APPEALS LODGED AGAINST THE DECISION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF MINERAL RESOURCES AND ENERGY TO GRANT AN INTEGRATED ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION FOR THE PROPOSED TETRA 4 CLUSTER 2 VIRGINIA GAS PRODUCTION PROJECT ACTIVITIES, IN FREE STATE PROVINCE

This document is an appeal decision by the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment of South Africa regarding an Integrated Environmental Authorisation (IEA) granted by the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy (DMRE) to Tetra 4 (Pty) Ltd. The IEA concerned the Tetra 4 Cluster 2 Virginia Gas Production Project in the Free State Province. Following appeals by Natural Justice and the Centre for Environmental Rights (on behalf of MEJCON-SA and MACUA), the Minister dismissed several grounds of appeal but remitted the application back to the DMRE for reconsideration due to deficiencies in the climate change and geohydrology assessments.

• The Tetra 4 Cluster 2 Virginia Gas Production Project involves significant infrastructure expansion, including the drilling of up to 300 production wells and 400 exploratory wells, the construction of high- and low-pressure pipelines, and the installation of LNG and Helium stations.
• The Minister granted a condonation request for Tetra 4 (Pty) Ltd to file its responding statement 10 days late, ruling that the delay was not extensive and that the technical complexity of the appeals justified the extension.
• The Minister refused to consider comments submitted by the DMRE on 20 November 2023 because they were filed outside regulated timeframes without a request for condonation.
• Appellants raised concerns that the project's Air Quality Assessment (AQIA) was deficient because it only estimated routine operational emissions and failed to quantify emissions from the planning, design, decommissioning, and rehabilitation phases, as well as well flaring.
• Appellants argued that the project poses a high risk of groundwater contamination due to potential well casing failures and the migration of deep saline water or radioactive elements (uranium and radium) into the shallow potable aquifer.
• The Minister's Technical Advisory Team (TAT) found that the project's Climate Change Assessment (CCA) contained legitimate omissions in GHG emission calculations and failed to adequately analyze the physical risks of climate change on the project and affected communities.
• The TAT identified gaps in the Geohydrology Report, noting it relied too heavily on desktop studies with minimal site-specific ground truthing and lacked clear definitions of hydrogeological impact source terms.
• The Minister dismissed the appeal regarding the Public Participation Process (PPP), concluding that the applicant's efforts—including 78 site notices and multiple community meetings—met the requirements of the 2014 EIA Regulations.
• The Minister dismissed the ground of appeal regarding socio-economic impacts, finding that the applicant had submitted a Social Impact Assessment (SIA) and included the necessary mitigation measures in the Environmental Management Programme (EMPr).
• The Minister dismissed the claim that the DMRE failed to provide adequate reasons for its decision, stating that the 'Key Findings' section of the Environmental Authorisation (EA) provided sufficient justification.
• The Minister dismissed the appeal claiming South Africa lacks the resources to monitor gas operations, labeling it a 'bald and unsubstantiated' claim lacking factual support.
• The Minister decided to remit the EA application back to the DMRE for reconsideration, specifically requiring the applicant to expand the CCA to address GHG calculations, climate change impacts on river hydrology, and the viability of LNG as a 'bridging fuel'.
• As part of the remittal, the Minister required the applicant to provide detailed information on gas well construction, stratigraphy, and the water quality of the deep confined aquifer to address potential leakage into shallow aquifers.
• The Minister mandated that the revised EIAr and EMPr be subjected to a new Public Participation Process to allow registered interested and affected parties (I&APs) to review and comment on the updated information.

APA

Centre for Environmental Rights (n.d.). APPEALS LODGED AGAINST THE DECISION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF MINERAL RESOURCES AND ENERGY TO GRANT AN INTEGRATED ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION FOR THE PROPOSED TETRA 4 CLUSTER 2 VIRGINIA GAS PRODUCTION PROJECT ACTIVITIES, IN FREE STATE PROVINCE. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Tetra4-Appeal-Decision.pdf?x21779

Chicago

Centre for Environmental Rights. APPEALS LODGED AGAINST THE DECISION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF MINERAL RESOURCES AND ENERGY TO GRANT AN INTEGRATED ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION FOR THE PROPOSED TETRA 4 CLUSTER 2 VIRGINIA GAS PRODUCTION PROJECT ACTIVITIES, IN FREE STATE PROVINCE. n.d. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Tetra4-Appeal-Decision.pdf?x21779.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Centre for Environmental Rights |title=APPEALS LODGED AGAINST THE DECISION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF MINERAL RESOURCES AND ENERGY TO GRANT AN INTEGRATED ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION FOR THE PROPOSED TETRA 4 CLUSTER 2 VIRGINIA GAS PRODUCTION PROJECT ACTIVITIES, IN FREE STATE PROVINCE |url=https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Tetra4-Appeal-Decision.pdf?x21779 |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{centreforenvironmentalrightsndappeals, author = {{Centre for Environmental Rights}}, title = {{APPEALS LODGED AGAINST THE DECISION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF MINERAL RESOURCES AND ENERGY TO GRANT AN INTEGRATED ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION FOR THE PROPOSED TETRA 4 CLUSTER 2 VIRGINIA GAS PRODUCTION PROJECT ACTIVITIES, IN FREE STATE PROVINCE}}, institution = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, url = {https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Tetra4-Appeal-Decision.pdf?x21779}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }