Appeal response report

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) filed an appeal on July 9, 2019, against an integrated environmental authorisation (IEA) granted by the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR) to Mineral Sands Resources (Pty) Ltd (MSR). The authorisation allows MSR to extend mining operations at Tormin Mine, affecting ten beaches and inland areas on the Farm Geelwal Karoo 262 and other farms in the Varhynsdorp Magisterial District, Western Cape. The CER argues that the authorisation was granted through an unlawful circumvention of the mining right application process and fails to protect Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBAs).

• The CER contends that MSR unlawfully used section 102 of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002 (MPRDA) to expand its mining footprint without applying for a new prospecting or mining right. The CER argues this is an "unlawful circumvention of the application process" and that the DMR ignored the legislature's intent to exclude extensions under this section, as evidenced by the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Amendment Act, 2008.
• The CER claims the impact assessment methodology is flawed because it conflates 'long term' impacts with 'irreversible' impacts and fails to independently account for the 'irreplaceable loss of resources'. The CER asserts that 'long term' is defined simply as "more than 15 years", which does not address whether an impact can be reversed.
• The proposed mining area largely falls within Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBAs) dominated by Namaqualand Strandveld, a vegetation type that has decreased by more than 20% since 2011. The CER argues that the terrestrial ecology specialist incorrectly rated the impact extent as 'local' rather than 'regional' or 'national', leading to an underestimated significance rating of 'medium' negative.
• The CER argues that the reliance on rehabilitation and revegetation to mitigate impacts in a CBA is inappropriate because Namaqualand Strandveld is "extremely difficult to rehabilitate" and unlikely to return to an ecologically equivalent habitat. The CER notes that the provided rehabilitation plan is only 'high-level' and lacks evidence of past success or specific timeframes.
• The CER asserts that the DMR failed to require a biodiversity offset, despite draft national policy and provincial guidelines stating that residual impacts of 'medium' to 'high' significance should trigger such a requirement. For CBAs, the draft policy suggests an offset ratio of "at minimum 20 times the impacted area".
• The CER claims the DMR failed to apply a risk-averse and cautious approach, noting that the flora survey did not include the spring season, meaning annuals, forbs, and geophytes were not adequately represented. The CER argues that the assumption that Species of Conservation Concern (SCC) could simply be translocated contradicts SANBI guidelines, which emphasize in situ conservation.
• The CER argues that the financial provision for rehabilitation is wholly insufficient, as it only covers "2 to 3 years of maintenance and aftercare" following closure. This is contrasted with the terrestrial ecology specialist's statement that the effectiveness of rehabilitation in restoring species richness can only be evaluated after 10 or more years.
• The CER states that the applicant admitted the project may not be ecologically sustainable, stating that "For the Mine to be commercially viable, there may be some impacts that are not environmentally (ecologically) sustainable." The CER argues this admission proves the project is incompatible with sustainable development principles and the constitutional right to a healthy environment.

APA

Centre for Environmental Rights (2019). Appeal response report. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Appeal-of-Environmental-Authorisation-Extension-Application-for-Tormin-Mine.pdf?x21779

Chicago

Centre for Environmental Rights. Appeal response report. 2019. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Appeal-of-Environmental-Authorisation-Extension-Application-for-Tormin-Mine.pdf?x21779.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Centre for Environmental Rights |title=Appeal response report |date=9 July 2019 |url=https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Appeal-of-Environmental-Authorisation-Extension-Application-for-Tormin-Mine.pdf?x21779 |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{centreforenvironmentalrights2019appeal, author = {{Centre for Environmental Rights}}, title = {{Appeal response report}}, institution = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, year = {2019}, month = jul, url = {https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Appeal-of-Environmental-Authorisation-Extension-Application-for-Tormin-Mine.pdf?x21779}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }