APPELLANTS’ SUBMISSIONS IN THE APPEAL ON 15 TO 17 AUGUST 2017

This document contains the legal and technical submissions made by a coalition of eight appellants (including Earthlife Africa Johannesburg and BirdLife South Africa) on August 14, 2017, appealing an environmental authorisation (EA) granted to Atha-Africa Ventures (Pty) Ltd for the Yzermyn underground coal mine in Mpumalanga, South Africa.

• The proposed Yzermyn underground coal mine is located within the Mabola Protected Environment (MPE), an area declared as a protected environment on January 22, 2014. The mine would utilize the bord-and-pillar mining method with an estimated life of 15 years.
• Specialist reports indicate that the mine area contains wetlands of 'VERY HIGH' Ecological Importance and Sensitivity (EIS) and a 'Category A' Present Ecological State (PES), meaning they are natural and unmodified. The area is also part of the Wakkerstroom/Luneburg Grasslands, which is listed as an endangered ecosystem.
• Dewatering activities required for the underground mine are predicted to create 'cones of dewatering' extending several kilometers, potentially causing the reduction or complete cessation of spring yields and negatively impacting wetlands fed by shallow aquifers.
• There is a high risk of Acid Mine Drainage (AMD) post-closure. Specialists predict that mine voids will flood approximately 45 years after active dewatering stops, leading to the decant of contaminated water into surface water resources, including the Assegaai River.
• The appellants identify significant gaps in the Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR), including a lack of geochemical modelling for AMD, no assessment of the risk of subsidence, and a failure to adequately evaluate cumulative impacts with other mines like the Loskop Coal Mine.
• The socio-economic benefits for the local community are argued to be minimal. While 576 jobs are projected, the EIAR suggests most skilled labor will be sourced nationally or from India, and the total community investment of R6.06 million over five years represents only 0.06% of the anticipated ten-year revenue.
• The mine's strategic importance is questioned, as it would contribute only 0.86% of South Africa's total coal reserves and produces 'low grade bituminous coal'. Furthermore, 67.4% of the coal is intended for export, contradicting claims that the project ensures local energy security.
• The appellants contend that the Chief Director of the Mpumalanga Environmental Department lacked the authority to grant the EA. They argue the Minister of Environmental Affairs is the correct competent authority because the project impacts international commitments under the Ramsar Convention, the Migratory Species Convention, the Biological Diversity Convention, and the UNFCCC.
• The Environmental Management Programme (EMPr) is alleged to be legally deficient because it fails to provide specific design, capacity, or implementation timelines for the proposed water treatment plant, which is a primary mitigation measure for AMD.
• The appellants claim that the Environmental Assessment Practitioners (EAPs) from EcoPartners were not professionally registered with the South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions (SACNASP), as required by the Natural Scientific Professions Act 27 of 2003.

APA

Centre for Environmental Rights (2017). APPELLANTS’ SUBMISSIONS IN THE APPEAL ON 15 TO 17 AUGUST 2017. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/CER_EA_appeal_submissions_FINAL.pdf?x21779

Chicago

Centre for Environmental Rights. APPELLANTS’ SUBMISSIONS IN THE APPEAL ON 15 TO 17 AUGUST 2017. 2017. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/CER_EA_appeal_submissions_FINAL.pdf?x21779.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Centre for Environmental Rights |title=APPELLANTS’ SUBMISSIONS IN THE APPEAL ON 15 TO 17 AUGUST 2017 |date=14 August 2017 |url=https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/CER_EA_appeal_submissions_FINAL.pdf?x21779 |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{centreforenvironmentalrights2017appellants, author = {{Centre for Environmental Rights}}, title = {{APPELLANTS’ SUBMISSIONS IN THE APPEAL ON 15 TO 17 AUGUST 2017}}, institution = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, year = {2017}, month = aug, url = {https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/CER_EA_appeal_submissions_FINAL.pdf?x21779}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }