REVISED DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) …rhdhv.co.za/media/Final EIR 06.10.pdf · Revised...

Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Proposed Regional General and Hazardous Waste

Management Facility in the Eastern Cape

Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 i

REVISED DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

REPORT (EIR) AND DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL

MANAGEMENT PLAN (EMP) FOR THE

PROPOSED REGIONAL GENERAL AND

HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITY

IN THE EASTERN CAPE

DWEA REFERENCE NO: 12/12/20/445

June 2010



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 ii

Please note that due the former Department’s of

Water Affairs and Forestry, and Environmental

Affairs and Tourism having been reconstituted as

the Depart of Water and Environmental Affairs

(DWEA) during 2009, all previous policies,

guidelines, regulations and permitting requirements

and procedures authored by these entities, will be

referenced in the text of this report as the latter.



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 iii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. INTRODUCTION

The C oega D evelopment C orporation ( CDC) a nd t he N elson M andela B ay

Municipality (NMBM) have identified the need for the establishment and operation

of a new Regional General and Hazardous Waste Management Facility (GHWMF)

in the Eastern Cape to serve the Municipality and surrounding areas. General

waste generated in the NMBM is presently disposed of at Arlington (G:L:B-) and

other general waste disposal sites, while hazardous waste is disposed of at the

privately o wned A loes I I h igh h azard (H :H) w aste facility o r the municipally

owned Koedoeskloof low hazard (H:h) waste facility. EnviroServ’s Aloes II H:H

landfill site has limited available airspace and it is expected to be at capacity by

mid-2011 (an e nvironmental impact a ssessment is currently underway f or a n

extension to this site that will increase i ts lifespan to beyond 2016, with a lease

extension f rom t he N MBM r ecently g ranted). The K oedoeskloof ( H:h) w aste

facility is also limited in the types and volumes of hazardous waste that may be

disposed of there. It is further anticipated that the development of the Coega

Industrial Development Zone (IDZ) and associated industries will significantly add

to the demand for hazardous waste disposal facilities within the proximity of the

NMBM area. Therefore, the proposed GHWMF is required in order to serve the

region, N MBM a nd t he C oega IDZ. T he GHWMF s ite u nder in vestigation is

proposed to be a H:H s ite. T he site will be a co-disposal si te ( i.e. i t will accept

both hazardous and general waste) and although it is a regional waste site it will

primarily serve the greater NMBM.

The disposal of all waste in South Africa is managed in terms of the Environment

Conservation Act (Act 73 of 1989) and the recently promulgated National

Environmental M anagement Waste Act (Act 59 of 2008). Section 20 o f the

Environment Conservation Act (ECA) stipulates that all waste disposal sites

require a permit issued by the Minister of Water Affairs and Forestry. Chapter 5 of

the National Environmental Management Waste Act also stipulates the

requirements for licensing waste sites. The proposed activity is subject to the

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations (R1184 - R1186) of 5

September 1 997 published i n terms of the ECA (Act No 73 of 1 989) as the

application was initiated when these regulations were still in effect, as well as the

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations (GN. R 385-387 of 2006)

published in terms of Section 24(5) read with Section 44 of the National

Environmental Management Act (NEMA), 1998 (Act No 107 of 1998 as amended).

Also applicable as of 3 July 2009 is GN. R 718 which lists the waste management

activities which are likely to have a detrimental effect on the environment, as well

as the required environmental reporting and waste permitting processes to be

adhered to in attaining approval for new waste management facilities.



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 iv

Accordingly, a full EIA has b een carried out f or this project in terms of ECA

Regulations 1184 - 1186 as the application process for environmental

authorisation was initiated prior to the promulgation of the NEMA EIA Regulations

in June 2006 and GN. R 718 in July 2009. The process followed to date is,

however, in accordance with the requirements of GN. R 718.

The Department of Water and Environmental Affairs (DWEA) was mandated to

devise a permitting system that would improve waste disposal in South Africa. In

1994 DWEA published the f irst edition of the 'Minimum Requirements for Waste

Disposal by Landfill' (referred to as t he Minimum Requirements). The se cond

edition of the Minimum Requirements was published in 1998, and the third edition

published i n draft form i n 2005. T he m ain o bjectives o f t he M inimum

Requirements are: to improve the standard of waste disposal in South Africa, to

facilitate the enforcement of the landfill permitting system provided for in the

Environment Conservation Act, and to take steps to prevent the degradation of

water quality and the environment. Hazardous waste disposal sites are classified

as either high hazard (H:H) or low hazard (H:h) in terms of DWEA Minimum

Requirements for Waste Disposal to Landfill. In addition to the EIA, the Permit

Application Report (PAR) Procedure outlined in the Minimum Requirements

(Version 2, 1998) will be adhered to, in order to obtain a conceptual landfill

permit for the proposed GHWMF.

