APPENDIX 5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "APPENDIX 5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY"

Kristian Nelson
6 years ago
Views:

1 APPENDIX 5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY In line with the Minerals and Petroleum Resource Development Act 20 of 2002 (MPRDA), an Impact Assessment is required for prospecting in terms of Section 39(3)(b). The requirements for the EIA include an an assessment of the nature, extent, duration probability, and significance of the identified potential environmental, social and cultural impacts of the proposed mining operation, including cumulative environmental impacts. In the baseline study of this document, the environmental parameters that can be impacted by the proposed prospecting activities are described; i.e. fauna, flora, surface hydrology, groundwater, etc. Each impact identified for the proposed prospecting project is ranked based on the categories detailed here, considering the consequence of the impact and the likelihood of its occurrence. Once the consequence and likelihood are ranked, the overall significance of an activity/impact is evaluated based on the total score. This value can be read off the matrix presented below. A significance ranking of LOW, MEDIUM or HIGH is then indicated. When reviewing the significance ranking, it is important to note that the impact score presented in has been ranked based on available information (desk study) and the assumption that no mitigation measures are implemented. By ranking in this way, it is possible to determine (qualitatively) if management measures are effective, through re-evaluation of the ranking assuming management measures are in place. Impacts that are associated with the proposed mining operation were determined in the following ways: Consultation with Interested and Affected Parties (I&AP), including: o Members of the public; o The local farmers group and individual farmers; o The Authorities; o The Municipality; Conducting a baseline environmental study, including: o Air Quality and Noise Assessment; o Soil Classification and Characterisation, Land Use and Land Capability Assessment; o Geological Assessment; o Hydrology and Hydrogeological Assessment; o Heritage Assessment; o Biodiversity Assessment; o Socio-economic Assessment. The method used to rank the impacts (determine significance) is described below.

3 Ranking of Impacts Criteria to Consider The ranking system used to determine the significance of the impacts resulting from prospecting was developed, taking cognizance of the requirements of the MPRDA. Regulation 50 of the MPRDA stipulates that the EIA must include an assessment of the nature, extent, duration, probability and significance of the identified environmental impacts. Therefore, for the purpose of this report, the significance ranking of mining related impacts will be determined through the evaluation of the following criteria: Criteria Nature / intensity of impact Spatial extent of impact Duration of impact Probability of potential occurrence Frequency of potential occurrence Overall Significance Abbreviation used in the Impact Assessment Nat Ext Dur Prob Freq OS Table Ranking of evaluation criteria CONSEQUENCE LIKELIHOOD Nature / Intensity / Severity of Impact: Low Impacts affect the environmental in such a way that natural, cultural and/or social functions and processes are not affected. Medium Impacts affect the environment in such a way that natural, cultural and/or social functions and processes are altered 3 High Impacts affect the environment in such a way that natural, cultural and/or social functions and processes will temporarily or permanently cease. 5 Spatial extent of Impact: On-site Impact occurs on-site. Local Impact occurs within 5km radium of the site. 2 Regional Impact occurs within a 00km radius of the site 3 National Impact occurs within South Africa 4 International Impact occurs internationally 5 Duration of Impact: Short-term Through dilution and dispersion, the impact reduces to insignificant within week. Medium-term Through dilution and dispersion, the impact reduces to insignificant within the life of the mine. 2 Long-term The impact will cease after the operational life of the mine either because of natural process or by human intervention 3 Permanent Where mitigation either by natural process or by human intervention will not occur in such a way or in such a time span that the impact can be 4 considered transient. Probability of potential occurrence of the Impact: Improbable The possibility of the impact materializing is very low either because of design or historic experience. Probable There is a distinct possibility that the impact will occur. 2 Highly probably It is most likely that the impact will occur. 3 Definite The impact will occur regardless of any prevention measures. 4 Frequency of potential occurrence of the Impact: Annually or less Impact occurs at least once in a year or less frequently. 6 months Impact occurs at least once in 6 months. 2 Monthly Impact occurs at least once a month. 3 Weekly Impact occurs at least once a week. 4 Daily Impact occurs daily. 5

4 Table 2 Significance Ranking Matrix LIKELIHOOD CONSEQUENCE The significance of impacts is determined based on the evaluation of an activity s impact in terms of; consequence and likelihood. Using the sum of the evaluated ranking within Table and the matrix in Table 2, overall significance can be classified as follows: Low Medium High Where it will not have a significant influence on the environment. Management measures can be proposed to ensure that significance does not increase. Where it could have a significant influence on the environment unless it is mitigated or managed. Where it would have a significant influence on the environment regardless of any possible mitigation and hence must be either avoided or managed As indicated previously, Regulation 50 of the MPRDA specifically lists the criteria to be used for evaluation, including the cumulative environmental impacts. In addition, comments from interested and affected parties (IAP) will also influence the ranking of impacts as these will vary from site to site. For example, where prospecting is being undertaken close to a residential area, concerns regarding dust and noise will have a higher significance ranking for prospecting that is far away from any human habitation. Similarly, the impact on the ecological environment will be greater in pristine environments than in disturbed areas. An explanation of these additional criteria is given below. Additional criteria that influence significance Abbreviation used in the Tables in Section 4 Cumulative impacts with off-site activities Cum Feedback from interested and affected parties IAP Seasonality Sea Cumulative Impacts Cumulative Impacts affect the significance ranking of an impact because it considers an impact in terms of both on-site (directly related to prospecting) and offsite (not related to prospecting) sources. Feedback from Interested and affected parties According to the MPRDA, the applicant must consult with IAPs and record their comments and concerns. Although the significance ranking (as described above) may evaluate an impact to have a medium impact, the members of the public may consider the impact as having a high significance. The concerns raised by the public will then be indicated with the significance ranking with management measures being proposed and implemented to address all realistic concerns raised by IAPs.

5 Seasonality Although seasonality is not considered in the ranking of the significance, if may influence the evaluation during various times of year. For example, during the summer/rainy months, the significance ranking of dust generation is likely to be low, while during winter, the significance of the impact will increase. As seasonality will only influence certain impacts, it will only be considered for these, with management measures being imposed accordingly (i.e. dust suppression measures being implemented during winter). Prioritising impacts for management The evaluation of the impacts, as described above, will be used to prioritise which impacts require mitigation measures. Management measures will be drawn up for negative impacts that are ranked as a medium - high significance. For impacts ranked as low significance, no alternatives will be considered but management measures may be proposed (where possible) to ensure that the impacts remain of low significance. Where an impact is considered to have a positive high to medium significance, commitments will be included that ensure these benefit are continued. Presentation of evaluation For ease of reference, the significance of each impact is tabulated in each subsection of the EIA. Tables highlighted in blue indicate a positive impact, while those highlighted in red indicate a negative impact.

4 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES

4 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 4.1 Introduction In terms of the EIA Regulations published in Government Notice R543 of 2 August 2010 in terms of Section 24 of the National Environmental Management Act (Act No.