APPENDIX 5: SPECIALIST STUDIES Appendix 5.6: Aquatic Ecology … · 2018-11-12 · Prepared by:...

The South African Breweries (Pty) Limited

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR A GLASS BOTTLE MANUFACTURING PLANT

PROPOSED BY SAB AND PARTNERS

File name: 2018-11_Glass Bottle Manufacturing Plant_EIAR-draft

720.19124.00005

November 2018

124

APPENDIX 5: SPECIALIST STUDIES

Appendix 5.6: Aquatic Ecology Assessment

FRESH WATER RESOURCE VERIFICATION AND

DELINEATION AS PART OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL

ASSESSMENT AND AUTHORISATION PROCESS FOR THE

PROPOSED SAB GLASS BOTTLE MANUFACTURING

PLANT; NEAR VEREENIGING, GAUTENG PROVINCE.

Prepared for

SLR Consulting (Pty) Ltd

June 2018

Prepared by: Scientific Aquatic Services Report author: M. Mbangezeli Report reviewer: S. van Staden (Pr.Sci.Nat) Report Reference: SAS 218058

Date: June 2018

Scientific Aquatic Services CC CC Reg No 2003/078943/23 Vat Reg. No. 4020235273 PO Box 751779 Gardenview 2047 Tel: 011 616 7893 Fax: 086 724 3132 E-mail: [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

SAS 218058 June 2018

ii

DOCUMENT GUIDE

The Document Guide below is for reference to the procedural requirements for environmental authorisation applications in accordance to GN267 of 24 March 2017, as it pertains to NEMA.

No. Requirement Section in report

a) Details of -

(i) The specialist who prepared the report Appendix C

(ii) The expertise of that specialist to compile a specialist report including a curriculum vitae

Appendix C

b) A declaration that the specialist is independent Appendix D

c) An indication of the scope of, and the purpose for which, the report was prepared Section 1.2

cA) An indication of the quality and age of base data used for the specialist report N/A

cB) A description of existing impacts on the site, cumulative impacts of the proposed development and levels of acceptable change

N/A

d) The duration, date and season of the site investigation and the relevance of the season to the outcome of the assessment

N/A

e) A description of the methodology adopted in preparing the report or carrying out the specialised process inclusive of equipment and modelling used

Appendix B

f) Details of an assessment of the specific identified sensitivity of the site related to the proposed activity or activities and its associated structures and infrastructure, inclusive of a site plan identifying site alternatives

Section 4

g) An identification of any areas to be avoided, including buffers N/A

h) A map superimposing the activity including the associated structure and infrastructure on the environmental sensitivities of the site including areas to be avoided, including buffers

N/A

i) A description of any assumption made and any uncertainties or gaps in knowledge Section 1.3

j) A description the findings and potential implication\s of such findings on the impact of the proposed activity, including identified alternatives on the environment or activities

Section 3

k) Any mitigation measures for inclusion in the EMPr Section 3

l) Any conditions for inclusion in the environmental authorisation Section 4

m) Any monitoring requirements for inclusion in the EMPr or environmental authorisation N/A

n) A reasoned opinion - Section 5

(i) As to whether the proposed activity, activities or portions thereof should be authorised N/A

(iA) Regarding the acceptability of the proposed activity or activities N/A

(ii) If the opinion is that the proposed activity, activities or portions thereof should be authorised, any avoidance, management and mitigation measures that should be included in the EMPr, and where applicable, the closure plan

Section 3

o) A description of any consultation process that was undertaken during the course of preparing the specialist report

N/A

p) A summary and copies of any comments received during any consultation process and where applicable all responses thereto; and

N/A

q) Any other information requested by the competent authority N/A

SAS 218058 June 2018

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DOCUMENT GUIDE ............................................................................................................. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................................................................................... iii LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................................................. iv LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................ iv GLOSSARY OF TERMS ...................................................................................................... v LIST OF ACRONYMS ......................................................................................................... vi 1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background ............................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Project Scope ............................................................................................................ 4 1.3 Assumptions and Limitations ..................................................................................... 4 1.4 Legislative Requirements .......................................................................................... 4 2. RESULTS OF THE DESKTOP ANALYSIS ............................................................... 5 3. RESULTS: WATER RESOURCES ASSESSMENT .................................................. 8 4. IMPACT ASSESSMENT ......................................................................................... 15 4.1 Impact Analyses ...................................................................................................... 15

Consideration of impacts and application of mitigation measures ............................ 15 Impact discussion and essential mitigation measures .............................................. 16 Activities and aspect register ................................................................................... 16 Impact assessment of the artificial water resources on the south western portion

of the study area ...................................................................................................... 16 Impact assessment of the artificial water resources on the eastern portion of the

study area ............................................................................................................... 18 Impact Mitigation ..................................................................................................... 19

5. CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................ 20 6. REFERENCES ........................................................................................................ 21 APPENDIX A: Legislative requirements and Indemnity ................................................. 22 APPENDIX B: Indemnity and Terms of use of this Report ............................................. 24 APPENDIX C: Method of Assessment ............................................................................. 25 APPENDIX D: Declaration and Specialists CV’s ............................................................. 32 APPENDIX E: Specialist CV’s and Declaration ............................................................... 33

SAS 218058 June 2018

iv

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: The study area depicted on a 1:50 000 topographical map in relation to the surrounding area. ................................................................................................ 2

Figure 2: Digital Satellite image depicting the location of the study area in relation to surrounding areas. ............................................................................................... 3

Figure 3: NFEPA natural wetlands, associated with the study area. ................................... 7 Figure 4: Imagery depicting wet characteristics .................................................................. 9 Figure 5: Imagery depicting stormwater canals within the study area located in close

proximity to the artificial wetland features .......................................................... 10 Figure 6: Imagery depicting current land uses within the study area ................................. 10 Figure 7: A 1970 imagery (left) depicting cultivation activities within the southwestern

portion of the study area highlighted by the green circle. A 1980 imagery (right) depicting no signs of cultivation (indicated by a green circle). ............................ 11

Figure 8: Historical imagery depicting artificial water resource signatures ......................... 11 Figure 9: Map depicting the delineated features within the study area and 500m

investigation area............................................................................................... 12 Figure 10: Map depicting the applicable zones of regulation associated with the Tributary

of the Vaal River. ............................................................................................... 14

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Summary of the conservation characteristics for the study area. ......................... 6 Table 2: A summary of the perceived activities to occur within the study area ................. 16 Table 3: Potential Impact loss of the artificial water resource habitat and ecological

structure (Unmanaged and Managed) ............................................................... 17 Table 4: Potential changes to the hydrological functioning of the water resource

(Unmanaged and managed) .............................................................................. 17 Table 5: Potential impact loss of the habitat and ecological structure resource

(Unmanaged and Managed) .............................................................................. 18 Table 6: Potential change to the hydrological functioning of the water resource

(Unmanaged and Managed) .............................................................................. 18

SAS 218058 June 2018

v

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

Alien vegetation: Plants that do not occur naturally within the area but have been introduced either intentionally or unintentionally. Vegetation species that originate from outside of the borders of the biome -usually international in origin.

Alluvial soil: A deposit of sand, mud, etc. formed by flowing water, or the sedimentary matter deposited thus within recent times, especially in the valleys of large rivers.

Biodiversity: The number and variety of living organisms on earth, the millions of plants, animans and micro-organisms, the genes they contain, the evolutionary history and potential they encompass and the ecosystems, ecological processes and landscape of which they are integral parts.

Catchment: The area where water is collected by the natural landscape, where all rain and run-off water ultimately flows into a river, wetland, lake, and ocean or contributes to the groundwater system.

Chroma: The relative purity of the spectral colour which decreases with increasing greyness.

Delineation (of a wetland):

To determine the boundary of a wetland based on soil, vegetation and/or hydrological indicators.

Ecological Importance and Sensitivity

Ecological importance refers to the diversity, rarity or uniqueness of the habitats and biota. Ecological sensitivity refers to the ability of the ecosystem to tolerate disturbances and to recover from certain impacts.

Ecoregion: An ecoregion is a "recurring pattern of ecosystems associated with characteristic combinations of soil and landform that characterise that region”.

Episodic stream: Highly flashy systems that flow or flood only in response to extreme rainfall events, usually high in their catchments. May not flow in a five-year period, or may flow only once in several years.

Facultative species: Species usually found in wetlands (76%-99% of occurrences) but occasionally found in non-wetland areas

Gleying: A soil process resulting from prolonged soil saturation which is manifested by the presence of neutral grey, bluish or greenish colours in the soil matrix.

Groundwater: Subsurface water in the saturated zone below the water table.

Hydrology: The study of the occurrence, distribution and movement of water over, on and under the land surface.

Hydromorphic soil: A soil that in its undrained condition is saturated or flooded long enough to develop anaerobic conditions favouring the growth and regeneration of hydrophytic vegetation (vegetation adapted to living in anaerobic soils).

Hydromorphy: A process of gleying and mottling resulting from the intermittent or permanent presence of excess water in the soil profile.

Hydrophyte: Any plant that grows in water or on a substratum that is at least periodically deficient of oxygen as a result of soil saturation or flooding; plants typically found in wet habitats.

Index of Habitat Integrity

The habitat integrity of a river refers to the maintenance of a balanced composition of physico-chemical and habitat characteristics on a temporal and spatial scale that are comparable to the characteristics of natural habitats of the region.

Indigenous vegetation: Vegetation occurring naturally within a defined area.

Intermittent flow: Flows only for short periods.

Mottles: Soils with variegated colour patterns are described as being mottled, with the “background colour” referred to as the matrix and the spots or blotches of colour referred to as mottles.

Resource Water Quality Objectives

*Guidelines set by the South African Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS), formerly DWA or DWAF, for various physico-chemical and biological parameters for various uses as well as ecosystem functioning.

Seasonal zone of wetness:

The zone of a wetland that lies between the Temporary and Permanent zones and is characterised by saturation from three to ten months of the year, within 50cm of the surface

Sub-quaternary Reach

A finer subdivision of the quaternary catchments (the catchment areas of tributaries of main stem rivers in quaternary catchments).

Temporary zone of wetness:

the outer zone of a wetland characterised by saturation within 50cm of the surface for less than three months of the year

Water Use License The National Water Act (Act 36 of 1998) gives the Department of Water and Sanitation the tools to gather the information that we need for the optimal management of our water resources. The registration of water use is one of these tools.

Watercourse:

In terms of the definition contained within the National Water Act, a watercourse means:

A river or spring;

A natural channel which water flows regularly or intermittently;

A wetland, dam or lake into which, or from which, water flows; and

Any collection of water which the Minister may, by notice in the Gazette, declare to be a watercourse;

and a reference to a watercourse includes, where relevant, its bed and banks

Wetland Vegetation (WetVeg) type:

Broad groupings of wetland vegetation, reflecting differences in regional context, such as geology, climate, and soils, which may in turn have an influence on the ecological characteristics and functioning of wetlands.

SAS 218058 June 2018

vi

LIST OF ACRONYMS

BGIS Biodiversity Geographic Information Systems

CBA Critical Biodiversity Area

CSIR Council of Scientific and Industrial Research

DEMC Desired Ecological Management Class

DO Dissolved Oxygen

DWA Department of Water Affairs

DWAF Department of Water Affairs and Forestry

DWS Department of Water and Sanitation (formerly known as DWA, DWAF, see above)

EAP Environmental Assessment Practitioner

EC Ecological Class or Electrical Conductivity (use to be defined in relevant sections)

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

EIS Ecological Importance and Sensitivity

EMC Ecological Management Class

EMP Environmental Management Program

ESA Ecological Support Area

EWR Ecological Water Requirements

FEPA Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas

FRAI Fish Response Assessment Index

GDARD Gauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Development

GIS Geographic Information System

GN General Notice

GPS Global Positioning System

HGM Hydrogeomorphic

IHAS Invertebrate Habitat Assessment System

IHI Index of Habitat Integrity

m Meter

MAP Mean Annual Precipitation

NA Not Applicable

NBA National Biodiversity Assessment

NEMA National Environmental Management Act

NFEPA National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas

NWA National Water Act

PEMC Present Ecological Management Class

PES Present Ecological State

REC Recommended Ecological Category

Ref Reference

RHP River Health Program

RQIS Research Quality Information Services

SACNASP South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions

SANBI South African National Biodiversity Institute

SANParks South African National Parks

SAS Scientific Aquatic Services

subWMA Sub-Water Management Area

WET Whole Effluent Toxicity

WetVeg Groups Wetland Vegetation Groups

WMA Water Management Areas

WMS Water Management System

WRC Water Research Commission

SAS 218058 June 2018

1

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Scientific Aquatic Services was appointed to conduct a freshwater resource verification and

delineation as part of the environmental assessment and authorisation process for the

proposed development of SAB Glass Bottle Manufacturing Plant to be located on Portion 238

of the farm Leeuwkuil 596 IQ, near Vereeniging, within the Gauteng Province, hereafter

referred to as the “study area” (Figure 1 and 2).

The study area is situated immediately north of the R28 (Boy Louw Str), east of Lager Road,

and west of the R59 (Sybrand van Niekerk Freeway). The R54 (Houtkop Road) is situated

approximately 2.7 km north of the study area. The suburb of Leeuhof is situated approximately

380m to the north east, and Sharpeville 1 km southeast of the study area.

Prior to the site investigation, a background study was undertaken, during which the relevant

national and provincial spatial databases were consulted.

SASA 218058 June 2018

2

Figure 1: The study area depicted on a 1:50 000 topographical map in relation to the surrounding area.

SAS 218058 June 2018

3

Figure 2: Digital Satellite image depicting the location of the study area in relation to surrounding areas.

SASA 218058 June 2018

4

1.2 Project Scope

Specific outcomes in terms of this report are outlined below:

To verify and delineate water resources within the study area on site, delineate and

freshwater resources occurring within 500m of the study area on a desktop basis;

To determine whether the water resources within the study area are natural or artificial;

To determine the environmental impacts of the proposed development on the water

resources associated with the study area; and

Present management and mitigation measures which should be implemented during

the various development phases to assist in minimising the impact on the receiving

environment.

1.3 Assumptions and Limitations

The following assumptions and limitations are applicable to this report:

The ecological assessment is confined to the study area and does not include the

neighbouring and adjacent properties; except where bulk service infrastructure

associated with the project, such as electrical and sewer infrastructure, were situated

outside the study area.

With ecology being dynamic and complex, certain aspects (some of which may be

important) may have been overlooked. However, it is expected that the proposed

development activities have been accurately assessed and considered, based on the

field observations.

1.4 Legislative Requirements

The following legislative requirements and relevant provincial guidelines were taken into

consideration during the assessment. A detailed description of these legislative requirements

is presented in Appendix A:

National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) (Act No. 107 of 1998);

National Water Act (NWA) (Act No. 36 of 1998); and

General Notice 509 as published in the Government Gazette 40229 of 2016 as it

relates to the NWA (Act 36 of 1998); and

The Gauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Development’s (GDARD)

Requirements for Biodiversity Assessments, Version 3 (GDARD, 2014).

SASA 218058 June 2018

5

2. RESULTS OF THE DESKTOP ANALYSIS

The following section contains data accessed as part of the desktop assessment and are

presented as a “dashboard” report below (Table 1). The dashboard report aims to present

concise summaries of the data on as few pages as possible in order to allow for integration of

results by the reader to take place. Where required, further discussion and interpretation is

provided, and information that was considered to be of particular importance was emboldened.

It is important to note that although all data sources used provide useful and often verifiable,

high quality data, the various databases used do not always provide an entirely accurate

indication of the study area’s actual site characteristics at the scale required to inform the

environmental authorisation and/or water use licencing processes. However, this information

is considered to be useful as background information to the study. Thus, this data was used

as a guideline to inform the assessment and to focus on areas and aspects of increased

conservation importance.

SAS 218058 June 2018

6

Table 1: Summary of the conservation characteristics for the study area.

Aquatic ecoregion and sub-regions in which the study area is located Detail of the study area in terms of the National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Area (NFEPA) (2011) database

Ecoregion Highveld FEPACODE

The study area is located within a subWMA currently not considered important in terms of fish species or freshwater resource conservation.

Catchment Vaal

Quaternary Catchment C22F

NFEPA Wetlands According to the NFEPA database, there are no wetland features located within the study area, however one natural wetland feature is situated within 500m of proposed infrastructure.

WMA Upper Vaal

subWMA Downstream Vaal Dam

Dominant characteristics of the Highveld Ecoregion Level 2 (11.03) (Kleynhans et al., 2007)

Wetland vegetation Type The study area is located within the Mesic Highveld Grassland Group 3, a least threatened wetland vegetation type. Dominant primary terrain

morphology Plains; Low and Moderate Relief;

Dominant primary vegetation types

Moist Cool Highveld Grassland NFEPA Rivers

According to the NFEPA database, there are no Rivers located within the study area or the immediate vicinity (within 500m).

Altitude (m a.m.s.l) 1300-2100

MAP (mm) 400 to 800 Detail of the study area in terms of the Gauteng Conservation Plan (C-Plan V3.3, 2011)

Coefficient of Variation (% of MAP)

20 to 34

The study area and its immediate surrounding area (500m thereof) is not associated with any areas or features of conservation concern, namely Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBAs), Ecological Support areas (ESAs), Wetlands, Rivers or Ridges according to the Gauteng Conservation Plan. The study area does however fall within the urban area according to the Gauteng C-Plan. Although the Urban Edge was rescinded as a policy document in the Gauteng Spatial Development Framework (2011), it nevertheless remains a useful indicator of where concentration [of development] should occur. Therefore, for the purposes of this report, the Urban Edge boundaries as defined by the C-Plan v3.3 are utilised as a guideline to inform decision making

Rainfall concentration index 45 to 64

Rainfall seasonality Early to late summer

Mean annual temperature. (°C) 12 to 18

Winter temperature (July) -2 – 18 ºC

Summer temperature (Feb) 10 – 28 ºC

Median annual simulated runoff (mm)

5 to 10 (limited); 10 to 150

CBA = Critical Biodiversity Area, ESA = Ecological Support Area; m.a.m.s.l = Metres Above Mean Sea Level; mm = Millimetres; MAP = Mean Annual Precipitation; NFEPA = National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Area; WMA = Water Management Area

SAS 218058 June 2018

7

Figure 3: NFEPA natural wetlands, associated with the study area.

SAS 218058 June 2018

8

3. RESULTS: WATER RESOURCES ASSESSMENT

Following the desktop assessment, and site visit undertaken in April 2018, the following key

observations were made:

1. According to the NFEPA database, there are no rivers located within the study area,

however one natural wetland feature is located within the north-eastern portion of the

500m investigation areas. Refer to Figure 3;

2. During the site assessment, several water resources were identified within the study

area, and a formalised tributary of the Vaal was confirmed to be within the 500m

investigation area;

3. Based on observations and through consultation of historical imagery, the water

resources identified within the study area were classified as artificial or man-made, due

to their nature and proximity to man-made features such as furrows, water canals and

roads located to the south and eastern portion of the study area. It is likely that the

furrows within the study area were developed to drain the higher lying areas.

Based on site observations, the construction and excavation of the canals has resulted in the

formation of small berms adjacent to these canals. This, together with additional runoff from

the roads adjacent to the study area, has resulted in artificial ponding of water adjacent to

these canals, which has resulted in the formation of artificial wetland features. These artificial

features were then delineated using the methods as presented in the “Updated manual for the

identification and delineation of wetland and riparian resources” (DWAF, 2008). The

foundation of the method is based on the fact that watercourses have several distinguishing

factors including the following:

Landscape position;

The presence of water at or near the ground surface;

Distinctive hydromorphic soils;

Vegetation adapted to saturated soils; and

The presence of alluvial soils in stream systems.

Vegetation did not depict any distinction between terrestrial and wetland vegetation, and the

topography was relatively flat within the extent of the study area, thus soils took precedence.

The soil form identified within the wetlands was classified as Rensburg and this type of soil

form is a distinctive feature of wetland areas, since they are found in lower lying landscape

positions. Gleyed soils, or gleyed soils with mottles are indications that the soil exists in an

anaerobic state. They are characterised as hydric soils. Figure 4 depicts a wet area within the

study area and soil indicators of wetland characteristics. Figure 5 presents some of the artificial

SAS 218058 June 2018

9

water canals observed within the study area, which are located in close proximity to the

wetlands identified.

Figure 4: Imagery depicting wet characteristics

The left imagery above depicts a wet area within the study area. Imagery (top and bottom

right) depicting a grey matrix (gleying) of the G horizon which is indicative of wetland soils

(Top) Rensburg soil form was identified. (Bottom left) gleyed soils with mottles (areas of

contrasting color) also served as an indication that the soil exists in an anaerobic state for

sufficient periods of time for redoximorphic characteristics catena to form.

Wet area within the study area

Gleying of the G Horizon

Mottling

SAS 218058 June 2018

10

Figure 5: Imagery depicting stormwater canals within the study area located in close proximity to the artificial wetland features

The study area is dominated by increaser 2 and 3 subclimax and climax grass species such

as Sporobolus africanus, Eragrostis chloromelas, and Aristida congesta. Increaser 2 and 3

species are grass species which are dominant in overgrazed veld, and as such is an indication

of prolonged overgrazing by domestic livestock. Figure 6 below depicts current land use within

the study area.

Figure 6: Imagery depicting current land uses within the study area

Scrutiny of historical Imagery was made in order to ascertain whether the water resources

identified within the study area are natural or artificial. Below is the historical imagery of the

southern and eastern portion of the study area. During the year of 1970, the imagery only

portrays land cultivation but with no signatures of wetlands and artificial water canals evident.

It appears that the cultivation has discontinued around the year 1980 and roads were visible

in close proximity of the study area. However, in 2010 and 2015 water resources and artificial

canals became visible within the area.

Livestock grazing Open space

SAS 218058 June 2018

11

Figure 7: A 1970 imagery (left) depicting cultivation activities within the southwestern portion of the study area highlighted by the green circle. A 1980 imagery (right) depicting no signs of cultivation (indicated by a green circle).

Figure 8: Historical imagery depicting artificial water resource signatures

2010 2015

1970 1980

SAS 218058 June 2018

12

Figure 9: Map depicting the delineated features within the study area and 500m investigation area.

SAS 218058 June 2018

13

Based on the findings of the study, the following is recommended:

1. The water resources identified within the study area are regarded as artificial features.

Although they are artificial, the features would persist under normal circumstances

given the permanent changes to the landscape. Therefore, these features should be

avoided where possible;

2. A tributary of the Vaal River was identified approximately 90m to the south of the study

area, which is protected under the National Water Act, 1998 (Act 36 of 1998) since it

is a regarded as a watercourse despite being formalised for an extensive portion of its

course.

3. In terms of the listed activities stipulated in the National Environmental Management

Act, 1998 (Act 107 of 1998), 2014 EIA regulations (as amended), a 32m zone of

regulations is applicable to the Tributary of the Vaal;

4. According to the Gauteng C-Plan (2011), the study area is located inside of the Urban

Edge, thus in terms of the GDARD guidelines, a 32m buffer or setback is applicable to

the Vaal tributary;

5. In accordance with GN509 of 2016 as it relates to the National Water Act(NWA), a

regulated area of a watercourse for section 21c and 21i of the NWA, 1998 is defined

as:

the outer edge of the 1 in 100-year flood line and/or delineated riparian habitat,

whichever is the greatest distance, measured from the middle of the watercourse

of a river, spring, natural channel, lake or dam;

In the absence of a determined 1 in 100-year flood line or riparian area the area

within 100m from the edge of a watercourse where the edge of the watercourse is

the first identifiable annual bank fill flood bench; or

a 500 m radius from the delineated boundary (extent) of any wetland or pan.

6. If any proposed activities are located within the unnamed tributary of the Vaal River as

defined by the 1:100 year floodline (the extent of the watercourse), authorisation by

means of a Water Use Licence is required in terms of Section 21 c&i of the NWA.

Figure 10 below provides the conceptual representation of the abovementioned zones of

regulation and setback areas.

SAS 218058 June 2018

14

Figure 10: Map depicting the applicable zones of regulation associated with the Tributary of the Vaal River.

SAS 218058 June 2018

15

4. IMPACT ASSESSMENT

This section presents the significance of perceived potential impacts on the artificial water

resources ecology within the study area. In addition, it also indicates the required mitigatory

measures needed to minimise the perceived impacts of the proposed development and

presents an assessment of the significance of the impacts taking into consideration the

available mitigatory measures and assuming that they are fully implemented.

4.1 Impact Analyses

Consideration of impacts and application of mitigation measures

Following the assessment of the artificial water resources within the study area, the below

listed mitigation measures were compiled for all development phases. The points below

summarise the factors considered in impact assessment as well as the development of

mitigation measures:

As this is an artificial water resource and not connected to any natural system it is not

considered to be a natural watercourse, however, the features are likely to persist

under “normal circumstances”;

Due to the artificial nature of these water resources, the impact on ecoservice

provision and water quality did not form the part of assessment.

It must be must be noted that the artificial water resources situated on the southern

portion of the study area will be unavoidably severely impacted due to their close

proximity to the footprint of the proposed development.

It is advisable to minimise the extent of the activities associated with the development

(i.e. during construction) within proximity to the artificial water resources, to reduce

impacts on the habitat and ecological structure.

At the time of this assessment, the overall freshwater environment was of low

ecological importance and sensitivity.

SAS 218058 June 2018

16

Impact discussion and essential mitigation measures

There are two key ecological impacts on the artificial water resources that are

anticipated to occur namely,

Loss of freshwater feature habitat and ecological structure; and

Impacts on the hydrology and sediment balance of the freshwater features.

Various activities and development aspects may lead to these impacts, however, provided

that the mitigation hierarchy is followed, and mitigation is cogently planned and executed,

these impacts can be avoided or adequately minimized where avoidance is not feasible.

Although, these water resources are classified as artificial with low ecological importance,

they have created a habitat for some protected species such as Crinum Macowanii.

Activities and aspect register

The table below identifies potential activities that are likely take place during the various

phases of the proposed development, which could possibly impact on the habitat and

ecological structure of within the surrounding of the artificial water resources. It should be

noted that these activities listed in the table below were used during the impact assessment

as pre-mitigated impacts.

Table 2: A summary of the perceived activities to occur within the study area

Impact assessment of the artificial water resources on the south western

portion of the study area

The artificial water resources that are situated on the southwestern portion of the study area

will be significantly impacted during the development phase due to the loss of surface runoff

and the removal of nearly all the storm water channels feeding these water resources during

Construction Operational

Site clearing and the removal of vegetation leading to increased runoff and erosion during rainfall events.

Potential poor management and monitoring measures of alien vegetation control within the artificial water resources as a result of the construction activities.

Potential indiscriminate movement of construction vehicles within the 1:100 year floodline and close proximity to the artificial water resource edge leading to increased soil compaction.

Potential indiscriminate movement of vehicles within close proximity to the artificial water resources edge during alien vegetation control, leading to habitat alterations through soil compaction, vegetation removal and altered flow patterns.

Earthworks surrounding the artificial water resources leading to loss of habitat, erosion and altered runoff patterns.

Spillage from construction vehicles and dumping of waste leading to soil contamination within the artificial water resources.

Changes to the artificial water resources vegetation community due to alien invasion resulting in altered conditions.

SAS 218058 June 2018

17

intense rainfall events. Although these water resources will be highly impacted, the impact

significance remains very low since they are artificially formed, as the result of anthropogenic

activities. Table 3 and 4 below provide the results of the unmanaged and managed impact

scoring for the potential loss of the resource habitat and ecological structure as well as the

potential change in the hydrological functioning respectively.

Table 3: Potential Impact loss of the artificial water resource habitat and ecological structure (Unmanaged and Managed)

Unmanaged Probability of Impact

Sensitivity of receiving environment

Severity Spatial scale

Duration of

impact

Likelihood Consequence Significance

Construction phase

5 1 3 1 3 6 7 42(low)

Operational phase

1 1 1 1 2 2 4 8(very low)

Managed Probability of Impact



Duration of

impact


Construction phase

5 1 1 1 2 6 4 24(Very Low)

Operational phase

1 1 1 1 1 2 3 6 (Very Low)

Table 4: Potential changes to the hydrological functioning of the water resource (Unmanaged and managed)




Duration of

impact


Construction phase

5 1 3 1 3 6 7 42(Low)

Operational phase

1 1 1 1 2 2 4 8(very low)




Duration of

impact


Construction phase

5 1 1 1 2 6 4 24(Very low)

Operational phase

1 1 1 1 1 2 3 6 (Very Low)

SAS 218058 June 2018

18

Impact assessment of the artificial water resources on the eastern portion

of the study area

The artificial water resources situated on the eastern portion of the study area are unlikely to

be impacted is due to their positioning further away the footprint of the proposed development.

Table 5 and 6 below provide the results of the unmanaged and managed impact scoring for

the potential loss of the resource habitat and ecological structure as well as the potential

change in the hydrological functioning respectively.

Table 5: Potential impact loss of the habitat and ecological structure resource (Unmanaged and Managed)




Duration of

impact


Construction phase

2 1 1 1 3 3 5 15(Very low)

Operational phase

1 1 1 1 2 2 4 8(very low)




Duration of

impact


Construction phase

1 1 1 1 2 2 4 8(Very Low)

Operational phase

1 1 1 1 1 2 3 6(Very Low)

Table 6: Potential change to the hydrological functioning of the water resource (Unmanaged and Managed)




Duration of

impact


Construction phase

2 1 1 1 3 3 5 15(Very low)

Operational phase

1 1 1 1 2 2 4 8(very low)




Duration of

impact


Construction phase

1 1 1 1 2 2 4 8(Very Low)

Operational phase

1 1 1 1 1 2 3 6(Very Low)

SAS 218058 June 2018

19

Impact Mitigation

General “good practice” mitigation measures applicable to a development of this nature are

stipulated below. The following recommendations are made in order to minimise further

impacts which may occur during the operational phase, should authorisation to proceed be

granted:

Storage facilities and all other non-essential activities should be located away from

the water resources in order to avoid water and soil contamination, which would affect

the structure and function of the artificial water resources;

No unnecessary stockpiling of construction material must take place within the 1:100

year floodline or close to the artificial water resources and beyond the planned

footprint of the proposed development, and all stockpiles must be removed

immediately following construction;

A comprehensive storm water management plan must be developed for the proposed

facility;

If feasible, construction must be scheduled for the drier winter period in order to

minimise the risk of sediment-laden runoff reaching the downstream water resources

as a result of the construction activities;

Should it be necessary to clear any areas of vegetation, these areas, including

contractor laydown areas, must remain as small as possible, to reduce the risk of

further proliferation of alien vegetation, and to retain a level of protection to the

wetland during construction (e.g. sediment trapping, slowing of stormwater runoff

etc.);

Contractor laydown areas and all non-essential activities are to remain outside of the

1:100 year floodline and as far from the water resources as possible;

All exposed soils must be protected for the duration of the construction phase with a

suitable material to prevent erosion and sedimentation of the artificial water

resources;

Soils should not be stockpiled within close proximity to the artificial water resources,

but should rather be outside of the temporary zone boundaries to prevent

sedimentation of the artificial water resources;

Stockpiles should not exceed 2m in height. If 2m is exceeded, erosion control

measures should be implemented;

Any remaining soils following the completion of construction activities are to be

levelled and re-seeded with indigenous flora species to minimise the risk of further

sedimentation of the artificial water resources, and to aid in the natural reclamation

process; and

SAS 218058 June 2018

20

It is highly recommended that an alien vegetation management plan be compiled

during the planning phase and implemented concurrently with the commencement of

construction. This plan should also be implemented during the operational phase

under recommendation of the ECO.

The GN 704 regulations were consulted during this study, although this article of legislation is

not applicable to the proposed development since Regulation GN704 applies specifically to

mining, however it provides useful guidelines for best practice for dirty water management.

Given the above, the following recommendations are applicable:

Confine any unpolluted water to a clean water system and direct it away from any dirty

area;

The outlet structure of the clean water diversion system should include the use of

energy dissipaters to slow the velocity of water inflow into the artificial water resources

and to mitigate erosion;

Collect the water arising within any dirty area, including water seeping from the

manufacturing plant operations and direct it into a dirty water system;

Design, construct, maintain and operate any dirty water system or activity so that it is

not likely to spill into any clean water system more than once in 50 years; and

Design, construct and maintain all water systems in such a manner as to guarantee

the serviceability of such conveyances for flows up to and including those arising as a

result of the maximum flood with an average period of recurrence of once in 50 years.

5. CONCLUSION

In conclusion the water resources identified on site can best be defined as artificial water

resources which are likely to persist under the “normal circumstances”, due to the presence

of the furrow and the roads in the area. The systems are, however, of limited ecological

importance and sensitivity and serves no true socio-cultural function nor does it provide any

essential goods and services. It is therefore recommended that this information be presented

to the DWS, as the custodian of water resources in South Africa, to obtain guidance on any

Water Use Authorisation process that may need to be followed given the characteristics of

the water features in the area.

SAS 218058 June 2018

21

A summary of the results obtained from the impact assessment conducted on the water resources within the eastern portion of the study area.

Impact 1: Loss of habitat and ecological structure Pre-mitigation Post-Rehabilitation/ Post-mitigation

Construction phase Low Very Low

Operational phase Very Low Very Low

Impact 2: Impacts on hydrological function Pre-mitigation Post-mitigation

Construction phase Low Very Low


A summary of the results obtained from the impact assessment conducted on the water resources within the eastern portion of the study area.

Impact 1: Loss of habitat and ecological structure Pre-mitigation Post-Rehabilitation/ Post-mitigation

Construction phase Very Low Very Low


Impact 2: Impacts on hydrological function Pre-mitigation Post-mitigation

Construction phase Very Low Very Low


It is the opinion of the freshwater ecologists that development within the study area will not

lead to an unacceptable loss of water resources as they do not hold any true ecological

importance and the risk to any natural wetlands and rivers is negligible. Mitigation measures

should, however, be implemented, and the disturbance avoided where possible to minimise

impacts on the watercourses of the general area.

6. REFERENCES

Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF). 2008. Updated Manual for the Identification

and Delineation of Wetlands and Riparian Areas, prepared by M. Rountree, A. L.

Batchelor, J. MacKenzie and D. Hoare. Report no. X. Stream Flow Reduction

Activities, Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, Pretoria, South Africa.

National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) 107 of 1998

National Water Act 36 of 1998

NFEPA: Driver, A., Nel, J.L., Snaddon, K., Murruy, K., Roux, D.J., Hill, L., Swartz, E.R.,

Manuel, J. and Funke, N. 2011. Implementation Manual for Freshwater Ecosystem

Priority Areas. Water Research Commission. Report No. 1801/1/11. Online available:

http://bgis.sanbi.org/nfepa/project.asp

SAS 218058 June 2018

22

APPENDIX A: Legislative requirements and Indemnity

National Environmental Management Act (NEMA, Act 107 of 1998) The National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of 1998) and the associated

Environmental Impact Assessments Regulations, 2014), states that prior to any development

taking place within a wetland or riparian area, an environmental authorisation process needs to

be followed. This could follow either the Basic Assessment process or the Environmental

Impact Assessment (EIA) process depending on the nature of the activity and scale of the

impact.

National Water Act, 1998 (NWA, Act 36 of 1998) The NWA (Act 36 of 1998) recognises that the entire ecosystem and not just the water itself in

any given water resource constitutes the resource and as such needs to be conserved;

No activity may therefore take place within a watercourse unless it is authorised by DWS or

registered;

A watercourse is defined by the NWA as:

A river or spring;

A natural channel in which water flows regularly or intermittently;

A wetland, lake or dam into which, or from which, water flows; and

Any collection of water which the Minister may, by notice in the Gazette, declare to be a

watercourse, and a reference to a watercourse includes, where relevant, its bed and banks.

Any area within a wetland or riparian zone is therefore excluded from development unless

authorisation is obtained from DWA in terms of Section 21.

General Notice 509 as published in the Government Gazette 40229 of 2016 as it relates to the NWA (Act 36 of 1998) In accordance with GN509 of 2016, a regulated area of a watercourse for section 21c and 21i of the

NWA, 1998 is defined as:

the outer edge of the 1 in 100 year flood line and/or delineated riparian habitat, whichever is

the greatest distance, measured from the middle of the watercourse of a river, spring, natural

channel, lake or dam;

in the absence of a determined 1 in 100 year flood line or riparian area the area within 100 m

from the edge of a watercourse where the edge of the watercourse is the first identifiable annual

bank fill flood bench; or

a 500 m radius from the delineated boundary (extent) of any wetland or pan.

This notice replaces GN1199 and may be exercised as follows:

i) Exercise the water use activities in terms of Section 21(c) and (i) of the Act as set out in

Table A1 below, subject to the conditions of this authorisation;

ii) Use water in terms of section 21(c) or (i) of the Act if it has a low risk class as determines

through the Risk Matrix;

iii) Do maintenance with their existing lawful water use in terms of section 21(c) or (i) of the

Act that has a LOW risk class as determined through the Risk Matrix;

iv) Conduct river and stormwater management activities as contained in a river management

plan;

v) Conduct rehabilitation of wetlands or rivers where such rehabilitation activities have a LOW

risk class as determined through the Risk Matrix; and

vi) Conduct emergency work arising from an emergency situation or incident associated with

the persons’ existing lawful water use, provided that all work is executed and reported in

the manner prescribed in the Emergency protocol.

SAS 218058 June 2018

23

Table A1: Activities that are generally authorized for any person subject only to compliance to the conditions of this notice:

Any Person ACTIVITY

Farmers and any other landowners Emergency River crossings for vehicles to gain access to livestock, crops or residences etc.

Any landowner Maintenance to private roads and river crossings provided that footprint remains the same and the road is less than 4 m wide

Any landowner Erection of fences provided that the fence will not in any way impede or divert flow, or affect resource quality detrimentally in the short, medium or long term

The General Authorisation (GA) issued, as per this notice will require the proponent to adhere with

specific conditions, rehabilitation criteria and monitoring and reporting programme. Furthermore, the

water user must ensure that there is a sufficient budget to complete, rehabilitate and maintain the water

use as set out in this GA.

Upon completion of the registration, the responsible authority will provide a certificate of registration to

the water user within 30 working days of the submission. On written receipt of a registration certificate

from the Department, the person will be regarded as a registered water user and can commence within

the water use as contemplated in the GA.

GDARD Requirements for Biodiversity Assessments Version 3 (GDARD, 2014). The biodiversity assessment must comply with the minimum requirements as stipulated by GDARD Version 3 of 2014 and must contain the following information:

The riparian delineation must be undertaken according to the DWAF guidelines; and The riparian zone and a protective buffer zone, beginning from the outer edge of the riparian

zone, must be designated as sensitive in a sensitivity map. Guidelines for buffer zone widths pertaining to riparian zones are as follows:

32m for riparian zones for rivers/streams occurring inside urban areas; and

100m for riparian zones for rivers/streams occurring outside urban areas.

SAS 218058 June 2018

24

APPENDIX B: Indemnity and Terms of use of this Report

The findings, results, observations, conclusions and recommendations given in this report are based

on the author’s best scientific and professional knowledge as well as available information. The report

is based on survey and assessment techniques which are limited by time and budgetary constraints

relevant to the type and level of investigation undertaken and SAS CC and its staff reserve the right to

modify aspects of the report including the recommendations if and when new information may become

available from ongoing research or further work in this field, or pertaining to this investigation.

Although SAS CC exercises due care and diligence in rendering services and preparing documents,

SAS CC accepts no liability and the client, by receiving this document, indemnifies SAS CC and its

directors, managers, agents and employees against all actions, claims, demands, losses, liabilities,

costs, damages and expenses arising from or in connection with services rendered, directly or indirectly

by SAS CC and by the use of the information contained in this document.

This report must not be altered or added to without the prior written consent of the author. This also

refers to electronic copies of this report which are supplied for the purposes of inclusion as part of other

reports, including main reports. Similarly, any recommendations, statements or conclusions drawn from

or based on this report must make reference to this report. If these form part of a main report relating

to this investigation or report, this report must be included in its entirety as an appendix or separate

section to the main report.

SAS 218058 June 2018

25

APPENDIX C: Method of Assessment

FRESHWATER RESOURCE ASSESSMENT APPROACH

Literature Review A desktop study was compiled with all relevant information as presented by the South African National Biodiversity Institutes (SANBI’s) Biodiversity Geographic Information Systems (BGIS) website (http://bgis.sanbi.org). Wetland specific information resources taken into consideration during the desktop assessment of the subject property included:

National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas (NFEPAs, 2011) NFEPA water management area (WMA) FEPA (sub)WMA % area Sub water catchment area FEPAs Water management area FEPAs Fish sanctuaries Wetland ecosystem types Gauteng Conservation Plan, Version 3.3 (2011)

National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas (NFEPA; 2011)

The NFEPA project is a multi-partner project between the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), Water Research Commission (WRC), South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI), Department of Water Affairs (DWA), South African Institute of Aquatic Biodiversity (SAIAB) and South African National Parks (SANParks). The project responds to the reported degradation of freshwater ecosystem condition and associated biodiversity, both globally and in South Africa. It uses systematic conservation planning to provide strategic spatial priorities of conserving South Africa’s freshwater biodiversity, within the context of equitable social and economic development. The NFEPA project aims to identify a national network of freshwater conservation areas and to explore institutional mechanisms for their implementation. Freshwater ecosystems provide a valuable, natural resource with economic, aesthetic, spiritual, cultural and recreational value. However, the integrity of freshwater ecosystems in South Africa is declining at an alarming rate, largely as a consequence of a variety of challenges that are practical (managing vast areas of land to maintain connectivity between freshwater ecosystems), socio-economic (competition between stakeholders for utilisation) and institutional (building appropriate governance and co-management mechanisms). The NFEPA database was searched for information in terms of conservation status of rivers, wetland habitat and wetland features present within the subject property.

Classification System for Wetlands and other Aquatic Ecosystems in South Africa (2013)

All wetland or riparian features encountered within the study area were assessed using the Classification System for Wetlands and other Aquatic Ecosystems in South Africa. User Manual: Inland systems, hereafter referred to as the “Classification System” (Ollis et. al., 2013). A summary on Levels 1 to 4 of the classification system are presented in the tables below.

Table C1: Classification System for Inland Systems, up to Level 3.

WETLAND / AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM CONTEXT

LEVEL 1: SYSTEM

LEVEL 2: REGIONAL SETTING

LEVEL 3: LANDSCAPE UNIT

Inland Systems

DWA Level 1 Ecoregions OR NFEPA WetVeg Groups OR Other special framework

Valley Floor

Slope

Plain

Bench (Hilltop / Saddle / Shelf)

http://bgis.sanbi.org/

SAS 218058 June 2018

26

Table C2: Hydrogeomorphic (HGM) Units for the Inland System, showing the primary HGM Types at Level 4A and the subcategories at Level 4B to 4C.

FUNCTIONAL UNIT

LEVEL 4: HYDROGEOMORPHIC (HGM) UNIT

HGM type Longitudinal zonation/ Landform / Outflow drainage

Landform / Inflow drainage

A B C

River

Mountain headwater stream Active channel

Riparian zone

Mountain stream Active channel

Riparian zone

Transitional Active channel

Riparian zone

Upper foothills Active channel

Riparian zone

Lower foothills Active channel

Riparian zone

Lowland river Active channel

Riparian zone

Rejuvenated bedrock fall Active channel

Riparian zone

Rejuvenated foothills Active channel

Riparian zone

Upland floodplain Active channel

Riparian zone

Channelled valley-bottom wetland

(not applicable) (not applicable)

Unchannelled valley-bottom wetland

(not applicable) (not applicable)

Floodplain wetland Floodplain depression (not applicable)

Floodplain flat (not applicable)

Depression

Exorheic

With channelled inflow

Without channelled inflow

Endorheic



Dammed



Seep With channelled outflow (not applicable)

Without channelled outflow (not applicable)

Wetland flat (not applicable) (not applicable)

Level 1: Inland systems

From the classification system, Inland Systems are defined as aquatic ecosystems that have no existing connection to the ocean1 (i.e. characterised by the complete absence of marine exchange and/or tidal influence) but which are inundated or saturated with water, either permanently or periodically. It is important to bear in mind, however, that certain Inland Systems may have had a historical connection to the ocean, which in some cases may have been relatively recent.

1 Most rivers are indirectly connected to the ocean via an estuary at the downstream end, but where marine exchange (i.e. the presence of

seawater) or tidal fluctuations are detectable in a river channel that is permanently or periodically connected to the ocean, it is defined as

part of the estuary.

SAS 218058 June 2018

27

Level 2: Ecoregions & NFEPA Wetland Vegetation Groups

For Inland Systems, the regional spatial framework that has been included in Level 2 of the classification system is that of the DWA’s Level 1 Ecoregions for aquatic ecosystems (Kleynhans et. al., 2005). There is a total of 31 Ecoregions across South Africa, including Lesotho and Swaziland. DWA Ecoregions have most commonly been used to categorise the regional setting for national and regional water resource management applications, especially in relation to rivers. The Vegetation Map of South Africa, Swaziland and Lesotho (Mucina & Rutherford, 2006) groups’ vegetation types across the country, according to Biomes, which are then divided into Bioregions. To categorise the regional setting for the wetland component of the NFEPA project, wetland vegetation groups (referred to as WetVeg Groups) were derived by further splitting Bioregions into smaller groups through expert input (Nel et al., 2011). There are currently 133 NFEPA WetVeg Groups. It is envisaged that these groups could be used as a special framework for the classification of wetlands in national- and regional-scale conservation planning and wetland management initiatives.

Level 3: Landscape Setting At Level 3 of the classification system for Inland Systems, a distinction is made between four Landscape Units (Table C1) on the basis of the landscape setting (i.e. topographical position) within which an HGM Unit is situated, as follows (Ollis et. al., 2013):

Slope: an included stretch of ground that is not part of a valley floor, which is typically located on the side of a mountain, hill or valley;

Valley floor: The base of a valley, situated between two distinct valley side-slopes;

Plain: an extensive area of low relief characterised by relatively level, gently undulating or uniformly sloping land; and

Bench (hilltop/saddle/shelf): an area of mostly level or nearly level high ground (relative to the broad surroundings), including hilltops/crests (areas at the top of a mountain or hill flanked by down-slopes in all directions), saddles (relatively high-lying areas flanked by down-slopes on two sides in one direction and up-slopes on two sides in an approximately perpendicular direction), and shelves/terraces/ledges (relatively high-lying, localised flat areas along a slope, representing a break in slope with an up-slope one side and a down-slope on the other side in the same direction).

Level 4: Hydrogeomorphic Units Seven primary HGM Types are recognised for Inland Systems at Level 4A of the classification system (Table C2), on the basis of hydrology and geomorphology (Ollis et. al., 2013), namely:

River: a linear landform with clearly discernible bed and banks, which permanently or periodically carries a concentrated flow of water;

Channelled valley-bottom wetland: a valley-bottom wetland with a river channel running through it;

Unchannelled valley-bottom wetland: a valley-bottom wetland without a river channel running through it;

Floodplain wetland: the mostly flat or gently sloping land adjacent to and formed by an alluvial river channel, under its present climate and sediment load, which is subject to periodic inundation by over-topping of the channel bank;

Depression: a landform with closed elevation contours that increases in depth from the perimeter to a central area of greatest depth, and within which water typically accumulates;

Wetland Flat: a level or near-level wetland area that is not fed by water from a river channel, and which is typically situated on a plain or a bench. Closed elevation contours are not evident around the edge of a wetland flat; and

Seep: a wetland area located on (gently to steeply) sloping land, which is dominated by the colluvial (i.e. gravity-driven), unidirectional movement of material down-slope. Seeps are often located on the side-slopes of a valley but they do not, typically, extend into a valley floor.

The above terms have been used for the primary HGM Units in the classification system to try and ensure consistency with the wetland classification terms currently in common usage in South Africa. Similar terminology (but excluding categories for “channel”, “flat” and “valleyhead seep”) is used, for example, in the recently developed tools produced as part of the Wetland Management Series including WET-Health (Macfarlane et. al., 2008), WET-IHI (DWAF, 2007) and WET-EcoServices (Kotze et. al., 2009).

SAS 218058 June 2018

28

Wetland Delineation

For the purposes of this investigation, a wetland is defined in the National Water Act (1998) as “land which is transitional between terrestrial and aquatic systems where the water table is at or near the surface, or the land is periodically covered with shallow water, and which in normal circumstances supports or would support vegetation typically adapted to life in saturated soil”. The wetland zone delineation took place according to the method presented in the DWAF (2005) document “A practical field procedure for identification and delineation of wetlands and riparian areas. An updated draft version of this report is also available and was therefore also considered during the wetland delineation (DWAF, 2008). The foundation of the method is based on the fact that wetlands and riparian zones have several distinguishing factors including the following:

The position in the landscape, which will help identify those parts of the landscape where wetlands are more likely to occur;

The type of soil form (i.e. the type of soil according to a standard soil classification system), since wetlands are associated with certain soil types;

The presence of wetland vegetation species; and The presence of redoxymorphic soil feature, which are morphological signatures that appear in

soils with prolonged periods of saturation. By observing the evidence of these features in the form of indicators, wetlands and riparian zones can be delineated and identified. If the use of these indicators and the interpretation of the findings are applied correctly, then the resulting delineation can be considered accurate (DWAF, 2005 and 2008). Riparian and wetland zones can be divided into three zones (DWAF, 2005). The permanent zone of wetness is nearly always saturated. The seasonal zone is saturated for a significant periods of wetness (at least three months of saturation per annum) and the temporary zone surrounds the seasonal zone and is only saturated for a short period of saturation (typically less than three months of saturation per annum), but is saturated for a sufficient period, under normal circumstances, to allow for the formation of hydromorphic soils and the growth of wetland vegetation. The object of this study was to identify the outer boundary of the temporary zone and then to identify a suitable buffer zone around the wetland area.

Ecological Impact Assessment Method

In order for the Environmental Assessment Practitioner (EAP) to allow for sufficient consideration of all environmental impacts, impacts were assessed using a common, defensible method of assessing significance that will enable comparisons to be made between risks/impacts and will enable authorities, stakeholders and the client to understand the process and rationale upon which risks/impacts have been assessed. The method to be used for assessing risks/impacts is outlined in the sections below.

The first stage of risk/impact assessment is the identification of environmental activities, aspects and impacts. This is supported by the identification of receptors and resources, which allows for an understanding of the impact pathway and an assessment of the sensitivity to change. The definitions used in the impact assessment are presented below.

An activity is a distinct process or task undertaken by an organisation for which a responsibility can be assigned. Activities also include facilities or infrastructure that is possessed by an organisation.

An environmental aspect is an ‘element of an organizations activities, products and services which can interact with the environment’2. The interaction of an aspect with the environment may result in an impact.

Environmental risks/impacts are the consequences of these aspects on environmental resources or receptors of particular value or sensitivity, for example, disturbance due to noise and health effects due to poorer air quality. In the case where the impact is on human health or wellbeing, this should be stated. Similarly, where the receptor is not anthropogenic, then it should, where possible, be stipulated what the receptor is.

Receptors can comprise, but are not limited to, people or human-made systems, such as local residents, communities and social infrastructure, as well as components of the biophysical environment such as wetlands, flora and riverine systems.

Resources include components of the biophysical environment. Frequency of activity refers to how often the proposed activity will take place.

2 The definition has been aligned with that used in the ISO 14001 Standard.

SAS 218058 June 2018

29

Frequency of impact refers to the frequency with which a stressor (aspect) will impact on the receptor.

Severity refers to the degree of change to the receptor status in terms of the reversibility of the impact; sensitivity of receptor to stressor; duration of impact (increasing or decreasing with time); controversy potential and precedent setting; threat to environmental and health standards.

Spatial extent refers to the geographical scale of the impact. Duration refers to the length of time over which the stressor will cause a change in the resource

or receptor. The significance of the impact is then assessed by rating each variable numerically according to the defined criteria. Refer to the Table C3. The purpose of the rating is to develop a clear understanding of influences and processes associated with each impact. The severity, spatial scope and duration of the impact together comprise the consequence of the impact and when summed can obtain a maximum value of 15. The frequency of the activity and the frequency of the impact together comprise the likelihood of the impact occurring and can obtain a maximum value of 10. The values for likelihood and consequence of the impact are then read off a significance-rating matrix and are used to determine whether mitigation is necessary3.

The assessment of significance is undertaken twice. Initial, significance is based on only natural and existing mitigation measures (including built-in engineering designs). The subsequent assessment takes into account the recommended management measures required to mitigate the impacts. Measures such as demolishing infrastructure, and reinstatement and rehabilitation of land, are considered post-mitigation.

The model outcome of the impacts was then assessed in terms of impact certainty and consideration of available information. The Precautionary Principle is applied in line with South Africa’s National Environmental Management Act (No. 108 of 1997) in instances of uncertainty or lack of information, by increasing assigned ratings or adjusting final model outcomes. In certain instances where a variable or outcome requires rational adjustment due to model limitations, the model outcomes have been adjusted.

Table C3: Criteria for assessing significance of impacts

LIKELIHOOD DESCRIPTORS

Probability of impact R

A

TI

N

G

Highly unlikely 1

Possible 2

Likely 3

Highly likely 4

Definite 5

Sensitivity of receiving environment R

A

TI

N

G

Ecology not sensitive/important 1

Ecology with limited sensitivity/importance 2

Ecology moderately sensitive/ /important 3

Ecology highly sensitive /important 4

Ecology critically sensitive /important 5

3 Some risks/impacts that have low significance will however still require mitigation.

SAS 218058 June 2018

30

CONSEQUENCE DESCRIPTORS

Severity of impact RATING

Insignificant / ecosystem structure and function unchanged 1

Small / ecosystem structure and function largely unchanged 2

Significant / ecosystem structure and function moderately altered 3

Great / harmful/ ecosystem structure and function largely altered 4

Disastrous / ecosystem structure and function seriously to critically altered 5

Spatial scope of impact RATING

Activity specific/ < 5 ha impacted / Linear developments affected < 100m 1

Development specific/ within the site boundary / < 100ha impacted / Linear developments affected <

100m

2

Local area/ within 1 km of the site boundary / < 5000ha impacted / Linear developments affected <

1000m

3

Regional within 5 km of the site boundary / < 2000ha impacted / Linear developments affected < 3000m 4

Entire habitat unit / Entire system/ > 2000ha impacted / Linear developments affected > 3000m 5

Duration of impact RATING

One day to one month 1

One month to one year 2

One year to five years 3

Life of operation or less than 20 years 4

Permanent 5

Table C4: Significance Rating Matrix.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30

3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45

4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75

6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 72 78 84 90

7 14 21 28 35 42 49 56 63 70 77 84 91 98 105

8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72 80 88 96 104 112 120

9 18 27 36 45 54 63 72 81 90 99 108 117 126 135

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150

LIKE

LIHO

OD

(Fre

quen

cy o

f act

ivity

+

Freq

uenc

y of

impa

ct)

CONSEQUENCE (Severity + Spatial Scope + Duration)

SAS 218058 June 2018

31

Table C5: Positive/Negative Mitigation Ratings.

Significance Rating

Value Negative Impact Management Recommendation Positive Impact Management Recommendation

Very high 126-150 Critically consider the viability of proposed projects Improve current management of existing projects significantly and immediately

Maintain current management

High 101-125 Comprehensively consider the viability of proposed projects Improve current management of existing projects significantly


Medium-high 76-100 Consider the viability of proposed projects Improve current management of existing projects


Medium-low 51-75 Actively seek mechanisms to minimise impacts in line with the mitigation hierarchy

Maintain current management and/or proposed project criteria and strive for continuous improvement

Low 26-50

Where deemed necessary seek mechanisms to minimise impacts in line with the mitigation hierarchy


Very low 1-25 Maintain current management and/or proposed project criteria and strive for continuous improvement


The following points were considered when undertaking the assessment: Risks and impacts were analysed in the context of the project’s area of influence

encompassing:

Primary project site and related facilities that the client and its contractors develops or controls;

Areas potentially impacted by cumulative impacts for any existing project or condition and other project-related developments; and

Areas potentially affected by impacts from unplanned but predictable developments caused by the project that may occur later or at a different location.

Risks/Impacts were assessed for all stages of the project cycle including:

Pre-construction;

Construction; and

Operation. If applicable, transboundary or global effects were assessed. Individuals or groups who may be differentially or disproportionately affected by the project

because of their disadvantaged or vulnerable status were assessed. Particular attention was paid to describing any residual impacts that will occur after

rehabilitation.

Mitigation measure development

The following points present the key concepts considered in the development of mitigation measures for the proposed development.

Mitigation and performance improvement measures and actions that address the risks and

impacts4 are identified and described in as much detail as possible. Measures and actions to address negative impacts will favour avoidance and prevention over

minimisation, mitigation or compensation. Desired outcomes are defined, and have been developed in such a way as to be measurable

events with performance indicators, targets and acceptable criteria that can be tracked over defined periods, with estimates of the resources (including human resource and training requirements) and responsibilities for implementation.

Recommendations Recommendations were developed to address and mitigate impacts associated with the proposed development. These recommendations also include general management measures which apply to the proposed development as a whole. Mitigation measures have been developed to address issues in all phases throughout the life of the operation from planning, through to construction and operation.

4 Mitigation measures should address both positive and negative impacts

SAS 218058 June 2018

32

APPENDIX D – Declaration and Specialists CV’s

Declaration Declaration that the specialist is independent in a form as may be specified by the competent

authority

I, Stephen van Staden, declare that -

I act as the independent specialist in this application;

I will perform the work relating to the application in an objective manner, even if this results in views and findings that are not favourable to the applicant;

I declare that there are no circumstances that may compromise my objectivity in performing such work;

I have expertise in conducting the specialist report relevant to this application, including knowledge of the relevant legislation and any guidelines that have relevance to the proposed activity;

I will comply with the applicable legislation;

I have not, and will not engage in, conflicting interests in the undertaking of the activity;

I undertake to disclose to the applicant and the competent authority all material information in my possession that reasonably has or may have the potential of influencing - any decision to be taken with respect to the application by the competent authority; and - the objectivity of any report, plan or document to be prepared by myself for submission to the competent authority;

All the particulars furnished by me in this form are true and correct

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Signature of the Specialist

SAS 218058 June 2018

33

APPENDIX E: Specialist CV’s and Declaration

SCIENTIFIC AQUATIC SERVICES (SAS) – SPECIALIST CONSULTANT INFORMATION

CURRICULUM VITAE OF STEPHEN VAN STADEN

PERSONAL DETAILS

Position in Company Managing member, Ecologist, Aquatic Ecologist

Date of Birth 13 July 1979

Nationality South African

Languages English, Afrikaans

Joined SAS 2003 (year of establishment)

Other Business Trustee of the Serenity Property Trust

MEMBERSHIP IN PROFESSIONAL SOCIETIES

Registered Professional Scientist at South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions (SACNASP)

Accredited River Health practitioner by the South African River Health Program (RHP)

Member of the South African Soil Surveyors Association (SASSO) Member of the Gauteng Wetland Forum

Member of IAIA South Africa

EDUCATION

Qualifications

MSc (Environmental Management) (University of Johannesburg)

2003

BSc (Hons) Zoology (Aquatic Ecology) (University of Johannesburg) 2001

BSc (Zoology, Geography and Environmental Management) (University of

Johannesburg)

Tools for wetland Assessment short course Rhodes University

2000

2016

COUNTRIES OF WORK EXPERIENCE

South Africa – All Provinces

Southern Africa – Lesotho, Botswana, Mozambique, Zimbabwe Zambia

Eastern Africa – Tanzania Mauritius

West Africa – Ghana, Liberia, Angola, Guinea Bissau, Nigeria, Sierra Leona

Central Africa – Democratic Republic of the Congo

SAS 218058 June 2018

34

SELECTED PROJECT EXAMPLES

Client Project Project Description Area

RESIDENTIAL

GIBB (PTY) LTD Bloemwater Knelpoort Project Full ECO Assessment Free State

DLC Town Plan (Pty) Ltd Bongwini and Toekomsrus Project Gold 1

Environmental Sensitivity Analyses as part of the development of site Development Plans and Precinct Planning on the outskirts of Takoradi Ghana (2000 ha) Randfontein

SRK Consulting (PTY) Ltd Skoenmaker River Wetland, Aquatic & ECO Assessment Somerset East

Century Property Development The Hills Eco Estate Wetland delineation and ecological assessment, and rehabilitation plan Midrand, Gauteng

ROADS, PIPELINES, POWERLINES AND OTHER LINEAR DEVELOPMENTS

Delta Built Environment Consultants Lesotho Border Road Project

Soil & Land Capability Assessment, full wetland ecological assessment and aquatic assessment as part of the EIA process Lesotho

Spoor Environmental

Thabazimbi Waste Water Treatment Works; Upgrade of Sewer Pipeline Freshwater resource ecological assessment and rehabilitation and management plan Limpopo

Royal Haskoning DHV (Pty) Ltd N11 Ring Road Freshwater Ecological Assessment Limpopo

Chameleon Environmental N7 Road Upgrade Cederberg & Kransvleikloof

Floral RDL scan and delineation of the wetland areas along the proposed N7 road upgrade between Clanwilliam and Citrusdal Western Cape

Iliso Consulting (Pty Ltd) N3TC De Beers Pass Route Variation order for additional work on N3TC De Beers pass route and existing N3 route Kwa-Zulu Natal

MINING

Anglo Platinum Der Brochen Mine Ongoing bi-annual seasonal aquatic biomonitoring from 2011 to present Steelport Limpopo

Anglo Platinum Der Brochen Mine Wetland Ecological Assessment (2014) Full terrestrial, wetland and aquatic ecological assessment, soil and land capability assessment (2018)

Steelpoort, Limpopo

Bokoni Platinum Mine Bokoni Platinum Mine Annual Soil Monitoring & Soil Contamination Free State

GIBB (PTY) LTD Rustenburg Bridges Aquatic Biomonitoring Assessment Rustenburg, North West

Assmang Chrome Machadodorp Assmang Chrome Machadodorp Works Biomonitoring & Toxicological Monitoring for the 2015 period

Machadodorp, Mpumalanga

Globesight Advisory, Consulting & Training Sabie TGME Project

Freshwater Ecological Assessment as part of the environmental assessment and authorization process for the proposed development (gold mining project – pre-mined residue and hard rock mining near Sabie) Mpumalanga

Ikwezi Mining (Pty) Ltd Ikwezi Doornkop Colliery Develop freshwater resource rehabilitation and management plans, and conduct ecological biomonitoring in fulfilment of the water use licensing process for the Ikwezi Doornkop Colliery near Newcastle Newcastle

Sappi Southern Africa (Pty) Ltd Blesbokspruit Enstra Mill Biomonitoring studies, whole effluent toxicity (WET) studies, bioaccumulation assessment and sediment heavy metal contaminant analyses Johannesburg

Stibium Mining Malati Opencast Freshwater ecological assessment, risk assessment and freshwater rehabilitation and management plan and plant species plan as part of the water use authorization process for a proposed Malati opencast near Tzaneen Limpopo

EXM Advisory Services Heuningkranz Mine Freshwater assessment, soil and land capability assessment done for Sishen Iron Ore Company (Pty) Ltd part of Kumba Iron Ore limited as part of the environmental management services for the Heuningkranz project Northern Cape

Shangoni Management Services (Pty) Ltd Leslie Colliery

Project manager, freshwater ecological assessment as part of the environmental impact assessment process for the underground coal mine to determine the status of the freshwater resources within the proposed mining area Mpumalanga

SAS 218058 June 2018

35

SLR Consulting (Africa) (Pty) Ltd Commissiekraal Colliery Full Ecological investigation, including a terrestrial fauna and flora assessment as well as an assessment of the wetland and aquatic PES and wetland ecoservices on the site. Kwa-Zulu Natal

Jacana Environmental CC Leandra Colliery Full Ecological Assessment, including a terrestrial fauna and flora assessment as well as an assessment of the wetland and aquatic PES and wetland ecoservices on the site. Mpumalanga

SRK Consulting (PTY) Ltd Marula Platinum Mine Freshwater resource ecological assessment. Development of a plant species plan in line with the project’s rehabilitation objectives Burgersfort

Jacana Environmental CC Donkerhoek Dam development Full ecological assessment (Fauna, floral, wetland and aquatic assessment) as part of the EIA process Mpumalanga

EXM Advisory Services Evander Gold Mining (Pty) Ltd Determination of the Wetland Offset Requirements for the proposed expansion of the Elikhulu Tailings Storage Facility Mpumalanga

EXM Advisory Services Canyon Coal - Witfontein mining project

Delineate and characterize the wetland and aquatic resources for the Witfontein mining project located by the farms Holfontein and Witrand near Bethal Mpumalanga

SRK Consulting (South Africa) (PTY) Ltd The Sierra Rutile Mine Specialist terrestrial ecology, aquatic ecology and wetland ecology studies

Moyamba District - Sierra Leona

INFRASTRUCTURE

GIBB (Pty) Ltd Bronkhorstspruit Feeder Line Monthly Aquatic Biomonitoring as part of the environmental assessment and authorization process for the proposed conversion of the Bronkhorstspruit plots feeder from 6.6kv to 22kv Bronkhorstspruit

SRK Consulting (PTY) Ltd South Dunes Precinct Project Full Ecological Assessment Richards Bay

SRK Consulting (PTY) Ltd Braamfonteinspruit Rehabilitation

Terrestrial, Freshwater and Aquatic Ecological Assessment as part of the rehabilitation and management plan for the Braamfonsteinspruit, Johannesburg Johannesburg

Iliso Consulting (Pty Ltd) City of Johannesburg Aquatic Ecological Assessment, monitoring and managing the ecological state of rivers in the City Of Johannesburg Metropolitan area Johannesburg

Maanakana Projects and Consulting (Pty) Ltd Lethabo Pump Station Aquatic present ecological state assessment of the Vaal river Vereeniging

SRK Consulting CTIA runway re-alignment project – Wetland Offset

Determination of the Wetland offset requirements for Cape Town international Airport runway realignment, identification of a suitable offset location and compilation of relevant baseline assessments (Wetland and faunal), Khayelitsha. (2017) Cape Town

GIBB (Pty) Ltd Musami Dam Determination of the draft environmental water quality requirements for the project Zimbabwe

Nemai Consulting (PTY) Ltd uMkhomazi Water Project Determination of the Wetland and Terrestrial Biodiversity Offset Requirements for the proposed uMkhomazi Water Project Richmond - KZN

POWER GENERATION

Iliso Consulting Mzimvubu Dam Full Terrestrial (Flora and Faunal), Wetland and Aquatic Baseline Ecological Assessment Eastern Cape

WKN-Wind current SA C/O Alan Wolfromm HGA HAGA WEF Hydrological Assessment Eastern Cape

SRK Consulting (PTY) Ltd RPM Crossing Wetland Delineation Free State

SRK Consulting (Pty) Ltd Eskom Denova Powerline and sub-station

Freshwater assessment as part of the EIA process for the proposed Eskom powerline (1, 75 km in length) and sub-station (132kV) near Denova, Western Cape. (2014) Western Cape

CSIR Consulting & Analytical Services Sutherland WEF Freshwater Ecological Assessments Northern Cape

CSIR Consulting & Analytical Services Victoria West WEF Freshwater Ecological Assessments Northern Cape

SAS 218058 June 2018

36


CURRICULUM VITAE OF MTHOKOZISI MBANGEZELI

PERSONAL DETAILS

Position in Company Soil Scientist Date of Birth 11th March 1990 Nationality South African Languages IsiXhosa, English Joined SAS 2018


SACNASP – Registered as a Candidate Natural Scientist EDUCATION

Qualifications B. Tech Crop Production and Soil Sciences (Tshwane University of Technology) 2015 BA (Hons) Development Studies (Nelson Mandela University) 2017


South Africa – Gauteng and Limpopo SELECTED PROJECT EXAMPLES

Soil, Land Use and Land Capability Assessments

Soil, land use and land capability scoping assessment as part of the environmental assessment and authorisation process for the proposed Dwarsrivier expansion project, Limpopo province

Freshwater Ecological Assessments

Freshwater resource verification and delineation as part of the environmental assessment and authorisation process for the proposed ab InBev glass bottle manufacturing plant; near Vereeniging, Gauteng province.

FRESH WATER RESOURCE ASSESSMENT AS PART OF

THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND

AUTHORISATION PROCESS FOR THE PROPOSED ISANTI

PROJECT; NEAR VEREENIGING, GAUTENG PROVINCE.

Prepared for

SLR Consulting (Pty) Ltd

October 2018

Prepared by: Scientific Aquatic Services Report author: M. Mbangezeli (Cand. Sci. Nat) Report reviewer: S. van Staden (Pr. Sci. Nat) Report Reference: SAS 218150 Date: October 2018

Scientific Aquatic Services CC CC Reg No 2003/078943/23 Vat Reg. No. 4020235273 PO Box 751779 Gardenview 2047 Tel: 011 616 7893 Fax: 086 724 3132 E-mail: [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

SAS 218150 October 2018

ii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Scientific Aquatic Services (SAS) was appointed to conduct a freshwater resource assessment and delineation as part of the environmental assessment and authorisation process for the proposed Isanti Project development located on Portion 238 of the farm Leeuwkuil 596 IQ, near Vereeniging, within the Gauteng Province, hereafter referred to as the “study area” (Figure 1 and 2). Associated with the proposed development is a sewer package plant, a potable water pipeline and electrical infrastructure. It is proposed that treated effluent will be released within the existing stormwater infrastructure adjacent to the study area and the R59. Additionally, a potable water pipeline is anticipated to be attached to the bridge which crosses over the unnamed Tributary of the Vaal River.

The study area is situated immediately north of the R28 (Boy Louw Street), east of Lager Road, and west of the R59 (Sybrand van Niekerk Freeway). The R54 (Houtkop Road) is situated approximately 2.7 km north of the study area. The suburb of Leeuhof is situated approximately 380m to the north east and Sharpeville 1 km southeast of the study area.

The assessment took the following approach:

• A desktop study was conducted, in which possible freshwater resources were identified for on-site investigation, and relevant national and provincial databases were consulted. The results of the desktop study are contained in Section 2 of this report;

• At the time of this assessment, the overall freshwater environment was of low ecological importance and sensitivity;

• During the filed assessment, there were no natural wetlands identified within the study area, however a tributary of the Vaal River was confirmed to be within the southern portion of the investigation area to the south of the R28 and 50m from the nearest point of development of the Imali complex;

• The only wetlands observed within the investigation area are artificial in nature and the majority of them are located upgradient of the proposed development and thus there is no quantum of risk posed to them;

• Various artificial water resources were identified, including a concrete water canal where the treated effluent is proposed to be discharged into situated adjacent the study area;

Based on observations and through consultation of historical imagery, the water resources identified within the study area, were classified as artificial and anthropogenically derived, due to their nature and close proximity to man-made features such as furrows, water canals and roads located to the south and eastern portion of the study area. It is likely that the furrows within the study area were developed to drain the higher lying areas; Based on the findings of the freshwater resource assessment and the results of the risk assessment, it is the opinion of the ecologist that the proposed construction and operation activities pose a low risk to the unnamed tributary of the Vaal River and water resources in the greater area. The concrete water canal, together with the other artificial water resources in the vicinity of the proposed development, are considered to have no ecological importance and sensitivity due their artificial nature with no wetland characteristics. However, the concrete water canal will convey the treated sewage effluent into the downstream systems (tributary of the Vaal River), for this reason mitigation measures stipulated on this report must be applied in order to minimize the risks that are outlined in section 4.1.2 of this report. During the operation phase It is highly recommended that a conservancy tank be constructed as part of the sewage effluent treatment plant in order to ensure that effluent can be stored during periods of maintenance and thus prevent the release of sub-standard effluent; and regular testing of the effluent quality is to take place to ensure that the effluent quality being released to the receiving environment is of an acceptable quality. Moreover, the proposed pipeline is anticipated to cross over the unnamed Tributary of the Vaal River, however the risk posed by the operational phase of the pipeline is considered negligible, in light of the fact that the pipeline will be used for the conveyance of potable water and also taking into account of low ecological integrity of the Tributary of the Vaal River as well as the poor quality of water in the system.


iii

• Furthermore, a series of artificial dams were observed within the investigation area located on the southern section of the investigation area;

• Due to the position of the watercourses in the area along with other infrastructure components the proposed development poses no quantum of risk to them except for the risk posed by the discharge of treated sewage effluent,

• The proposed pipeline will traverse the Tributary of the Vaal River, however the pipe would be used for potable water and also taking into consideration of the low ecological integrity of the Tributary of the Vaal River as well as poor water quality, the risk posed by the construction and the operational phase is considered negligible, and

• The detailed results of the field assessment are contained in Section 3 of this report. A summary of the outcome of the DWS Risk Assessment is provided in the table below.


iv

Table A: Summary of the results of the DWS risk assessment matrix applied to artificial concrete water canal and the tributary of the Vaal River into which the proposed treated effluent will be discharged into.

No.

Ph

ases

Activity Aspect Impact

Sev

erit

y

Co

nse

qu

ence

Lik

elih

oo

d

Sig

nif

ican

ce

Ris

k R

atin

g

Control Measures

1

Co

nst

ruct

ion

Ph

ase

Site clearing prior to commencement of construction activities.

Removal of vegetation and associated disturbances to soils. *Removal of terrestrial vegetation and associated disturbances (rubble and litter) to soils

*Exposure of soils, leading to increased runoff and erosion, and thus increased sedimentation of the receiving watercourses via the concrete water canal *Decreased ecoservice provision; and *Proliferation of alien vegetation because of disturbances.

1 3 4 12 L

As the water canal has low/no ecological importance and sensitivity, soil erosion should nevertheless still need to be minimised to avoid sedimentation load into the concrete water canal and ultimately the tributary of the Vaal River; *Therefore exposed soils should to be protected from erosion during the construction and operational phases of development and also retain as much indigenous vegetation as possible.

2 Ground-breaking, excavation of trench for installing the treated sewer pipeline linking into the concrete water canal

*Removal of topsoil; and *Excavation and trenching leading to stockpiling of soil.

*Altered runoff patterns, leading to increased erosion and sedimentation of the receiving environment via the concrete water canal

1 3 4 12 L *After installation of the pipeline, the open trenches should be closed immediately, in sections so as to ensure that no open trenches are left open for extensive periods; *Trenches should be backfilled with the stockpiled excavated materials in layers, up to 150mm below the natural ground level, after which the topsoil is replaced (to the natural ground level) and the removed vegetation is reinstated as part of the rehabilitation of the site; and *Soil must be lightly recompacted to a depth of 450 mm, and all construction material must be removed from site upon the completion of construction.

3 Installation of treated effluent pipeline that will discharge into the concrete water canal

*Potential mixing and casting of concrete: *Placement of bedding material within the excavated trench underneath the pipelines; *Backfilling of trench, where after

*Erosion of the exposed trench; *Potential sedimentation of the water canal and downstream watercourses; *Potential of backfill material to enter the canal, increasing the sediment load

1 3 4 12 L


v

No.

Ph

ases


Sev

erit

y

Co

nse

qu

ence

Lik

elih

oo

d

Sig

nif

ican

ce

Ris

k R

atin

g

Control Measures

it will be compacted.

reporting to the receiving environment;

4 Potential indiscriminate waste disposal within the canal or within the vicinity thereof.

Disposal of construction-related waste material (such as rubble, hazardous chemicals and litter)

*waste material being transported to downstream watercourses; and *Altered water quality of the tributary of the Vaal River due to chemical waste disposal.

2 4 4 16 L *Suitable waste disposal facilities should be provided and should regularly be emptied and taken to an appropriately registered waste disposal facility; *If waste/spillage has entered the concrete canal as they will lead to a contamination of the downstream systems, these spills should immediately be cleared.

5 Potential spillage from construction vehicles

Spills / chemical leaks from construction vehicles.

*Possible contamination surface water

2 4 4 16 L

6

Op

erat

ion

al P

has

e

Operation and maintenance of the treated effluent plant

*during standard operation, regular monitoring must take place to ensure that the effluent being discharged is of the licensed and appropriate standard * During maintenance there is risk that substandard effluent is discharged into the concrete

* during maintenance there is risk that substandard effluent is discharged into the concrete canal which will report to the receiving environment

1 3 4 12 L

*a Water and effluent quality monitoring program must be implemented and maintained, and the results gathered used to pro-actively manage the effluent plant and the associated release of effluent. *It is highly recommended that a conservancy tank be constructed as part of the sewage effluent treatment plant in order to ensure that effluent can be stored during periods of maintenance and thus prevent the release of sub-standard effluent; and *Regular testing of the effluent quality is to take place to ensure that the effluent quality being released to the receiving environment is of an acceptable quality. *Erosion might occur in the event of overflows, but the risk is low, due to artificial nature of the concrete water canal; *Only existing roadways should be utilised during maintenance and monitoring activities to avoid indiscriminate movement of vehicle


vi

No.

