Environmental Issues
Waste rock dumps: The mine is currently focusing on vegetating the dumps on the mine’s perimeter that
are visible from the town of Henley-on-Klip. The mineralogy of the waste rock dumps will not produce acid
rock drainage, with seepage reported to be alkaline and enriched in calcium and magnesium. Although,
the waste rock dumps are at the angle of repose, the dumps are not high (less than 20m) and do not pose
a stability risk. Therefore, it is not expected that the dumps will require re-profiling to a lesser slope.
Tails disposal: Tails from the plant are pumped to temporary storage facilities, where it is allowed to dry.
Once dry, these tails are sold to farmers as agricultural lime. It is reported that minimal dust is generated,
as the product sold to the farmers still contains approximately 10% moisture.
Hazardous material handling: Historical hydrocarbon housekeeping management has resulted in the
contamination of soil adjacent to the plant and workshop area (approximately 2 – 3Ha). The area has
been ripped and fertilised to stimulate microbial activity that should degrade the hydrocarbons.
Although monitoring boreholes have been drilled in this area, these boreholes have not yet been sampled.
Therefore, information on plume development is absent. SRK is of the opinion that groundwater
contamination is unlikely to be significant, as it is expected that the groundwater will daylight in the pit
where it will be sufficiently diluted.
Asbestos: Some of the older buildings still contain asbestos in the form of ceiling boards (100 – 200m3)
that ultimately will require disposal at a hazardous waste site (approximate cost (ZAR0.1m). The mine
report that the majority of PCB contaminated oils have been removed from electrical installations with only
residual PCB levels remaining. SRK does not consider this a significant liability.
Water contamination: Groundwater inflow to the pits is returned to the plant (68%), discharged to the
Klipspruit (22%) and the remainder used for dust suppression. The geology of the area results in an
enrichment of calcium, magnesium and alkalinity in discharge water, however, it is only alkalinity that sometimes exceeds permit conditions. The mine is to embark on a baseline survey to determine whether
the enrichment is natural or a result of mining activities. Periodically, nitrates (blasting residues)
accumulate in the pit water, with the result that the nitrate concentrations in the discharge to the Klipspruit
are slightly elevated (15% – 30% above DWAF drinking water guideline). This should improve with the
change in blasting procedures.
Water management: The mine is not compliant with GN 704 with clean storm water runoff from the land
surrounding the mine flowing through a culvert under the access road to the mine and then through the
plant area, where it becomes contaminated with sediments and sometimes alkalinity. It then enters a
diversion around the pit and is release into the Klipriver. The mine has investigated the problem and
discovered that, due to the topography of the area, there is no other flow path for the water. SRK considers
this a risk, as the mine might be forced by DWAF to collect the water in a retention dam and then pump it
to the Klipspruit, to prevent the clean water being contaminated. SRK therefore proposes a sensitivity
contingency of ZAR1 – 2m.
Sink hole formation: Water accumulating on surface has lead to the formation of sinkholes. Currently,
this is not a significant problem and it is managed by ensuring that there is minimal surface water
accumulation. No predictive geotechnical work has been undertaken to identify zones of high sinkhole
formation potential so the future risk is not known. The mine are, however, aware of potential sinkhole
formation and regularly monitor this area.
Air emissions: Dust emissions from the mine are currently a problem for the local community with dust
being generated in the pit, on haul roads and in the plant. The mine has implemented dust control
measures, however there are still occasions when the DEAT action level guidelines are triggered at three
of the boundary monitoring points. Assuming appropriate management is implemented, this is not
considered a major risk.
Community relationships: The mine built a school for the local community in 1997. There were plans
to extend the school, however, the Department of Education never applied for permission to rezone the
13 stands on which the school was located, so Phase II never started. The mine has submitted its Social
and Labour Policy, which contains plans to uplift the surrounding community. The mine does however,
make ad hoc donations to the community as and when required, with each request for donations being
individually evaluated.
Decommissioning and closure liability: The mine has no closure plan, however, closure costing is
based on commitments made in the EMPR. The mine has assessed its immediate closure cost (June
2005) to be ZAR9.8m. This includes ZAR6.9m for demolition costs and ZAR1.9m for rehabilitation costs.
The primary expense associated with rehabilitation appears to be the re-vegetation of the waste rock
dumps. There does not seem to be an allowance for any restoration of the footprints where infrastructure
is removed. SRK is of the opinion that the rehabilitation costs are insufficient, with there being a shortfall
of ZAR13 – 17m. Based on the information available, SRK is of the opinion that the R6.9m for demolition
is sufficient.
| 
back to top