Namdeb Centre, 10 Dr. Franseia.met.gov.na/screening/444_app_00444_final_eia... · Namdeb Centre, 10...

APP-00444 DBMN EIA Report i Lüderitz Logistic Shore Base-August 2019

APP-00444 Final Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report to Support the

Application for Environmental Clearance Certificate (ECC) for the Proposed Upgrading of the Lüderitz

Logistics Shore Base (LLSB) in the Port of Lüderitz, Lüderitz

//Karas Region, Southern Namibia

De Beers Marine Namibia (Pty) Ltd Namdeb Centre, 10 Dr. Frans Indongo Street

P.O. Box 23016

WINDHOEK, NAMIBIA

APP-00444 DBMN EIA Report ii Lüderitz Logistic Shore Base-August 2019

CLIENT / PROPONENT / OFFSHORE OPERATOR INFORMATION

De Beers Marine Namibia (Pty) Ltd Address: 4th Floor, Namdeb Centre

10 Dr. Frans Indongo Street WINDHOEK, NAMIBIA.

Responsible Person: Chief Executive Officer

Tel No.: +264 61 297 8000 Fax No.: +264 61 297 8100

Contact Person: Environmental Manager

Tel No.: + 264 61 297 8215 Fax No.: + 264 61 297 8120

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report Prepared By

Risk-Based Solutions (RBS) CC WINDHOEK, NAMIBIA, AUGUST 2019

CITATION: Risk-Based Solutions (RBS), 2019. Final Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) to Support the Application for Environmental Clearance Certificate (ECC) for the Proposed Upgrading of the Lüderitz Logistics Shore Base (Lüderitz Port), //Karas Region, Southern Namibia by De Beers Marine Namibia (DBMN) (Pty) Ltd, Windhoek, Namibia

APP-00444 DBMN EIA Report iii Lüderitz Logistic Shore Base-August 2019

PROPONENT, LISTED ACTIVITIES

AND RELATED INFORMATION SUMMARY

PROPONENT

De Beers Marine Namibia (DBMN) (Pty) Ltd

ADDRESS OF THE PROPONENT

De Beers Marine Namibia (Pty) Ltd

Namdeb Centre, 10 Dr. Frans Indongo Street P.O. Box 23016

WINDHOEK, NAMIBIA

PROPOSED PROJECT

Upgrading of the Lüderitz Logistics Shore Base (Lüderitz Port),

De Beers Marine Namibia (DBMN) (Pty) Ltd

PROJECT LOCATION

Lüderitz, //Karas Region, Southern Namibia (Latitude: -26° 38' 53.02" S, Longitude: 15° 09' 33.98" E)

X: -26.64806, Y: 15.15944

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS

Risk-Based Solutions (RBS) CC (Consulting Arm of Foresight Group Namibia (FGN) (Pty) Ltd)

41 Feld Street Ausspannplatz Cnr of Lazarett and Feld Street

P. O. Box 1839, WINDHOEK, NAMIBIA Tel: +264 - 61- 306058; Fax: +264 - 61- 306059

Cell: + 264-811413229; Email: [email protected] Global Office / URL: www.rbs.com.na

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PRACTITIONER (EAP)

Dr. Sindila Mwiya PhD, PG Cert, MPhil, BEng (Hons), Pr Eng

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.rbs.com.na/

APP-00444 DBMN EIA Report iv Lüderitz Logistic Shore Base-August 2019

APP-00444 DBMN EIA Report v Lüderitz Logistic Shore Base-August 2019

STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS / SUMMARY CV /PROFILE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PRACTITIONER (EAP) DR. SINDILA MWIYA

Dr. Sindila Mwiya has more than eighteen (18) years of direct technical industry experience in Environmental Assessment (SEA, EIA, EMP, EMS), Energy (Renewable and Non-renewable energy sources), onshore and offshore resources (minerals, oil, gas and water) exploration / prospecting, recovery and utilisation, covering general and specialist technical exploration and recovery support, Health, Safety and Environment (HSE) permitting for Geophysical Surveys such as 2D and 3D Seismic and Gravity Surveys for mining and petroleum (oil and gas) operations support, through to engineering planning, layout, designing, logistical support, recovery, production / operations, compliance monitoring, rehabilitation, closure and aftercare projects lifecycles. Through his companies, Risk-Based Solutions (RBS) CC and Foresight Group Namibia (FGN) (Pty) Ltd , which he founded, he has undertaken more than 200 projects for local, regional (SADC) and international clients. He continue to work for global reputable resources (petroleum and mining / minerals) and energy companies such as BW Offshore (Singapore), Shell Namibia B. V. Limited (Namibia/ the Netherlands), Tullow Oil (UK), Debmarine (DBMN) (Namibia), Reconnaissance Energy Africa Ltd (ReconAfrica) (UK/Canada), Osino Resource Corporation (Canada/Germany/ Namibia), Desert Lion Energy Corporation (Canada/ Australia), Petrobras Oil and Gas (Brazil) / BP (UK), REPSOL (Spain), ACREP (Namibia/Angola), Preview Energy Resources (UK), HRT Africa (Brazil / USA), Chariot Oil and Gas Exploration (UK), Serica Energy (UK), Eco (Atlantic) Oil and Gas (Canada / USA), ION GeoVentures (USA), PGS UK Exploration (UK), TGS-Nopec (UK), Maurel & Prom (France), GeoPartners (UK), PetroSA Equatorial Guinea (South Africa / Equatorial Guinea), Preview Energy Resources (Namibia / UK), Sintezneftegaz Namibia LTD (Russia), INA Namibia (INA INDUSTRIJA NAFTE d.d) (Croatia), Namibia Underwater Technologies (NUTAM) (Namibia), InnoSun Holding (Pty) Ltd (Namibia / France) and OLC Northern Sun Energy (Pty) Ltd (USA /Namibia). Dr. Sindila Mwiya is highly qualified with extensive experience in petroleum, mining, renewable energy (Solar, Wind, Biomass, Geothermal and Hydropower), Non Renewable energy (Coal, Petroleum, and Natural Gas), applied environmental assessment, management and monitoring (Scoping, EIA, EMP, EMP, EMS) and overall industry specific HSE, cleaner production programmes, geoenvironmental, geological and geotechnical engineering specialist fields. Dr. Sindila Mwiya has undertaken and continue to undertake and manage high value projects on behalf of global and local resources and energy companies. Currently, (2019-2021) Dr. Sindila Mwiya is responsible for permitting planning through to operational and completion compliance monitoring, HSE and engineering technical support for multiple major upstream petroleum, minerals, mining and manufacturing operations in different parts of the World including Namibia. He continue to worked as an International Consultant, national Environmental Assessment Practitioner (EAP), Engineering / Technical Consultant (RBS / FGN), Project Manager, Programme Advisor for the Department of Natural and Applied Sciences, Namibia University of Science and Technology (NUST) and has worked as a Lecturer, University of Namibia (UNAM), External Examiner/ Moderator, NUST, National (Namibia) Technical Advisor (Directorate of Environmental Affairs, Ministry of Environment and Tourism / DANIDA – Cleaner Production Component) and Chief Geologist for Engineering and Environment Division, Geological Survey of Namibia, Ministry of Mines and Energy and a Field-Based Geotechnician (Specialised in Magnetics, Seismic, Gravity and Electromagnetics Exploration and Survey Methods) under the Federal Institute for Geoscience and Natural Resources (BGR) German Mineral Exploration Promotion Project to Namibia, Geophysics Division, Geological Survey of Namibia, Ministry of Mines and Energy. He has supervised and continue to support a number of MScs and PhDs research programmes and has been a reviewer on international, national and regional researches, plans, programmes and projects with the objective to ensure substantial local skills development pivotal to the national socioeconomic development through the promotion of sustainable natural resources coexistence developmental and resources recovery approaches, utilisation, management and for development policies, plans, programmes and projects financed by governments, private investors and donor organisations. Since 2006 until 2017, he has provided extensive technical support to the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA), Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET) through GIZ and continued to play a significant role in the amendments of the Namibian Environmental Management Act, 2007, (Act No. 7 of 2007), preparation of new Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Regulations, preparation of the updated Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations as well as the preparation of the new SEA and EIA Guidelines and Procedures all aimed at promoting effective environmental assessment and management practices in Namibia. Among his academic achievements, Dr Sindila Mwiya is a holder of a PhD (Geoenvironmental Engineering and Artificial Intelligence) – Research Thesis: Development of a Knowledge-Based System Methodology (KBSM) for the Design of Solid Waste Disposal Sites in Arid and Semiarid Environments focusing on Namibia, MPhil/PG Cert and BEng (Hons) (Engineering Geology and Geotechnics), qualifications from the University of Portsmouth, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, United Kingdom. During the 2004 Namibia National Science Awards, organised by the Namibian Ministry of Education, and held in Windhoek, Dr. Sindila Mwiya was awarded the Geologist of the Year for 2004, in the professional category. Furthermore, as part of his professional career recognition, Dr. Sindila Mwiya is a life member of the Geological Society of Namibia, Consulting member of the Hydrogeological Society of Namibia and a Professional Engineer registered with the Engineering Council of Namibia. WINDHOEK, AUGUST 2019

APP-00444 DBMN EIA Report vi Lüderitz Logistic Shore Base-August 2019

CONTENT LIST

NON TECHNICAL SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................. X

1. BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................................... - 1 -

1.1 OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................................ - 1 - 1.2 PROJECT LOCATION .................................................................................................................................. - 1 - 1.3 OPERATIONAL ARRANGEMENTS ................................................................................................................. - 1 - 1.4 PROJECT MOTIVATION .............................................................................................................................. - 1 - 1.5 PURPOSE OF THIS EIA AND EMP REPORT ................................................................................................. - 7 - 1.6 STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT ..................................................................................................................... - 7 -

2. APPROACH AND METHODS ................................................................................................................... - 8 -

2.1 OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................................ - 8 - 2.2 TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THIS REPORT .................................................................................................. - 8 - 2.3 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS .................................................................................................. - 9 -

2.3.1 Summary of the Approach ............................................................................................................ - 9 - 2.3.2 Assumptions and Limitations ...................................................................................................... - 10 -

2.4 PUBLIC AND STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION PROCESS ............................................................................ - 10 - 2.4.1 Overview ..................................................................................................................................... - 10 - 2.4.2 Objective of Conducting Public and Stakeholder Consultation Process .................................... - 11 - 2.4.3 Consultation Activities, Timing and Outcomes ........................................................................... - 11 -

2.5 IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT CRITERIA .................................................................................. - 16 - 2.5.1 Environmental Impact Assessment Rankings ............................................................................ - 16 - 2.5.2 Environmental Management Plan (EMP) Framework ................................................................ - 17 - 2.2.3 DBMN Environmental Management System (EMS) ................................................................... - 17 -

3. PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................. - 19 -

3.1 SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT ............................................................... - 19 - 3.2 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT .......................................... - 19 -

3.2.1 Civil Construction ........................................................................................................................ - 19 - 3.2.2 Fence and Concrete Ring Beam ................................................................................................ - 19 - 3.2.3 Engineered Layers and Hardstand ............................................................................................. - 19 - 3.2.4 Services Requirements and Engineering Specifications ............................................................ - 20 -

3.3 IMPLEMENTATION STAGES, HEALTH SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT ............................................................... - 21 - 3.3.1 Development Stages ................................................................................................................... - 21 - 3.3.2 Operational Health Safety and Environment (HSE).................................................................... - 21 -

3.4 FUTURE SUSTAINABILITY AND MINE CLOSURE PLAN ................................................................................. - 23 - 3.4.1 Future Mine Plan ......................................................................................................................... - 23 - 3.4.2 Proposed Activities Support to Mine Closure Plan ..................................................................... - 23 -

4. REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ............................................................................................................... - 24 -

4.1 NAMIBIAN PORTS AUTHORITY LEGISLATION .............................................................................................. - 24 - 4.2 COMPETENT AUTHORITY ......................................................................................................................... - 24 - 4.3 ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS .............................................................................................................. - 24 - 4.4 REGULATORY REGISTER ......................................................................................................................... - 24 - 4.5 STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES .................................................................................................................. - 26 -

5. RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT .................................................................................................................. - 28 -

5.1 OVERVIEW .............................................................................................................................................. - 28 - 5.2 CLIMATE COMPONENTS ........................................................................................................................... - 28 -

5.2.1 Wind ............................................................................................................................................ - 28 - 5.2.2 Temperature................................................................................................................................ - 28 - 5.2.3 Precipitation ................................................................................................................................ - 28 -

5.3 ONSHORE, COASTAL AND MARINE ENVIRONMENTS ................................................................................... - 29 - 5.3.1 Overview ..................................................................................................................................... - 29 - 5.3.2 Flora and Flora ............................................................................................................................ - 29 - 5.3.3 Lüderitz Regional, Local Geology and Water ............................................................................. - 31 - 5.3.4 Archaeology ................................................................................................................................ - 34 - 5.3.5 Lüderitz Coastal and Marine Sensitive Environment .................................................................. - 34 -

5.3.5.1 Overview ........................................................................................................................................... - 34 - 5.3.5.2 Marine Water Quality ........................................................................................................................ - 37 - 5.3.5.3 Marine Ecology ................................................................................................................................. - 37 -

APP-00444 DBMN EIA Report vii Lüderitz Logistic Shore Base-August 2019

5.3.5.4 Mariculture and Ranching ................................................................................................................. - 37 - 5.3.5.5 Marine and Coastal Avifauna ............................................................................................................ - 37 - 5.3.5.6 Fisheries ........................................................................................................................................... - 38 - 5.3.5.7 Recreation ........................................................................................................................................ - 38 - 5.3.5.8 Private and Commercial Navigation .................................................................................................. - 38 - 5.3.5.9 Marine Sediment Quality ................................................................................................................... - 38 - 5.3.5.10 Vibration, Noise and Increased Traffic Movement ............................................................................ - 38 -

5.3.6 SOCIOECONOMIC SETTINGS ................................................................................................................ - 38 - 5.3.6.1 Overview ........................................................................................................................................... - 38 - 5.3.6.2 Summary of the Conclusions on Socioeconomic Setting .................................................................. - 39 - 5.3.6.3 Socioeconomic Contributions of DBMN ............................................................................................ - 39 - 5.3.6.4 Social Corporate Responsibility of DBMN ......................................................................................... - 40 -

6. IMPACT AND RISK ASSESSMENT ....................................................................................................... - 41 -

6.1 ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE ...................................................................................................................... - 41 - 6.2 ASSESSMENTS OF ALTERNATIVES AND KEY ISSUES .................................................................................. - 41 -

6.2.1 Summary of Alternatives ............................................................................................................. - 41 - 6.3 IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRITERIA ............................................................................................................... - 45 -

6.3.1 Evaluation of Impacts .................................................................................................................. - 45 - 6.3.2 Environmental Impact Assessment Rankings ............................................................................ - 45 -

6.4 IDENTIFICATION OF LIKELY IMPACTS ......................................................................................................... - 47 - 6.4.1 Summary of Sources Impacts ..................................................................................................... - 47 - 6.4.2 Summary of Likely Positive Impacts ........................................................................................... - 47 - 6.4.3 Summary of Likely Negatively Impacts ....................................................................................... - 48 -

6.5 RESULTS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT ......................................................................... - 48 - 6.5.1 Positive Impacts Results ............................................................................................................. - 48 - 6.5.2 Negative Impacts Results ........................................................................................................... - 50 -

6.6 RISK ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS ............................................................................................. - 53 - 6.6.1 Risk Assessment Criteria ............................................................................................................ - 53 - 6.6.2 Impacts Risk Assessment ........................................................................................................... - 54 - 6.6.3 Socioeconomic Risk Assessment ............................................................................................... - 54 - 6.6.4 Cumulative Risks Assessment.................................................................................................... - 54 -

7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................................... - 55 -

7.1 CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................................................ - 55 - 7.2 RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................................... - 55 -

8. BIBLIOGRAPHY AND FURTHER READING ......................................................................................... - 56 -

9. ANNEXES .................................................................................................................................................... - 64 -

ANNEX 1–FINAL SCOPING REPORT / BID – AUGUST 2019 ................................................................................. - 64 - ANNEX 2 – PUBLIC AND STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION MATERIALS ................................................................. - 64 - ANNEX 3 - RISK MATRIX (ANGLO) ................................................................................................................ - 64 -

APP-00444 DBMN EIA Report viii Lüderitz Logistic Shore Base-August 2019

List of Figures

Figure 1.1: Regional location of the Lüderitz Logistics Shore Base (Port of Lüderitz). .......... - 2 - Figure 1.2: Detailed location of the Lüderitz Logistic Shore Base (Port of Lüderitz).............. - 3 - Figure 1.3: Shareholding structure, operational companies and license areas with

respect to Namdeb Holdings (Pty) Ltd, DBMN (Pty) Ltd and Namdeb Diamond Corporation (Pty) Ltd ........................................................................... - 5 -

Figure 1.4: Illustration of DBMN logistical arrangements linking Windhoek (HQ), Oranjemund Airport (Logistics Aviation Base), Offshore Operations (ML 47 Mining and Exploration), Cape Town and the Port of Lüderitz (Logistics Shore Bases)................................................................................................................ - 6 -

Figure 2.1: Summary of the environmental assessment process in Namibia. ....................... - 8 - Figure 2.2: Copy of the 1st Public Notice was published in the Confidente Weekly

Newspaper 8th – 14th August 2019. .................................................................. - 13 - Figure 2.3: Copy of the 2nd Public Notice that was published in the Windhoek Observer

Weekly Newspaper dated Friday, 16th August 2019. ........................................ - 14 - Figure 2.4: Copy of the 3rd Public Notice that was published in the Namibian Daily

Newspaper dated Thursday, 22nd August 2019. ............................................... - 15 - Figure 2.5: Illustration of environmental assessment, management and monitoring as

part of the overall ISO 14001 Environmental Management System adopted by DBMN. ........................................................................................................ - 18 -

Figure 3.1: Outline of the proposed logistic shore base infrastructure developments. ........ - 22 - Figure 5.1: Map showing hours of sunshine per day, rainfall in mm, and number of fog

days per year. .................................................................................................. - 29 - Figure 5.2: The local solid bedrock around Lüderitz area. .................................................. - 32 - Figure 5.3: Lüderitz Bay environmental setting and features .............................................. - 35 - Figure 5.4: An overview of key sensitive habitats / areas in relation to the proposed

logistic shore base site situated inside the Port of Lüderitz............................... - 36 - Figure 6.1: Other coastal and marine users around Lüderitz Prepared by RBS, 2019. ....... - 43 - Figure 6.2: Example of the already existing pollution sources affecting the bay Prepared

by RBS, 2019. .................................................................................................. - 44 -

List of Tables Table 2.1: Summary of the proposed activities, alternatives and key issues considered

during the Environmental Assessment (EA) process covering EIA and EMP phases. .............................................................................................................. - 9 -

Table 2.2: Summary of the Interested and Affected Parties (I&APs) consultation activties undertaken during the month August 2019. ........................................ - 12 -

Table 2.3: Definition of impact assessment categories. .................................................... - 16 - Table 2.4: The criteria used to determine the significance rating of the impact(s). ............ - 17 - Table 4.1: R553 Regional Standards for Industrial Effluent, in Government Gazette No

217 dated 5 April 1962. .................................................................................... - 26 - Table 4.2: Comparison of selected guideline values for drinking water quality. ................. - 27 - Table 6.1: Definition of impact categories. ........................................................................ - 46 - Table 6.2: The criteria used to determine the significance rating of the impact(s). ............ - 46 - Table 6.3: Payment of Taxes / royalties and services to NamPort through DBMN

expanded operations. ....................................................................................... - 49 - Table 6.4: Employment and contracts creation through DBMN expanded operations. ...... - 49 - Table 6.5: Local, regional and national infrastructure and social services. ........................ - 49 - Table 6.6: Training and skills transfer through expanded DBMN operations. .................... - 49 - Table 6.7: Boost to the local (Lüderitz), regional (//Karas) and national Namibia as well

as South Africa economies through increased DBMN operational activities. .... - 50 - Table 6.8: Support to the sustainable closure of DBMN operations through the provision

of excellent national infrastructure that may be used by other sectors that may replace diamonds mining operations. ....................................................... - 50 -

APP-00444 DBMN EIA Report ix Lüderitz Logistic Shore Base-August 2019

Table 6.9: Disruption / disturbance of the coastal and marine habitats within the Lüderitz Logistic Shore Base (Port of Lüderitz) developmental and surrounding areas (Lüderitz Town). ............................................................................................... - 50 -

Table 6.10: Disturbance / disruption of the surrounding Lüderitz area including the supporting infrastructure. ................................................................................. - 50 -

Table 6.11: Disturbance of coastal and marine fauna and birds. ......................................... - 51 - Table 6.12: Effects on the ecosystem functions, services, use values and non-use or

passive use. ..................................................................................................... - 51 - Table 6.13: Visual and land degradation. ............................................................................ - 51 - Table 6.14: Pollution of the land, coastal and marine environment and resources. ............. - 51 - Table 6.15: Resource use. .................................................................................................. - 52 - Table 6.16: Air quality, noise and dust. ............................................................................... - 52 - Table 6.17: Refuelling spillages. ......................................................................................... - 52 - Table 6.18: Solid waste management. ................................................................................ - 52 - Table 6.19: Sewage, other liquid and oil waste management. ............................................ - 53 - Table 6.20: Accident. .......................................................................................................... - 53 - Table 6.21: Archaeological, paleontological and historical aspects. .................................... - 53 -

List of Plates Plate 1.1: The Port and Town of Lüderitz showing the outline of the DBMN Logistics

Shore Base Area ................................................................................................ - 4 - Plate 5.1: The great dune belt of the Namib Desert around the Town of Lüderitz ............. - 30 - Plate 5.2: Bare and rugged basement rocks. ................................................................... - 31 - Plate 5.3: Strongly deformed high-grade banded gneisses and schists commonly

around Lüderitz ................................................................................................ - 33 -

APP-00444 DBMN EIA Report x Lüderitz Logistic Shore Base-August 2019

NON TECHNICAL SUMMARY Debmarine Namibia (“DBMN”) is proposing to upgrade the supporting infrastructure on its 8700 m2

currently rented logistics shore base space situated inside the Port of Lüderitz in the //Karas Region in southern Namibia. The proposed supporting infrastructure upgrades of the Lüderitz Logistics Shore Base (LLSB) will cover the following areas / activities:

(i) Civil construction;

(ii) Fence and concrete ring beam; (iii) Engineered layers and hardstand; (iv) Services (sewer, water, fire hydrants, electrical installation); (v) Oil containments, and; (vi) Security detail (Security Gate House with gate for vehicles and pedestrian).

The proposed activities are listed in the Environmental Management Act, 2007, (Act No. 7 of 2007) and the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations 30 of 2012 and cannot be undertaken without an Environmental Clearance Certificate (ECC). The environmental assessment process inclusive of the preparation of this EIA Report has been undertaken in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations No. 30 of 2012 and the Environmental Management Act, 2007 as well as international best practices. The following key project alternatives have been considered as part of the EIA Process: Project location and the no-action alternative, other coastal and marine users and potential user conflicts, influence on the ecosystem function, services, use values and non-use or passive. Public and stakeholders consultations process has been undertaken during the month of August 2019. Public notices were published in the Confidente Weekly Newspaper dated 8th-14th August 2019, the Windhoek Observer Weekly Newspapers dated Friday 16th August 2019 and the Namibian Daily Newspaper dated Thursday 22nd August 2019. Despite the public notices published in the local newspapers, no stakeholder registration or written comments / inputs or objection were received during the consultation period. The climate of the southern Namibian coastline and indeed that of the project location is arid with typically low, unpredictable winter rains, strong predominantly southerly or south-westerly winds and frequent fogy events. The proposed logistic shore base (Port of Lüderitz) fails within the Lüderitz Municipal Townlands. The area surrounding the Town and Port of Lüderitz is well protected with the Tsau //Khaeb (Sperrgebiet) National Park towards the south, the Namib-Naukluft Park towards the north of Lüderitz and the western marine environment area falling within the Namibian Islands' Marine Protected Area (NIMPA). It is estimated that at least 30 reptile, 4 amphibian, 30 mammal and 95 bird species (breeding residents) are known to or expected to occur in the general/immediate Lüderitz area of which a high proportion are endemic species. It is estimated that at least 15 to 22 species of larger trees and shrubs (>1m) (Curtis and Mannheimer 2005 and Mannheimer and Curtis 2009) and at least 5 to 14 (approximately 18 species) grasses (Burke 2003, Mannheimer et al. 2008, Müller 1984, Müller 2007 and Van Oudshoorn 1999) occur in the general Lüderitz area. The local economy is centred on the utilisation of the clean sheltered waters for aquaculture purposes and tourism development such as sailing, kiting, fishing and whale watching. The Port of Lüderitz is an important fishing, mining/energy supply and minor import/export port. Based on the results of the project screening process, Environmental Scoping evaluation of the key issues and the impact assessment undertaken in this report, it’s likely that the proposed project activities no significant impacts / influences on the receiving environment (physical, biological and socioeconomic). In line with DBMN risk assessment matrix, a rating criteria for the impact assessment have been standardised to include set definitions with the allocation of the assessment ranking categories been based on quantifiable criteria which can be measured. The allocated ranks refer to the resultant impact (e.g. habitat area affected, or time that the result of the impact will last), and not of the

APP-00444 DBMN EIA Report xi Lüderitz Logistic Shore Base-August 2019

cause thereof (e.g. the airport area being upgraded, or time of active impact). Detailed assessment table with management intervention measures are provided in the EMP Report. Based on the results of this Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report, it’s hereby recommended that the proponent (DBMN) be issued with an Environmental Clearance Certificate (ECC) for the proposed upgrading of the Lüderitz Logistics Shore Base (LLSB) in the Port of Lüderitz, Lüderitz, //Karas Region, South Namibia. The proposed Lüderitz Logistics Shores Base area falls within already exiting and operational industrial port area and the site is not pristine. Workers must use Personal Protective Clothing / Equipment at all times, site equipment / vehicles movement procedures and protocols and all the related activities shall be undertaken in accordance with the Namibian Port Authority (NamPort) corporate requirements, environmental standards and management systems. Mitigation measures have been prepared to be implemented by DBMN with respect to the impacts ranked as having either a “high” or “medium” significant impacts on the receiving environment. The Environmental Performance Monitoring activities shall be undertaken during the preconstruction, construction and operational stages of the proposed upgrading of the Lüderitz Logistics Shores Base with bi-annual monitoring reports submitted to the Environmental Commissioner in the Ministry of Environment and Tourism.

APP-00444 DBMN EIA Report - 1 - Lüderitz Logistic Shore Base-August 2019

1. BACKGROUND 1.1 Overview Debmarine Namibia (“DBMN”) is proposing to upgrade the supporting infrastructure for its logistics shore base spaces situated inside the Port of Lüderitz in the //Karas Region in southern Namibia (Fig. 1.1). The Port of Lüderitz is located 254 nautical miles south of the Port of Walvis Bay along Namibia’s southern coastline and caters for all the business and cargo in the southern part of the country, and further provides access to markets in the Northern Cape of South Africa.

1.2 Project Location The Port of Lüderitz, (Logistic shore base for DBMN) is located in the //Karas Region in southern Namibia (Figs. 1.1 and 1.2 and Plate 1.1). According to Namibia Port Authority (NamPort), the southern Namibia strategic coastline location of the port make it’s a key export and import hub offering excellent logistical services and links to other towns in Namibia and South Africa. It serves as an important base for the fishing industry and the offshore diamond and mining industries. According to NamPort, for the fruit industry’s exports to Europe, particularly grapes from Aussenkehr and from the Northern Cape Province, shipping from Lüderitz saves more than 2 days in delivery time (www.namport.com.na). With a new 500m quay, two recently-acquired 60-tonne Haulers and one 45-tonne Reach Stacker, the port can provide efficient and safe cargo handling facilities for importers and exporters.

1.3 Operational Arrangements Namdeb Diamond Corporation (Pty) Ltd (Namdeb) and DBMN are 100% subsidiaries of Namdeb Holdings (Pty) Ltd (Fig. 1.3). Namdeb Holdings (Pty) Ltd which is 50% owned by the Republic of Namibia and the remaining 50% held by the De Beers Group through De Beers Namibia Holdings (Pty) Ltd, holds all land-based and marine exclusive prospecting licences and mining licences. Namdeb and DBMN perform contractual land-based and marine prospecting and mining operations respectively for Namdeb Holdings (Pty) Ltd (Figs. 1.3). Fig. 1.4 illustrates DBMN operational logistical arrangements linking Windhoek (the Headquarters), Oranjemund Airport (Logistics Aviation Base), offshore operations (ML 47 Mining and Exploration location), Cape Town and the Port of Lüderitz (Logistics Shore Bases).

1.4 Project Motivation DBMN uses the Port of Lüderitz as the logistic shore base for vessels maintenance operations and handling of all supply items to and from the vessels in the MLA No. 47. The company is currently renting about 8700 m2 of land inside the Port of Lüderitz from NamPort for logistic operations. However, due to the envisaged increase in operations, DBMN is proposing to upgrade the supporting infrastructure for its logistic shore base space. The upgraded logistics shore base infrastructure within the Port of Lüderitz will greatly support the envisaged increased operations by DBMN and ensure efficient, secure and effective handling of all supply items to and from the vessels. In addition, all vessels maintenance operations and associated activities will results in increased local socioeconomic benefits to the people and town of Lüderitz. The socioeconomic benefits include land rental and port fees payable to NamPort, direct and indirect jobs and services and purchase of local supplies.


Figure 1.1: Regional location of the Lüderitz Logistics Shore Base (Port of Lüderitz).


Figure 1.2: Detailed location of the Lüderitz Logistic Shore Base (Port of Lüderitz)

(Source: www.openstreetmap.org).

http://www.openstreetmap.org/


Plate 1.1: The Port and Town of Lüderitz showing the outline of the DBMN Logistics Shore Base Area (RBS Geotagged Imaged Series, 2019).


Figure 1.3: Shareholding structure, operational companies and license areas with

respect to Namdeb Holdings (Pty) Ltd, DBMN (Pty) Ltd and Namdeb Diamond Corporation (Pty) Ltd (Source: DBMN, 2018).


Figure 1.4: Illustration of DBMN logistical arrangements linking Windhoek (HQ), Oranjemund Airport (Logistics Aviation Base), Offshore

Operations (ML 47 Mining and Exploration), Cape Town and the Port of Lüderitz (Logistics Shore Bases).


1.5 Purpose of this EIA Report This report has been prepared in order to support the application for the Environmental Clearance Certificate (ECC) for DBMN (Proponent) proposed upgrading of the Lüderitz Logistics Shore Base (LLSB) inside the Port of Lüderitz. The preparation of this report took into consideration the provisions of the following key documents:

Environmental Management Act, (Act No. 7 of 2007);

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations, 2012;

DBMN Environmental Management System, Environmental and Sustainability Policies as well as all other related operational and contractual obligations, and;

NamPort Environmental Management Systems, operational and corporate requirements and standards.

1.6 Structure of the Report

The following is the summary structure outline of this report: Section 1: Background covering the proposed project location;

Section 2: Approach and Methods summarises the approach and methodology adopted

in the preparation of the report;

Section 3: Description of the proposed activities covering the summary of the preconstruction, construction and operational stages of the proposed multi-phased development of the LLSB (Port of Lüderitz) upgrading;

Section 4: Regulatory Framework with respect to the proposed LLSB (Port of Lüderitz)

upgrading; Section 5: Receiving Environment covering summaries of the physical, biological and

socioeconomic environments; Section 6: Impact and Risk Assessment covering criteria and results of the impact and

risk assessment processes;

Section 7: Conclusions and Recommendations - Summary of the findings and way forward.

ANNEXES:


ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

Submission of

Project

Proposal

Register Project

with DEA/MET

Classification of

Proposal

Terms of Reference

Development of ProposalNotify Interested and Affected Parties (I&APs);

Establish policy, legal and administrative

requirements; Consult relevant Ministries/I&APs;

Identify alternatives and issues

Scoping

Public Participation

Draft Scoping Report (SR)

Submit Draft SR to

Authorities & I&APs

DEA/MET to issue

Record of

Decision (RoD)

InvestigationSpecialist Studies

Report

Draft Environmental Impact

Assessment (EIA) & Environmental

Management Plan (EMP)

Submit Draft EIA &

EMP to

Authorities & I&APs

Finalize EIA &

EMP and submit to

DEA/MET

DEA/MET

to issue RoD

Finalize SR and

submit to DEA/MET

Implement, Monitor

and Audit

ApprovedNot Approved

APPEAL

Significant Impact

2. APPROACH AND METHODS

2.1 Overview The preparation of this EIA report has taken into considerations the provisions of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations No. 30 of 2012 gazetted under the Environmental Management Act, (EMA), 2007, (Act No. 7 of 2007) and DBMN Corporate and environmental requirements and policies. The EIA has been prepared in line with the January 2015 Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET) Environmental Assessment Reporting Guideline. Fig. 2.1 summarises the Environmental Assessment process in Namibia as adopted for this project.

Figure 2.1: Summary of the environmental assessment process in Namibia.

2.2 Terms of Reference for this Report Summary of the proposed activities, alternatives and key issues considered during the Environmental Assessment (EA) process covering EIA and EMP stages are provided in Table 2.1 (Annex 1).


Table 2.1: Summary of the proposed activities, alternatives and key issues considered during the Environmental Assessment (EA) process covering EIA and EMP phases.

PROPOSED PROJECT

ACTIVITIES

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED

KEY ISSUES TO BE EVALUATED AND ASSESSED WITH ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN (EMP) /

MITIGATION MEASURES PREPARED

(i) Preconstruction:

Planning, designing and permitting; Mobilisation and implementation;

Site access plan and surveying;

Determination of locally available construction materials (sand / gravel) excavations, and;

Demolition / excavations and erection of security and safety zones.

(ii) Construction:

Soil / ground preparation and supporting Infrastructure construction;

Foundation excavations and building;

Structural development / Actual construction;

Supporting infrastructure (internal access, energy requirements, water supply, waste water management and solid waste management).

(iii) Operational:

Day to day running of the Lüderitz Logistic Shore Base by DBMN supporting the Port of Lüderitz (NamPort) and the Town of Lüderitz and surrounding areas and generating liquid and solid waste, noise, dusty, interact with local people, visitors, wild life and the broader natural receiving environment.

(i) Location of the proposed Logistic Shore Base (Cape Town, Walvis Bay or Lüderitz) and the actual site location within the Port of Lüderitz as well as the actual location / placement of the various infrastructures within the allocated land

(ii) Other Alternative Land Uses: Conservation and Tourism

(iii) Ecosystem Function

(What the Ecosystem Does

(iv) Ecosystem Services (v) Use Values (vi) Non-Use, or Passive

Use

(vii) The No-Action Alternative

(viii) Others to be identified

during the public consultation process

Potential land use conflicts / opportunities for coexistence between proposed activities and other existing land uses such as conservation, tourism and urban development

Physical Environment

1. Land and marine water pollution 2. Disturbance / disruption of the

surrounding Lüderitz area including the supporting infrastructure

3. Visual and land degradation 4. Air quality, noise and dust 5. Increased local resource use

(energy and water) 6. Refuelling spillages and accidents 7. Solid and liquid waste

management 8. Climate change influences.

Biological Environment

1. Disruption / disturbance of the coastal and marine habitats within the Lüderitz Logistic Shore Base (Port of Lüderitz) developmental and surrounding areas (Lüderitz Town)

2. Disturbance of coastal and marine fauna and birds

3. Protected areas and resources 4. Ecosystem functions, services,

use values and non-use or passive use.

Socioeconomic, cultural and archaeological environment

1. Local, regional and national socioeconomic settings

2. Tourism and recreation 3. Cultural, biological and

archaeological resources

Environmental Management Plan (EMP) Providing Mitigation Measures and Monitoring Plan

Mitigation shall focus on the following in order of preference: 1. Enhancement, e.g. provision of

new habitats; 2. Avoidance, e.g. alternative /

sensitive design to avoid effects on ecological receptors;

3. Reduction, e.g. limitation of effects on receptors through design changes; and

4. Compensation, e.g. community benefits such as a water well being provided.

2.3 Environmental Assessment Process

2.3.1 Summary of the Approach

The following assessment steps as recommended in the Scoping Report/ BID were implemented (Annex 1):

(i) Project screening process was undertaken in July 2019;

(ii) A Draft Environmental Scoping Report / Background Information Document (BID) prepared in August 2019;


(iii) The Project was registered with the Environmental Commissioner in the Ministry of

Environment and Tourism through the Ministry Work and Transport (Competent Authority) in August 2019 under the application No. APP-00444;

(iv) During the month August 2019 public / stakeholders notices were published in the local

newspapers;

(v) Preparation of the Final Scoping Report / BID, Draft EIA and EMP Reports was undertaken during the month of August 2019;

(vi) The final EIA and EMP Report was finalised and submitted to the Environmental

Commissioner in the Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET) through the Competent Authority Ministry Work and (Transport) by the week starting 2nd September 2019.

2.3.2 Assumptions and Limitations

The following assumptions and limitations underpin the methodology and approach that has been adopted for this study, the overall outcomes and recommendations thereof:

The proposed activities, plans, maps, site boundary / coordinates, appropriate data sets guidelines received from the proponent, project partners, regulators are assumed to be current and valid at the time of compilation of the Scoping, EIA and EMP reports;

The impact assessment outcomes, mitigation measures and recommendations provided are

valid for the entire duration of the proposed activities covering the preconstruction, construction and operational stages;

A precautionary approach has been adopted in instances where baseline information was

insufficient or unavailable or site-specific mitigation measures cannot be provided, and;

Mandatory timeframes as provided for in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations No. 30 of 2012 and the Environmental Management Act, (EMA), 2007, (Act No. 7 of 2007) have been observed and will apply to the review and provision of the Records of Decisions by the Competent Authority and the Environmental Commissioner.

2.4 Public and Stakeholders Consultation Process

2.4.1 Overview

During the consultations process Draft Scoping, EIA and EMP Reports as well as the Public Notices published in the local newspapers have been the key sources of information for the public and all the stakeholders. Although a written commenting is sufficient to meet the legal requirements, it might in certain cases be appropriate to convene public meetings, especially for activities which might affect intensively the interests of stakeholders. If meetings are held for public commenting, smaller, focused meetings may be preferable to ensure adequate time for comment, rather than larger meetings where few people have the opportunity to speak. There is a variety of ways to gather opinion from the more vulnerable groups and ensure that they can meaningfully participate, e.g. use of community representatives such as councillors and traditional authority leadership, interviews and meetings. Beside the public review of the reports, there are other stages, which are relevant for consultation. During the review process the Office of the Environmental Commissioners (OEC) has the right to convene a further public hearing. Taking this into account, public consultation is more a cross-cutting process during the whole environmental assessment process rather than a particular step linked to the specific stage of the assessment. The scoping report / ToR included provisions on the concrete public consultation measures implemented as part of the assessment process.


2.4.2 Objective of Conducting Public and Stakeholder Consultation Process

The overall objectives of conducting public and stakeholder consultation process is to inform, identify and request Interested and Affected Parties (I&APs) to submit written inputs, comments or objections about the proposed project activities, disclose the Terms of Reference, the assessment and management reports.

2.4.3 Consultation Activities, Timing and Outcomes

The type of activities undertaken during the implementation of the Scoping, EIA and EMP consultation processes and details of the entire process are provided in Table 2.2. Risk-Based Solutions (RBS) had the overall responsibilities for implementing the stakeholder consultation process as part of the Scoping, EIA and EMP process as was required by the regulations as well as DBMN corporate requirements. The RBS staff members led by Dr. Vita Stankevica supported by Ms. Christine Links and Ms. Meriam Kauyama were responsible for the implementation of the consultation process. Stakeholder communications as well as drafting of all technical reports, document and letters were being managed by Dr. Sindila Mwiya, the Projects Director. DBMN provided all the applicable proposed project specific information such as the site boundary, drawings and design and engineering specifications. In line with the provisions of the regulations, the public notices have been published in the Confidente Weekly Newspaper dated 8th- 14th August 2019 (Fig. 2.2), the Windhoek Observer Weekly Newspapers dated Friday 16th August 2019 (Fig. 2.3) and the Namibian Daily Newspaper dated Thursday 22nd August 2019) (Fig. 2.4). Deadline for registration and submission of written objections, comments, inputs to the environmental assessment process is the 30th August 2019. Despite the publication of highly visible (half page) public notices in the three (3) newspapers as shown in Figs. 2.2-2.4, no written I&APs / stakeholders registrations or written objections, comments or inputs were received during and after the consultation period undertaken for the month of August 2019.


Table 2.2: Summary of the Interested and Affected Parties (I&APs) consultation activties undertaken during the month August 2019.

SCOPING, EIA AND EMP PROJECT CONSULTATION ACTIVITIES

SCOPING STAGE INFORMATION TO DISCLOSED

RESPONSIBILITY

ACTIVITIES TIMING

July 2019

Aug 2019

Sep 2019

Oct 2019

1. Project screening

2. Prepared Summarised Background Information Document (BID) and Posters

3. Prepared Public Advert and published in the Local Newspapers

4. Opened a Stakeholder Register (no registration received)

5. Registered the project with the Environmental Commissioner in the Ministry of Environment and Tourism via Ministry of Works and Transport

6. Published Public Advert / Notice to in the Local Newspapers: Note:

Published to at least three newspaper circulated widely in Namibia

Twenty (21) days for input period from the date of 1st publication

7. Prepare Final Scoping/ BID, Draft EIA and EMP Report

8. Updated and finalized the Draft EIA and EMP Reports as was applicable

9. Submitted the Application for ECC to the Environmental Commissioner supported by the final EIA and EMP Reports

1. Background Information Document (BID) summarising the proposed project

2. Draft Scoping Report with Terms of Reference (ToR) for EIA and EMP

3. Draft EIA and EMP Reports

Risk-Based Solutions (RBS) will undertake the activities on behalf of DBMN

DBMN will provide all the applicable proposed project specific information such as the site location and the type of activities to be undertaken.


Figure 2.2: Copy of the 1st Public Notice was published in the Confidente Weekly Newspaper 8th – 14th August 2019.


Figure 2.3: Copy of the 2nd Public Notice that was published in the Windhoek Observer Weekly Newspaper dated Friday, 16th August 2019.


Figure 2.4: Copy of the 3rd Public Notice that was published in the Namibian Daily Newspaper dated Thursday, 22nd August 2019.


2.5 Impact Assessment and Management Criteria 2.5.1 Environmental Impact Assessment Rankings

To ensure consistency in the evaluation of environmental impacts associated with DBMN’s activities for all of their operations, the rating criteria for the impact assessment for the proposed LLSB has been standardised to include a set definitions applied in the risk assessment (Table 2.3). To the extent possible, allocation to rank categories is based on quantifiable criteria which can be measured as detailed in Table 2.3. Furthermore, when evaluating impacts, the allocated ranks refer to the resultant impact (e.g. habitat area affected, or time that the result of the impact will last), and not of the cause thereof (e.g. time of active impact). Each activity has been assessed with respect to the type of effect that the aspect will have on the relevant component of the receiving environment (physical, biological and socioeconomic components) and includes “what will be affected and how?” The criteria used to determine the significance rating of the impact(s) is detailed in Table 2.4. Table 2.3: Definition of impact assessment categories.

Rating Definition of Rating

Status of the Impact – in terms of meeting the objective of maintaining a healthy environment.

Positive The impact benefits the environment

Negative The impact results in a cost to the environment

Neutral The impact has no effect

Probability – the likelihood of the impact occurring

Negligible Possibility negligible

Improbable Possibility very low

Probable Distinct possibility

Highly Probable Most likely

Definite Impact will occur regardless of preventive measures

Degree of confidence in predictions – in terms of basing the assessment on available information

Low Assessment based on extrapolated data

Medium Information base available but lacking

High Information base comparatively reliable

Extent – the area over which the impact will be experienced

Site specific Confined to within < 1 km of the project

Local Confined to the study area or within 5 km of the project

Regional Confined to the region, i.e. > 5 km but < National

National Nationally

International Beyond the borders of Namibia

Duration – the time frame for which the impact will be experienced

Very short Less than 2 years

Short-term 2 to 5 years

Medium-term 6 to 15 years

Long-term More than 15 years

Permanent Generations

Intensity – the magnitude of the impact in relation to the sensitivity of the receiving environment

Negligible Natural functions and processes are negligibly altered due to adaptation by the receptor(s) to high natural environmental variability

Mild Natural functions and processes continue albeit in a modified way that does not appear to

have a significant disruptive effect (i.e. changes are temporary)

Moderate Natural functions and processes continue albeit in a modified way that does appear to have a

noticeable disruptive effect (i.e. changes are permanent)

Severe Natural functions or processes are altered to the extent that they temporarily cease resulting in severe deterioration of the impacted environment

Very Severe Natural functions or processes permanently cease or are completely disrupted


Table 2.4: The criteria used to determine the significance rating of the impact(s).

Low: Where the impact will have a negligible influence on the environment and no modifications or mitigations are necessary for the given project description. This would be allocated to impacts of any severity/ magnitude, if at a local scale/ extent and of temporary duration/time.

Medium: Where the impact could have an influence on the environment, which will require modification of the project design and/or alternative mitigation. This would be allocated to impacts of moderate severity, locally to regionally, and in the short term.

High:

Where the impact could have a significant influence on the environment and, in the event of a negative impact, the activity(ies) causing it should not be permitted without substantial mitigation and management, and pro-active rehabilitation commitments (i.e. there could be a ‘no-go’ implication for the project). This would be allocated to impacts of severe magnitude, locally over the medium-term, and/or of severe magnitude regionally and beyond.

2.5.2 Environmental Management Plan (EMP) Framework

Environmental management plans have only been developed to ameliorate aspects / risks of medium to high significance identified through the impact assessment. In line with DBMN environmental management system, management plans have been prepared and are divided into two (2) categories and these are:

(i) Strategic management plans which form part of the EIA and EMP report and range from 2 years up to the end of the life of the mine, and;

(ii) Short term plans concerned with day-to-day operations, which include areas such as codes of practice, specific responsibilities and monitoring which are integrated separately into the Environmental Management System.

The overall focus of the EMP framework has been to development mitigation measures appropriate for each activity with medium to high significant impact on the receiving environment. Mitigation is the purposeful implementation of decisions or activities designed to reduce the undesirable impacts of a proposed action on the affected environment. A hierarchy of methods for mitigating significant adverse effects that adopted in order of preference are:

(i) Enhancement, e.g. provision of new habitats;

(ii) Avoidance, e.g. sensitive design to avoid effects on ecological receptors;

(iii) Reduction, e.g. limitation of effects on receptors through design changes, and;

(iv) Compensation, e.g. community benefits.

2.2.3 DBMN Environmental Management System (EMS)

The EIA and EMP report will be integrated in the DBMN’s ISO 14001 Environmental Management Systems (EMSs). Fig. 2.5 shows the EMP as part of the overall ISO 14001 EMS. The implementation of Environmental Management System (EMS) of DBMN is guided by the following policies:

DBMN's Environmental Policy;

DBMN’s Sustainability Statement Policy;

De Beers Group Environmental Policy;

De Beers Group Occupational Health Policy, and;

De Beers Group Safety Policy.


Figure 2.5: Illustration of environmental assessment, management and monitoring as part of the overall ISO 14001 Environmental Management

System adopted by DBMN.


3. PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION

3.1 Summary of the Proposed Infrastructure Development The proposed upgrading of the Lüderitz Logistics Shore Base (LLSB) Port of Lüderitz logistics shore base supporting infrastructure upgrades will cover the following areas / activities:

(i) Civil construction;

(ii) Fence and concrete ring beam; (iii) Engineered layers and hardstand; (iv) Services (sewer, water, fire hydrants, electrical installation); (v) Oil containments, and; (vi) Security detail (Security Gate House with gate for vehicles and pedestrian).

The above proposed logistics shore base supporting infrastructure upgrades will all be confined within the currently rented 8700 m2 land inside the port area (Plate 1.1).

3.2 Detailed Description of the Proposed Infrastructure Development

3.2.1 Civil Construction

The civil works include the construction of a security fence with concrete ground beam and gate, cement paver hard stand over engineered and levelled layer works and masonry or similar prefabricated security guardhouse (Fig. 3.1). Water and fire water supply and sewer connection will be required to service the existing building. Electricity connection to the new guard house and gate (Fig. 3.1). A concrete surfaced, oil storage bunted containment is required for an estimated 80-120 drums of oil.

3.2.2 Fence and Concrete Ring Beam

A 250 mm (w) x 400 mm (h) reinforced concrete ring beam will be required along the perimeter of the site. The Concrete ring beam will be reinforced by 6 x Yl0 bars along the full extent of the beam, spaced evenly as detailed. Shear links of Y10 @ 200mm intervals will be provided along the full extent of the ground beam. The total distance of the beam is estimated at 310m. The placing of the fence posts will be every 3m. The posts are 2.7m long, cast 300mm into the concrete beam. The Clearvu fence is then attached to the posts as per supplier’s detail. In the area where the ground beam exist, the fence will be cast in place by a 400x400x400 35MPa concrete footing. A 50mm diameter sleeve pipe required along the bottom, centre of the beam (inside the links) to provide sleeves to the surveillance cameras, which will be mounted on the fence posts. Draw-boxes provided every 18m OR where the cameras are mounted (within the 18m) on the inside (Debmarine side) of the beam.

3.2.3 Engineered Layers and Hardstand

The hardstand required is 80mm, 40MPa concrete interlocking paver layer, packed in a herringbone pattern over 20mm (max) thick sand layer. The finish levels of the hard-stand to meet the existing levels of the concrete ring beams and 50mm below the FFL of the existing buildings. Alternative sub layers:

(i) Option 1: The sand is placed over a stabilized G2 base course material at a ratio of 5% volume. The Base is compacted to 100% Mod MSHTO (American Association of State


Highway and Transportation Officials). The base material is placed over two layers of 150mm each, total layer of 300mm, G4 sub-base, stabilized with 5% road lime and compacted to 98% Mod MSHTO. Sub-base material is placed over the in-situ soil, compacted to 100% Mod MSHTOO with minimum bearing of CBR 14, and;

(ii) Option 2: Alternatively the sand is placed over the existing layer works. The layer to be brought to level, ripped 150mm deep and re-compacted to 100% Mod MSHTO to required level. Pavers placed over the existing layers. The existing material needs to have a minimum CBR of 25.

3.2.4 Services Requirements and Engineering Specifications

The following is the summary of the key services that shall be installed with the key engineering specifications provided:

(a) All services that crosses the hard-stand needs to be placed below the sub-base layer or min 600mm deep, whichever is deeper. The services excavation will be 200mm below the sub-base level, on a sand bedding of 50mm and backfilled with 100mm deep, 10MPa concrete over the service pipe/sleeve. Services along the fence will be backfilled with G4 sub-base stabilized with 5% road lime and compacted to 98% Mod MSHTO;

(b) Services required are: (i) Sewer: A 80m long, 110mm sewer line (min fall 1:100) OR 150mm sewer line (min fall

1:150) to be provided from the Wall Building to the nearest sewer manhole at the Rosh Pinah Zink building. Provision for two pre-cast sewer manholes need to be made along the full distance of the sewer line, with heavy duty cast iron manhole covers to engineer's acceptance;

(ii) Water: A 155m long, 40mm, class 9 HOPE, potable water supply line to be provided to the Wall Building from the nearest water supply source. Three, 20mm T-off from the 40mm line will be required for the Security building and two surface taps along the route, and;

(iii) Fire Water (Fire Hydrant): Provide one (1) fire hydrant next to the wall building (i.e.

OBMN Warehouse) and connect to the existing fire hydrants supply line with an 80mm diameter class 16 HOPE at a depth of 750mm deep. The distance of the connection is approximately 100m to the existing.

(c) Oil Containment with Bund Wall: A 10mx20m OR 12mx18m concrete platform to be constructed

over the engineered layers. The reinforced concrete platform will be 150mm thick and bunted with a 300mm high and 250mm wide reinforced concrete bunt walls. A 3m wide concrete ramp will be required at the entrance to the oil storage area. A sump and pump to be installed or kept on site;

(d) Electrical Installation: Provision should be made for the appointment of an electrical sub-contractor for all electrical installations and requirements. The civil contractor will be responsible for the installation of 500m, 110mm PVCsleeves at a depth of 750mm to make provision for electrical supply cables. Layout and sleeve positions will be determined on site;

(e) Security Gate House and Perimeter Fence: The perimeter fence is 380m ClearVu, Plascoat (Galvanized PVC Coastal specification) fence with a height of 2,4m above ground and 600mm overhang to the outside. The fence has a concrete bottom foundation to prevent access at the bottom;

(f) The fence panel specifications are as follows: (i) Panel height: 2,4m above ground;


(ii) Panel Width: 3m wide;

(iii) Vertical wire diameter: 4mm; (iv) Horizontal wire diameter: 3,15mm; (v) Mesh opening or aperture 12.6mm x 76.2mm, and; (vi) Posts: Square posts 80mm x 80mm.

(g) The Vehicle Gate: 8m wide x 2,4m high with the 600mm overhang to the outside motorized

sliding gate with Clear Vu panels operating on roller wheels and track. The gate motor must be operated via the access control system. Infra-red beams must be installed inside the gate opening to prevent the gate from closing while a vehicle is passing through;

(h) Pedestrian Gate: TS-FHT9 Full height Stainless steel 304#, two sided card reading, 90 degree rotation turnstile mounted on a concrete base. The turnstile must be housed inside the guard house for weather protection;

(i) Security Gate House specifications are as follows: (i) 5m wide x 5m long masonry or prefabricated building with provision for five doors, two

windows (1200 x 900), tiles, power and lighting sleeves only;

(ii) Big six roof & ceiling, and; (iii) Below sketch only for illustration, but similar arrangement.

3.3 Implementation Stages, Health Safety and Environment

3.3.1 Development Stages

The following is the summary of the key proposed project activities implementation stages:

(i) Preconstruction,

(ii) Construction, and;

(iii) Operational.

3.3.2 Operational Health Safety and Environment (HSE)

The Operational Health Safety and Environment (HSE) issues of the proposed development and operations of the upgraded LLSB shall comply with the De Beers Group policy on Occupational Health Safety and Environment as well as NamPort and the national and international requirements.


Figure 3.1: Outline of the proposed logistic shore base infrastructure developments (Source: DBMN, 2019).


3.4 Future Sustainability and Mine Closure Plan

3.4.1 Future Mine Plan The proposed upgrading of the Lüderitz Logistics Shore Base (LLSB) is in line with the long-term future exploration and marine diamond recovery operational expansions. The current Minerals Licence expires in 2035 and the Life of Mine (LoM) for Atlantic 1 has a rolling 20 year planning window. The first few years of the LoM plan are based on the profitable part of the high confidence Local Block Estimate (LBE) resource, whilst the rest of the plan is based on a Global Resource Estimate (GRE) which has very low confidence. In order to mitigate the risk associated with transition from the LBE resource to the GRE, the regional Uniform Conditioning resource has been introduced and only the profitable component is scheduled before the GRE resource is considered. However, as part of strategic business planning process, DBMN reviews the LoM plan annually in order to update the plans with the latest assumptions reflecting current realities.

3.4.2 Proposed Activities Support to Mine Closure Plan

DBMN has an overarching Mine Closure Plan (MCP) which ensures that both environmental and socioeconomic closure issues are addressed in the early stages of mine planning, thereby reducing the potential impacts that may arise due to either premature or planned closure of operations in the mining licence area. The proposed upgrading of the LLSB provides is a key overarching sustainable objectives that is aimed at providing high quality infrastructure to the town and Port of Lüderitz. The upgraded LLSB within the Port of Lüderitz will provided the much needed infrastructure that can support the growth of other sectors such as logistic, aquaculture, travel, leisure and tourism which are all vital to the long-term sustainable socioeconomic growth of the town of Lüderitz beyond the diamond exploration and recovery operations. The upgrading of the LLSB shall be incorporated in the recommended mine closure objectives developed based on the environmental risk assessments undertaken to date. Furthermore, the overall closure requirements inclusive of any implication that may be associated with the LLSB shall also be costed to ensure the financial viability of the overall DBMN operations by incorporating environmental costs in determining the quantum of financial guarantee required for mine closure.


4. REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

4.1 Namibian Ports Authority Legislation The Lüderitz logistic shore base infrastructure proposed to be upgraded by DBMN falls within the Port of Lüderitz which is regulated by the Namibian Ports Authority Act, 1994, Act No. 2 of 1994. The Act provide for the establishment of the Namibian Ports Authority to undertake the management and control of ports and lighthouses in Namibia and the provision of facilities and services related thereto; and to provide for matters incidental thereto.”

4.2 Competent Authority Due to the location of the proposed activities (upgrading of the shore base infrastructure within the Port of Lüderitz by DBMN), this environmental assessment report has identified the Namibia Port Authority (NamPort) / Ministry of Work and Transport as the Competent Authority through which the application for Environmental Clearance Certificate (ECC) shall be submitted to the Environmental Commissioner in the Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET).

4.3 Environmental Regulations Environmental assessment and management in Namibia is governed by the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations No. 30 of 2012 gazetted under the Environmental Management Act, (EMA), 2007, (Act No. 7 of 2007). The proposed upgrading of the Lüderitz Logistic Shore Base infrastructure by DBMN falls within the category of listed activities that cannot be undertaken without an Environmental Clearance Certificate (ECC).

4.4 Regulatory Register The following is the summary of the key legislation relevant to the proposed upgrading of the Lüderitz Logistic Shore Base infrastructure by DBMN:

1. Namibian Ports Authority Act, 1994, Act No. 2 of 1994);

2. Environmental Management Act, (EMA), 2007, (Act No. 7 of 2007);

3. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations No. 30 of 2012;

4. The Diamond Act 13 of 1999 (and the Regulations 1 April 2000 and Amendment of the Diamond

Regulations 2003);

5. Territorial Sea and Exclusive Economic Zone of Namibia Act 3 of 1990;

6. Marine Resources Act 27 of 2000, and accompanying regulations;

7. Seashore Ordinance 37 of 1958;

8. Marine Traffic Act 2 of 1981, as amended;

9. Wreck and Salvage Act 5 of 2004;

10. Prevention and Combating of Pollution of the Sea by Oil Act 24 of 1991;

11. Merchant Shipping Act 57 of 1951;

12. Dumping at Sea Control Act 73 of 1980;

13. Public Health Act 36 of 1919 (as last amended by Act 21 of 1988);


14. Water Act 54 of 1956 (as amended);

15. National Monuments Act 28 of 1969 (as amended by the National Monuments Amendment Acts

22 of 1970 and 30 of 1971, the Expropriation Act 63 of 1975, and the National Monuments Amendment Act 35 of 1979);

16. Soil Conservation Act 76 of 1969 (as amended in South Africa (SA) to March 1978; section 13 is amended by the Forest Act 12 of 2001);

17. Hazardous Substance Ordinance 14 of 1974;

18. Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Ordinance 11 of 1976;

19. Petroleum Products and Energy Act 13 of 1990 (as amended by the Petroleum Products and Energy Amendment Act 29 of 2004, Act 3 of 2000 and Act 16 of 2003;

20. Nature Conservation Amendment Act 5 of 1996;

21. Road Traffic and Transport Act 22 of 1999 (as amended by the Road Traffic and Transport Amendment Act 6 of 2008);

22. Electricity Act 2 of 2000 and Electricity Act 4 of 2007 (and the Electricity Regulations: Administrative Electricity Act 2 of 2000 and the Electricity Control Board: Namibian Electricity Safety Code, 2009: Electricity Act, 2007);

23. National Heritage Act 27 of 2004 (and the Regulations/Appointments/Declarations made under the National Monuments Act 28 of 1969 and the Regulations 2005);

24. Labour Act 11 of 2007 (and the Labour Amendment Act 2 of 2012);

25. Disaster Risk Management Act 10 of 2012;

26. International Conventions and Protocols:

A. International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) 1951 (as last amended in 1997);

B. Convention on Wetlands of International Importance, Especially as Waterfowl Habitat (The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands) 1971;

C. Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment 1972;

D. Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer 1985 and Montreal Protocol

on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer 1987;

E. Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal 1989;

F. United Nations (UN) Framework Convention on Climate Change 1992 and Kyoto

Protocol to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change 1997;

G. Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), Rio de Janeiro, 1992;

H. Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) 2001 (as amended in 2009 and 2011);

I. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Convention

on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage 2001;


J. Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage 2003;

K. Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions 2005;

L. Revision of International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPM) No. 15

Regulation of Wood Packaging.

27. Regional Agreements:

A. Southern African Development Community (SADC) Protocol on Mining 1997;

B. Southern African Development Community (SADC) Protocol on Energy 1998.

4.5 Standards and Guidelines Industrial effluent likely to be generated by the proposed upgrading of the Lüderitz Logistic Shore Base infrastructure by DBMN must comply with provisions of the Government Gazette No 217 dated 5 April 1962 (Table 4.1) while the drinking water quality comparative guideline values are shown in Table 3.2. Table 4.1: R553 Regional Standards for Industrial Effluent, in Government Gazette No 217 dated

5 April 1962.

Colour, odour and taste

The effluent shall contain no substance in concentrations capable of producing colour, odour or taste

pH Between 5.5 and 9.5

Dissolved oxygen At least 75% saturation

Typical faecal coli No typical faecal coli per 100 ml

Temperature Not to exceed 35 °C

Chemical demand oxygen Not to exceed 75 mg/l after applying a correction for chloride in the method

Oxygen absorbed Not to exceed 10 mg/l

Total dissolved solids (TDS)

The TDS shall not have been increased by more than 500 mg/l above that of the intake water

Suspended solids Not to exceed 25 mg/l

Sodium (Na) The Na level shall not have been increased by more than 50 mg/l above that of the intake water

Soap, oil and grease Not to exceed 2.5 mg/l

Other constituents

Residual chlorine 0,1 mg/l as Cl

Free & saline ammonia 10 mg/l as N

Arsenic 0,5 mg/l as As

Boron 1,0 mg/l as B

Hexavalent Cr 0,05 mg/l as Cr

Total chromium 0,5 mg/l as Cr

Copper 1,0 mg/l as Cu

Phenolic compounds 0,1 mg/l as phenol

Lead 1,0 mg/l as Pb

Cyanide and related compounds 0,5 mg/l as CN

Sulphides 1,0 mg/l as S

Fluorine 1,0 mg/l as F

Zinc 5,0 mg/l as Zn


Table 4.2: Comparison of selected guideline values for drinking water quality (after Department of Water Affairs, 2001).

Parameter and

Expression of the results

WHO

Guidelines for Drinking-

Water Quality 2nd

edition 1993

Proposed Council Directive

of 28 April 1995

(95/C/13- 1/03) EEC

Council Directive of 15

July 1980 relating to the

quality intended for

human consumption 80/778/EEC

U.S. EPA

Drinking water Standards and

Health Advisories Table December

1995

Namibia, Department of Water Affairs

Guidelines for the evaluation of drinking-water for human consumption with reference to chemical, physical

and bacteriological quality July 1991

Guideline Value (GV)

Proposed Parameter

Value

Guide Level (GL)

Maximum Admissible Concentration (MAC)

Maximum Contaminant Level

(MCL)

Group A Excellent Quality

Group B Good

Quality

Group C Low

Health Risk

Group D Unsuitable

Temperature t °C - - 12 25 - - - - -

Hydrogen ion concentration

pH, 25° C

- R <8.0 6.5 to 9.5 6.5 to 8.5

10 - 6.0 to 9.0 5.5 to 9.5 4.0 to 11.0 <4.0 to >11.0

Electronic conductivity

EC, 25° C

mS/m

- 280 45 - - 150 300 400 >400

Total dissolved solids

TDS mg/l R 1000 - - 1500 - - - - -

Total Hardness CaCO3 mg/l - - - - - 300 650 1300 >1300

Aluminium Al μ g/l R 200 200 50 200 S 50-200 150 500 1000 >1000

Ammonia NH4+ mg/l R 1.5 0.5 0.05 0.5 - 1.5 2.5 5.0 >5.0

N mg/l 1.0 0.04 0.4 - 1.0 2.0 4.0 >4.0

Antimony Sb μ g/l P 5 3 - 10 C 6 50 100 200 >200

Arsenic As μ g/l 10 10 - 50 C 50 100 300 600 >600

Barium Ba μ g/l P 700 - 100 - C 2000 500 1000 2000 >2000

Berylium Be μ g/l - - - - C 4 2 5 10 >10

Bismuth Bi μ g/l - - - - - 250 500 1000 >1000

Boron B μ g/l 300 300 1000 - - 500 2000 4000 >4000

Bromate BrO3 - μ g/l - 10 - - P 10 - - - -

Bromine Br μ g/l - - - - - 1000 3000 6000 >6000

Cadmium Cd μ g/l 3 5 - 5 C 5 10 20 40 >40

Calcium Ca CaCO3

mg/l - - 100 - - 150 200 400 >400

mg/l - - 250 - - 375 500 1000 >1000

Cerium Ce μ g/l - - - - - 1000 2000 4000 >4000

Chloride Cl- mg/l R 250 - 25 - S 250 250 600 1200 >1200

Chromium Cr μ g/l P 50 50 - 50 C 100 100 200 400 >400

Cobalt μ g/l - - - - - 250 500 1000 >1000

Copper after 12 hours in pipe

Cu μ g/l P 2000 2 100 - C TT## 500 1000 2000 >2000

μ g/l - - 30001 - S 1000 - - - -

Cyanide CN- μ g/l 70 50 - 50 C 200 200 300 600 >600

Fluoride F- mg/l 1.5 1.5 - at 8 to 12 oC: 1.5

C 4 1.5 2.0 3.0 >3.0

mg/l - - - at 25 to 30 oC: 0.7

P,S 2 - - - -

Gold Au μ g/l - - - - - 2 5 10 >10

Hydrogen sulphide

H2S μ g/l R 50 - - undetectable - 100 300 600 >600

Iodine I μ g/l - - - - - 500 1000 2000 >2000

Iron Fe μ g/l R 300 200 50 200 S 300 100 1000 2000 >2000

Lead Pb μ g/l 10 10 - 50 C TT# 50 100 200 >200

Lithium Li μ g/l - - - - - 2500 5000 10000 >10000

Magnesium Mg mg/l - - 30 50 - 70 100 200 >200

CaCO3 mg/l - - 7 12 - 290 420 840 >840

Manganese Mn μ g/l P 500 50 20 50 S 50 50 1000 2000 >2000

Mercury Hg μ g/l 1 1 - 1 C 2 5 10 20 >20

Molybdenum Mo μ g/l 70 - - - - 50 100 200 >200

Nickel Ni μ g/l 20 20 - 50 - 250 500 1000 >1000

Nitrate* NO3-

N mg/l P 50 50 25 50 45 45 90 180 >180

mg/l - - 5 11 C 10 10 20 40 >40

Nitrite* NO2-

N mg/l 3 0.1 - 0.1 3 - - - -

mg/l - - - C 1 - - - -

Oxygen, dissolved

O2 % sat.

- 50 - - - - - - -

Phosphorus P2O5

PO43-

μ g/l - - 400 5000 - - - - -

μ g/l - - 300 3350 - - - - -

Potassium K mg/l - - 10 12 - 200 400 800 >800

Selenium Se μ g/l 10 10 - 10 C 50 20 50 100 >100

Silver Ag μ g/l - - - 10 S 100 20 50 100 >100

Sodium Na mg/l R 200 - 20 175 - 100 400 800 >800

Sulphate SO42- mg/l R 250 250 25 250 S 250 200 600 1200 >1200

Tellurium Te μ g/l - - - - - 2 5 10 >10

Thallium TI μ g/l - - - - C 2 5 10 20 >20

Tin Sn μ g/l - - - - - 100 200 400 >400

Titanum Ti μ g/l - - - - - 100 500 1000 >1000

Tungsten W μ g/l - - - - - 100 500 1000 >1000

Uranium U μ g/l - - - - P 20 1000 4000 8000 >8000

Vanadium V μ g/l - - - - - 250 500 1000 >1000

Zinc after 12 hours in pipe

Zn μ g/l R 3000 - 100 - S 5000 1000 5000 10000 >10000

μ g/l - - 5000 - - - - - -

P: Provisional R: May give reason to complaints from consumers

C: Current; P: Proposed; S: Secondary; T#: Treatment technique in lieu of numeric MCL; TT##: treatment technique triggered at action level of 1300 μ g/l


5. RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT

5.1 Overview The area surrounding the Town and Port of Lüderitz is well protected with the Tsau //Khaeb (Sperrgebiet) National Park towards the south, the Namib-Naukluft Park towards the north of Lüderitz and the western marine environment area falling within the Namibian Islands' Marine Protected Area (NIMPA).The likely influences and impacts to the components of the receiving environment (climatic, physical, biological and socioeconomic) with respect to the proposed activities are described in this Chapter. The report covers general brief summaries on the onshore, coastal and shallow marine environmental settings. The Chapters also discusses the air quality, noise and visual impacts that may be associated with the activities to be undertaken at the Lüderitz Logistic Shore Base during the preconstruction, construction and operational stages.

5.2 Climate Components

5.2.1 Wind

Due to the position of the south Atlantic high-pressure system, the prevailing strong winds along the coast are south-to-south-westerly. These winds are stronger and less seasonal in the Lüderitz area to the south of Namibian coast. In winter, the easterly (berg) winds occur frequently in the northern half of the coast of Namibia and less frequent in the south (including Lüderitz).

5.2.2 Temperature

The average maximum temperatures for Diaz Point (Lüderitz) are 17.2 – 21.4 oC and minimums are 10.2 – 14.3 oC. The average sea surface temperature (SST) ranges from 12 – 14.8oC (running average 23 days) (Molloy, 1990).

5.2.3 Precipitation

The Namibian coast in general has very low rainfall at around 15 – 20 mm/year. Fog is common in the northern half of the coast (Walvis Bay, Swakopmund and Henties Bay) receiving >125 fog days per year, while Lüderitz in the south having substantially less (Fig. 5.1).


Figure 5.1: Map showing hours of sunshine per day, rainfall in mm, and number of fog days per year (Molloy and Reinikainen, 2003).

5.3 Onshore, Coastal and Marine Environments

5.3.1 Overview

The receiving physical environment around the Town and Port of Lüderitz comprises three contrasting geomorphological units namely:

(i) Namib Sand Sea (Plate 5.1);

(ii) The bare and rugged, north-trending troughs and ridges closely related to structures in the basement rocks, and (Plate 5.2), and;

(iii) A gently undulating plain, largely devoid of relief, which lies to the east of the deflation basin

and extends to the base of the rocky great escarpment (Plates 5.1 and 5.2).

5.3.2 Flora and Flora

The proposed project area (Port of Lüderitz) is already disturbed and fully built-up industrial area and not pristine with no onsite protected fauna or flora. It is estimated to have at least 30 reptile, 4 amphibian, 30 mammal and 95 bird species (breeding residents) are known to or expected to occur in the general/immediate Lüderitz area of which a high proportion are endemics species. It is estimated that at least 15 to 22 species of larger trees and shrubs (>1m) (Curtis and Mannheimer 2005 and Mannheimer and Curtis 2009) and at least 5 to 14 (approximately 18 species) grasses (Burke 2003, Mannheimer et al. 2008, Müller 1984, Müller 2007 and Van Oudshoorn 1999) occur in the general Lüderitz area. If herbs and “lower” plants (e.g. algae, lichens, etc.) were to be included, this would undoubtedly increase the floral composition of the area tremendously – e.g. more than 100 lichen species are known from coastal Namibia – e.g. c120 species from the Namib Desert (Wirth 2010). Shrubs, grasses, and other species such as lichens are known to occur in the general area. The succulent flora is extremely important with many endemics and near-endemics occurring throughout the area. The most important larger tree/shrub species expected to occur in the general surrounding Luderitz area and not necessary on site are the endemics – Acanthosicyos horridus, Capparis hereroensis and Ectadium latifolium – and near-endemics – Ceraria fruticulosa, Ceraria mamaquensis and Commiphora capensis. The endemic Stipagrostis sabulicola is viewed as the most important grass species expected to occur in the general area. Overall, the whole area surrounding the Town of Lüderitz is well protected with the Tsau //Khaeb (Sperrgebiet) National Park towards the south, the Namib-Naukluft Park towards the north of Lüderitz and the western marine environment area falling within the Namibian Islands' Marine Protected Area (NIMPA).


Plate 5.1: The great dune belt of the Namib Desert around the Town of Lüderitz (RBS Geotagged Image Series, 2019).


Plate 5.2: Bare and rugged basement rocks (RBS Geotagged Image Series, 2019).

5.3.3 Lüderitz Regional, Local Geology and Water

The regional and local geology around Lüderitz comprises varying landscape falling in the following general zones:

(i) Topographically high area covering the central bare gneissic metamorphic mountainous terrain with very high and steep slopes in some places (>20º), comprising bare rock heads, boulders, cobbles, gravels and limited or no sands and silts. The area is likely have a low flora and fauna diversity;

(ii) Intermediate topographically high areas with slopes angles ranging between 10 – 20 degrees with undulating landscape in some places, loose to cemented surficial deposits in some areas. Mark the transition between very high and low topographically areas. The area is likely have a moderately high flora and fauna diversity;

(iii) Topographically low-lying areas with slopes angles generally less than 10 degrees but very sharp scarps in some areas along the mudflats part of the shoreline area. Comprise, loose to cemented well-rounded and poorly sorted silts / surficial deposits in some areas. Surficial materials characterized by cobbles, gravels, calcrete, sands and silts. The area is likely to have a high flora and fauna diversity;

(iv) Topographically very low lying areas comprising shoreline zone characterised by sandy / silt/ gravel / shell and bare rocky head zones frequently battered by wave action. The onshore zone boundary marks the high water mark horizon. The area is likely to have a low flora and fauna diversity, and;

(v) Coastal and Shallow Marine Environment dominated by characterised by sandy / silt/ gravel / shell and bare rocky head zones.

The geology of the Lüderitz area comprises key lithological domains as shown in Fig. 5.2. The first one is the older basement, which constitutes the north-western extension of the 1200 Ma Namaqua-Natal Metamorphic Complex, and comprises strongly deformed high-grade gneisses and schists (Plate 4.3). Granites and granodiorites extensively intruded these rocks. Moderately deformed sedimentary rocks of the Pan-African Gariep Belt represents the second domain. The eastern and northern parts of Lüderitz are dominated by the Namib Desert Sand Dunes with alluvial, sand, gravel and calcrete found in some areas further to the east of the town (Fig. 5.2). The Port of Lüderitz is situated within the mixed basement gneisses, which are generally covered with uniformly grained quartz sand and locally the sand cover is underlain by sand and gravel (beach) deposits. A number of discontinuities including 3rd , 4th and 5th order of discontinuities are likely to occur within the hard rock (mixed gneiss and associated intrusive rocks), and the in situ permeability coefficient (k) is expected to vary between 10-3 cm/s (sand cover) and 10-10 cm/s (5th order of discontinuity within the bedrock). According to the Department of Water Affairs, the Port of Lüderitz is situated in an area which does not belong to the surface catchment of the Koichab Pan, where the aquifer that supplies water to Lüderitz is located. The Koichab wellfield is situated 100 km north-east of Lüderitz at the foot of a massive dune formation up to 200 m high. The water supply for the Town of Lüderitz comes from a limited system comprising eight (8) boreholes in the Koichab Pan aquifer. The water supply to Lüderitz is based on fossil water reserves in the Koichab paleo-channel.


Figure 5.2: The local solid bedrock around Lüderitz area (RBS Map Series, 2019).


Plate 5.3: Strongly deformed high-grade banded gneisses and schists commonly around Lüderitz (RBS Image Series, 2019).


5.3.4 Archaeology

Archaeological sites in Namibia are fully protected under the National Heritage Act (27 of 2004). The archaeological evidence shows that early man frequented the coastal zones of southern Namibia from about 1.5 million years ago. A highly clustered sites of archaeological resources are expected around Lüderitz for the Holocene and Recent periods, while the Pleistocene archaeology may show a more general distribution over the landscape. According to Kinahan, (2016), archaeological sites in the Lüderitz area consist mainly of small surface scatters of stone artefacts and artefact debris, as well as small shell middens composed mainly of various limpet species, with osteological evidence of penguin, fish and seals on the more recent sites. Some of these sites are also associated with nomadic pastoralist pottery dating to within the last 2000 years. In addition, several small rock shelter sites have been investigated and a number of burial sites have been excavated. Nonetheless, the proposed LLSB development site falls inside the Port of Lüderitz, an operational industrial area that has already been disturbed during the construction of the initial port infrastructure. No archaeological resources are expected to occur on site. However, in an event that an archaeological artefact is unearthed during the construction phase, any such artefact/ resource shall be reported to NamPort who in turn shall notify the National Heritage Council of Namibia in Windhoek (Phone: 061 244 375) for their review, assessment and further investigation if necessary.

5.3.5 Lüderitz Coastal and Marine Sensitive Environment

5.3.5.1 Overview

The following is summary of the key potential coastal and marine issues / implications that have been considered in this study with respect to the proposed upgrading of the LLSB within the Port of Lüderitz and in relation to the environmental settings and feaster as well as likely perceptions and concerns of other users as shown in Figs. 5.3 and 5.4:

Marine water quality;

Marine ecology;

Mariculture;

Ranching;

Marine and coastal birds;

Fisheries;

Recreation;

Private and commercial navigation;

Marine sediments quality, and;

Vibration, Noise and Increased Traffic Movement.


Figure 5.3: Lüderitz Bay environmental setting and features (Source: Currie, el al., 2009).


Figure 5.4: An overview of key sensitive habitats / areas in relation to the proposed

logistic shore base site situated inside the Port of Lüderitz (Prepared by RBS, 2019).


5.3.5.2 Marine Water Quality

Anthropogenic sources, such as physical and biological processes tend to affect the Lüderitz Bay and nearby environment as well as already existing pollution sources associated with surrounding urban land uses (Figs. 5.3 and 5.4). The proposed activities including the construction of the LLSB infrastructure inside the Port will not touch the marine environment and will not affect bottom sediments. The proponent shall ensure that contaminants to the seawater do not adversely affect ecosystem integrity or the health, welfare and amenity of people and resource uses by meeting statutory requirements and acceptable standards through avoidance or management of adverse impacts. Risks from the proposed activity on the Lüderitz Bay and nearby ecosystems are likely to be low medium. The activities of the proponent will be undertaken within the environmental framework of NamPort and the Port has coexisted with the other coastal and marine user since its development.

5.3.5.3 Marine Ecology

Coastal upwelling associated with the Benguela Current advects nutrients to the photic zone which makes a conducive environment for high phytoplankton growth which, in turn, supports heterotrophic populations high up in the foodchain. The phytoplankton is carried by tidal exchange into the Lüderitz Bay, where they support zoobenthos such as polychaetes, mollusks, crustaceans, amongst others. Due to the low oxygen concentration in the sediment, benthic fauna in the Bay is species-poor, that is, low biodiversity, although with high abundances. The limited suite of species found there are adapted to conditions of low oxygen concentration, and the biomass is dominated by few opportunistic species. Any heavy metals or toxic substances might, therefore, also be spread and pose risks for the marine ecology in the bay due to the impacts on water quality by newly introduced contaminants. The proposed activities will not pose a major risk to the fauna (including the abalone and rock lobster) or the ranching and rock lobster industry. The activities of the proponent will be undertaken within the environmental framework of NamPort and the Port has coexisted with the other coastal and marine user.

5.3.5.4 Mariculture and Ranching

Commercial marine aquaculture is currently dominated by oyster production. Both Pacific oysters (Crassostrea gigas) and European oysters (Ostrea edulis) are grown. Culture methods include baskets suspended from rafts and longlines and on-shore raceways and ponds. The abalone farm in the vicinity of the port, pumps seawater ashore into the farm, and they are also involved in abalone ranching in the nearby environment. Thus, the water quality of the Bay is of paramount importance to the oyster and abalone stock in the farm, as well as those released in the natural habitat. Aquaculture is a vital sector and clean water is critical for this industry because the oysters and abalone are produced for human consumption. The overall likely level of risk posed by the proposed activities covering the construction and operational stages is very low. The activities of the proponent will be undertaken within the environmental framework of NamPort and the Port has coexisted with the mariculture and ranching operations over the years.

5.3.5.5 Marine and Coastal Avifauna

Lüderitz Bay and its Islands have unique and abundant birdlife as a consequence of high productivity of sea life and plankton, due to the nutrient-rich Benguela current, as well as the effluents from the fish processing plants. The Islands are Important Bird Area (IBA) and hosts a couple vulnerable, threatened, and endangered species (Figs. 5.3 and 5.4). Other key habitat areas around Lüderitz include rocky shores, sandy beaches, lagoons and the wetlands. These habitats are key nesting areas for birds. The overall likely risk posed by the proposed activities covering the construction and operational stages is very low. The activities of the proponent will be undertaken within the environmental framework of NamPort and the Port has coexisted with the marine and coastal avifauna.


5.3.5.6 Fisheries

Industrial fishing occurs outside Lüderitz Bay on the inner continental shelf and further offshore. Artisanal and subsistence fishing is conducted within the sheltered waters of the bay, mainly south and north of the Port area. Shore-based angling takes place around the bay area, thus there no major potential loss of fishing spots near the proposed project site (Within the Port Area). Construction and operational activities could affect the distribution of line-fish species targeted by anglers. The activities of the proponent will be undertaken within the environmental framework of NamPort and the Port has coexisted with the other coastal and marine user.

5.3.5.7 Recreation

There are some recreational activities around the bay but not on the proposed site. The activities of the proponent will be undertaken within the environmental framework of NamPort and the Port has coexisted with the other coastal and marine user.

5.3.5.8 Private and Commercial Navigation

Namport is the harbour authority, and Lüderitz Bay is under the control of the NamPort. Its duty is to ensure the safe navigation of all vessels within port limits, and its responsibilities include the regulation of navigation, management of pilotage, and the provision and maintenance of aids to navigation, such as buoys, markers, and lights. Resolve operational problems with an efficient Traffic Management System. The activities of the proponent will be undertaken within the environmental framework of NamPort and the Port has coexisted with the other coastal and marine user.

5.3.5.9 Marine Sediment Quality

The sea bottom of Lüderitz Bay is likely to consist of fine- to medium-grained sand that is overlain with a layer of thick dark green diatomaceous mud. Fine, muddy sediments are found at the southern end of the Lagoon, gradually increasing to coarser sand near the mouth as a results of natural depositional processes. The mouth and lower reaches of the Lagoon are presently in a state of equilibrium with the coastal processes that control their dynamics and basic configuration. The Lagoon sediments are high in organic matter, but none of the bio accumulative or toxic substances normally of concern have been found in the Lüderitz Bay. The activities of the proponent will be undertaken within the environmental framework of NamPort and proposed activities are unlikely to cause any noticeable negative influences to the marine sediment quality of the Bay.

5.3.5.10 Vibration, Noise and Increased Traffic Movement

Lüderitz Bay is home to Namibia’s second port, thus sources of vibration, noise and occasional increased traffic movements all linked to the cargo handling, vehicular traffic, loading/unloading containers from ships, landings of fish by fishing vessels, maintenance of infrastructure and equipment, servicing of vessels and rigs and operation of cranes, synchrolift and floating dock. The proposed activities will certainly have additional sources of vibration, noise and negligible increased traffic movement. However, the proposed activities will only introduce limited and temporary additional changes to the ambient noise levels in the Bay and its environs and, in particular, for resident coastal and marine fauna. The proposed activities will be undertaken within the environmental framework of NamPort.

5.3.6 Socioeconomic Settings

5.3.6.1 Overview

The proposed project location (Port of Lüderitz) falls within the Town of Lüderitz in the !Nami=nüs, formerly Lüderitz Constituency of //Karas Region, Namibia. !Nami=nüs is a Constituency in the //Karas Region of Namibia. The !Nami=nüs constituency covers a total area of 48 642 km2 amounting to 30.7%


of the total area of //Karas Region (161 231 km2) and a population density of 0.5 persons per km2. //Karas Region borders the Hardap Region in the north, Botswana in the east, South Africa in the south and the shores of the Atlantic Ocean in the west. The region’s economy is largely dependent on fisheries, tourism, mining and trading including import and export through the Port of Lüderitz.

5.3.6.2 Summary of the Conclusions on Socioeconomic Setting

The demographic information provided indicates the following:

There has been a proportional decline in the //Karas Regions population as only 3.66% of the country’s population live in the region and the region’s population is growing at a slower rate (1.1%) than the national growth rate (1.4%);

There is high migration rate from especially the north central regions to the //Karas region;

There is only slightly more males than female indicating that either migratory male job seekers had moved away from the region (an possible explanation for the negative growth rate in the Lüderitz/!Nami=nüs constituency) or that more females are being employed by companies which historically employed men;

A high proportion (63%) of the population is of working age (between 15 and 59 years);

There is a large urban population (54% compared to 43% nationally) and 92.4% of the residents in the Lüderitz/!Nami=nüs constituency live in the town;

The main source of income in the region is wages and salaries (72%) and the fishing and mining industries are the largest employers;

There is a high labour force participation rate of 75.4% for the region. The socio-economic information is summarised as follow:

There is a shortage of skills which hampers development projects;

Infrastructure and facilities are available in the region, but are not fully operational or utilized, such as the railway. Power shortages are intermittently experienced in Lüderitz area and alternative sources of energy are not utilised optimally;

Lüderitz experiences a shortage of houses resulting increasing informal settlements, and; The economy of Lüderitz is dependent on local resources of fishing, mining and tourism.

5.3.6.3 Socioeconomic Contributions of DBMN

DBMN is a key player and economic driver on the socioeconomic landscape of Namibia. The company employs over 800 people (https://debmarinenamibia.com), with a workforce that is sourced countrywide and not accommodated in Oranjemund. Only a smaller share of contractors servicing the operational base are staying in Oranjemund. DBMN has a significant number of women working in all aspects of the operations. The company’s employees are from different parts of Namibia and are flown to Oranjemund to be flown to their place of work, the Atlantic 1 Mining License Area. The company covers the transportation cost for the duration of a ‘shift’, i.e. the number of days when they are ‘on roster’, and provided with food and accommodation (offshore). Fly-in/ fly-out (FIFO) arrangements by DBMN is not contributing to the negative change of socio-demographic characteristics in Oranjemund town. In such way the company’s workforce has very little interaction with local community in Oranjemund and does not affect the socio-demographic composition (e.g. gender and/or age composition) of the town. In Lüderitz, DBMN will have a very limited number of employee

https://debmarinenamibia.com/


permanently based in this harbour town. When vessels will be calling at the Port of Lüderitz for repair, the work force will be based on-board the vessel. The bulk of local socioeconomic contributions to the Town of Lüderitz will be in form of port fees payable to NamPort and purchases of local goods and services.

5.3.6.4 Social Corporate Responsibility of DBMN

The Company’s social responsibility programme focuses on all the regions of the country, including the labour sending areas as well as the social well-being of employees. DBMN awards full bursaries to deserving young Namibians on an annual basis for study in various fields. The bursary programme offers study opportunities in various areas depending on the Company’s needs, such as: Marine Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Chemical Engineering, Metallurgy, Geology, Environmental Science, Surveying and Commercial Services related studies, amongst others. The company participates in a number of career and trade fairs in various regions throughout Namibia in order to promote development and placement opportunities to Namibian learners and students. As a responsible corporate citizen, the Debmarine Namibia Social Responsibility Fund (SRF) was established in 2004 to facilitate the Company’s social responsibility activities across the communities of Namibia, and has made a significant contribution to society over the years. The fund undertakes a number of activities across a broad spectrum of community development areas in most regions of the country with major investments made in the field of education (particularly in the area of science and technology), health, welfare and supporting sustainable income-generating community projects.


6. IMPACT AND RISK ASSESSMENT

6.1 Assessment Procedure The overall impact assessment approach for this project adopted the DBMN matrix assessment methodology used for predicting the impact of a project on the receiving environment. Impact Assessment results of the magnitude, duration, extent and probability (significant) of the potential impacts due to the proposed project activities interacting with the receiving environment are discussed and presented in this report with mitigation measures provided Chapter 7 for impacts with medium to high significant impacts. Based on the results of the screening process and Scoping / BID report that has been undertaken leading to the preparation of the EIA and EMP Reports, the proposed project activities are likely to have some negative and positive impacts / influences on the receiving physical, biophysical and socioeconomic environment. As such, the Scoping / BID Report recommended the preparation of the EIA and EMP reports in order to support the application for Environmental Clearance Certificate (ECC). The environmental assessment process has been undertaken in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations 30 of 2012 and the Environmental Management Act (EMA), 2007, (Act No. 7 of 2007) and DBMN Corporate requirements.

6.2 Assessments of Alternatives and Key Issues

6.2.1 Summary of Alternatives

The following is the summary of the key project alternatives that have been considered during the environmental assessment process:

(i) Location: Alternatives to the use of the Port of Lüderitz have been considered. The Lüderitz Port was selected because it is closer to offshore diamond recovery area comparted to the Port of Walvis Bay. The Port of Lüderitz is also not as busy as the Port of Walvis Bay and other ports in South Africa such as Cape Town;

(ii) The No-Action Alternative - A comparative assessment of the environmental impacts of the ‘no-action’ alternative (a future in which the proposed upgrading of the LLSB activities covering preconstruction, construction and operational stages do not take place) has been undertake. An assessment of the environmental impacts of a future, in which the proposed activities do not take place, may be good for the receiving environment because there be no project-specific potential negative environmental impacts or cumulative impacts associated with the proposed activities by DBMN.

However, it is important to also understand that even if the proposed activities do not take, to which the likely negative environmental impacts is likely to be negligible and localised, the current and other future uses of Port of Lüderitz facilities and infrastructure will still have some negative impacts on the receiving environment. The likely negative environmental impacts of the natural and other current and future port users that may still happen in the absence of the proposed activities includes: Natural dust and generation of particulate matter during windy events around Lüderitz, land, coastal and marine pollution and environmental degradation associated with current land uses in and around the Port of Lüderitz. Examples of such land uses and sources of pollution around the Port of Lüderitz are shown in Figs. 6.1 and 6.2.

Key loses that may never be realised if the proposed project activities do not go-ahead include: Loss in income for NamPort use of the port services, infrastructure and land lease, loss of increased buying power for the Town of Lüderitz that could have been added by DBMN direct good and services purchases and indirect payments of salaries and fees to


workers and contractors / subcontractors who in turn would spend their money in Lüderitz, loss of jobs that could have been created directly or indirectly, loss of other direct and indirect socioeconomic benefits to be derived from the proposed DBMN operations in Lüderitz, loss of direct and indirect contracts and employment opportunities, export earnings, foreign direct investments and various taxes payable to the Government.

(iii) Other Alternative Land Uses: The Port of Lüderitz is already a heavy industrial area being

used for some form of import and exports trading activities including stockpiling of imported or exported of goods. The proposed land use is in line with the existing user rights of the port area;

(iv) Potential Land Use Conflicts: The current land use practices (other import and export

trading activities, conservation and tourism) and the proposed activities will not result in any user conflict. NamPort has been using the Port of Lüderitz Port for activities that are in line with what the proponent is proposing to undertake;

(v) Ecosystem Function (What the Ecosystem Does): There are wildlife habitats, carbon

cycling or the trapping of nutrients and characterised by the physical, chemical, and biological processes or attributes that contribute to the self-maintenance of an ecosystem around the Port of Lüderitz. The proposed activities will not affect the ecosystem function due to the limited scope of utilising the already existing facilities and infrastructure;

(vi) Ecosystem Services: Food chain, harvesting of animals or plants, and the provision of

clean water or scenic views are some of the local ecosystem services associated with the Port of Lüderitz and surrounding area. However, the proposed activities will not affect the ecosystem services due to the limited scope and area of coverage that will use the existing facilities and infrastructure;

(vii) Use Values: The Port of Lüderitz Port and surrounding areas all have direct use by other

land uses such as industrial, residential, business, conservation and tourism as well as indirect include watching a television show about the general area and its wildlife, food chain linkages that sustains the complex life within these areas and bequest values for future generations to enjoy. The proposed activities will not destroy the current uses values because the proponent will use the existing port areas with already existing facilities and infrastructure, and;

(viii) Non-Use or Passive Use: The areas have existence values that is not linked to the direct

use / benefits to current or future generations. The proposed activities will not affect ecosystem current or future none or passive uses due to the limited scope of the proposed site specific operations.


Figure 6.1: Other coastal and marine users around Lüderitz Prepared by RBS, 2019.


Figure 6.2: Example of the already existing pollution sources affecting the bay Prepared

by RBS, 2019.


6.3 Impact Assessment Criteria

6.3.1 Evaluation of Impacts

As part of the Environmental Impact Assessment process, all the environmental aspects and their associated impacts included as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment have been assessed. A user-friendly assessment from which impacts ranked as having medium or high significance have been identified and assessed. In line with DBMN’s objective of focusing attention specifically on impacts of potentially significant risk and how best to mitigate for these, the following approach was recommended regarding the concept of whether issues in the EIA table need to be actively addressed in the EMP:

If environmental aspects are evaluated to be of low significance, they do not require specific management plans, and need not be actively addressed in the EMP (although they may still be listed and reported on);

A decision on the need to actively address any issue with a "Medium" significance ranking will require consideration of other relevant factors, such as the nature of the impact, risks associated with possible cumulative aspects, and the degree of concern of stakeholders, and;

If environmental aspects receive a "High" significance ranking, they must be addressed by means of active management, mitigation or rehabilitation measures.

For each negative impact of high or medium significance, mitigation objectives are set (i.e. ways of reducing negative impacts), and attainable management actions are subsequently addressed in the EMP in line with the mitigation framework of DBMN. Without management, these impacts would either breach statutory limits or be unacceptable to statutory authorities or to stakeholders, as they would result in a significant deterioration of one or more environmental resources.

6.3.2 Environmental Impact Assessment Rankings

To ensure consistency in the evaluation of environmental impacts associated with DBMN’s activities for all of their operations, the rating criteria for the impact assessment have been standardised to include set definitions applied in the risk assessment (Table 6.1). To the extent possible, allocation to rank categories is based on quantifiable criteria which can be measured as detailed in Table 6.1. Furthermore, when evaluating impacts, the allocated ranks refer to the resultant impact (e.g. habitat area affected, or time that the result of the impact will last), and not of the cause thereof (e.g. time of active impact). Each activity has been assessed with respect to the type of effect that the aspect will have on the relevant component of the environment and includes “what will be affected and how?” The criteria used to determine the significance rating of the impact(s) is detailed in Table 6.2.


Table 6.1: Definition of impact categories.

Rating Definition of Rating

Status of the Impact – in terms of meeting the objective of maintaining a healthy environment.

Positive The impact benefits the environment

Negative The impact results in a cost to the environment

Neutral The impact has no effect

Probability – the likelihood of the impact occurring

Negligible Possibility negligible

Improbable Possibility very low

Probable Distinct possibility

Highly Probable Most likely

Definite Impact will occur regardless of preventive measures

Degree of confidence in predictions – in terms of basing the assessment on available information

Low Assessment based on extrapolated data

Medium Information base available but lacking

High Information base comparatively reliable

Extent – the area over which the impact will be experienced

Site specific Confined to within < 1 km of the project

Local Confined to the study area or within 5 km of the project

Regional Confined to the region, i.e. > 5 km but < National

National Nationally

International Beyond the borders of Namibia

Duration – the time frame for which the impact will be experienced

Very short Less than 2 years

Short-term 2 to 5 years

Medium-term 6 to 15 years

Long-term More than 15 years

Permanent Generations

Intensity – the magnitude of the impact in relation to the sensitivity of the receiving environment

Negligible Natural functions and processes are negligibly altered due to adaptation by the receptor(s) to high natural environmental variability

Mild Natural functions and processes continue albeit in a modified way that does not appear to

have a significant disruptive effect (i.e. changes are temporary)

Moderate Natural functions and processes continue albeit in a modified way that does appear to have a

noticeable disruptive effect (i.e. changes are permanent)

Severe Natural functions or processes are altered to the extent that they temporarily cease resulting in severe deterioration of the impacted environment

Very Severe Natural functions or processes permanently cease or are completely disrupted

Table 6.2: The criteria used to determine the significance rating of the impact(s).

Low: Where the impact will have a negligible influence on the environment and no modifications or mitigations are necessary for the given project description. This would be allocated to impacts of any severity/ magnitude, if at a local scale/ extent and of temporary duration/time.

Medium: Where the impact could have an influence on the environment, which will require modification of the project design and/or alternative mitigation. This would be allocated to impacts of moderate severity, locally to regionally, and in the short term.

High:

Where the impact could have a significant influence on the environment and, in the event of a negative impact, the activity(ies) causing it should not be permitted without substantial mitigation and management, and pro-active rehabilitation commitments (i.e. there could be a ‘no-go’ implication for the project). This would be allocated to impacts of severe magnitude, locally over the medium-term, and/or of severe magnitude regionally and beyond.


6.4 Identification of Likely Impacts

6.4.1 Summary of Sources Impacts

This Environmental Assessment process has taken into consideration the sensitivity of the receiving environment (physical, biological, socioeconomic and ecosystem services and functions) with respect to the proposed activities. The following is the summary of the likely sources of negative impacts on the receiving environment that have been evaluated during the EIA process for the proposed upgrading of the Lüderitz Logistic Shore Base by DBMN:

(i) Preconstruction: Planning, designing and permitting;

Mobilisation and implementation;

Site access plan and surveying;

Determination of locally available construction materials (sand / gravel) excavations,

and;

Demolition / excavations and erection of security and safety zones.

(ii) Construction: Soil / ground preparation and supporting Infrastructure construction;

Foundation excavations and building;

Structural development / Actual construction;

Supporting infrastructure (internal access, energy requirements, water supply, waste

water management and solid waste management).

(iii) Operational: Day to day running of the Lüderitz Logistic Shore Base by DBMN supporting the Port of

Lüderitz (NamPort) and the Town of Lüderitz and surrounding areas and generating liquid and solid waste, noise, dusty, interact with local people, visitors, wild life and the broader natural receiving environment.

6.4.2 Summary of Likely Positive Impacts

The following is the summary of the key likely negative environmental impacts that the proposed activities may have on the receiving environment:

(i) Payment of taxes / royalties by DBMN due to increased production supported by upgraded

Lüderitz Logistic Shore Base;

(ii) Support to the much needed local, regional and national infrastructural development for the Port of Lüderitz;

(iii) Support the local economic through land rental and port fees payable to NamPort and other

local services providers;

(iv) Employment creation through DBMN expanded production as well as support to the growth of other sector locally (Lüderitz) regionally (//Karas) and nationally Namibia as well as South Africa;


(v) Boost to the local (Lüderitz), regional (//Karas) and national Namibia as well as South Africa

economies, and;

(vi) Support to the sustainable closure of DBMN operations through the provision of excellent national infrastructure that may be used by other sectors that may replace diamonds mining operations.

The above listed likely positive impacts have been evaluated during the assessment and management phases for the proposed upgrading of the Lüderitz Logistic Shore Base by DBMN with mitigation measures provided in the EMP Report

6.4.3 Summary of Likely Negatively Impacts

The following is the summary of the key likely negative environmental impacts that the proposed activities may have on the receiving environment:

1. Disruption / disturbance of the coastal and marine habitats within the Lüderitz Logistic Shore

Base (Port of Lüderitz) developmental and surrounding areas (Lüderitz Town); 2. Disturbance / disruption of the surrounding Lüderitz area including the supporting infrastructure

3. Disturbance of coastal and marine fauna and birds; 4. Effects on the ecosystem functions, services, use values and non-use use; 5. Visual and land degradation; 6. Pollution of the land, coastal and marine environment and resources; 7. Increased local resource use (energy and water); 8. Air quality, noise and dust; 9. Refuelling spillages; 10. Solid waste management; 11. Sewage, other liquid and oil waste management; 12. Accident, and; 13. Archaeological, paleontological and historical aspects.

The above listed likely negative impacts have been evaluated during the assessment and management phases for the proposed upgrading of the Lüderitz Logistic Shore Base by DBMN with mitigation measures provided in the EMP Report.

6.5 Results of the Environmental Impact Assessment

6.5.1 Positive Impacts Results

Tables 6.3 - 6.8 summarises the impact assessment results associated with positive impacts linked to the socioeconomic benefits covering payment of taxes / royalties, employment, improved social services, training and skills transfer, boost to local economies, development of technology and technological advancement, support to use of non-renewable resources and closure of DBMN operations.


Table 6.3: Payment of Taxes / royalties and services to NamPort through DBMN expanded operations.

Contribution to local, regional and national economy through continued payment of services to NamPort and taxes and royalties as a results of DBMN expanded operations

Status Positive

Probability Definite

Confidence High

Extent International; DBMN also uses South African contactors and vendors, the airborne services are provided by a Canadian Company

Duration Medium-term

Intensity Moderate

Significance

High; DBMN makes a marked contribution to the Namibian economy through payment of taxes and royalties and contribution to the Lüderitz economy

Table 6.4: Employment and contracts creation through DBMN expanded operations.

Provision additional employment and contract opportunities through DBMN expanded operations

Status Positive


Confidence High

Extent International; Employees are mostly from Namibia, with fewer from South Africa and other countries.


Intensity High

Significance High; a significant number of especially Namibian families are being supported financially over a long period.

Table 6.5: Local, regional and national infrastructure and social services.

Development of new and improved existing local, regional and national infrastructure and social services through expanded DBMN operations

Status Positive


Confidence High

Extent International


Intensity Moderate

Significance Medium

Table 6.6: Training and skills transfer through expanded DBMN operations.

Provision of employee training and development of skills

Status Positive


Confidence High


Duration Long-term

Intensity High

Significance High


Table 6.7: Boost to the local (Lüderitz), regional (//Karas) and national Namibia as well as South Africa economies through increased DBMN operational activities.

Increase in the use of the upgraded LLSB and the Port of Lüderitz facilities, purchasing of local goods & services, use of local vendors will contribute to direct and indirect local employment and local economic boost.

Status Positive


Confidence High

Extent Local to Regional

Duration Long-term

Intensity High (=Severe)

Significance High

Table 6.8: Support to the sustainable closure of DBMN operations through the provision of excellent national infrastructure that may be used by other sectors that may replace diamonds mining operations.

Termination of all contributions to the economy including taxes, employment, support to secondary industries.

Abandonment of infrastructure, buildings and equipment.

Status Negative


Confidence High


Duration Permanent

Intensity Very High (=Very Severe)

Significance High

6.5.2 Negative Impacts Results

Tables 6.9 - 6.21 summarises the negative impact assessment results associated with proposed upgrading of the LLSB (Port of Lüderitz) activities covering the preconstruction, construction and operational stages of each of the proposed phases (complete proposed project lifecycle) with respect to the receiving environment. Table 6.9: Disruption / disturbance of the coastal and marine habitats within the Lüderitz Logistic

Shore Base (Port of Lüderitz) developmental and surrounding areas (Lüderitz Town).

Table 6.10: Disturbance / disruption of the surrounding Lüderitz area including the supporting

infrastructure.

Disturbance / disruption of the surrounding Lüderitz area including the supporting infrastructure areas such access road, water, sewage lines as well as borrow pits (sources of construction materials such as sand and gravel)

Status Negative

Probability

Probable; Supporting infrastructure areas such access road, water, sewage lines as well as borrow pits (sources of construction materials such as sand and gravel)

Confidence Medium

Extent Local (within 5 km of project area)

Duration Long-term

Intensity Mild

Significance Medium to low

Disturbance of the coastal, marine and marine protected are due to the expanded LLSB supporting infrastructures and increase activities within the Port of Lüderitz

Status Negative

Probability Improbable; Existing Port Infrastructure area

Confidence Medium


Duration Long-term

Intensity Mild

Significance Medium to Low


Table 6.11: Disturbance of coastal and marine fauna and birds.

Disturbance to coastal and marine fauna and birds caused by noise from the increased use of the Port of Lüderitz by DBMN

Status Negative

Probability Improbable; Existing Port Infrastructure area

Confidence Medium


Duration Very Short; for duration of flight only of the life of the mine / airport (Permanent)

Intensity Mild

Significance Medium to Low

Table 6.12: Effects on the ecosystem functions, services, use values and non-use or passive use.

Influences on the ecosystem functions, services, use values and non-use or passive use

Status Negative

Probability Improbable; Ecosystem functions, services, use values and non-use or passive use will not be affected in any way

Confidence Medium


Duration Long-term

Intensity Mild

Significance Low

Table 6.13: Visual and land degradation.

Visual effects of the proposed additional structures resulting in land degradation

Status Negative

Probability Improbable; Addition to the already existing structures and disturbed land

Confidence Medium


Duration Long-term

Intensity Mild

Significance Low

Table 6.14: Pollution of the land, coastal and marine environment and resources.

Pollution of the land, coastal and marine environment and resources during the preconstruction, construction and operational phases

Status Negative

Probability Improbable; Addition to the already existing structures with limited land, coastal and seawater polluting activities

Confidence Medium


Duration Long-term

Intensity Mild

Significance Low


Table 6.15: Resource use.

Depletion of natural and non-renewable resources through engine machinery operation, electricity generation, fresh water consumption, paper consumption etc.

Status Negative

Probability Definite (impact will occur regardless of prevention measures)

Confidence High

Extent Site specific

Duration Long-term

Intensity Mild

Significance Low

Table 6.16: Air quality, noise and dust.

Exceeding international standards for exhaust emissions and noise levels from increased vehicles movements and vessels / equipment emissions coupled with increased dust generation

Status Negative

Probability Improbable; The likely increase as a result of DBMN activities is negligible

Confidence Medium


Duration Very Short; dilution of emissions, noise and dust will be rapid

Intensity Negligible

Significance Low

Table 6.17: Refuelling spillages.

Land pollution from small spills during connection and disconnection while re-fuelling helicopters and aircrafts

Status Negative

Probability Improbable; due to strict control and procedures implemented as well as pollution / spill containments available onsite

Confidence Medium

Extent Site specific; limited to immediate area around the refuelling point / station

Duration Very Short and contained on site

Intensity Mild re-fuelling takes around an engineered area with spillage containments

Significance Low

Table 6.18: Solid waste management.

