Scoping Report

SCOPING REPORT

FOR LISTED ACTIVITIES ASSOCIATED WITH MINING RIGHT AND/OR BULK SAMPLING ACTIVITIES INCLUDING TRENCHING IN CASES OF ALLUVIAL DIAMOND PROSPECTING.

SUBMITTED FOR ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORIZATIONS IN TERMS OF THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ACT, 1998 AND THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT WASTE ACT, 2008 IN RESPECT OF LISTED ACTIVITIES THAT HAVE BEEN TRIGGERED BY APPLICATIONS IN TERMS OF THE MINERAL AND PETROLEUM RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT, 2002 (MPRDA) (AS AMENDED).

NAME OF APPLICANT: Samancor Chrome Limited

TEL NO: +27 13 249 4407 FAX NO: +27 86 233 3976 POSTAL ADDRESS: PostNet Suite 803, Private Bag X9, Benmore, South Africa, 2010 PHYSICAL ADDRESS: 1st Floor, Block B, Cullinan Place, Cullinan Close, Morningside, Sandton, SA, 2196 FILE REFERENCE NUMBER SAMRAD: NW30512210109MR

IMPORTANT NOTICE

In terms of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (Act 28 of 2002 as amended), the Minister must grant a prospecting or mining right if among others the mining “will not result in unacceptable pollution, ecological degradation or damage to the environment”.

Unless an Environmental Authorisation can be granted following the evaluation of an Environmental Impact Assessment and an Environmental Management Programme report in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of 1998) (NEMA), it cannot be concluded that the said activities will not result in unacceptable pollution, ecological degradation or damage to the environment.

In terms of section 16(3)(b) of the EIA Regulations, 2014, any report submitted as part of an application must be prepared in a format that may be determined by the Competent Authority and in terms of section 17 (1) (c) the competent Authority must check whether the application has taken into account any minimum requirements applicable or instructions or guidance provided by the competent authority to the submission of applications.

It is therefore an instruction that the prescribed reports required in respect of applications for an environmental authorisation for listed activities triggered by an application for a right or permit are

1 submitted in the exact format of, and provide all the information required in terms of, this template. Furthermore please be advised that failure to submit the information required in the format provided in this template will be regarded as a failure to meet the requirements of the Regulation and will lead to the Environmental Authorisation being refused.

It is furthermore an instruction that the Environmental Assessment Practitioner must process and interpret his/her research and analysis and use the findings thereof to compile the information required herein. (Unprocessed supporting information may be attached as appendices). The EAP must ensure that the information required is placed correctly in the relevant sections of the Report, in the order, and under the provided headings as set out below, and ensure that the report is not cluttered with un-interpreted information and that it unambiguously represents the interpretation of the applicant.

OBJECTIVE OF THE SCOPING PROCESS

1) The objective of the scoping process is to, through a consultative process—

(a) identify the relevant policies and legislation relevant to the activity; (b) motivate the need and desirability of the proposed activity, including the need and desirability of the activity in the context of the preferred location; (c) identify and confirm the preferred activity and technology alternative through an impact and risk assessment and ranking process; (d) identify and confirm the preferred site, through a detailed site selection process, which includes an impact and risk assessment process inclusive of cumulative impacts and a ranking process of all the identified alternatives focusing on the geographical, physical, biological, social, economic, and cultural aspects of the environment; (e) identify the key issues to be addressed in the assessment phase; (f) agree on the level of assessment to be undertaken, including the methodology to be applied, the expertise required as well as the extent of further consultation to be undertaken to determine the impacts and risks the activity will impose on the preferred site through the life of the activity, including the nature, significance, consequence, extent, duration and probability of the impacts to inform the location of the development footprint within the preferred site; and (g) identify suitable measures to avoid, manage, or mitigate identified impacts and to determine the extent of the residual risks that need to be managed and monitored. ______

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Project Title

Proposed establishment of a new underground mining area by Samancor Chrome Limited (Samancor) on Turffontein 462 JQ. The new mining area will be accessed via the existing Buffelsfontein East Section Shaft which requires a Mining Right, as contemplated in section 22 of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002 (Act No. 28 of 2002).

Purpose Statement

This report seeks to satisfy the objective of the scoping process, associated with the underground mining of the Turffontein 462 JQ Farm, by means of the following:

 Identifying legislation which may be triggered by the proposed project;  Outlining the need and desirability of the proposed project;  Determining and motivate the preferred site, activity and technology alternatives;  Identifing the expected potential environmental and social impacts;  Outlining the method by which the potential impacts will be assessed during the Environmental Impact Reporting process (EIR) phase;  Defining/outlining possible cumulative impacts;  Outlining the Plan of Action (PoA) for the EIR phase;  Defining what specialist studies will be undertaken during the EIR phase; and  Outlining the methodology to be applied to the specific assessments.

The overarching purpose of the Scoping and Environmental Impact Reporting (S&EIR) process (Environmental Authorisation process) is to obtain approval from the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR), in accordance with the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (NEMA), as amended, and the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002 (MPRDA) (as amended), for the proposed underground mining of the Turffontein 462 JQ Farm.

Introduction

Samancor currently operates two sets of mines and three alloy producing plants, in the North West, Limpopo and Mpumalanga provinces of South Africa. The Mines are called Eastern Chrome Mines (ECM) and Western Chrome Mines (WCM). WCM is located in the Rustenburg area within the North West Province. ECM is located near the Lydenburg/Steelpoort area of the Limpopo Province. The three smelters are called Ferrometals, Middelburg Ferrochrome and Tubatse Ferrochrome. The three smelting operations are located in the northern and north-eastern parts of South Africa.

The Samancor WCM is comprised of (listed from west to east):

 Elandsdrift Section;  The Mooinooi Section;  The Buffelsfontein West Section; and  The Buffelsfontein East Section.

As part of an extension to the existing Samancor WCM, the company submitted a Mining Right application to the DMR in order to transfer/upgrade the existing Turffontein 462 JQ Farm Prospecting Right into a Mining Right. Along with the Mining Right application the company submitted a Mine Works Program (MWP) which defined the depth of the ore reserve which is targeted by Samancor and the methods proposed to extract the ore reserve feasibly. The primary targeted ore seams include both the MG1 and MG2. The seams are considered extremely rich in chromite. Samancor proposes to access the Turffontein farm underground area via the existing decline shaft at the Buffelsfontein East Section. As part of the 2008 Environmental Management Programme (EMPR) amendment the following shafts were approved:

 New material transport shaft (decline shaft) near the plant area (Mooinooi Section) – Currently in construction phase;  Two decline access shafts at the proposed section (Buffelsfontein West Section) – Construction phase has not commenced; and  Two decline access shafts at the proposed section (Buffelsfontein East Section) – Established – operational phase.

Note: Lonmin Plc (Lonmin) holds Mining Rights on the Turffontein 462 – JQ Farm however Lonmin’s Mining Rights refers only to the UG2 and Merensky Reefs. The Lonmin targeted reefs occur at a far shallower depth than that of the MG reef (including MG1 and MG2 seams).

The proposed project is associated with the primary extraction and primary processing of ore thus falls under the jurisdiction of the DMR (competent authority).

Background

Samancor holds two Mining Right (MR)s, related to the WCM, which include the following:

 NW 482 MR (SAM/M7/7) (Old Order – ML 21/1994) covering the Elandsdrift, Elandskraal and Buffelsfontein Farms.  NW 481 MR (SAM/M7/16) (Old Order – ML 21/1994) which is only applicable to the Elandskraal Farm.

Prospecting Right NW 1333 PR (P/SAM/GEN/26) forms the subject of this application for Environmental Authorisation. Before the Prospecting Right can be upgraded to a Mining Right, the project must be approved in terms of relevant environmental legislation, in this case the NEMA and MPRDA.

The Environmental Authorisation will be linked to the Mining Right approved over the Turffontein Farm (excluding the UG2 and Merensky Reefs). However, it should be noted that although the Environmental Authorisation resulting from this application will be linked directly to the Turffontein Farm, the Farm underground workings will be accessed by an existing Buffelsfontein East Section decline shaft which is approved under EMPR reference number RDNW(KL) 6/2/2/2264. Therefore, certain components of the EMPRs (i.e. existing and proposed approval) will be interrelated.

Project Description

In terms of this report, the proposed project is limited to operational, decommissioning, closure and post- closure phases. This due to the fact that the existing Buffelsfontein Operations will be extended to the north to accommodate the Turffontein farm area. The proposed project will target the MG1 and MG2 seams as profitable resources. The MG1 seam will be mined out using a conventional footwall haulage system and the MG2 seam(s) by using a completely mechanised, trackless method. Existing technology forming part of existing underground workings will be transferred to the Turffontein underground workings.

Alternatives

No alternative sites are being considered by the applicant due to the following reasons:

 The existance of a prospecting right on the Turffontein farm;  The capital spent on prospecting activities over Turffontein;  The proximity of the farm to supporting Samancor surface infrastructure;  Little to no amendments required to existing infrastructure in order to support accessing of a new large ore reserve;  The farm is currently being mined and has been extensively mined by Lonmin which ensures that the proposed project falls into the current sense of place and land use;  No land claims exist on the farms which reduces the overall risk of investment; and  No significant surface water bodies (i.e. perennial streams or large dams/ponds).

Only underground mining is considered feasible to extract the resource therefore no activity type alternative are considered worth assessing as part of the approval process.

Existing underground technologies (in terms of both conventional and trackless mechanised mining) will be transferred to the Turffontein underground workings. No alternatives were considered as the existing technologies are considered sufficient to achieve the proposed project goals.

The no-go option may be viable, however it will impact on the viability of the overall operations.

Legal Context

No new surface supporting infrastructure will be established as part of the project; however, in time, as mining advances, supporting infrastructure such as ventilation shafts, waste storage facilities (or expansions thereto), water storage infrastructure and possible mineral processing facility expansions may likely ensue. Such infrastructure (both new and upgrades) will be incorporated into the operation by way of an EMPR amendment(s), facilitated by Samancor under the prevailing legislation.

Given the lack of surface infrastructure requirements, only the following three legal triggers are considered applicable to the proposed project:

 The NEMA, Government Notice Regulation (GNR) 984;  The MPRDA, Section 39 (1); and  The National Water Act (Act No. 36, 1998) (NWA) Section 21(j).

Stakeholder Engagement

In accordance with the NEMA, GNR 982, Chapter 6, potential Interested and Affected parties (I&APs) either have been or will be notified of the proposed project using the following means:  Fixing a notice board in conspicuous areas around the proposed project site. In this case the boundary of the Turffontein farm was not deemed effective. As such, notices were erected within high population areas around the site;  Written notice to the: o Land owner of the site where the activity to which the application relates to; and o The current occupier of the land; o Municipal ward councillor(s) related to the project site; o Municipality which has jurisdiction in the area; and o Commenting authorities.  Placing an advertisement in a local newspaper.

 Providing copies of the draft scoping report and EIAR for comment by registered interested and affected parties.

A public meeting is planned during the Environmental Authorisation process. The meeting will take place during the draft Scoping Report public review period. Should significant interest be shown by the public, a second meeting may be considered during the EIR Phase which will be planned during the Draft EIAR public review period.

Baseline Environment

The existing geology, groundwater, surface water, ecology, heritage, climate, air quality, topography, soil, land-capability, land use, noise, visual and socio-economic environments are described within this report. These descriptions will be used as the baseline against which potential impacts associated with the project can be measured.

Summary of Impacts Identified in the Scoping Phase

The potential environmental impacts identified in the scoping process include:

 Geology - geology impacts relate to the risk of collapse resulting from the existence of two different underground mine operations within one area; and permanent removal of an extricable resource.  Topography - Due to the absence of any new surface structures associated with the project, there will be no direct impact on topography.  Air Quality - Due to the absence of any new surface activities or associated emissions associated with the project, there will be no impact on air quality.  Soil, Land Use and Land Capability - Due to the absence of any new surface activities there will be no impact on soil, land use or land capability.  Hydrology and Hydrogeology - The proposed mining of the Turffontein farm will potentially affect the groundwater environment in the following ways: o Opening of Mine workings within the deeper aquifer will cause groundwater to flow into the workings. It is important to estimate and manage this inflow for the safety of the miners. o Groundwater inflow to the Mine workings may lower groundwater levels in both the shallow and deep aquifers over the workings. Therefore, the water level may drop in water supply boreholes near the proposed mining area. This may also affect baseflow contributions to surface water features. o During mining, the Mine will act as a groundwater sink and no contamination is expected. After mining is complete, the workings will flood. Contaminated water in the flooded workings may leak into the surrounding groundwater and cause a change in groundwater quality.  Biodiversity – Potential changes to baseflow (associated with dewatering) into watercourses and wetlands located on the farm, may have impacts on associated aquatic ecosystems.  Noise and vibrations - Underground mining of the Turffontein farm will require blasting activities from 300m to 650m below the surface level. Introducing additional underground workings at a depth greater than UG2 and Merensky, noise impacts on the surface are not expected to be notable by biodiversity and/or residence on the surface. Vibrations, if they reach the surface, are not expected to be felt by dwellings and/or biodiversity.  Visual - Due to the absence of any new surface activities there are no anticipated impacts on the visual / esthetic characteristics of the project area.  Socio-economic - The proposed project, considered an extension of existing operations, will ensure an extended life of mine which translates into extended availability of mining related jobs by/for Samancor. The proposed project will not necessarily result in additional job opportunities, but rather an extension of the status quo.

Given that no surface infrastructure is proposed as part of the aplication, only a hydrogeological study and possibly a heritage impact assessment are proposed to take place during the EIR Phase to determine if any surface related impacts are associated with the proposed project.

Way Forward

This report, the draft scoping report, will be distributed to interested and affected parties for review for a period no less than 30 days; thereafter the report will be finalised, incorporating all relevant comments raised during the review period, and submitted to the DMR. Once the DMR approves the scoping phase, the project will advance into the EIR phase which involves specialist studies and more in-depth assessment of potential social and environmental impacts.

______

SCOPING REPORT

2) Contact Person and Correspondence Address a) Details of: Nigel Seed

i) The EAP who prepared the report

Name of The Practitioner:

EAP: Nigel Seed Company: WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Physical address: Block A, 1 on Langford, Langford Road, Westville, Durban, 3629, South Africa Postal address: Po Box 98864, Sloane Park 2151, South Africa Postal code: 2151 Cell: +27 (0) 83 6361768 Telephone: +27 (0) 31 2408800 Fax: +27 (0) 31 2408861 E-mail: [email protected]

ii) Expertise of the EAP.

(1) The qualifications of the EAP

(With evidence attached as Appendix 1).

Nigel Seed is a Director with 14 years’ environmental management and consulting experience in Southern Africa. Nigel is the Business Unit Manager of the Environmental Services Business Unit with the responsibility for professional teams in Durban, Johannesburg and Cape Town.

Nigel’s technical expertise centres on pollution and waste issues and associated environmental projects in the industrial sectors. He has delivered major projects in the fields of planning and permitting, waste management, cleaner production, strategy and risk management, legal compliance, and environmental management systems.

Nigel has diverse sectorial experience including mining and metallurgy (aluminium, gold, platinum, ferro- alloys, iron/steel and uranium); large-scale thermal power generation; chemical manufacturing (pulp and paper, polymers, petro-chemical and agri-chemical); manufacturing (FMCG, food & beverage); infrastructure (ports, road, rail electricity transmission); waste management and agriculture.

Professional Qualifications:

 Bachelor of Science (Honours), Social Science, Environmental Management & Geography, University of Natal, Durban, South Africa  Member - International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA)  Registered Environmental Assessment Practitioner (EAP), March 2012

(2) Summary of the EAP’s past experience

(Attach the EAP’s curriculum vitae as Appendix 2)

Table 1 provides a list and descriptor of each project Jared has been involved in as a Project Manager and/or lead consultant.

Table 1 – Nigel Seed Relevant Project Experience

Sector Project Scoping and Environmental Mining and Metallurgy Impact South Uranium Plant SX Circuit Replacement, South Africa (2011): Project Reporting Manager. EIA process for proposed solvent extraction plant replacement at Vaal Processes River Operations. The SX process employs atmospheric acid leaching, counter current decantation and ion exchange systems to concentrate uranium leach liquor, which is then further upgraded and purified and reacted to produce ammonium di- uranate. Client: AngloGold Ashanti (Pty) Ltd.

Smelter SO2 Abatement Projects, Polokwane / Rustenburg, Limpopo / North West Province, South Africa (2012): Technical Support. Technical support to the EIA process for proposed SO2 abatement equipment initiatives at the Polokwane and Mortimer Smelters. Client: Anglo American Platinum Ltd.

Desulpherisation Unit, Newcastle, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa (2006): Project Manager. EIA process for proposed upgrade of the desulphurisation unit and dust abatement system associated with the steel plant furnaces. Client: Arcelor Mittal South Africa Ltd.

60 MVA Ferrosilicon Smelter, South Africa (2003): Project Manager. EIA Process for the proposed establishment of a 60 MVA ferrosilicon smelter. Client: Silicon Technology (Pty) Ltd.

Richards Bay Bulk Materials Handling Facility ESIA, South Africa (2003): Project Manager. Development of a Bulk Materials Handling Facility associated with the Port dry bulk terminal Import/export facilities. Client: Richards Bay Coal Distributors.

Effluent and Waste Management

Netcare National Waste Management Strategy, South Africa (2015): Project Lead (Waste). Baseline waste management assessment of 70 of Netcare’s healthcare facilities including clinics and hospitals. Development of a national integrated waste management system and strategy. Client: Netcare Limited.

Healthcare Risk Waste Treatment Facilities, Pietermaritzburg, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa (2006-2009): Project Manager. EIA Process and Waste Management License for proposed static and mobile microwave disinfection units for the treatment of healthcare risk waste. Client: Ecocycle (Pty) Ltd.

Electron Road Regional Waste Transfer Station, South Africa (2005-2006): Project Manager. EIA process and waste management licensing for a 2400 ton per day regional waste transfer station. Client: Durban Solid Waste.

KwaDukuza waste disposal site, South Africa (2010): Project Manager. EIA process peer review associated with the proposed high hazard (H:H) permitting of the Kwadukusa waste disposal site. Client: Metamorphosis Environmental Consultants.

Illovo South Africa Waste Legislation Compliance Review and Strategy, South Africa (2010): Project Manager. Provision of technical waste management support to a legal (including Waste Act) assessment with Garlicke & Bousfield. The study included six Illovo Sugar facilities within KwaZulu-Natal including distilleries and mills. Client: Illovo Sugar South Africa Limited.

Waste Disposal Site Prefeasibility, South Africa (2010): Project Manager. Waste disposal site prefeasibility for ferrosilicon smelting operations. The determination of waste type, landfill class and associated CAPEX and OPEX was based on relevant DEA standards Client: Silicon Technology (Pty) Ltd.

Newcastle Works Effluent Buffering, South Africa (2009): Project Manager. EIA

Sector Project process associated with the implementation of effluent buffering capacity in order to address ammonia toxicity to the biological effluent treatment process. The project proposal entailed the use of an existing leachate dam associated with an existing high hazard (H:H) waste disposal site situated on the complex. Client: Arcelor Mittal South Africa Ltd.

AngloGold Waste Management Strategy, Vaal River, Gauteng, South Africa (2008): Project Manager. Development of a comprehensive waste management strategy for 27 business (mines, metallurgical plants, commercial services) units in the Vaal River and West Wits area (2003). In 2008 the strategy was updated to include the development of a comprehensive action plan for the management of hazardous waste. Client: AngloGold Ashanti (Pty) Ltd.

Lebowa Mining Complex Waste Management Strategy, South Africa (2008): Project Manager. Waste management baseline assessments, waste management strategies, and to develop detailed waste management procedures for the Lebowa Platinum Mine complex and the Polokwane Smelter. Client: Anglo American Platinum Ltd.

Umbogintwini Industrial Complex Effluent Balance, South Africa (2007-2008): Project Manager. Effluent balance and feasibility studies for additional marine effluent disposal capacity & associated water and energy recovery. Client: Heartland Leasing (Pty) Ltd.

Resource Recovery Facility – Uitenhage, Eastern Cape, South Africa (2007-2008): Waste Management License / EIA process for the development of a resource recovery facility for the handling and treatment of hydrocarbon and organic effluents, various general and hazardous solid wastes. Client: Veolia Environmental Services (Pty) Ltd.

Effluent Treatment Facilities, South Africa (2007/8): Project Manager. ESIA/ESMP for effluent treatment facilities intended to address increasingly stringent sulphide limitations at the Southern Wastewater Treatment Works. Client: SAPREF.

Study on Priority Hazardous Waste Streams in the Western Cape, South Africa (2007): Project Manager. Development of the Best Practicable Environmental Options for priority hazardous waste streams in the Western Cape. Client: Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning.

Hazardous Waste Transfer Facility, Richards Bay, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa (2006): Project Manager. EIA Process for the proposed establishment of a hazardous waste transfer facility at the Richards Bay Dry Bulk Terminal. Client: Transnet Port Terminals.

Logmed® Medical Waste Facilities, South Africa (2002): Project Manager. Assessment of four alternative Medical Waste Treatment Facility sites within the eThekwini Municipality as part of an EIA process. Client: WasteMan (Pty) Ltd.

b) Description of the property

Table 2 - Property Information

Farm Name: Turffontein 462 JQ Application area (Ha) 2841,7356 Magisterial district: Bojanala Platinum District Municipality Distance and direction from nearest Segwaelane (within project Boundary) town Modderspruit (1.5km southeast of project boundary) 21 digit Surveyor General Code for each T0JQ00020000046200000 farm portion

c) Locality map

(show nearest town, scale not smaller than 1:250000 attached as Appendix 3).

See Figure 1. A3 print out is attached as Appendix 3.

d) Description of the scope of the proposed overall activity

i) Listed and specified activities

Provide a plan drawn to a scale acceptable to the competent authority but not less than 1: 10 000 that shows the location, and area (hectares) of all the aforesaid main and listed activities, and infrastructure to be placed on site and attach as Appendix 4

Refer to Appendix 3 (not Appendix 4).

The proposed undermining of the Turffontein 462 JQ farm will not require any additional surface infrastructure at this stage in the project. The underlying ore will be accessed through an existing decline shaft at the Samancor Buffelsfontein East operation. From the shaft, the ore will be transferred to the existing Mooinooi operation where the ore will be processed to form a concentrate ready for transporting to one of three off-site Samancor Smelters. The existing Mooinooi Section TSF will also be utilised as capacity still exists (under the approved 2008/9 EMPR Amendment). The Buffelsfontein East Section operation is currently under ‘Care and Maintenance’. Table 3 contains activities proposed, area coverage and related listed activity.

Table 3 - Activities Proposed, Extent of Each and Associated Legal Trigger

NAME OF ACTIVITY Aerial extent of the LISTED APPLICABLE Activity ACTIVITY LISTING Ha or m² NOTICE Mark with an X where (GNR 544, applicable or affected. GNR 545 or GNR 546)/NOT LISTED (All activities including activities not listed) (E.g. Excavations, blasting, stockpiles, discard dumps or dams, Loading, hauling and transport, Water supply dams and boreholes, accommodation, offices, ablution, stores, workshops, processing plant, storm water control, berms, roads, pipelines, power lines, conveyors, etc…etc…etc.)

Proposed establishment of a new 2841,7356 Ha X GNR 984 underground mining area on (17) Turffontein 462 JQ which will be accessed from the existing Buffelsfontein East Buffelsfontein Shaft which requires a mining right as contemplated in section 22 of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002 (Act No. 28 of 2002).

NAME OF ACTIVITY Aerial extent of the LISTED APPLICABLE Activity ACTIVITY LISTING Ha or m² NOTICE Mark with an X where (GNR 544, applicable or affected. GNR 545 or GNR 546)/NOT LISTED

Undermining of the Turffontein 462 JQ 2841,7356 Ha Included within Included farm. above within above

Blasting will occur from 300m to 650m 2841,7356 Ha Included within Included below surface level to loosen the rock above within above for transfer to surface.

Drilling will occur from 300m to 650m 2841,7356 Ha Included within Included below surface level to set explosives above within above and progress mine tunneling.

Supporting Facilities/Activities (pre-existing and/or formed part of a prior application process) - Below Activities are defined however it should be noted that these activities are pre-existing and not considered part of this application. The activities do however form essentail supporting facilities to the proposed underground mining of the Turffontein farm.

Waste Rock is extracted from the Approximately 1.5 Pre-existing (does - decline shaft and stockpiled on the Ha (existing not form part of existing WRD (located within the Buffelsfontein East porposed project Buffelsfontein East Section fenceline). Section WRD) scope)

Tailings stockpiling (existing sorage Approximately 14 Pre-existing (does - facility). Ha not form part of porposed project scope)

Pollution control dams [existing at Buffelsfontein East Pre-existing (does - Buffelsfontein East Section (Decline Section not form part of Shaft) and at Mooinooi Section (Approximately porposed project (Processessing Plant)]. 0.97Ha) scope) Mooinooi Section (Approximately 1.5 Ha)

All ore material extracted from the Approximately 7km Pre-existing (does - decline shaft is trucked/hauled to the (between decline not form part of beneficiation plant at Mooinooi seciton. and beneficiation porposed project plant) scope)

Water abstracted from the the Approximately 0.08 Pre-existing (does - Buffelsfontein East Decline shaft (as Ha (limited to not form part of part of on-going underground working decline shaft adit) porposed project dewatering activities) will continue as scope) per the current scenario. The groundwater is transferred to the A WUL exists for Mooinooi beneficiation plant [5.5 km to the abstraction the west of the decline (straight line)]. activity

NAME OF ACTIVITY Aerial extent of the LISTED APPLICABLE Activity ACTIVITY LISTING Ha or m² NOTICE Mark with an X where (GNR 544, applicable or affected. GNR 545 or GNR 546)/NOT LISTED Water will form part of on-going process water circulation between underground workings and the beneficuition plant to satisfy water requirements.

Mooinooi material beneficiation plant. Approximately 10 Pre-existing Ha

Sylvania Recovery plant (Mooinooi Approximately 0.7 section). Ha

Change houses. Formed part of the Pre-existing - EMPR Amendment reference, RDNW (KL) 6/2/2/2701

Security control room. Formed part of the Pre-existing - EMPR Amendment reference, RDNW (KL) 6/2/2/2701

Lamp room. Formed part of the Pre-existing - EMPR Amendment reference, RDNW (KL) 6/2/2/2701

Fencing. Formed part of the Pre-existing - EMPR Amendment reference, RDNW (KL) 6/2/2/2701

Workshop. Formed part of the Pre-existing - EMPR Amendment reference, RDNW (KL) 6/2/2/2701

Wash bay. Formed part of the Pre-existing - EMPR Amendment reference, RDNW (KL) 6/2/2/2701

Small store. Formed part of the Pre-existing - EMPR Amendment reference, RDNW (KL) 6/2/2/2701

Water storage tanks. Formed part of the Pre-existing -

Settling dams. Formed part of the Pre-existing - EMPR Amendment reference, RDNW (KL) 6/2/2/2701

Compressor. Formed part of the Pre-existing - EMPR Amendment reference, RDNW (KL) 6/2/2/2701

Mini sub-station. Formed part of the Pre-existing - EMPR Amendment reference, RDNW (KL) 6/2/2/2701

Note: In order to keep the scoping report restricted to the proposed project as far as possible, not all supporting infrastructure is noted here. Examples include the position and distance of fencelines, all the supporting facilities at the Mooinooi section, where the ore will be precossed, etc. Kindly refer to past approvals including:

 RDNW (KL) 6/2/2/2264 (year: 2000);  RDNW (KL) 6/2/2/33 (year: 2001); and/or  RDNW (KL) 6/2/2/2701 (year: 2008).

In summary, the only listed activity relevant to this application is Activity 17, of NEMA GNR 984, resulting from the need for a Mining Right under the MPRDA. At this point in the project, the underground mining activity will be fully supported by the existing Buffelsfontein East Section infrastructure.

ii) Description of the activities to be undertaken

(Describe Methodology or technology to be employed, and for a linear activity, a description of the route of the activity) Introduction

Samancor currently operates two sets of Mines and three alloy producing plants, in the North West, Limpopo and Mpumalanga provinces of South Africa. The Mines are called ECM and WCM. WCM are located in the Rustenburg area within the North West Province. ECM is located near the Lydenburg/Steelpoort area of the Limpopo Province. The Samancor smelters are called Ferrometals, Middelburg Ferrochrome and Tubatse Ferrochrome. The three smelting operations are located in the northern and north-eastern parts of South Africa. The ‘smelters’ are considered the direct customers associated with the ore generated by the existing and proposed mining activities.

The Samancor WCM are comprised of (listed from west to east):

 Elandsdrift Section;  The Mooinooi Section;  The Buffelsfontein West Section; and  The Buffelsfontein East Section

Figure 1 indicates the location of the various sections, for reference.

As part of an extension to the existing Samancor WCM, the company submitted a Mining Right application to the DMR in order to transfer/upgrade the existing Turffontein 462 JQ Farm Prospecting Right into a Mining Right. Along with the Mining Right application the company submitted a MWP which defined the depth of the ore reserve which is targeted by Samancor and the methods proposed to feasibly extract the ore reserve. The targeted ore seams include both the MG1 and MG2 (along with six other less desirable MG seams). The MG1 and MG2 seams, are considered extremely rich in chromite. Samancor proposes to access the Turffontein Underground area via the existing decline shaft at the Buffelsfontein East Section.

Note: Lonmin Plc (Lonmin) hold Mining Rights on the Turffontein 462 JQ Farm however Lonmin’s Mining Rights refers to the UG2 and Merensky Reefs which occur at a shallower depth than that of the MG1 and MG2 seams that are proposed to be mined by Samancor.

Western Chrome Mines Background (ECM will not be discussed further)

Samancor holds two Mining Right (MR)s, related to the WCM, which include the following:

Figure 1 - Proposed project Site (including reference to supporting Buffelsfontein and Mooinooi Sections)

16 Proposed Project

From this point onwards, the report will focus on the area covered by the NW 1333 PR (only the Turffontein 462 JQ Farm).

The information in this section is largely based on the Final MWP.

Mineral prospecting work commenced on Turffontein 462 JQ during the mid to the late 2000’s. Prospecting activities were resumed again in the middle of 2014 and will be carried out until the third quarter of 2016. To date in excess of fifty boreholes have been drilled and sampled (See Figure 2). Drilling was conducted through the Lonmin mining right area. The sub-sections to follow outline the mineral resource available, preferred mining method, power supply, mining waste management and water supply. Information is based on prospecting activity results contained in the Final MWP.

Figure 2 - Exploration Boreholes Drilled

17 Mineral Resource Summary

There is approximately 175 million tons of chrome ore in the exploration area of Turffontein 462 JQ contained in the eight seams, including MG0, MG, MG1, MG2A, MG2B, MG2C, MG3 and MG4. All these resources are in the ‘indicated stage’ (not ‘actual’) due to borehole spacing and sampling which is still being conducted as exploration activities are still taking place. Of the 175 million tons of ore, 46 million met the criteria and are contained in MG2 and MG1 which forms the mineable seams. These resources will change as exploration activities continue. On completion of prospecting activities, the ‘indicated stage’ will shift into the ‘measured stage’. The DMR will be updated once the prospecting activities have concluded.

Mining Method

As indicated, access to the proposed underground mining operations on Turffontein 462 JQ will be via the existing decline shaft located at the Buffelsfontein East Section (referred to as Mooinooi section within the MWP). Underground mining of Turffontein 462 JQ will thus form an extension of the underground mining area associated with the Buffelsfontein East Section.

All existing Buffelsfontein East Section infrastructure will be used to support the proposed mining activities on Turffontein 462 JQ (see Figure 3 for decline shaft area layout). Shared infrastructure will include: road access, water and power supply, administration offices, mine stores, workshops, ventilation shafts, WRD(s), hoisting equipment, underground locomotives, hoppers, silos, primary/secondary crushers, chairlift, etc.

Turffontein 462 JQ resources are down dip extension of the Buffelsfontein 465 JQ resources. The Buffelsfontein 465 JQ infrastructure rehabilitiation, sliping and equipping will continue into the Turffontein 462 JQ farm (this process will take approximately three years). When complete ore reserve development can commence in ‘year 3’ and will continue through year 10 to final completion on mining limit. Footwall development will be done only on 25 and 28 Levels. Decline development will be done on waste until MG2 is intersected and will then continue on the MG2 horizon. MG1 stoping operations can commence during year 1 from the 10 Level access. Stoping operations from the Buffelsfontein 465 JQ can commence in approximately year six.

Two underground mining methods are employed by WCM, namely conventional mining and mechanised (trackless) mining. Conventional mining involves the ore being drilled and blasted in 15 meter panels, then scraped mechanically to loading points from where it is transported to shaft tips by locomotives and hoppers. From here it is hoisted to surface via surface hoisting equipment. The Mooinooi Mine infrastructure will be used to extract material in conjunction with the Buffelsfontein East Section.

The layout of the new declines, at Mooinooi and Buffelsfontein West, will be semi trackless whereby strike belts and roadways will be developed on MG1 from access crosscuts developed to MG1. From there dip raises will be developed and 15 meters breast panels mined out of the raises. See Figure 4 for an illustration of the planned mining method, relevant to MG1 seam. The Mooinooi and Buffelsfontein East shafts will form alternative shaft access points to the Turffontein farm.

Mining of the MG2 seam will involve trackless (mechanised) board and pillar layout on an apparent dip. Panels will be 10 meters with pillars 10 meters wide and 10 meters long. Loading onto strike belts will be done by means of Load, Haul, Dump machines. See Figure 5 for an illustration of the planned mining method, relevant to MG2 seam.

Figure 3 - Decline Shaft Layout (Buffelsfontein East Section)

Figure 4 - Conventional Stoping Mining Method (MG1 Seam) 20

Figure 5 - Mechanised Mine design (MG2 Seam)

Material Processing

The ore will be processed through an existing beneficiation plant operated by Samancor at Mooinooi Section (See Figure 6 for Mooinooi Section layout). This beneficiation plant has sufficient exsiting capacity to process the ore arisings from the proposed mining on Turffontein 462 JQ. The coarse material will be crushed and screened and processed by density medium separation (DMS) while the -2mm fine material will undergo further beneficiation through wet separation processes either by a standard spiral separation and/or wet high intensity magnetic separation. Figure 7 indicates is an example of the planned process flow of the Run of Mine (RoM) material in order to produce the products.

Mine Waste Management

Any waste rock produced by the project will be transferred to existing WRDs. No new WRDs will be developed as part of the proposed project. The volume of waste rock expected from the proposed project is minimal as the targeted seams will be accessed via existing shafts.

Fines mateiral (waste) is expected from the beneficiation process (Mooinooi Section), in the form of ~2mm fines. The fines will be stockpiled within existing authorised TSF at Mooinooi Section.

The proposed project does not necessitate changes to waste disposal facilities at Buffelsfontein East Section. If there is a future requirement to increase capacity, this will be a separate future EMPR amendment at Buffelsfontein East Section.

Water Supply

All water requirements will be supplied from the Buffelsfontein East Section. Water will also be extracted from underground operations. The extracted water will be cycled between the shaft Pollution Control Dams, the beneficiation plant and the underground workings in an effort to control water volumes and maintain a safe dam freeboard.

The below are existing water users that will not be altered once the proposed mining on Turffontein 462 JQ commences:

 Beneficiation plant operation, at Mooinooi Section;  Dust suppression; and  Drinking water, ablution facilities and change houses.

The mining of Turffontein 462 JQ will result in the generation of additional water from dewatering activities. Due to the integrated nature of water management associated with Turffontein 462 JQ and the Buffelsfontein East Section the Buffelsfontein East Section Water Use License may be amended instead of applying for a new Water Use License for Turffontein 462 JQ. The amendment application for the Buffelsfontein East Section WUL will be accompanied by an Integrated Waste Water Management Plan (IWWMP) addendum. The addendum will link directly to the existing Buffelsfontein East Section IWWMP.

Power Supply

Eskom power is already available through the Buffelsfontein East Section. Turffontein is an extension of Buffelsfontein East Section and as a result the existing power supply to the shaft is considered adequate.

Mine Design and Scheduling

Refer to Figure 8 (Basic Mine Design Map) and Figure 9 (Schematic Mine Scheduling Map).

Figure 6 - Mooinooi Section layout

Figure 7- Diagram indication high level process flow

Figure 8 - Basic Mine Design Map 25

Figure 9- Schematic Mine Scheduling Map

e) Policy and Legislative Context

APPLICABLE REFERENCE WHERE APPLIED LEGISLATION AND GUIDELINES USED TO COMPILE THE REPORT

(a description of the policy and legislative context within which the development is proposed including an identification of all legislation, policies, plans, guidelines, spatial tools, municipal development planning frameworks and instruments that are applicable to this activity and are to be considered in the assessment process) The Constitution of South The Constitution cannot manage environmental resources as a stand- Africa (No. 108 of 1996) alone piece of legislation hence additional legislation has been promulgated in order to manage the various spheres of both the social and natural environment. Each promulgated Act and associated Regulations are designed to focus on various industries or components of the environment to ensure that the objectives of the Constitution are effectively implemented and upheld on an on-going basis throughout the country. In terms of Section 7, a positive obligation is placed on the State to give effect to the environmental rights.

Minerals and Petroleum In terms of Section 5 of the MPRDA no person may mine any area Resources Development without: Act (No. 28 of 2002) - A mining right; - An approved EMPR; and - Notifying and consulting with the landowner.

Therefore, to ensure that mining within the study area is lawful the applicant must:

- Lodge a mining right application with the DMR in terms of Section 22 of the MPRDA; - Conduct a Scoping and EIR process, accompanied by an EMPR in terms of Section 39 of the MPRDA and submit such to the DMR; and - Notify and consult with the landowner in terms of Section 27 of the MPRDA.

National Environmental In terms of Section 24(2) of the NEMA, the Minister may identify Management Act (No. 107 activities which may not commence without prior authorisation The of 1998) Minister thus published GNR 983 (Listing Notice 1), 984 (Listing Notice 2) and 985 (Listing Notice 3) (4 December 2014) listing activities that may not commence prior to authorisation.

The regulations outlining the procedures required for authorisation are published in GNR 982 [Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations

27 APPLICABLE REFERENCE WHERE APPLIED LEGISLATION AND GUIDELINES USED TO COMPILE THE REPORT

(EIA)] (4 December 2014). Listing Notice 1 identifies activities that require a Basic Assessment (BA) process to be undertaken, in terms of the EIA Regulations, prior to commencement of that activity. Listing Notice 2 identifies activities that require an S&EIR process to be undertaken, in terms of the EIA Regulations, prior to commencement of that activity. Listing Notice 3 identifies activities within specific areas that require a BA process to be undertaken, in terms of the EIA Regulations, prior to commencement of that activity.

WSP undertook a review of the listed activities according to the proposed project description to conclude that only Listed Activity 17 of GNR 984 is considered applicable. The limited listed activity tiggers can be attributed the lack of surface infrastructure requirements of the proposed project.

Under the One Environmental System, the Minister of Mineral Resources will issue environmental authorisations in terms of the NEMA for mining activities related to the primary extraction and/or primary processing of ore material. The Minister of Environmental Affairs will form the appeal authority.

National Water Act (No. 36 Section 22(1) of the NWA states that a person may only use water if of 1998) the water use is authorised by a license under NWA or if the responsible authority has dispensed with a license requirement if it is satisfied that the purpose the NWA will be met by the granting of a license, permit or other authorisation under any other law.

A person may only use water without a license if the water use is permissible:

- Under Schedule I of NWA; - As a continuation of an existing lawful use; and - In terms of a general authorisation issued under Section 39 of NWA.

A WUL is required in terms of Section 41 of the NWA for activities listed in Section 21 of the Act. The water use applicable to the proposed project is (j) removing, discharging or disposing ot’ water found underground if it is necessary for the efficient continuation of an activity or for the safety of people

The requirements of GNR 704 should be upheld by Samancor when considering the existing surface operations. The proposed project will result in additional underground water being pumped to surface however, the groundwater will be accomodated by existing surface water containment facilities. The Mine should carry out GNR 704 audits to ensure on-going complaince and improvement.

APPLICABLE REFERENCE WHERE APPLIED LEGISLATION AND GUIDELINES USED TO COMPILE THE REPORT

Bonjanala District No District level by-laws deemed applicable to the proposed project. Municipality Guidelines Madibeng Local Draft Spatial Planning and Land Use Management By-Law 2016 Municipality The Municipality must determine the use and development of land within the municipal area to which it relates in order to promote –

(a) harmonious and compatible land use patterns; (b) aesthetic considerations; (c) sustainable development and densification; and (d) the accommodation of cultural customs and practices of traditional communities in land use management; and (e) a healthy environment that is not harmful to a person’s health.

The Enviornmental Authorisation process being facilitated in support of the proposed project supports the purpose of the Land Use Scheme requirements drafted by the local government.

f) Need and Desirability of the Proposed Activities.

(Motivate the need and desirability of the proposed development including the need and desirability of the activity in the context of the preferred location).

The first aspect to defining the desirability of the proposed project is determining whether or not there is a use for the end product. The below bullets define the need for chrome in the global market.

Chrome and Chrome Ore Uses

Chromite has several industrial end uses, primarily based on its Chrome to Iron ratio (Cr: Fe) and %Cr2O3 content. High chromium ores (defined by having high Cr:Fe ratios) are used for producing Ferro-chromium for metallurgical applications such as stainless steel (the most important application by volume 85%) and special uses (super-alloys, special steels and plating).

Chromite ores are also used for the production of chromium salts (used in the leather tanning industry, as a pigment and in chromium plating) and refractory purposes (production of magnesite chromite and chromite- magnesite bricks). Figure 10 and Figure 11 indicates breakdown of applications for chrome ore and ferrochrome alloys, respectively.

Figure 10 - Chromite Ore First Uses (as presented by the International Chromium Development Association on 25 January 2015 at Indinox conference, India)

Figure 11 -Types of Ferrochrome produced and Ferrochrome uses (as presented by the ICDA on 25 January 2015 at Indinox conference, India)

Thin coatings of chromium alloys are used as plating on automotive parts, appliances and other products and given the name “chrome plated”. Foundry sands and refractory ore with a high chromium (Cr2O3) content are also produced and is in demand for its sizing qualities.

There are no economical substitutes for chromite ore in the production of ferrochrome (i.e. stainless steel), chromium chemicals, super-alloys or chromite refractories at present. Currently, chromium-free substitutes either compromise product quality and/or increase costs.

The second aspect to defining the desirability of the proposed project is determining whether or not there is a demand for the end product.

Chrome Ore Supply/Demand

Up to mid-2008, supply of world chromite was under severe pressure driven by the robust demand for ferrochrome used in ferroalloy production. Over 90% of the world’s chromite production is converted into ferrochrome for metallurgical applications. Given that most chromite is produced by vertically integrated ferrochrome producers, the amount of material available to non-metallurgical markets has been in short supply. This has changed somewhat since 2008 and global chrome prices have fallen drastically, in a large part due to the rapid introduction of UG2 chromite ore into the global trade of chrome ore market. UG2 chromite ore is produced as a by-product by South African Platinum miners that mine the UG2 reef in the Bushveld complex.

One of the main challenges for purchasers of non-metallurgical chromite is that consumers do not have a substantial choice when it comes to supply. Production is concentrated in just a few countries, notably South Africa which produces about 50% of the world’s chromite, followed by India and Kazakhstan with about 11% and 12%, respectively as indicated in Figure 12.

Figure 12 - Global Chromite Ore Production (Source: USGS Commodity Summaries 2016)

In addition to the introduction of low cost UG2 into the market, stainless steel and ferrochrome markets were negatively impacted by the global financial crisis. As a result of the global crisis in late 2008, the demand for steel plummeted, forcing most of the ferrochrome producers to place their operations on care and maintenance. This situation lasted through most of 2009 and it was only in late 2009 that ferrochrome producers began to slowly restart their furnaces.

Demand for ferrochrome used in making ferroalloy, which in turn is used in making stainless steel, has led to a healthy demand for chromite ore. Non-metallurgical applications consume only a fraction of chromite production, with the refractory industry accounting for only about 1% and 3% each for the foundry and chemical industries (Figure 10). The non-metallurgical industry is dependent on chromite requirements of the metallurgical industry as most chromite is manufactured by vertically integrated ferrochrome producers. Major traders of non-metallurgical chromite from South Africa provide more than half of global chromite supply.

The declining availability of chromite ore is proving challenging for producers that are not vertically integrated, especially when non-metallurgical applications are indicating increased demand for the material. The supply shortage is mainly attributed to the booming stainless steel industry, with China being the main consumer of globally traded chromite ore. China consumes approximately 35% of total global chrome ore production in its raw form, and as China only has 0.1% of global ore resources, this requirement is met almost completely with imported ore (Figure 13).

Figure 13 - China’s chrome ore demand history (Source: Official Chinese Customs Data)

Demand for chromite, and ferrochrome, is expected to remain strong mainly due to the continued growth of China’s stainless steel industry, which is underpinned by the massive urbanization drive in China. Until more supply comes onto the market, consumers of non-metallurgical chromite can expect continuing tightness in supply, and as such South Africa is anticipated to remain a major supplier of ore to China South Africa supplies approximately 70% of the Chinese chrome ore requirement (Figure 14.)

Figure 14 - Chinese Chrome Ore Imports (Chinese Customs Statistics Data)

An additional discussion point, as required by the DMR Scoping Report template, is the desirability of the Mine location.

The proposed project site is located within the Western Limb of the Bushveld Igneous Complex (Middelgroup of the Upper Critical Zone) (Figure 15). The MG1 and MG2 seams are especially high in Chrome resource and considered feasible to mine. Further to the presence of an extremely high Chrome ore resource, Samancor operates adjacent operations dedicated to the purpose of extracting and processing chrome ore. As such, all the surface infrastructure is in place and can support the management and processing of additional chrome resources.

Note: Any additions to existing infrastructure required into the life of the Turffontein Farm underground Mine will form separate approval processes. The current surface infrastructure is considered adequate for the purpose of the proposed mining area for the purposes of this application.

Samancor also holds a prospecting right for Chrome within the upper critical zone of the Bushveld Igneous Complex. During the period through which Samancor has held the prospecting right over Turffontein 462 JQ extensive prospecting activities have rendered the area feasible to Mine. Prospecting is still underway and the final avaiable reserve will only be fully understood following the completion of the drilling and survey activities.

Figure 15 - Rustenburg Layered Suite (Source: Executive summary short form SAMREC compliant techno economic valuation statement (http://africanmining.com/reports/Bauba/)

g) Period for which the environmental authorisation is required

The current Life of Mine (LoM) in Turffontein 462 JQ exceeds 30 years which is the maximum number of years a new order mining right can be applied for. More exploration activities are still being conducted and therefore, the production decline has not been considered as yet.

The validity of the Environmental Authorisation being applied for at Turffontein 462-JQ farm will need to be linked directly to the mining right which is 30 years. The Environmental Authorisation will be subject to any amendments to both the MPRDA and the NEMA. Changes to such Acts in terms of validity periods will be reviewed in terms of any transitional arrangements which may accompany such amendments.

h) Description of the process followed to reach the proposed preferred site

NB!! – This section is not about the impact assessment itself; it is about the determination of the specific site layout having taken into consideration (1) the comparison of the originally proposed site plan, the comparison of that plan with the plan of environmental features and current land uses, the issues raised by interested and affected parties, and the consideration of alternatives to the initially proposed site layout as a result.

Selection of the Preferred Site

The proposed project site is the Turffontein 462-JQ farm. The farm was identified as a potential expansion area for Samancor specifically looking at the Chrome rich reefs/seams (specifically MG1 and MG2). Following substantial prospecting activities to determine feasibility of mining the reserve, the area has been identified by Samancor to further the LoM of the WCM operations (specifically Buffelsfontein East Section

34 and Mooinooi Section). Given the groundwork already laid as part of the prospecting activities (i.e. the reserve has been identified and is financially viable), the farm is considered the preferred site for Samancor to extend it’s operations.

The site is located adjacent to existing Samancor infrastructure which is operationally critical from both an extraction and primary processing perspective.

The area proposed for mining is as per the original specifications laid out in the prospecting right (the plans have not changed). The plans with regards to extraction points (i.e. which shafts will be used to gain access may have changed to some degree). However, the overall plans to mine the area without the need to establish new surface infrastructure has remained the same.

Plan of environmental features and current land uses

Figure 16 provides an overview of the current features on the proposed project site. The site is currently occupied by Lonmin mining activities (both opencast and underground), associated surface supporting infrastructure, a regional road, Lonmin internal mining roads, grazing land, limited agriculture (if any), a residential settlement, rehabilitated areas, natural and impeded streams, decommissioined infrastructure and a koppie (within the residential area).

Figure 16 - Plan of Environmental Features and Current Land Uses

Scoping Report

i) Details of all alternatives considered

With reference to the site plan provided as Appendix 4 and the location of the individual activities on site, provide details of the alternatives considered with respect to:

See Appendix 3.

(a) The property on which or location where it is proposed to undertake the activity

No alternative sites are being considered by the applicant due to the following reasons:

(b) The Type of Activity to be Undertaken

Underground Mining is the only activity type which can be used to access the ore reserve in a viable manner. The depth of the MG1 and MG2 seams is between 300m to 650m below surface level (depending on the reef/seam dip). Opencast is not a viable option and would result in far greater impacts when compared to underground mining. A change in activity type would render the project ‘not feasible’.

Design - MG1 Seam (Conventional track based mining, with partial semi- trackless mining)

A conventional footwall haulage system will be developed to mine the MG1 in the top 2 levels. The mining method that will be employed at the Turffontein farm area comprises a conventional breast mining, as described earlier in the report. South Africa typically uses conventional Mine development methods to access an orebody, usually with hand-held drilling machines and track-bound hauling, which requires a significant amount of labour and time. The method however is preferred in most cases due to the dip and strike of the different zones within the regional geology.

The bottom section will be a semi trackless section, whereby strike belts and roadways will be developed on MG1. From there dip raises will be developed and 15 meters breast panels. Scraping of ore out of panels will be done by means of winches into muck bays. From here Load Haul Dumpers (LHD)’s will load ore onto strike belt and hoisted to surface.

Design - MG2 Seam (Trackless Mining)

MG2 will be a completely trackless area on an apparent dip. Panels will be 10 meters with pillars 10 meters wide and 10 meters. Drilling will be done by drill rigs and cleaning by LHD to a strike conveyor belt that feeds onto the dip conveyor belt to surface. Again, the motivation to select such a method is based on the

37 Scoping Report expected dip/strike of the reef as well as the relationship between both the MG1 and MG2 reefs. More details will be provided within the EIAR regarding the positive and negative aspects of both mining methods.

Layout

MG1 will be a conventional stoping layout. MG2 will be a board and pillar layout. This is the optimal layout and no alternatives are being considered.

(d) The Technology to be used in the Activity

The technology used will be limited to the technology currently used within the Buffelsfontein East Operation underground workings. The same equipment will be used to mine out Turffontein once the Mine advances into the proposed project area. As and when new technology becomes available the applicant will consider such technology from a cost benefit perspective. Currently Mine workings have proven successful thus no need to change technologies has been considered for the purposes of the proposed project.

(e) The Operational Aspects of the Activity

The chrome ore will be primarily extracted via the Buffelsfontein East Section (decline shaft). The ore will be transferred to the Mooinooi beneficiation plant via road haulage, daily. At the Mooinooi Section, a concentrate will be produced which will subsequently be transferred to the off-site Samancor Smelting facilities (of which there are three). During the beneficiation process, tailings will be reprocessed by a recovery facility (approved under the 2008/9 EMPR amendment). The current operational flow is efficient and the investigation into alternatives is not warranted at this stage.

(f) The option of not implementing the Activity (‘no-go’)

Should the project not go ahead, the MG1 and MG2 resource under the Turffontein farm will remain untapped. Samancor may need to consider mining the less viable MG3, MG4 and MG4A seams which are contained within the existing Mining right areas to ensure the on-going operation of the Mooinooi beneficiation plant through the anticipated LoM. The no-go option may be viable, however it will impact on the viability of the overall operations.

ii) Details of the Public Participation Process Followed

Describe the process undertaken to consult interested and affected parties including public meetings and one on one consultation. NB: The affected parties must be specifically consulted regardless of whether or not they attended public meetings. (Information to be provided to affected parties must include sufficient detail of the intended operation to enable them to assess what impact the activities will have on them or on the use of their land.

Public participation is understood to be a series of inclusive and culturally appropriate interactions aimed at providing stakeholders with opportunities to express their views, so that these can be considered and incorporated into the S&EIR process. Effective public participation requires the prior disclosure of relevant and adequate project information to enable stakeholders to understand the risks, impacts, and opportunities of the proposed project.

Scoping Report

The objectives of the public participation process can be summarised as follows:

 Identify relevant individuals, organisations and communities who may be interested in or affected by the Proposed Project;  Clearly outline the scope of the Proposed Project, including the scale and nature of the existing and proposed activities;  Identify viable proposed project alternatives that will assist the relevant authorities in making an informed decision;  Identify shortcomings and gaps in existing information;  Identify key concerns, raised by Stakeholders that should be addressed in the subsequent specialist studies;  Highlight the potential for environmental impacts, whether positive or negative; and  To inform and provide the public with information and an understanding of the proposed project, issues and solutions.

In accordance with the NEMA, GNR 982, Chapter 6, the following activities have taken place or are proposed to take place within the Draft Scoping Report review period or beyond. Chapter 6 [Section 39(1)] requires the following:

I&AP Consultations

The public participation process…[omission]….must include consultation with (1) the competent authority, (2) every state department that administers a law relating to the matter, (3) all organs of state which have jurisdiction in respect of the activity to which the application relates, (4) all potential, or, where relevant, registered interested and affected parties. In order to satisfy this requirement, the EAP will undertake the following consultations:

 Competent Authority: - The DMR is the competent authority related to this application. This application forms the first of the consultations with the DMR following the submission of the Mining Right Application by Samancor. The EAP undertakes to engage in on-going communications with the DMR (preferably directly with the allocated case officer).

 State Departments that administer a law relating to the matter - An amendment to the existing Samancor Integrated WUL is required prior to the proposed project operational phase. As such, the DWS forms a proposed project competent authority governing the application of the NWA. The DWS will be engaged by the project to ensure a swift authority review process. Proof of communication will be submitted to the DMR to ensure awareness of the concurrent approval process. Meeting minutes will be held, and will be made available to the DMR upon request.

 All organs of state which have jurisdiction in respect of the activity to which the application relates

o National Level: The Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) - Under the “One Environmental System” rolled out by Government on 8 December 2014, licensing processes for mining, environmental authorisations and water use have been streamlined. Under the One Environmental System, The Minister of Mineral Resources will issue environmental authorisations and waste management licences in terms of the NEMA, and the National Environmental Management: Waste Act, 2008 (Act No. 59 of 2008), respectively, for mining and related activities. However, note that in the new system, the Minister of Environmental Affairs will be the appeal authority for these authorisations to ensure complete independency to the competent authority. The DEA will thus be notified as both a commenting authority and to ensure that the DEA is kept up to speed process progress as the allocated appeals authority.

Scoping Report

o Provincial Level: Given that the activity is located within the North West province the North West Department of Rural, Environment and Agricultural Development (NWREAD) will form a primary commenting authority during the process. The provincial Heritage Resource authority will be informed about the proposed project however, no form of clearance is required from the authority as the project is limited to underground workings.

o District Level The proposed project is located within the Bojanala Platinum District Municipality. The Bojanala Platinum District Municipality will be informed about the project as part of on-going spatial development planning and land use updates. Furthermore, the Integrated Development Plan (IDP), when updated during the next five year interval, will need to account for increased mining activities and the overall economics of the region.

o Local Level: The Madibeng Local Municipality is the local authority governing the proposed project area. The Municipality is responsible for managing the various wards which make up the proposed project area and surrounds. The Wards associated include: Ward 25, Ward 32 and Ward 38. The ward councillors will be a primary target for the proposed project in an effort to communicate the project to as greater stakeholder database as possible, especially considering the locals will be the most affected stakeholder grouping.

 All potentially registered I&Aps - The existing Samancor stakeholder database will be used as a base starting point. The database will be updated following any stakeholder request to be registered. The use of site notices, Notification Letters, Short Messaging Systems (SMS), email and fax will be used as methods in which to reach potentially interested and affected parties.

The latest stakeholder database is included within this report as Appendix 5.

All registered I&APs, which have a direct affect/effect on the proposed project or are directly or indirectly impacted by the proposed project, have the right to lodge a comment/question on the project (until such time that the appeals process comes to a close).

Notification of Potential I&APs

In accordance with GN. R 982 Section 41(2)(a-b) a site notice was developed (see Appendix 5) and placed at five locations, including:

 Segwaelane Primary School;  Mooinooi Section main entrance;  Johane Mokolobetsi Secondary School; and  Spar Mooinooi.

See Table 4 for details and proof of display.

Scoping Report

Table 4 - Site Notice Locations

Location Co-ordinate Photographs

Zoomed In Landscape

Spar 25° 45’ 14.12’’ Mooinooi S 27° 33’ 27.54’’ E

Mooinooi 25° 43’ 22.81’’ Section S 27° 34’ Main 09.36’’ E Entrance

Segwaelane 25° 39’ 50.24’’ Primary S 27° 36’ School 34.94’’ E

Johane 25° 43’ 03.48’’ Mokolobetsi S 27° 39’ Secondary 24.74’’ E School Photograph to be provided in the Photograph to be provided in the Final Final Scoping Report Scoping Report

Scoping Report

The site notice will serve to inform the occupiers of the land along with the newspaper advert and existing stakeholder database. The following additional notifications will take place:

 A formal letter will be submitted to the owner of the land, despite the fact that the proposed project will not require any additional infrastructure on the surface.  Lonmin, Segwaelane, Maroelakop and Modderspruit are considered to be either upon the proposed project site or directly adjacent. A formal letter will be sent to Lonmin. Segwaelane, Maroelakop, Modderspruit will be informed via site notices, newspaper advertisements and public meeting invites.  Three ward councillors have been identified and will be notified via telephone call and/or emails. The ward councillors will be requested to notify the communities in the related affected areas in an effort to capture a greater database.

In accordance with GN. R 982 41(2)(c) of Chapter 6 an advert was placed in two newspapers including the Brits Post and the Rustenburg Herald. The Rustenburg Herald was selected as the newspaper covering the widest array of stakeholders in the related area. There are many local languages spoken in the area of which Tswana and Xhosa are the most prevalent. English is considered a universal language; therefore the newspaper advert was placed in English only. See proof of undertaking in Appendix 5.

Should the EAP note an affected stakeholder, and be made aware of his/her existence by the ward councillor, or traditional leader, efforts will be made to ensure his/her participation in the stakeholder engagement process [as required by Section 41(2) (e) of Chapter 6].

In addition to the minimum requirements outlined in GNR 982, the EAP has undertaken the following:

 Distribution of notification letters to Samancor stakeholders via email and fax (where contact data is available); and  A public meeting is planned during the Environmental Authorisation process. The meeting will take place during the draft Scoping Report public review period. Should significant interest be shown by the public, a second meeting may be considered during the EIR Phase which will be planned during the Draft EIAR public review period

Any stakeholder whom submits a comment along the course of the process will be automatically registered on the project specific stakeholder database.

Note: No stakeholder comments have been received as yet. Any comments received during the draft scoping report review period will be updated in the Final scoping report and submitted to the competent authority.

Public Review of the Draft Scoping Report

The Draft Scoping Report will be placed on public review for a period of 30 days from 27 July 2016 to 29 August 2016, at Segwaelane Primary School, Johane Mokolobetsi Secondary School and Mooinooi Spar. The report will also be made available on the WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff website (http://www.wspgroup.com/en/WSP-Africa/What-we-do/Services/All-Services-A-Z/Technical-Reports/). The website report will not be accompanied by appendices due to report size restrictions. Kindly request the required appendices directly from the EAP.

All registered stakeholders and authorising/commenting state departments will be notified of the public review period as well as the locations of the DSRs via fax, email as well as the open house. The

Scoping Report

abovementioned plan, for notification and provision of reports, will also be utilised for the review of the EIR once the EIR Phase has commenced.

iii) Summary of issues raised by I&Aps

(Complete the table summarising comments and issues raised, and reaction to those responses)

Interested and Affected Date Issues raised EAPs response to issues Consultation Parties Comments as mandated by the Status Received applicant (consensus List the names of dispute, not persons consulted in finalised,etc) this column, and Mark with an X where those who must be consulted were in fact consulted. No comments received to date. To be updated during Final report update process.

iv) The Environmental attributes associated with the sites

(1) Baseline Environment

(a) Type of environment affected by the proposed activity. (its current geographical, physical, biological, socio- economic, and cultural character).

Information contained within this section was obtained from the following information sources:

 EMPR associated with the Western Chrome Mines Mooinooi-Buffelsfontein-Elandskraal Section (2000);  EMPR for Samancor Chrome: Western Chrome Mines Mooinooi Section [Related to various portions of the Farms Elandskraal 469 JQ, Buffelsfontein 465 JQ and Turffontein 462 JQ (2008)];  Turffontein Farm 462 JQ - Mining Work Programme; and  Statistics South Africa 2011 Census data.

GEOLOGY

Regional Description

The Bushveld Igneous Complex contains the chromite ore resources in South Africa. This complex is a saucer-like intrusive igneous mass extending for about 400 km from east to west and roughly the same distance north to south. This geological phenomenon consists of a series of interconnected ultramafic- mafic layered intrusions and a suite of associated granitoid rocks. The ultramafic-mafic layered rocks occur in three main limbs, namely the western, eastern and northern limbs. Four areas in which chromite ore is mined within the Bushveld Igneous Complex are the eastern chromite belt, the western chromite belt, the Zeerust district and the area south of Potgietersrus. The WCM is situated within the western limb of the Bushveld Igneous Complex (Figure 17) (this includes the proposed project site).

Scoping Report

The ultramafic-mafic rocks of the Bushveld Igneous Complex are collectively known as the Rustenburg Layered Suite (RLS). The RLS comprises five stratigraphic zones as follows:

 The Marginal Zone, which comprises pyroxenites and norites with no economic potential;  The Lower Zone which comprises ultramafic rocks, such as pyroxenites and harzburgites, containing thin, high-grade chromitite seams;  The Critical Zone pyroxenites, norites and anorthosites that host all the significant platinum group elements (PGEs) and chromite deposits;  The Main Zone, which consists mainly of homogeneous norites and gabbros that are locally exploited as dimension stone;  The Upper Zone norites, gabbros and diorites, which host over 20 massive magnetite seams, some of which are exploited for vanadium and iron ore.

The general sequence of the different zones is illustrated in Figure 15 and Figure 17.

Chromitite layers occur throughout the Critical Zone and have been classified into lower, middle and upper groups with the lower group occurring in the Lower Critical Zone and the upper groups in the Upper Critical Zone. The chromitite layers are named according to their location within the layered succession with the lowermost group being named LG1, followed by LG2, LG3, etc., progressing to MG1, MG2, etc., and then on to UG1, UG2, UG3. The thickness of the chromitite layers range from several millimetres to several meters and named chromitite layers may comprise multiple layers of chromitite separated by interlaminated silicate rocks. MG2 consist of a 1.27 m layer with a 0.46 layer 0.8 m above. The MG4 consist of two thick (2.01 m and 1.00 m, respectively) chromitite layers, 2.6 m apart, which may have associated thinner chromitite layers. The middle group of chromitite layers dip of approximately 13º towards the north. The layers are displaced and disturbed by northwest-southeast striking faults with varying displacements and an east-west striking dyke. Subsidence structures called potholes occur locally.

Scoping Report

Figure 17 - Geological Map of the Western Limb of the Bushveld Igneous Complex

Scoping Report

Figure 18 below represents a Samancor strip log indicating the sequence of seams through the geology.

Figure 18 - A Representative Lithological Column through Turffontein 462 JQ Showing Various Lithological Units

Scoping Report

In the mining lease area, the Bushveld complex consists of a variation of norite and pyroxenite lithological units and chrome seams. The noritic variation dominates the upper units. Pyroxenite and anorthosite units are intersected deeper into the lithological successions. The lithological units have a shallow dip of 14° towards the north. The intersected chrome units begin from the upper group 2 (UG2) on the entire farm and the UG1 and the Merensky Reef intersected further north of the farm. All the middle groups (MG’s) are intersected the entire farm.

Several dykes estimated to be of the Pilanesberg as well as Karoo age were mapped using magnetic geophysical surveys. These structures have a tendency of traversing the area in a north of northwest to south of south east direction. The dykes have an average thickness of between five to ten meters (calculated from the intersected holes). Faults occur, some striking semi parallel to these igneous structures.

The fault displacements are both down throw and lateral as indicated in the illustration in Figure 19. The displacements are manageable as experienced in Buffelsfontein East Section. Although the general dip of the lithology is 14° towards the north, floor undulations are not ruled out and will be encountered during mining. Pot holes inherent to the Bushveld Complex may be encountered as well. None of these structures are reported to be excessively water bearing.

Figure 19 - An illustration of the dykes (green and red lines traversing mainly north east to south west) and faults (marked “f” in the figure) in Turffontein 462 JQ

The middle groups are the chrome seams of interest to Samancor. These seams occur throughout the entire Mine Right area and some with bifurcations which end up adopting the alphanumeric nomenclature. Figure 20 represents a zoomed in lithological column through Turffontein 462 JQ showing only the middle groups targeted by Samancor.

Scoping Report

Figure 20 - The middle groups chrome seams in Turffontein 462 JQ

Scoping Report

Table 5 describes each of the chrome bearing seams underlying the Turffontein farm:

Table 5 – Chrome Bearing Seams Underlying the Turffontein Farm

Seam Description

MG4 and MG4A The MG4 seam occurs within the entire farm as MG4, A, B and C. The MG4 and the Seams MG4A have been sampled. The MG4 occurs throughout the entire area in Turffontein 462 JQ. It has an average thickness of 1.9m and contains approximately 45.93Mt at

30.26% Cr2O3. The MG4A also contains 29.01Mt at 30.42%Cr2O3. All these seams indicate that the chrome content deteriorate with decreasing depth of burial from surface. Economics will determine if this seam will be mined further down the LoM.

MG3 Seam This seam has an average thickness of 1m and an average 33.98% Cr2O3 content. It contains a resource of approximately 28.94 million metric tons of chrome at the prospected area. This seam does not separate throughout the entire farm. Economics will determine if this seam will be mined further down the LoM.

MG2 Seam This seam has about three bifurcations with the MG2B sandwiched by layers of pyroxenite from the basal MG2A and the top MG2C. The separation between the MG2C and MG2B is varies between 2 to 3m while the separation between the MG2B and MG2A varies, beginning from very thin and enlarges to in excess of 1.2m towards the east of the property. The separation between the MG2A and B is sometimes very thin to no non-existent at the west of the property to the extent that it is named MG2AB. MG2 is one of the seams Samancor will focus its mining on

MG2A contains 11.29Mt at 39.33% Cr2O3 and it averages 0.83m in thickness. The

MG2B in turn contains 4.76Mt at 37.77% Cr2O3. And the MG2C contains 12.71Mt at

35.82% Cr2O3. This is one of the seams Samancor will focus its mining on.

MG1 Seam The MG1 has an estimated 33.44 million tons of chrome ore at an average of 1.24m and

40.86% Cr2O3 content. This seam occurs within the entire farm and has no bifurcations. This is one of the MG seams which Samancor will focus its mining efforts upon.

MG stringers and These are the two basal seams separated by a thin layer of pyroxenite. The MG MG0 stringers are 0.45m thick including pyroxenites while the MG0 is 0.65m. The pyroxenite parting is sometimes very thick and renders these seams uneconomically minable both

independently and collectively. However, they contain 2.56 million tons at 31% Cr2O3

and 11.3 million tons at 38% Cr2O3 respectively.

GROUNDWATER

The geology of the area consists of norite, pyroxenite, and anorthosite of the Bushveld Igneous Complex. Near surface, these rocks are weathered with black clay turf at surface, underlain by weathered bedrock, and fresh bedrock. This geological environment hosts two main groundwater aquifers at the Turffontein farm:

 Shallow aquifer - the pore spaces and fracture systems of the shallow weathered bedrock (less than 25 m deep). This aquifer is widely used in the area for drinking water with borehole yields of about 1 L/s; and

Scoping Report

 Deep aquifer - the voids within fissures, joints, and fracture systems of the deeper unweathered bedrock. Yields are not well known since there are few boreholes in this aquifer. However, yields are likely to be high where transmissive fractures occur.

Storage and groundwater movement is generally larger in the shallow aquifer. Rainfall recharges the shallow aquifer. The shallow aquifer recharges the deeper aquifer through leakage along fracture systems.

The depth to groundwater in the shallow aquifer is between 3 m and 20 m below surface in the southern portion of the Turffontein farm where the proposed mining is planned to start. Groundwater flows generally northward at a gradient of 1% or less. Groundwater quality in the shallow aquifer is generally potable, but little information is available for the deep aquifer quality.

The groundwater system in the Turffontein area is impacted by mining on Turffontein and the adjacent properties. This results in lowered groundwater levels and poor groundwater quality in certain areas.

The locations of boreholes identified during the 2008 hydro census are indicated in Figure 21. The information sources, types of boreholes and number of boreholes is summarised in Table 6. The names and location of the hydro census results from the 1999 study are presented in Table 7.

Table 6 - Sources of Information During the 2008 Hydro Census

Information Source Type of boreholes Quantity SAMANCOR WCM Monitoring 6 LONMIN Monitoring 43 International Ferro Metals Monitoring 9 Boreholes on Farms and Smallholdings Domestic Use 15

Scoping Report

Figure 21 - Location of Hydro census Boreholes identified in the 2008 geohydrological study

51 Scoping Report

Table 7 - 1999 Hydro census Results

SWL Borehole Farm/Settlement Abstraction Rate (l/hr) Use Comments (mgbl) BH1 Buffelsfontein Chrome Mine Not known 15.1 Bathing and Irrigation 2 x 5 000 I reservoir TF6 Buffelsfontein Chrome Mine Not known 8.88 Domestic and Irrigation 5 000 I reservoir TFT Buffelsfontein 465 JO, Portion 97 Not known 11.45 Domestic and Irrigation Water pumped to two farms TF8 Buffelsfontein 465 JO, Portion 98 Not known 14.5 Domestic and Irrigation No access TF9 Buffelsfontein Not known 33.17 Domestic and Irrigation 2 000 I reservoir TF1O Elandskraal E47 Not known 10.8 Domestic and Irrigation - TF11 Mooinooi dumping site Not known NA Monitoring Borehole No access TF12 Elandskraal E49 3600 6.66 Domestic and Irrigation - TF13 Elandskraal Not known 12.05 Domestic and Irrigation 5 000 I reservoir TF14 Modderspruit D070 1300 8 Domestic and Irrigation 5 000 I reservoir TF15 Modderspruit F454 Not known NA Domestic and Irrigation No access TF16 Outskirts of Modders. ruit Not known 8.04 Monitoring Borehole - TF17 50 Groenkloof NA Domestic and Irrigation No access TF18 D25 Groenkloof Not known NA Domestic and Irrigation No access TF19 Groenkloof Nursery Not known 12 Domestic and Irrigation for nursery - TF20 Eastern Platinum Mine Not known NA Domestic and Irrigation No access TF21 Eastern Platinum Mine Not known 7.66 Domestic and Irrigation 1 000 I reservoir TF22 Eastern Platinum Mine farm Not known NA Domestic,Irrigation and stock watering 2 x 4 000 I reservoir TF23 Middelkraal Not known 0.82 Monitoring Borehole - TF24 Rooiheuwel Not known 6.36 Monitoring Borehole for slimes dam - TF25 - Not known 3.51 Irrigation - TF26 - Not known 2.15 Monitoring Borehole for slimes dam - TF27 - Not known NA Domestic and Irrigation - TF28 Buffelsfontein Chrome Mine Not known 3.19 Not in use - TF29 Buffelsfontein Chrome Mine Not known 6.5 Not in use- old borehole - TF30 Buffelsfontein 465 JQ, Portion 40 5000 17.85 Domestic,Irrigation and stock watering Pumps continuously TF31 Buffelsfontein 465 JQ, Portion 40 7000 4.5 Domestic and Irrigation Pumps continuously TF32 Buffelsfontein 465 JQ, Portion 40 Not known 24.1 Domestic and Irrigation Pumps continuously TF33 Buffelsfontein 465 JQ, Portion 40 Not known 24.2 Domestic and Irrigation - TF34 Buffelsfontein 465 JQ, Portion 37 Not known NA Domestic and Irrigation -

Scoping Report

Ground Water Use

The boreholes identified during the hydro census indicate that the ground water to the south of the proposed project site (upstream) is mainly used for domestic purposes, stock watering and irrigation. Details on the boreholes identified during the hydro census regarding both use and qualities are contained in Table 7.

Groundwater Quality [Buffelsfontein Sections (East and West)]

The following trends were derived from interpretation of water quality monitoring and related data and confirmed in the assessments during the annual report (2008) with the following conclusions:

 Sulphate is a prominent and widespread contaminant in the base metal processing areas such as the concentrators, smelters and refineries. Average sulphate concentrations were within the ideal ranges for domestic use during the past monitoring year.  Magnesium is generally associated with sulphate-type pollution because magnesium exchanges calcium in the normal geohydrological cycle. Magnesium is the dominating cation. Despite being the dominant cation, average concentrations are within the ideal and recommended ranges for domestic use.  Sodium and chloride are usually present in high concentrations in connate water within the crystal structure or matrix of rocks. When blasted, crushed, smelted or processed in some other way, sodium and chloride are liberated. Average concentrations of both sodium and chloride are within the ideal ranges.  Nitrate contamination occurs mostly at the shaft areas as a result of traces of nitrate-based explosives used in the mining process and dissolving in process and mine water. Similar contamination is also expected to occur at the proposed Buffelsfontein West shaft areas, but current concentrations are within the ideal ranges.  Due to neutral or slightly basic pH conditions heavy and trace metals are present in very low concentrations in the groundwater of the area due to the poor solubility in these conditions.

In the vicinity of the Buffelsfontein West and East Sections, groundwater qualities are relatively consistent. Both the monitoring boreholes are unaffected by groundwater pollution caused by existing and previous mining activities. The main conclusions from the hydrogeochemistry are:

 Inorganic groundwater quality remained relatively stable throughout the 2008 monitoring year;  The groundwater chemistry is dominated by magnesium cations and bicarbonate alkalinity;  The salinity of the water is generally too high to use for irrigation, unless under special circumstances; and  Groundwater within the Buffelsfontein area is unaffected by groundwater pollution.

Groundwater Quality [Lonmin mining area (Proposed Project Area)]

From the data received from Lonmin during the 2008 EMPR amendment process, it was determined that a total of 50 boreholes occur within the vicinity of the proposed project mining area. Of the 50 monitoring boreholes only 36 of them are discussed briefly, below:

 Sulphate concentrations are all within the ideal and recommended ranges for domestic use. The highest sulphate concentrations are within the direct vicinity of the tailings dam, but are still within domestic ranges.  Magnesium concentrations are elevated, especially within close proximity of the tailings dam.

53 Scoping Report

 Several boreholes display magnesium concentrations exceeding the maximum permissible level of 100 mg/l.  Sodium and chloride concentrations are all within the ideal and recommended ranges for domestic use. Chloride concentrations are slightly elevated within the immediate vicinity of the tailings dam, but do not exceed the maximum permissible level of 600 mg/l.  Nitrate concentrations are elevated well above the maximum permissible level of 20 mg/l within the direct vicinity of the shaft areas. The elevated nitrate concentrations is the result of the extensive usage of nitrate based explosives.

Groundwater Quality (International Ferro Metals - South west of Buffelsfontein West Section)

Of the nine available boreholes, only three of them were last sampled in October 2008, and discussed briefly below:

 Sulphate concentrations are all within the ideal ranges for domestic use and vary between 46 and 324 mg/l.  Magnesium concentrations are within the ideal ranges for domestic use. Borehole GCS11 is the exception with a concentration of 173 mg/l, which far exceeds the maximum permissible level of 100 mg/l.  Sodium and chloride concentrations are within the ideal and recommended ranges.  Nitrate concentrations are within the ideal ranges for domestic use. Borehole GCS11 is the exception with a nitrate concentration of 40 mg/l, which exceeds the maximum permissible level of 20 mg/l.

Surface Water

River Catchments

The Mooinooi (Elandskraal) and Buffelsfontein West Sections lie within the A21K catchment, with Buffelsfontein East Section lying within the A21J catchment (Figure 22). The area is traversed by various non-perennial streams, such as the Elandskraalspruit, Maretlwana (Mooinooi and Buffelsfontein West Sections) and an unnamed tributary of the Modderspruit (Buffelsfontein East Section).

The Elandskraalspruit lies on the south-western boundary of the site and drains to the northwest into the Middlekraal Dam on the Maretlwana River. The unnamed tributary of the Modderspruit flows in a north- easterly direction into the Kareespruit. Both the Maretlwana River and Kareespruit ultimately discharge into the Crocodile River and form part of the Limpopo River Basin.

The streams are described and evaluated as follows:

 Maretlwana River – Main stream west of Mooinooi Section;  Elandskraalspruit – Tributary of the Maretlwana River. Small non-perennial stream south of Mooinooi Section; and  Buffelsfonteinspruit – Tributary of the Elandskraalspruit. Small non-perennial stream south east of Mooinooi Section.

The catchment upstream of the Middelkraal dam and before the confluence of the Maretlwana River and the Elandsdriftspruit is about 86 km2.

Scoping Report

Figure 22 - Quaternary Catchments

Scoping Report

Mean Annual Run-off

Comparative mean annual runoff (MAR) volumes were calculated from the data available in the Water Research WR90 report, as no onsite data is available for the two non-perennial streams. The A21K catchment has a gross MAR of 14,69 x 106 m3 and a catchment area of 119 km2 that comprises of an upper mountainous area and a lower grass and vegetative area. (C-factor used is 18.5).

The Elandskraalspruit was estimated to have an MAR of 10,1 x 106 m3, with the catchment profile being very similar to the A21K catchment. Similarly, the Modderspruit sub-catchment has been estimated to have a MAR of 10,5 x 106 m3. Variables and results used for the calculations of the MAR, in 2005, are indicated in Table 8.

Table 8 - Variables and Results for the MAR Calculations

Catchment Receiving Water Body MAR (mm) Area Run off (MI) (mk2) Subcatchment upstream of the mine

Buffelsfonteinspruit Elandskraalspruit 37 32.82 1214.34 Elandskraalspruit Maretlwana River 37 10.56 390.35 Maretlwana River Confluence of Maretlwana and 37 26.64 985.68 Elandsdriftspruit Affected catchment - discharge to the receiving water body

Buffelsfonteinspruit Elandskraalspruit 37 37.67 1393.79 Elandskraalspruit Maretlwana River 37 10.89 402.93 Maretlwana River Confluence of Maretlwana and 37 30.08 1112.96 Elandsdriftspruit

Flood Peaks and Volumes

The peak flow of the affected sub-catchment is calculated according to the Rational Method. The Rational Method predicts peak run-off rates from data on rainfall intensity and drainage basin characteristics. The method assumes that a rainstorm of uniform intensity covers the whole basin. Run-off will increase as water from more distant parts of the catchment area reaches the outlet. When the whole drainage area is contributing, a steady state is reached, and discharge becomes a constant maximum. The time required to reach this steady state is called the time of concentration of the basin, and after this time, storm-flow discharge is a fixed proportion of the rainfall intensity.

The peak flows and volumes at the confluence of the Maretlwana River and the Elandsdriftspruit are summarised in Table 9. The maximum estimated peak flow that can occur in the closed system for a return period of 100 years with a point intensity of 61.5 mm/h, is approximately 432 m3/s.

Table 9 - Flood peaks and volumes

Drainage Recurrence Area (A) Intensity Runoff Modification Peakflow Flood Area km2 (I) mm/h Factor (C) Factor Q=CIA/3.6 Volume (m3/s) (m3) 1 1:20 79.00 48.6 0.32 0.9 307 3839400 1 1:50 79.00 56.6 0.32 0.95 378 4471400 1 1:100 79.00 61.5 0.32 1 432 4858500

56 Scoping Report

Drainage Recurrence Area (A) Intensity Runoff Modification Peakflow Flood Area km2 (I) mm/h Factor (C) Factor Q=CIA/3.6 Volume (m3/s) (m3) 1 RMF 79.00 55 0.32 1 386 4345000

The calculated peak flow for the RMF (Regional Maximum Flood) is thus 386 m3/s.

River Diversions

It is understood that no river diversions occur within the surface area of the Turffontein farm however various river impedances area noted resulting from Lonmin surface infrastructure such as opencast pits and road culverts.

No river diversions currently occur as a result of the Buffelsfontein Section and/or the Mooinooi section. However, the stockpile and WRD to the east of the chrome stockpile north of the river at Mooinooi Section does influence the natural flow of the river.

It is noted that the proposed project will not result in the establishment of any surface infrastructure or affect any surface water resource directly.

Surface Water Quality

The water quality of the surface streams close to the Buffelsfontein West and East Sections have not been ascertained during past studies within the area, as the streams are normally dry. The streams only flow briefly during heavy rainfall. Based on the upstream activities, surface water quality is expected to be good, particularly within the Magaliesburg catchment area. However, it should be noted that the area downstream of the Magaliesburg may be affected by run off from agriculture, mining, settlements, roads and other disturbed areas.

Table 10 provides the water quality of the Maretlwana River, both up and down stream of the Mooinooi Section operations. The river water quality of the Kareespruit is not available.

Table 10 - Water Quality up– and Downstream of Mooinooi Section, Maretlwana River (February 2008)

Variable Donestic Use Unit Upstream Downstream (MN06) TWQGR Tolerated (MN07) pH 6 - 9 5 - 9.5 8.03 8_03 TDS 450 1000 (mg/l) 102 238 EC 70 150 (mS/m) 18.82 46.10 Hardness 200 300 (mg/l) 79.2 171.5 Ca 30 150 (mg/l) 8 27 Mg 70 100 (mg/l) 14 26 Na 100 200 (mg/l) 7 22 K 25 50 (mg/l) 1 2 Alkalinity 500 - (mg/l) 49 80 CI 100 200 (mg/l) 4 30 S04 200 400 (mg/l) 8 31 F 0.7 1 (mg/l) <0.01 <0.01 Fe 0.5 1 (mg/l) 0.308 0.133 Mn 0.1 0.4 (mg/l) <0.01 0.012 Al 0.15 0.5 (mg/l) 0.133 0.044 PO4 2 - (mg/l) 0.29 027 NO3 6 10 (mg/l) <0.1 <0.1

Scoping Report

Variable Donestic Use Unit Upstream Downstream (MN06) TWQGR Tolerated (MN07) NH, 1 2 (mg/l) <0.1 0.29 SAR 2 - (mg/l) 0.33 023 Cr5+ 0.05 1 (mg/l)

Surface Water Use

The farmers upstream of the Maretlwana river rely on groundwater resources to irrigate citrus orchards and for the watering of livestock. The downstream land use is predominately mining and therefore no abstraction of surface water is expected to occur immediately downstream of the proposed project site. However, depending on extraction licenses which Mines may be in possession of downstream, abstraction is possible. Residential settlement is present further downstream at which river water abstraction is expected.

The farmers upstream of the Kareespruit river are understood to be reliant on groundwater resources due to the non-perennial flow of the Kareespruit. The Modderspruit community upstream of the proposed project site may use water for different reasons however use is expected to be limited due to unreliable flow. Downstream water users of the Kareespruit mainly include mining and agriculture. As per the upstream user restrictions on flow, the same is expected for downstream users.

Ecology

The proposed project area lies in the North West Province, within the Bushveld Biome. The Savanna Biome is the largest Biome in southern Africa, occupying 46% of its area, and over one-third the area of South Africa. It is well developed over the Lowveld and Kalahari region of South Africa and is also the dominant vegetation in Botswana, Namibia and Zimbabwe. The vegetation is characterized by a grassy ground layer and a distinct upper layer of woody plants.

According to the North West Conservation Plan (referred to as the C-Plan hereafter) the proposed project area contains Category 1 and Category 2 Critical biodiversity areas (CBAs). CBAs are defined as areas of the landscape that need to be maintained in a natural or near-natural state in order to ensure the continued existence and functioning of species and ecosystems and the delivery of ecosystem services. In other words, if these areas are not maintained in a natural or near-natural state then biodiversity conservation targets cannot be met. Maintaining an area in a natural state can include a variety of biodiversity- compatible land uses and resource uses (SANBI, 2016).

 CBA 1s are natural landscapes; these areas contain ecosystems and species fully intact and undisturbed. These are areas with high irreplaceability or low flexibility in terms of meeting biodiversity pattern targets. If the biodiversity features targeted in these areas are lost then overall conservation targets for the Province and the country will not be met. These are landscapes that are at or past their limits of any acceptable change.

 CBA 2s are near-natural landscapes; ecosystems and species largely intact and undisturbed. Areas with intermediate irreplaceability or some flexibility in terms of area required to meet biodiversity targets. There are options for loss of some components of biodiversity in these landscapes without compromising our ability to achieve targets. These are landscapes that are approaching but have not passed their limits of acceptable change.

Scoping Report

FLORA

The proposed project site has two major vegetation types; Marikana Thornveld and Norite Koppies Bushveld (Mucina and Rutherford, 2011).

Marikana Thornveld (SVcb 6)

This vegetation type occurs on plains from Rustenburg area in the west, through Marikana and Brits to the Pretoria area in the east. Vegetation is open Acacia Karroo woodland occurring in valleys and slightly undulating plains, and some lowland hills. Shrubs are more dense along the drainage lines, on termitaria and rocky outcrops or in other habitat protected from fire. Most of the area is underlain by the mafic intrusive rocks of the RLS of the Bushveld. Alien vegetation is considerable and usually dense along drainage lines.

Expected species include Acacia type bushveld with other tree species such as Combretum molle, Searsia lancea, Ziziphus mucronata, Celtis africana, Dombeya rotundifolia, Pappea capensis, Peltophorum africanum, Terminalia sericia, Euclea crispa subsp. crispa, Olea europea subsp. africana, Searsia pyroides var pyroides.

A number of large and small shrubs are present; including Diospyros lycoides subsp. guerkei, Ehretia rigida subsp. rigida, Euclea undata, Grewia flava, Pavetta gardeniifolia, Asparagus cooperii, Rhynchosia nitens, Indigofera zeyheri, Justicia flavens, Clematis brachiata, Helinis integrifolius, Pentarrhinum insipidum, Cyphostemma cirrhosum,

A well-developed grass sword is present that includes various herbs and forbs, typical of the bushveld. Species such as Elionorus muticus, Eragrostis lehmanniana, Setaria sphacelata, Themeda triandra, Aristida scabrivalvis subsp. scabrivalvis, Fingerhuthia africana, Heteropogon contortus, Hyperthelia dissolute, Melinis nerviglumis, Pogonarthia squarrosa, Hermannia depressa, Ipomea obscura, Barleria macrostegia, Dianthus mooiensis subsp. mooiensis, Ipomea oblongata, Vernonia oligocephala, Ledebouria revolute, Ornithogalum tenuifolium, Sanseveria aethiopica.

Norite Koppies Bushveld (SVcb 7)

This vegetation type extends from the North West to Gauteng Province. It is embedded in Marikana Thornveld, north of the Magaliesburg on rocky hills between Rustenburg and Pretoria with the highest hills near Brits. This is a low, semi-open to closed woodland up to five metres tall, consisting of dense deciduous shrubs and trees with very sparse undergrowth on shallow soils, with large areas not covered by vegetation. Tree and shrub layers are continuous. The stands of this unit are found on noritic outcrops and koppies, many appearing as inselbergs above the surrounding plains.

Expected species include trees such as Sclerocarya birrea subsp. caffra, Combretum molle, Croton gratissimus, Ficus abutifolia, Pappea capensis, Acacia caffra, Bridelia mollis, Combretum apiculatum, Cussonia paniculata, Dombeya rotundifolia, Faurea saligna, Ficus glumosa, Lannea discolour, Obetia tennax, Peltophorum africanum, Rhus leptodictya, Vangueria infausta, Ziziphus mucronata, Euphorbia cooperi and various shrubs (Triaspris glaucophylla, Canthum gilfillanii, Clerodendrum glabrum Diplorhynchus condylocarpum, Euclea natalensis, Grewia flavescens, Grewia monticola, Gymnosporia nemorosa, Gymnosporia polyacantha, Pavetta eylesii, Pouzolzia mixta, Psydrax livida, Vitex zeyheri, Jatropha latifolia var. latifolia, Abutilon austro-africanum, Hermannia floribunda, Hibiscus subreniformis, Searsia zeyheri, Tetradenia brevispicata, Osyris lanceolata, Helinis integrifolius, Rhoicissus tridentata, Turraea obtusifolia, Sarcostemma viminale, Cyphostemma lanigerum, Chrysopogon serrulatus). Grass species include Setaria lindenbergiana, Aristida congesta, Bulbostylis humilis, Eustachys puniceus. paspaglumis, Panicum maximum, Themeda triandra, and forbs such as Hibiscus sidiformis, Pellaea calomelanis, Pellaea viridis, Scadoxus.

Scoping Report

Sensitivity

Marikana Thornveld is endangered according to Mucina and Rutherford (2011). Furthermore, the ecosystem is listed as Vulnerable according to the National List of Threatened Ecosystems. The National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (No.10 of 2004) provides for listing of threatened or protected ecosystems. Vulnerable ecosystems being ecosystems that have a high risk of undergoing significant degradation of ecological structure, function or composition as a result of human intervention, although they are not critically endangered ecosystems or endangered ecosystems.

Less than 1% is statutorily conserved. The vegetation is considerably impacted with 48% transformed. Erosion is considered low to moderate.

Norite Koppies Bushveld is endemic to the North West Province. This vegetation type is Least threatened according to Mucina and Rutherford (2011) and not largely conserved. Areas close to human settlements are often severely disturbed and many woody species have been harvested from these areas for fuel and building materials. Weeds and a number of declared alien plant species are more common in these disturbed sites.

Potential Species of Special Concern (SSC)

There are two expected species of special concern (SSC) for the proposed project area. The Marula (Sclerocarya birrea subsp. caffra) is Nationally Protected Tree in terms of the National Forests Act of 1998 (No. 84 of 1998). The African Holly (Ilex mitis) is listed as declining according to the Plants of Southern Africa (POSA) database.

FAUNA

The North West is home to 53% of the known mammal and 67% of bird species recorded in South Africa (North West Rural, Environment and Agricultural Development, 2013). The fauna which is expected to occur within the proposed project area include assemblages of mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians and invertebrates within terrestrial and wetland ecosystems. Each of these assemblages occurs within unique habitats, the ecological state of these habitats directly relates to the number of species found within them. The main habitats occurring in the proposed project area are bushveld plains and wetlands with little altitudinal variation.

Habitat Types

Within the proposed project area, four habitat types are expected to occur. These include:

 Bushveld;  Koppies;  Wetlands; and  Rivers.

Species of Special Concern

Threatened animal species reported to have occurred in North West and that may potentially occur on the proposed project site, according to the expected habitat types.

 Mammals - No threatened large mammals are expected to occur within the proposed project area. The Short-eared trident bat (Cloeotis percivali), along with locally Endangered (EN) species, including the Robust golden mole (Amblysomus robustus), White-tailed mouse (Mystromys albicaudatus) could potentially occur within the proposed project area. Medium-sized problem

Scoping Report

carnivores, such as the Black-backed jackal (Canis mesomelas) and caracal (Caracal caracal) and the Brown hyaena (Hyaena brunnea) are likely to occur within the project area (READ, 2013).  Birds - According to the South African Bird Atlas Project Version 2 (SABAP 2) (Birdlife, 2016) two red data listed bird species occur within the proposed project area. The Cape Vulture (Gyps coprotheres) is expected to occur in the area and is listed as Endangered (EN). Vultures as a group are threatened by poisonings, while powerlines are a threat through both electrocutions and collisions that can incur significant negative effects on populations of these birds. The Lesser Flamingo (Phoenicopterus minor) is listed as Near Threatened (NT). There is likely habitat for both of these species within the proposed project area.  Reptiles - The Rare, Striped Harlequin Snake (Homoroselaps dorsalis) and Southern African Python (Python natalensis) may potentially occur within the proposed project area.  Amphibians - There is potential habitat for the Giant Bullfrog (Pyxicephalus adspersus) which is listed as Least Concern (LC) globally. This is because the species occurs in a number of southern and east African countries where it is not yet threatened. It is listed as Near-Threatened (NT) in South Africa. In South Africa many populations of the species have been destroyed or otherwise adversely affected by human activities. Habitat loss is having the greatest impact on the species.

WETLANDS

Wetlands are dynamic ecosystems providing a number of important ecological goods and services. They are home to a variety of specifically adapted organisms and are also the source of a number of wild food types as well as building and craft resources for people. They are also a natural defence against floods and filters for water quality. Wetlands are interfaces between aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems and therefore are impacted by activities and conditions in both.

The North West is well-endowed with respect to pans and wetland features. This is a function of the climatic conditions and specific geomorphology of this region known as the Western Plateau Wetland Group region (READ, 2013).

The proposed project area lies in the Crocodile (West) and Marico Water Management Area and within Quaternary Catchments; A21J: A21K: The Crocodile West and Marico WMA is one of the many water stressed catchments in South Africa. Surface water resources are used extensively, particularly in the Crocodile River catchment, with the main water users being agriculture, industry, mining and urban development.

According to the North West C Plan, there are two wetlands present within the proposed project area; an unchannelled valley bottom wetland and a channelled valley bottom wetland.

According to the North West C-Plan the Present Ecological State Category (PESC) is Class C; moderately modified. The river flows through the southern portion of the proposed project area. It is expected that wetlands could be linked to this water body.

Heritage

A substantial amount of information is available regarding the Rustenburg area relating to the Stone Age, the Iron Age, and the Historical Age. Relevance to each age is outlined below.

Stone Age

The Stone Age is the period in human history when lithic material was mainly used to produce tools (Coertze & Coertze 1996: 293). In South Africa, the Stone Age can be divided in three periods. It is, however, important to note that dates are relative and only provide a broad framework for interpretation. The division for the Stone Age according to Korsman & Meyer (1999: 93-94) is as follows:

Scoping Report

 Early Stone Age (ESA) 2 million – 150 000 years ago;  Middle Stone Age (MSA) 150 000 – 30 000 years ago; and  Late Stone Age (LSA) 40 000 years ago – 1850 - A.D.

The closest known Stone Age site in the vicinity of the surveyed area is a rock art site to the northeast. A number of Late Stone Age sites are also known from the Magaliesburg Mountains. Rock engravings are found to the south and east of Rustenburg. These date back to the Late Stone Age (Bergh 1999: 4-5).

Two Stone Age occurrences were identified on a farm close to proposed project area (Huffman, 2005). Many other isolated Stone Age finds were also identified during heritage surveys in the broader environment (Archaetnos database).

No natural shelter exists, although the Magaliesburg Mountain Range is only a few kilometres to the south of the project area. The area probably provided good grazing and therefore it is possible that Stone Age people may have utilized the site for hunting purposes. One may therefore find Stone Age material out of context lying around, although none were identified during the survey.

Iron Age

The Iron Age is the name given to the period of human history when metal was mainly used to produce metal artefacts (Coertze & Coertze 1996: 346). In South Africa it can be divided in two separate phases according to Van der Ryst & Meyer (1999: 96-98), namely:

 Early Iron Age 200 – 1000 A.D; and  Late Iron Age 1000 – 1850 A.D.

Huffman (2007: xiii) however, indicates that a Middle Iron Age should be included. His dates, which now seem to be widely accepted in archaeological circles, are:

 Early Iron Age (EIA) 250 – 900 A.D.;  Middle Iron Age (MIA) 900 – 1300 A.D.; and  Late Iron Age (LIA) 1300 – 1840 A.D.

Many Late Iron Age sites have been identified in the area around the towns of Rustenburg, Koster and Groot Marico as well as in the Waterberg Mountains which excludes the surveyed area (Bergh 1999: 7-8). During earlier times this part of the Northwest Province was inhabited by Tswana groups, namely the Fokeng and Kwena. These people fled from Mzilikazi during the Difaquane, but later on returned (Bergh 1999: 9-11).

Huffman (2005) identified a vast number of Iron Age in the geographical surroundings of the study area. He noted at least 70 such sites. On the Archaetnos database more Iron Age sites from the area are known. At least four of these are on the farm Turffontein.

The close proximity of the study area to the Magaliesburg Mountain may mean that people used the plains and therefore isolated pottery may well be present.

Historical Age

The historical age began with the first recorded oral histories in the area. It includes the moving into the area of people that were literate. This era is often referred to as the Colonial era or the recent past.

Scoping Report

Due to factors such as population growth and a decrease in mortality rates, more people inhabited the country during the recent historical past. Therefore, much more cultural heritage resources from this era have been left on the landscape. It is important to note that all cultural resources older than 60 years are potentially regarded as part of the heritage and that detailed studies are required in order to determine whether these indeed have cultural significance. Factors to be considered include aesthetic, scientific, cultural and religious value of such resources.

 Early travellers have moved through this part of the Northwest Province. This included Coenraad de Buys in 1821 and 1825, David Hume in 1825, Robert Scoon and William McLuckie in 1827 and 1829 and Dr. Robert Moffat and Reverend James Archbell in 1829 (Bergh 1999: 12, 117-119).  Hume again moved through this area in 1830 followed by the expedition of Dr. Andrew Smith in 1835 (Bergh 1999: 13, 120-121). Hume again moved through the area with Scoon in 1835. In 1836 William Cornwallis Harris visited the area. The well-known explorer Dr. David Livingston passed through this area in 1847 (Bergh 1999: 13, 119-122).  In 1837 the Voortrekkers also moved through the Swartruggens area (Bergh 1999: 11). During this year a Voortrekker commando moved out against Mzilikazi and was engaged in a battle with his impi to the north of Swartruggens. The area surveyed was inhabited by white settlers as early as 1839 (Bergh 1999: 14-15).  The greater Magaliesburg and Rustenburg area saw much action during the Anglo-Boer War (1899-1902). British troops reached Rustenburg on 14 June 1900. Three battles were fought here during the War, being the one at Buffelspoort on 3 December 1900, the one at Nooitgedacht on 13 December 1900 and the one at Vlakfontein on 29 May 1901 (Bergh 1999: 51-52).

From the study done by Huffman (2005) and the Archaetnos database some historical sites, including graves, are known from the Rustenburg area. Two of these are on the farm Turffontein.

Historical structures, such as farm houses and infrastructure relating to these times, may be found in the surveyed area. It is also possible that graves, associated with the above, may be present.

Climate

The information in this section is derived from the air quality investigation and surface water investigations conducted by Metago for International Ferrometals and from the approved EMPR for the Mooinooi, Elandsdrift and Buffelsfontein Sections, dated 2000. Information in these investigations was obtained from a number of climate stations in the Rustenburg/Brits region, as indicated below. Where two sets of data were obtained, the data from the climate station closest to the Buffelsfontein East and/or West Sections has been included.

Regional Climate

The area is situated on the northern slopes of the Magaliesburg and adjacent low-lying areas to the north, is very effectively sheltered by the extensive Highveld plateau and the Magaliesburg Mountain.

The project site is situated within the Highveld climatic zone the main features of which are: warm temperate climate, annual average precipitation of 650 mm/year in the West to 900 mm/year on the eastern border, consisting mainly of thunderstorms in the summer months (October to March), with the maximum rainfall occurring in January.

The winter months are normally dry as about 85% of the annual rainfall falls in the summer months, rain of 124 – 150 mm have been recorded to fall within one day. The annual average of thunderstorms varies from about 75 to 100. These storms are often violent with severe lightning and strong gusty south-westerly winds and sometimes hail. This region has about the highest hail frequency in South Africa as 4 – 7 occurrences may be expected annually at any single location.

Scoping Report

The average daily maximum temperature is roughly 27º C in January and 17ºC in July but may rise to 38ºC and 26ºC respectively. Average daily minima range from about 13ºC in January to 0º in July, whereas extremes can sink to 1ºC and -13ºC respectively. The period during which frost is likely to form lasts on the average for about 120 days from May to September.

The annual average number of thunderstorms varies from about 75 to 100. Thunderstorms are most common in January and to a lesser extent November and December. These storms are often violent with severe lighting and strong (but short-lived) gusty south-westerly winds and are sometimes accompanied by hail.

Sunshine duration in summer is about 60% and in winter about 80% of the time.

Climatic data were obtained from the South African Weather Service recording station in the Rustenburg area. The results are presented in Table 11.

Table 11 - Climate data for Rustenburg Station (May 2002– April 2003)

Month Average daily Average daily Monthly daily rain A-Pan evaporation maximum minimum data (mm) (mm) temperature (oC) temperature (oC) January 31.8 17.4 111.8 199 February 30.8 18.7 136.2 214 March 29.6 14,3 46.2 210 April 29.1 12.8 6.8 204 May 25.0 6.5 17.4 250 June 20.1 4.4 6.0 193 July 21.8 1.7 0.0 157 August 23.7 7.4 1.4 129 September 27.2 9.2 0.0 141 October 30.1 13.4 76.4 113 November 30.5 14.8 34.0 115 December 29.7 17.3 130.4 155

Rainfall

The mean annual precipitation is approximately 685 mm/annum, of which 85% occurs during the summer rainfall season (November to March). The monthly daily rainfall figures for the year 2002 can be seen in Table 12.

Monthly and annual rainfall statistics for the Mooinooi area based on Water Resources of South Africa 1990 are given in Table 12. All figures are in millimetres (mm).

Table 12 - Rainfall Characteristics

Rainfall Mean Min. Max. Standard Coefficient Deviation Variance January 117.1 29.7 243.0 54.2 0.5 February 99.0 16.0 256.0 56.9 0.6 March 91.6 0.1 163.3 571 0.6 April 50.5 0.0 163.3 38.9 0.8 May 17.7 0.0 109.0 22.8 1.3 June 10.2 0.0 149.8 25.5 2.5 July 5.3 0.0 91.8 13.7 2.6 August 7.1 0.0 48.2 11.7 1.7 September 21.7 0.0 152.1 29.5 1.4

Scoping Report

Rainfall Mean Min. Max. Standard Coefficient Deviation Variance October 52.4 9.1 145.1 32.5 0.6 November 87.1 13.4 169.8 42.0 0.5 December 110.7 5.3 226.4 53.8 0.5 A n n u a l 667 404 1145 159 4.2

Maximum Rainfall Intensities per Month

The maximum rainfall intensities obtained from the Waterkloof weather station in Marikana are:

 60 minute / 1:50 year storm event: 83 mm;  24 hours / 1:50 year storm event: 133 mm; and  24 hours / 1:100 year storm event: 154 mm.

Temperature

The monthly temperatures for the year 2002 can be seen in Table 11. Temperatures are generally mild, with mean annual maximum temperatures of 26.4°C, and mean monthly maximum temperatures exceeding 30°C in summer.

Wind

Wind information was obtained from the Lonmin climate station. Prevailing daytime wind direction is from the north and north-western sectors. With an average speed of 0.0034 m/s. Prevailing night time wind direction is from the north in addition to some wind from the south and southeast.

Mean daily wind speeds are in the range of 1 m/s to 4.8 m/s with maximum daily speeds typically ranging from 1.7 m/s to 10 m/s. Wind speeds decrease at night. Approximately 95% of the time, wind speeds is less than 3.5 m/s, and the yearly average in this area is 2 m/s.

September and October are characterised by increased wind velocities, while low wind speeds occur during June and July.

Evaporation

Potential A-pan evaporation figures for the area exceed the rainfall in the area indicating the level of water deficiency in the area. The monthly evaporation figures can be seen in Table 11.

Extreme Weather Conditions

Relevant to the proposed project site is the fact that in late winter the climate is characterised by dry periods and gusty winds. This combination of factors results in the increased lifting and transportation of exposed dust particles. The area experiences a host of extreme events on a regular basis. For instance:

 The area is prone to drought conditions and may vary from mild to severe;  Mild frost is common during the winter period (June to August);  The area typically experiences rainfall in the form of showers and thunderstorms;  Strong gusty winds are associated with thunderstorms; and  Hail occurs on average three times a year, most commonly in November and December.

Scoping Report

AIR QUALITY

All information in this section was extracted from the 2008 EMPR compiled by M2 Environmental Connections cc.

M2 Environmental Connections cc compiled the EMPR based on the findings made within the air quality investigation and the background air quality monitoring programme conducted by Annegarn Environmental Research (Pty) Ltd, in 2003, for the International Ferro-metals (SA) smelter. The specialist investigation was completed by Airshed Planning Professionals. This information is relevant due to the close proximity of the Buffelsfontein East and West Sections and less than 1 km from the southern boundary of the Turffontein farm boundary. It should be noted that most of the air quality issues relates to the various smelters in the area, with mining mainly contributing to airborne dust issues.

Existing Sources of Air Pollution (Regional sources)

The contribution of various sources of emission to ambient particulate and gaseous concentrations within the Rustenburg region is of interest, given that air quality can migrate across a region. The most significant sources located within the Rustenburg-Brits region include:

 Stack, vent and fugitive emissions from industrial operations - industrial emissions include various

criteria pollutants (as SO2, NOx, CO and particulates), greenhouse gases (CO2 and CH4), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs), various heavy metals and other toxins such as dioxins and furans. Industries in the region include three platinum smelter operations, viz.: Anglo American Platinum Limited (Anglo Platinum) Smelter Operation (Waterval Smelter), Impala Platinum and Lonmin (Western Platinum). Sources of emissions at these operations typically include stack emissions, including main stack releases which comprise furnace and converter off-gases, acid plant stack emissions and releases from flash dryer stacks. The furnace and converter operations are also associated with significant fugitive emissions. Aside from the two ferro-chrome industries situated in the region, viz. the Xstrata (Rustenburg) and Xstrata (Wonderkop) operations, Merafe Ferrochrome is situated to the north west of Rustenburg and IFM ~30 km east of Rustenburg. Furnace stack emissions, furnace fugitives and baghouse stack releases represent the main sources at these operations. The induction furnaces at Joerg Foundry (Trek Engineering) represent a smaller source of industry-related emissions. There are no furnaces at Mooinooi Section, Buffelsfontein West Section or Buffelsfontein East Section.

 Stack emissions from boiler operations - boiler stack emissions include particulates, NOx, SO2, CO,

VOCs and CO2. In addition to various smelter plants, boiler operations are also undertaken at Rainbow Chickens, Rustenburg Abattoir, MKTV Tobacco Limited, Rustenburg Provincial Hospital, British American Tobacco Products, Mageu Number One and Anglo Platinum Base Metals Refinery.  Stack emissions from incineration operations - emissions include criteria gases (SO2, NOx, CO, lead and particulates), acid gases (hydrogen chloride, hydrogen bromide, hydrogen fluoride), metal gases (chromium, arsenic, cadmium, mercury, manganese, etc.) and dioxins and furans. Incineration operations are undertaken at Anglo Platinum Precious Metals Refinery, with medical waste incineration occurring at Ferncrest Hospital.  Fugitive emissions from quarrying and mining operations - comprising mainly dust releases, with

small amounts of NOx, CO, SO2, methane, CO2 being released during blasting operations.  Fugitive dust emissions from tailings impoundments which are associated with Anglo, Impala and Lonmin mineral processing operations. Anglo Platinum tailings dams in the region currently include Phases 1-3 (i.e. Paardekraal tailings), Waterval West, Waterval East, and Klipfontein.  Lonmin's tailings include Western Platinum - North, - East, - South and - West, Karee Mine and Eastern Platinum. Impala Platinum has one large tailings dam.  Vehicle tailpipe emissions - significant primary pollutants emitted by motor vehicles include CO2,

CO, hydrocarbons (HCs), SO2, NOx, particulate matter and lead.

Scoping Report

 Household fuel combustion (coal, wood) - coal burning emits a large amount of gaseous and

particulate pollutants including SO2, heavy metals, total and respirable particulates including heavy

metals and inorganic ash, CO, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), NO2 and various toxins

such as benzo(a)pyrene. Pollutants from wood burning include respirable particulates, NO2, CO, PAHs, particulate benzo(a)pyrene and formaldehyde. Particulate emissions from wood burning have been found to contain about 50% elemental carbon and about 50% condensed hydrocarbons.  Biomass burning - major pollutants from veld fires are particulates, CO and VOCs. The extent of

NOx emissions depend on combustion temperatures, with minor sulphur oxides being released.  Various miscellaneous fugitive dust sources, including: agricultural activities, wind erosion of open areas, vehicle-entrainment of dust along paved and unpaved roads.  Ambient air pollutant concentrations within the Rustenburg region occur not only due to local source but also as a result of emissions from various remote sources. Regionally- transported air masses comprising well mixed concentrations of 'aged' (secondary) pollutants are known to represent a significant component of ambient fine particulate concentrations within the South African interior. Such air masses contain pollutants released from various remote sources including elevated releases from distant industrial operations and power generation facilities and large scale biomass burning in neighbouring countries. Typical pollutants which circulate within such regionally-transported polluted air masses include nitrates, ammonium nitrate and sulphates.

The quantification of background particulate concentration is complicated due to the large number of sources of this pollutant. Sources of particulates also include a significant proportion of fugitive emissions from diffuse sources (e.g. vehicle-entrained dust from roadways, wind-blown dust from stockpiles and open areas, dust generated by materials handling) which are more difficult to quantify than are emissions from point sources.

Synopsis of Ambient Monitored Data

A synopsis of the measured and estimated emissions from WCM is presented in Table 13.

Table 13 - Synopsis of Measured and Estimated Emissions for Mooinooi Section

Source Group PM10 TSP Crushing and screening 25.30 253.00 Materials Handling 6.26 13.20 Unpaved Roads 56.00 179.00 Wind Erosion 8.54 63.50 Total 96.00 508.00

Total PM10 and Total Suspended Particles (TSP) emissions from Mooinooi Section were estimated to be 96.0 and 508 tonnes per annum (tpa), respectively. Vehicle entrainment of dust from unpaved roads was found to be the most significant contributor (58%) to total PM10 emissions, followed by emissions from crushing and screening at 26%. Fugitive dust emissions from crushing and screening operations and unpaved roads were estimated to contribute 50% and 35% to total TSP emissions, respectively (Figure 23).

Total PM10 and TSP emissions as a result of all existing WCM operations were estimated to be 798 and 2,800 tpa, respectively, with Millsell being responsible for 86% and 80%, respectively. Table 13 provides a synopsis of measured and estimated emissions for Mooinooi Section.

Data provided in the 2008 EMPR report has been considered as the latest applicable information.

Scoping Report

Figure 23 - Mooinooi Section Source Contributions to Total Emissions

TOPOGRAPHY

The regional topography is dominated by the Magaliesburg range, which is situated 6 km to the south of the Elandskraal (Mooinooi) site (Figure 1). Altitude varies from approximately 1800m at the crests of the Magaliesburg Mountain to the contour line of 1,300 m which defines the base of the Magaliesburg northern slopes, down to the flat areas where the mining sites are situated between the contour lines of 1200 – 1100m.

The hydrographic basin of the area is almost entirely formed by the northern slopes of the Magaliesburg. Four main streams and their tributaries drain the area northwards to the low-lying areas where the whole drainage system enters the Crocodile River. These four streams are the Crocodile itself (across the area of Brits), the Elandspruit, and the Sterkstroom (across the area of Mooinooi/Marikana) and the Hex River (across the area of Kroondal/Rustenburg). This whole drainage system cuts across, perpendicularly, the narrow and elongated strips of the geological, edaphic and vegetation formations of the area.

The Elandskraal mining area is situated in a region of undulating plains approximately 2 km North East of Mooinooi Section. The natural topography is relatively flat with a gentle, even slope from south to north, with the natural vegetation comprising savannah grass lands. Agricultural farming is temporarily sterilised due to mining activities although agricultural farming is minimised in this area due to a lack of groundwater. The elevation of the land in the mining area is between 1100 – 1200 meters above mean sea level (mamsl).

Drainage from the western side of the Maretlwana River is from west to east. Most of the drainage is directed towards the Maretlwana River. The lowest point occurs on the western most portions with an altitude of 1,143 mamsl. Slope gradients are gentle ranging from 1:25 to 1:100.

The topographic gradient at Buffelsfontein East Section is in the order of 0.02 towards the north. There are also a few small norite hills scattered in the area.

The topography of the Turffontein Farm site is depicted in Figure 24. The North-South and West-East elevation profiles are presented in Figures 25 and 26.

Scoping Report

Figure 24 - Topography of the Turffontein Farm

Scoping Report

Figure 25- Topography of the Turffontein Farm (Google Earth, 2016)

Figure 26 - Elevation prolife of West – East Orientation (Google Earth, 2016)

Scoping Report

SOIL

Soil Types

The soil forms and families identified on WCM properties are indicated in Table 14. Pre-mining land use was exclusively for agricultural purposes.

Table 14 - Soil forms and families identified on WCM properties

Soil Form Soil Family Diagnostic Horizons

Arcadia Lonehill Vedic A: Unspecified - non-diagnostic saprolite Rensburg Rietkuil Vedic A: G Horizon Katspnuit Orthic A: G Horizon Hutton Slangspruit Orthic A: Red Apedal B Oakleaf Stella Orthic A: Neocutanic B Mispah Caledon Orthic A: Hard Rock

Mooinooi Section

Five different soil types were identified at the Mooinooi Section (Figure 27). Soils of the Mispah form, consisting of an orthic A horizon on hard rock are present the eastern surveyed area. The orthic A horizon has a dark brown, apedal to weak, fine blocky structure, with a clay content of between 25 – 25% (sandy clay loam to sandy clay) it has a thickness that varies between 10 – 30 cm.

Surface rock outcrops are present (20 – 40% of the surface). The soils of the Mispah form have a low fertility due to the shallow depth and rockiness of the area. It also has a low erodibility.

Soils of the Oakleaf form, consisting of an orthic A horizon ever a neucutanic B horizon, are also present. It consists of a dark brown to brownish red, weak, fine blocky sandy clay loam (25 – 35%) topsoil, 20 – 30 cm thick over a mottled reddish brown, weak, fine sandy blocky sandy clay (35 – 45% clay) sud soil, 50 – 60 cm deep with underlying saprolite (weathered rock). At some places the soil does not show a massive appearance due to compaction. Soils of the Oakleaf from have a medium to high fertility. It has a low to medium erodibility.

In the north-eastern part of the area, soils of the Arcadia form are present. It consists of a black coloured vertic A horizon on hard rock. The vertic A horizon has a medium to strong, fine blocky to crumble structure, with a clay content of more than 65%. A surface crust is present. It has a thickness of between 60 – 80 cm. The soils of the Arcadia form have a high fertility. It has a low erodibility in its natural state, but will easily erode when put onto a slope.

The rest of the area is covered with soils of the Hutton form. It consists of an orthic A horizon on a red apedal horizon. These soils are divided into two different mapping units, according to depth. Soils from the Hutton form in map unit H1 have a depth that varies between 60 – 90 cm. it consists of a red to brownish red, apedal to weak, fine blocky sandy clay loam (25 – 35% clay) topsoil (orthic A horizon), 20 – 30 cm thick over red, apedal to weak, fine blocky sandy-clay loam (30 – 40% clay) B horizon, 60 – 90 cm deep. The underlying material varies between hard rock and saprolite (weathered rock). The soils of the Hutton and Oakleaf forms are closely interlinked.

Soils of the Hutton form in map unit H2 have a depth of between 20 – 30 cm. The underlying material is hard rock. The orthic A horizon consists of brownish red to red, weak, fine blocky sandy clay loam (25 –

71 Scoping Report

35% clay) topsoil. The soils of the Hutton form have a medium to high fertility and low erodibility and are the best soils for rehabilitation purposes.

A small stream area, consisting of mainly soils of the Katspruit form is also present.

Buffelsfontein West Section

Only one soil type was identified in this area, namely Arcadia (Figure 28). It consist of a vertic A horizon on hard rock. The vertic A horizon has a black colour, with a thickness that varies between 70 – 100 cm. It consists of a medium to strong, fine blocky to crumble structure with a clay content of more than 65%. The surface shows signs of self-mulching. The soils of the Arcadia form have a high fertility due to the high cation exchange capacity (140 cmol/kg clay) and high clay content. It has a low erodibility in its natural state, but will erode easily when put onto a slope.

Buffelsfontein East Section

The soils in the area can be broadly described as Vertisoils. According to the South African Soil classification system, the soils of the area are of the Arcadia soil form (Figure 29). The Arcadia soil form consists of a Vertic A horizon on undifferentiated material, which is in this case saprolite. These soils are characterised by a high clay content, a strongly developed soil structure and a plasticity which is plastic when moist or sticky when wet. Due to the dominant occurrence of smectite clays these soils have a tendency to shrink and swell under variable soil moisture. Due to this characteristic the ped surface have characteristic slickenside surfaces.

As mentioned previously the Arcadia form has a high fertility, low erodibility in its natural state and erodes easily when placed on a slope. Without precaution soils of the Arcadia form is not suitable for housing development, but are suitable for grazing or can be used for crops with preference to high clay.

Soil Fertility and Erodibility

Soils of the Mispah form have a low to medium fertility due to the shallow and rockiness. Due to many outcrops present in these soils, it cannot be used for cultivation purposes. The soils have a low erodibility, but it will be difficult to use for rehabilitation purpose due to the rock outcrops present.

Soils of the Oakleaf form have a medium to high fertility. It has a low to medium erodibility.

At least 80% of the area is covered by soil of the Arcadia form. These soils have a high fertility due to the high cation exchange capacity of more than 140 cmol/kg clay and the high clay content of the soils. It has low erodibility in its natural state, but will erode quite easily when put onto a slope. This is due to the high clay content and low infiltration rate as well as the self-mulching effect of these soils and the strong surface crust.

Soils of the Hutton from have a medium fertility due to the shallow depth and rockiness of these soils. These soils have a tendency to compact quite easily, resulting in a much higher runoff than infiltration. This results in much less grass cover than normal. Although these soils are compacted, it has a low erodibility. Soils of the Hutton form can therefore be regarded as the best soils for rehabilitation purposes, especially on the slopes.

Scoping Report

Figure 27 - Table 14 - Soil distribution map of Mooinooi Section

73 Scoping Report

Figure 28 - Soil Distribution Map of Mooinooi Section

Scoping Report

Figure 29 - Soil map of Buffelsfontein East Section

Soil Depth

Soil depth is fairly consistent and consists of about 0.8 m black vertisolic clay, which overlies 15.0 m of weathered pyroxinite.

Soil Potential (dry land/irrigation/grazing)

The potential of each soil is indicated in Table 15.

Table 15 - Soil potential of the Different Soil Types Present in the Study Area

Soil Form Soil Potential Dry Land Irrigation Grazing Arcadia Medium Medium to Low High Rensburg Medium Low to Medium High

75 Scoping Report

Soil Form Soil Potential Dry Land Irrigation Grazing Mispah Low Low Low Oakleaf Medium Medium to Low High Hutton (H1) Medium Medium High Hutton (H2) Low Low Low Katspruit Low Low Low to Medium

The available moisture capacity of the Arcadia Form (the dominant soil form) soils is moderate. The intake rate and drainage in these soils is poor. There are moderate tillage constraints in these soils due to the extremely strong structure and cloddy consistency. They tend to be very slippery when wet and hard and cloddy when dry, making it extremely difficult to get a good till. These soils should not be worked when too wet or too dry, as hard clods will form. The nutrient status is fair, but fertilizer supplements will be required. The dry land cultivation potential of these soils is poor.

Generally, the irrigation potential of the area is generally fair to poor. Water intake rates decline rapidly when the soils are moistened and hence furrow irrigation is usually preferable. Only groundwater from boreholes would be available in the area for irrigation purposes. The area has been irrigated in the past, using groundwater from boreholes in the area. Salinity and sodicity problems are of concern on these soils, and will be aggravated by salt concentrations if the irrigation process recharges the groundwater source.

PRE-MINING LAND CAPABILITY

Land capability was determined using data obtained from the soil survey and classified using two methods - the Chamber of Mines Classification System (1991) and the system developed by Camp (1998). Most of the site is uniformly underlain by one form of soil (Figure 27, Figure 28 and Figure 29) and a single land capability class (Figure 30). Table 16 gives a summary of the land capability classes of the different soils types.

The production capacity of tons/ha is not available. There are no available figures for the carrying capacity of these soils. Indications in the area are that the carrying capabilities are low, and it is cautioned as to weather these soils should be used for any form of farming. It is recommended that the end use would be better used for wilderness or held under conservation constraints.

Table 16 - Land Capability of the Different Soil Types

Soil Form Soil Family Diagnostic Horizons Arcadia A Arable land (II) and Grazing land (Ill) Rensburg B Grazing land (III) Mispah C Grazing land (Ill) Oakleaf D Grazing Jand (III) Katspruit E Grazing land (III) Hutton H1 Arable land (II) to Grazing land (III) Hutton H2 Grazing land (III)

The Turffontein site comprises land of a grazing capability. During the 2008/9 EMPR amendment, discussions with local farmers indicated that 4 ha of natural grazing land carries approximately 1 large stock unit and 10 small stock units. That discussion related to the farms to the south of the proposed project area. One hectare of cultivated grazing land carries two large stock units and 20 small stock units. ENPAT (DEAT, 2000) classifies the area of intermediate suitability for arable agriculture (IFM, 2008).

Scoping Report

LAND CAPABILITY

Pre-Mining Land Use

Historically (before 1972), the main land use in the area was agriculture. According to the 2008/9 EMPR Report, the Elandskraal portions 152, 153 and 154 were used for the cultivation of sunflowers, maize or sorghum. Hernic mined the area before the Mooinooi Section was established.

The greater area, including the Turffontein farm, was primarily savannah veld with the potential for grazing and farming of crops for example mealies, tobacco, cotton and citrus although consideration should be given to the relatively low rainfall of the area.

No historical data is available with regards to historical agricultural production on the Turffontein farm.

Currently, the main land use in the region is mining and agriculture. The proposed project site, as well as properties to the north, east and south are currently used for mining operations, amongst other uses.

Parts of the adjacent areas are privately owned and have been ploughed in the past and are currently being used for informal settlements and grazing. There are a limited number of private residences in the area.

On the southern side of the N4 highway there is some citrus farming. In addition, three settlements (comprising non landowners) occur immediately to the south west and south of the Buffelsfontein sites.

The Magaliesburg mountain range is a protected nature conservation area. This area runs from east to west between Pretoria and Rustenburg. Activities of WCM do not encroach on the protected nature conservation area.

Scoping Report

Figure 30 - Land Capability and Agricultural Potential Map

Land use distribution at Mooinooi and Buffelsfontein West Sections as in 2000 and at Buffelsfontein East Section (2004) is indicated in Table 17.

Table 17 - Past and Current Land use at the Various Sections

Land use Situation in 2000 (ha) Current rehabilitated areas (ha) Mooinooi Section Stockpile areas Discard dumps 1.7834 0 Slimes dams 8.67095 0 Water control structures 3.8785 0 Structures that: 0  will be demolished (plant) 5.3586  will be re-used (office) 12.4470 Total area disturbed 32.22845 Area not disturbed 142.22605 Total 174.4545 Buffelsfontein West Section Discard Dumps 35.000 0 Tailings dam 30.625 0 Water control structures 24.000 0 Structures that: 0  will be demolished (plant) 5.6728  will be re-used (office) 3.4507

Scoping Report

Land use Situation in 2000 (ha) Current rehabilitated areas (ha) Total area disturbed 98.7485 Area not disturbed 197.3705 Total 296.1190 Buffelsfontein East Section Opencast area (2004) 38 38 Total area disturbed 100

The Turffontein Farm is currently occupied, in part, by residential settlement (including both a public settlement and the Mine accommodation). The land area also accommodates roads (both government controlled roads and Mine roads). Lonmin operations dominate the central and southern parts of the Turffontein Farm landscape including water storage infrastructure, mine waste residues, Mine offices, Shaft infrastructure, etc. across the farm. The north section of the Turffontein farm is occupied by the relatively large Segwaelane settlement (dominated by residential settlement).

NOISE

A noise study was conducted by MENCO, in 2008, as part of the 2008/9 EMPR Amendment process. The information contained in this section is based on the 2008 study alone.

The 2008 specialist study, sampled noise levels during a typical working day between 9 am and 5 pm. The humidity during the sample runs ranged between 20% and 45%. The temperature ranged between 23.2 and 29.2°C. The sky was relatively clear during all sampling instances.

Various measurement points were selected and monitored in accordance with SANS 0103 requirements (Figure 31).

Various equipment that might be used for the specific activity, such as adit development during construction (equipment used: Bulldozer, Excavator, Trucks, Front End Loader) or the operation of the Buffelsfontein East operation during operation (Equipment used: Crusher plant, Screening Plant, Front End Loader, Trucks, Compressors, ventilation fans) were identified per activity, and listed. Using typical noise emissions from these major noise sources in terms of their octave band sound pressure contribution, the resultant octave band sound pressure levels were calculated.

Noise Emissions Into the Surrounding Environment

The ambient daytime sound pressure levels are displayed as Sound Pressure Noise Contours, displayed in Figure 32 developed from the data obtained during the sampling at the points indicated in Figure 31. It should be noted that traffic from the N4 Highway was audible at most monitoring points.

The N4, the International Ferro-metals smelting plant and the Mooinooi section are clearly the largest of the noise contributors. The proposed project will not result in any surface level noise. All drilling, blasting related to extracting ore from underground workings will take place far beneath the land surface. However, the associated continued operations at Buffelsfontein, Mooinooi and other supporting facilities will have an indirect on noise levels resulting from the operation of the shaft hoist equipment, human activity at the shaft and operations and haulage of ore between the Buffelsfontein east decline shaft and the Mooinooi processing plant.

Scoping Report

Figure 31 - Location of Monitoring Points

Scoping Report

Figure 32 - Ambient Daytime Sound Pressure Levels, Contours

Scoping Report

VISUAL

The information in this section was obtained from the 2008 EMPR Amendment report. During the 2008 study a specialist visual assessment was undertaken including a baseline assessment.

Landscape Character

The proposed project site lies in a flat and relatively open area characterised by mining related activities, open cast pits and agriculture. The natural environment in and around the project site has been extensively disturbed by mining and agricultural activities. The vegetation in the area shows effects of mining and agricultural activities.

Both opencast and underground mining has taken place in the area in the past. This has resulted in the presence of open cast pits, various WRDs and derelict structures in the area.

With direct relevance to the Turffontein farm, the farm is covered predominantly by grazing veld, roads, Lonmin surface infrastructure and Mine dumps and residential area. The proposed undermining of the Turffontein farm will not result in a direct surface impact. Rather, the additional ore removed from underground will contribute to the height of the WRD at the Buffelsfontein East Section shaft and an increased height of the TSF at the beneficiation plant (Mooinooi Section).

Sense of Place

Central to the concept of sense of place is that the landscape requires uniqueness and distinctiveness. The proposed project site is located within a ‘mining belt’. The mining activities and associated infrastructure dominate the landscape of the area. A belt of mountains can be seen on the horizon known as the Magaliesburg mountain range which definitely has an impact on the sense of place.

When viewed from within the mining belt, the project site has a relatively weak sense of place. However, the larger area has a stronger sense of place due to the presence of distant hills, which soften the harsh nature of the mining activities. Considering the mountain range on the horizon and the pre-existing mountain range it can be said that the area has a moderate sense of place.

Landscape Quality and Aesthetic Value

The landscape quality of the study area can be divided into two distinct categories. The landscape when experienced from within the flat areas surrounding the plant or the ‘mining belt’, in which case the aesthetic value of the area is low due to the dominance of the mining activities.

The landscape when experienced from beyond the flat areas or ‘mining belt’ where the natural features of the study area tend to dominate the scene. The mining activities get ‘absorbed’ into the landscape due to the flat nature of the topography and the presence of many trees on the plains south of the mining belt. This landscape type is considered to be of moderate aesthetic value.

82 Scoping Report

Views of the Project Site

The proposed project will not be visible to road users or dwellings in the area as all project related activities will take place underground. Any surface activities will form part of existing Samancor Sections which are approved and will continue to operate as usual.

Sensitive Viewing Areas

Roads and tourist routes in the vicinity of the project are the N4 and the R556. The closest main route to the site is the N4 that runs east west directly south of the site connecting Rustenburg to Pretoria and is approximately 0.5 km away from the site at its nearest point. People using this road would definitely be able view the existing mining structures as they travel along the road. The proposed project however is associated with underground activities only. However, as mentioned previously the additional mining area (untapped MG1 and MG2 ore) may result in an increased height or ore stockpiles and Mine dumps associated with the Buffelsfontein East and Mooinooi Sections.

The R556 tourist route to Sun City and Pilanesberg National Park passes through the eastern side of the proposed project site. Views of the site along the road are composed of a combination of villages/towns/communities, mining activity and vegetation on flat topography. Given that the proposed project site will be undermined with no additional proposed surface infrastructure the current visual impacts will remain as is currently.

REGIONAL SOCIO-ECONOMIC STRUCTURE

The information provided in this section is derived directly from the 2008 EMPR Amendment Report. The 2008 report sourced its information from the socio-economic investigation conducted during the original EMPR Report, dated March 2003 as well as updated 2011 census information from Statistics South Africa (2016).

Population Density, Growth and Location

Population size of the North West Province

The total population of the North West Province in 2011 was about 3.5 million. This mineral-rich Province covers 9.5% of the total area of the country. The North West has a population density of 33.47 persons per km2, the third lowest in the country after the Northern Cape and the Free State. The Black African population in the North West Province forms an overwhelming majority of approximately 89.8%.

The growth rate of the North West Province was calculated using the average growth performances in the North West Province over a long period. Making use of the urbanisation rate, three scenarios were formulated:

 In Scenario 1, the population will grow at a rate of 3.6% per annum using the 1980-1991 North West urbanisation rates (Rustenburg City Council, 1998).  In Scenario 2, the population will grow at a rate of 9.7% per annum using the urbanisation rate of the North West for the 1990-1995 periods.  In Scenario 3, the population will grow at 5.3% per annum using the average urbanisation rate of the North West for the 1980-1995 periods.

Hence, in terms of growth, a growth rate of 3.6% per annum can be seen as a minimum. Further growth of the Province’s population will result from factors such as future urban growth as well as immigration.

Scoping Report

Population size of Madibeng Local Municipality

The major labour-sending areas are Brits, Mooinooi, Bapong, Majakaneni and Modderspruit/Tornado.

All areas fall within the Madibeng Local Municipality, hence the presentation of baseline social and economic information at a local municipality level.

The Madibeng Local Municipality is located in the Bojanala Platinum District Municipality. The Municipality is demarcated into 31 wards of which 10 fall in the urban areas (Brits, Hartebeespoort and Skeerpoort) and 21 in the rural areas and villages. It includes approximately 43 villages and 9 000 farm areas. The total population of Madibeng is 477,381 with a growth rate of 3.17%.

The proposed project area falls under (straddles) Wards 25, 32 and 38, according to Figure 33. Figures 34 and 35 provide various sets of 2011 South Africans Census data for reference on population groupings, sex and age distributions.

Scoping Report

Figure 33 - Demarcation Board (www.localgovernment.co.za/locals/)

Scoping Report

Figure 34 - Population groupings in Madibeng Local Municipality (STATS SA, 2011 Census)

Figure 35 - Population Sex and Age Distribution in Madibeng Local Municipality (STATS SA, 2011 Census)

The Madibeng Local Municipality has a relatively rural population with more than 70% of the population located in rural villages and farms. It has about 160 724 households and the population’s electricity access is quite high, at 81% overall. More than 80% of the households have access to water, either bulk, full, intermediate, informal intermediate or basic supply, and more than 50% of the population has no access to basic sanitation.

Water is supplied from the Hartbeespoort Dam and Crocodile River. In the rural areas, borehole water is used. The southern part of the municipality is connected to the Magalies water systems through metered bulk connections feeding the various water distribution zones via service reservoirs.

86 Scoping Report

Figures 36, 37 and 38 provide various sets of 2011 South Africans Census data for reference on population living conditions within the Municipality.

Figure 36 - Settlement Type in Madibeng Local Municipality (STATS SA, 2011 Census)

Figure 37 - Energy or fuel for cooking, heating and lighting in Madibeng Local Municipality (STATS SA, 2011 Census)

Scoping Report

Figure 38 - Source of Water in Madibeng Local Municipality (STATS SA, 2011 Census)

A number of economic activities occurring within the Municipality play a significant role in the growth of the province and country as a whole, and which include agriculture, mining, tourism and manufacturing. Mining is presently predominant with Madibeng being the world’s third largest chrome producer. Manufacturing is also a dominant sector with a wide variety of industries situated in the various industrial areas.

Tourism is one of the strong contenders, if well explored in the area. The possible establishment of the tourism belt is being researched for economic expansion. The advantage of rail and road infrastructure spanning in all lucrative destinations will begin to bear necessary fruit for the prosperity of the people of Madibeng.

The municipality is characterised by high levels of unemployment. In Madibeng, the unemployment rate for those aged 15 to 24 is 38,2%, which is almost 10% more than the overall unemployment rate.

Figures 39 to 43 provide various sets of 2011 South Africans Census data for reference on economic conditions within the Municipality.

Figure 39 - Employment for those aged 15-64 in Madibeng Local Municipality (STATS SA, 2011 Census)

Scoping Report

Figure 40 - Average Household Income in Madibeng Local Municipality (STATS SA, 2011 Census)

Figure 41 - Agricultural households in specific activity, Madibeng Local Municipality (STATS SA, 2011 Census)

Scoping Report

Figure 42 - Agricultural households by type of activity, Madibeng Local Municipality (STATS SA, 2011 Census)

Figure 43 - Income category of agricultural households, Madibeng Local Municipality (STATS SA, 2011 Census)

Scoping Report

The language preference in the communities surrounding the project area is Tswana and Xhosa. Tswana, the local language for the area, is as prevalent as Xhosa in the settlements.

(b) Description of the Current Land Uses

The Turffontein 462-JQ farm is occupied by the following current land uses:

Mining

Lonmin surface and underground operations are apparent on the Farm. The surface Lonmin operations, including a vast TSF, a stormwater runoff catchment facility, offices, concentrator plant, workshops and shaft cover approximately 390 Ha of the Turffontein farm. These operations are located in the centre of the farm and are the most prominent featured land use of the farm.

In addition, to the above mentioned mining activity, Lonmin is also in control of opencast operations to the south west of the farm boundary. The opencast operations are being rehabilitated as mining commences. Part of the farm is therefore also rehabilitated area resulting from past/legacy mining operations. On the southern boundary, a decommissioned shaft is apparent. The shaft, based on aerial imagery appears to be partly stripped and materials reclamation is essentially complete. The area will most likely be rehabilitated as part of the Lonmin Mine closure planning.

Residential

Associated with the central Lonmin operations, is a mining community by the name of Maroelakop which is expected to house mainly Mine workers. Adjacent to Maroelakop, exists a more formalised mine housing area. Segwaelane exists to the north end of the farm, which covers an area of approximately 480 Ha. The residential area is expected to house mine workers associated with Lonmin, Samancor and other mine companies in the area.

Natural Features

The Kareespruit flows in a northerly direction through the south east section of the Turffontein Farm. The river is non-perennial originating from the Magalies mountain range to the south. A number of non- perennial tributaries contributing to the flow of the Kareespruit flow across the central area of the farm towards the east, where they converge with the Kareespruit. Another contributing tributary exists to the north east end of the Turffontein farm, just to the east of the Segwaelane community.

Another river occurring in the area (not within the Turffontein farm) is the Maretlwana river which occurs approximately 3.5 km to the west of the western boundary of the Turffontein farm.

Roads

The area is occupied by roads supporting the on-going mining operations as well as the residential areas occupying the farm. The regional R556 runs through the east side of the Farm boundary. The regional road plays a major role in providing access between the N4 highway, leading to Pretoria, and the Pilanesberg.

Agriculture

No agriculture is evident on the site. It can be assumed that communities within the farm boundary grow crops on a subsistence level however, commercial farming is not evident. Note: The end land use of the area will likely entail grazing or agriculture. However, any surface rehabilitation and closure planning will fall under the jurisdiction of Lonmin. Samancor has not established surface infrastructure within the farm.

Scoping Report

Samancor is responsible for the rehabilitation of the prospecting holes suck over the years, since the prospecting right was issued and will be responsible for the rehabilitation of the holes which are still to be sunk within the farm boundary.

See Figure 16 for a representation of the extent and layout of existing surface features.

As indicated above, the site is characterised by past and existing surface and underground mining workings. Lonmin has been active in the area for a number of years. Lonmin has and continues to target the Merensky and UG2 reefs which occur at a shallower depth than the MG reefs targeted by Samancor.

The central to southern portion of the farm is dominated by Lonmin operations (either active, rehabilitated or decommissioned) where the north is dominated by a residential settlement and the east dominated by the regional R556 road. Principal supporting roads run 1] from North (Segwaelane) to the south of the farm boundary, leading to the N4 national road (2.5 km to the south of the farm boundary) and 2] from west to east, joining the Marikana and Wonderkop to the R556 and the agricultural areas on the east.

(d) Environmental and current land use map

(Show all environmental, and current land use features)

See Figure 16 and Appendix 6.

i) Impacts identified (Provide a list of the potential impacts identified of the activities described in the initial site layout that will be undertaken, as informed by both the typical known impacts of such activities, and as informed by the consultations with affected parties together with the significance, probability and duration of the impacts

During the Scoping phase the following enviroments have been considered from an impacts perspective, some of which will require further investigation during the EIR Phase and others not:

 Geology;  Topography;  Air quality;  Soil, land use and land capability;  Biodiversity;  Hydrology and geohydrology;  Noise;  Visual aspects;  Sites of archaeological, historic or cultural interest; and  Socio-economic aspects;

During the Scoping phase mitigation measures have been considered however not included in this report. The mitigation measures are being discussed with both the applicant and relevant specialists to ensure practicality and effectiveness. The overall feasibility of a mitigation measure will depend on the overall significance of the impact which is determined by the EIR phase. The proposed mitigation measures and recommendations will be included in detail in the EIAR.

Scoping Report

Any additional concerns raised by the public during the public participation process will be further considered by the EAP during the EIR Phase.

ii) Methodology used in determining the significance of environmental impacts

(Describe how the significance, probability, and duration of the aforesaid identified impacts that were identified through the consultation process was determined in order to decide the extent to which the initial site layout needs revision).

In accordance with GNR 982, promulgated in terms of Section 24(J) of the NEMA, the following parameters should be understood before the overall impact significance can be determined. The Hacking risk assessment methodology will be used for the ranking of the impacts. The following list outlines those criteria which will be considered by the EAP during the EIR Phase:

 Cumulative impacts;  The nature, significance and consequences of the impact and risk;  The extent and duration of the impact and risk;  The probability of the impact and risk occurring;  The degree to which the impact and risk can be reversed;  The degree to which the impact and risk may cause irreplaceable loss of resources; and  The degree to which the impact and risk can be mitigated.

Specialist studies contemplated during this phase will be required to consider the same aspects to ensure consistency across the assessment.

The potential project environmental and social impacts will be evaluated according to their intensity, extent, duration, probability and confidence of the impact. Furthermore, cumulative impacts will also be taken into consideration, as far as practically possible. The existence of Lonmin’s surface and underground workings (primarily underground workings) is an important consideration from a cumulative impacts perspective. Considering the nature of the proposed project, the groundwater cumulative impacts consideration are considered essential to understanding the significance of the project impact on the environment.

iii) The positive and negative impacts that the proposed activity (in terms of the initial site layout) and alternatives will have on the environment and the community that may be affected

(Provide a discussion in terms of advantages and disadvantages of the initial site layout compared to alternative layout options to accommodate concerns raised by affected parties)

No site alternatives have been considered as part of this report due to the existing context of Samancor Operations at both the Buffelsfontein East and Mooinooi Sections. The layout is essentially the underground mining of the Turffontein Farm using mining methods proposed in Section (ii). As mining commences the applicant will ensure underground supports are always in place to ensure on-going miner safety. The underground mining layout will be a continuously adapting function.

Scoping Report

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACTS

The proposed project has the potential to result in underground impacts and potential surface impacts relating to underground dewatering activities.

Due to the fact that no additional surface infrastructure will be required to support the underground mining of the Turffontein farm, the impact assessment will be linked to on-going underground mining of the MG seams. Therefore, project phases will be limited to Operations, Decommissioning, Closure and Post- Closure.

The advancement of existing underground mining from the Buffelsfontein farm into the Turffontein farm is viewed as an extension of on-going operations laterally across to a bordering farm. Once underground mining operations reach and enter into the Turffontein farm, the phase will remain as ‘operations’. Upon completion of the anticipated LoM, the decommissioning and closure phases will be entered into. The closure and post closure phases will be closely linked to the ‘preliminary closure planning’ and ‘closure planning’ of Samancor. Closure planning is not foreseen at this point in time due to the extensive LoM predicted. The extended LoM is directly linked to the extension of underground workings into the Turffontein Farm.

The Operational phase is linked to the on-going operations at the Buffelsfontein decline shaft(s) and the beneficiation operations at Mooinooi. The mitigation measures proposed as part of this process are based on the assumption that the existing environmental approvals for both Buffelsfontein East and Mooinooi are existing and satisfactory. Mitigations proposed as part of this process are either limited to underground workings of Turffontein or considered an extension of the measures forming part of the existing Buffelsfontein East and Mooinooi Section approvals.

For the purpose of this report, anticipated/potential impacts have been identified, although this was distinguished from a desktop approach. This approach also took into consideration typical impacts expected form a project of this nature. Each potential impact, and any additional potential impacts identified during the next process phase, will be assessed during the EIR Phase of the approval process. See Table 18 for project environemntal and social impacts identified in the scoping phase.

Table 18 - Potential Environmental and Social Impacts Identified during Scoping Phase

Environment Impact Descriptor/Discussion (negative/positive/ neutral overall impact) Geology The MG seams (specifically MG1 & 2, potentially more) will be mined out by Samancor. MG1 seam (located below MG2) of 1.24m will be mined out using supports and the MG2 will be mined out within three different sub-sections (unknown thickness). It can be assumed that the proposed project will result in the mining out of approximately 2-4 m of seam, which vary between different areas.

The MG reef occurs far below the existing Lonmin underground workings. The risk of collapse is mitigated by using conventional mining supports such as wooden support beams and pillar structures. The seam will be permanently removed from the local geology. Therefore further gain by future prospectors will be permanently removed.

In summary, geology impacts relate to the risk of collapse resulting from the existence of two different underground mine operations within one area; and permanent removal of an extricable resource.

Topography The Mine does not expect any waste rock to come to surface as the proposed project represents a continuation of underground workings from the adjacent farm.

Scoping Report

Environment Impact Descriptor/Discussion (negative/positive/ neutral overall impact) However, minimal waste rock may result from mining operations at Turffontein depending on the thickness and orientation of the seam.

Blasting may in some cases result in waste rock. Any waste rock generated by the project will be disposed at the existing Buffelsfontein East shaft facility WRD.

All Chrome ore extracted from the shaft(s) supporting the Turffontein underground workings will be transferred to the existing Mooinooi plant which will generate tailings. The additional material will result in an increased scale of the Mooinooi TSF. Increased height/extent of the Buffelsfontein WRD and the Mooinooi TSF will impact the immediate topography and possibly link to a visual impact.

The abovementioned impacts associated with the TSF and the WRD are indirectly associated with the proposed project. Due to the absence of any new surface structures associated with the project, there will be no direct impact on topography.

Air Quality There are no opencast or surface operations proposed therefore air quality impacts found at the existing Buffelsfontein and Mooinooi section operations will remain unchanged.

Due to the absence of any new surface activities or associated emissions associated with the project, there will be no impact on air quality.

Soil, Land Use Considering the existing land use in the area is dominated by Lonmin mining and Land activities, ad hoc community cattle grazing and mining associated residential Capability settlement as well as the fact that the mining method proposed is purely underground, the soil, land capability and land use dynamic will not be altered.

Hydrology and The proposed mining of the Turffontein farm will potentially affect the groundwater Hydrogeology environment in the following ways:

 Opening of Mine workings within the deeper aquifer will cause groundwater to flow into the workings. It is important to estimate and manage this inflow for the safety of the miners.  Groundwater inflow to the Mine workings may lower groundwater levels in both the shallow and deep aquifers over the workings. Therefore, the water level may drop in water supply boreholes near the proposed mining area. This may also affect baseflow contributions to surface water features.  During mining, the Mine will act as a groundwater sink and no contamination is expected. After mining is complete, the workings will flood. Contaminated water in the flooded workings may leak into the surrounding groundwater and cause a change in groundwater quality.

In addition, the additional water brought to the surface will need to be stored within the existing storage facilities of Samancor (at Buffelsfontein and Mooinooi Sections). Poor management of those facilities may result in overflows and an impact on surface water quality. The management of the existing water storage facilities will fall under the existing approvals held by Samancor.

Biodiversity Considering the additional underground dewatering activities proposed by Samancor, any base flow into surface streams may be impacted. Base flow into surface streams is not expected due to the non-perennial nature of the streams.

Furthermore, it is emphasised that although Merensky and UG2 reef mining is

Scoping Report

Environment Impact Descriptor/Discussion (negative/positive/ neutral overall impact) above that of the MG reef, the mining of the Merensky and UG 2 reefs (and associated dewatering requirements) would have already resulted in a cone of depression and possibly impacted any possible base flow. Dewatering deeper into the geology may not compound this potential (existing) impact.

As already described, a specialist hydrogeological study will be undertaken to understand potential impacts of dewatering on surface water systems. Specialist ecological impact assessment will only be necessary in the event that impacts on surface water features is identified.

Noise and Underground mining of the Turffontein farm will require blasting activities from Vibrations 300m to 650m below the surface level. Introducing additional underground workings at a depth greater than UG2 and Merensky, noise impacts on the surface are not expected to be notable by biodiversity and/or residence on the surface. Vibrations, if they reach the surface, are not expected to be felt by dwellings and/or biodiversity.

Existing noise and vibration emanating from the Buffelsfontein East and Mooinooi sections is and will continue to be managed under the existing environmental approvals.

Considering the existing baseline environment, the proposed project is expected to have minimal impact on the surface from a noise and vibration perspective.

Visual All proposed project activities will take place underground. All material extracted from the workings will end up as product from the beneficiation process, waste rock or tailings. The height of the TSF and WRD are taken into account by existing approvals. Any extensions to such dumps/facilities will be considered as a separate project, if required.

Due to the absence of any new surface activities there are no anticipated impacts on the visual / esthetic characteristics of the project area.

Archaeology, The proposed project will not disturb surface features therefore no impact is Historic and expected on any existing archaeology, historic and cultural features. Cultural A specialist study is contemplated. This will be a desktop review based on SAHRA and provincial heritage authority information. A full study will only be undertaken should the SAHRA request such - although this is considered unlikely because there are no surface features.

Socio-economic The majority of the communities within the immediate area as well as Rustenburg rely on mining activities either partly or wholly to make a living. The proposed project, considered an extension of existing operations, will ensure an extended LoM which translates into extended availability of mining related jobs by/for Samancor. The proposed project will not necessarily resuly in additional job opportunities, but rather an extension of the status quo.

Training opportunities are on-going and will continue into the LoM indefinitely. Extension of the LoM will further extend the availability of the training opportunities.

Proposed project information will be presented to the locals (including labour sources) to gain comment on the socio-economic impact expected from the proposed project. The proposed project does have a direct impact on the socio- economic environment.

Scoping Report

Findings of any specialist studies will be presented in the EIAR.

Cumulative Impacts

The direct and indirect impacts which are expected to result from the proposed project as well as the existing impacts caused by other mining operations in the area should be understood to make informed decisions. The impact of existing Lonmin workings is not quantitatively understood as an assessment of the Lonmin operations does not form part of the scope of this study however this study will consider those existing operations as far as practically possible and as far as deemed necessary by the proposed project.

iv) The possible mitigation measures that could be applied and the level of risk

(With regard to the issues and concerns raised by affected parties provide a list of the issues raised and an assessment/ discussion of the mitigations or site layout alternatives available to accommodate or address their concerns, together with an assessment of the impacts or risks associated with the mitigation or alternatives considered).

No mitigation measures have been included in this report, the proposed mitigation measures and recommendations will be included in detail in the draft EIAR. The draft EIAR will take into account EAP and specialist findings.

v) The outcome of the site selection Matrix. Final Site Layout Plan

(Provide a final site layout plan as informed by the process of consultation with interested and affected parties)

See Figure 44 and Appendix 3 which illustrate the high level plan showing the farm location in relation to the shaft and processing plant which will support the proposed project. In addition, Figures 45 and 46 Illustrate the current layout of the supporting shaft and processing plant.

Scoping Report

Figure 44 - Site layout plan

98 Scoping Report

Figure 45- Buffelsfontein East Section Layout (existing infrastructure)

Scoping Report

Figure 46: Mooinooi Section Site Layout (existing infrastructure) 100

Scoping Report

vi) Motivation where no alternative sites were considered

The Turffontein site is covered by an existing prospecting right on which vast exploration has been accomplished to date (not yet complete). The existence of a prospecting right and expenditure on feasibility reporting on the area makes the farm the only site consideration for the Applicant.

In addition, the existence of the shaft and beneficiation plant on adjacent farms makes the site the most preferred from a processing perspective. The site is considered energy efficient considering the transfer distance to the shaft and the plant.

vii) Statement motivating the preferred site

(Provide a statement motivation the final site layout that is proposed)

MG1 will be a conventional stoping layout. MG2 will be a board and pillar layout. This is the optimal layout; there are no material environmental and social implications associated with the layout; therefore no alternatives are being considered.

(i) Plan of study for the Environmental Impact Assessment process

i. Description of alternatives to be considered including the option of not going ahead with the activity.

Site Alternatives

The S&EIR process is not considering any site alternatives. See section above which provide reasoning.

Activity type Alternatives

As described in section (ii), underground mining is the only activity type which can be used to access the ore reserve. No activity type alternatives will be considered during the EIR Phase.

Design or Layout Alternatives

 MG1 Seam - As described in section (ii), conventional track based mining, with partial semi- trackless mining is the layout designed and contemplated by the project design team. The layout was selected based on the dimensions, the dip, the strike and ease of access of the ore body. Other methods may/will prove ineffective for the intended purpose.

 MG2 Seam - As described in section (ii), trackless Mining was elected for the purposes of mining out the three sub-sections of the MG2 reef/seams. The mobility of mechanised mining better suites the complexity and thickness of the MG2 seams.

Layout

As described in section (ii), MG1 Seam will be a conventional stoping layout, and MG2 Seam will be a board and pillar layout. No additional layout related alternatives have been considered.

Technology Alternatives

No alternatives other than conventional versus mechanised mining have been considered.

101 Scoping Report

More details will be provided within the EIAR regarding the positive and negative aspects of both mining methods.

No-go Alternative Alternatives

As described in section (ii) should the project not go ahead, the MG1 and MG2 resource under the Turffontein farm will remain untapped. The LoM will remain as is dictated by the life of the Mining Rights currently held by the company. The impacts associated with the No-Go alternative will be further elaborated during the EIR Phase.

ii. Description of the aspects to be assessed as part of the environmental impact assessment process

(The EAP must undertake to assess the aspects affected by each individual mining activity whether listed or not, including activities such as blasting, Loading, hauling and transport, and mining activities such as Excavations, stockpiles, discard dumps or dams, water supply dams and boreholes, accommodation, offices, ablution, stores, workshops, processing plant, storm water control, berms, roads, pipelines, power lines, conveyors, etc…etc…etc.).

The only aspect considered by the proposed project which will be assessed during the EIR Phase, is underground workings which involves: blasting; dewatering, sludge removal and cycling of water between surface and underground workings.

The Buffelsfontein East Section shaft (which has been identified as the ore extraction point) is existing and operational. The shaft will provide a WRD facility, power source, loading, hauling, water storage, offices, ablution, stores, workshops, storm water control infrastructure, roads linking the shaft to the road network and ultimately the processing plant, pipelines cycling water underground, ore conveyor, ore stockpiles (not necessarily silos).

The Mooinooi Section shaft (which has been identified as the ore processing plant) is existing and operational. The beneficiation plant will provide a concentration facility, TSF facility, process water storage and recycling facilities, a recovery plant to reprocess tailings, employee accommodation and office facilities, road transport, and other supporting infrastructure.

Furthermore, the Mooinooi Section will facilitate the transfer of Turffontein concentrate to the off-site smelting facilities.

The smelting facilities are not discussed further in this report. The smelting facilities form secondary processing of the ore, which leads to the generation of a ‘matte’ for later refining.

In summary, the directly related activities of the proposed project all pertain to underground workings and little direct impact on the surface (only related impact). The proposed project relies wholly on existing approved surface supporting infrastructure.

iii. Description of aspects to be assessed by specialists

Given that no surface infrastructure is proposed as part of the aplication, only a hydrogeological study and possibly a heritage impact assessment are proposed to determine the surface related impacts, if any, are associated with the proposed project.

The hydrogeological study will be undertaken by Solution[H+] and the potential heritage study by Archaetnos. Relevance of the heritage study is still to be confirmed.

102

Scoping Report

The following sections outline the methodologies proposed by the specialists:

Heritage study

Note: The heritage study will only be undertaken based on motivation between the scoping and EIR Phases. Should the study commence the following will be undertaken by the specialist:

 Identify as many objects, sites, occurrences and structures of an archaeological or historical nature (cultural heritage sites) located on the property as possible given the extent of the Farm;  Assess the significance of the cultural resources, if any, in terms of their archaeological, historical, scientific, social, religious, aesthetic and tourism value;  Describe the possible impact of the proposed project on the cultural remains, according to a standard set of conventions;  Propose suitable mitigation measures to minimise possible negative impacts on the cultural resources;  Recommend suitable mitigation measure should there be any sites of significance that might be impacted upon by the proposed project; and  Review applicable legislative requirements

Hydrogeological Study

The hydrogeological study will be undertaken by Solution[H+]. The following work will be conducted during the EIR Phase to understand the potential impact on surface and groundwater resources in the vicinity of the proposed project:

 Scientifically characterise the groundwater environment. This will be done through evaluating monitoring information from existing boreholes at Turffontein and reviewing the site geology. If necessary, additional boreholes will be drilled to provide site-specific measurements of geology, groundwater occurrence, and groundwater parameters such as hydraulic conductivity and transmissivity.  Develop a numerical groundwater model using the results of the characterisation. The model will allow the effect of the proposed mine to be mathematically simulated. The model will provide estimates of the volume of groundwater inflow to the mine workings and the potential lowering of groundwater levels around the workings, and how long it will take for groundwater levels to recover. The model will also estimate the potential leakage of contaminated water into the deeper aquifer after the workings have flooded.  Evaluate the results of the numerical simulations and develop measures to manage and mitigate significant groundwater impacts. A groundwater monitoring programme will be formulated to track changes in groundwater levels and quality during construction, operation, and after mine closure. This will allow groundwater impacts to be identified promptly so that they can be managed without delay.

iv. Proposed method of assessing the environmental aspects including the proposed method of assessing alternatives

As per Section (ii).

v. The proposed method of assessing duration significance

As per Section (ii).

103

Scoping Report

vi. The stages at which the competent authority will be consulted

The EAP will notify the competent authority via submission of the Environmental Authorisation application form (on 09/06/2016). The commenting authorities will be notified of the proposed project via notification letters. The notification letters will provide high level project information with a reference to the Draft Scoping Report. Comments received from any commenting authority at any stage in the process (prior to completion of the appeals process) will be considered and made known to the competent authority (DMR).

The EAP will arrange an authorities meeting with the DMR, to which the DWS, the Municipality and ward councillors will be invited. The date is yet to be confirmed and will be communicated to the authorities during the draft scoping report stakeholder review period. The meeting will be used to gain agreement on the process being followed and provide commitments for all parties involved during the authorisation process.

vii. Particulars of the public participation process with regard to the Impact Assessment process that will be conducted

1. Steps to be taken to notify interested and affected parties

(These steps must include the steps that will be taken to ensure consultation with the affected parties identified in (h) (ii) herein).

In accordance with the NEMA, GNR 982, Chapter 6, potential I&APs either have been or will be notified of the proposed project using the following means:

 Fixing a notice board in conspicuous areas around the proposed project site. In this case the boundary of the Turffontein farm was not deemed effective. As such, notices were erected within high population areas around the site;  Written notice to the: o Land owner of the site where the activity to which the application relates to; o The current occupier of the land; o Municipal ward councillor(s) related to the project site; o Municipality which has jurisdiction in the area; and o Commenting authorities.  Placing an advertisement in a local newspaper.

Refer to Section h(ii) for detail on the above.

2. Details of the engagement process to be followed

(Describe the process to be undertaken to consult interested and affected parties including public meetings and one on one consultation. NB the affected parties must be specifically consulted regardless of whether or not they attended public meetings and records of such consultation will be required in the EIA at a later stage).

Refer to Section h(ii).

3. Description of the information to be provided to Interested and Affected Parties

(Information to be provided must include the initial site plan and sufficient detail of the intended operation and the typical impacts of each activity, to enable them to assess what impact the activities will have on them or on the use of their land).

104

Scoping Report

During the initial stakeholder notification process, high level project detail will be provided including location of the project, boundary of the proposed project site, farm details, land use information, legal triggers and proposed way forward.

During the draft scoping report public review period, all information contained within this report will be provided to any interested party who wishes to review the report.

During the scoping phase public meeting, the following information will be presented to stakeholders verbally:

 Site Plans;  Alternatives;  A description of activities and operations to be undertaken;  Baseline information;  Specialist studies to be undertaken; and  Proposed impact assessment methods.

During the EIR Phase, the following information will be disclosed in the EIAR:

 Impact assessment undertaken and results thereof;  Management measures;  Monitoring plans; and  Closure objectives.

viii. Description of the tasks that will be undertaken during the environmental impact assessment process

Once the Final Scoping Report has been submitted to and accepted by the DMR, the proposed project will proceed into the detailed EIR Phase, which involves the detailed specialist investigations (as described in earlier sections of this report). The EAP will produce a Draft EIAR after the completion of the required specialist studies. The Draft EIAR will provide an assessment of all the identified key issues and associated impacts from the Scoping phase. All requirements as contemplated in the 2014 EIA Regulations will be included in the Draft EIAR.

105

Scoping Report

ix. Measures to avoid, reverse, mitigate, or manage identified impacts and to determine the extent of the residual risks that need to be managed and monitored

ACTIVITY POTENTIAL IMPACT MITIGATION TYPE POTENTIAL whether listed or not listed. FOR RESIDUAL (E.g. Excavations, blasting, (e.g. dust, noise, (modify, remedy, control, RISK stockpiles, discard dumps or drainage surface or stop) dams, Loading, hauling and disturbance, fly rock, through transport, Water supply dams surface water (e.g. noise control and boreholes, accommodation, contamination, measures, storm-water offices, ablution, stores, groundwater control, dust control, workshops, processing plant, contamination, air rehabilitation, design storm water control, berms, pollution etc….etc…) measures, blasting roads, pipelines, power lines, controls, avoidance, conveyors, etc…etc…etc.). relocation, alternative activity etc. etc)

E.g. Modify through alternative method. Control through noise control Control through management and monitoring through rehabilitation. No mitigation measures have been included in this report, the proposed mitigation measures and recommendations will be included in detail in the EIAR and EMPR. l) Other Information required by the competent Authority

i) Compliance with the provisions of sections 24(4)(a) and (b) read with section 24 (3) (a) and (7) of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of 1998). the EIA report must include the:-

(1) Impact on the socio-economic conditions of any directly affected person

(Provide the results of Investigation, assessment, and evaluation of the impact of the mining, bulk sampling or alluvial diamond prospecting on any directly affected person including the landowner, lawful occupier, or, where applicable, potential beneficiaries of any land restitution claim, attach the investigation report as Appendix 2.19.1 and confirm that the applicable mitigation is reflected in 2.5.3; 2.11.6.and 2.12.herein).

The proposed project is expected to have a positive to neutral impact on the socio-economic context of the area. A positive impact in respect of ensuring the required LoM is maintained which in turn results in job security for Samancor employees. A neutral impact in respect of the proposed project being an extension of an existing underground Mine therefore the proposed project is more of a production profile maintenance project rather than an increase in production capacity. The Samancor Social Labour Plan will be extended upon within the EIR Phase. EIR Phase Evaluation of the project impact will be contained within the EIAR. No ‘investigation report’ has been compiled.

106

Scoping Report

(2) Impact on any national estate referred to in section 3(2) of the National Heritage Resources Act

(Provide the results of Investigation, assessment, and evaluation of the impact of the mining, bulk sampling or alluvial diamond prospecting on any national estate referred to in section 3(2) of the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (Act No. 25 of 1999) with the exception of the national estate contemplated in section 3(2)(i)(vi) and (vii) of that Act, attach the investigation report as Appendix 2.19.2 and confirm that the applicable mitigation is reflected in 2.5.3; 2.11.6.and 2.12.herein).

The proposed project is focused upon underground workings. No additional supporting surface infrastructure is proposed as part of this application. However, a heritage impact assessment is contemplated by the EAP in order to extend the baseline knowledge of the impacted area. The undertaking of such a study is yet to be confirmed. Confirmation will be included in either the final Scoping Report or the Draft EIAR. There is no expected impact on surface archaeology as the underground Mine workings will occur at a depth of 300m to 650m. m) Other matters required in terms of sections 24(4)(a) and (b) of the Act

(the EAP managing the application must provide the competent authority with detailed, written proof of an investigation as required by section 24(4)(b)(i) of the Act and motivation if no reasonable or feasible alternatives, as contemplated in sub-regulation 22(2)(h), exist. The EAP must attach such motivation as Appendix 4).

The motivation for lack of consideration of site alternatives is presented within this report. The motivation is not presented as a separate stand-alone appendix.

107

Scoping Report

j) UNDERTAKING REGARDING CORRECTNESS OF INFORMATION

I Nigel Seed herewith undertake that the information provided in the foregoing report is correct, and that the comments and inputs from stakeholders and Interested and Affected parties have been correctly recorded in the report.

______Signature of the EAP DATE: 27 July 2016

k) UNDERTAKING REGARDING LEVEL OF AGREEMENT

I Nigel Seed herewith undertake that the information provided in the foregoing report is correct, and that the level of agreement with interested and Affected Parties and stakeholders has been correctly recorded and reported herein.

______Signature of the EAP DATE: 27 July 2016

108

Scoping Report

Appendices

109

Scoping Report

Appendix 1 – EAP Qualifications

110

Scoping Report

Appendix 2 – EAP CV

111

NIGEL SEED, B.Soc.Sc. EAP DIRECTOR (ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE), ENVIRONMENT & ENERGY

CAREER SUMMARY Nigel is a Director with 14 years’ environmental management and consulting experience in Southern Africa. Nigel is the Business Unit Manager of the Environmental Services Business Unit with the responsibility for professional teams in Durban, Johannesburg and Cape Town. Nigel’s technical expertise centres on pollution and waste issues and associated environmental projects in the industrial sectors. He has delivered major projects in the fields of planning and permitting, waste management, cleaner production, strategy and risk management, legal compliance, and environmental management systems. Nigel has diverse sectorial experience including mining and metallurgy (aluminium, gold, platinum, ferro-alloys, iron/steel and uranium); large-scale YEARS WITH THE FIRM thermal power generation; chemical manufacturing (pulp and paper, polymers, 13 petro-chemical and agri-chemical); manufacturing (FMCG, food & beverage); infrastructure (ports, road, rail electricity transmission); waste management and YEARS TOTAL agriculture.

15 EDUCATION

PROFESSIONAL Bachelor of Science (Honours), Social Science, 2000 QUALIFICATIONS Environmental Management & Geography, University of Natal, EAP Durban, South Africa

AREAS OF PRACTICE ADDITIONAL TRAINING Environmental Impact Diploma in AutoCAD 2000 Assessment Process

Environmental Impact PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS Assessments Legal Compliance Institute for Waste Management South Africa IWMSA Reviews International Association for Impact Assessment IAIA Environmental Certified Environmental Assessment Practioner EAP Management Plans & Systems, and PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Environmental Monitoring Waste Management Environmental Impact Assessment Process Crude Oil Refining à Cleaner Fuels Phase 2, South Africa, (2013): Project Director. ESIA/ESMP in terms Shell HSSE & SP impact assessment and social performance standards for modifications to the SAPREF refinery in order to achieve pending specifications for sulphur for both diesel and gasoline, and benzene and aromatics in gasoline. South Africa. Client: SAPREF. à Tetra Ethyl Lead Facilities Decommissioning Projects, South Africa (2012 - 2015): Project Director. Environmental risk assessment, ESMP and oversight of all environmental monitoring associated with the decommissioning of TEL handling and waste storage facilities at the SAPREF Refinery and Island View. South Africa. Client: SAPREF. NIGEL SEED, B.Soc.H., EAP

à East London Joint Depot Facility (JDF) Petroleum Storage Depot Transactional Environmental Due Diligence, South Africa (2015): Technical Lead. Environmental due diligence assessment of a large-scale petroleum products storage depot with key emphasis on buyer’s potential statutory, waste management, and subsurface contamination remediation liability. South Africa. Client BP SA (Pty) Ltd. à ENREF Environmental Risk and Integrity Assessment, South Africa (2014). Technical Lead. Determination of potential for Section 30 emergency incidents, appraisal of preventative and migratory measures, development of action plan, authority liaison and facilitation. Client: Engen Limited. à Environmental Legal Appraisal of Refinery Projects, South Africa (2012-2014). Technical Lead. Environmental and legal appraisal of projects viz. vertical deep well anode bed pipeline protection (2015), LL Extraction Column for BTEX reduction in CD2/3 de-salter effluent (2014), Sour Water Stripper and SRU-3 Coalescer replacement Projects (2012). KZN, South Africa. Client: SAPREF. à Waste Act Legal Review of SASOL Synfuels Refinery, South Africa (2013- 2014). Legal Specialist. Process block assessment of pre-identified unit processes and process streams at the SASOL Synfuels Refinery, development and application of criteria for the identification of legally defined wastes and activities requiring waste licenses. Client: SASTECH. à Industry Waste Management Plan for the South African Used Lubrication Oils Sector, South Africa (2015). Project Director. Preparation of an industry waste management plan as part of the ROSE Foundation extender producer responsibility (EPR) programme for the South African Lubrication Oil manufacturing sector. Client: ROSE Foundation. Mining and Metallurgy à Underground Chrome Mine, South Africa (2011): Project Director. ESIA for the establishment of an underground chrome mine targeting the Middle Group and Lower Group Reefs covering 28 500 hectares on the Farm Turfontein 462 JQ. Client: Samancor Chrome Ltd. à South Uranium Plant SX Circuit Replacement, South Africa (2011): Project Manager. EIA process for proposed solvent extraction plant replacement at Vaal River Operations. The SX process employs atmospheric acid leaching, counter current decantation and ion exchange systems to concentrate uranium leach liquor, which is then further upgraded and purified and reacted to produce ammonium di-uranate. Client: AngloGold Ashanti (Pty) Ltd.

à Smelter SO2 Abatement Projects, Polokwane / Rustenburg, Limpopo / North West Province, South Africa (2012): Technical Support. Technical support to the EIA process for proposed SO2 abatement equipment initiatives at the Polokwane and Mortimer Smelters. Client: Anglo American Platinum Ltd. à Desulpherisation Unit, Newcastle, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa (2006): Project Manager. EIA process for proposed upgrade of the desulphurisation unit and dust abatement system associated with the steel plant furnaces. Client: Arcelor Mittal South Africa Ltd. à 60 MVA Ferrosilicon Smelter, South Africa (2003): Project Manager. EIA Process for the proposed establishment of a 60 MVA ferrosilicon smelter. Client: Silicon Technology (Pty) Ltd.

– Page 2 of 7 NIGEL SEED, B.Soc.H., EAP

à Richards Bay Bulk Materials Handling Facility ESIA, South Africa (2003): Project Manager. Development of a Bulk Materials Handling Facility associated with the Port dry bulk terminal Import/export facilities. Client: Richards Bay Coal Distributors. Effluent and Waste Management à Netcare National Waste Management Strategy, South Africa (2015): Project Lead (Waste). Baseline waste management assessment of 70 of Netcare’s healthcare facilities including clinics and hospitals. Development of a national integrated waste management system and strategy. Client: Netcare Limited. à Healthcare Risk Waste Treatment Facilities, Pietermaritzburg, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa (2006-2009): Project Manager. EIA Process and Waste Management License for proposed static and mobile microwave disinfection units for the treatment of healthcare risk waste. Client: Ecocycle (Pty) Ltd. à Electron Road Regional Waste Transfer Station, South Africa (2005-2006): Project Manager. EIA process and waste management licensing for a 2400 ton per day regional waste transfer station. Client: Durban Solid Waste. à KwaDukuza waste disposal site, South Africa (2010): Project Manager. EIA process peer review associated with the proposed high hazard (H:H) permitting of the Kwadukusa waste disposal site. Client: Metamorphosis Environmental Consultants. à Illovo South Africa Waste Legislation Compliance Review and Strategy, South Africa (2010): Project Manager. Provision of technical waste management support to a legal (including Waste Act) assessment with Garlicke & Bousfield. The study included six Illovo Sugar facilities within KwaZulu-Natal including distilleries and mills. Client: Illovo Sugar South Africa Limited. à Waste Disposal Site Prefeasibility, South Africa (2010): Project Manager. Waste disposal site prefeasibility for ferrosilicon smelting operations. The determination of waste type, landfill class and associated CAPEX and OPEX was based on relevant DEA standards Client: Silicon Technology (Pty) Ltd. à Newcastle Works Effluent Buffering, South Africa (2009): Project Manager. EIA process associated with the implementation of effluent buffering capacity in order to address ammonia toxicity to the biological effluent treatment process. The project proposal entailed the use of an existing leachate dam associated with an existing high hazard (H:H) waste disposal site situated on the complex. Client: Arcelor Mittal South Africa Ltd. à AngloGold Waste Management Strategy, Vaal River, Gauteng, South Africa (2008): Project Manager. Development of a comprehensive waste management strategy for 27 business (mines, metallurgical plants, commercial services) units in the Vaal River and West Wits area (2003). In 2008 the strategy was updated to include the development of a comprehensive action plan for the management of hazardous waste. Client: AngloGold Ashanti (Pty) Ltd. à Lebowa Mining Complex Waste Management Strategy, South Africa (2008): Project Manager. Waste management baseline assessments, waste management strategies, and to develop detailed waste management procedures for the Lebowa Platinum Mine complex and the Polokwane Smelter. Client: Anglo American Platinum Ltd. à Umbogintwini Industrial Complex Effluent Balance, South Africa (2007-2008): Project Manager. Effluent balance and feasibility studies for additional marine

– Page 3 of 7 NIGEL SEED, B.Soc.H., EAP

effluent disposal capacity & associated water and energy recovery. Client: Heartland Leasing (Pty) Ltd. à Resource Recovery Facility – Uitenhage, Eastern Cape, South Africa (2007- 2008): Waste Management License / EIA process for the development of a resource recovery facility for the handling and treatment of hydrocarbon and organic effluents, various general and hazardous solid wastes. Client: Veolia Environmental Services (Pty) Ltd. à Effluent Treatment Facilities, South Africa (2007/8): Project Manager. ESIA/ESMP for effluent treatment facilities intended to address increasingly stringent sulphide limitations at the Southern Wastewater Treatment Works. Client: SAPREF. à Study on Priority Hazardous Waste Streams in the Western Cape, South Africa (2007): Project Manager. Development of the Best Practicable Environmental Options for priority hazardous waste streams in the Western Cape. Client: Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning. à Hazardous Waste Transfer Facility, Richards Bay, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa (2006): Project Manager. EIA Process for the proposed establishment of a hazardous waste transfer facility at the Richards Bay Dry Bulk Terminal. Client: Transnet Port Terminals. à Logmed® Medical Waste Facilities, South Africa (2002): Project Manager. Assessment of four alternative Medical Waste Treatment Facility sites within the eThekwini Municipality as part of an EIA process. Client: WasteMan (Pty) Ltd. Power à ESIA for the 120MW combined cycle gas turbine power project and associated Light Crude Oil and Natural Gas pipelines and storage facilities in the Tema Free Zone Enclave in Ghana (2016): Project Manager. Client: Atlantic Electric Company / LMI Holdings. à Photovoltaic, Concentrated Solar, and Wind Power Generation Facilities in Northern and Western Cape Provinces, South Africa (2015): project Director. ESIA for the Letsoai concentrated solar (300MW), Enamandla Solar PV (375MW), Maralla Wind (280MW) and Esizayo Wind (140MW) including associated 275kV / 400kV grid connections. Client: Biotherm Energy. à Gledhow Mill 11-18MW Biomass Energy Project, South Africa (2012): Project Manager. EIA processes for a renewable energy power project within the Gledhow Sugar Mill Complex. The project will comprise the installation of a biomass boiler and electricity generation plant with a capacity ranging from 11MW to 18MW which will be exported to the national grid. Client: Illovo Sugar Ltd. à Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Generation Facility, South Africa (2011): Project Director. Basic Assessment (BA) process for the proposed construction of a Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Generation Facility. Client: eThekwini Municipality Energy Office. à National Landfill Gas to Electricity Projects, South Africa (2009-2010): Project Manager. EIA process and waste management licensing of 17 landfill Gas to Electricity Clean Development Mechanism Projects. Client: CEF (Pty) Ltd. à Durban Solid Waste Landfill Gas to Electricity Projects, South Africa (2003- 2004): Project Manager. EIA process and waste management licensing of – Page 4 of 7 NIGEL SEED, B.Soc.H., EAP

landfill Gas to Electricity Clean Development Mechanism Projects at Bisasar Road, Mariannhill, and La Mercy landfill sites. Client: Durban Solid Waste. à Mozambique Gas Engine Power Project, Mozambique, Africa (2011): Technical Support. EIA process for the proposed Mozambique Gas Engine Power Plant (MGEPP) 140 – 170 Megawatt (MW) electricity generation facility in Ressano Garcia, Mozambique. Client: Sasol Technology (Pty) Ltd. à Sasolburg 180-200MW Combined Cycle Gas Engine Power Project, South Africa (2011): BAT Review and Waste Management Specialist. Open cycle power plant with an output capacity of approximately 180MW; future conversion to a combined cycle (heat recovery) which will generate an additional 20MW. Client: SASOL New Energy Holdings. à Sappi Saiccor 20MW Multi-Fuel Boiler, South Africa (2011): Project Director. EIA processes for the a) establishment of a high pressure 20MW coal and biomass boiler and associated infrastructure at the Sappi Saiccor Mill and upgrade of chemical recovery boiler in order to derive energy and chemical recovery benefits. Client: Sappi Southern Africa Limited. à Sappi Tugela 40MW CCGT Project, South Africa (2011): Project Director. EIA processes for a 40MW combined cycle gas-powered combustion turbine. Client: Sappi Southern Africa Limited. à Power Line Construction and Upgrading projects, South Africa (2001-2004): Project Manager. Various 132KV & 275KV electrical transmission line construction and upgrading projects in the eThekwini Municipality. Client: eThekwini Electricity Department. Food and Agriculture à Ubombo Mill Furfural project, Swaziland (2015): Project Director. ESIA process for the establishment of a greenfield furfural manufacturing plant associated with the Ubombo Sugar Mill. Project included the furfural manufacturing facility and associated utilities viz. boiler utilities, effluent treatment facilities, materials handling, and waste management infrastructure. Client: Illovo Southern Africa. à 200t/day Tea Factory, Kenya, Africa (2012): Project Manager. ESIA for a proposed 200t/day (made tea) tea factory in Kericho, Kenya. Partnership with Howard Humphries (Ltd.) in order to facilitate local regulatory processes. Client: Unilever Limited. à Yeast Plant Environmental Prefeasibility, Southern Africa (2011): Project Manager. Site selection and environmental feasibility for the establishment of a yeast manufacturing facility within the Southern African region. Client: AB Mauri Technology & Development Ltd. à Waste Management Licensing, Stanger, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa (2010): Project Manager. Waste Management License application and Scoping and EIA process for waste management activities at the Stanger Mill. Client: Sappi Stanger (Pty) Ltd. Chemicals Manufacturing à Anhydrous Hydrofluoric Acid Plant, South Africa (2012): Project Director. EIA Process associated with product diversification projects to optimize the internal use of intermediate products, and minimize site pollutants; entailing production of anhydrous hydrogen fluoride and aluminium trifluoride. Client: Foskor (Pty) Ltd.

– Page 5 of 7 NIGEL SEED, B.Soc.H., EAP

à MSMA Production, South Africa (2009): Project Manager. Technical, environmental and legal assessment of proposed mono sodium methyl arsenate (MSMA) at the CleanTech (Berlin) industrial facility. Client: Mzanzi Chemicals (Pty) Ltd. à PET Plant Debottlenecking - South Africa (2007-2008): Project Manager. Environmental duty of care assessment and integrated permitting (Scheduled Trade) procedure for PET production debottlenecking. Client: HOSAF (Pty.) Ltd. à Biodiesel Manufacturing, Berlin, Eastern Cape, South Africa (2007): Project Manager. EIA Process for proposed conversion of industrial facilities for the production of Biodiesel at the CleanTech (Berlin) industrial facility. Client. CleanTech Africa. à Industry Waste Management Plan, Western Cape, South Africa (2007): Project Manager. Provision of technical support to the development of an Industrial Waste Management Plan for the Consumer Formulated Chemicals Sector. Client: Western Cape Department of Environmental Affairs. à Ferromanganese Storage, Durban, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa (2006): Project Manager. EIA Process for the proposed relocation of ferromanganese handling facilities within the Port of Durban. Client: Transnet National Ports Authority. à Acrylic Emulsion Plant Debottlenecking, South Africa (2006): Project Manager. Proposed de-bottlenecking project involving several initiatives aimed at improving process efficiency related to water based acrylic and co-acrylic emulsions (Styrene Acrylic Emulsions) production. Client: Rohm and Haas (Pty) Ltd. à Solid State Polymerisation (SSP) plant upgrade, Durban, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa (2004): Project Manager. EMP and post construction audit for the construction of a Solid State Polymerisation (SSP) plant upgrade. Client: HOSAF (Pty.) Ltd. à Di Methyl Phthalate Plant Adaptation, South Africa (2003): Project Manager. Environmental appraisal of proposed Di Methyl Phthalate Plant adaptation project. Client: Orchem (Pty) Ltd. à Lignosulphonate Plant Construction Project. South Africa (2003): Environmental Control Officer. EMP, environmental monitoring and training for a greenfield lignosulphonate plant expansion project. Client: Lignotech (Pty) Ltd. Municipal Infrastructure à Outer West Roads Upgrades, South Africa (2005): Project Manager. EIA Process for strategic upgrading of key transportation routes in the eThekwini Municipality Outer West area. Client: eThekwini Roads Department. à Esidweni Low Cost Housing, South Africa (2003): Project Manager. Environmental prefeasibility and EIA Process for proposed development of the Esidweni low cost housing development at Umlazi. Client: eThekwini Housing Department. à Le Domaine Sewage Scheme, South Africa (2003): Project Manager. EIA for sewage treatment options for the Le Domaine retirement estate, Hillcrest, KwaZulu-Natal. Client: Le Domaine (Pty) Ltd.

– Page 6 of 7 NIGEL SEED, B.Soc.H., EAP

à Mpumalanga Eastern Trunk Sewer, South Africa (2002): Environmental Control Officer. EMP, environmental monitoring, training, and rehabilitation project management for the construction of the 4km Mpumalanga eastern trunk sewer. Client: eThekwini Wastewater Department / Stewart Scott Engineers. à Sewage Treatment Facilities, Durban, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa (2001): Project Manager. EIA Process for sewage treatment facilities associated with the redevelopment of the Rob Roy Hotel Site. Client: Alliance Property Group. Roads, Rail and Ports à Pemba Oil and Gas Port and Logistics Centre, South Africa (2014): Project Director. Environmental Screening and Site Selection, ESIA/ESMP Technical and Environmental Appraisal of an onshore 12000 hectare greenfield oil and gas logistics support base to the Rovuma offshore concession areas. Client: Sonils/ENH. à Transnet Rail Engineering Waste Management Strategies, South Africa (2011): Project Director. Development of an Industry Waste Management Plan for Durban and Koedoespoort Regions. Client: Transnet Rail Engineering. à Richards Bay Port Dry Bulk Terminal Waste Management Strategy, South Africa (2006): Project Manager. Development of waste management baseline assessment and development of a bulk material waste minimisation strategy for the Richards Bay Dry Bulk Terminal. Client: Transnet Port Terminals. à Richards Bay Port Dry Bulk Terminal Waste Transfer Station, South Africa (2006): Project Manager. EIA Process for the proposed establishment of a hazardous waste transfer facility at the Richards Bay Dry Bulk Terminal. Client: Transnet Port Terminals. à Durban Port Upgrades of Island View Berths 5 and 6. South Africa (2005): Environmental Control Officer. EMP and environmental auditing for the reconstruction of Island View Berths 5 and 6, Port of Durban. Client: Transnet Port Terminals. à Richards Bay Port Waste Management Strategy, South Africa (2004): Project Manager. Development of a waste management baseline assessment, waste management strategy, and strategy implementation guidelines for the Port of Richards Bay. Client: Transnet Port Terminals. à Durban Port Ore and Ferrochrome Facility EMS, South Africa (2007): Project Manager. Environmental management system for the Durban container, bulk ore and ferrochrome handling facilities. Client: Bridge Ports (Pty) Ltd. General à SAAB Gripen Legal Review, Durban, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa (2006): Project Manager. Activities associated with the introduction of the Gripen Aircraft into South Africa. Client: SAAB (c/o SAAB Sweden). à South African Police Services EMS. St. Lucia Wetland Park, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa (2007): Project Manager. Environmental management system for SAPS training facilities. Client: South African Police Services.

– Page 7 of 7 Scoping Report

Appendix 3 – Proposed Project Layout

112

.! .! .!

.! .!

SAMANCOR CHROME LIMITED Makolokwe .! PROPOSED PROJECT SITE Hartebeestpoort B 410- JQ !. Legend

!. Farms Tshukutswe .! Place Names Wonderkop Points 400- JQ !. Rivers Sonop .! .! N4 B Buffelsfontein East Section Mooinooi Section C Segwaelane West Buffelsfontein A .! Section Site Boundary Kafferskraal 460- JQ Parent Farm !. District Municipal Boundaries D E F Provincial Boundaries G H Waterberg NORTHERN PROVINCE Kareespruit Maretlwana Marikana Nkangala .! .! Middelkraal J Turffontein 466- JQ I 462- JQ !. !. .! .! Bojanala K ± NORTH WEST City of Tshwane L 0 400 800 1,200 1,600 2,000

Bapong-Skoolplaas Metres GAUTENG Boschfontien .! City of Johannesburg 458- JQ DATA SOURCE: West Rand Ekurhuleni !. Bapong-Legalaopeng CHIEF DIRECTORATE: NATIONAL GEO- .! SPATIAL INFORMATION Buffelsfontien PROJECTION: WGS HARTEBEESHOEK 94 Sedibeng M 465- JQ PROJECT TITLE: PROPOSED TURFONTIEN PROJECT EMPR AMENDMENT CO ORDINATE SYSTEM: WGS HARTEBEESHOEK 94 !. Bapong-Newtown .! PROJECT NO: 47910 Bapong-Nommer 1 SCALE: 1:75,000 AT A4 DATE: 29/04/2016 Tornado-Modderspruit .! DRAWN BY: SABELO DUBE FIGURE NO: .! REVIEWED BY: JARED O' BRIEN Elandsdrift Elandsdrift 467- JQ 469- JQ !. !.

Majakaneng WWW.WSP-PB.COM Modderspruit Groenkloof .! .! DISCLAIMER 464- JQ The information on this figu re was derived from variou s digital databases available to WSP Environmental (Pty) Ltd. All information is provided “as is” and it mu st be acknowledged that data, information, and maps are dynamic and in a constant state of !. maintenance, correction and u pdate. WSP Environmental (Pty) Ltd cannot accept any responsibility for errors, omissions, or positional accu racy where it has not been directly responsible for the produ ction of the data referenced. There are no warranties, expressed or implied, as to the u se of this information, inclu ding the warranty of Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, m erchantability or fitness for a particu lar pu rpose. Notification of any errors will be AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community appreciated. .! Scoping Report

Appendix 4 (Blank)

113

Scoping Report

Appendix 5 – Stakeholder Engagement Records

114

SCOPING AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTING PROCESS SAMANCOR CHROME LIMITED, NEAR MOOINOOI, NORTH WEST PROVINCE

WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff ref: 47910 DMR ref: NW 30/5/1/2/3/2/1/ (10109) EM

Notice is given in terms of Chapter 6 of Government Notice Regulation (GNR) 982 (4 December 2014) published under the National Environmental Management Act (No. 107 of 1998), as Amended, (NEMA), read with Section 39 of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002 (Act No. 28 of 2002) (MPRDA), for the submission of an application for an environmental Authorisation in respect of activities identified in terms of GNR 984 (4 December 2014)

Samancor Chrome Limited (Samancor), proposes to establish a new underground mining area on The contact details of the EAP are as follows: the farm Turffontein 462 JQ (Figure 1 - red polygon). Approximately 175 million tons of chrome ore has been identified within the Turffontein farm exploration area. The ore is contained within eight Name: Jared O’Brien mineral seams, including MG0, MG, MG1, MG2A, MG2B, MG2C, MG3 and MG4. The tonnages Tel: 011 361 1396 expected are ‘indicated’ (not ‘actual’). The estimations are based on 500 m by 500 m grids drilled by Fax: 086 505 3939 the company. E-mail: [email protected] Address: PO Box 98867, Sloane Park, 2152 Prospecting related sampling is currently ongoing. Of the 175 million tons of ore quantified, 46 million met the criteria and are contained in MG2 and MG1 which forms the mineable/viable seams. You are invited to review the draft Scoping Report that will be placed on public review for a period Only once prospecting activities have reached completion will the indicated values shift to the of 30 days, at the following venues: Mooinooi Section main entrance, Segwaelane Primary School, ‘measured stage’. The mining method that will be employed to extract the MG1 on the Turffontein Johane Mokolobetsi Secondary School and the Mooinooi Spar. In addition the draft report will farm will be the conventional breast mining method. The MG2 seam will be extracted via the appear on WSP’s website (url: http://www.wsp-pb.com/en/WSP-Africa/What-we-do/Services/All- trackless board and pillar method. Services-A-Z/Technical-Reports/). In order to ensure you are notified of the draft report public review dates, kindly ensure that your details are forwarded to the EAP. Registered stakeholders will The proposed undermining of the Turffontein 462 JQ farm will not require any additional surface be notified of the public review period via email, facsimile and/or SMS notification. infrastructure. The underlying ore will be accessed through an existing decline shaft at the Samancor Buffelsfontein East Section (Figure 1 - green polygon) (part of the Western Chrome Mines). From the shaft, the ore will be transferred to the existing Mooinooi Section (Figure 1 - blue polygon) where the ore will be processed to form a concentrate ready for transporting to one of three off-site Samancor Smelters (smelters not depicted on figure).

The Turffontein 462 JQ farm is not included within Samancor’s current mining right limits. In order, to gain the mineral rights (only related to the MG seams) the company has submitted a Mining Right application to the Department of Mineral Resources in accordance with Section 22 of the MPRDA. Therefore, the proposed project is a listed activity for which an Environmental Authorisation is required in terms of the 2014 Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations.

The listed activity reads as follows, “Any activity including the operation of that activity which requires a mining right as contemplated in section 22 of the MPRDA, including associated infrastructure, structures and earthworks, directly related to the extraction of a mineral resource, including activities for which an exemption has been issued in terms of section 106 of the MPRDA”.

The application for Environmental Authorisation requires a Scoping and Environmental Reporting process, with successful completion and approval thereof, before commencement.

The Environmental Authorisation process includes consultation with parties that may be affected by, or have an interest, in the project. The purpose of this notice is to notify potential interested and affected parties (I&AP) of the commencement of the Scoping and Environmental Reporting process. Parties wishing to formally register as an I&AP are requested to forward their full contact details to Jared O’Brien at the details provided below. Registered I&APs will be notified of additional opportunities to participate in the process.

Figure 1: Proposed Project Site (red polygon = Turffontein 462 JQ)

PAGE 8 RUSTENBURG HERALD 22 JULY 2016 ‘Die Van Wyks kom ‘n lang pad’… sê oom Roelof RUSTENBURG HERALD - ELANDSKRAAL - ‘n Onenigheid tussen ‘n klompie die oupa van mnr (oom) Roelof van Wyk prysgeldjie ingepalm. Toe dit tyd was om die Voortrekkers in Rustenburg in dié destydse dorpie se pioniersjare is sekerlik vir die van Elandskraal – vandag sekerlik een van skoolbanke vaarwel toe te roep, het oom Roelof meeste mense van vandag betreklik betekenisloos. die bekendste en mees gerespekteerde gemeen hy gaan met “ondervinding” boer – Behalwe vir geskiedenisskrywers is daar Potgieter en Pretorius wat in Rustenburg broodboomversamelaars in Suid-Afrika, daarom dat hy besluit het om BSc Landbou seker nie baie mense wat vandag nog tot ‘n geskiedkundige ooreenkoms gelei suider Afrika, die vasteland self en waarskynlik aan die Universiteit van Pretoria te gaan hierin sou belangstel nie. Maar tog het dié het, groot “bekendheid” verwerf. Die ook ter wêreld. Oom Roelof soos ons met studeer. Die feit dat oom Roelof die eerste kind befaamde relletjie tussen die Trekkerleiers ooreenkoms is destyds op die presiese hom kennis gemaak het, sal egter nie vir ‘n van die destydse Wagpos Hoër-landbouskool grond van voormalige oomblik huiwer om jou “reg te help” deur te geword het om in daardie jare universiteit toe Hervormde Kerk sê “ek weet ook nie alles nie – niemand weet te gaan, het nog ‘n onderskeiding geword. Hy Rustenburg in alles nie…” het sy BSc-graad in 1956 verwerf. *RPROHPR$FDGHP\ 37< /WG Kerkstraat beklink. Maar in kort soos ons mense graag op In 1964 is oom Roelof se vader oorlede en QIRU-XO\WLOO$XJXVW Maar ‘n paar jaar half komiese wyse in Afrikaans sê – wat oom hy moes plaas toe om te kom boer – as derde HJLVWUDWLR of wat voordat die Roelof van broodbome vergeet het, moet die oudste was dié voorreg hom beskore omdat 2SHQIRU5 twee “groot manne” meeste mense nog leer. sy oudste broer (Piet) feitlik ‘n internasionaal- O ce hours for registration!!!! met die lang baarde Hier aan die suidelike hange van die bekende botanikus was wat velerlei boeke .PO5IVt'SJt4BU egter sou hand Magaliesberg net ‘n hanetreetjie anderkant die oor die bome van Suid-Afrika (onder meer die Please come and book your seat to avoid disappointment. skud, het ‘n groepie skone Buffelspoortdam, het oom Roelof oor Kruger-wildtuin) die lig laat sien het en hom Please visit our o ces for more information. van 17 trekkers en die afgelope net meer as 33 jaar een van die intussen in Australië gevestig het. Die tweede hul families van gesaghebbendste broodboomversamelings broer (Willem) was ewe-vermoënd en het -FZET4USFFU 3VTUFOCVSH die Potgietertrek in Suid-Afrika tot stand gebring en behoorlik hom as ingenieur bekwaam – hy was in latere 5FM weggebreek en laat bloei. Maar dit is deel van ‘n lang storie… jare die besturende direkteur van die Yster- ooswaarts in die Oom Roelof was die derde geslag Van Wyk- en Staalreus – Yskor. rigting van vandag seuns om op die plaas Elandskraal gebore te So, oom Rolof beland in 1964 op die plaas se Buffelspoort- word. Hy was een van vyf broers en ‘n suster Elandskraal nadat hy en sy eggenote (Ulza) vir Mooinooi waarvan vandag nog vier kinders leef. In ‘n aantal jaar as landbouvoorligtingsbeamptes (Elandskraal) getrek die destydse jare was daar op omtrent elke by die destydse departement Landbou gewerk waar die groep plaas ‘n plaasskooltjie – so het oom Roelof sy het. Hier boer hulle met hoofsaaklik sitrus, vir hulself grond eerste kennismaking met boeke (behalwe die papajas, katoen, mielies, grondboontjies, geokkupeer het. Bybel natuurlik) aan die Elandskraalskooltjie perskes, appelkose, avokados en natuurlik Op 2 Junie 1842 te danke. Die Laerskool Elandskraal op beeste – dit was totdat die broodboomgogga het ene Louis van Mooinooi het vandag nog die naam, hoewel hom presies 33 jaar gelede gebyt het, en niks Wyk vir hom die dit natuurlik nie meer dieselfde gebou is nie. was daarna ooit weer dieselfde nie. (Blaai na -,&$&$'(0<2)/($51,1* plaas Elandskraal Vir sy hoërskooljare moes oom Roelof bladsy 16 en lees verder) net buite Mooinooi en sy broers na Wagpos op Brits 7UDLQLQJ&RXUVHV$YDLODEOH geokkupeer. wat in daardie dae by uitstek ‘n Dieselfde nag nog, landbouskool was omdat, wel %ODVWLQJ&HUWL¿FDWHV het Louis se vrou omdat ons mense van daardie geboorte gegee jare maar grotendeels boere was. 6KLIW6XSHUYLVRUV aan Louis (Snr) se Oom Roelof onthou goed hoe seun (Louis Jnr) wat ‘n onderwyser van daardie tyd, toevallig die eerste ene Pollie Roux – die kinders se 0LQH2YHUVHHUV blanke kind was wat belangstellling in hul omgewing in die destydse Suid- aangewakker het deur ‘n prys van )RUIXUWKHULQIRUPDWLRQSOHDVHFRQWDFW6RORPRQ Afrika noord van die 50c aan te bied vir die kind wat in .KXPRHQJ Magaliesberg gebore ‘n spesifieke tyd, week, maand of is. seisoen, die meeste verskillende 7HOHSKRQH1R Louis Jnr se broer tipes grasse bymekaar kon maak. 0ROHQ6WUHHW%R'RUS5XVWHQEXUJ Piet van Wyk (hulle Oom Roelof en sy broers (Piet (PDLO$GGUHVV6RORPRQ.KXPRHQJ#MLFFR]D was vyf seuns) was en Willem) het gereeld hierdie Roelof en Ulza van Wyk van Elandskraal.

6&23,1*$1'(19,5210(17$/,03$&75(3257,1*352&(66

127,&(2)7+(352326('(67$%/,6+0(172)$1(:81'(5*5281'0,1,1* $5($%<6$0$1&25&+520(/,0,7('217+()$50785))217(,1-4 :63_3$56216%5,1&.(5+2))5() '055() 1: (0 1RWLFHLVJLYHQLQWHUPVRI&KDSWHURI*RYHUQPHQW1RWLFH5HJXODWLRQ *15 'HFHPEHU SXEOLVKHGXQGHUWKH1DWLRQDO(QYLURQPHQWDO0DQDJHPHQW$FW 1RRI DV$PHQGHG 1(0$ UHDGZLWK6HFWLRQRIWKH0LQHUDODQG3HWUROHXP5HVRXUFHV'HYHORSPHQW$FW $FW1RRI 035'$ IRUWKHVXEPLVVLRQRIDQDSSOLFDWLRQIRUDQHQYLURQPHQWDO $XWKRULVDWLRQLQUHVSHFWRIDFWLYLWLHVLGHQWL¿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

/(*$/&217(;7 %26&+2(.-4+$6%((1/2'*(':,7+7+( 7KH7XUIIRQWHLQ-4IDUPLVQRWLQFOXGHGZLWKLQ6DPDQFRU¶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³$Q\DFWLYLW\ LQFOXGLQJWKHRSHUDWLRQRIWKDWDFWLYLW\ZKLFKUHTXLUHVDPLQLQJULJKWDVFRQWHPSODWHGLQVHFWLRQ RIWKH035'$LQFOXGLQJDVVRFLDWHGLQIUDVWUXFWXUHVWUXFWXUHVDQGHDUWKZRUNVGLUHFWO\UHODWHGWR WKHH[WUDFWLRQRIDPLQHUDOUHVRXUFHLQFOXGLQJDFWLYLWLHVIRUZKLFKDQH[HPSWLRQKDVEHHQLVVXHGLQ WHUPVRIVHFWLRQRIWKH035'$ 7KHDSSOLFDWLRQIRU(QYLURQPHQWDO$XWKRULVDWLRQUHTXLUHVD6FRSLQJDQG(QYLURQPHQWDO5HSRUWLQJ 6 (,5 SURFHVVZLWKVXFFHVVIXOFRPSOHWLRQDQGDSSURYDOWKHUHRIEHIRUHFRPPHQFHPHQW

67$.(+2/'(55(*,675$7,21 :63(QYLURQPHQWDO 3W\ /WGKDVEHHQDSSRLQWHGE\6DPDQFRUDVWKHLQGHSHQGHQW(QYLURQPHQWDO 1(('$&$5%$..,(758&." $VVHVVPHQW3UDFWLWLRQHU ($3 WRPDQDJHWKH6 (,5SURFHVV7KHSURFHVVLQFOXGHVFRQVXOWDWLRQ ZLWKSDUWLHVWKDWPD\EHDIIHFWHGE\RUKDYHDQLQWHUHVWLQWKHSURSRVHGSURMHFW7KHSXUSRVHRI WKLVQRWLFHLVWRQRWLI\SRWHQWLDOLQWHUHVWHGDQGDIIHFWHGSDUWLHV , $3 RIWKHFRPPHQFHPHQWRIWKH 6 (,5SURFHVV3DUWLHVZLVKLQJWRIRUPDOO\UHJLVWHUDVDQ, $3DUHUHTXHVWHGWRIRUZDUGWKHLUIXOO FRQWDFWGHWDLOVWR-DUHG2¶%ULHQDWWKHGHWDLOVSURYLGHGEHORZ5HJLVWHUHG, $3VZLOOEHIRUZDUGHG DOOIXWXUHFRUUHVSRQGHQFHDQGQRWLILHGRIDGGLWLRQDORSSRUWXQLWLHVWRSDUWLFLSDWHLQWKHSURFHVV7KH FRQWDFWGHWDLOVRIWKH($3DUHDVIROORZV 1DPH -DUHG2¶%ULHQ 3KLOOLS 7HO )D[ (PDLO -DUHG2%ULHQ#ZVSJURXSFR]D $GGUHVV32%R[6ORDQH3DUN 38%/,&5(9,(:2)'5$)76&23,1*5(3257

NOTICE OF THE PROPOSED ESTABLISHMENT OF A NEW UNDERGROUND MINING AREA BY SAMANCOR CHROME LIMITED ON THE FARM TURFFONTEIN 462 JQ

WSP | PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF REF: 47910 DMR REF: NW 30/5/1/2/3/2/1/ (10109) EM

PROJECT DESCRIPTION Samancor Chrome Limited (Samancor) proposes to establish a new underground mining area on Turffontein 462 JQ. The proposed undermining of the Turffontein 462 JQ farm will not require any additional surface infrastructure at this stage in the project. The underlying ore will be accessed through an existing decline shaft at the Samancor Buffelsfontein East Section (part of the Western Chrome Mines). From the shaft, the ore will be transferred to the existing Mooinooi Section where the ore will be processed to form a concentrate ready for transporting to one of three off-site Samancor Smelters.

LEGAL CONTEXT The Turffontein 462 JQ farm is not included within Samancor's current mining right limits. In order, to gain the mineral rights (only related to the MG seams) the company has submitted a Mining Right application to the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR) in accordance with Section 22 of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002 (Act No. 28 of 2002) (MPRDA). Therefore, the proposed project is a listed activity for which an Environmental Authorisation is required in terms of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations. GNR 984 (17) states, “Any activity including the operation of that activity which requires a mining right as contemplated in section 22 of the MPRDA, including associated infrastructure, structures and earthworks, directly related to the extraction of a mineral resource, including activities for which an exemption has been issued in terms of section 106 of the MPRDA.

The application for Environmental Authorisation requires a Scoping and Environmental Reporting (S&EIR) process, with successful completion and approval thereof, before commencement.

STAKEHOLDER REGISTRATION WSP Environmental (Pty.) Ltd. has been appointed by Samancor as the independent Environmental Assessment Practitioner (EAP), to manage the S&EIR process. The process includes consultation with parties that may be affected by, or have an interest, in the proposed project. The purpose of this notice is to notify potential interested and affected parties (I&AP) of the commencement of the S&EIR process. Parties wishing to formally register as an I&AP are requested to forward their full contact details to Jared O'Brien at the details provided below. Registered I&APs will be forwarded all future correspondence, and notified of additional opportunities to participate in the process. The contact details of the EAP are as follows:

Name: Jared O'Brien Tel: 011 361 1396 Fax: 086 505 3939 E-mail: [email protected] Address: PO Box 98867, Sloane Park, 2152

PUBLIC REVIEW OF DRAFT SCOPING REPORT You are invited to review the draft Scoping Report that will be placed on public review for a period of 30 days, at the following venues: Mooinooi Section main entrance, Segwaelane Primary School, Johane Mokolobetsi Secondary School and the Mooinooi Spar. In order to ensure you are notified of the draft report public review dates, kindly ensure that your details are forwarded to the EAP. Registered stakeholders will be notified of the public review period via email, facsimile and/or SMS notification. Full Name Organisation Syd Absolom Samancor Limited: Bhp Billiton Madeleine Horn Anglo Platinum Stan Anderson Afrox David Bell Afrox Rustenburg - Salesperson Andy Birtles SRK Consulting Air Pollution Control Standards Specialist Witold Bryzewski Management & Consulting Services PS Buys Xstrata Wonderkop Chrome Division Riaan Cilliers Xstrata Rustenburg Andre Cordier Ptn 46 Chris De Bruyn North West Ecoforum Dr David de Waal Afrosearch Executive Director H de Wet Samancor Fanie De Wit Omega Risk Solution - Chief Operating Officer Ockert Douglas Shaft Sinkers (SDM) - General Manager J Du Plessis Hernic Ferrochrome - Manager Mining Services Pierre Du Plessis Afrox VS Edwards Xstrata Wonderkop Steve Monty Ferreira - Karen Field D48 Groenkloof, Old Rustenburg Road, Mooinooi Heather Flemming Samancor Limited Western Chrome - Mines Manager K Fourie - Ockie Fourie Omega Risk Solution Hennie Geyer Geometals Refineries (NNM) - Manager David Giese Blackfriars Court Investment Holdings Limited - Director Mike Goosen Lonmin Platinum Division (LPD) Nanette Hattingh Groundwater Consulting Services Ben Hefer Hernic Ferrochrome - Quality and Environmental Officer Paul Herbst Department of Water Affairs and Forestry Head Office Erich Heymann Anglo Platinum - Group Environmental Consultant Johan Japp - Justin Japp Tony Jooste TFJ Engineering Services (Traffic) D Jordaan Hernic Ferrochrome - Services Manager Bheki Khumalo Lonmin Platinum Division (LPD) W Leroux - Sid Levinson National Manganese Mines D Lottering DFL PARANANE Unemployment Organisation Jack Louis Hernic Ferrochrome Peter McElligott Lonmin Adrian Sinovich Protea Valley Trading 9 (Pty) Ltd Amanda Magro Xstrata Wonderkop Chrome Division Jacobus Malan Anglo Platinum Francois Malherbe Acoustic Consulting Full Name Organisation The Manager Gracepoint Accommodation Adelaine Manake Department of Water Affairs and Forestry Head Hartebeespoort Anton Mauve Divisional Environmental Manager - West Platinum Jaco Meyer Xstrata George Mogale Bapo Ba Mogale - Community Representative Norbert Mohl - Andries Mouton African Mining Trust Suan Mulder Impala Platinum Ltd Walter Murray Samancor Limited Kuda Ngoma Afrox Chris Oertel Pyromet Technologies - Director Business Development Elize Oosthuizen Mooinooi Police Station Jasper Pieters Hernic Ferrochrome - Operations Director Dick Putter - Gordon Ramsay Kroondal Platinum Mine Ralph Rossouw Samancor Chrome Ltd Ferrometals Franz Schmidt Samancor Chrome Ltd Ferrometals - Ferrobank Hennie Schoeman Schoeman en Venote

Shawn Shanahan Afrox Rustenburg - Salesperson Roger Smith Samancor Peter Stephanis Pyromet - Project Manager Manfred Suhr Kroodal Environmental Forum T.A Tromp Minco Harry Van Aswegen Northwest Recycling Jaques B van Blerk Metix Marinda van der Merwe Divisional Environmental Manager - East Platinum Z Van der Walt SA Chrome - Director of Ferrochrome Ltd P Van Wyk - Kirby Vermaak Afrox Rustenburg - Customer Sales Manager HN Verryne - J Visser Hernic Ferrochrome - Production Manager Susan Visser Xstrata Rustenburg - Environmental Officer H Wenhold Casmar Nursery Chris Wimbury Rustenburg Medical Association Gerhard Viljoen - W Attwell SAPD Mooinooi TG Barnard Caide Bawlow Wester Chrome Mines Sybrandt Blydeveldt -

AJP Bosch - B Bosch - Deon Briel - Full Name Organisation PJ Buys -

Jan Coetzee Coetzee Produkte Marelize de Roux - Peter De Vasconcellos Andru Mining Hilgard de Wet - Peet de Wet Omega Risks Solutions Robert Douglas Buffelshoek Irrigation Board Sue Elsey DPR Elna Ferreira - Heather Fleming Wester Chrome Mines Simon Forster Development Planning and Research CH Fourie - JJ Fourie - HA Gebhardt - CJ Hutton - N Kepadisa - Charles Kgosiemang Bapo Ba Mogale - Community Representative Frank Khala - Andre Korp Mariakana Farmers Association - Secretary Johann Kruger Machadam Combined School J Kuhn - Frans H Kuhne Kuhne Vegetables Jan Kuijers Die Wa Nursery PM Le Roux - Sonja Lemmer Lonmin Platinum Sam Lewyakwane Wester Chrome Mines Johan Lubbe Shaft Sinkers (SDM) - Mining Director Ronnie Mabale Bapo Ba Mogale - Community Representative P Marais Xstrata Rustenburg Douglas McCarthy - Miss CMS Minnaar - Sarel Minnaar - David Molefe Community Development Forum: Phophemfi - Bleskop Area Mandy Momberg Magaliesburg Protection Association Zeblon Moraka Modderspruit - Community Representative BM Ngakaemang - E Ngoepe National Union of Mineworkers (NUM): Rustenburg Region Basie Niemandt Freedom Front Moleboheng Gr Ngetho Mooinooi - Community Representative Harry Oostdam Oostburg International Flowers Alan Page - Solly Phetoe Environmental Justice Networking Forum - Chairperson Full Name Organisation Anna Potgieter - Kobus Pretorius - W Pretorius - W. Pretorius - Patrick Pringle Legal Resources Centre Hennie Prinsloo - Herman Prinsloo Elandskraal Panelbeaters W Prinsloo - MA Puleng - Lizzy Rabeng - DW Rall - Vera Roberts - Goodman Salukazana Wester Chrome Mines Christa Schimper Impala Platinum Ltd Johan Schoeman Rustenburg Rate Payers Association Hilary Seeley - Sipho Sibilanga - Ms D Sipos - Mark Stanton - Dave Starley Kroondal Platinum Mine - Mine Manager JH Steenkamp - Dr Paul Swart Olifantsnek Landowner Association Edith Tukakgomo Madibeng Local Municipality Nicholson Tyesi - Peter Van De Walt Jasmyn Shop - Owner PJ Van Der Walt Philnes Workshop Marikana Teuns van Staden - Dr Van Wyk Mooinooi Diere Kliniek Willem Van Wyk - C Van Zyl - Dick Venter Chrisick Construction (Transport) Hennie Venter Marikana Platinum Mine Leon Weber Magalieskruis Grain Cooperative Ltd Neville Wenhold - Walter Wobben - John Young North West Agricultural Union - Chairman Priscilla Daina Mamogwe Ward Councillor (32) Mamogihake Euphonia Moatshe Ward Councillor (25) Frans Rapulana Mogaki Olerelle Trade and Invest (Pty) Ltd Mr Innocent Sirovha Municipal Manager Bonjala Platinum District Municipality Execuive Secretary of Municipal Manager Bonjala Platinum District Tsholofelo B Dikgole Municipality M.E Makhabane Segwaelane Primary School Full Name Organisation - Segwaelane Clinic S.K Tlholoe Sedupe Primary School S. Thage Thaba Morula High School Our Lady Of Perpertual Help Catholic Church Jennifer Nkete Tsogang Lo Direle bana Sewing Project Dorcas Matlou Kgatelopele Chicken and Eggs Project AP Conradie Modderfontein Irrigation Board - Chairman Christoph Wichmann Kuhne Vegetables - Manager Christoph Penzhorn Rustenburg District Agriculture Union - Chairman Dawid Bezuidenhout - Dr A Du Plessis - Dr CM Alberts - Dr N Sein Rustenburg Provincial Hospital - Medical Officer Dr SJ Barnard - Elsa Novrega Madeira Café - Manager Geodfrey Mabeo - Gideon Deysel Head Office Total Garage (along N4) - Manager Hove Wood Rustenburg Chamber of Commerce and Industry - Manager Jacob Erasmus - OG Leeuw - Paul Prinsloo - PJ Matiti - RJ Van Wyk Agrelek Marnet Radio (Local broadcasting radio) Rudolf Delport - Stuenie Raads Groenkloof General Dealers The Secretary Mfidikwe Photsaneng Thekwane Development Committee JM Petlele Bapo Ba Mogale Tribal Authority Alan Doyle Transvaal Ferrochrome Limited - Director Dyrick Hobbs Engineering On-line

Dr R Kruger Radiologist Daniel November North West South African Heritage and Resource Agency Julius Pistorius Archaeologist Diseko Sebastiaan Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Environment Isaac Madonsela Majakaneng - Community Representative Grace Maleba Modderspruit - Community Representative Onica Mathuluse Majakaneng - Community Representative Anderson Banda Madibeng Local Municipality SA Byldeveldt Samancor Justin Jack - George Khondlo SAPS Mooinooi LSH Mataboge Modderspruit Community (SANCO) Bigboy Miller SAPS Mooinooi Full Name Organisation Cecilia Nakin Community Member Joshua Ramakhula Majakaneng - Community Representative T Sunder JABM Luise Tembe Majakaneng - Community Representative BD Msomi National Department of Agriculture: Land use and Soil Management National Department of Environment and Tourism: Pollution and Ms Zanele Mvusi Waste Management National Department of Environment and Tourism: Environmental Ms Lize McCourt Impact Management National Department of Environment and Tourism: Air Quality Mr Peter Lukey Management and Climate Change National Department of Environment and Tourism: Biodiversity and Willeen Olivier Conservation J Kitto South African Heritatge Resource Agency Nametso Kgabileng Department of Water and Sanitation Mr Leon Bredenhann National Department of Environment and Touris: Waste Management Lungiswa Nonkomo NWREAD Portia Kristan NWREAD Motshabi Mohlalisi NWREAD Mr Mafu Nkosi North West Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Environment Mr Sebastian Diseko Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Environment Aaron Kharivhe North West Department of Minerals and Energy North West Department of Health: Rustenburg District North West Department of Transport, Roads and Community Safety: Mr LF Masenya Director of Eastern Region Motlhabane Mosiane North - West PHRA KATHRYN SMUTS North West: SAHRA Phillip Hine North West: SAHRA Daniel November North West: SAHRA Mr P Venter North West Department of Water Affairs and Forestry B Molebatsi Head Office: Heritage House in Mafikeng Bojanala Platinum District Municipality: Local Economic Development, EM Molotsi Tourism and Job Creation Cllr. Gugulethu Mtshali Bojanala Platinum District Municipality (Speaker) Tsholofelo B Dikgole Executive Secretary of Municipal Manager Mr Innocent Sirovha Bojanala Platinum District Municipality (Municpal Manager) General Information Address Bojanala Platinum District Municipality Andre Venter/ Marie Meiner Rustenburg Municipality Manfred Suhr Kroondal and Ward 31 Ecoforum N Fenner Magalies Water Board Rustenburg SAPS Chris De Bruyn North West Ecoforum Christoph Penzhorn Rustenburg District Agriculture Union Full Name Organisation Rustenburg Local Municipality: Infrastructure Development and Ms TG Mhlongo Management Johan Schoeman Rustenburg Rate Payers Association Rustenburg Tourist Information Thea van Steenderen Rustenburg Association of Business Daan Erasmus Department of Agriculture Aubrey Julies Lonmin Senior Manager Environmental Hazel Fiehn Lonmin Environmental Specialist (Land and Waste Specialist) Tara Anderson Lonmin Group Environmental Specialist (Air, Climate Change & Water) Mandy Jubileus Lonmin Group Environmental Specialist (Operations) Sammy Thongoana Lonmin Group Environmental Practitioner Leanie Heijmans Lonmin Group Practioner Administrator Bapo Tribal Authority - Mr Motlana Mphoreng Administrator:Bapo Development Projects Mr Israel Moerane Chairperson: Bapo Tribal Authority Council Leslie Nthosi Chairperson: Bapo Development Committee Tribal Secretariat - Lydia Medupe Tribal Secretary Susan Rampao Tribal Secretary Tribal Area Leaders - Maria Mkhobeni Headlady: Segwaelane Christina Sekomeng Headlady: Wonderkop Joyce Moerane Headlady: Leokeng Youth Development - Lesego Kgobane Bapo –Youth Development Tshepo Maboe Bapo –Youth Development Tshepiso Moeketsi Bapo –Youth Development Solomon Mabitsela Bapo –Youth Development Lennox Ndiya Bapo –Youth Development Development Committee - Leslie Nthodi Bapo Development Committee - Chairperson Development committee Peter Setuke Bapo Development Committee - Headman Wonderkop Maria Mokomele Bapo Development Committee - Headlady Segwaelane Christinah Sekomeng Bapo Development Committee - Headlady Wonderkop Snooky Morare Bapo Development Committee - Development Committee member Interim Committee - Lucy Mmutlwane Bapo- Interim Committee - Bapo Ba Mogale Clifford Tladi Bapo- Interim Committee - Bapo Ba Mogale Exec Greater Bapong Youth Development - Tshepo Maboe Exec Greater Bapong Youth Development - Secretary No 1 Section Exec Greater Bapong Youth Development - Events Coordinator No 1 Tshepiso Moeketsi Section Solomon Mabitsela Exec Greater Bapong Youth Development - Assistant Secretary Full Name Organisation Skoonplaas Exec Greater Bapong Youth Development - Safety& Environment Lennox Ndiya Representative Wonderkop Other Landowner Representatives - Simon Meloa Majakaneng Churchill Madumo Majakaneng Daphney Gumede Majakaneng Harry Modisakeng Land-owners Majakaneng Jairos Monegi Land-owners Majakaneng C.J Mamogale Bakwena Ba Mogopa Valerie Kgarodi Bakwena Ba Mogopa Bethanie Tribal Authority - Valarie Kgarodira Bethanie Tribal Athority Reuben Manyaka Tlapa and Maumong Council - Kgosana MUCIPALITIES - Rustenburg - Solly Mnisi Rustenburg - Mngr-Office of the Chief Whip Matthew Wolmarans Rustenburg - Mayor Rustenburg A Boschoff Rustenburg - Municipal Manager Rustenburg Local Municipality - Planning & Human Settlement (DPHS) Jan Pieterse - Acting Director. Kelebogile Mekgoe Rustenburg Local Municipality - Environmental Officer Maletse Mako Rustenburg Local Municipality - Muncipal Manager Madibeng - Molokoane-Machika Sopy Madibeng - Mayor Municipality Moruti Tsotetsi Madibeng - IDP Manager JN Rangwanashe Madibeng - MMC Community Safety, Social & Health Mondi Juta Madibeng Local Municipality - Municipal Manager Madiba Madibeng - Manager -Environmental Management Bojanala - Anneline Mashishi Bojanala District Amanda Bubu Bojanala District Municipality - Environmental Director Innocent Sirovha Bojanala District Municipality - Municipal Manager Tshepo Lenake Bojanala Platinum District Municipality - Environmental Officer Government Departments - Mrs Lehohlo Department of Health Charles Stofile Dept of Sports, Arts & Culture - District Manager Linda Sifumba National Dept.of Agriculture David Dikobe North-West agriculture Jane Letshwiti Dept. of Agriculture- Provincial Andiswa Sibanyoni Commission on Restitution of Land Rights C Lobakeng Dept Of Water Affairs - Northwest Director Delta Mahlaku NWREAD - Environmental Officer Full Name Organisation Desmond Makamu Department Of Mineral Resources (Dmr) - Environmental Director Department of Economic Development, Environment, Conservation Livhuwani Kutame and Tourism - Environmental Officer Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism - Director: Air Mazwi Lushaba Quality Managemen North West Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Environment Motshabi Mohlalisi - Assistant Director Mpho Magasa Madibeng Local Municipality - Environmental Specialist Nonofho Ndobochani SAHRA - Heritage Officer Phillip Hine South African Heritage Resource Agency (SAHRA) - Heritage Officer Phumudzo Nethwadzi Department of Mineral Resources (DMR) - Assistant Director Thabo Mashomo Bojanala District Municipality - Coordinator Thomas Baloi Department of Health - Environmental Health Officer Tshisikhawe Tshikororo Department Of Mineral Resources (Dmr) Victor Tities Department Of Rural Development And Land Reform M Tsotetsi Dipaleseng Local Municipality - Ward 05 Councillor Councillors - Zebulon Morake GLC Ward Councellor - Modderspruit Anderson Banda GLC Ward Councellor - Majakaneng Mathabo Molefe GLC Ward Councellor - Maditlhokwa Jacob Letsinye Tlapa and Maumong Council - Councillor Orphan More Tlapa and Maumong Council - Coucillor O.P. Mosielele Sonop - Councillor Anderson Banda Majakaneng - Councillor Phillip Maake Bapong - Councillor

Herman Mahuma Bethanie Councillor for Ward 23 Appreciate Ndlovu Rustenburg Local Municipality - 32 Ward Councillor Ephraim Diale Wonderkop Sub Council - Council Member Eva Tlhapi Wonderkop Sub Council - Council Member Frank James Sekgwaelane Sub Council - Council Member G Betha Madibeng Local Municipality - 28 Ward Councillor I S Monamode Bapo Ba Mogale Traditional Authority - Council Member Ivon Padi Madibeng Local Municipality - 25 Ward Councillor Josephine Mogoahle Madibeng Municipality - 32 Ward Councillor - - GLC Environmental Committee - Chris Molebatsi GLC Environment Committees - Marikana Hosea Moroke GLC Environment Committees - Marikana Julius Ramaboa GLC Environment Committees - Wonderkop Oupa Modikoane GLC Environment Committees - Wonderkop - UNIONS - Full Name Organisation Japie Van Zyl Solidarity Hannes Scholtz UASA Sydwell Dokolwana NUM Hannelie Schoeman FTUR AUSA Patrick Moepadira AMCU - Other Organisations - Selby Mabalane Umsobomvu Youth Fund (Provincial) - UYF Provincial Administrator Mamsey Zitha Anglo Platinum - Provincial Manager SED Moses Sibiya Aquarius Mines - Community Liason Officer Tswelopele Youth Development Org (Maditlhokwa) - Chairperson Thabo Molefe Maditlhokwa Tswelopele Youth Development Org (Maditlhokwa) - Secretary Bushy Molemane Maditlhokwa Buyiswa IKSSA - Acting Chief Executive Valerie Bethanie Tribal Secretary George Khondlo SAPS--Mooinooi Mzenene SAPS--Marikana Phumza Mlwandu Social Worker - Sonop Debra Motswai Social Worker - Sonop Rhulani Malungane GLC Radio - Middelkraal Motsomi Mogwe GLC Radio - Middelkraal Adel Malebana GLC Developmental Forum Facilitator Chris du Bruyn North West Ecoforum Pogiso Bothomane Rustenburg Environmental Coalition (RECO) Chris Molebatsi Rustenburg Environmental Coalition (RECO) Johannes Dire Regional Secretary Jeremiah Khunoana - Pitso Mapalane Safety and Environement Gideon Marole - Solly Matheba General Secretary Dexon Matjee Chairperson Godfrey Ntlakana Regional Organiser Jabulile Nxumalo Councillor Sam Rakoto Regional Secretary E.G Selema Principal Roy Thompson - Erika Wenhold - Michelle Crawford Aquarius Platinum Pty Ltd Nicole Spurijt Phoenix Platinum Mining (Pty) Ltd Rene Smit Xstrata South Africa (Pty) Ltd Sonja Lemmer International Ferro Metals Sa Chere-Lee Beukes Tharisa Minerals Pty Ltd - Managing Director Eugenie Ceccarelli Samancor Chrome Limited - Samancor Chrome Limited Full Name Organisation - Samancor Chrome Limited - SHEQ Manager Hulme Scholes Aquarius Platinum Pty Ltd

FARMERS AND LANDOWNERS LOTS OF REPITITION WITH THE INFO ABOVE Hannes Erasmus Erasmus Boers Trust V.J. Barnard Farmer T. van Staden Farmer Mr Mentor Applegreen North West Mirror - Editor Marthinus Barnard Landowner - Barnard Tribe Willie Barnard Barnard Tribe Paolo Belfiore C/o Minaco (Pty) Ltd Mr Gideon Botes Marikana Housing Development Co Fanie Botha Tharisa Metals Willem Botha Landowner Annet de Beer - Dirk de Waal - Jacobus du Toit Marikana Stone Crusher (Pty) Ltd Jan-Hendrik Fourie Shop Stewart - United Association of South Africa (UASA) Durkje Gilfillan Legal Resource Centre (LRC) Herman Glas - Martine Hartgers - Lydia Hesse - Barend Janse van Rensburg - Engela Janse van Rensburg Rens Trust Andre Joubert Infoteam Inv 35 cc Reuben Karlse Task Team Herculas Kleynhans - Andre Korb - Johan Korb -

Jacobus Kotze Landowner Daniel Kotzee - Heinrich Lange - Roelf le Roux Project Manager, Magalies Water Board Pieter Louw Libririan, Rustenburg Public Library Catharina Meyer - Magdalene Meyer - Penzhorn Otto - Ivon Pabi - Jan Pieters Rustenburg Local Municipality Maria Potgieter - Anna Robinson Swartkoppies Farm, MARIKANA 0284 Full Name Organisation Alex Salang Maditlhoka Development Community Fo rum Johannes Schaap Archipax cc Colette Scheermeyer Provincial Manager, South African Heritage Resource Agency (SAHRA) Hulme Scholes Aquarius Platinum (Pty) Ltd Johannes Schoombie - Rene Smit Xstrata South Africa (Pty) Ltd Phillipus Smith - Project Manager Dave Starley Aquarius Platinum Mine Virginia Steenkamp Stakeholder Michael Steyn Stakeholder Daniel Steyn Stakeholder Fransina Steyn Landowner Ismail Sullliman Dopper Inv cc Martha Swart Stakeholder Talie Taljaardt Editor The Principal Marikana Primary School Ockert Theunissen Stakeholder Jacob Traut Landowner Johanna van der Hoven Lyrantjies Port cc Johannes van der Merwe - Francina van Greuning - Pieter van Greuning - Elsie van Heerden Postmaster, Mooinooi Post Office, The Spar Cobus van Rooyen Superintendent: Waste Management, Madibeng Local Municipality - - Theunis van Staden - Andre Venters Landowner Arnold Verster Landowner Deon Verster Landowner Susara Verster - Johannes Viljoen - Louisa Viljoen - Waldie Volschenk Reporter Erika Wenhold Kroondal and Ward 31 Environmental Forum Otto Wenhold - Johanne Micheal Barnard Dralta Boerdery Dries Barnard Dralta Boerdery Niekie Van der Merwe Nic van der Merwe en Seuns Boerdery Peet Janse van Rensburg Langplaas Boerdery Gert Janse van Rensburg Langplaas Boerdery Hans Els K.K Wes Boerdery Christa Bosch Owner of Hartbeespoort Ptn 1128 Full Name Organisation Nicholas Rakolle - James Wallis Brits - Agricultural Department Cobus Van der Walt Miracle Waters' Manager Estelle du Plessis Miracle Waters' Berno Wenhold Krokodildrift Wes Boerdery Johan Snyman - Estelle Barnard Mabone Electric (Pty) Ltd Henk Barnard Mabone Electric (Pty) Ltd Magaliesberg Citrus Company - Farm Kareepoort and Hartebeespoort Hans Du Preez 410JQ Petrus Venter Department of Water Affairs & Forestry - NW Water Quality Rens Botha Department of Water Affairs & Forestry - NW Water Supply Esmy Madumo Department of Water Affairs Department of Water Affairs & Forestry - Water Quality - Botshe Molokwane Haartbeespoort Department of Water Affairs and Forestry: Water Pollution Control Sheryl Enele Officer Department of Water Affairs & Forestry - Water Quality - Cornia Theunissen Haartbeespoort C. Lebakeng (Acting chief director) Department of Water Affairs and Forestry-North West Mojalefa Nale (Acting) Department of Economic Development and Tourism Isbal Motala Department of Local Gorvenment and Housing Mathanzima H Mweli Department of Education Lydia Keneilwe Sebego Department of Health Irene Mpolweni Department of Sport , Arts and Culture Nic van Staden Department of Transport Obakeng Mongale Department of Public Works Molokwane Premier Office - Lehurutshe Keitumetse Makgophe Provincial Heritage Resources Agency - SAHRA: Provincial manager Semenya Commission on Restitution for Land Right-Rustenburg Department of Minerals and Energy: Deputy Director Mine Enviro Aaron Kharivhe Management M.E Madavha Department of Minerals and Energy: Assistant Director P.R Nethwadzi Department of Minerals and Energy: Assistant Director Taole Matsoko Department of Minerals and Energy: Senior Environmental Officer Department of Agriculture-Land Use and Soil Management- Anton Maluka Potchefstroom Pete Theron Department of Agriculture Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Environment Department of Local Government and Housing: Director: Integrated Desree Tlhoaele Development Planning North West Department of Agriculture, Conservation, Environment Marchant Le Roux and Tourism: Environmental Officer Ishmael Maputle Department of Agriculture: Resource auditor Comfort Molokoane Bojanala Municipal Manager Full Name Organisation Bojanala District Municipality:Public Participation and Traditional V. Mosome Leadership Co-ordinator C. Rammule Bojanala District Municipality:Special Projects Co-ordinator Mirriam Legana Bojanala Platinum District Muncipality Itumeleng Louis Bojanala Platinum District Muncipality: Municipal Manager Jurie Vorster Bojanala Platinum District Muncipality Tebogo Makgalemele Bojanala Platinum District Muncipality: Manager R.L Motsepe Bojanala Platinum District Municipality: Mayor Dawie Barnard Bojanala District Land Reform Office MF Sithole Madibeng Local Authority RB Sithole Madibeng Local Authority Energy Manaka Madibeng Municipality: Manager Environmental Services Elvis Khumalo Marikana Municipality P.M Mapulane Madibeng Municipal Manager Mashudu Mposi Madibeng Muncipality: Manager Environmental Impact P Buys Madibeng Local Municipality Martin Rosenburg Bapo-ba-Mogale Tribal Authority srael Moerane Bapo-ba-Mogale Tribal Authority Moira Lekalakala Bapo-ba-Mogale Tribal Authority Michael Mokwena Bapo-ba-Mogale Tribal Authority Julia Dipale South African Heritage Resourse Agency - North West Province Marry Leslie South African Heritage Resourse Agency - Cape Town D Saingleton (Singleton) Telkom L Human Eskom Anneline Pretorius Eskom Distribution: Land & Rights Practitioner - Northern Region Mamakie Phoolo North West Parks and Tourism Board Wildlife and Environment Society of South Africa (WESSA) - John Wesson Conservation Coordinator: North West Province Hawi Viljoen Greater Brits Investment Group Dries Nolte Afrikaanse Sakekamer (Handelsinstituut) EU Sternagel Brits Industrial Association Paul Satti Magaliesberg Protection Association Manfred Suhr North West Ecoforum: Representative Chris De Bruyn North West Eco-Forum W.P Auret North West Agricultural Union M.G Morule North West Farmers Union Charlie Moagi Madibeng Business Forum Maganta Madibeng Business Forum Mmoni Yabo Entrepreneurial Support Centre Galic Ghoor Madibeng Traders Association Martie v.d Walt Jong Dames Dinamiek Johan van Rensburg North West Conservancy Association, Peglerae Conservancy John Wesson North West Conservancy Association, Peglerae Conservancy Andrie Loubscher Bankenveld Conservation Group NW Madibeng area Full Name Organisation Vanessa Bezuidenhout De Wildt Cheetah Centre Mark Turner Birdlife Harties Branch Birdlife SA: Vice Chair B Calitz Councillor of Ward 24 O.P Mosielele Councillor of Ward 25 Leanna Rautenbach Crocodile River Mine Martin Steenkamp African Chrome Bernie Hernic Ferrochrome Petra Anglo Platinum A.J Britz Anglo Platinum E Heymann Anglo Platinum E Wood Anglo Platinum Cardis N.J Samancor Northern Chrome Mine Mari De Jager Western Chrome R.D Halland Vamteco Bezuidenhout / Van Rooyen Thari Bus Services P Lion Eastern Region Taxi Organisation Wessels Steenkamp Agricultural Farmers Association Danie Liebenberg Brits District Agricultural Union Mr NL Fourie Hartbeespoort Irrigation Board Isaac Magidi Magidi Agricultural Development Ethel Sithole Keletsong Community Training & Resource Centre Brazil Green Broederstroom Landowners Andrea Bligh Hartebeespoort webmaster Beresford Jobling Hartbeespoort Heritage Association Hennie Venter Aquarius: Engineering Manager Lesego Raborifi Metals: Environmental Coordinator Coetzee, Hendrik Christiaan Owner of Portion 43 D Mellet Eastern Platinum Limited (owner of portion 17, 22, 25, 27 and 28) D Steel Eastern Platinum Limited J Modisane M2 Group Holdings (owner of portion 3) I Moetaesi M2 Group Holdings (owner of portion 3) Roy Barlow R Barlow Boerdery Trust (owner of portion 49) Van der Merwe David Johannes Farmer (Owner of Portion 10) Coetzee J Farmer (Owner of Portion 8) W Pelser B & P Vervoer L.G Grimbeek Barplats O Scharfetter Bigen Africa D.G Roose Concor Ds G Victor Dutch Reformed Church J.H Nel Eko Rehabilitation C Barnard Farmer Full Name Organisation J E Barnard Farmer C.I Bester Farmer J.J Bester Farmer F.G Bezuidenhout Farmer P.J Bezuidenhout Farmer H Botha Farmer M Byleveldt. Farmer D Claasen Farmer P.W.T Coetzee Farmer S Coetzee Farmer A.G.S De Beer Farmer J.H.R De Beer Farmer J.A de Beer Farmer A.L du Preez Farmer J du Toit Farmer H.H Els Farmer J.M Els Farmer H Esterhuizen Farmer H Glas Farmer M Griffiths Farmer Herman Farmer J.D Horik Farmer J Jacobs Farmer Carel Koekemoer Farmer K.T Korb Farmer J.W Leite Farmer A.W Loots Farmer J.J.J Loots Farmer S Louwrens Farmer A.J Meintjes Farmer F Meintjies Farmer Carel Meyer Farmer J Moatshe Farmer J Wallis Farmer Jan Putter Farmer P Reynecke Farmer S Venter Farmer E Richter Farmer J De V Roos Farmer L Meyer Farmer M Willers Farmer M.S Smit Farmer D van der Merwe Farmer Full Name Organisation J.J van der Merwe Farmer P.J van der Merwe Farmer M van der Merwe Farmer J.FJ van Rensburg Farmer J van Vuuren Farmer B.J.A van Wyk Farmer C.F van Wyk Farmer M.J van Zyl Farmer H Verryne Farmer K Verryne Farmer S.J Schoeman Farmer, SSCM F.J Bezuidenhout Stakeholder A Bosch Stakeholder Advocate Bosch Stakeholder T Coetzee Stakeholder H.C Coetzee Stakeholder P Dekker Stakeholder H.J Els Stakeholder H.J Fick Stakeholder D.J.H Hattingh Stakeholder Kleinsmit Stakeholder D Maritz Stakeholder D Meyer Stakeholder L Myburgh Stakeholder A.H Stander Stakeholder T van Eck Stakeholder E Venter Stakeholder J.P Wessels Stakeholder M Botha Private M Wilke Private J.J.M Bezuidenhout Magalies A Ebrahim Stakeholder L Loggenberg Stakeholder J Vermaak Stakeholder J.P Du Plessis Hernic Ferrochrome H Barnard HFB Engineering L.F Eloff I.S.S F.M Senatle Ipelegeng Development Projects M.S Thshelare Karaborisk Services J Engelbrecht Resident H Scheepers Resident J Eyssen Sempres F.A Engelbrecht Sonop Primary School Full Name Organisation D Neethling Madibeng M Watson Madibeng carel Hattingh ACDP J.P Setshogoe ANC B Coetzee Brits Commando I Madumo Chief Co. S.T Ditshwene Community R.S Masote Diphetogo Hi-Tech Projects E Mokgathle Diphetogo Hi-Tech Projects Hans du Preez Magaliesberg Citrus, Co-op Johan Smit Magalies Citrus Company Ltd (Production Manager) Dries Nolte Sakekamer Van Madibeng W C Robbentse Rens Security C Lourens Lourens Attorneys Hennie Schoeman Schoeman and Vennote and Magalies Sitrus S T Ditshwene Community Councillor Riana Roos(Le Roux) Overhex Boerdery Uitval 416 K van JQ Number 41, 29, 30 Jonas Modise Stakeholder

Scoping Report

Appendix 6 – Current Land-use Figure

115

SAMANCOR CHROME LIMITED TURFFONTIEN FARM Tshukutswe FEATURES

Legend .! Place Names Rivers Segwaelane .! Drainage Channel Drainage channel from Tailings Storage Facility Natural Drainage Channel R556 Site Boundary Veld/Cattlegrazing Area Decommissioned shaft Lonmin Mine Community Lonmin Mining Activities Lonmin Shaft Mine Offices Mine Residence Opencast Mining Activities (Including .! Waste Rock Stockpiles) Kareespruit Previous Mining Activities (Diggings) Residential Settlement .! Parent Farm West Buffelsfontein Section Buffelsfontein East Section Mooinooi Section ± .! 0 200 400 600 800 1,000

Metres .! DATA SOURCE:

CHIEF DIRECTORATE: NATIONAL GEO- SPATIAL INFORMATION

PROJECTION: WGS HARTEBEESHOEK 94 PROJECT TITLE: PROPOSED TURFONTIEN PROJECT EMPR AMENDMENT

PROJECT NO: 47910 Maretlwana SCALE: 1:45,000 AT A4 DATE: 09/06/2016 DRAW.!N BY: SABELO DUBE FIGURE NO: REVIEWED BY: JARED O' BRIEN

WWW.WSP-.!PB.COM Tornado-Modderspruit .! DISCLAIMER The information on this figu re was derived from variou s digital databases available to WSP Environmental (Pty) Ltd. All information is provided “as is” and it mu st be acknowledged that data, information, and maps are dynamic and in a constant state of maintenance, correction and u pdate. WSP Environmental (Pty) Ltd cannot accept any responsibility for errors, omissions, or positional accu racy where it has not been directly responsible for the produ ction of the data referenced. There are no warranties, Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, e xpressed or implied, as to the u se of this information, inclu ding the warranty of merchantability or fitness for a particu lar pu rpose. Notification of any errors will be AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community appreciated.

.! Scoping Report

-END-

116