Ph

ases


Sev

erit

y

Co

nse

qu

ence

Lik

elih

oo

d

Sig

nif

ican

ce

Ris

k R

atin

g

Control Measures

canal which will report to the receiving environment


vii

Table B: Summary of the results of the DWS Risk Assessment applied to the unnamed Tributary of the Vaal River which the proposed potable water pipeline would be attached to a bridge traversing the unnamed Tributary of Vaal River.

No.

Ph

ases

Activity

Aspect Impact

Sev

erit

y

Co

nse

qu

ence

Lik

elih

oo

d

Sig

nif

ican

ce

Ris

k R

atin

g

Control Measures

1

Co

nst

ruct

ion

Ph

ase

Site clearing prior to commencement of construction activities

Removal of vegetation and associated disturbances to soils.

*Exposure of soils, leading to increased runoff and erosion, and thus increased sedimentation of the unnamed tributary of the Vaal River *Proliferation of alien vegetation because of disturbances

1 3 4 12 L

*exposed soils should to be protected from erosion during the construction and operational phases of development and also retain as much indigenous vegetation as possible and; *All development footprint areas to remain as small as possible and vegetation clearing to be limited to what is absolutely essential.

2

Ground-breaking, excavation of trench for installing the potable water pipeline crossing over the tributary of the Vaal River

*Disturbances to soils; and *Compactions of surrounding soil to the pits; and *Stockpiling of soils.

*Disturbances of soils leading to increased alien vegetation proliferation, *Altered runoff patterns, leading to increased erosion and sedimentation of the receiving of the receiving environment

1 3 4 12 L

*After installation of the pipeline outside the wetland, the open trenches should be closed immediately, in sections so as to ensure that no open trenches are left open for extensive periods; *Trenches should be backfilled with the stockpiled excavated materials in layers, up to 150mm below the natural ground level, after which the topsoil is replaced (to the natural ground level) and the removed vegetation is reinstated as part of the rehabilitation of the site; and *Soil must be lightly recompacted to a depth of 450 mm, and all construction material must be removed from site upon the completion of construction.

3

Installation of the potable water pipeline crossing the tributary of the Vaal River

*Potential Mixing and casting of concrete *Placement of bedding material within the excavated trench underneath the pipelines; *Backfilling of trench, where after it will be compacted.

*Potential spillage of concrete within the surrounding area to the chambers which through runoff could enter the Tributary of the Vaal River, impacting on the surface water quality; and

1 3 4 12 L


viii

4

Potential indiscriminate waste disposal within the canal or within the vicinity thereof



2 4 4 16 L

*Suitable waste disposal facilities should be provided and should regularly be emptied and taken to an appropriately registered waste disposal facility; *If waste/spillage has entered the Tributary of the Vaal River as they will lead to a contamination of the downstream systems, these spills should immediately be cleared.

5

Potential spillage from construction vehicles



2 4 4 16 L

6

Op

erat

ion

al P

has

e

Operations and maintenance of the proposed potable water pipeline crossing the Tributary of the Vaal River

Potential failure of infrastructure, possible leaks from pipeline into river, causing incision and erosion.

Possible incision and alteration of the hydroperiod of the river.

1 3 4 12 L

*It is recommended that the managing authority test the integrity of the pipeline at least once every five years or more often should there be any sign or reports of a leak; *It should be ensured that additional freshwater areas are not inundated as a result of leaks or bursting of the pipeline, and that an emergency plan should be compiled to ensure a quick response and attendance to the matter in case of a leakage or bursting of the pipeline; *Only existing roadways should be utilised during maintenance and monitoring activities to avoid indiscriminate movement of vehicles; and. *Should repair of the pipeline be required to address a leak, access to the pipeline should be gained through the access chambers, in order to prevent any impact on the receiving environment

Based on the findings of the water resource assessment and the results of the risk assessment, it is the opinion of the ecologist that the proposed development may pose a low risk to the water resources associated with the study area development, as these water resources are considered to be of low ecological importance and sensitivity. Moreover, some of the identified artificial water resources are positioned upgradient of the proposed development, therefore the proposed development poses no quantum of risk to them. Potential impacts relating to the release of the treated effluent must also be considered as the released effluent will ultimately enter the tributary of the Vaal River. Adherence to the mitigation measures stipulated in this report accompanied by good construction practice, is crucial if the significance of perceived impacts is to be reduced to acceptable levels. Since the proposed pipeline would only be used for potable water, in the event of a leak of the pipeline during the operational phase, the severity thereof would negligible as opposed if it would have been for sewage effluent, however the additional water input into the system could influence its hydrological regime, and lead to additional erosion. If regular inspection of the pipeline occurs and a leak is repaired within a short period of time, the risk is considered insignificant.


ix

DOCUMENT GUIDE

The table below provides the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act 107 of 1998) (NEMA) Regulations 2017 (as amended in 2014) for Specialist Reports and also the relevant sections in the reports where these requirements are addressed.

No. Requirement Section in report

a) Details of -

(i) The specialist who prepared the report Appendix F

(ii) The expertise of that specialist to compile a specialist report including a curriculum vitae

Appendix F

b) A declaration that the specialist is independent Appendix F

c) An indication of the scope of, and the purpose for which, the report was prepared Section 1.2

cA) An indication of the quality and age of base data used for the specialist report Section 1.5

cB) A description of existing impacts on the site, cumulative impacts of the proposed development and levels of acceptable change

Section 4.1

d) The duration, date and season of the site investigation and the relevance of the season to the outcome of the assessment

Section 1.5

e) A description of the methodology adopted in preparing the report or carrying out the specialised process inclusive of equipment and modelling used

Appendix C

f) Details of an assessment of the specific identified sensitivity of the site related to the proposed activity or activities and its associated structures and infrastructure, inclusive of a site plan identifying site alternative

Section 3

g) An identification of any areas to be avoided, including buffers N/A

h) A map superimposing the activity including the associated structure and infrastructure on the environmental sensitivities of the site including areas to be avoided, including buffers

Section 3

i) A description of any assumption made and any uncertainties or gaps in knowledge Section 1.3

j) A description the findings and potential implication\s of such findings on the impact of the proposed activity, including identified alternatives on the environment or activities

Section 4

k) Any mitigation measures for inclusion in the EMPr Section 4

l) Any conditions for inclusion in the environmental authorisation Section 4

m) Any monitoring requirements for inclusion in the EMPr or environmental authorisation N/A

n) A reasoned opinion - N/A

(i) As to whether the proposed activity, activities or portions thereof should be authorised N/A

(iA) Regarding the acceptability of the proposed activity or activities Section 4

(ii) If the opinion is that the proposed activity, activities or portions thereof should be authorised, any avoidance, management and mitigation measures that should be included in the EMPr, and where applicable, the closure plan

N/A

o) A description of any consultation process that was undertaken during the course of preparing the specialist report

N/A

p) A summary and copies of any comments received during any consultation process and where applicable all responses thereto; and

N/A

q) Any other information requested by the competent authority N/A


x

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... ii DOCUMENT GUIDE ............................................................................................................ ix TABLE OF CONTENTS ....................................................................................................... x LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................................................. xi LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................ xi GLOSSARY OF TERMS .................................................................................................... xii LIST OF ACRONYMS ....................................................................................................... xiii 1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background .................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Project Scope ............................................................................................................... 4 1.3 Assumptions and Limitations ........................................................................................ 4 1.4 Legislative Requirements and Provincial Guidelines .................................................... 5 1.5 Freshwater Resource Field Verification ........................................................................ 5 1.6 Risk Assessment and Recommendations..................................................................... 5 2. RESULTS OF THE DESKTOP ANALYSIS ............................................................... 6 3. RESULTS: WATER RESOURCES ASSESSMENT .................................................. 9 3.1 Freshwater Resource System Characterisation ............................................................ 9 3.2 Field Verification Results ............................................................................................ 10 4. RISK ASSESSMENT .............................................................................................. 16 4.1 Risk Analyses ............................................................................................................. 16

Consideration of impacts and application of mitigation measures ................. 16 Risk discussion and essential mitigation measures ....................................... 17

5. CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................ 23 6. REFERENCES ........................................................................................................ 25 APPENDIX A - Terms of Use and Indemnity .................................................................... 26 APPENDIX B - Legislative requirements and Indemnity ................................................ 27 APPENDIX C - Method of Assessment ............................................................................ 28 APPENDIX D – Risk Assessment Methodology. ............................................................. 32 APPENDIX E – Standard Mitigation Measures ................................................................ 36 APPENDIX F – DETAILS, EXPERTISE AND CURRICULUM VITAE OF SPECIALISTS ... 38


xi

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Digital Satellite image depicting the location of the study area in relation to surrounding areas. ............................................................................................. 2

Figure 2: The study area depicted on a 1:50 000 topographical map in relation to the surrounding area. ............................................................................................... 3

Figure 3: Natural wetlands identified by the NFEPA (2011) database associated with the study area and the investigation area ........................................................... 8

Figure 4: Imagery depicting stormwater canals within the study area located in close proximity to the artificial wetland features ......................................................... 11

Figure 5: Photographs illustrating the trapezoidal concrete water canal (left) adjacent to the study area and the artificial dams situated in the southern corner of the investigation area (left) and a concrete water canal (right) adjacent to the study area. ....................................................................................................... 11

Figure 6: Photograph depicting the formalized section of the tributary of the Vaal River located on the southern section of the proposed development. It was also noted that the system has been canalized had sewage effluent in it lowering its ecological integrity. ...................................................................................... 11

Figure 7: A 1970 imagery (left) depicting cultivation activities within the southwestern portion of the study area highlighted by the green circle. A 1980 imagery (right) depicting no signs of cultivation (indicated by a green circle). ................ 12

Figure 8: Historical imagery depicting artificial water resource signatures ....................... 12 Figure 9: Map depicting the delineated features within the study area and investigation

area. ................................................................................................................. 13 Figure 10: Map depicting the applicable zones of regulation associated with the

Tributary of the Vaal River. ............................................................................... 15

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Summary of the conservation characteristics for the study area. ......................... 7 Table 2: Characterisation of the water resources identified within the study area. ............. 9 Table 3: Summary of the results of the DWS risk assessment matrix applied to artificial

concrete water canal and the tributary of the Vaal River into which the proposed treated effluent will be discharged into. .............................................................. 19

Table 4: Summary of the results of the DWS Risk Assessment applied to the unnamed Tributary of the Vaal River which the proposed potable water pipeline would be attached to a bridge traversing the unnamed Tributary of Vaal River. ........... 21


xii

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

Alien vegetation: Plants that do not occur naturally within the area but have been introduced either intentionally or unintentionally. Vegetation species that originate from outside of the borders of the biome -usually international in origin.

Alluvial soil: A deposit of sand, mud, etc. formed by flowing water, or the sedimentary matter deposited thus within recent times, especially in the valleys of large rivers.

Biodiversity: The number and variety of living organisms on earth, the millions of plants, animans and micro-organisms, the genes they contain, the evolutionary history and potential they encompass and the ecosystems, ecological processes and landscape of which they are integral parts.

Delineation (of a wetland):

To determine the boundary of a wetland based on soil, vegetation and/or hydrological indicators.

Ecological Importance and Sensitivity

Ecological importance refers to the diversity, rarity or uniqueness of the habitats and biota. Ecological sensitivity refers to the ability of the ecosystem to tolerate disturbances and to recover from certain impacts.

Ecoregion: An ecoregion is a "recurring pattern of ecosystems associated with characteristic combinations of soil and landform that characterise that region”.

Episodic stream: Highly flashy systems that flow or flood only in response to extreme rainfall events, usually high in their catchments. May not flow in a five-year period or may flow only once in several years.

Groundwater: Subsurface water in the saturated zone below the water table.

Hydrology: The study of the occurrence, distribution and movement of water over, on and under the land surface.

Indigenous vegetation: Vegetation occurring naturally within a defined area.

Intermittent flow: Flows only for short periods.

Resource Water Quality Objectives

*Guidelines set by the South African Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS), formerly DWA or DWAF, for various physico-chemical and biological parameters for various uses as well as ecosystem functioning.

Watercourse:

In terms of the definition contained within the National Water Act, a watercourse means:

• A river or spring;

• A natural channel which water flows regularly or intermittently;

• A wetland, dam or lake into which, or from which, water flows; and

• Any collection of water which the Minister may, by notice in the Gazette, declare to be a watercourse;

• and a reference to a watercourse includes, where relevant, its bed and banks

Wetland Vegetation (WetVeg) type:

Broad groupings of wetland vegetation, reflecting differences in regional context, such as geology, climate, and soils, which may in turn have an influence on the ecological characteristics and functioning of wetlands.


xiii

LIST OF ACRONYMS

DWA Department of Water Affairs

DWAF Department of Water Affairs and Forestry

DWS Department of Water and Sanitation (formerly known as DWA, DWAF, see above)

EAP Environmental Assessment Practitioner

EC Ecological Class or Electrical Conductivity (use to be defined in relevant sections)

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

EIS Ecological Importance and Sensitivity

EMC Ecological Management Class

EMP Environmental Management Program

GDARD Gauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Development

GIS Geographic Information System

GN General Notice

GPS Global Positioning System

HGM Hydrogeomorphic

IHAS Invertebrate Habitat Assessment System

IHI Index of Habitat Integrity

m Meter

MAP Mean Annual Precipitation

NA Not Applicable

NBA National Biodiversity Assessment

NEMA National Environmental Management Act

NFEPA National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas

NWA National Water Act

PEMC Present Ecological Management Class

PES Present Ecological State

REC Recommended Ecological Category

Ref Reference

RHP River Health Program

RQIS Research Quality Information Services

SACNASP South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions

SANBI South African National Biodiversity Institute

SANParks South African National Parks

SAS Scientific Aquatic Services

subWMA Sub-Water Management Area

WET Whole Effluent Toxicity

WetVeg Groups Wetland Vegetation Groups

WMA Water Management Areas

WMS Water Management System

WRC Water Research Commission


1

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Scientific Aquatic Services (SAS) was appointed to conduct a freshwater resource

assessment and delineation as part of the environmental assessment and authorisation

process for the proposed Isanti Project development located on Portion 238 of the farm

Leeuwkuil 596 IQ, near Vereeniging, within the Gauteng Province, hereafter referred to as the

“study area” (Figure 1 and 2). Associated with the proposed development is a sewer package

plant, a potable water pipeline and electrical infrastructure. It is proposed that treated effluent

will be released within the existing stormwater infrastructure adjacent to the study area and

the R59. Additionally, a potable water pipeline is anticipated to be attached to the bridge which

crosses over the unnamed Tributary of the Vaal River.

The study area is situated immediately north of the R28 (Boy Louw Street), east of Lager

Road, and west of the R59 (Sybrand van Niekerk Freeway). The R54 (Houtkop Road) is

situated approximately 2.7 km north of the study area. The suburb of Leeuhof is situated

approximately 380m to the north east and Sharpeville 1 km southeast of the study area. In

order to identify all potential freshwater resources that may potentially be impacted by the

proposed project, a 500m “zone of investigation” around the study area, in accordance with

Regulation 509 of 2016 as it relates to the National Water Act (NWA), were used as a guide

in which to assess possible sensitivities of the receiving environment. This area – i.e. the 500m

zone of investigation around the study area - will henceforth be referred to as the “Investigation

Area” (Figure 1 and 2).

The Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS) Risk Assessment Matrix was applied to

determine the significance of the perceived impacts associated with the proposed of treated

sewage effluent discharge activities, and the operational activities impact on the receiving

environment. In addition, mitigatory measures were developed which aim to minimise the

perceived impacts associated with the proposed development, followed by an assessment of

the significance of the impacts after mitigation, assuming that they are fully implemented.

This report, after consideration and a description of the ecological integrity of the proposed

activities, must guide the relevant authorities, by means of a reasoned opinion and

recommendations, as to the viability of the proposed development activities from a freshwater

resource management point of view.


2

Figure 1: Digital Satellite image depicting the location of the study area in relation to surrounding areas.


3

Figure 2: The study area depicted on a 1:50 000 topographical map in relation to the surrounding area.


4

1.2 Project Scope

Specific outcomes in terms of this report are outlined below:

➢ To undertake a site assessment during which all watercourses within the study area

will be verified, characterised and delineated. All watercourses within the investigation

area surrounding the study area will be delineated using desktop methods.

➢ The DWS Risk Assessment Matrix was applied to identify potential impacts that may

affect the water resources as a result of the proposed activities, and to aim to quantify

the significance; and

➢ Present management and mitigation measures which should be implemented during

the various development phases to assist in minimising the risk on the receiving

freshwater environment.

1.3 Assumptions and Limitations

The following assumptions and limitations are applicable to this report:

➢ The portion of the unnamed tributary of the Vaal River that flows past the site to the

south and on the southern side of the R28 has been canalised into an artificial earth

canal. Although this system has some characteristics associated with rivers it is largely

a segment of the system. Furthermore, at the time of the field assessment it was clear

that large volumes of untreated or partially treated sewage effluent were being

released into the system. For this reason, it was not deemed necessary to undertake

detailed Eco status assessments of this system;

➢ The assessment and determination of the freshwater resource boundaries is confined

within the study area. All freshwater resources identified within the investigation area

were delineated in fulfilment of Regulation GN509 of the NWA on a desktop level with

limited field verification; however, these resources were not assessed individually;

➢ A large extent of the natural occurring vegetation has been removed due to seasonal

veld fires. Therefore, the use of vegetation species in aid of the delineation of the

watercourse proved to be limited in the entire study area;

➢ The freshwater resource delineation as presented in this report is regarded as a best

estimate of the freshwater resource boundaries, based on the site conditions present

at the time of assessment. Global Positioning System (GPS) technology is inherently

inaccurate and some inaccuracies due to the use of handheld GPS instrumentation

may occur. If more accurate assessments are required, the freshwater resource will

need to be surveyed and pegged according to surveying principles; and


5

➢ With ecology being dynamic and complex, certain aspects (some of which may be

important) may have been overlooked. However, it is expected that the proposed

development activities have been accurately assessed and considered, based on the

field observations.

1.4 Legislative Requirements and Provincial Guidelines

The following legislative requirements and relevant provincial guidelines were taken into

consideration during the assessment. A detailed description of these legislative requirements

is presented in Appendix B:

➢ National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act 107 of 1998) (NEMA);

➢ National Water Act, 1998 (Act 36 of 1998) (NWA);

➢ General Notice 509 as published in the Government Gazette 40229 of 2016 as it

relates to the NWA (Act 36 of 1998);

➢ The Gauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Development’s (GDARD)

Requirements for Biodiversity Assessments, Version 3 (GDARD, 2014); and

➢ National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act 10 of 2004)

(NEMBA)

1.5 Freshwater Resource Field Verification

The site assessment was undertaken in August 2018, during which factors influencing the

water quality of any water resources, and a general overview of the ecological state of the

identified water resources was determined.

A detailed explanation of the method of assessment related to the freshwater resource’s

assessment is provided in Appendix C of this report.

1.6 Risk Assessment and Recommendations

Following the completion of the assessment, a risk assessment was conducted (Appendix D), and

recommendations were developed to address and mitigate impacts associated with the proposed

construction activities and the proposed discharge of treated sewage effluent. These

recommendations also include general ‘best practice’ management measures, which apply to the

proposed development as a whole. Mitigation measures have been developed to address issues

in all phases throughout the life of the operation including planning, construction and operation.

The detailed site-specific mitigation measures are outlined in Section 4 of this report.


6

2. RESULTS OF THE DESKTOP ANALYSIS

The following section contains data accessed as part of the desktop assessment and are

presented as a “dashboard style” report below (Table 1). The dashboard report aims to present

concise summaries of the data on as few pages as possible in order to allow for integration of

results by the reader to take place.

It is important to note that although all data sources used provide useful and often verifiable,

high quality data, the various databases used do not always provide an entirely accurate

indication of the study area’s actual site characteristics at the scale required to inform the

environmental authorisation and/or water use licencing processes. However, this information

is considered to be useful as background information to the study. Thus, this data was used

as a guideline to inform the assessment and to focus on areas and aspects of increased

conservation importance.


7

Table 1: Summary of the conservation characteristics for the study area.

Aquatic ecoregion and sub-regions in which the study area is located Detail of the study area in terms of the National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Area (NFEPA) (2011) database

Ecoregion Highveld FEPACODE

The study area is located within a subWMA currently not considered important in terms of fish species or freshwater resource conservation.

Catchment Vaal

Quaternary Catchment C22F

NFEPA Wetlands According to the NFEPA database, there are no wetland features located within the study area, however one natural wetland feature is situated within the investigation area.

WMA Upper Vaal

subWMA Downstream Vaal Dam

Dominant characteristics of the Highveld Ecoregion Level 2 (11.03) (Kleynhans et al., 2007)

Wetland Vegetation Type The study area is located within the Mesic Highveld Grassland Group 3, a least threatened wetland vegetation type. Dominant primary terrain

morphology Plains; Low and Moderate Relief;

Dominant primary vegetation types

Moist Cool Highveld Grassland NFEPA Rivers

According to the NFEPA database, there are no rivers located within the study area or the immediate vicinity of the investigation area.

Altitude (m a.m.s.l) 1300-2100

MAP (mm) 400 to 800 Detail of the study area in terms of the Gauteng Conservation Plan (C-Plan V3.3, 2011)

Coefficient of Variation (% of MAP)

20 to 34 The study area and the investigation area is not associated within any areas or features of conservation concern, such as Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBAs), Ecological Support areas (ESAs), Wetlands, Rivers or Ridges according to the Gauteng Conservation Plan. The study area does, however, fall within the urban edge according to the Gauteng C-Plan. Although the Urban Edge was rescinded as a policy document in the Gauteng Spatial Development Framework (2011), it nevertheless remains a useful indicator of where concentration [of development] should occur. Therefore, for the purposes of this report, the Urban Edge boundaries as defined by the C-Plan v3.3 are utilised as a guideline to inform decision making. According to this database the study area and the investigation area falls within Zone 1 of the Environmental Management Zones (EMZ). Which has the intention to streamline urban development activities in it and to promote development infill.

Rainfall concentration index 45 to 64

Rainfall seasonality Early to late summer

Mean annual temperature. (°C) 12 to 18

Winter temperature (July) -2 – 18 ºC

Summer temperature (Feb) 10 – 28 ºC

Median annual simulated runoff (mm)

5 to 10 (limited); 10 to 150

CBA = Critical Biodiversity Area, ESA = Ecological Support Area; m.a.m.s.l = Metres Above Mean Sea Level; mm = Millimetres; MAP = Mean Annual Precipitation; NFEPA = National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Area; WMA = Water Management Area


8

Figure 3: Natural wetlands identified by the NFEPA (2011) database associated with the study area and the investigation area


9

3. RESULTS: WATER RESOURCES ASSESSMENT

3.1 Freshwater Resource System Characterisation

During the field assessment that was undertaken in August 2018 the identified water resources

within the study area were classified as artificial and anthropogenically derived, due to their

nature and proximity to man-made features such as furrows, water canals and roads located

to the western portion of the study area. Additionally, a formalised tributary of the Vaal River

was confirmed to be within the investigation area with the series of dams situated in the

southern portion of the investigation area.

Table 2: Characterisation of the water resources identified within the study area.

Feature Status Location Characteristics Significance

Artificial water resources

the identified features are situated in close proximity to man-made features, such as water canals, furrows and roads

The features are positioned upgradient of the proposed development

These features were confirmed to be artificial with no wetland characteristics

Due to the artificial nature of these features, they are considered to have low/no ecological importance and sensitivity, therefore the risk posed to them is low

Trapezoidal concrete canal

An artificial concrete canal with no vegetation

The canal is situated downgradient of the proposed development

The feature has no ecological importance and sensitivity

The risk posed by the proposed development is low due its artificial nature with no habitat provision

Culverts A man-made concrete structure that allows water to flow under a road

Positioned upgradient of the proposed development

Man-made concrete structure with no wetland characteristics

It is situated upgradient of the proposed development and thus there is no quantum of risk posed to them

Drainage lines

Excavated probably to drain higher lying areas

The feature is located upgradient of the proposed development

There is ponding of water. and It is uncertain as to whether the features are natural or artificial and driven by leaking infrastructure

The feature is also located upgradient of the proposed development, there is no quantum of risk posed to them

Tributary of the Vaal River

The portion of tributary has been canalised into an artificial earth canal. Moreover, here was evidence of large volumes of untreated or partially treated sewage effluent being released into the system

The feature is situated adjacent to and downgradient of the development; thus, the released effluent will ultimately enter the system

the system has some characteristics associated with rivers it is largely a formalised segment of the system

Due to low ecological integrity of the system, the risk posed by the proposed development is considered low. Furthermore, since the R28 occurs between the system and the proposed development the risk from construction to the system is negligible

Dams Man-made dams with no wetland features

The features are located in a position in the landscape where they cannot be impacted by the development

They are artificial feature with no ecological importance and sensitivity

The dams are situated upgradient of the proposed development, therefore there is no quantum of risk posed to them


10

3.2 Field Verification Results

Based on the desktop and field assessment results, that was undertaken in April 2018 and in

August 2018 in the same general area of the proposed development, the following key

observation were made:

➢ According to the NFEPA database, there are no rivers located within the study area,

however one natural wetland feature is located within the north-eastern portion of the

investigation area;

➢ However, at the time of the assessment, several water resources, the majority

positioned upgradient of the proposed development were observed. Additionally, a

formalised tributary of the Vaal River together, with a series of dams were confirmed

to be within the southern portion of the investigation area;

➢ The identified water resources include, a trapezoidal concrete stormwater water canal

where the treated effluent is proposed to be discharged into, situated adjacent to the

southern section of the study area and the R59;

➢ Based on observations and through consultation of historical imagery, the water

resources identified within the study area were classified as artificial and

anthropogenically derived, due to their nature and proximity to man-made features

such as furrows, water canals and roads located to the south and eastern portion of

the study area. It is likely that the furrows within the study area were developed to drain

the higher lying areas;

➢ The excavation and construction of the canals, together with additional runoff form the

roads may be the result of ponding of water, which has given rise to the establishment

of these artificial wetland features (Figure 4);

➢ Due to the artificial establishment of these water resources, they were considered to

have low ecological importance and sensitivity with no ecoservices and habitat

provision and,

➢ The portion of the unnamed tributary of the Vaal River that flows past the site to the

south and on the southern side of the R28 has been canalised into an artificial earth

canal. Although this system has some characteristics associated with rivers it is largely

a segment of the system. Furthermore, at the time of the field assessment it was clear


released into the system


11

Figure 4: Imagery depicting stormwater canals within the study area located in close proximity to the artificial wetland features

Figure 5: Photographs illustrating the trapezoidal concrete water canal (left) adjacent to the study area and the artificial dams situated in the southern corner of the investigation area (left) and a concrete water canal (right) adjacent to the study area.

Figure 6: Photograph depicting the formalized section of the tributary of the Vaal River located on the southern section of the proposed development. It was also noted that the system has been canalized had sewage effluent in it lowering its ecological integrity.


12

During the classification of the identified water resources within the study area, historical

imagery was examined in order to infer whether the water resources identified are natural or

artificial. Below is the historical imagery depicting the southern and eastern portion of the study

area. According to the provided illustrations below, during the year of 19, the imagery only

portrays land cultivation but with no signatures of wetlands and artificial water canals present.

It appears that the cultivation has discontinued around the year 1980 and roads were visible

in close proximity of the study area. However, in 2010 and 2015 water resources and artificial

canals became visible within the area. Therefore, it is evident that the occurrence of these

artificial features is due to the historical anthropogenic activities took place within the area.

Figure 7: A 1970 imagery (left) depicting cultivation activities within the southwestern portion of the study area highlighted by the green circle. A 1980 imagery (right) depicting no signs of cultivation (indicated by a green circle).

Figure 8: Historical imagery depicting artificial water resource signatures

1980000

2010 2015

1970


13

Figure 9: Map depicting the delineated features within the study area and investigation area.

SAS 218150 September 2018

14

Below are the considerations and applicable legislative requirement:

1. In terms of the definition contained within the National Water Act (1998), a watercourse

means:

(a) a river or spring;

(b) a natural channel in which water flows regularly or intermittently;

(c) a wetland, lake or dam into which, or from which, water flows; and

(d) any collection of water which the Minister may, by notice in the Gazette, declare to be

a watercourse, and a reference to a watercourse includes, where relevant, its bed and

banks.

2. Therefore, a concrete water canal, as much as it is a water resource, it is not considered

a watercourse as it does not conform to the abovementioned definition of a watercourse,

and thus does not enjoy protection under the NWA;

3. The tributary of the Vaal River was identified approximately 50m to the south of the study

area, which is protected under the National Water Act, 1998 (Act 36 of 1998) since it is a

regarded as a watercourse despite being formalised for an extensive portion of its course;

4. In terms of the listed activities stipulated in the National Environmental Management Act,

1998 (Act 107 of 1998), 2014 EIA regulations (as amended), a 32m zone of regulation

applies to the tributary of the Vaal river;

5. According to the Gauteng C-Plan (2011), the study area is located inside of the Urban

Edge, thus in terms of the GDARD guidelines, a 32m buffer or setback applies to the

tributary of the Vaal River. Also, the study area is considered to fall in with Zone 1 of the

Environmental Management Zones.

6. In accordance with GN509 of 2016 as it relates to the National Water Act (NWA), a

regulated area of a watercourse for section 21c and 21i of the NWA, 1998 is defined as:

➢ the outer edge of the 1 in 100-year flood line and/or delineated riparian habitat,

whichever is the greatest distance, measured from the middle of the watercourse of

a river, spring, natural channel, lake or dam;

➢ In the absence of a determined 1 in 100-year flood line or riparian area the area within

100m from the edge of a watercourse where the edge of the watercourse is the first

identifiable annual bank fill flood bench; or

➢ a 500 m radius from the delineated boundary (extent) of any wetland or pan.

7. If any proposed activities are located within the unnamed tributary of the Vaal River as

defined by the 1:100-year floodline, or if the floodline has not been determined, the extent

of the watercourse, authorisation by means of a Water Use Licence is required in terms

of Section 21 (c) and (i) of the NWA.

Figure 10 below provides the conceptual representation of the abovementioned zones of

regulation and setback areas.


15

Figure 10: Map depicting the applicable zones of regulation associated with the Tributary of the Vaal River.


16

4. RISK ASSESSMENT

This section presents the significance of perceived potential risk associated with the treated

effluent that will be discharged into the concrete water canal which will eventually drain into

the tributary of the Vaal River. In addition, it also indicates the required mitigatory measures

needed to minimise the perceived impacts of the proposed development and presents an

assessment of the significance of the impacts taking into consideration the available

mitigatory measures and assuming that they are fully implemented.

4.1 Risk Analyses

Consideration of impacts and application of mitigation measures

Following the assessment of the freshwater resources, the DWS prescribed Risk

Assessment Matrix (2016) was applied to ascertain the significance of perceived impacts

on the water quality of the tributary of the Vaal River. These results are summarised at the

end of Section 4.1.2 of this report.

Following the risk assessment, mitigation measures were compiled to serve as guidance

throughout the construction and operational phases. The points below summarise the

considerations undertaken:

➢ The identified water resources are considered to be artificially established and not

connected to any natural system it is not considered to be a natural watercourse,

however, the features are likely to persist under “normal circumstances”;

➢ Due to the artificial nature of these water resources, the impact on ecoservice

provision and water quality did not form the part of assessment;

➢ It must be noted that the proposed stormwater pipe is anticipated to traverse the

artificial water resources situated on the eastern portion of the study due to their

close proximity to the footprint of the proposed development;

➢ The risk assessment was applied assuming the proposed discharge of treated

effluent will eventually drain into the tributary of the Vaal River; consequently,

negatively impacting on the water quality of tributary of the Vaal River;

➢ The formalized tributary of the Vaal River did not form part of assessment as if falls

out of the study area, however it was considered due its close proximity to the footprint

area of the proposed development and the formalised section is anticipated to be

affected by the proposed discharge of treated effluent;


17

➢ The risk assessment was applied assuming that a high level of mitigation is

implemented, thus the results of the risk assessment provided in this report presents

the perceived impact significance post-mitigation;

➢ At the time of this assessment, the overall freshwater environment (the tributary of

the Vaal River) was of low ecological importance and sensitivity, and

➢ The operation of the discharge treated effluent will be a permanent activity.

Risk discussion and essential mitigation measures

Impact on the water quality of the tributary of the Vaal River t is most likely to occur as the

result of the discharged treated effluent and the installation of the potable water pipeline that

is anticipated to be attached on the bridge crossing over the tributary of the Vaal River.

The mitigation measures provided in this report have been developed with the mitigation

hierarchy in mind, and the implementation and strict adherence to these measures will assist

in minimising the significance of impacts on the receiving environment.

As the proposed treated effluent pipeline will discharge into the concrete water canal which

will convey treated effluent into the tributary of the Vaal River, the site preparation for the

construction of the treated effluent pipeline is considered low. Additionally, construction of

the surface infrastructure is considered to be of a relatively short duration which will be

confined to the specified localities far from any water resources. Therefore, loss of vegetation

and soil erosion as the result of the construction related activities is considered to be low.

As treated effluent is proposed to be discharged into the concrete canal, it is anticipated that

the discharged effluent will drain into the downstream natural freshwater system (tributary of

the Vaal River). This is, however, less likely to be harmful with only the quality of the effluent

of concern, if the discharge quality of the treatment plant is maintained the risk on the water

quality to the tributary of the Vaal River, as the result of the discharge of the treated effluent,

is limited.

The potable water pipeline will be attached on the bridge, crossing over the Tributary of the

Vaal River and it entails a very small project footprint, thus during the construction phase,

site clearance will be limited to the demarcated areas and therefore disturbance as the result

of construction activities to the water quality of the Tributary of the Vaal River is considered

low/negligible.

Since the proposed pipeline would only be used for potable water, in the event of a leak of

the pipeline during the operational phase, the severity thereof would be negligible as opposed


18

if it would have been for sewage effluent, however the additional water input into the system

could influence its hydrological regime, and potentially lead to additional erosion. If regular

inspection of the pipeline occurs and a leak is repaired within a short period of time, the risk

is considered insignificant.

Based on the findings of the freshwater ecological assessment, several recommended

mitigation measures are made to minimise the impact on the freshwater ecology:

➢ If feasible, construction must be scheduled for the drier winter period in order to

minimise the risk of sediment-laden runoff reaching the downstream tributary of the

Vaal River as a result of the construction activities;

➢ All exposed soils must be protected for the duration of the construction phase to

prevent erosion and sedimentation of the water canal, which will ultimately enter the

downstream tributary of the Vaal River.

➢ Any remaining soils following the completion of construction activities are to be

levelled and re-seeded with indigenous flora species to minimise the risk of further

sedimentation of the concrete water canal and to aid in the natural reclamation

process;

➢ It is recommended that the managing authority test the integrity of the treated effluent

pipeline at least once every five years or more often should there be any sign or

reports of leaks;

➢ It is highly recommended that a conservancy tank be constructed as part of the

sewage effluent treatment plant in order to ensure that effluent can be stored during

periods of maintenance and thus prevent the release of sub-standard effluent; and

➢ Regular testing of the effluent quality is to take place to ensure that the effluent quality

being released to the receiving environment is of an acceptable quality.

The table below summarise the risks of the construction and operation phases associated

with the proposed treated effluent discharge and is also coupled with recommended

mitigation measures to be applied in order to alleviate the perceive impacts of the planned

activities.


19

Table 3: Summary of the results of the DWS risk assessment matrix applied to artificial concrete water canal and the tributary of the Vaal River into which the proposed treated effluent will be discharged into.

No. P

has

es


Sev

erit

y

Co

nse

qu

ence

Lik

elih

oo

d

Sig

nif

ican

ce

Ris

k R

atin

g

Control Measures

1

Co

nst

ruct

ion

Ph

ase

Site clearing prior to commencement of construction activities.

Removal of vegetation and associated disturbances to soils. *Removal of terrestrial vegetation and associated disturbances (rubble and litter) to soils

*Exposure of soils, leading to increased runoff and erosion, and thus increased sedimentation of the receiving watercourses via the concrete water canal *Decreased ecoservice provision; and *Proliferation of alien vegetation because of disturbances.

1 3 4 12 L

*As the water canal has low/no ecological importance and sensitivity, soil erosion should nevertheless still need to be minimised to avoid sedimentation load into the concrete water canal and ultimately the tributary of the Vaal River; *Therefore exposed soils should to be protected from erosion during the construction and operational phases of development and also retain as much indigenous vegetation as possible.

2 Ground-breaking, excavation of trench for installing the treated sewer pipeline linking into the concrete water canal

*Removal of topsoil; and *Excavation and trenching leading to stockpiling of soil.

*Altered runoff patterns, leading to increased erosion and sedimentation of the receiving environment via the concrete water canal

1 3 4 12 L *After installation of the pipeline, the open trenches should be closed immediately, in sections so as to ensure that no open trenches are left open for extensive periods; *Trenches should be backfilled with the stockpiled excavated materials in layers, up to 150mm below the natural ground level, after which the topsoil is replaced (to the natural ground level) and the removed vegetation is reinstated as part of the rehabilitation of the site; and *Soil must be lightly recompacted to a depth of 450 mm, and all construction material must be removed from site upon the completion of construction.

3 Installation of the treated sewer pipeline and associated manholes that will be connected to the concrete water canal

*Potential mixing and casting of concrete: *Placement of bedding material within the excavated trench underneath the pipelines; *Backfilling of trench, where after it will be compacted

*Erosion of the exposed trench; *Potential sedimentation of the water canal and downstream watercourses; *Potential of backfill material to enter the canal, increasing the sediment load reporting to the receiving environment

1 3 4 12 L


20

No.

Ph

ases


Sev

erit

y

Co

nse

qu

ence

Lik

elih

oo

d

Sig

nif

ican

ce

Ris

k R

atin

g

Control Measures

4 Potential indiscriminate waste disposal within the canal or within the vicinity thereof.



2 4 4 16 L *Suitable waste disposal facilities should be provided and should regularly be emptied and taken to an appropriately registered waste disposal facility; *If waste/spillage has entered the concrete canal as they will lead to a contamination of the downstream systems, these spills should immediately be cleared.

5 Potential spillage from construction vehicles



2 4 4 16 L

6

Op

erat

ion

al P

has

e

Operation and maintenance of the treated effluent plant

*during standard operation, regular monitoring must take place to ensure that the effluent being discharged is of the licensed and appropriate standard * During maintenance there is risk that substandard effluent is discharged into the concrete canal which will report to the receiving environment

* during maintenance there is risk that substandard effluent is discharged into the concrete canal which will report to the receiving environment

1 3 4 12 L

*a Water and effluent quality monitoring program must be implemented and maintained, and the results gathered used to pro-actively manage the effluent plant and the associated release of effluent. It is highly recommended that a conservancy tank be constructed as part of the sewage effluent treatment plant in order to ensure that effluent can be stored during periods of maintenance and thus prevent the release of sub-standard effluent; and *Regular testing of the effluent quality is to take place to ensure that the effluent quality being released to the receiving environment is of an acceptable quality. *Erosion might occur in the event of overflows, but the risk is low, due to artificial nature of the concrete water canal; *Only existing roadways should be utilised during maintenance and monitoring activities to avoid indiscriminate movement of vehicle


21

Table 4: Summary of the results of the DWS Risk Assessment applied to the unnamed Tributary of the Vaal River which the proposed potable water pipeline would be attached to a bridge traversing the unnamed Tributary of Vaal River.

No.

Ph

ases

Activity

Aspect Impact

Sev

erit

y

Co

nse

qu

ence

Lik

elih

oo

d

Sig

nif

ican

ce

Ris

k R

atin

g

Control Measures

1

Co

nst

ruct

ion

Ph

ase

Site clearing prior to commencement of construction activities

Removal of vegetation and associated disturbances to soils.

*Exposure of soils, leading to increased runoff and erosion, and thus increased sedimentation of the unnamed tributary of the Vaal River *Proliferation of alien vegetation because of disturbances

1 3 4 12 L

*exposed soils should to be protected from erosion during the construction and operational phases of development and also retain as much indigenous vegetation as possible and; *All development footprint areas to remain as small as possible and vegetation clearing to be limited to what is absolutely essential.

2

Ground-breaking, excavation of trench for installing the potable water pipeline crossing over the tributary of the Vaal River

*Disturbances to soils; and *Compactions of surrounding soil to the pits; and *Stockpiling of soils.

*Disturbances of soils leading to increased alien vegetation proliferation, *Altered runoff patterns, leading to increased erosion and sedimentation of the receiving of the receiving environment

1 3 4 12 L

*After installation of the pipeline outside the wetland, the open trenches should be closed immediately, in sections so as to ensure that no open trenches are left open for extensive periods; *Trenches should be backfilled with the stockpiled excavated materials in layers, up to 150mm below the natural ground level, after which the topsoil is replaced (to the natural ground level) and the removed vegetation is reinstated as part of the rehabilitation of the site; and *Soil must be lightly recompacted to a depth of 450 mm, and all construction material must be removed from site upon the completion of construction

3

Installation of the potable water pipeline crossing the tributary of the Vaal River

*Potential Mixing and casting of concrete *Placement of bedding material within the excavated trench underneath the

*Potential spillage of concrete within the surrounding area to the chambers which through runoff could enter the Tributary of the Vaal River, impacting on the surface water quality; and

1 3 4 12 L


22

pipelines; *Backfilling of trench, where after it will be compacted.

4

Potential indiscriminate waste disposal within the canal or within the vicinity thereof



2 4 4 16 L

*Suitable waste disposal facilities should be provided and should regularly be emptied and taken to an appropriately registered waste disposal facility; *If waste/spillage has entered the Tributary of the Vaal River as they will lead to a contamination of the downstream systems, these spills should immediately be cleared.

5

Potential spillage from construction vehicles


*Possible contamination surface water 2 4 4 16 L

6

Op

erat

ion

al P

has

e

Operations and maintenance of the proposed potable water pipeline crossing the Tributary of the Vaal River

Potential failure of infrastructure, possible leaks from pipeline into river, causing incision and erosion.

Possible incision and alteration of the hydroperiod of the river.

1 3 4 12 L

*It is recommended that the managing authority test the integrity of the pipeline at least once every five years or more often should there be any sign or reports of a leak; *It should be ensured that additional freshwater areas are not inundated as a result of leaks or bursting of the pipeline, and that an emergency plan should be compiled to ensure a quick response and attendance to the matter in case of a leakage or bursting of the pipeline; *Only existing roadways should be utilised during maintenance and monitoring activities to avoid indiscriminate movement of vehicles; and. *Should repair of the pipeline be required to address a leak, access to the pipeline should be gained through the access chambers, in order to prevent any impact on the receiving environment


23

5. CONCLUSION

At the time of the site visit, there were no natural watercourses identified within the study

area. However, various artificial water resources were identified, including a concrete water

canal where the treated effluent is proposed to be discharged into, situated adjacent to and

downgradient of the study area. Additionally, a tributary of the Vaal River was confirmed to

be within the southern portion of the investigation area.

Following the assessment of these features, the ecological status concerning the features

could be summarised as below:

➢ An identified trapezoidal concrete canal situated downgradient of the proposed

development is considered to have no ecological importance and sensitivity, therefore

the risk posed by the proposed development is low due its artificial nature with no

habitat provision;

➢ Excavated drainage line with ponding of water were located upgradient of the

proposed development and it is uncertain as to whether the features are natural or

artificial and driven by leaking infrastructure. However, due to the position of the

features in the area along with other infrastructure components the proposed

development poses no quantum of risk to them;

➢ Concrete culverts which are developed to allow water to flow under a road were also

positioned upgradient of the proposed development. Therefore, the proposed

development poses no quantum of risk to them;

➢ Furthermore, a series of artificial dams were also observed upgradient of the proposed

development; Due to the position of the features in the area along with other

infrastructure components the proposed development poses no quantum of risk to

them except for the risk posed by the discharge of treated sewage effluent and;

➢ The tributary of the Vaal River is situated adjacent to and downgradient of the

development; thus, the released effluent will ultimately enter the system. Although the

system has some characteristics associated with rivers it is largely a formalised

segment of the system. Furthermore, at the time of the field assessment it was clear


released into the system. Due to low ecological integrity of the system, the risk posed

by the proposed development is considered low. Furthermore, since the R28 occurs

between the system and the proposed development the risk from construction to the

system is negligible.


24

These identified artificial water resources within the study area were considered to have

no/low ecological sensitivity and importance due to their artificial nature with no ecoservices

and habitat provision. Even though the concrete water canal was not assessed it was deemed

necessary to undertake the DWS risk assessment matrix as the concrete water canal has an

outflow that links into the tributary of the Vaal River.

Based on the findings of the freshwater resource assessment and the results of the risk

assessment, it is the opinion of the ecologist that the proposed construction and operation

activities pose a low risk to the tributary of the Vaal River and water resources in the greater

area. The concrete water canal is considered to have no ecological importance and sensitivity

due its artificial nature with no true wetland characteristics. However, the concrete water

canal will convey the treated effluent into the downstream systems (tributary of the Vaal

River), for this reason mitigation measures stipulated on this report must be applied in order

to minimize the risks that are outlined in this report.

The identified

During the operational phase of the proposed discharge of treated effluent a Water and

effluent quality monitoring program must be implemented and maintained, and the results

gathered used to pro-actively manage the effluent plant and the associated release of

effluent. Furthermore, it is highly recommended that a conservancy tank be constructed as

part of the sewage effluent treatment plant in order to ensure that effluent can be stored

during periods of maintenance and thus prevent the release of sub-standard effluent; and

regular testing of the effluent quality is to take place to ensure that the effluent quality being

released to the receiving environment is of an acceptable quality. Lastly, regular testing of

the effluent quality must to take place to ensure that the effluent quality being released to the

receiving environment is of an acceptable quality.

Since the proposed pipeline would only be used for potable water and also taking into account

of the ecological integrity of the Tributary of the Vaal River with no ecoservice provision , thus

in the event of a leak of the pipeline during the operational phase, the risk is considered

negligible as opposed if it would have been for sewage effluent, however the additional water

input into the system could influence its hydrological regime, and lead to additional erosion. If

regular inspection of the pipeline occurs and a leak is repaired within a short period of time,

the risk is considered insignificant.


25

6. REFERENCES

Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF). 2008. Updated Manual for the Identification

and Delineation of Wetlands and Riparian Areas, prepared by M. Rountree, A. L.

Batchelor, J. MacKenzie and D. Hoare. Report no. X. Stream Flow Reduction Activities,

Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, Pretoria, South Africa.

National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) 107 of 1998

National Water Act 36 of 1998

NFEPA: Driver, A., Nel, J.L., Snaddon, K., Murruy, K., Roux, D.J., Hill, L., Swartz, E.R.,

Manuel, J. and Funke, N. 2011. Implementation Manual for Freshwater Ecosystem

Priority Areas. Water Research Commission. Report No. 1801/1/11. Online available:

http://bgis.sanbi.org/nfepa/project.asp


26

APPENDIX A - Terms of Use and Indemnity

INDEMNITY AND TERMS OF USE OF THIS REPORT

The findings, results, observations, conclusions and recommendations given in this report are based

on the author’s best scientific and professional knowledge as well as available information. The report

is based on survey and assessment techniques which are limited by time and budgetary constraints

relevant to the type and level of investigation undertaken and SAS CC and its staff reserve the right to

modify aspects of the report including the recommendations if and when new information may become

available from ongoing research or further work in this field or pertaining to this investigation.

Although SAS CC exercises due care and diligence in rendering services and preparing documents,

SAS CC accepts no liability and the client, by receiving this document, indemnifies SAS CC and its

directors, managers, agents and employees against all actions, claims, demands, losses, liabilities,

costs, damages and expensed arising from or in connection with services rendered, directly or indirectly

by SAS CC and by the use of the information contained in this document.

This report must not be altered or added to without the prior written consent of the author. This also

refers to electronic copies of this report which are supplied for the purposes of inclusion as part of other

reports, including main reports. Similarly, any recommendations, statements or conclusions drawn from

or based on this report must make reference to this report. If these form part of a main report relating

to this investigation or report, this report must be included in its entirety as an appendix or separate

section to the main report.


27

APPENDIX B - Legislative requirements and Indemnity

LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS

National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) (Act No. 107 of 1998)

The National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) (Act 107 of 1998) and the associated Regulations as amended in 2017, states that prior to any development taking place within a wetland or riparian area, an environmental authorisation process needs to be followed. This could follow either the Basic Assessment Report (BAR) process or the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process depending on the scale of the impact. Provincial regulations must also be considered.

National Water Act (NWA) (Act No. 36 of 1998)

The National Water Act (NWA) (Act 36 of 1998) recognises that the entire ecosystem and not just the water itself in any given water resource constitutes the resource and as such needs to be conserved. No activity may therefore take place within a watercourse unless it is authorised by the Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS). Any area within a wetland or riparian zone is therefore excluded from development unless authorisation is obtained from the DWS in terms of Section 21 (c) & (i).

General Notice 509 as published in the Government Gazette 40229 of 2016 as it relates to the NWA (Act 36 of 1998)

In accordance with Regulation GN509 of 2016, a regulated area of a watercourse for section 21c and 21i of the NWA, 1998 is defined as: ➢ The outer edge of the 1 in 100 year flood line and/or delineated riparian habitat, whichever is

the greatest distance, measured from the middle of the watercourse of a river, spring, natural

channel, lake or dam;

➢ In the absence of a determined 1 in 100 year flood line or riparian area the area within 100 m

from the edge of a watercourse where the edge of the watercourse is the first identifiable

annual bank fill flood bench; or

➢ A 500 m radius from the delineated boundary (extent) of any wetland or pan.

This notice replaces GN1199 and may be exercised as follows: i) Exercise the water use activities in terms of Section 21(c) and (i) of the Act as set out in the

table below, subject to the conditions of this authorisation;

ii) Use water in terms of section 21(c) or (i) of the Act if it has a low risk class as determines

through the Risk Matrix;

iii) Do maintenance with their existing lawful water use in terms of section 21(c) or (i) of the Act

that has a LOW risk class as determined through the Risk Matrix;

iv) Conduct river and stormwater management activities as contained in a river management plan;

v) Conduct rehabilitation of wetlands or rivers where such rehabilitation activities has a LOW risk

class as determined through the Risk Matrix; and

vi) Conduct emergency work arising from an emergency situation or incident associated with the

persons’ existing lawful water use, provided that all work is executed and reported in the

manner prescribed in the Emergency protocol.

A General Authorisation (GA) issued as per this notice will require the proponent to adhere with specific conditions, rehabilitation criteria and monitoring and reporting programme. Furthermore, the water user must ensure that there is a sufficient budget to complete, rehabilitate and maintain the water use as set out in this GA. Upon completion of the registration, the responsible authority will provide a certificate of registration to the water user within 30 working days of the submission. On written receipt of a registration certificate from the Department, the person will be regarded as a registered water user and can commence within the water use as contemplated in the GA.


28

APPENDIX C - Method of Assessment

FRESHWATER RESOURCE METHOD OF ASSESSMENT

1. Desktop Study

Prior to the commencement of the field assessment, a background study, including a literature review, was conducted in order to determine the ecoregion and ecostatus of the larger aquatic system within which the freshwater features present or in close proximity of the proposed study area are located. Aspects considered as part of the literature review are discussed in the sections that follow. 1.1 National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas (NFEPA, 2011) The NFEPA project is a multi-partner project between the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), Water Research Commission (WRC), South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI), DWA, South African Institute of Aquatic Biodiversity (SAIAB) and South African National Parks (SANParks). The project responds to the reported degradation of freshwater ecosystem condition and associated biodiversity, both globally and in South Africa. It uses systematic conservation planning to provide strategic spatial priorities of conserving South Africa’s freshwater biodiversity, within the context of equitable social and economic development.

The NFEPA project aims to identify a national network of freshwater conservation areas and to explore institutional mechanisms for their implementation. Freshwater ecosystems provide a valuable, natural resource with economic, aesthetic, spiritual, cultural and recreational value. However, the integrity of freshwater ecosystems in South Africa is declining at an alarming rate, largely as a consequence of a variety of challenges that are practical (managing vast areas of land to maintain connectivity between freshwater ecosystems), socio-economic (competition between stakeholders for utilisation) and institutional (building appropriate governance and co-management mechanisms).

The NFEPA database was searched for information in terms of conservation status of rivers, wetland habitat and wetland features present in the vicinity of or within the proposed study area.

2. Classification System for Wetlands and other Aquatic Ecosystems in South Africa The freshwater features encountered within the proposed study area were assessed using the Classification System for Wetlands and other Aquatic Ecosystems in South Africa. User Manual: Inland Systems (Ollis et al., 2013), hereafter referred to as the “Classification System”. A summary of Levels 1 to 4 of the classification system are presented in Table C1 and C2, below.

Table C1: Proposed classification structure for Inland Systems, up to Level 3.

WETLAND / AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM CONTEXT

LEVEL 1: SYSTEM

LEVEL 2: REGIONAL SETTING

LEVEL 3: LANDSCAPE UNIT

Inland Systems

DWA Level 1 Ecoregions OR NFEPA WetVeg Groups OR Other special framework

Valley Floor

Slope

Plain

Bench (Hilltop / Saddle / Shelf)


29

Table C2: Hydrogeomorphic (HGM) Unit for the Inland System, showing the primary HGM Types at Level 4A and the subcategories at Level 4B to 4C.

FUNCTIONAL UNIT

LEVEL 4: HYDROGEOMORPHIC (HGM) UNIT

HGM type Longitudinal zonation/ Landform / Outflow drainage

Landform / Inflow drainage

A B C

River

Mountain headwater stream Active channel

Riparian zone

Mountain stream Active channel

Riparian zone

Transitional Active channel

Riparian zone

Upper foothills Active channel

Riparian zone

Lower foothills Active channel

Riparian zone

Lowland river Active channel

Riparian zone

Rejuvenated bedrock fall Active channel

Riparian zone

Rejuvenated foothills Active channel

Riparian zone

Upland floodplain Active channel

Riparian zone

Channelled valley-bottom wetland (not applicable) (not applicable)

Unchannelled valley-bottom wetland (not applicable) (not applicable)

Floodplain wetland Floodplain depression (not applicable)

Floodplain flat (not applicable)

Depression

Exorheic With channelled inflow


Endorheic With channelled inflow


Dammed With channelled inflow


Seep With channelled outflow (not applicable)

Without channelled outflow (not applicable)

Wetland flat (not applicable) (not applicable)

Level 1: Inland systems

From the Classification System, Inland Systems are defined as aquatic ecosystems that have no existing connection to the ocean1 (i.e. characterised by the complete absence of marine exchange and/or tidal influence) but which are inundated or saturated with water, either permanently or periodically. It is important to bear in mind, however, that certain Inland Systems may have had a historical connection to the ocean, which in some cases may have been relatively recent.

Level 2: Ecoregions & NFEPA Wetland Vegetation Groups

For Inland Systems, the regional spatial framework that has been included at Level 2 of the classification system is that of DWA’s Level 1 Ecoregions for aquatic ecosystems (Kleynhans et al., 2005). There is a total of 31 Ecoregions across South Africa, including Lesotho and Swaziland. DWA Ecoregions have

1 Most rivers are indirectly connected to the ocean via an estuary at the downstream end, but where marine exchange (i.e. the presence of seawater) or tidal fluctuations are detectable in a river channel that is permanently or periodically connected to the ocean, it is defined as part of the estuary.


30

most commonly been used to categorise the regional setting for national and regional water resource management applications, especially in relation to rivers.

The Vegetation Map of South Africa, Swaziland and Lesotho (Mucina & Rutherford, 2006) group’s vegetation types across the country according to Biomes, which are then divided into Bioregions. To categorise the regional setting for the wetland component of the National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas (NFEPA) project, wetland vegetation groups (referred to as WetVeg Groups) were derived by further splitting bioregions into smaller groups through expert input (Nel et al., 2011). There are currently 133 NFEPA WetVeg Groups. It is envisaged that these groups could be used as a special framework for the classification of wetlands in national- and regional-scale conservation planning and wetland management initiatives.

Level 3: Landscape Setting

At Level 3 of the Classification System, for Inland Systems, a distinction is made between four Landscape Units (Table C1) on the basis of the landscape setting (i.e. topographical position) within which an HGM Unit is situated, as follows (Ollis et al., 2013):

➢ Slope: an included stretch of ground that is not part of a valley floor, which is typically located

on the side of a mountain, hill or valley;

➢ Valley floor: The base of a valley, situated between two distinct valley side-slopes;

➢ Plain: an extensive area of low relief characterised by relatively level, gently undulating or

uniformly sloping land; and

➢ Bench (hilltop/saddle/shelf): an area of mostly level or nearly level high ground (relative to

the broad surroundings), including hilltops/crests (areas at the top of a mountain or hill flanked

by down-slopes in all directions), saddles (relatively high-lying areas flanked by down-slopes

on two sides in one direction and up-slopes on two sides in an approximately perpendicular

direction), and shelves/terraces/ledges (relatively high-lying, localised flat areas along a slope,

representing a break in slope with an up-slope one side and a down-slope on the other side in

the same direction).

Level 4: Hydrogeomorphic Units

Seven primary HGM Types are recognised for Inland Systems at Level 4A of the Classification System (Table C2), on the basis of hydrology and geomorphology (Ollis et al., 2013), namely:

➢ River: a linear landform with clearly discernible bed and banks, which permanently or

periodically carries a concentrated flow of water;

➢ Channelled valley-bottom wetland: a valley-bottom wetland with a river channel running

through it;

➢ Unchannelled valley-bottom wetland: a valley-bottom wetland without a river channel

running through it;

➢ Floodplain wetland: the mostly flat or gently sloping land adjacent to and formed by an alluvial

river channel, under its present climate and sediment load, which is subject to periodic

inundation by over-topping of the channel bank;

➢ Depression: a landform with closed elevation contours that increases in depth from the

perimeter to a central area of greatest depth, and within which water typically accumulates.

➢ Wetland Flat: a level or near-level wetland area that is not fed by water from a river channel,

and which is typically situated on a plain or a bench. Closed elevation contours are not evident

around the edge of a wetland flat; and


31

➢ Seep: a wetland area located on (gently to steeply) sloping land, which is dominated by the

colluvial (i.e. gravity-driven), unidirectional movement of material down-slope. Seeps are often

located on the side-slopes of a valley but they do not, typically, extend into a valley floor.

The above terms have been used for the primary HGM Units in the classification system to try and

ensure consistency with the wetland classification terms currently in common usage in South Africa.

Similar terminology (but excluding categories for “channel”, “flat” and “valleyhead seep”) is used, for

example, in the recently developed tools produced as part of the Wetland Management Series including

WET-Health (Macfarlane et al., 2008), WET-IHI (DWAF, 2007) and WET-EcoServices (Kotze et al.,

2009).


32

APPENDIX D – Risk Assessment Methodology.

In order for the EAP to allow for sufficient consideration of all environmental impacts, impacts were

assessed using a common, defensible method of assessing significance that will enable comparisons

to be made between risks/impacts and will enable authorities, stakeholders and the client to understand

the process and rationale upon which risks/impacts have been assessed. The method to be used for

assessing risks/impacts is outlined in the sections below.

The first stage of the risk/impact assessment is the identification of environmental activities, aspects

and impacts. This is supported by the identification of receptors and resources, which allows for an

understanding of the impact pathway and an assessment of the sensitivity to change. The definitions

used in the impact assessment are presented below.

➢ An activity is a distinct process or task undertaken by an organisation for which a responsibility

can be assigned. Activities also include facilities or infrastructure that is possessed by an

organisation.

➢ An environmental aspect is an ‘element of an organizations activities, products and services

which can interact with the environment’2. The interaction of an aspect with the environment

may result in an impact.

➢ Environmental risks/impacts are the consequences of these aspects on environmental

resources or receptors of particular value or sensitivity, for example, disturbance due to noise

and health effects due to poorer air quality. In the case where the impact is on human health or

wellbeing, this should be stated. Similarly, where the receptor is not anthropogenic, then it

should, where possible, be stipulated what the receptor is.

➢ Receptors can comprise, but are not limited to, people or human-made systems, such as local

residents, communities and social infrastructure, as well as components of the biophysical

environment such as freshwater features, flora and riverine systems.

➢ Resources include components of the biophysical environment.

➢ Frequency of activity refers to how often the proposed activity will take place.

➢ Frequency of impact refers to the frequency with which a stressor (aspect) will impact on the

receptor.

➢ Severity refers to the degree of change to the receptor status in terms of the reversibility of the

impact; sensitivity of receptor to stressor; duration of impact (increasing or decreasing with

time); controversy potential and precedent setting; threat to environmental and health

standards.

➢ Spatial extent refers to the geographical scale of the impact.

➢ Duration refers to the length of time over which the stressor will cause a change in the resource

or receptor.

The significance of the impact is then assessed by rating each variable numerically according to the

defined criteria (refer to the table below). The purpose of the rating is to develop a clear understanding

of influences and processes associated with each impact. The severity, spatial scope and duration of

the impact together comprise the consequence of the impact and when summed can obtain a maximum

value of 15. The frequency of the activity, impact, legal issues and the detection of the impact together

comprise the likelihood of the impact occurring and can obtain a maximum value of 20. The values for

likelihood and consequence of the impact are then read off a significance rating matrix and are used to

determine whether mitigation is necessary3.

The model outcome of the impacts was then assessed in terms of impact certainty and consideration

of available information. The Precautionary Principle is applied in line with South Africa’s National

Environmental Management Act (No. 108 of 1997) in instances of uncertainty or lack of information, by

2 The definition has been aligned with that used in the ISO 14001 Standard. 3 Some risks/impacts that have low significance will however still require mitigation


33

increasing assigned ratings or adjusting final model outcomes. In certain instances, where a variable or

outcome requires rational adjustment due to model limitations, the model outcomes have been

adjusted.

"RISK ASSESSMENT KEY” (Based on DWS 2015 publication: Section 21 c and i water use Risk Assessment Protocol)

Table D1: Severity (How severe does the aspects impact on the resource quality (flow regime, water quality, geomorphology, biota, habitat)

Insignificant / non-harmful 1

Small / potentially harmful 2

Significant / slightly harmful 3

Great / harmful 4

Disastrous / extremely harmful and/or wetland(s) involved 5

Where "or wetland(s) are involved" it means that the activity is located within the delineated boundary of any wetland. The score of 5 is only compulsory for the significance rating.

Table D2: Spatial Scale (How big is the area that the aspect is impacting on)

Area specific (at impact site) 1

Whole site (entire surface right) 2

Regional / neighbouring areas (downstream within quaternary catchment) 3

National (impacting beyond secondary catchment or provinces) 4

Global (impacting beyond SA boundary) 5

Table D3: Duration (How long does the aspect impact on the resource quality)

One day to one month, PES, EIS and/or REC not impacted 1

One month to one year, PES, EIS and/or REC impacted but no change in status 2

One year to 10 years, PES, EIS and/or REC impacted to a lower status but can be improved over this period through mitigation 3

Life of the activity, PES, EIS and/or REC permanently lowered 4

More than life of the organisation/facility, PES and EIS scores, a E or F 5

PES and EIS (sensitivity) must be considered.

Table D4: Frequency of the activity (How often do you do the specific activity)

Annually or less 1

6 monthly 2

Monthly 3

Weekly 4

Daily 5

Table D5: The frequency of the incident or impact (How often does the activity impact on the resource quality)

Almost never / almost impossible / >20% 1

Very seldom / highly unlikely / >40% 2

Infrequent / unlikely / seldom / >60% 3

Often / regularly / likely / possible / >80% 4

Daily / highly likely / definitely / >100% 5

Table D6: Legal issues (How is the activity governed by legislation)

No legislation 1

Fully covered by legislation (wetlands are legally governed) 5

Located within the regulated areas


34

Table D7: Detection (How quickly or easily can the impacts/risks of the activity be observed on the resource quality, people and resource)

Immediately 1

Without much effort 2

Need some effort 3

Remote and difficult to observe 4

Covered 5

Table D8: Rating Classes

RATING CLASS MANAGEMENT DESCRIPTION

1 – 55 (L) Low Risk Acceptable as is or consider requirement for mitigation. Impact to watercourses and resource quality small and easily mitigated.

56 – 169 M) Moderate Risk Risk and impact on watercourses are notably and require mitigation measures on a higher level, which costs more and require specialist input. Licence required.

170 – 300 (H) High Risk Watercourse(s) impacts by the activity are such that they impose a long-term threat on a large scale and lowering of the Reserve. Licence required.

A low risk class must be obtained for all activities to be considered for a GA

Table D9: Calculations

Consequence = Severity + Spatial Scale + Duration

Likelihood = Frequency of Activity + Frequency of Incident + Legal Issues + Detection

Significance\Risk = Consequence X Likelihood

The following points were considered when undertaking the assessment:

➢ Risks and impacts were analysed in the context of the project’s area of influence

encompassing:

• Primary project site and related facilities that the client and its contractors develops or

controls;

• Areas potentially impacted by cumulative impacts for further planned development of the

project, any existing project or condition and other project-related developments; and

• Areas potentially affected by impacts from unplanned but predictable developments caused

by the project that may occur later or at a different location.

➢ Risks/Impacts were assessed for construction phase and operational phase; and

➢ Individuals or groups who may be differentially or disproportionately affected by the project

because of their disadvantaged or vulnerable status were assessed.

Control Measure Development

The following points presents the key concepts considered in the development of mitigation measures

for the proposed construction:

➢ Mitigation and performance improvement measures and actions that address the risks and

impacts4 are identified and described in as much detail as possible. Mitigating measures

are investigated according to the impact minimisation hierarchy as follows:

• Avoidance or prevention of impact;

• Minimisation of impact;

• Rehabilitation; and

• Offsetting.

➢ Measures and actions to address negative impacts will favour avoidance and prevention

over minimisation, mitigation or compensation; and

4 Mitigation measures should address both positive and negative impacts


35

➢ Desired outcomes are defined and have been developed in such a way as to be

measurable events with performance indicators, targets and acceptable criteria that

can be tracked over defined periods, wherever possible.

Recommendations Recommendations were developed to address and mitigate potential impacts on the freshwater ecology of the resources in traversed by or in close proximity of the proposed infrastructure.


36

APPENDIX E – Standard Mitigation Measures

General construction management and good housekeeping practices

Latent and general impacts which may affect the freshwater ecology and biodiversity, will include any

activities which take place in close proximity to the proposed development that may impact on the

receiving environment. Mitigation measures for these impacts are highlighted below and are relevant

to the freshwater system identified in this report:

Development footprint

➢ All development footprint areas should remain as small as possible and should not encroach

into the freshwater areas unless absolutely essential and part of the proposed development. It

must be ensured that the freshwater habitat is off-limits to construction vehicles and non-

essential personnel;

➢ The boundaries of footprint areas, including contractor laydown areas, are to be clearly defined

and it should be ensured that all activities remain within defined footprint areas. Edge effects

will need to be extremely carefully controlled;

➢ Planning of temporary roads and access routes should avoid freshwater areas and be restricted

to existing roads where possible;

➢ Appropriate sanitary facilities must be provided for the life of the construction phase and all

waste removed to an appropriate waste facility;

➢ All hazardous chemicals as well as stockpiles should be stored on bunded surfaces and have

facilities constructed to control runoff from these areas;

➢ It must be ensured that all hazardous storage containers and storage areas comply with the

relevant SABS standards to prevent leakage;

➢ No fires should be permitted in or near the construction area; and

➢ Ensuring that an adequate number of waste and “spill” bins are provided will also prevent litter

and ensure the proper disposal of waste and spills.

Vehicle access ➢ All vehicles must be regularly inspected for leaks. Re-fuelling must take place on a sealed

surface area to prevent ingress of hydrocarbons into the topsoil; ➢ In the event of a vehicle breakdown, maintenance of vehicles must take place with care and

the recollection of spillage should be practiced near the surface area to prevent ingress of hydrocarbons into topsoil and subsequent habitat loss; and

➢ All spills should they occur, should be immediately cleaned up and treated accordingly. Vegetation

➢ Removal of the alien and weed species encountered within the freshwater resources must take place in order to comply with existing legislation (amendments to the regulations under the Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act, 1983 and Section 28 of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998). Removal of species should take place throughout the construction, operational, and maintenance phases; and

➢ Species specific and area specific eradication recommendations:

• Care should be taken with the choice of herbicide to ensure that no additional impact and loss of indigenous plant species occurs due to the herbicide used;

• Footprint areas should be kept as small as possible when removing alien plant species; and


37

Soils ➢ Sheet runoff from access roads and from the golf course should be slowed down by the

strategic placement of berms; ➢ As far as possible, all construction activities should occur in the low flow season, during the

drier winter months; ➢ As much vegetation growth as possible (of indigenous floral species) should be encouraged to

protect soils; ➢ No stockpiling of topsoil is to take place within close proximity to the water canal, and all

stockpiles must be protected with a suitable geotextile to prevent sedimentation of the water canal;

➢ All soils compacted as a result of construction activities as well as ongoing operational activities falling outside of project footprint areas should be ripped and profiled; and

➢ A monitoring plan for the development and the immediate zone of influence should be implemented to prevent erosion and incision.

Rehabilitation

➢ Construction rubble must be collected and disposed of at a suitable landfill site; and ➢ All alien vegetation in the footprint area as well as immediate vicinity of the proposed

development should be removed. Alien vegetation control should take place for a minimum period of two growing seasons after rehabilitation is completed.


38

APPENDIX F – DETAILS, EXPERTISE AND CURRICULUM

VITAE OF SPECIALISTS

1. (a) (i) Details of the specialist who prepared the report

Mthokozisi Mbangezeli B.Tech Crop Production and Soil Science (Tshwane University of

Technology)

Stephen van Staden MSc (Environmental Management) (University of Johannesburg)

1. (a). (ii) The expertise of that specialist to compile a specialist report including a curriculum vitae

Company of Specialist: Scientific Aquatic Services

Name / Contact person: Stephen van Staden

Postal address: 29 Arterial Road West, Oriel, Bedfordview

Postal code: 2007 Cell: 083 415 2356

Telephone: 011 616 7893 Fax: 011 615 6240/ 086 724 3132

E-mail: [email protected]

Qualifications

MSc (Environmental Management) (University of Johannesburg) BSc (Hons) Zoology (Aquatic Ecology) (University of Johannesburg) BSc (Zoology, Geography and Environmental Management) (University of Johannesburg)

Registration / Associations

Registered Professional Scientist at South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions (SACNASP) Accredited River Health practitioner by the South African River Health Program (RHP) Member of the South African Soil Surveyors Association (SASSO) Member of the Gauteng Wetland Forum

1. (b) A declaration that the specialist is independent in a form as may be specified by the competent authority I, Stephen van Staden, declare that -

• I act as the independent specialist in this application;

• I will perform the work relating to the application in an objective manner, even if this results in views and findings that are not favourable to the applicant;

• I declare that there are no circumstances that may compromise my objectivity in performing such work;

• I have expertise in conducting the specialist report relevant to this application, including knowledge of the relevant legislation and any guidelines that have relevance to the proposed activity;

• I will comply with the applicable legislation;

• I have not, and will not engage in, conflicting interests in the undertaking of the activity;

• I undertake to disclose to the applicant and the competent authority all material information in my possession that reasonably has or may have the potential of influencing - any decision to be taken with respect to the application by the competent authority; and - the objectivity of any report, plan or document to be prepared by myself for submission to the competent authority;

• All the particulars furnished by me in this form are true and correct

--------------------------------------------------------------------------- Signature of the Project Manager


39

I, Mthokozisi Mbangezeli, declare that -

• I act as the independent specialist in this application;

• I will perform the work relating to the application in an objective manner, even if this results in views and findings that are not favourable to the applicant;

• I declare that there are no circumstances that may compromise my objectivity in performing such work;

• I have expertise in conducting the specialist report relevant to this application, including knowledge of the relevant legislation and any guidelines that have relevance to the proposed activity;

• I will comply with the applicable legislation;

• I have not, and will not engage in, conflicting interests in the undertaking of the activity;

• I undertake to disclose to the applicant and the competent authority all material information in my possession that reasonably has or may have the potential of influencing - any decision to be taken with respect to the application by the competent authority; and - the objectivity of any report, plan or document to be prepared by myself for submission to the competent authority;

• All the particulars furnished by me in this form are true and correct

-------------------------------------------------------- Signature of the Specialist


40


CURRICULUM VITAE OF STEPHEN VAN STADEN

PERSONAL DETAILS

Position in Company Managing member, Ecologist with focus on Freshwater Ecology

Date of Birth 13 July 1979

Nationality South African

Languages English, Afrikaans

Joined SAS 2003 (year of establishment)

Other Business Trustee of the Serenity Property Trust and emerald Management Trust


Registered Professional Scientist at South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions (SACNASP);

Accredited River Health practitioner by the South African River Health Program (RHP);

Member of the South African Soil Surveyors Association (SASSO);

Member of the Gauteng Wetland Forum;

Member of International Association of Impact Assessors (IAIA) South Africa;

Member pf the Land Rehabilitation Society of South Africa (LaRSSA)

EDUCATION

Qualifications

MSc (Environmental Management) (University of Johannesburg)

2003

BSc (Hons) Zoology (Aquatic Ecology) (University of Johannesburg) 2001

BSc (Zoology, Geography and Environmental Management) (University of Johannesburg)

Tools for wetland Assessment short course Rhodes University

2000

2016


South Africa – All Provinces

Southern Africa – Lesotho, Botswana, Mozambique, Zimbabwe Zambia

Eastern Africa – Tanzania Mauritius

West Africa – Ghana, Liberia, Angola, Guinea Bissau, Nigeria, Sierra Leone

Central Africa – Democratic Republic of the Congo

PROJECT EXPERIENCE (Over 2500 projects executed with varying degrees of involvement)

1. M 1 Mining Coal, Chrome, PGM’s, Mineral Sands, Gold, Phosphate, river sand, clay, fluorspar 2 Linear developments 3 Energy Transmission, telecommunication, pipelines, roads 4 Minerals beneficiation 5 Renewable energy (wind and solar) 6 Commercial development 7 Residential development 8 Agriculture 9 Industrial/chemical


41

REFERENCES ➢ Terry Calmeyer (Former Chairperson of IAIA SA)

Director: ILISO Consulting Environmental Management (Pty) Ltd Tel: +27 (0) 11 465 2163 Email: [email protected]

➢ Alex Pheiffer

African Environmental Management Operations Manager SLR Consulting Tel: +27 11 467 0945 Email: [email protected]

➢ Marietjie Eksteen

Managing Director: Jacana Environmental Tel: 015 291 4015

Yours faithfully

STEPHEN VAN STADEN


42


CURRICULUM VITAE OF MTHOKOZISI MBANGEZELI

PERSONAL DETAILS

Position in Company Soil Scientist Date of Birth 11th March 1990 Nationality South African Languages IsiXhosa, English Joined SAS 2018


SACNASP – Registered as a Candidate Natural Scientist EDUCATION

Qualifications B. Tech Crop Production and Soil Sciences (Tshwane University of Technology) 2015 BA (Hons) Development Studies (Nelson Mandela University) 2017


South Africa – Gauteng and Limpopo SELECTED PROJECT EXAMPLES

Soil, Land Use and Land Capability Assessments

• Soil, land use and land capability scoping assessment as part of the environmental assessment and authorisation process for the proposed Dwarsrivier expansion project, Limpopo province

Freshwater Ecological Assessments

• Freshwater resource verification and delineation as part of the environmental assessment and authorisation process for the proposed ab InBev glass bottle manufacturing plant; near Vereeniging, Gauteng province.

APPENDIX 5: SPECIALIST STUDIES Appendix 5.6: Aquatic Ecology … · 2018-11-12 · Prepared by:...

Documents

Transcript of APPENDIX 5: SPECIALIST STUDIES Appendix 5.6: Aquatic Ecology … · 2018-11-12 · Prepared by:...