Increased in litter and violating national solid waste management legislation

Status Negative

Probability

Improbable; Limited volumes with waste management procedures in place and sources sorting infrastructures for effective onsite solid waste management will be provided

Confidence Medium

Extent Local (<5 km)

Duration Long-term


Significance Low


Table 6.19: Sewage, other liquid and oil waste management.

Violating waste water standards / discharge permit requirements and liquid waste and used oil management procedures held by NamPort

Status Negative

Probability

Improbable; due to adherence to the already existing NamPort protocol and supporting infrastructure. DBMN will have its own used / waste oil storage /management facility

Confidence High

Extent Site specific (<1 km)

Duration Long-term


Significance Low

Table 6.20: Accident.

Fire, accident or spillage of fuel due to increased activities at the Port of Lüderitz

Status Negative

Probability

Improbable; There is an Emergence Response Plan (ERP) and additional equipment such as onsite firefight equipment will be upgraded as part of the proposed development

Confidence Medium

Extent Site specific (<1 km)

Duration Very Short; fires likely to be rapidly extinguished

Intensity Mild

Significance Low

Table 6.21: Archaeological, paleontological and historical aspects.

Disturbance / damage of sites of archaeological, historical and/or cultural value during preconstruction and construction of the proposed LLSB infrastructure

Status Negative

Probability

Unknown, but improbable because the proposed project area within the Port of Lüderitz is already disturbed with all the proposed supporting infrastructure falling within the current fenced Port area.

Confidence Low; with regard to the value of the archaeological resource as a sound information base is lacking

Extent Site Specific

Duration Permanent

Intensity Very Severe; if archaeological artefacts, cultural or historical sites are destroyed

Significance Medium

6.6 Risk Assessment of Potential Impacts

6.6.1 Risk Assessment Criteria

The risk assessment has been conducted to identify medium and high risk aspects associated with the proposed upgrading of the LLSB (Port of Lüderitz) and that may result in environmentally unacceptable impacts on the receiving environments (physical, biological and socioeconomic). The risk assessment has been undertaken in accordance with Anglo American Risk Matrix (Annex 3).


6.6.2 Impacts Risk Assessment

The receiving environment and the impacts associated with the proposed upgrading of the LLSB (Port of Lüderitz) have been assessed as detailed in Tables 6.3 - 6.8 for the positive impacts and Tables 6.9 – 6.21 for the negative impacts. The overall key risk areas of the proposed activities can be divided the following:

(i) The general Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) issues associated with potential injuries. The overall risk to workers is high while the risk to residents and visitors is very low;

(ii) Noise and dust impact within the port area particularly during the construction phase;

(iii) Worst case scenario of an overflow or accidental spillage of products. Optimum designs shall

be implemented at all time. The overall risk associated with overflow or accidental spillage of fuel or chemicals or liquid waste including oil is low because the proponent shall adhere to NamPort procedures on all matters related to the prevision, management and clean-up of spillages, and;

(iv) Solid waste management an area of concern that may pose some risks that could be associated with illegal dumping of waste to be generated from the proposed activities. Key waste management procedures must be put in place for the collection, storage, transportation and ultimate safe disposal of solid waste to be generated by the proposed activities. The overall risk associated with solid management is low because the proponent shall adhere to the TransNamib and NamPort procedures on all matters related to the waste management. Nonetheless, due to the nature of the proposed operations which will be handled in accordance with NamPort and DBMN procedures, all the solid waste to be generated by the proposed activities shall be sorted at source, recused, recycled and finally disposed in a specially developed and design cell within the municipal waste disposal site as may be required. The cell shall be managed and operated by the proponent or appointed and well supervised contractor.

6.6.3 Socioeconomic Risk Assessment

The overall economic gains associated with the proposed upgrading of the LLSB (Port of Lüderitz) resulting in increased DBMN operations are made up of income for NamPort, indirect and direct employment and contractual opportunities, improved local socioeconomic environment, payment of Government taxes and increased forex exporting earnings and all rated “High”. A significant number of Namibians benefit from employment opportunities, contractual and local procurement preferential support, the skills transferred, training, awareness raising in various subjects, and other direct and indirect benefits received by the wider society. The employees are from across the country, therefore the gains are widespread and for an extended period, benefiting extended families and various generations.

6.6.4 Cumulative Risks Assessment

The cumulative risks associated with the proposed upgrading of LLBS (Port of Lüderitz) is negligible from an overall negative contribution perspectives. However, from an overall positive perspective, the cumulative risk assessment outputs are high with potential to not only support the proposed expanded DBMN operations with its positive socioeconomic benefits but also support the growth of other sectors such export and import services, leisure, travel and tourism far beyond the current mining operations. The upgrading of the LLSB (Port of Lüderitz) will have a positive support to DBMN mine closure plan through the provisions of good quality infrastructures in the Port of Lüderitz that can support alternative economic sectors in place of the current diamond recovery operations. A joint social and labour plan combining efforts of DBMN and NamPort shows commitment to jointly taking on cumulative socioeconomic impacts. Collaborative efforts should also be more effective from a practical and socioeconomic initiatives. DBMN and NamPort could for instance plan environmental awareness raising campaigns, or strategically target certain local (Lüderitz), regional (//Karas Region) and national (Namibia) socioeconomic interventions targeting vulnerable communities, youth and women


7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 Conclusions The proposed Lüderitz Logistics Shores Base (LLSB) area falls within the NamPort operated Port of Lüderitz which is an industrial area of the Town of Lüderitz. The proposed LLSB site allocated by NamPort to DBMN for the development of the LLSB infrastructure is not pristine. Based on the low sensitivity of the receiving environment (physical, biological and socioeconomic) and the low /negligible and medium to high negative and positive impacts results respectively, it’s hereby concluded that the proposed upgrading of the LLSB shall go-ahead and will coexists with other port operations and the receiving environment.

7.2 Recommendations Based on the results of this Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report, it’s hereby recommended that the proponent (DBMN) be issued with an Environmental Clearance Certificate (ECC) for the proposed upgrading of the Lüderitz Logistics Shore Base (LLSB) in the Port of Lüderitz, Lüderitz, //Karas Region, South Namibia. Mitigation measures / appropriate management intervention measures to be implemented by DBMN with respect to the impacts ranked as having either a “high” or “medium” significance are provided in the EMP Report covering the preconstruction, construction and operational phases of the proposed LLSB infrastructure development. Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) is key components of the LLSB and Port of Lüderitz safe operations. Workers must use Personal Protective Clothing / Equipment at all times, site equipment / vehicles movement procedures and protocols and all the related activities shall be undertaken in accordance with DBMN and NamPort corporates requirements, environmental standards and management systems. The Environmental Performance Monitoring activities shall be undertaken by DBMN Environmental Manager during the preconstruction, construction and operational stages of the proposed upgrading of the Lüderitz Logistics Shores Base with bi-annual monitoring reports submitted to the Environmental Commissioner in the Ministry of Environment and Tourism, Executive Director (ED) in the Ministry of Works and Transport and Lüderitz Port Captain.


8. BIBLIOGRAPHY AND FURTHER READING

1. FURTHER GENERAL READING

Department of Affairs and Forestry, 2001. Groundwater in Namibia: An explanation to the hydrogeological map. MAWRD, Windhoek, 1, 128 pp. Directorate of Environmental Affairs, 2002. Atlas of Namibia Project. Ministry of Environment and Tourism, Windhoek, http://www.met.gov.na Geological Survey of Namibia, 1999. The Simplified Geological Map of Namibia, Windhoek. https://debmarinenamibia.com/ (Accessed June 2019) http://portals.flexicadastre.com/Namibia-MME Portal) (Accessed June 2019). Kinahan, J., 2016. Archaeological survey and assessment of the Namdeb Project and National Wind Project at Elizabeth Bay, Karas Region, specialist study for Risk-Based Solution, Windhoek, Namibia. Miller, R.McG. 2008. The geology of Namibia. Geological Survey, Ministry of Mines and Energy, Windhoek, Vol. 3. Miller, R. McG., 1992. Stratigraphy. The mineral resource of Namibia, Geological Survey of Namibia, MME, Windhoek, 1.2 .1 -1.2.13. Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET) and Ministry of Mines and Energy (MME), 2018). National policy on prospecting and mining in protected areas, 2018 -2022, Windhoek, Namibia. National Statistic Agency (NSA). (2012). Poverty Dynamics in Namibia: A Comparative Study Using the 1993/94, 2003/04 and the 2009/2010 NHIES Surveys. National Statistics Agency: Windhoek. National Statistics Agency (NSA). (2014a). Namibia 2011 Population and Housing Census Main Report. National Statistics Agency: Windhoek Robertson, T., Jarvis, A., Mendelsohn, J. and Swart, R. 2012. Namibia’s Coast – ocean riches and desert treasures. Directorate of Environmental Affairs, Windhoek. South African National Standards (SANS), 2005. South African National Standard, Ambient Air Quality – Limits for Common Pollutants. SANS 1929:2005. Standards South Africa, Pretoria. www.openstreetmap.org (Accessed June 2019)

2. FURTHER READING ON FAUNA AND FLORA

Alexander, G. and Marais, J. 2007. A guide to the reptiles of southern Africa. Struik Publishers, Cape Town, RSA. Barnard, P. 1998. Underprotected habitats. In: Barnard, P. (ed.). Biological diversity in Namibia: a country study. Windhoek: Namibian National Biodiversity Task Force. Bester, B. 1996. Bush encroachment – A thorny problem. Namibia Environment 1: 175-177. Branch, B. 1998. Field guide to snakes and other reptiles of southern Africa. Struik Publishers, Cape Town, RSA. Branch, B. 2008. Tortoises, terrapins and turtles of Africa. Struik Publishers, Cape Town, RSA.

https://debmarinenamibia.com/

http://portals.flexicadastre.com/Namibia

http://www.openstreetmap.org/


Boycott, R.C. and Bourquin, O. 2000. The Southern African Tortoise Book. O Bourquin, Hilton, RSA. Broadley, D.G. 1983. Fitzsimons’ Snakes of southern Africa. Jonathan Ball and AD. Donker Publishers, Parklands, RSA. Brown, C.J., Jarvis, A., Robertson, T. and Simmons, R. 1998. Bird diversity. In: Barnard, P. (ed.). Biological diversity in Namibia: a country study. Windhoek: Namibian National Biodiversity Task Force. Buys, P.J. and Buys, P.J.C. 1983. Snakes of Namibia. Gamsberg Macmillan Publishers, Windhoek, Namibia. Carruthers, V.C. 2001. Frogs and frogging in southern Africa. Struik Publishers, Cape Town, RSA. Channing, A. 2001. Amphibians of Central and Southern Africa. Protea Bookhouse, Pretoria, RSA. Channing, A. and Griffin, M. 1993. An annotated checklist of the frogs of Namibia. Madoqua 18(2): 101-116. Coats Palgrave, K. 1983. Trees of Southern Africa. Struik Publishers, Cape Town, RSA. Craven, P. 1998. Lichen diversity in Namibia. In: Barnard, P. (ed.). Biological diversity in Namibia: a country study. Windhoek: Namibian National Biodiversity Task Force. Craven, P. (ed.). 1999. A checklist of Namibian plant species. Southern African Botanical Diversity Network Report No. 7, SABONET, Windhoek. Crouch, N.R., Klopper, R.R., Burrows, J.E. & Burrows, S.M. 2011. Ferns of southern Africa – a comprehensive guide. Struik Nature, Cape Town, RSA. Cunningham, P.L. 1998. Potential wood biomass suitable for charcoal production in Namibia. Agri-Info 4(5): 4-8. Cunningham, P.L. 2006. A guide to the tortoises of Namibia. Polytechnic of Namibia, Windhoek, Namibia. Curtis, B. and Barnard, P. 1998. Sites and species of biological, economic or archaeological importance. In: Barnard, P. (ed.). Biological diversity in Namibia: a country study. Windhoek: Namibian National Biodiversity Task Force. Curtis, B. and Mannheimer, C. 2005. Tree Atlas of Namibia. National Botanical Research Institute, Windhoek, Namibia. De Graaff, G. 1981. The rodents of southern Africa. Buterworths, RSA. Du Preez, L. and Carruthers, V. 2009. A complete guide to the frogs of southern Africa. Struik Publishers, Cape Town, RSA. Estes, R.D. 1995. The behaviour guide to African mammals. Russel Friedman Books, Halfway House, RSA. Giess, W. 1971. A preliminary vegetation map of South West Africa. Dinteria 4: 1 – 114. Griffin, M. 1998a. Reptile diversity. In: Barnard, P. (ed.). Biological diversity in Namibia: a country study. Windhoek: Namibian National Biodiversity Task Force. Griffin, M. 1998b. Amphibian diversity. In: Barnard, P. (ed.). Biological diversity in Namibia: a country study. Windhoek: Namibian National Biodiversity Task Force.


Griffin, M. 1998c. Mammal diversity. In: Barnard, P. (ed.). Biological diversity in Namibia: a country study. Windhoek: Namibian National Biodiversity Task Force. Griffin, M. 2003. Annotated checklist and provisional national conservation status of Namibian reptiles. Ministry of Environment and Tourism, Windhoek. Griffin, M. 2005. Annotated checklist and provisional national conservation status of Namibian mammals. Ministry of Environment and Tourism, Windhoek. Hebbard, S. n.d. A close-up view of the Namib and some of its fascinating reptiles. ST Promotions,Swakopmund, Namibia. Hockey, P.A.R., Dean, W.R.J. and Ryan, P.G. 2006. Roberts Birds of Southern Africa VII Edition. John Voelcker Bird Book Fund. IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2, www.iucnredlist.org Joubert, E. and Mostert, P.M.K. 1975. Distribution patterns and status of some mammals in South West Africa. Madoqua 9(1): 5-44. Komen, L. n.d. The Owls of Namibia – Identification and General Information. NARREC, Windhoek. Maclean, G.L. 1985. Robert’s birds of southern Africa. John Voelcker Bird Book Fund. Maggs, G. 1998. Plant diversity in Namibia. In: Barnard, P. (ed.). Biological diversity in Namibia: a country study. Windhoek: Namibian National Biodiversity Task Force. Mannheimer, C. and Curtis, B. (eds) 2009. Le Roux and Müller’s field guide to the trees and shrubs of N amibia. Macmillan Education Namibia, Windhoek. Marais, J. 1992. A complete guide to the snakes of southern Africa. Southern Book Publishers, Witwatersrand University Press, Johannesburg, RSA. Mendelsohn, J., Jarvis, A., Roberts, A. & Robertson, T. 2002. Atlas of Namibia. A portrait of the land and its people. David Philip Publishers, Cape Town, RSA. Monadjem, A., Taylor, P.J., Cotterill, F.P.D. & Schoeman, M.C. 2010. Bats of southern and central Africa – A biogeographic and taxonomic synthesis. Wits University Press, Johannesburg, South Africa. Müller, M.A.N. 1984. Grasses of South West Africa/Namibia. John Meinert Publishers (Pty) Ltd, Windhoek, Namibia. Müller, M.A.N. 2007. Grasses of Namibia. John Meinert Publishers (Pty) Ltd, Windhoek, Namibia. Passmore, N.I. and Carruthers, V.C. 1995. South African Frogs - A complete guide. Southern Book Publishers, Witwatersrand University Press, Johannesburg, RSA. Rothmann, S. 2004. Aloes, aristocrats of Namibian flora. ST promotions, Swakopmund. SARDB, 2004. CBSG Southern Africa. In: Griffin, M. 2005. Annotated checklist and provisional national conservation status of Namibian mammals. Ministry of Environment and Tourism, Windhoek. Schultz, M. and Rambold, G. 2007. Diversity shifts and ecology of soil lichens in central Namibia. Talk, Ecological Society of Germany, Austria and Switzerland (GfÖ), 37th Annual Meeting, Marburg: 12/9/2007 to 15/9/2007. Schultz, M., Zedda, L. and Rambold, G. 2009. New records of lichen taxa from Namibia and South Africa. Bibliotheca Lichenologica 99: 315-354.

http://www.iucnredlist.org/


Simmons, R.E. 1998a. Important Bird Areas (IBA’s) in Namibia. In: Barnard, P. (ed.). Biological diversity in Namibia: a country study. Windhoek: Namibian National Biodiversity Task Force. Simmons, R.E. 1998b. Areas of high species endemism. In: Barnard, P. (ed.). Biological diversity in Namibia: a country study. Windhoek: Namibian National Biodiversity Task Force. Skinner, J.D. and Chimimba, C.T. 2005. The mammals of the southern African subregion. Cambridge University Press, Cape Town, RSA. Tarboton, W. 2001. A guide to the nests and eggs of southern African birds. Struik Publishers, Cape Town, RSA. Taylor, P.J. 2000. Bats of southern Africa. University of Natal Press, RSA. Tolley, K. and Burger, M. 2007. Chameleons of southern Africa. Struik Nature, Cape Town, RSA. Van Oudtshoorn, F. 1999. Guide to grasses of southern Africa. Briza Publications, Pretoria, South Africa. Van Wyk, B. and Van Wyk, P. 1997. Field guide to trees of Southern Africa. Cape Town: Struik Publishers. 3. MARINE RELATED BIBLIOGRAPHY AND FURTHER READING Anderson, D.M. and B.A Keafer 1985 - Dinoflagellate cyst dynamics in coastal and estuarine waters.In Toxic Dinoflagellates.Anderson, D.M., White, A.W. and D.G. Baden (Eds). Elsevier Science Publishing Company: 219-224. Anderson, D.M., Aubrey, D.G., Tyler, M.A. and D.W. Coats 1982 - Vertical and horizontal distributions of dinoflagellate cysts in sediments.Limnol.Oceanogr.27: 757-765. Andrews, W.R.H., Hutchings, L., 1980. Upwelling in the southern Benguela Current.Progress in Oceanography9, 1–81. Bakun, A., 1996. Patterns in the Ocean (University of California Sea Grant Program: San Diego, CA). Centro de Investigaciones Biologicas de Noreste, La Paz, Mexico.323 pp. Bakun, A., Weeks, S.J., 2006. Adverse feedback sequences in exploited marine systems: are deliberate interruptive actions warranted? Fish and Fisheries 7, 316–333. Barnes,J.I., Zeybrandt F., Kirchner, C., and A. L. Sakko. 2002. The economic value of Namibia’s recreational shore fishery: A review.DEA RESEARCH DISCUSSION PAPER Number 50. Barber, J.R., K.R. Crooks, and K. Fristrup. 2010. The costs of chronic noise exposure for terrestrial organisms. Trends Ecology and Evolution 25(3): 180–189. Available at: http://www.sciencedirect.com/ Bartholomae, C.H., van der Plas, A.K., 2007. Towards the development of environmental indices for the Namibian shelf, with particular reference to fisheries management.African Journal of Marine Science29 (1), 25–35. Bayne, E.M., L. Habib and S. Boutin. 2008. Impacts of Chronic Anthropogenic Noise from Energy-Sector Activity on Abundance of Songbirds in the Boreal Forest. Conservation Biology 22(5) 1186-1193. Available at: ttp://oz. Biology .ualberta. ca/faculty /stan_ boutin /uploads /pdfs/Bayne%20etal%202008%20ConBio.pdf Blanco, J. 1995 - Cyst production in four species of neritic dinoflagellates. J. Plankton Res. 17: 165-182.


Boyer, D.C., Boyer, H.J., Fossen, I., Kreiner, A., 2001.Changes in abundance of the northern Benguela sardine stock during the decade 1990–2000, with comments on the relative importance of fishing and the environment.South African Journal of Marine Science 23, 67–84. Boyer, D.C., Hampton, I., 2001.An overview of the living marine resources of Namibia.South African Journal of Marine Science23, 5–35. Brown, P.C., Hutchings, L. and D.Horstman 1979 - A red-water outbreak and associated fish mortality at Gordon’s Bay near Cape Town.Fish. Bull. S. Afr.11: 46-52. Bruno, M., Gucci, P.M.B., Pierdominici, E., Loppolo, A. and L. Volterra 1990 – Presence of saxitoxin in Carr, M.-E., 2002.Estimation of potential productivity in eastern boundary currents using remote sensing.Deep-Sea Research. Part 2: Topical Studies in Oceanography 9 (1–3), 59–80. Chapman, P., Shannon, L.V., 1985. The Benguela Ecosystem, Part 2. Chemistry and related processes.Oceanography and Marine Biology: An Annual Review 23, 183–251. Cockcroft, A.C., van Zyl, D., Hutchings, L., 2008. Large-scale changes in the spatial distribution of South African rock lobsters: an overview. African Journal of Marine Science30 (1), 149–160. Cockroft, A.C., Schoeman, D.S., Pitcher, G.C., Bailey, G.W. and D.L. Van Zyl 2000 – A mass stranding or “walkout” of West Coast rock lobster Jasus lalandii in Elands Bay, South Africa: causes, results and implications. In The Biodiversity Crises and Crustacea.Von Kaupel Klein, J.C. and F.R. Schram (Eds).Crustacean Iss.11: 673-688. Coetzee, J., van der Lingen, C., Hutchings, L., Fairweather, T., 2008. Has the fishery contributed to a major shift in the distribution of South African Sardine? ICES Journal of Marine Science65, 1676–1688. Colberg, F., Reason, C.J.C., 2007. Diagnosis of large scale South Atlantic modes that impact on the transboundary Benguela Current large marine ecosystem: investigating the potential for improved predictability and sustainable management Final report. BCLME project EV/LS/02/06, 194 pp. Copenhagen, W.J. 1953 – The periodic mortality of fish in the Walvis region: a phenomenon within the Benguela Current. Investl. Rep. Div. Fish. S. Afr. 14: 35pp. Crawford, R.J.M., Sabaros, P.S., Fairweather, T., Underhill, L.G., Wolfaardt, A.C., 2008.Implications for seabirds off South Africa of a long-term change in the distribution of sardine.African Journal of Marine Science30 (1), 177–184. Crawford, R.J.M., Shannon, L.V., Pollock, D.E., 1987. The Benguela Ecosystem, Part 4.The major fish and invertebrate resources. Oceanography and Marine Biology: An Annual Review 25, 353–505. Currie H, Grobler CAF and Kemper J 2009. Namibian Islands’ Marine Protected Area. Concept note, background document and management proposal for the declaration of Marine Protected Areas on and around the Namibian offshore islands and adjacent coastal area. Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources, Namibia. Demarcq, H., Barlow, R.G., Hutchings, L., 2007. Application of a chlorophyll index derived from satellite data to investigate the variability of phytoplankton in the Benguela ecosystem. African Journal of Marine Science29 (2), 271–282. Dooling, R. 2002. Avian Hearing and the Avoidance of Wind Turbines.National Renewable Energy Laboratory, NREL/TP-500-30844. 83 p. Available at: http:// www. nrel. Gov /wind/pdfs/30844.pdf Dooling R. J., and A. N. Popper. 2007. The effects of highway noise on birds. Report to the California. Department of Transportation, contract 43AO139.California Department of Transportation, Division of Environmental Analysis, Sacramento, California, USA. Available at: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/bio/files/caltrans_birds_10-7-2007b.pdf


Eppley, R.W. and W.G. Harrison 1975 – Physiological ecology of Gonyaulax polyedra a red water dinoflagellate of southern California.In Proceedings of the First International conference of Toxic Dinoflagellate Blooms. LoCicero, V.R. (Ed.). Wakefield MA: Massachusetts Science and Technology Foundation: 11-22. Field, J.G., Shillington, F.A., 2004. Variability of the Benguela Current System. In: Robinson, A.R., Brink, K.H. (Eds.), The Sea, The Global Ocean, Interdisciplinary Regional Studies and Syntheses, vol. 14. Harvard University Press, pp. 833–860. Florenchie, P., Reason, C.J.C., Lutjeharms, J.R.E., Rouault, M., Roy, C., Masson, S., 2003.The source of Benguela Ninos in the South Atlantic Ocean.Geophysical Research Letters30 (10), 1505. doi:10.1029/2003GL017172. Francis, C.D., C.P. Ortega and A. Cruz. 2009. Noise Pollution Changes Avian Communities and Species Interactions. Current Biology, in press, doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2009.06.052. Available at: http://www.sciencedirect.com/ Franks, P.J.S. and D.M. Anderson 1992 - Alongshore transport of a toxic phytoplankton bloom in abuoyancy current: Alexandriumtamarense in the Gulf of Maine. Mar. Biol. 112:153-164. Foppen, R., and R. Reijnen, 1995, “The Effects of Car Traffic on Breeding Bird Populations in Woodland. II. Breeding Dispersal of Male Willow Warblers (Phylloscopus trochilus) in Relation to the Proximity of a Highway,” Journal of Applied Ecology 32:95-101. Fukuyo, Y. 1985 – Morphology of Protogonyaulax tamarensis (Lebour) Taylor and Protogonyaulax catenella (Whedon and Kofoid) Taylor from Japanese coastal waters.Bull. Mar. Res. 37: 529-537. Grindley, J.R. and E. Nel 1968 - Mussel poisoning and shellfish mortality on the west coast of Africa. S.Afr. J. Sci.64: 420-422. Grindley, J.R. and E. Nel 1970 – Red water and mussel poisoning at Elands Bay, December 1966.Fish. Bull. S. Afr. 6: 36-55. Grindley, J.R. and F.J.R.Taylor 1962 - Red water and mass-mortality of fish near Cape Town.Nature, Lond. 195: p. 1324. Grindley, J.R. and F.J.R. Taylor 1964 – Red water and marine fauna mortality near Cape Town.Trans. Grindley, J.R. and N. Sapeika 1969 – The cause of mussel poisoning in South Africa.S. Afr. Med. J. Harmful and Toxic Algal Blooms. Yasumoto, T., Oshima, Y. and Y. Fukuyo (Eds). Paris: UNESCO: 89-92. Habib, L, E.M. Bayne and S. Boutin. 2007. Chronic industrial noise affects pairing success and age structure of ovenbirds Seiurus aurocapilla. Journal of Applied Ecology 44: 176-184. Available at: http://oz.biology. ualberta.ca/faculty/stan _boutin/ilm/ uploads/ pdfs/ Habib% 20etal%202007%20JAE.pdf Hart, T.J. 1934 - Red water bloom in South African seas. Nature, Lond.134: 459-460. Hill, A.E., Hickey, B.M., Shillington, F.A., Strub, P.T., Brink, K.H., Barton, E.D., Thomas, A.C., 1998. Eastern ocean boundaries. In: Robinson, A.R., Brink, K.H. (Eds.), The Sea, The Global Coastal Ocean, Regional Studies and Syntheses, vol. 11. John Wiley and Sons, New York, pp. 29–68. Horstman, D.A. 1981 – Reported red-water outbreaks and their effects on fauna of the west and south coasts of South Africa, 1959-1980.Fish. Bull. S. Afr. 15: 71-88.


Horstman, D.A., McGibbon, S., Pitcher, G.C., Calder, D., Hutchings, L. and P. Williams 1991 – Red tides in False Bay, 1959-1989, with particular reference to recent blooms of Gymnodinium sp. Trans R. Soc. S. Afr. 47: 611-628. Houghton, R.W., 1976. Circulation and hydrographic structure over the Ghana continental shelf during the 1974 upwelling.Journal of Physical Oceanography6, 909–924. Huggett, J., Freon, P., Mullon, C., Penven, P., 2003. Modelling the transport success of anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus) eggs and larvae in the southern Benguela: the effect of spatio-temporal spawning patterns.Marine Ecology Progress Series250, 247–262. Joyce, L.B. 2005. Investigation into the Diversity and Distribution of Cysts of Harmful Algal Blooms within Luanda Bay (Angola), and Walvis Bay and Lüderitz Bay (Namibia). Ref: RAF/00/G32 BCLME BCLME Project EV/HAB/05/01. Joyce, L.B., Pitcher, G.C., du Randt, A. and P.M.S. Monteiro 2005 - Dinoflagellate cysts from surface sediments of Saldanha Bay, South Africa: an indication of the potential risk of harmful algal blooms. Harmful Algae4: 309-318. Kofoid, C.A. 1911 - Dinoflagellata of the San Diego region, IV. The genus Gonyaulax, with notes on its skeletal morphology and a discussion of its generic and specific characters.Univ. Cal. Publ. Zool. 8: 187-269. LaGory, K.E., Chang, Y-S., Chun, K.C., Reeves, T., Liebich, R and K. Smith. 2001. A study of the effects of gas well compressor noise on breeding bird populations of the Rattlesnake Canyon Habitata Management Area, San Juan County, New Mexico. U.S. Department of Energy. 100pp. Lewis, J., Tett, P. and J.D. Dodge 1985 – The cyst-theca cycle of Gonyaulax polyedra (Lingulodinium machaerophorum) in Creran, a Scottish west coast loch.In Toxic Dinoflagellates.Anderson, D.M., White, A.W. and D.G. Baden (Eds). Elsevier Science Publishing Company: 85-90. Marasovic, I. 1989 - Encystment and excystment of Gonyaulax polyedra during a red tide. Est. Coast. Shelf Sci. 28: 35-41. Marasovic, I. 1991 – Preliminary observations on the relationship between temporary and resting cysts of Lingulodinium polyedrum (Stein) comb. Nov.In Abstracts Participants, Fifth International Conference on Toxic Marine Phytoplankton. Newport, Rhode Island: 77. Marler, P., M. Konishi, R. Lutjen, and M.S. Waser, 1973, “Effects of Continuous Noise on AvianHearing and Vocal Development,” Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences, USA 70:1393- 1396. Matsuoka, k. and Y. Fukuyo 2000 - Technical guide for modern dinoflagellate cyst study. WESTPAC- HAB/WESTPAC/IOC 2000. Matthews, S.G. and G.C. Pitcher 1996 – Worst recorded marine mortality on the South African coast. In Mayfield, s. 1998. Assessment of predation by the west coast rock lobster (Jasus lalandii): relationships among growth rate, diet and benthic community composition, with implications for the survival of juvenile abalone (Haliotis midae). Zoology Department and Marine Biology Research Institute, UCT. Molloy, F.J. 1990. Utilized and potentially utilizable seaweeds on the Namibian coast: biogeography and accessibility. Hydrobiologia204/205: 293 – 299. Molloy, F.J. and T. Reinikainen. 2003. Namibia’s Marine Environment. Directorate of Environmental Affairs, Ministry of Environment and Tourism, Namibia, 162 pp.


Morant, P.D. 1999. Benguela Current Large Marine Ecosystem: synthesis of information on coastal environment between the Congo River mouth and Cape Agulhas. CSIR, division water, environment and forestry technology. NAMPORT. 2009. EIA study for strategic expansion of the Walvis Bay container terminal. Final Scoping Report. Report No. CSIR/CAS/EMS/ER/2009/0017/A. Nehring, S. 1993 - Mechanisms for recurrent nuisance algal blooms in coastal zones: resting cyst formation as life-strategy of dinoflagellates. In Interdisciplinary Discussion of Coastal Research and Coastal Management Issues and Problems. H. Sterr, H., Hofstade, J. and H-P. Plag, (Eds). Proc. Int. Coastal Congress, Kiel, 1992. Lang, Frankfurt: 454-467. News.Wyatt, T. (Ed.). Paris: Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO 17: 1-3. Paredes, F.J. 1962 - On occurrence of red water on the coast of Angola. Mem.Jta. Invest. Ultramar.33: 87-114. Paz, B., Riobo, P., Fernandez, M.L., Fraga, S. and J.M. Franco 2004 - Production and release of yessotoxins by the dinoflagellates Protoceratium reticulatum and Lingulodinium polyedrum in culture.Toxicon44: 251-258. Pieterse, F. and D.C. Van Der Post 1967 - The pilchard of south west Africa. Oceanographical conditions associated with red tides and fish mortalities in the Walvis Bay region. Investl Rep. Mar. Res. Lab. S.W. Afr.14: 125pp. Pitcher, G.C. 1998 - Harmful Algal Blooms of the Benguela Current.Report. Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources, Windhoek, Namibia: pp 20. Pitcher, G.C. and A.C. Cockrfoft 1998 – Low oxygen, rock lobster strandings and PSP. In Harmful Algae Pitcher, G.C. and D. Calder 2000 – Harmful algal blooms of the southern Benguela Current: a review Pitcher, G.C. and S.G. Matthews 1996 – Noxious Gymnodinium species in South African waters.In Harmful Algae News.Wyatt, T. (Ed.). Paris: Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO 15: 1-3. Pitcher, G.C., Bernard, S. and R.N. Peinaar 1999 – Brown tides on the west coast. In Harmful Algae News. Wyatt, T. (Ed.). Paris: Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO 18: 8-10. Pitcher, G.C., Horstman, D.A. and D. Calder 1993 - Formation and decay of red tide blooms in the southern Benguela upwelling system during the summer of 1990/91.In Toxic Phytoplankton Blooms in the Sea.Smayda, T.J. and Y. Shimizu (Eds). Elsevier Science Publishers: 317-322. Popkiss, M.E.E., Horstman, D.A. and D. Harpur 1979 – Paralytic Shellfish Poisoning.S. Afr. Med. J. 55: 1017-1023. Prakash, A. 1967 - Growth and toxicity of a marine dinoflagellate, Gonyaulax tamarensis.J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 24:1589-1606. Quinn, J.L., M.J. Whittingham, S.J. Butler, and W. Cresswell. 2006. Noise, predation risk compensation and vigilance in the chaffinch Fringilla coelebs. Journal of Avian Biology 37: 601-608. Available at: http://www.ncl.ac.uk/biology/assets/MWhitt_pdf/06quinnJAB.PDF Reijnen, R., and R. Foppen, 1995a, “The Effects of Car Traffic on Breeding Bird Populations in Woodland.I. Evidence of Reduced Habitat Quality for Willow Warblers (Phylloscopus trochilus) Breeding Close to a Highway,” Journal of Applied Ecology 32:481-491. Sapeika, N. 1948 – Mussel poisoning.S. Afr. Med. J. 22: 337-338.

http://www.ncl.ac.uk/biology/assets/MWhitt_pdf/06quinnJAB.PDF


Sapeika, N. 1958 – Mussel poisoning: a recent outbreak. S. Afr. Med. J. 32: 527. Satake, M., Mackenzie, L. and T. Yasumoto 1997 - Identification of Protoceratium reticulatum as the biogenetic origin of yessotoxin.Natural Toxins5: 164-167. Shannon, L.V. and M.J. O’Toole 1999 – Integrated overview of the oceanography and environmental variability of the Benguela Current region. Thematic Report No. 2: Synthesis and Assessment of Information on the Benguela Current Large Marine Ecosystem (BCLME). 1-36. Tyler, M.A., Coats, D.W. and D.M. Anderson 1982 - Encystment in a dynamic environment: Deposition of dinoflagellate cysts by a frontal convergence. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 7: 163-178. Wall, D. and B. Dale 1968 - Modern dinoflagellate cysts and evolution of the peridiniales.Micropaleontol.14: 265-304. White A.W. and C.M. Lewis 1982 - Resting cysts of the toxic red tide dinoflagellate Gonyaulax excavata in Bay of Fundy sediments.Can. J. Fish.Aquat. Sci. 39: 1185-1194. Yasumoto, T. and M. Satake 1998 – New toxins and their toxilogical evaluations.In Harmful Algae.Reguera, B., Blanco, J., Fernandez, M.L. and T. Wyatt (Eds). Paris: Xunta de Galicia and Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO: 461-464.

9. ANNEXES

Annex 1–Final Scoping Report / BID – August 2019

Annex 2 – Public and Stakeholders Consultation Materials

Annex 3 - RISK MATRIX (ANGLO)

Namdeb Centre, 10 Dr. Franseia.met.gov.na/screening/444_app_00444_final_eia... · Namdeb Centre, 10...

Documents

Transcript of Namdeb Centre, 10 Dr. Franseia.met.gov.na/screening/444_app_00444_final_eia... · Namdeb Centre, 10...