APPELLANTS’ RESPONDING STATEMENT, IN TERMS OF REGULATION 74(8) OF THE MINERAL AND PETROLEUM RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 2004, TO ATHA-AFRICA VENTURES (PTY) LTD’S REPLYING SUBMISSION

This responding statement, submitted by the Centre for Environmental Rights on behalf of eight appellants, challenges the Department of Mineral Resources' (DMR) approval of the Environmental Management Programme (EMPR) for Atha-Africa Ventures (Pty) Ltd's proposed Yzermyn mine. The appellants argue that the approved EMPR authorizes an environmentally destructive discard dump, ignores extensive government conservation policies for the area, and contains woefully inadequate financial provisions for rehabilitation.

• The appellants argue that the March 2014 EMPR is unlawful because it authorizes a discard dump that Atha's own groundwater specialist found would cause unmitigatable pollution. This design was specifically disallowed by environmental authorities in the NEMA application-procedure and the DWS in the NWA application-procedure.
• The proposed mine area is subject to extensive conservation classifications across three spheres of government. It is identified as an "Irreplaceable Critical Biodiversity Area" in the Mpumalanga Biodiversity Sector Plan, a "sensitive natural area" by the Dr Pixley Ka Isaka Seme Local Municipality, and a "Zone 1: Conservation" area where mining is considered an "undesirable type of activity".
• The mine area is located within the Enkangala Drakensberg Strategic Water Source Area (SWSA), which is part of the 8% of South Africa's land area providing 50% of its surface water run-off. The appellants note that 92% of South Africa's coalfields do not overlap with SWSAs, and 84.5% of the Utrecht coalfield specifically falls outside this SWSA, suggesting there is no justifiable reason to mine in this sensitive area.
• The area is further designated as a "Category B" area in the Mining and Biodiversity Guideline, meaning it has the "Highest biodiversity importance" and is at the "Highest Risk for mining". Such a classification indicates a very high likelihood of a "fatal flaw" for new mining projects.
• The appellants contend that Atha's financial provision of approximately R5.7 million is severely inadequate. A specialist review by GCS Water and Environmental Consultants found that Atha failed to provide for the treatment of post-closure decant and the rehabilitation or loss of affected wetlands, despite evidence that decant is likely to occur.
• The appellants assert that Atha failed to conduct proper due-diligence before purchasing the prospecting right in late 2011, as evidence suggests the previous holder (Bunengi Mining Services) was informed that the area's strategic environmental status would likely lead to the rejection of a mining right application.

APA

Centre for Environmental Rights (n.d.). APPELLANTS’ RESPONDING STATEMENT, IN TERMS OF REGULATION 74(8) OF THE MINERAL AND PETROLEUM RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 2004, TO ATHA-AFRICA VENTURES (PTY) LTD’S REPLYING SUBMISSION. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Appellants-responding-statement-09-09-2019.pdf?x21779

Chicago

Centre for Environmental Rights. APPELLANTS’ RESPONDING STATEMENT, IN TERMS OF REGULATION 74(8) OF THE MINERAL AND PETROLEUM RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 2004, TO ATHA-AFRICA VENTURES (PTY) LTD’S REPLYING SUBMISSION. n.d. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Appellants-responding-statement-09-09-2019.pdf?x21779.

Wikipedia

{{cite press release |author=Centre for Environmental Rights |title=APPELLANTS’ RESPONDING STATEMENT, IN TERMS OF REGULATION 74(8) OF THE MINERAL AND PETROLEUM RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 2004, TO ATHA-AFRICA VENTURES (PTY) LTD’S REPLYING SUBMISSION |url=https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Appellants-responding-statement-09-09-2019.pdf?x21779 |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@misc{centreforenvironmentalrightsndappellants, author = {{Centre for Environmental Rights}}, title = {{APPELLANTS’ RESPONDING STATEMENT, IN TERMS OF REGULATION 74(8) OF THE MINERAL AND PETROLEUM RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 2004, TO ATHA-AFRICA VENTURES (PTY) LTD’S REPLYING SUBMISSION}}, publisher = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, url = {https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Appellants-responding-statement-09-09-2019.pdf?x21779}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }