

6.2.2 Rainfall ......................................................................................................................................... 11

6.2.3 Evaporation .................................................................................................................................. 11

6.3 Local Geology ................................................................................................................................... 12

6.4 Topography ...................................................................................................................................... 12

6.5 Regional soils, land capability and land use ..................................................................................... 14

6.5.1 Land Capability ............................................................................................................................. 14

6.6 Field Survey and Soil Classification .................................................................................................. 16

6.7 Soil Chemical Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 19

6.8 Land Evaluation ................................................................................................................................ 21

6.8.1 Site Specific Land Capability Classification .................................................................................. 21

6.8.2 Soil Agricultural Potential .............................................................................................................. 24

6.8.3 Estimated soil availability for rehabilitation actions ....................................................................... 24

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

v

6.9 Land Use .......................................................................................................................................... 24

7.0 DATA GAPS AND ASSESSMENT SHORTCOMINGS ................................................................................ 24

8.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT .............................................................................................. 25

8.1 Methodology for Assessing Impact Significance ............................................................................... 25

8.2 Project Phases ................................................................................................................................. 26

8.2.1 Construction phase ....................................................................................................................... 26

8.2.2 Operational phase ........................................................................................................................ 27

8.2.3 Closure and rehabilitation phase .................................................................................................. 27

8.3 Potential Impacts .............................................................................................................................. 27

8.3.1 Identified Impacts for the Construction phase ............................................................................... 27

8.3.2 Identified Impacts for the Operational phase ................................................................................ 28

8.3.3 Identified Impacts for the Decommissioning Phase ...................................................................... 30

8.3.4 Soil aspects impacted ................................................................................................................... 30

8.3.4.1 Degradation of soil quality ............................................................................................................ 30

8.3.4.2 Loss of soil as a resource (burial of soil) and land use change ..................................................... 31

8.3.4.3 Soil contamination ........................................................................................................................ 31

8.3.4.4 Soil compaction ............................................................................................................................ 31

8.3.4.5 Soil erosion ................................................................................................................................... 31

8.4 Residual impacts .............................................................................................................................. 39

8.5 Cumulative impacts .......................................................................................................................... 39

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMME ................................................................................... 39

9.1 Objectives ......................................................................................................................................... 39

9.2 Environmental Management and Mitigation Measures Identified ...................................................... 39

9.3 Summary of Mitigation and Management measures for the Operational, Decommissioning and

Closure phases ................................................................................................................................. 39

9.3.1 Degradation of soil quality ............................................................................................................ 39

9.3.2 Loss of soil as a resource and land use modification .................................................................... 40

9.3.3 Soil contamination ........................................................................................................................ 41

9.3.4 Soil compaction ............................................................................................................................ 42

9.3.5 Soil erosion ................................................................................................................................... 42

9.4 Mechanisms for monitoring compliance ............................................................................................ 44

10.0 CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................................................... 47

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

vi

11.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................. 47

TABLES

Table 1: Definition of land capability classes (after Scotney et al. 1987) ................................................................ 8

Table 2: National Land Capability Values (DAFF, 2017) ........................................................................................ 9

Table 3: Criteria for agricultural potential classification .......................................................................................... 9

Table 4: Average monthly temperatures in Sasolburg ......................................................................................... 10

Table 5: Metadata for Station C1E001 ................................................................................................................. 11

Table 6: Breakdown of National Land Capability of Project area ......................................................................... 14

Table 7: Physical properties of Soil Profiles evaluated ......................................................................................... 16

Table 8: Chemical properties of representative soil forms.................................................................................... 19

Table 9: Site Specific Soil capability classification and Land capability classification ........................................... 22

Table 10: Estimated volumes of topsoil and subsoil for project infrastructure area .............................................. 24

Table 11: Impact assessment factors .................................................................................................................. 25

Table 12: Impact assessment scoring methodology ............................................................................................ 25

Table 13: Significance of impact based on point allocation .................................................................................. 26

Table 14: Anticipated activities and related soil and land use impacts for the construction phase ....................... 27

Table 15: Anticipated activities and related soil and land use impacts for the operational phase ......................... 28

Table 16: Anticipated activities and related soil and land use impacts for the decommission and closure phase 30

Table 17: Impact on soil and land use significance ratings .................................................................................. 32

Table 18: Soil, Land use and Land Capability Monitoring Program ...................................................................... 45

FIGURES

Figure 1: Illustration of typical bord and pillar mining method for underground coal mining operations .................. 1

Figure 2: Project Locality ...................................................................................................................................... 4

Figure 3: Locations of soil sampling and observation points .................................................................................. 7

Figure 4: Average monthly temperatures at Sasolburg (https://en.climate-data.org/africa/south-africa/free-state/sasolburg-27320/) ....................................................................................................................................... 10

Figure 5: Average monthly rainfall at Deneysville (October 1938 to September 2018) ........................................ 11

Figure 7: Regional geological map showing Seriti Metsimaholo Project Area ...................................................... 13

Figure 8: National Land Capability Classification of Project site ........................................................................... 15

Figure 9: Distribution of soil forms within surveyed area ...................................................................................... 18

Figure 10: Site Specific Land Capability Values for Seriti Metsimaholo Project area ........................................... 23

APPENDICES

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

vii

APPENDIX A Field Survey Plan

APPENDIX B Representative Soil Profiles

APPENDIX C Laboratory Certificates

APPENDIX D Document Limitations

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

1

1.0 INTRODUCTION Seriti Coal (Pty) Ltd (Seriti) acquired the remaining Metsimaholo reserves as part of a purchase agreement

that involved Seriti taking ownership of several Anglo-American Thermal Coal (AATC) mines supplying thermal coal to Eskom. Seriti plans to access the remaining reserves through the development of Metsimaholo

Colliery. Golder Associates (Golder) is currently engaged in a process to compile and submit the following:

Application to graduate the prospecting rights (FS30/5/1/1/2/10383PR and FS30/5/1/1/2/10292PR) into a

consolidated Mining Right (MR) to the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR) in terms of the Mineral

and Petroleum Resources Development Act No. 28 2002 (MPRDA); and

An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in support of an application for environmental authorisation

to the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) in terms of the National Environmental Management

Act, No. 107 of 1998 (NEMA).

As part of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process, a specialist Soil, Land Capability and Land Use Assessment is required. This specialist report details the findings of the desktop review, the methodology and approach used for the specialist study, the findings of the field survey and resource assessment. This

report thus provides an understanding of the baseline soil conditions, prior to the intended mining activities

and includes the impact assessment with the recommended mitigation measures.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Seriti Coal proposes to establish an independent underground bord and pillar mine (Figure 1) operating from one decline shaft. The ROM production profile is approximately 3Mtpa. If the mining right is granted, and pending other future environmental authorisations, the projected life of mine (LoM) will be 30 years, planned to

commence in 2023 with the pre-construction and construction phase, initial production in 2025, and depleting in 2054. Access to the orebody is planned through a box-cut development, with a twin decline shaft system to intersect the top seam (“TMH”) floor and the middle seam (“MLMH”) floor from which the shaft bottom

development and main primary development would be initiated. MLMH will be accessed from underground via a developed decline. Main access development is planned from the decline shaft floor as a 7-road

development providing access to men, material and services. Bord and pillar mining using CM’s was selected

as the primary extraction method. Plans are for the operational phase of the mine to run 24-hours a day,

seven days a week. Current estimates are that the coal reserve is up to a depth of 240m.

Figure 1: Illustration of typical bord and pillar mining method for underground coal mining operations

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

2

Seriti Coal envisages that the surface infrastructure for the project will cover an area of about 60 ha and will

include the following key infrastructure:

Decline shaft;

Stockpiles of materials;

Silos for storage of coal;

Conveyor belts;

A pollution control dam;

Stores;

Offices and workshops;

An electrical power distribution network; and

Access roads.

The following main mining activities typically form part of the bord and pillar mining method:

Coal cutting and loading – the Continuous Miners (CM’s) typically use the cutting head, which is a rotating drum with cutting picks attached to cut the coal face. A loading mechanism then picks up cut

coal and delivers it into the central part of the machine. A conveying system, usually a chain conveyor, is used to run the coal in a steel trough from front to rear of the miner. A rear jib section capable of vertical

and horizontal movement is used to enable the coal to be delivered into a shuttle car.

Coal hauling and tipping – the loaded shuttle car will be used to haul the coal to the section feeder

breaker which crushes and feeds the coal on the conveyor belt system.

Roof support – a roof bolt machine will be used for making safe the roadways by installing roof bolts

according to a systematic support procedure.

Coal transportation – a conveyor belt system will be used to transport the coal from the mining section

to surface silos, ready for distribution to the market.

As the surface infrastructure for the proposed underground mine is expected to cover a limited footprint, it will

leave large portions of land available for landowners to continue with existing agricultural activities.

Construction, operation, closure and subsequent rehabilitation at the end of the life of the mine will be undertaken in accordance with an auditable EMPr as approved by the DMR and in compliance with all applicable legislation. The rehabilitation process will be designed to restore the affected area of land to an end

use agreed to by interested and affected parties and the relevant authorities

3.0 SPECIALIST STUDY INTRODUCTION The report provides the current soil characteristics, land capability and land use of the project area. As part of

the study, the soils within the project areas where the main mining infrastructural components are proposed, were surveyed in October 2018. Samples of the modal profiles, specifically of each diagnostic horizon, were submitted to Eco Analytical Laboratory for analysis of the soil properties required for pedological description

and classification of soils per the South African Soil Classification Working group.

The study provides an input into the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) as required in terms of the

Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA), Act 28 of 2002 and the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA), Act 107 of 1998. The Acts require the avoidance of pollution and/or

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

3

degradation of the environment or where neither can be avoided, it is required that the pollution or degradation

thereof be minimised or remediated.

3.1 Study Objectives The objectives of the study were therefore to do the following:

Conduct a detailed soils assessment on the proposed project mine infrastructure footprint;

Classify and map the observed soils per the South African Taxonomic Soil Classification System, 1991;

Map the current land-use within the proposed project mine infrastructure footprint;

Determine the impacts on soil and land use associated with the project; and

Propose environmental management actions required for the preservation of local soils (mitigation

measures).

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

4

Figure 2: Project Locality

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

5

4.0 POLICY LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK The following section outlines a summary of South African Environmental Legislation that needs to be

considered for the proposed new shaft area with regards to management of soil:

The law on Conservation of Agricultural Resources (Act 43 of 1983) states that the degradation of the

agricultural potential of soil is illegal;

The Bill of Rights states that environmental rights exist primarily to ensure good health and well-being,

and secondarily to protect the environment through reasonable legislation, ensuring the prevention of the

degradation of resources;

The Environmental right is furthered in the National Environmental Management Act 107 of 1998 (NEMA), which prescribes three principles, namely the precautionary principle, the “polluter pays”

principle and the preventive principle;

Furthermore, an Environmental Management Programme Report (EMPr) is required under NEMA;

Regulations on use of water for mining and related activities aimed at the protection of water resources, GN. 704, GG 20119, 4 June 1999 (GN. 704 of 1999) published under the National Water Act 36 of 1998

aimed at the protection of water resources;

National norms and standards for the remediation of contaminated land and soil quality in the Republic of South Africa, GN. 331, GG 37603, 2 May 2014 published under the National Environmental

Management: Waste Act 59 of 2008 provide a uniform national approach to determine the contamination status of an investigation area; and minimum standards for assessing necessary

environmental protection measures for remediation activities.

It is stated in the above-mentioned Act that the individual/group responsible for the degradation/pollution of natural resources is required to rehabilitate the polluted source; Soils and land capability are protected

under the National Environmental Management Act 107 of 1998, the Environment Conservation Act 73 of

1989, the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act 28 of 2002 and the Conservation of

Agricultural Resources Act 43 of 1983;

The National Veld and Forest Fire Bill of 10 July 1998 and the Fertiliser, Farm Feeds, Agricultural

Remedies and Stock Remedies Act 36 of 1947 can also be applicable in some cases;

The National Environmental Management Act 107 of 1998 requires that pollution and degradation of the

environment be avoided or, where it cannot be avoided, be minimized and remedied; and

The Conservation of Agriculture Resources Act 43 of 1983 requires the protection of land against soil erosion and the prevention of water logging and salinisation of soils by means of suitable soil

conservation works to be constructed and maintained. The utilisation of marshes, water sponges and

watercourses are also addressed.

5.0 METHODOLOGY

5.1 Desktop study The desktop study included a review of the historic and recent aerial imagery, evaluating topographic, land cover, land use, land type maps and memoirs, and geological maps of the study area. Review of previous soil

reports and soil surveys of the project area were also done. This background information was used to plan

and design the field survey.

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

6

5.2 Field Survey and Soil Classification The field survey plan is provided in APPENDIX A.

The soil survey was conducted per the standard soil survey techniques. During the field survey the project area was delineated (into map units) and the natural resources, terrain form, soil type and land use of the

project area, were recorded. The soil profile observations were evaluated along transects, evaluating the soil at the crest, scarp, midslope, footslope and valley bottom positions of the main geological groups, land types

and terrain units of the project area. The shapefiles of the project boundary, existing and proposed

infrastructure, surface water features, terrain, geology, land type, existing land capability and land use were superimposed on google earth imagery and 1:50 000 topographic map sheet to create field maps for the survey. The geographical positions of the observation points were loaded onto a hand-held Global Positioning

System (GPS) to aid in field traversing of the positions.

At each observation point, the soil was augered to a depth of 120 cm (unless an impenetrable layer was

encountered restricting sampling depth) using a bucket auger. The relevant and distinct soil and landscape features were recorded at each observation point. These included characteristics such as soil colour, texture, soil depth, stoniness, drainage class, parent material, signs of erosion, vegetation cover, micro-topography,

aspect and fauna.

For the classification, the soil characteristics were used to classify the soils according to the Taxonomic Soil

Classification System for South Africa (Soil Classification Working Group, 1991). The procedure used in the

identification of the soil types using the Taxonomic Soil Classification System involved the following:

1. Demarcating the master horizons present in the profile;

2. Identifying diagnostic horizons or materials;

3. Establishing the soil form using the Key in the Classification Book;

4. Identifying family criteria;

5. Establishing the soil family; and

6. Determining the texture class of the A horizon, which was then added to the code of the soil family.

For this study, a set of 16 modal profiles within the project area were described in detail and soil samples of the diagnostic topsoil and subsoil horizons were collected (locations of observation points for the transect

walks are presented in APPENDIX A).

5.3 Soil Sampling and Analysis The soil samples were only collected from distinctively different modal profiles comprising of A and B horizons or saprolite and were submitted for laboratory analysis to Eco Analytica laboratory, at the Northwest University

in Potchefstroom. The analysis was conducted according to methods set out in the Handbook of Standard Testing for Advisory purposes (Soil Science Society of South Africa, 1990). Soil samples were analysed for

the following parameters:

Three (3) fraction particle size (sand, silt and clay) analysis;

Ammonium acetate (at pH 7) extractable cations (Ca, Mg, K and Na);

Walkley- Black Organic Carbon;

Bray-1 Phosphorus; and

pH and EC.

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

7

Figure 3: Locations of soil sampling and observation points

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

8

5.4 Land Evaluation 5.4.1 Land Capability Classification

The land capability of the proposed footprint was assessed in accordance with the definitions and system

outlined by Scotney et al. (1987) and updated for South African soils by the Agricultural Research Council (Schoeman, 2000). The criteria used as general guidelines to place soil and land into capability classes are indicated below. This system is based on the Land Capability Classification system of the United

States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Soil Conservation Service by Klingelbiel and Montgomery (1961). The soils were classified into eight (8) capability classes (Table 1) based on varying limitations

(restrictions for rain-fed cropping) of the following soil parameters:

Effective Depth (D);

Soil Texture (T).

Flood Hazard (F);

Erosion Hazard (E);

Internal Drainage (W); and

Mechanical limitations (M).

Table 1: Definition of land capability classes (after Scotney et al. 1987)

Class General Description

ARABLE LAND SUITABILITY CLASSES

I Land has little permanent limitations that restrict the use thereof and has a high potential for intensive crop production.

II Land has some permanent limitations that lower the degree of intensity of crop production but is still of a high potential.

III Land has serious permanent limitations that restrict the choice of alternative crops or the intensity of crop production and is of a moderate potential.

IV Land has very serious permanent limitations that restrict the choice of alternative crops or the intensity of crop production to a great extent.

NON-ARABLE LAND SUITABILITY CLASSES

V Land is not suitable for the production of annual crops, but has a slight erosion hazard under natural veld, permanent pastures, forestry or special crops (crops which give sufficient cover and which, with special conservation measures will keep soil losses at an acceptable level).

VI Land has permanent limitations which make it unsuitable for cultivation and restrict the use of natural veld, forestry and nature life.

VII Land has such serious limitations that it is unsuitable for cultivation and intensification and the use of the land is therefore limited to natural veld, forestry and nature life.

VIII Land has permanent limitations that exclude it from commercial plant production and the use thereof is limited to nature life, recreation, water provision and aesthetic qualities.

The land capability of the proposed footprint was compared to the National Land Capability which was

refined in 2014- 2016. The National Land Capability methodology is based on a spatial evaluation

modelling approach and a raster spatial data layer consisting of fifteen (15) land capability evaluation values (Table 2), usable on a scale of 1:50 000 – 1:100 000 (DAFF, 2017). The previous system is based

on a classification approach, with 8 classes (Table 1).

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

9

Table 2: National Land Capability Values (DAFF, 2017)

Land Capability Evaluation Value Land Capability Description

1 Very Low

2

3 Very Low to Low

4

5 Low

6 Low to Moderate

7

8 Moderate

9 Moderate to High

10

11 High

12 High to Very High

13

14 Very High

15

5.4.2 Agricultural Potential Classification

Land Capability Classification (LCC) categorises soils into groups based on the ability to sustain typical cultivated rain-fed crops, which do not require intensive site conditioning or amelioration. The capability classification groups individual soil types (soil mapping units) into groups of similar soils (capability units or

classes) based on the criteria for the eight capability classes. Land with higher LCC typically has lower crop production input costs, producing higher yields than land with lower LCC (Singer, 2006). The LCC system thus provides an economic estimation of the soil agricultural capability (or potential). In previous

soil specialist studies conducted as part of EIA work, the soil agricultural potential was determined in terms of the land capability classification (Paterson, 2009; Kruger et al., 2009). The soil agricultural potential for

this study was determined based on the LCC, by assigning qualitative criteria ratings such as high,

moderate, marginal to low (Table 3) to the land capability classes.

Table 3: Criteria for agricultural potential classification

LCC Soil Agricultural Potential

I – III High

V – VI Medium

VII – VIII Marginal to Low

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

10

5.5 Land Use Mapping The current land use of the study area was mapped and described in accordance to the Spatial Planning

and Land Use Management Act (Act No.16 of 2013).

6.0 RESULTS

6.1 Environmental context

6.2 Climate The climate in the study area is mild, generally warm and temperate. It is a summer rainfall area. The

climate is classified as Cwb by the Köppen-Geiger system. The average annual temperature is 16.6 °C with an average 677 mm precipitation. Rainfall occurs as convective thunderstorms and is sometimes

accompanied by hail. Highveld thundershowers occur during the summer months with the winters left

generally dry but with frost and fog occurring in the mornings.

6.2.1 Temperature

The warmest month of the year is January, with an average temperature of 21.5 °C and a maximum of

27.9 °C. June has the lowest average temperature, of 9.2 °C and a minimum of 0.5°C.

Table 4: Average monthly temperatures in Sasolburg

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Avg. Temp (°C) 21.5 21.2 19.7 16.2 12.6 9.2 9.2 12.3 16.4 19.1 20.1 21.1

Min. Temp (°C) 15.2 14.9 13.1 9.1 4.3 0.5 0.3 3.3 8 11.6 13.4 14.5

Max. Temp (°C) 27.9 27.6 26.4 23.4 20.9 17.9 18.2 21.4 24.9 26.6 26.8 27.7

Figure 4: Average monthly temperatures at Sasolburg (https://en.climate-data.org/africa/south-africa/free-state/sasolburg-27320/)

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

11

6.2.2 Rainfall

Rainfall data from Meteorological Station C1E001 was used. The station metadata is summarised in Table

5. The selection is based on the fact that this station is reasonably close to the study area with a reliable

and long daily rainfall record from October 1938 to September 2018 plotted in Figure 5

Table 5: Metadata for Station C1E001

Station Name

Station No

Distance (km) from proposed shaft complex

Latitude Longitude Record (years)

MAP (mm)

Altitude (masl)

Deneysville C1E001 9.5 -26.88439 28.11081 80 629 1 495

The area is a summer rainfall region with low rainfall from May to September (below 26 mm/month). The annual precipitation measured at the gauge varies between 403 mm/year and 1 010 mm/year. The average monthly rainfall depths measured are plotted in Figure 5. The plot highlights the seasonality of the

rainfall, showing the highest rainfall during November, December and January.

Figure 5: Average monthly rainfall at Deneysville (October 1938 to September 2018)

6.2.3 Evaporation

Average monthly S-pan evaporation at site C1E001, illustrated in Figure 6, clearly shows the high levels of

evaporation compared to the rainfall in the area.

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

12

Figure 6: Average monthly evaporation at site C1E001

6.3 Local Geology The geology of the study area has a map which is of 1:90 000 scale (dated 1986), comprises of a network

of thick Karoo Dolerite sills, sheets and dykes mainly intrusive to a Vryheid form with an alluvium consisting of fine to coarse-grained, sandstone, shale, coal and seams. Groundwater is generally of good

quality across the study area where water can be classified as Na-bicarbonate type water.

6.4 Topography The topography of the proposed Metsimaholo shaft complex site is flat with an average slope of 0 - 5 % consisting of a straight slope curvature. Groundwater flows relatively from the South East to North Western side with shallow aquifer flow from the elevated areas towards the drainages. Elevations are estimated to be around 1477 mm.

February 2019

Figure 7: Regional geological map showing Seriti Metsimaholo Project Area

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

14

6.5 Regional soils, land capability and land use A reconnaissance landtype survey on a scale of 1:250 000 was conducted in the early 1970’s to compile

inventories of the natural resources of South Africa in terms of soil, climate and terrain. The survey highlights the dominant soils in each landtype and their respective percentages. This information is however not a

substitute for a detailed soil map but gives a very good indication of where certain soil types occur.

The landtype memoirs and associated maps of 2626 Wes-Rand and 2628 East Rand, (Landtype Survey Staff,

1976-2006) indicated that the study area comprises of landtypes Ea27 and Bb23.

The Bb23 landtype makes up the majority of the study area. The Bb23 landtype comprises Hutton, Avalon, Mispah, Rensburg, Westleigh form all make up at least 10% , with the Valsrivier, Longlands, Sterkspruit,

Katspruit, Wasbank, Escourt, Glenrosa forms representing between 1 -5% of the landtype unit.

Landtype unit Bb represents “a catena that in its perfect form is represented by (in order from highest to

lowest in the upland landscape) Hutton, Bainsvlei, Avalon and Longlands forms. The valley bottom is occupied

by one or other gley soil (e.g. Rensburg, Willowbrook, Katspruit, Champagne forms).”

The Ea27 landtype comprises 44% of the Arcadia soil form, 18% of the Valsrivier form, 14% of the Swartland form, 11% of the Bonheim form, 11% of the Rensburg form and 1% of the Willowbrook form. Landtype unit Ea

indicates “land with high base status, dark coloured and/or red soils, usually clayey, associated with basic

parent materials. A land type, more than half of which is covered by soil forms with vertic, melanic and red structured diagnostic horizons. Land types in which these soils cover less than half of the area may also qualify for inclusion (i) where duplex soils occur in the non-rock land but where unit Ea soils cover a larger

area than the duplex soils, or (ii) where exposed rock covers more than half the land type.” (AGIS, 2016).

6.5.1 Land Capability

The land capability classification was undertaken at a national scale, using the landtype data on a scale of

1:250 000 (Schoeman et. al. 2000).

The land capability for the project area, as defined in the National Land Capability for South Africa, is

presented in Table 6. The distribution of the various capability classes in shown in Figure 8.

Table 6: Breakdown of National Land Capability of Project area

National Land Capability Area (ha) Area (%)

Low to Moderate – value 7 2.6 1.1

Moderate – value 8 107.1 43.6

Moderate to High – value 9 134.4 54.7

Moderate to High – value 10 1.7 0.7

Total 245.8 100

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

15

Figure 8: National Land Capability Classification of Project site

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

16

6.6 Field Survey and Soil Classification The soils observed during the survey were classified according to the Taxonomic Soil system for South Africa

(Soil Classification Working Group, 1991). Six different soil forms were identified within the project area and a detailed legend of the observed soil forms is presented in Table 7. The spatial distribution of the observed

soils is presented in Figure 9. The soil profile descriptions are provided in APPENDIX B.

The Bainsvlei soil form within the project area represents ~37 %, Westleigh soil form represents ~28 %,

Clovelly represents ~18 %, Bonheim represents ~ 12 %, Steendal represents ~ 6% and the Etosha form

represents ~ 1.5 % of the total project area surveyed.

Table 7: Physical properties of Soil Profiles evaluated

Soil form Map Unit Sample ID

Horizon Top Bottom Slope Sand Clay Silt Soil texture

mm % (%<2mm)

Clovelly Cv1200 OB1.1 A 0 350 0 - 2 80.2 10.1 9.7 loamy sand

OB1.2 B1 350 500 76.7 14.8 8.6 sandy loam

OB1.3 B2 500 1200 60.5 30.5 9 sandy clay loam

Bainsvlei Bv1200 OB3.1 A 0 300 2 - 5 85.6 9.8 4.7 loamy sand

OB3.2 B1 300 650 (1200) 66.6 25.8 7.6 sandy clay loam

Bonheim Bo1110 OB4.1 A 0 200 0 - 2 58.0 26.5 15.6 sandy clay loam

OB4.2 B1 200 400 45.1 43.5 11.5 sandy clay

Etosha Et1121 OB8.1 A 0 220/300 0 - 2 81.4 11.8 6.8 sandy loam

OB8.2 B1 220/300 630 70.4 24.7 4.9 sandy clay loam

OB8.3 B2 630 750 67.3 27.8 5 sandy clay loam

OB8.4 B3 750+ 68.6 20.2 11.2 sandy clay loam

Clovelly Cv1200 OB9.1 A 0 400 0 - 2 81.1 12 6.9 sandy loam

OB9.2 B1 400 730 62.2 32.5 5.3 sandy clay loam

OB9.3 B2 730+ - - - Impermeable clay

Clovelly Cv1200 OB11.1 A 0 250 0 - 2 88.2 7.3 4.6 loamy sand

OB11.2 B1 250 350 76.9 18.6 4.5 sandy loam

OB11.3 B2 350 650 60.3 34.9 4.8 sandy clay

Westleigh We2000 OB12.1 A 0 350 0 - 2 81.9 11.3 6.8 sandy loam


OB12.3 B2 850+ 67.7 27.5 4.8 sandy clay loam

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

17

Soil form Map Unit Sample ID

Horizon Top Bottom Slope Sand Clay Silt Soil texture

mm % (%<2mm)

Bonheim Bo1110 OB13.1 A 0 50 0 - 2 57.7 26.5 15.8 sandy clay loam

OB13.2 B1 50 300 48.7 40 11.3 sandy clay

Steendal Sn2000 OB15.1 A 0 300 2 - 5 46.7 33.7 19.6 sandy clay loam

OB15.2 B1 300 700 42.2 37.6 20.2 clay loam

Bainsvlei Bv1200 OB16.1 A 0 250 - 500 0 - 2 79.4 13.8 6.8 sandy loam


February 2019 18101804-324135-5

18

Figure 9: Distribution of soil forms within surveyed area

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

19

6.7 Soil Chemical Analysis A summary of analytical laboratory results of sampled representative soil profiles is presented in Table 8.

Laboratory certificates of the analysis are presented in APPENDIX C.

The soil chemical results were evaluated using the guideline for interpretation of soil analysis as outlined in

the Fertilizer Society of South Africa’s Fertilizer Handbook (2007). The soils have the following soil fertility

related properties:

The soil textures of representative soil forms are predominantly sandy clay loam to sandy loam.

Most of the analysed soil forms are slightly acidic to slightly alkaline (4.8 < pH < 8. 5). The salinity of all

representative soil forms will have no effect on plant growth as the electrical conductivity (ECsat-paste) is

less than 200 mS/m;

The cations status of soils is highlighted in the table below. The cation status of the soils is medium to

high for all soils analysed.

The concentration of phosphorus (Bray-1) in majority of the soils is low (Bray 1 P < 8 mg/kg) in the

subsoils. The topsoils mostly have medium to high levels of P, typical of cultivated land.

Table 8: Chemical properties of representative soil forms

Soil Form Sample ID Horizon pH (H2O) EC Ca Mg K Na P OC

(mS/m) mg/kg %

Clovelly 1200

OB1.1 A 5.46 26.00 699.60 99.20 281.40 16.70 10.00 0.89

OB1.2 B1 6.17 34.00 1138.20 205.80 300.00 18.10 6.70

OB1.3 B2 6.12 40.00 1715.60 442.60 365.90 34.10 5.80

Bainsvlei 1200

OB3.1 A 4.94 22.00 5136.00 71.10 225.20 3.10 29.00 0.89

OB3.2 B1 5.58 30.00 1540.41 356.40 257.00 33.10 8.80

Bonheim 1110

OB4.1 A 5.39 35.00 2005.30 481.00 424.60 17.50 7.30 4.13

OB4.2 B1 5.81 36.00 3424.40 896.70 363.60 85.30 5.90

Etosha 1121

OB8.1 A 5.16 38.00 879.10 238.20 433.50 6.90 58.60 1.46

OB8.2 B1 6.55 31.00 1824.00 727.40 259.70 25.10 6.55

OB8.3 B2 7.26 36.00 2400.50 1053.00 300.20 53.70 7.26

OB8.4 B3 8.50 56.00 5371.60 1131.20 334.70 90.90 8.50

Clovelly 1200

OB9.1 A 6.45 32.00 1339.50 233.4 535.30 7.70 9.80 1.74

OB9.2 B1 5.84 33.00 1837.00 498.20 453.60 26.10 6.30

Clovelly 1200

OB11.1 A 4.81 86.00 536.60 90.80 262.00 3.80 21.20

OB11.2 B1 5.59 42.00 1160.40 317.40 283.20 19.30 8.50 1.10

OB11.3 B2 6.27 35.00 2040.00 774.50 277.00 81.30 6.20

Westleigh OB12.1 A 4.95 30.00 593.60 168.90 240.50 10.30 16.30

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

20

Soil Form Sample ID Horizon pH (H2O) EC Ca Mg K Na P OC

(mS/m) mg/kg %

2000 OB12.2 B1 7.17 47.00 1946.60 950.60 204.20 159.90 6.80 1.27

OB12.3 B2 8.07 86.00 2245.80 1113.60 225.60 271.90 6.50

Bonheim 1110

OB13.1 A 6.08 138.00 3760.70 850.50 576.40 48.00 26.10

OB13.2 B1 7.48 40.00 5710.00 1159.10 312.00 196.30 7.30 2.70

Steendal 2000

OB15.1 A 7.90 64.00 8591.40 488.20 324.10 70.40 6.00

OB15.2 B1 8.52 66.00 8204.50 709.80 258.80 220.40 5.70 2.67

Bainsvlei 1200

OB16.1 A 7.07 60.00 2039.20 460.70 394.90 31.80 53.90

OB16.2 B1 7.00 36.00 2351.80 987.30 344.10 79.90 7.90 1.31

Min 4.81 22.00 536.60 71.10 204.20 3.10 5.70 0.89

Max 8.52 138.00 8591.40 1159.10 576.40 271.90 58.60 4.13

Average 6.41 47.16 2739.67 594.68 329.50 64.46 13.72 1.82

Note: Cation status colour coding

Low medium High

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

21

6.8 Land Evaluation 6.8.1 Site Specific Land Capability Classification

The land capabilities present in the Seriti Metsimaholo project area were assessed in accordance to the methodology outlined in Section 5.4.1. The results from the field observations and the soil properties

presented in Table 9 and were compared to the land capability criteria presented in Section 5.4.1. The soil

capability and land capability classification are presented in Table 9.

The soil capability classes are derived from the evaluation of terrain (field observations) and soil factors (soil

properties).

For the land capability, the evaluation of the climatic factors alongside the soil capability is required (Note:

Land capability considers the restrictions for rain-fed cropping and thus needs to consider the climatic factors

which may limit for rain-fed crop production).

The site specific land capability of the project is Class III (84%) and Class IV(16%).

Examples of Class III properties are:

Moderately steep slopes.

High susceptibility to water or wind erosion or severe adverse effects of past erosion.

Frequent flooding accompanied by some crop damage.

Very slow permeability of the subsoil.

Wetness or some continuing waterlogging after drainage.

Shallow soil depth to bedrock, hardpan, fragipan or claypan that limit the rooting zone and the water

storage.

Low water-holding capacity.

Low fertility not easily corrected.

Moderate salinity or sodicity.

Examples of Class IV properties are:

Steep slopes.

Severe susceptibility to water or wind erosion or severe effects of past erosion.

Shallow soils.

Low water-holding capacity.

Frequent flooding accompanied by severe crop damage

Excessive wetness with continuing hazard of waterlogging after drainage.

Severe salinity or sodicity.

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

22

Table 9: Site Specific Soil capability classification and Land capability classification

Soil form Map Unit Sample ID Horizon Top (mm) Bottom (mm) Terrain Factors Soil Factors Soil Capability Class

Climatic Factors

Land Capability Classes

Erosion hazard

Flood hazard

Depth texture Wetness class

Mechanical limitation

Clovelly Cv1200 OB1.1 A 0 350 E1 F1 D1 T2 W1 MB0 S2 C3 III

OB1.2 B1 350 500

OB1.3 B2 500 1200

Bainsvlei Bv1200 OB3.1 A 0 300 E2 F1 D1 T3 W3 MB0 S3 C3 III

OB3.2 B1 300 650 (1200)

Bonheim Bo1110 OB4.1 A 0 200 E1 F3 D4 T1 W2 MB0 S4 C3 IV

OB4.2 B1 200 400

Etosha Et1121 OB8.1 A 0 220/300 E1 F3 D2 T2 W4 MB0 S4 C3 IV

OB8.2 B1 220/300 630

OB8.3 B2 630 750

OB8.4 B3 750


OB9.2 B1 400 730

OB9.3

730+


OB11.2 B1 250 350

OB11.3 B2 350 650

Westleigh We2000 OB12.1 A 0 350 E1 F1 D2 T2 W3 MB0 S3 C3 III

OB12.2 B1 350 850

OB12.3 B2 850+

Bonheim Bo1110 OB13.1 A 0 50 E1 F3 D4 T1 W2 MB0 S4 C3 IV

OB13.2 B1 50 300

Steendal Sn2000 OB15.1 A 0 300 E1 F3 D2 T1 W4 MB0 S4 C3 IV

OB15.2 B1 300 700

Bainsvlei Bv1200 OB16.1 A 0 250 - 500 E1 F1 D1 T2 W3 MB0 S3 C3 III

OB16.2 B1 250 1200

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

23

Figure 10: Site Specific Land Capability Values for Seriti Metsimaholo Project area

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

24

6.8.2 Soil Agricultural Potential

The results of the LCC shows that most of the Seriti Metsimaholo project area has High to medium potential to

produce dry land crops.

6.8.3 Estimated soil availability for rehabilitation actions

Based on the soil classification, soil map and horizon thickness recorded in field, the volume of topsoil and subsoil was estimated. The calculated volumes are indicated separately for the topsoil and subsoil. The

calculation is based on the survey area (as shown in the soil map).

Table 10: Estimated volumes of topsoil and subsoil for project infrastructure area

Name Area (ha) A-horizon thickness (mm)

B-horizon thickness (mm)

Topsoil Volume (m3)

Subsoil Volume (m3)

Cv1200 45.5 333 700 151515 318500

Bv1200 91.2 300 900 273600 820800

We2000 68.8 350 500 240800 344000

Sn2000 6.6 300 400 19800 26400

Bo1110 30.2 200 300 60400 90600

Et1211 3.7 250 500 9250 18500

Total 246

755365 1618800

6.9 Land Use The current land use was delineated as per the information obtained from the recent areal imagery (Google

Earth imagery dated 23 June 2017) and field observations. Most of the land within the proposed project area

is used for agricultural use, particularly grain cropping.

7.0 DATA GAPS AND ASSESSMENT SHORTCOMINGS The following limitations are relevant to this report:

Relevant information relating to the project such as general site arrangement drawings, topographical survey data made available to Golder by Seriti was used in the planning of the field survey and overall assessment of impacts;

The methodologies and procedures applied in this study are generally followed in the pedology and broader soil science community;

The presented findings in this report is based on our current understanding of the project and the level of information available at the time of the assessment and can be adjusted if additional information becomes available; and

The detailed civil engineering procedures/standards for final landform was not available at the time of preparation of this report. All soil volume estimations are based on current site layout provided to Golder.

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

25

8.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

8.1 Methodology for Assessing Impact Significance The significance of identified impacts was determined using the approach outlined below (terminology from

the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism Guideline document on EIA Regulations, April 1998). This approach incorporates two aspects for assessing the potential significance of impacts, namely

occurrence and severity, which are further sub-divided as follows:

Table 11: Impact assessment factors

Occurrence Severity

Probability of occurrence Duration of occurrence Scale/extent of impact Magnitude of impact

To assess these factors for each impact, the following four ranking scales are used:

Table 12: Impact assessment scoring methodology

Magnitude Duration

10- Very high/unknown 5- Permanent (>10 years)

8- High 4- Long term (7 - 10 years, impact ceases after site closure has been obtained)

6- Moderate 3- Medium-term (3 months- 7 years, impact ceases after the operational life of the activity)

4- Low 2- Short-term (0 - 3 months, impact ceases after the construction phase)

2- Minor 1- Immediate

Scale Probability

5- International 5- Definite/Unknown

4- National 4- Highly Probable

3- Regional 3- Medium Probability

2- Local 2- Low Probability

1- Site Only 1- Improbable

0- None 0- None

Significance Points= (Magnitude + Duration + Scale) x Probability.

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

26

Table 13: Significance of impact based on point allocation

Points Significance Description

SP>60 High environmental

significance

An impact which could influence the decision about whether or not to proceed with the project regardless of any possible mitigation.

SP 30 - 60 Moderate environmental

significance

An impact or benefit which is sufficiently important to require management and which could have an influence on the decision unless it is mitigated.

SP<30 Low

environmental significance

Impacts with little real effect and which will not have an influence on or require

modification of the project design.

+ Positive impact An impact that is likely to result in positive consequences/effects.

For the methodology outlined above, the following definitions were used:

Magnitude is a measure of the degree of change in a measurement or analysis (e.g. the area of pasture, or the concentration of a metal in water compared to the water quality guideline value for the metal), and is classified as none/negligible, low, moderate or high. The categorization of the impact magnitude may be based on a set of criteria (e.g. health risk levels, ecological concepts and/or professional judgment) pertinent to each of the discipline areas and key questions analysed. The specialist study must attempt to quantify the magnitude and outline the rationale used. Appropriate, widely-recognised standards are to be used as a measure of the level of impact;

Scale/Geographic extent refers to the area that could be affected by the impact and is classified as site, local, regional, national, or international;

Duration refers to the length of time over which an environmental impact may occur: i.e. immediate/transient, short-term (0 to 7 years), medium term (8 to 15 years), long-term (greater than 15 years with impact ceasing after closure of the project), or permanent; and

Probability of occurrence is a description of the probability of the impact actually occurring as improbable (less than 5% chance), low probability (5% to 40% chance), medium probability (40% to 60% chance), highly probable (most likely, 60% to 90% chance) or definite (impact will definitely occur).

8.2 Project Phases The environmental impacts were considered with respect to the Project Description detailed in Section 2.0,

with the understanding that the following project activities are anticipated:

8.2.1 Construction phase

Topsoil is removed prior to mining of the new areas and either stockpiled or transported directly to areas

at the mine requiring rehabilitation;

A HDPE lined PCD will be constructed;

Construction of shaft infrastructure and stockpile areas (waste);

Construction of laydown areas, parking bays;

Haul roads connecting the tip, stockpile areas, infrastructure laydown areas will be constructed.

Access roads will be constructed;

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

27

A fire water tank and raw water dams will be constructed’

8.2.2 Operational phase

Material (product and discard) handling and movement via haul trucks and conveyor;

Overburden, discard and interburden will be stored at designated stockpiles;

8.2.3 Closure and rehabilitation phase

The following activities are anticipated during this phase:

Any mine offices and buildings that are not required for alternative (e.g. community, business or

industrial) use will be demolished;

All infrastructure (as per project layout, Figure 2) will be removed;

The shaft will be backfilled;

Project site will be graded to ensure long-term drainage conditions on site; and

Regrading and revegetation of rehabilitated surfaces to ensure stabilisation of slopes.

8.3 Potential Impacts The soil processes and relevant soil characteristics were assessed in relation to the activities anticipated

during the construction, operation and decommissioning phases of the project. The potential impacts on soils

and/or land use that have been identified for the project phases are presented in Table 14 - Table 16. The key

soil aspects.

8.3.1 Identified Impacts for the Construction phase

The impacts identified per anticipated activity for the construction phase are listed in Table 14.

Table 14: Anticipated activities and related soil and land use impacts for the construction phase

Anticipated activities Potential effect on soil and land use

Vegetation clearance as project infrastructure are constructed

Loss of arable land with high agricultural potential.

Loss or modification of current land use in areas of

infrastructure development.

Loss of soils through erosion.

Loss of soil nutrients as a results of vegetation

stripping.

Loss of soil organic matter during vegetation stripping.

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

28


Topsoil stockpiling Loss of soils through erosion, particularly for topsoil stockpiles with unvegetated steep slopes.

Homogenization of soil profiles, i.e. loss of characteristic horizons.

Loss and/or reduction in soil biodiversity in stockpiled

soil.

Loss of soil nutrients, particularly for unvegetated topsoil stockpiles.

Loss of soil organic matter due to increased aeration (caused by soil disturbance) and subsequent organic

matter decomposition.

Modification of existing landscape and hydrological regimes.

Construction of access roads, haul roads,

stockpile areas, pollution control dam, raw water dam, laydown areas

Burial of soil / covering of soils by camp

accommodation facility, haul roads, mine waste facilities

and processing plant.

Soil compaction in areas where active heavy

machinery will be mobilised for the development of the accommodation facility, mine infrastructure and

associated utilities.

Increased run-off (and erosion) in compacted areas and

modification of natural infiltration.

Soil contamination from hydrocarbon and chemical

spills including sterilisation by cement pollutants.

Transportation and use of equipment Increased soil compaction and run-off at equipment

and machinery laydown areas.

Soil contamination from hydrocarbon spills at

equipment and machinery laydown areas; and vehicle workshop.

8.3.2 Identified Impacts for the Operational phase

The impacts identified per anticipated activity for the operational phase are listed in Table 15.

Table 15: Anticipated activities and related soil and land use impacts for the operational phase


February 2019 18101804-324135-5

29


Shaft development,

Drilling and blasting Change in Land use.

Soil disturbance due to excavation activities at pit

location as well as in surrounding soils.

Loss of potentially arable land.

Modification of natural soil hydrological regimes.

Potential effects on soil and land use with the

development of the open pit may be similar to what is

anticipated for construction phase.

Hauling of coal and waste rock for storage in their respective storage facilities.

Soil contamination from hydrocarbon spills from

vehicles; and

Soil contamination from spillage/poor handling of

product and waste rock outside the designated areas.

Stockpiling of product, discard and waste rock

Soil contamination due to leaching of soluble product and waste constituents into soils underlying the

stockpiles.

Contamination of soil adjacent to product and waste

stockpiles due to run-off or seepage of soluble product or

waste rock constituents.

Progressive rehabilitation of facilities and areas which are no longer in use

Soil disturbance due to earth moving activities.

Loss of soil organic matter due to increased aeration (caused by soil disturbance) and subsequent organic


Transportation (conveying or hauling) of

product and waste rock Soil contamination from spillage/poor handling of

product and waste rock outside the designated areas.

Transportation and use of equipment Increased soil compaction and run-off at equipment and

machinery laydown areas.

Soil contamination from hydrocarbon spills at equipment and machinery laydown areas; and vehicle

workshop;

Containment of sediment laden water in

PCD Soil contamination due to seepage of soluble

constituents from sediment into adjacent soils or soils

underlying unlined PCD.

Contamination of soils adjacent to PCD or along

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

30


pipelines due to pipe bursts or spillages (overflow at

PCD) of sediment laden water.

8.3.3 Identified Impacts for the Decommissioning Phase

The impacts identified per anticipated activity for the decommissioning and closure phase are listed in Table

16.

Table 16: Anticipated activities and related soil and land use impacts for the decommission and closure phase


Removal of redundant infrastructure Spillage of chemical solutions during the dismantling of

plant equipment, pipelines or pumps which were in contact with chemicals solution may contaminate the

soils.

Spillage of diesel, oils and greases from the dismantled plant equipment, resulting in hydrocarbon contamination

of exposed soils. (soil contamination)

Backfilling of shaft Spilling of backfill material during haulage outside the

designated areas. (soil contamination)

Grading of project site to ensure long-term drainage conditions on site

Soil compaction in areas where active heavy machinery will be mobilised for the shaping of the final

landform.

Loss of soil organic matter due to increased aeration

(caused by soil disturbance) and subsequent organic


Soil placement and revegetation of project site.

Soil handling to convey soil from topsoil stockpile to project site for surface rehabilitation activities, may

result in degradation of soil quality due to soil disturbance.

Contamination of soil by handling of soil with

contaminated earth moving machinery (machinery

previously used for handling mine waste such as

waste rock).

8.3.4 Soil aspects impacted

The key soil and land use aspects affected due to the project activities are soil quality degradation, loss of soil

as a resource, land use change, soil contamination, soil compaction and soil erosion.

8.3.4.1 Degradation of soil quality Soil is degraded when it partially or totally loses its capacity to support vegetation productivity. Land degradation means that the soil has lost the capacity to function within natural or managed ecosystem

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

31

boundaries, to sustain plant and animal productivity, maintain or enhance water quality, and support human health and habitation. The vegetation removal and soil disturbance expected during the construction phase will result in the disruption of the nutrient cycling process in the soil, i.e. the source of organic matter (vegetation, debris) is removed with a subsequent reduction in soil biodiversity. Overall, the significance of the impact of soil degradation is rated as high during the construction phase due to the nature of activities occurring during this phase. With appropriate mitigation measures, the significance of this impact can be moderate.

8.3.4.2 Loss of soil as a resource (burial of soil) and land use change With development of mining infrastructure, there will be loss of the current land use to mining. During the construction phase, the land and soils within the project area will gradually be covered by the mine infrastructure. Therefore, during the construction and operation phase the impact on soil as a resource and land use is high since the soil will covered and land use changed to mining. However, during the closure and decommissioning phase, the land use will be returned to the previous land use. The impact on land use during the closure phase is thus low if the rehabilitated land surface is able to sustain dryland cropping.

8.3.4.3 Soil contamination The contamination of soil from spillages of organic hydrocarbons is likely to occur as heavy mobile equipment typically use these chemicals. Contamination especially along the plant area is also anticipated. The contamination of topsoil from cement mixing is also anticipated during the construction phase. These contaminants are likely to leach into the soil resulting in the sterilisation of the soil. Soil contamination will minimise the land suitability for other land uses outside of industrial or mining due to the potential human health risk associated with contaminated soils. The impact significance is considered medium-low, given that the effect will be localized and has the potential to be long-term if contaminants are not removed or contained. With appropriate mitigation measures, the significance of this impact can be low.

8.3.4.4 Soil compaction

This occurs when the soil particles and porous network within are rearranged as a result of pressure applied on the surface. The soil is expected to be more prone to compaction if soil handling and stripping takes place when the soil is in a moist state. Areas where the mine infrastructure will be constructed will have more active compaction due to the increased use of vehicles and heavy machinery during the construction phase. The impact significance is considered low, given that the effect will be localized and restricted to access roads, vehicle hardstand areas and equipment and machinery laydown areas.

8.3.4.5 Soil erosion During the construction phase, areas which were initially covered with vegetation will be exposed, resulting in the increased susceptibility of the soils to erosion. This effect is more pronounced when vegetation is removed, and the soil is left bare during the rainy season, or for stockpiled soils (with steep slopes, sideslopes steeper than 1 in 3) which have not been vegetated before the start of the rainy season. The majority of the land has a moderate hazard to water erosion, though the soils are inherently prone to erosion. Given the disruptive nature of the earth moving activities anticipated during the construction and decommissioning phases, the soil characteristics controlling the soil erodibility (soil organic matter content, structure and permeability) are likely to be altered. The significance of the impact of soil erosion is rated as high during the construction and decommissioning phases. With appropriate mitigation measures, the significance of this impact can be moderate.

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

32

Table 17: Impact on soil and land use significance ratings

ACTIVITY whether listed or not listed. (E.g. Excavations, blasting, stockpiles, discard dumps or dams, Loading, hauling and transport, Water supply dams and boreholes, accommodation, offices, ablution, stores, workshops, processing plant, storm water control, berms, roads, pipelines, power lines, conveyors, etc…etc…etc.).

POTENTIAL IMPACT (e.g. dust, noise, drainage surface disturbance, fly rock, surface water contamination, groundwater contamination, air pollution etc….etc…)

ASPECTS AFFECTED

PHASE In which impact is anticipated (e.g. Construction, commissioning, operational Decommissioning, closure, post-closure)

Mag

nit

ud

e

Du

rati

on

Sca

le

Pro

bab

ility

Sig

nif

ican

ce

Sig

nif

ican

ce w

ith

ou

t M

itig

atio

n

Mag

nit

ud

e

Du

rati

on

Sca

le

Pro

bab

ility

Sig

nif

ican

ce

Sig

nif

ican

ce w

ith

Mit

igat

ion

Detailed Mitigation Measures

Mitigation Type (Modify, remedy, control or stop) e.g. Modify through alternative method; Control through noise control; Control through management and monitoring; Remedy through rehabilitation

Time period for implementation (time period when the measures in the environmental management programme must be implemented Measures must be implemented when required)

Standards to be Achieved (Impact avoided, noise levels, dust levels, rehabilitation standards, end use objectives etc)

Compliance with Standards (A description of how each of the recommendations made, will comply with any prescribed environmental management standards or practices that have been identified by Competent Authorities)

Responsible person

Vegetation clearance as project infrastructure are constructed

Disturbance of soil, resulting in increased decomposition of soil organic matter from topsoil.

Soil degradation

Construction Phase

10 5 1 5 80 High 10 4 1 4 60 Moderate

Procedures on land clearance, soils handling and rehabilitation plan to be adhered to. The following actions must be included in Land clearance form: a) Work should be stopped in land clearance areas during heavy rainfall periods b) Drainage channels and settling ponds must be developed as per the stormwater management plan and maintained. Drainage channels and soakaways must direct runoff away from cleared areas, but not into streams or rivers; c) Sediment deposited in drainage channels and sediment ponds must be removed prior to the rainy season or when channels are deemed to be full. d) All sediment deposited from erosion events needs to be placed on the topsoil stockpile(s); e) Provide adequate road drainage based on climate, road width, surface material, compaction, and maintenance. f) Limit access road gradients to reduce runoff-induced erosion. g) Increase vegetation cover upwind of cleared and exposed areas such as the Waste

Control Construction

phase

As per Seriti Land Clearance Procedure Soils Stripping and Handling Procedures.

As per Seriti Land Clearance Procedure Soils Stripping and Handling Procedures.

Environmental Manager

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

33

Rock facility and Plant areas.

h) Soil stockpiles mustbe developed as per theCompany Soils,Stripping and HandlingProcedures.i) Topsoil and Subsoilstockpiles must bevegetated once the finalstockpiles areconstructed;j) Ripping, replacingsoils and revegetatingclosed areas such asaccess roads and laydown areas followingcompletion ofconstruction works; andk) Periodic erosionmonitoring to beundertaken in clearedareas.

Soil stripping and stockpiling

- Loss of soilsthrough erosion,particularly fortopsoilstockpiles withunvegetatedsteep slopes-Homogenizationof soil profiles,i.e. Loss ofcharacteristichorizons.- Loss and/orreduction in soilbiodiversity instockpiled soil.- Loss of soilnutrients, particularly for unvegetated topsoil stockpiles. - Loss of soilorganic matterdue toincreasedaeration(caused by soildisturbance)and subsequentorganic matterdecomposition.- Modification ofexistinglandscape and

Soil degradation

Construction Phase

10 5 1 5 80 High 10 4 1 4 60 Moderate

Make sure that the results from the pre-mining soil survey are used effectively for the stripping phase to lead to optimal stockpiling. Ensure that there is participation by a soil scientist in the stripping and stockpiling process. Limit vehicle traversing on stockpiles. Implement concurrent rehabilitation measures for soils and protect soil stockpiles from erosion by utilising soils erosion procedures. Minimise stockpile height to <3 m. Re-use stockpiled soil within as short a period as possible (within 3-5 years). Strip and stockpile soils from seasonal pans separately, ideally in a similar landscape position to its origin, i.e. valley bottom.

Control

As required during soil stripping & stockpiling

Stockpile height not exceeding 3 m, where practically possible. Re-use stockpiled soil within as short a period as possible (within 3-5 years)- as per Coaltech Research Association NPC Project 8.2.6 June 2016 report.

Coaltech Research Association NPC

Project 8.2.6 June 2016 report


February 2019 18101804-324135-5

34

hydrological regimes.

Construction of project

infrastructure (refer to

Infrastructure map)

Burial of soil / covering of soils

by camp accommodation

facility, haul roads, mine

waste facilities and processing

plant. Soil compaction in areas where active heavy

machinery will be mobilised for

the development of

the accommodation

facility, mine infrastructure

and associated utilities.

Increased run-off (and

erosion) in compacted areas and

modification of natural

infiltration. Soil

contamination from

hydrocarbon and chemical

spills including sterilisation by

cement pollutants.

Soil availability. Soil quality

Construction Phase

10 5 1 5 80 High 6 4 1 5 55 Moderate

Final Project infrastructure, laydown and access areas will be clearly indicated in final construction plans provided to contractors/employees. The plans will consider environmental (soils) constraints. Access roads (etc.) will be planned to avoid sensitive areas. Contractors (in particular heavy machinery) will be restricted to designated areas as defined by the Environmental Department. Tracked vehicles will be utilised in soil clearance activities as per soil stripping and handling procedures. The extent of the fenced area will be minimised. Procedures on land clearance, soils handling and rehabilitation plan to be adhered to. The mine is to consider implementing pre-clearance permits prior to site clearance activities, which will be monitored by responsible personnel.

Control through management of construction activities on areas allocated for new infrastructure. Ensure that activities only occur in designated areas.

During project

Contaminant levels below SSV2 (GN. 331. Norms and Standards for Remediation of Contaminated Land & Soil Quality)

GN. 331. Norms and Standards for Remediation of Contaminated Land & Soil Quality


February 2019 18101804-324135-5

35

Transportation and use of

equipment - potential spills of chemicals

(e.g., hydrocarbon).

Soil contamination on adjacent

land potentially occurring due to

inappropriate waste disposal and potential oil

and diesel leakages from vehicles and machinery

Contamination of soils by

hydrocarbon pollutants.

Increased soil compaction and

run-off at equipment and

machinery laydown areas.

Soil contamination.

Soil compaction.

Construction Phase

10 5 1 3 48 Moderate 6 2 1 2 18 Low

- All vehicles and machinery shall be kept in good working order and inspected on a regular basis for possible leaks and shall be repaired as soon as possible if required. - Repairs shall be carried out in a dedicated repair area only, unless in-situ repair is necessary as a result of a breakdown. - Drip trays shall be placed under vehicles that require in-situ repairs. - Drip trays shall be emptied into designated containers only and the contents disposed of at a licenced hazardous material disposal facility. - Accidental spills (concrete, chemicals, process water, hydrocarbons, waste) need to be reported as soon as practical so that effective remediation and clean-up strategies and procedures can be implemented. - Where possible, soil that is contaminated by fuel or oil spills, for example, from vehicles, will be collected to be treated at a pre-determined and dedicated location, or will be treated in-situ, using sand, soil or cold cole-ash as absorption medium. Soil compaction during construction and decommissioning phases cannot be avoided as heavy machinery will be operational in all areas where disturbance is anticipated. Storage of chemicals should be within bunded areas.

- Identify areas where the soil was impacted. - Control through management or remediation options. -Prevent by restricting spillage from construction vehicles. - Control by implementation of storm water management measures. - Remedy by treatment of contaminated soils.

During project

Contaminant levels below SSV2 (GN. 331. Norms and Standards for Remediation of Contaminated Land & Soil Quality)


Shaft development,

drilling and blasting

Loss/change of current land use. Soil disturbance due to excavation activities at pit location as well as in surrounding soils. Modification of natural soil hydrological regime.

Land use Soil quality

Operation Phase 10 5 1 5 80 High 10 5 1 5 80 High Impact remains high

during this phase

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

36

Loss of potentially arable land. (Potential effects on soil and land use with the development of the open pit may be similar to what is anticipated for construction phase)

Conveying of coal to silos, hauling of waste rock for storage in their respective storage facilities

Soil contamination from hydrocarbon spills from vehicles; and Soil contamination from spillage/poor handling of product and waste rock outside the designated areas.

Soil quality Operation phase 10 5 1 5 80 High 6 4 1 2 22 Low

Implement suitable measures on mining infrastructure such as the Product and Waste rock Stockpile areas, PCD's to minimise soil contamination by controlling seepage and runoff. Implementing regular site inspections for materials handling and storage. Design conveyor to limit coal spillage. Maintain good housekeeping along conveyor belt route (e.g. clear coal spillages regularly)

Reduce through

eliminating contaminant

source

During project Comply to GN.

704 Comply to GN. 704


Stockpiling of discard and waste rock. Containment of sediment laden water in PCD

Soil contamination

due to leaching of soluble

product and waste

constituents into soils underlying the stockpiles; Contamination of soil adjacent to product and

waste stockpiles due

to run-off or seepage of

soluble product or waste rock constituents.

Soil quality Operation Phase 8 3 3 5 70 High 4 2 1 2 14 Low

Implement suitable measures on mining infrastructure such as the Product and Waste rock Stockpile areas, PCD's to minimise soil contamination by controlling seepage and runoff. Implementing regular site inspections for materials handling and storage.

Reduce through

eliminating contaminant

source

Operation phase Comply to GN.

704 Comply to GN. 704


Spills of chemicals (e.g., hydrocarbon).

Soil contamination on adjacent

land potentially occurring due to

inappropriate waste disposal and potential oil

and diesel leakages from vehicles and machinery

Contamination of soils by

hydrocarbon pollutants

Soil contamination

Operational Phase

4 5 1 3 30 Moderate 6 2 1 2 18 Low

- Accidental spills (concrete, chemicals, process water, hydrocarbons, waste) need to be reported as soon as practical so that effective remediation and clean-up strategies and procedures can be implemented. -Where possible, soil that is contaminated by fuel or oil spills, for example, from vehicles, will be collected to be treated at a pre-determined and dedicated location, or will be treated in situ, using sand, soil or cold

- Identify areas where the soil was impacted. - Control through

management or remediation

options. -Prevent by restricting

spillage from construction

vehicles. - Control by

implementation of storm water management

measures. - Remedy by treatment of

During project

Compliance to Seriti Spillage/Clean-up Procedure. Ensure soil contaminant levels below SSV1.

Comply to GN. 331 Environmental Manager

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

37

cole-ash as absorption medium. - Practice good housekeeping in chemical storage areas and ensure that storage areas are bunded.

contaminated soils.

Removal of redundant infrastructure

Spillage of chemical solutions during the dismantling of plant equipment, pipelines or pumps which were in contact with chemicals solution may contaminate the soils; Spillage of diesel, oils and greases from the dismantled plant equipment, resulting in hydrocarbon contamination of exposed soils.

Soil contamination

Decommissioning & Closure Phase

6 4 3 3 39 Moderate 4 2 1 2 14 Low

Ensure proper handling of hazardous chemicals and materials (e.g. fuel, oil, cement, concrete, reagents, etc.) as per their corresponding Safety Data Sheets (SDS); Dismantling of plant equipment and machinery should be carried out in designated appropriate facilities fitted with spillage containment, floors and sumps to capture any fugitive oils and greases. Develop detailed procedures for spills containment and soils clean up. Conduct soil assessment to determine post decommissioning/ closure soil quality on rehabilitated infrastructural footprint

Control through

minimizing occurrence of contaminant

source


Comply with targets set in Rehabilitation Strategy and

Implementation Plan (RSIP) &

EMPr

Implement approved RSIP & EMPr.

Comply with targets set in RSIP & EMPr


Grading of project site to ensure long-term drainage conditions on site

Soil compaction in areas where active heavy machinery will be mobilised for the shaping of the final landform; and Loss of soil organic matter due to increased aeration (caused by soil disturbance) and subsequent organic matter decomposition.

Soil compaction Soil quality Soil erosion


8 5 1 5 70 High 6 4 1 3 33 Moderate

Where possible, re-use stockpiled soil within as short a period as possible (within 3-5 years). Use appropriate soil handling machinery (NOT heavy earth moving equipment used for mining operations) to minimize compaction Limit vehicle traversing on both stockpiles and rehabilitated areas as far as possible. Prepare rehabilitated areas properly and monitor regularly. Ensure that the newly created soil profile is free draining (except in re-instated seasonal pan areas)

Control through

management and monitoring


Comply with targets set in RSIP & EMP




February 2019 18101804-324135-5

38

Soil placement and revegetation of project site

Soil handling to convey soil from topsoil stockpile to project site for surface rehabilitation activities, may result in degradation of soil quality due to soil disturbance. Contamination of soil by handling of soil with contaminated earth moving machinery (machinery previously used for handling mine waste such as waste rock material.

Insufficient soil volumes to meet end land use soil requirements.

Land use Soil quality

Soil quantity


10 5 1 5 80 High 6 4 1 3 33 Moderate

Where possible, re-use stockpiled soil within as short a period as possible (within 3-5 years). Use appropriate soil handling machinery (NOT heavy earth moving equipment used for mining operations) to minimize compaction Limit vehicle traversing on both stockpiles and rehabilitated areas as far as possible. Prepare rehabilitated areas properly and monitor regularly. Ensure that the newly created soil profile is free draining (except in re-instated seasonal pan areas)

Control through

management and monitoring






February 2019 18101804-324135-5

39

8.4 Residual impacts The following impacts remain of moderate significance due to the nature of the activities:

Soil degradation due to vegetation clearance and soil disturbances (initial stripping, and soil placement

during rehabilitation phase); and

Insufficient soil available for surface rehabilitation.

8.5 Cumulative impacts With the expected soil degradation occurring, a decline in the overall soil quality and health, may hinder the

soil suitability for the end land use.

9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMME This Environmental Management Programme (EMPr) addresses the management of potential environmental

impacts related to the proposed Seriti Metsimaholo project. The EMPr is used for managing, mitigating, and monitoring of the environmental impacts associated with construction, operational and rehabilitation phases of

the realigned route.

9.1 Objectives

Manage soil quality during the project phases.

9.2 Environmental Management and Mitigation Measures Identified A summary of mitigation measures should be presented:

For negative impacts (either / or):

Avoid;

Minimize;

Rehabilitate/Repair; or

Compensate;

For positive impacts:

Enhance.

9.3 Summary of Mitigation and Management measures for the Operational, Decommissioning and Closure phases

9.3.1 Degradation of soil quality

To mitigate land degradation impacts:

Avoid:

Minimise the Project footprint.

Reduce:

Minimize surface footprints to the extent possible and restrict heavy machinery and heavy truck

access to sensitive soil areas (utilize lighter machinery with less potential to compact soils in sensitive soils areas); and

Minimize soil contamination through suitable measures for containment and handling of potentially

polluting materials and implement Acid Rock Drainage and Metal Leaching mitigation measures.

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

40

Restore:

Implementing soil conservation measures (e.g. segregation, proper placement and stockpiling of clean soils and overburden material for existing site remediation and maintaining soil fertility of topsoils stored for future rehabilitation);

Ensuring that the overall thickness of the soils utilised for rehabilitation is where possible consistent with surrounding undisturbed areas and future land use;

Landscaping disturbed areas (other than permanent disturbances such as pit voids) to restore where

possible back to original contours and drainage lines;

Designing slopes to an appropriate gradient for rehabilitation as defined in the Closure Plan; and

Basing the soil fertilizing programs on the soil chemical, biological and physical status after topsoil

replacement.

Compensate:

None.

Enhance

None

Monitoring:

Environmental auditing to verify contractor compliance and soils handling and rehabilitation

procedures being implemented;

Chemical, biological and physical monitoring of potentially affected soils; and

Monitoring of soil fertility to be done every year with a system of demonstration plots after site

rehabilitation

9.3.2 Loss of soil as a resource and land use modification The potential negative impacts relating to this impact can be mitigated as follows:

Avoidance measures:

Minimise the project footprint and therefore disturbance to the minimum area necessary by forward

planning (clearing land during the dry season rather than wet season) and clear demarcation of the areas to be disturbed;

Avoid permanently impacting topsoil and subsoil, but salvaging the maximum depth of these when clearing areas for infrastructure; and

Minimise the extent of the restricted access area to allow for current land use practices (where

practically safe to do so).

Reduction measures: As land uses of a specific area in terms of productive farming are largely determined by soil properties, mitigation controls should be put in place such as:

Use lighter machinery with lower potential to compact soils when working in areas containing

sensitive/productive soils;

Avoid mixing topsoil (A-horizon) with subsoil (B-horizon) during stripping and storing of soil;

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

41

Inform relevant personnel regarding the handling of soils intended for rehabilitation and consider

demarcating and indicating areas intended for stockpiling of topsoil and subsoil with signage or

noticeboard;

Strip and stockpile topsoil together with vegetation to enable continuation of the biogeochemical

cycle, thereby preserving fertility;

Limiting the stockpile side slopes to 1 in 4 (or gentler where practically possible), and rounding the top edges;

Place a runoff containment berm down-gradient of the stockpile to capture runoff, let the transported soil settle and recover it;

Keep the stockpile moist to reduce wind erosion and facilitate vegetation growth, until vegetation has established;

Vegetate topsoil stockpile with locally indigenous grasses and forbs to maintain biological processes,

stabilise the soil and reduce soil loss due to erosion; and

Regular weeding.

Restoration measures:

Implementing soil conservation measures (e.g. segregation, proper placement and stockpiling of

clean soils and overburden material for existing site remediation);

Storing stripped topsoil and subsoil for future site rehabilitation activities;

Maintaining soils fertility for future rehabilitation;

In case of soil compaction during rehabilitation, ripping is recommended with the addition of fresh organic matter for the restoration of soil structure; and

Ensuring that the overall thickness of the soils utilised for rehabilitation is consistent with surrounding

undisturbed areas and future land use.

Enhance:

Identify and investigate sustainable land use options within the mine footprint and adjacent

communities; and

Promote sustainable land use and agricultural practices in the project area and adjacent areas.

Monitoring mechanisms:

Environmental auditing to verify employee/contractor compliance and soils handling and

rehabilitation procedures being implemented;

Soil fertility monitoring of stockpiles;

Soil assessment and land capability. Determination of chemical, biological and physical status of rehabilitated soils; and

Soil erosion assessment of cleared areas, collection and transfer of soil/silt from drainage lines etc.

9.3.3 Soil contamination

Avoid

Ensure proper handling and storage of hazardous chemicals and materials (e.g. fuel, oil, cement,

concrete, reagents, etc.) as per their corresponding Safety Data Sheets (SDS); and

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

42

Maintenance of vehicles and equipment should be carried out in designated appropriate facilities

fitted with spillage containment, floors and sumps to capture any fugitive oils and greases.

Reduce

Eliminate fire as a site clearance activity and establish fire breaks to minimise potential soil

contamination and protect site areas;

Implement suitable measures on mining infrastructure such as the TSF and WRDs to minimise soil contamination by controlling seepage and runoff; and

Implementing regular site inspections for materials handling and storage as well as pipeline monitoring.

Restore

Development of detailed procedures for spills containment and soils clean up.

Compensate

Not applicable.

Enhance

Not applicable.

Monitoring mechanisms:

Environmental inspections and auditing; and

Soils sampling and analysis as part of spills/contamination procedures and as per soils monitoring program around mining infrastructure.

9.3.4 Soil compaction Soil compaction during construction and decommissioning phases cannot be avoided as heavy machinery will

be operational in all areas where disturbance is anticipated. The compaction of soil will be limited to project

footprint. Where possible the following should be implemented:

Soil should be stripped in a dry state and not in a moist or wet state;

Loosening of the soil through ripping and discing prior to the stripping process is recommended to break

up crusting;

A secondary cultivation may be required to break up large clods;

Unnecessary trafficking and movement over the areas targeted for construction must be avoided,

especially heavy machinery; and

Regular dust suppression with uncontaminated water should be practiced to avoid elevated dust

generation especially along residential areas.

9.3.5 Soil erosion Erosion control measures need to be defined in the Land Clearance Form. The specific actions must indicate

how the following recommendations will be implemented:

a) Work should be stopped in land clearance areas during heavy rainfall periods;

b) Drainage channels and settling ponds must be developed as per the stormwater management plan and maintained. Drainage channels and soakaways must direct runoff away from cleared areas, but not into streams or rivers;

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

43

c) Sediment deposited in drainage channels and sediment ponds must be removed prior to the rainyseason or when channels are deemed to be full;

d) All sediment deposited from erosion events needs to be placed on the topsoil stockpile(s);

e) Provide adequate road drainage based on climate, road width, surface material, compaction, andmaintenance;

f) Limit access road gradients to reduce runoff-induced erosion;

g) Increase vegetation cover upwind of cleared and exposed areas such as the Waste Rock facility andPlant areas;

h) Soil stockpiles must be developed as per the Company Soils, Stripping and Handling Procedures;

i) Topsoil and Subsoil stockpiles must be vegetated once the final stockpiles are constructed;

j) Ripping, replacing soils and revegetating closed areas such as access roads and lay down areasfollowing completion of construction works; and

k) Periodic erosion monitoring to be undertaken in cleared areas.

Additional optional measures

Should erosion be evident or potentially likely, the following additional erosion controls can be utilised:

Contouring and minimizing length and steepness of slopes;

Mulching (applying organic materials) to stabilize exposed areas;

Lining steep channels and slopes (e.g. use jute matting);

Reducing or preventing off-site sediment transport through use of settlement ponds or silt fences;

Consideration needs to be given to the use of water for dust suppression– use of binding agents like

molasses should be considered for unsealed roads and for dust suppression;

Creating buffer strips of vegetation around land clearance areas to slow down runoff upstream and

downstream;

Avoid

As far as practicable, avoid disturbance of areas with high erosion potential.

Minimise erosion by designing and constructing access roads along gentle slopes and with drainagechannels along the roads spaced at intervals dictated by the slope, rainfall pattern and erodibility.

Reduce

Implement soil erosion minimisation techniques such as:

Scheduling construction and maintenance to avoid heavy rainfall periods (i.e., during the dry season) to

the extent practical;

Mulching to stabilize exposed areas;

Re-vegetating disturbed areas promptly;

Designing channels for post-construction flows;

By applying appropriate design of diversion drains around waste rock dump and road drainage to minimise erosion.

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

44

By doing annual inspections of drainage channels, and maintenance as necessary.

Soil erosion/sediment delivery needs to be minimized on areas stripped of vegetative cover prior to mining activities, during mining operations and on the post-mining landscape.

Restore

Rehabilitation to consider erosion factors and apply soil erosion control measures described above.

Compensate

None

Enhance

None

Monitoring Mechanism

Environmental auditing to verify contractor compliance and soils handling and rehab procedures being implemented.

Annual maintenance inspections of drainage channels.

Develop and distribute a map of restricted areas (including sensitive soil areas) and demarcate areas for construction activities and infrastructure developments

9.4 Mechanisms for monitoring compliance The mechanisms for compliance monitoring with and performance assessment against the environmental

management programme and reporting thereof, include:

Monitoring of impact Management Actions;

Monitoring and reporting frequency;

Responsible persons;

Time period for implementing impact management actions;

Mechanisms for monitoring compliance;

The impact of the development of Route F activities on soil, land use and land capability can be monitored by

the following methods (Table 18).

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

45

Table 18: Soil, Land use and Land Capability Monitoring Program

Type Objective Detailed Actions Monitoring Location Parameters Timeframe/Frequency Responsibility

Soil quality Maintain the soil quality along areas which will be developed for mining as well as areas adjacent to mine waste storage facilities.

Collection of at least one sample per hectare for developed areas or where visible signs of contamination is noted (spillage or seepage areas/zones)

All areas which will be developed for mining

pH and salinity;

Major anions and cations;

Sulphate, phosphate, Nitrate, total dissolved solids, electrical conductivity;

Heavy metals and hydrocarbons

Bi-annually Environmental Department

Soil stockpiles Maintain and minimise the quality and degradation of soil stockpiles

Collection of at least one composite sample per stockpile

Soil stockpiles pH and Salinity;

Major anions and cations;

Organic matter content for the topsoil;

Content of major plant nutrients (CEC);

Major cations and anions;

Metal and hydrocarbons;

Stockpile height (<3 m).

Annually Environmental Department

Soil erosion Mitigate and minimise soil erosion

Infrastructure and surface water bodies on-site to be maintained in accordance with the surface water management plan

Soil stockpiles Developed areas Haul roads

Assess soil stockpile heights and conditions (i.e. gullies and rills);

Assess the condition and effectiveness of vegetation on the stockpiles;

Quarterly Environmental Department

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

46

Type Objective Detailed Actions Monitoring Location Parameters Timeframe/Frequency Responsibility

Assess any evidence of erosion (as per the Surface water management plan);

Assess the effectiveness of water versus other dust suppression substances (e.g. molasses or bitumen).

Land Use Maintain and minimise land use change within the license area

Evaluation of land use within the mining precinct using satellite imagery

Mining license area Collection of satellite imagery

Every two years Environmental Department

Rehabilitated Areas Maintain the quality and condition of rehabilitated areas

Continuous monitoring of rehabilitated areas for closure compliance

Disturbed areas Organic content of topsoil;

Content of major plant nutrients;

Contamination assessment (pH, metals, hydrocarbons, electrical conductivity, total dissolved solids, nitrates, sulphate and phosphates);

Volume of soil replaced;

Annually Environmental Department

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

47

10.0 CONCLUSIONS The objectives of the study were as follows:

To conduct a detailed soil assessment of the proposed Seriti Metsimaholo mine infrastructure and classify the observed soils in accordance to the South African Taxonomic Soil Classification System

(Section 6.6); Derive respective land capability classes of soils underlying the proposed Seriti

Metsimaholo mine infrastructure and the agricultural potential thereof (Section 6.8.1);

Map the current land use on the Seriti Metsimaholo project area in accordance the Spatial Planning and

Land Use Management Act (Act No.16 of 2013) (Section 6.9 ); and

Identify key potential environmental impacts that will be associated with developments of the proposed

mining project (Section 8.3).

Summary of findings:

The Bainsvlei soil form within the project area represents ~37 %, Westleigh soil form represents ~28 %,

Clovelly represents ~18 %, Bonheim represents ~ 12 %, Steendal represents ~ 6% and the Etosha form

represents ~ 1.5 % of the total project area surveyed;

The soil textures of representative soil forms are predominantly sandy clay loam to sandy loam. Most of the analysed soil forms are slightly acidic to slightly alkaline (4.8 < pH < 8. 5). The salinity of all representative soil forms will have no effect on plant growth as the electrical conductivity (ECsat-paste) is

less than 200 mS/m. The cation status of the soils is medium to high for all soils analysed. The concentration of phosphorus (Bray-1) in majority of the soils is low (Bray 1 P < 8 mg/kg) in the subsoils.

The topsoils mostly have medium to high levels of P, typical of cultivated land;

The land capability classes that were identified for the project area fall within class III and IV with a high to medium agricultural potential. The majority of project area is currently used for agriculture, specifically

maize cropping;

The key soil and land use aspects affected due to the project activities are soil quality degradation, loss

of soil as a resource, land use change, soil contamination, soil compaction and soil erosion. These

impacts have high impact significance and when mitigated have low to moderate impact significance;

An extensive soil quality monitoring programme as per the environmental monitoring programme should

be implemented to minimise and/or eliminate the identified impacts; and

The residual impacts include soil degradation due to vegetation clearance and soil disturbances (initial stripping, and soil placement during rehabilitation phase); and insufficient soil available for surface

rehabilitation at closure.

11.0 REFERENCES

Chief Directorate: Spatial Planning and Information (CD: SPI). (2013). Report on the Workshops on Land Use Classification Standards, Methodology and Symbology. Department of Rural Development and Land

Reform (DRDLR). Available from: http://www.ruraldevelopment.gov.za/phocadownload/spatial_Planning_Information/Final-Report-on-the-

workshops-on-NLUC-standards-methodology-and-symbology-3.pdf [Accessed on 27 February 2018].

Land Type Survey Staff, 1976-2006. Land type Survey Database. ARC-ISCW, Pretoria.

Schoeman J.L.; van der Walt M.; Monnik K.A.; Thackrah A.; Malherbe J.; Le Roux R.E. 2000. Development and Application of a Land Capability Classification system for South Africa. ARC-ISCW

Report no. GW/A/2000/57

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

48

Singer, M.J. 2006. Land Capability Analysis, in Encyclopaedia of Soil Science (Vol. 2), edited by R Lal.

Scotney, D.M., F. Ellis, R.W. Nott, K.P. Taylor, B.J. van Niekerk, E. Verster & P.C. Wood, 1987. A system of soil and land capability classification for agriculture in the TBVC states. Technical Committee

for Agriculture and Environmental Affairs (MTC/AGEN).

Soil Classification Working Group. 1991. Soil Classification: A Taxonomic system for South Africa.

Memoirs of the Agricultural Natural Resources of South Africa No. 15. Department of Agricultural

Development, Pretoria.

Department of Water and Sanitation (2018). Hydrological Services - Surface Water (Data, Dams, Floods

and Flows). Accessed from: http://www.dwa.gov.za/Hydrology

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

Signature Page

Golder Associates Africa (Pty) Ltd.

Katlego Maake Ilse Snyman Elize Herselman Soil Scientist Soil Scientist Senior Soil Scientist

KM-ILS/EH/ck

Golder and the G logo are trademarks of Golder Associates Corporation

c:\users\upape\desktop\18101804-324135-5_seriti_metsimaholo_soils_v6_2019.04.18.docx

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

APPENDIX A

Field Survey Plan

Golder Associates Africa (Pty) Ltd. P.O. Box 6001 Halfway House, 1685 Building 1, Maxwell Office Park Magwa Crescent West Waterfall City Midrand, 1685 South Africa

T: +27 11 254 4800 +27 0 86 582 1561

Golder and the G logo are trademarks of Golder Associates Corporation golder.com

1.0 INTRODUCTION

It is understood that Seriti Coal (Pty) Ltd. obtained the remaining Metsimaholo reserves as part of a purchase

agreement that saw Seriti Coal take ownership of the Anglo Coal mines supplying coal to Eskom. The project

aims to start Metsimaholo colliery with these remaining reserves. The proposed Metsimaholo mine is

proposed to be an independent mine producing thermal coal from one operational decline shaft. As part of the

environmental authorisations Golder is assisting Seriti with, a soil and land use assessment is required in

order to:

Understand the baseline soil, land capability and land use of the proposed project footprints;

Provide a detailed description of baseline soil characteristics, land capability and land use;

Identify and map sensitive areas based on the above-mentioned information;

Evaluate the potential impacts associated with the proposed project activities; and

Describe and evaluate any limiting characteristics of the soils.

This technical memorandum outlines the approach and cost estimate for the soil, land capability and land use

of the proposed project. The study area occupies a total area of ~250 ha.

2.0 APPROACH

2.1 Preparation of Field map

In preparation for the field survey, a desktop study was conducted which included the review of the historic

and recent aerial imagery, previous soil reports, evaluating topographic, land cover, land use, land type maps

and memoirs, and geological maps of the study area.

Portions of the proposed infrastructure (north-east of the pit), particularly the haul roads, conveyor routes,

certain stockpile areas, and the new plant area appear to be within existing disturbed areas. These areas will

however by evaluated with a reconnaissance survey, to confirm the extent of disturbance, and may potentially

be mapped as anthrosol soils (any soils that have been modified profoundly by human activities, including

burial, partial removal, cutting and filling, waste disposal, manuring, and irrigated agriculture). The reviewed

background information was used to plan and design the field survey and identify the preliminary soil

observation locations.

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM

DATE 4 September 2018 Project No. 18101804

TO Tashriq Naicker, Golder Associates

CC Aiden Stoop

FROM Ilse Snyman and Elize Herselman EMAIL [email protected]

SERITI – SOIL, LAND USE AND LAND CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT – FIELD SURVEY PLAN

Tashriq Naicker Project No. 18101804

Golder Associates 4 September 2018

2

2.2 Field survey

A semi-detailed reconnaissance (at 1:25 000) field survey will be conducted to delineate (into map units) and

document the land use, natural resources climate, terrain form and soil type of the project area. Where the

topography is undulating, the soils will be mapped along transects from hilltops to the valley bottom positions.

The locations of the transect walks will be set out during the desktop assessment of the aerial imagery for the

site. In areas which are flat, the soil observations will be conducted according to a grid system. The soil

variability will be assessed by augering to a depth of 120 cm or deeper, unless prevented by impenetrable

material or excessive wetness. Observable soil characteristics such as colour, texture, soil depth, stoniness,

and drainage class and parent material will be logged. At each observation point the relevant and distinct

features will also be recorded such as signs of erosion, vegetation cover, micro-topography, aspect and fauna.

Once the dominant soil types have been identified during the transect walks, representative sites (modal

profiles) will be located, described in detail and sampled. The soil characteristics will be described and

classified according to the Taxonomic Soil Classification System for South Africa (Soil Classification Working

Group, 1991). For each modal profile the following features will be recorded in field:

▪ Soil form and family (as defined in the Taxonomic Soil Classification System for South Africa,1991);

▪ Soil depth (effective depth);

▪ Estimated soil texture;

▪ Soil structure, coarse fragments, calcareousness;

▪ Underlying material;

▪ Current land use; and

▪ Land capability.

The proposed observation points for the transect walks are shown in Figure 1 The co-ordinates of the

proposed observation points for the transect walks are listed in Table 1.

Table 1: Co-ordinates for proposed observation points along site transects

Observation Point X Y

Ob1 27.99982 -26.8713

Ob2 27.99946 -26.8754

Ob3 27.9972 -26.8776

Ob4 28.00166 -26.8803

Ob5 28.00432 -26.8782

Ob6 28.00453 -26.8756

Ob7 28.00953 -26.8755

Ob8 28.00962 -26.88

Ob9 28.01267 -26.883

Ob10 28.01456 -26.8778

Ob11 28.0054 -26.8724



3

Observation Point X Y

Ob12 28.01228 -26.8739

Ob13 28.00729 -26.8819

Ob14 28.00224 -26.8826

Figure 1: Proposed observation points for transect walks

2.3 Laboratory Analysis

Laboratory analysis of the soil samples will be conducted at Eco-Analytical Laboratories at the University of

the North West, South Africa. The soil properties which will be analysed, as required for classification

purposes include:

Phosphorus (Bray 1);

Exchangeable cations – Na, K. Ca, Mg (Ammonium Acetate Extraction);

pH (water and KCl);

Electrical conductivity

Organic matter content;

3-fraction particle size analysis

Clay mineral identification;

Acid saturation (%); and

Total metal and semi-metals analysis.



4

3.0 WORK SCHEDULE

The proposed work schedule for the duration of the sampling campaign is indicated in Table 2 below.

Table 2: Task team

Team member Duration onsite

Ilse Snyman 2 – 3 October 2018

Aviwe Mgoqi

4.0 ASSUMPTIONS

The following assumptions are relevant:

A dedicated person will be available to accompany Golder personnel during the fieldwork/site activities

and to assist to gain access to required areas;

All soil sampling will be done by means of a hand-auger;

The proposed scope of work is based on our current understanding of the level of information available

and can be adjusted if additional information becomes available.

The security of buried services situated anywhere on the project site(s), which are NOT identified on the

drawings provided or suitably demarcated on site to us, will remain the responsibility of the client;

The investigation procedures offered herein will involve operations and techniques using standard health

and safety norms applied by Golder to all its projects, and generally followed in the geotechnical

investigation industry. In the event that specific client requirements for safety issues are to be applied, of

which we have not been appraised in prior documentation, these will be implemented to the extent

reasonable and possible (within investigation industry standards and norms), but may attract additional

time and cost which are not covered in this present proposal and will be negotiated as contract extras;

Any water logged (or soft underfoot) areas may also present constraints insofar as accessibility of the

site for investigatory equipment is concerned and may therefore also require reconsideration of the

proposed programme and test method (and where necessary costing).

5.0 CONCLUDING REMARKS

It is envisioned that the sampling will require two day’s field work, to be conducted on 2-3 October 2018.

Samples will be couriered to the North West University Analytical Laboratory in South Africa for the other

analysis by 4 October 2018. Laboratory analysis results may be expected after about 3-4 weeks.

6.0 REFERENCES

Soil Classification Working Group.1991. Soil Classification –a Taxonomic System for South Africa. Memoirs

on the Agricultural Natural Resources of South Africa No. 15. Department of Agricultural Development,

Pretoria.

Ilse Snyman Elize Herselman Soil Scientist Senior Soil Scientist

ILS

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

APPENDIX B

Representative Soil Profiles

February 2019 18101804-324135-5

Geographic Coordinates of Soil Sampling Locations

Eleven (11) soil samples were selected from the proposed Metsimaholo shaft complex site for laboratory analyses. The geographic coordinates of the soil sampling locations are presented in Table B1. The

photographic records of the representative soil profiles are presented in Table B2.

Table B1: Geographic coordinates of soil sampling and observation points

Position ID Latitude Longitude Study Area

Ob1 -26.871291° 27.999825°

Ob3 -26.877565° 27.997199°

Ob4 -26.880336° 28.001659°

Ob8 -26.880010° 28.009624°

Ob9 -26.883048° 28.012670°

Ob10 -26.877834° 28.014560°

Ob11 -26.872413° 28.005398°

Ob12 -26.873927° 28.012278°

Ob13 -26.881945° 28.007290°

Ob15 -26.882100° 28.014660°

Ob16 -26.876600° 28.005500°

February 2019

Table B2: Photographic record of representation soil modal profiles

Cv1200 (Ob1)

Bo1110 Ob13

Bv1200 Ob16

Et1121 Ob8

We2000 Ob12

Sn2000 Ob15

February 2019

APPENDIX C

Laboratory Certificates

NORTH-WEST UNIVERSITY Eco Analytica

ECO-ANALYTICA P.O. Box 19140

NOORDBRUG 2522

Tel: 018-285 2732/3/4

GOLDER ASSOCIATES (COALBROOK)22/10/2018 Nutrient Status

Sample Ca Mg K Na P pH(H2O) pH(KCl) EC

no. (mg/kg) (mS/m)

OB 1.1 699.6 99.2 281.4 16.7 10.0 5.46 26

OB 1.2 1138.2 205.8 300.0 18.1 6.7 6.17 34

OB.1.3 1715.6 442.6 365.9 34.1 5.8 6.12 40

OB3.1 513.6 71.1 225.2 3.1 29.0 4.94 22

OB3.2 1540.4 356.4 257.0 33.1 8.8 5.55 30

OB4.1 2005.3 481.0 424.6 17.5 7.3 5.39 35

OB4.2 3424.4 896.7 363.6 85.3 5.9 5.81 36

OB8.1 879.1 238.2 433.5 6.9 58.6 5.16 38

OB8.2 1824.0 727.4 259.7 25.1 7.7 6.55 31

OB8.3 2400.5 1053.0 300.2 53.7 6.3 7.26 36

OB8.4 5371.6 1131.2 334.7 90.9 6.1 8.25 58

OB9.1 1339.5 233.4 535.3 7.7 9.8 6.45 32

OB9.2 1837.0 498.2 453.6 26.1 6.3 5.84 33

OB11.1 536.6 90.8 262.0 3.8 21.2 4.81 86

OB11.2 1160.4 317.4 283.2 19.3 8.5 5.59 42

OB11.3 2040.0 774.5 277.0 81.3 6.2 6.27 35

OB12.1 593.6 168.9 240.5 10.3 16.3 4.95 30

OB12.2 1946.6 950.6 204.2 159.9 6.8 7.17 47

OB12.3 2245.8 1113.6 225.6 271.9 6.5 8.07 86

OB13.1 3760.7 850.5 576.4 48.0 26.1 6.08 138

OB13.2 5710.0 1159.1 312.0 196.3 7.3 7.48 40

OB15.1 8591.4 488.2 324.1 70.4 6.0 7.90 64

OB15.2 8204.5 709.8 258.8 220.4 5.7 8.52 66

OB16.1 2039.2 460.7 394.9 31.8 53.9 7.07 60

OB16.2 2351.8 987.3 344.1 79.9 7.9 7.00 36

OB17.1 7952.2 486.9 310.1 72.2 6.3 8.12 62

OB17.2 7963.3 931.7 280.5 439.6 5.8 8.85 69

OB18.1 8595.3 509.1 317.5 80.7 5.6 8.00 60

OB18.2 7797.5 898.4 269.9 468.9 5.6 8.80 61

Exchangeable cations

Sample Ca Mg K Na CEC S-value Base satu- pH(H2O) Walkley Black

no. (cmol(+)/kg) ration (%) %C

OB 1.1 3.49 0.82 0.72 0.07 15.91 5.10 32.06 5.46 0.52

OB 1.2 5.68 1.69 0.77 0.08 20.89 8.22 39.36 6.17

OB.1.3 8.56 3.64 0.94 0.15 21.87 13.29 60.77 6.12

OB3.1 2.56 0.59 0.58 0.01 17.04 3.74 21.94 4.94 0.52

OB3.2 7.69 2.93 0.66 0.14 29.22 11.42 39.09 5.55

OB4.1 10.01 3.96 1.09 0.08 27.38 15.13 55.26 5.39 2.40

OB4.2 17.09 7.38 0.93 0.37 61.85 25.77 41.66 5.81

OB8.1 4.39 1.96 1.11 0.03 21.57 7.49 34.72 5.16 0.85

OB8.2 9.10 5.99 0.67 0.11 35.16 15.86 45.12 6.55

OB8.3 11.98 8.67 0.77 0.23 34.08 21.65 63.53 7.26

OB8.4 26.80 9.31 0.86 0.40 38.88 37.37 96.10 8.25

OB9.1 6.68 1.92 1.37 0.03 20.01 10.01 50.03 6.45 1.01

OB9.2 9.17 4.10 1.16 0.11 36.79 14.54 39.53 5.84

OB11.1 2.68 0.75 0.67 0.02 17.30 4.11 23.78 4.81 0.64

OB11.2 5.79 2.61 0.73 0.08 26.63 9.21 34.59 5.59

OB11.3 10.18 6.37 0.71 0.35 39.55 17.62 44.55 6.27

OB12.1 2.96 1.39 0.62 0.04 20.86 5.01 24.03 4.95 0.74

OB12.2 9.71 7.82 0.52 0.70 44.48 18.76 42.17 7.17

OB12.3 11.21 9.17 0.58 1.18 57.31 22.13 38.62 8.07

OB13.1 18.77 7.00 1.48 0.21 48.48 27.45 56.62 6.08 1.57

OB13.2 28.49 9.54 0.80 0.85 109.63 39.69 36.20 7.48

OB15.1 42.87 4.02 0.83 0.31 84.41 48.03 56.90 7.90 1.55

OB15.2 40.94 5.84 0.66 0.96 86.02 48.40 56.27 8.52

OB16.1 10.18 3.79 1.01 0.14 21.05 15.12 71.83 7.07 0.76

OB16.2 11.74 8.13 0.88 0.35 40.34 21.09 52.28 7.00

OB17.1 39.68 4.01 0.80 0.31 81.71 44.80 54.82 8.12 1.20

OB17.2 39.74 7.67 0.72 1.91 119.86 50.04 41.75 8.85 0.43

OB18.1 42.89 4.19 0.81 0.35 88.29 48.25 54.64 8.00 1.30

OB18.2 38.91 7.39 0.69 2.04 88.23 49.03 55.57 8.80 0.41

HANDBOOK OF STANDARD SOIL TESTING METHODS FOR ADVISORY PURPOSES

Exchangeable cations: 1M NH4-Asetaat pH=7 EC: Saturated Extraction

CEC: 1 M Na-asetaat pH=7 pH H2O/KCl: 1:2.5 Extraction

Extractable, Exchangeable micro-elements: 0.02M (NH4)2 EDTA.H2O Phosphorus: P-Bray 1 Extraction

22/10/2018Particle Size Distribution

Sample > 2mm Sand Silt Clay

no. (%)

OB 1.1 6.1 80.2 9.7 10.1

OB 1.2 19.2 76.7 8.6 14.8

OB.1.3 16.6 60.5 9.0 30.5

OB3.1 1.6 85.6 4.7 9.8

OB3.2 1.1 66.6 7.6 25.8

OB4.1 0.2 58.0 15.6 26.5

OB4.2 0.3 45.1 11.5 43.5

OB8.1 0.2 81.4 6.8 11.8

OB8.2 0.5 70.4 4.9 24.7

OB8.3 1.1 67.3 5.0 27.8

OB8.4 13.7 68.6 11.2 20.2

OB9.1 0.3 81.1 6.9 12.0

OB9.2 0.6 62.2 5.3 32.5

OB11.1 0.1 88.2 4.6 7.3

OB11.2 0.1 76.9 4.5 18.6

OB11.3 0.3 60.3 4.8 34.9

OB12.1 0.4 81.9 6.8 11.3

OB12.2 0.6 68.2 4.7 27.1

OB12.3 0.3 67.7 4.8 27.5

OB13.1 0.6 57.7 15.8 26.5

OB13.2 0.2 48.7 11.3 40.1

OB15.1 3.7 46.7 19.6 33.7

OB15.2 3.8 42.2 20.2 37.6

OB16.1 0.2 79.4 6.8 13.8

OB16.2 0.3 67.0 4.9 28.1

OB17.2 4.4 43.5 20.8 35.7

OB18.2 6.1 43.0 21.0 36.0

OB17.1 NOT ENOUGH SAMPLE

OB18.1 NOT ENOUGH SAMPLE

This laboratory participates in the following quality control schemes:

International Soil-Analytical Exchange (ISE), Wageningen, Nederland.

No responsibility is accepted by North-West University for any losses due to the use of this data

(% < 2mm)

Position [°2θ] (Cobalt (Co))

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Counts

0

2500

10000

OB 1.1

Quartz 94.4 %

Calcite 0.5 %

Magnesioferrite 0.6 %

Illite 2M1 3.9 %

Feldspar 0.6 %


10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Counts

0

400

1600

3600

6400

OB 1.3

Quartz 61.8 %

Goethite 32.5 %

Keatite 3.2 %

Brucite 2.6 %


10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Counts

0

2500

10000

OB 4.1

Quartz 88.5 %


Brucite 0.9 %

Chloritoid 8.0 %


10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Counts

0

2500

10000 OB 4.2

Quartz 80.2 %


Brucite 0.8 %

Chloritoid 10.0 %

Kaolinite 1A 3.3 %

Albite 2.8 %


10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Counts

0

2500

10000

22500 OB 8.1

Quartz 99.0 %

Sodalite 0.8 %

Brucite 0.2 %


10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Counts

0

400

1600

3600

6400

OB 8.4

Quartz 65.0 %

Calcite 31.5 %

Brucite 2.4 %

Jacobsite 1.2 %


10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Counts

0

2500

10000

22500

OB 11.1

Quartz 97.7 %

Portlandite 0.2 %

Calcite 0.8 %

Rutile 0.9 %

Sodalite 0.5 %


10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Counts

0

2500

10000

OB 12.1

Quartz 98.0 %

Rutile 0.8 %

Portlandite 0.2 %

Calcite 0.6 %

Magnetite-(Ti) 0.4 %


10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Counts

0

2500

10000

OB 13.1

Quartz 93.9 %


Brucite 2.1 %

Calcite 1.5 %


10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Counts

0

2500

10000 OB 13.2

Quartz 83.4 %


Brucite 3.5 %

Albite 9.8 %


10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Counts

0

400

1600

3600

6400

OB 15.1

Quartz 62.3 %

Calcite 17.8 %


Rutile 2.8 %

Albite 8.1 %

Muscovite 1M, magnesian 7.2 %


10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Counts

0

400

1600

3600

6400 OB 15.2

Quartz 54.9 %

Calcite 29.8 %


Rutile 1.3 %

Albite 9.1 %

Phengite 3T 0.3 %

Clinochlore 3.3 %


10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Counts

0

2500

10000

OB 16.1

Quartz 97.4 %

Rutile 1.1 %

Brucite 0.2 %

Calcite 0.5 %



10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Counts

0

2500

10000 OB 16.2

Quartz 86.8 %


Rutile 4.0 %

Brucite 1.4 %

Kaolinite 1A 4.5 %

GOLDER - SERITI

Microwave digested (Ethos UP, Magna Analytical) with EPA3051A method and results were obtained by using Agilent ICP-MS - mg/kg10/10/2018Sample: OB 1.1 OB 1.2 OB.1.3 OB4.1 OB4.2 OB8.1 OB8.2 OB8.3 OB8.4 OB9.1 OB9.2 OB12.1 OB12.2 OB12.3 OB15.1 OB15.2 OB17.1 OB17.2

mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kgBe 9 0.7728 1.147 2.098 1.422 2.14 0.7283 1.1 1.395 1.054 0.784 1.861 0.6504 1.214 1.14 1.288 1.113 1.058 1.144B 11 5.325 5.509 8.066 5.756 9.052 1.326 2.949 4.222 2.008 1.945 5.261 0.01415 1.902 0.9582 6.711 7.327 6.548 6.015Na 23 68.32 90.25 177.9 144.9 306.9 92.16 153.9 243.2 265.7 67 173.5 66.6 378.5 500.1 165 364.1 168.8 517.8Mg 24 1107 1662 2814 2416 4040 1381 2792 4157 5075 1405 3101 948.5 3497 3885 4532 5275 4313 5367Al 27 21700 35740 69740 40660 64870 22290 35700 46140 35710 25290 59430 18620 38750 35020 29750 28590 28720 26170P 31 167.2 164.2 183.7 207.9 158.8 317 132.4 124.2 108.6 225.9 213.2 254.8 116.6 103.5 244.8 192.8 208.3 178.2K 39 2616 3582 6144 4534 6391 2574 3463 4687 3981 3063 5959 1621 2689 2556 3263 3188 3039 2828Ca 43 934.6 1275 1726 2005 3031 932.2 1803 2301 29100 1224 1956 661.7 1801 1930 41210 56660 35770 55460Ti 47 484.1 466 592.6 554 681.6 345.2 432.6 525.8 346.8 310.5 457.6 399.9 508 511.1 467.9 488.7 277.9 294.2V 51 43.82 66.76 111.5 58.6 70.73 37.85 46.36 50.76 42.35 37.45 61.84 35.67 44.17 40.92 78.89 51.48 47.45 62.69Cr 53 109.4 133.4 187.5 113.7 133.4 110.9 130.8 137 99.08 100.3 143.7 115.5 131.2 126.3 100.7 87.16 65.34 80.38Mn 55 615.4 2024 2092 380.7 210.4 289.1 254 331 465.6 324.1 375 254.3 232.2 253.6 777.4 865.4 693.7 788.8Fe 57 14810 26310 48890 22750 31220 14280 20770 24820 20620 14780 29520 12140 20980 19580 22970 17590 17400 20420Co 59 14.13 53.75 68.22 11.91 10.04 8.134 7.799 10.13 10.28 8.965 14.16 6.487 7.499 7.771 18.65 16.53 14.07 18.2Ni 60 29.47 45.77 73.51 29.92 40.53 27.59 41.52 55.98 49.19 30.7 53.1 20.86 39.61 35.8 39.24 34.41 34.13 35.96Cu 63 17.14 25.14 42.05 23.97 28.46 16.72 21.49 24.14 20.8 15.33 27.93 13.83 20.33 18.89 23.66 19.1 19.25 20.29Zn 66 22.14 27.03 44.09 37.67 47.35 28.11 30.72 36.17 31.17 22.73 38.86 19.24 27.45 27.22 33.29 29.95 32.28 28.62As 75 3.471 5.331 8.453 5.169 6.153 2.393 2.841 3.152 2.863 2.727 4.107 2.16 2.428 2.258 7.437 4.775 4.222 5.702Se 82 1.017 1.178 1.554 1.47 1.845 1.029 1.16 1.287 1.26 0.8851 1.317 0.9336 1.079 1.021 1.779 1.603 1.232 1.335Rb 85 35.44 53.08 90.71 63.1 90.07 31.72 50.47 64.43 51.73 38.13 83.57 23.89 42.07 38.51 48.46 50.49 45.33 48.33Sr 88 13.14 17.31 21.8 23.29 37.04 13.68 30.31 42.16 98.46 13.84 23.01 9.518 29.34 30.59 69.5 101.1 63.78 108.4Mo 95 1.393 1.969 2.321 1.342 1.198 1.246 1.082 1.011 0.8374 1.239 1.404 1.248 0.9794 0.9144 1.206 0.9456 0.8327 0.9713Pd 105 0.3939 0.3452 0.3569 0.5603 0.7541 0.3261 0.4461 0.5968 1.129 0.4035 0.6069 0.3095 0.5255 0.5249 0.9884 0.922 0.7819 0.9456Ag 107 0.9787 0.9111 0.7013 0.4542 0.3175 0.1106 0.1384 0.184 0.1819 0.1067 0.1804 0.1144 0.1709 0.1306 0.1877 0.1851 0.1603 0.1729Cd 111 0.5292 0.5397 0.5049 0.534 0.5098 0.5052 0.4811 0.4898 0.4779 0.4753 0.4696 0.4779 0.4598 0.4358 0.521 0.5352 0.504 0.5179Sb 121 0.1897 0.3352 0.4703 0.2834 0.2671 0.1615 0.1509 0.1529 0.07045 0.1602 0.2131 0.1347 0.12 0.117 0.3461 0.2997 0.07679 0.2385Ba 137 130.3 344.4 367.7 137.3 254.7 68.9 139 198.9 801.1 99.43 144.3 38.81 73.94 102.4 483.5 648.8 490.7 568.2Pt 195 0.01316 0.01458 0.01982 0.0139 0.01481 0.009397 0.009985 0.01138 0.01116 0.008766 0.01257 0.007983 0.01083 0.0102 0.01399 0.0124 0.01131 0.01014Au 197 0.05926 ND ND ND ND 0.01476 ND ND ND ND 0.01387 0.03045 ND 0.1154 ND ND ND NDHg 202 0.2564 0.122 0.07963 0.06684 0.05261 0.0425 0.02986 0.02847 0.02782 0.02777 0.02419 0.02732 0.01986 0.01563 0.02543 0.01856 0.02508 0.02185Tl 205 0.3218 0.7113 0.944 0.4465 0.6561 0.1846 0.2726 0.3537 0.2956 0.2142 0.4284 0.1503 0.2806 0.2666 0.4016 0.423 0.3892 0.4016Pb 208 9.569 26.32 36.04 15.37 14.52 7.918 7.093 8.012 7.501 8.003 11.24 7.301 7.737 7.424 15.07 14.98 12.52 14.82Bi 209 0.1962 0.1776 0.2212 0.2824 0.315 0.1119 0.1123 0.1356 0.1289 0.1203 0.1532 0.1146 0.1256 0.1194 0.2539 0.2589 0.24 0.258Th 232 6.069 5.402 6.585 8.566 9.382 3.622 3.815 4.604 4.307 3.312 4.947 4.669 4.617 4.235 7.152 7.559 7.066 7.686U 238 0.7699 0.6785 0.9686 0.9114 1.006 0.3972 0.3943 0.3564 0.4211 0.4025 0.6143 0.5519 0.4201 0.3087 0.9846 1.046 0.8108 1.258

February 2019

APPENDIX D

Document Limitations

DOCUMENT LIMITATIONS

GAA GAIMS Form 10, Version 4, August 2018 Golder and the G logo are trademarks of Golder Associates Corporation

Document is uncontrolled if downloaded or printed Page 56 of 67

This document has been provided by Golder Associates Africa Pty Ltd (“Golder”) subject to the following

limitations:

i) This Document has been prepared for the particular purpose outlined in Golder’s proposal and no responsibility is accepted for the use of this Document, in whole or in part, in other contexts or for any other purpose.

ii) The scope and the period of Golder’s Services are as described in Golder’s proposal, and are subject to restrictions and limitations. Golder did not perform a complete assessment of all possible conditions or circumstances that may exist at the site referenced in the Document. If a service is not expressly indicated, do not assume it has been provided. If a matter is not addressed, do not assume that any determination has been made by Golder in regard to it.

iii) Conditions may exist which were undetectable given the limited nature of the enquiry Golder was retained to undertake with respect to the site. Variations in conditions may occur between investigatory locations, and there may be special conditions pertaining to the site which have not been revealed by the investigation and which have not therefore been taken into account in the Document. Accordingly, additional studies and actions may be required.

iv) In addition, it is recognised that the passage of time affects the information and assessment provided in this Document. Golder’s opinions are based upon information that existed at the time of the production of the Document. It is understood that the Services provided allowed Golder to form no more than an opinion of the actual conditions of the site at the time the site was visited and cannot be used to assess the effect of any subsequent changes in the quality of the site, or its surroundings, or any laws or regulations.

v) Any assessments made in this Document are based on the conditions indicated from published sources and the investigation described. No warranty is included, either express or implied, that the actual conditions will conform exactly to the assessments contained in this Document.

vi) Where data supplied by the client or other external sources, including previous site investigation data, have been used, it has been assumed that the information is correct unless otherwise stated. No responsibility is accepted by Golder for incomplete or inaccurate data supplied by others.

vii) The Client acknowledges that Golder may have retained sub-consultants affiliated with Golder to provide Services for the benefit of Golder. Golder will be fully responsible to the Client for the Services and work done by all its sub-consultants and subcontractors. The Client agrees that it will only assert claims against and seek to recover losses, damages or other liabilities from Golder and not Golder’s affiliated companies. To the maximum extent allowed by law, the Client acknowledges and agrees it will not have any legal recourse, and waives any expense, loss, claim, demand, or cause of action, against Golder’s affiliated companies, and their employees, officers and directors.

viii) This Document is provided for sole use by the Client and is confidential to it and its professional advisers. No responsibility whatsoever for the contents of this Document will be accepted to any person other than the Client. Any use which a third party makes of this Document, or any reliance on or decisions to be made based on it, is the responsibility of such third parties. Golder accepts no responsibility for damages, if any, suffered by any third party because of decisions made or actions based on this Document.

GOLDER ASSOCIATES AFRICA (PTY) LTD

APPENDIX E

Specialist Declaration and CV

SPECIALIST DECLARATION As required under Appendix 6 of the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2014 (as amended), I,

Ilse Snyman, declare that:

I act as an independent specialist in this application;

I will perform the work relating to the application in an objective manner, even if this results in views and

findings that are not favourable to the applicant;

I declare that there are no circumstances that may compromise my objectivity in performing such work;

I have expertise in conducting the specialist report relevant to this application, including knowledge of

Acts, Regulations and any guidelines that have relevance to the proposed activity;

I will comply with all applicable Acts and Regulations in compiling this report;

I have not, and will not engage in conflicting interests in the undertaking of the activity;

I undertake to disclose to the applicant and the competent authority all material information in my

possession that reasonably has or may have the potential of influencing:

any decision to be taken with respect to the application by the competent authority; and

the objectivity of any report, plan or document to be prepared by myself for submission to the

competent authority;

All the particulars furnished by me in this declaration are true and correct.

Signature of the specialist:

Golder Associates Africa (Pty) Ltd

Name of company (if applicable):

28 February 2019

Date:

1

Curriculum Vitae ILSE SNYMAN

Education

MSc Agric Soil Science, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, 2011

BSc Agric Agronomy & Soil Science, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, 2005

Certifications

Professional Natural Scientist- in the field of Soil Science, 2014

Languages

English – Fluent

Afrikaans – Fluent

Johannesburg

Employment History

Golder Associates Africa – Johannesburg Soil Scientist (May 2015 to Present)

Responsible for assessing and interpreting soils in relation to agricultural production and overall environmental quality. Assisting with collecting of environmental soil, sediment and waste samples and in-field soil property assessment.

Golder Associates Africa – Pretoria Rehabilitation Consultant (July 2014 to April 2015)

Providing support for planning and execution of rehabilitation in the mining and industrial sectors. Devise and combine multiple concepts and considerations into integrated rehabilitation and eminent closure plans. Conceptualize and formulate rehabilitation and closure objectives, measures, associated packaging of solutions, as well as the actions for implementation. Assist in the completion of rehabilitation programmes to implementation phase. Assisting with rehabilitation and closure planning projects and interacting with multiple consulting disciplines to deliver innovative and integrated rehabilitation and closure plans to clients.

Elsenburg Agricultural College, Western Cape Department Of Agriculture –

Stellenbosch Lecturer (2009 to 2013)

Presentation of soil fertility and soil classification course to undergraduate 1st and 2nd year students.

Strategic Environmental Focus – Cape Town, South Africa Soil Scientist (2008 to 2009)

Conducting of soil surveys as part of Environment Impact Assessment projects, mainly to inform Agricultural Potential Assessments and Wetland Delineation in terms of soil parameters.

SENWES Ltd – Klerksdorp, South Africa Agronomist (2006 to 2007)

Advisory agronomic support to emerging farmers and commercial farmers on agricultural crop production aspects, agricultural production planning, grain (maize) crops yield estimation and soil moisture and soil classification

2


PROJECT EXPERIENCE – CONTAMINATED LAND REMEDIATION

Aluvert Blinds Gauteng, South Africa

Phase 1 Contaminated land Assessment

Middelbult 284IS Mpumalanga, South

Africa Contaminated Land and Related Assessment of Portion 17, 49, 52, 53 & 54 of the farm Middelbult 284IS,

Minmetals North West, South Africa

Phase 1 Contaminated land assessment

Alrode, Alberton Gauteng, South Africa

Soil screening level assessment as part of a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment at a proposed new site

Kelvin Power Station Gauteng, South Africa

Phase 1 Contaminated land assessment

Delta EMD Mpumalanga, South

Africa

The setup of laboratory simulation of the potential remediation treatments for contaminated soil.

PROJECT EXPERIENCE – WASTE

Middelburg Ferrochrome

Mpumalanga, South Africa

Site reconnaissance survey and site-wide sampling of waste rock, tailings,and various other waste streams generated on site.

Phalaborwa Mining Company

Limpopo, South Africa

Site-wide sampling of waste rock, tailings, sewage sludge and various other waste streams generated on site.

Richards Bay Coal Terminal

Kwa-Zulu Natal, South Africa

Sampling and classification of material underlying coal stockyards, and collection of waste sediment and water generated on site.

PROJECT EXPERIENCE – MINING

Wolwekrans, Mpumalanga, South

Africa

The assessment of the condition/effectivity of the evaporative soil covers of discard dumps.

Union Mine Mpumalanga, South

Africa

The assessment of the condition/effectivity of the evaporative soil covers of discard dumps.

TCSA Springbok Siding

Mpumalanga, South Africa

The development of practical surface rehabilitation plan for Springbok Siding- included a topsoil quality assessment.

3


TCSA Bethal Siding Mpumalanga, South

Africa

The development of practical surface rehabilitation plan for Bethal Siding- included a topsoil quality assessment.

PROJECT EXPERIENCE – ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

Societe D'exploitation De Kipoi (SEK)- Kipoi

Copper Project Katanga, DRC

Soil, Land Use and Land Capability Assessment

Chirano TSF 1 North East Project

Ghana

Environmental Impact Assessment: Chirano TSF 1 North East Project: Groundwater, Geochemistry and Soils, Kinross Chirano Gold Mine, Ghana

Kokoya Liberia

Land capability, agricultural potential assessment for the proposed mining areas - Kokoya Gold Mining Project; Liberia;

Millsite Gauteng, South Africa

Soils Agricultural Potential Assessment for the proposed Millsite Residential Development

Fleurhof Ext 2 Gauteng, South Africa

Soils Agricultural Potential Assessment for the proposed Fleurhof Ext 2

Eskom South Africa

Soils Agricultural Potential Assessment for the Eskom Pretoria Strategic Environmental Assessment

Madibeng Local Municipality

North West, South Africa

Soils Agricultural Potential Assessment for the Madibeng Local Municipality Environmental Management Framework

PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS

SACNASP- Professional Natural Scientist, in the field of Soil Science

Soil Science Society of South Africa

appendix f soil, land capability and land use assessment · february 2019 18101804-324135-5 iii the...

Documents