The National Environmental Management Act No. 107 of 1998 (NEMA) builds on

the Environment Conservation Act and provides a link between new developments

and environmental protection. One of the main principles proposed in NEMA is

that o f Integrated Waste M anagement (I WM) which p romotes t he a voidance,

minimisation, recycling and treatment of waste in preference to its disposal to

landfill. T he N ational W aste M anagement Strategy ( NWMS), a j oint p roject

between DWEA and the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism

(DWEA), and funded by the Danish Co-operation for Environment and

Development (DANCED), was published in July 1999. The NWMS implements the

government’s IWM policy on waste, and the action plans arising from it have

considerable implications for the approach that should be used to address the

waste m anagement n eeds of t he C oega IDZ a nd t he g reater P ort E lizabeth

Region. The strategy includes short, medium, and l ong-term action plans that,

once implemented, will lead to greatly improved waste management practices in

South Africa.

In order to fulfil the DWEA Minimum Requirements for Waste Disposal by Landfill

(Version 2, 1998), the main purpose of this Revised Draft Environmental Impact

Assessment Report (EIR) is to further assess project specific impacts, mitigation

measures, alternatives a nd p otential f atal f laws a ssociated with the p referred

footprint (Footprint F – on the Farm Grassridge 190 Remainder that is currently

owned by Pretoria Portland Cement - PPC) for the siting of the proposed facility.



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 v

These were previously identified and subjected to initial assessment during the

site s election s tages of th e pr ocess and t he r esults p resented in th e F inal

Footprint Ranking Report dated November 2006 and a lso in the Final Feasibility

Report dated December 2007 prepared by Bohlweki-SSI Environmental. It must

be noted that the EIA and PAR processes are separate application processes but

are conducted in parallel w ith each other. Accordingly, there i s some overlap in

these processes with b oth the W ater a nd Env ironmental A ffairs line f unction

Departments of DWEA being obliged to review the Final EIR within the context of

their respective decision making processes, and with the EIR being an obligatory

minimum requirement of the PAR application process.

The p roposed facility provides a n opportunity f or th e region t o d evelop a n

approach to the management of its waste that takes into account the NWMS. The

final design of the proposed waste processing facility depends on the nature of

the waste that needs to be managed. Determination of the actual waste disposal

requirements of the region over the long-term (<12 years) is extremely difficult,

due in part to changes in industry types and the possibility of new technologies

for disposal recovery or treatment of waste. However, in order to determine the

required capacity for the proposed waste processing facility, as well as to

determine the types o f t reatment facilities that may be needed, an initial waste

market survey was conducted in 2000 by Chemical Marketing and Consulting

Services. T he results are summarised in an Inception Report that was compiled

for the CDC by Bohlweki Environmental in 2000. Subsequently, a waste

inventory covering the expected waste volumes and types likely to be generated

by the Coega IDZ was prepared by Arcus Gibb in 2007. The proposed landfill will

be developed in phases but will function as a total waste management facility that

could, in future, include a combination of the following:

• a l eachate m anagement s ystem i ncluding t reatment b efore d ischarge t o

sewer or, if appropriate, to water course;

• a short-term co-disposal landfill cell;

• a small waste stabilisation, immobilisation and micro-encapsulation plant;

• a small chemical treatment plant for the neutralisation of acids and alkalis,

precipitation o f h eavy m etals, oxidation o f c yanide and r eduction o f

chromate;

• a t hermal t reatment f acility f or h igh h azard org anic waste, a nd p ossibly

difficult wastes such as abattoir waste;

• a mono-disposal area for stabilised inorganic wastes;

• a medical waste treatment facility to support facilities already available in

Port Elizabeth, if quantities warrant it; and

• a recovery plant for heavy metals and other valuable materials, i f quantities

warrant it.



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 vi

It is important to note that the current design does not include certain of the

abovementioned future options such as a thermal treatment facility, a medical

waste treatment facility or a recovery plant for heavy metals. Should the

development of certain of the above be proposed then this would be subject to a

separate EIA application process. The Sundays River Valley Community Forum

(SRVCF), a significant and constructive stakeholder in the process to date, has

indicated that they are vehemently opposed to any incineration of waste on site.

They have engaged in the s ite selection and environmental reporting process to

date on the understanding that waste incineration will never occur at the

proposed facility. This option has not been part of the scope of works for this EIA

process a nd w as n ot t he su bject t o sp ecialist a ssessment. Accordingly, it is

recommended that no waste incineration of any classification be allowed at the

facility du ring its lifespan, a nd th at th is i s i ncluded a s a c ondition o f

environmental authorisation.

Bohlweki-SSI Environmental was appointed by the CDC and NMBM to undertake

the required environmental studies according to the Environmental Impact

Assessment (EIA) Regulations (R1184 - R1186) of 5 S eptember 1997, published

in terms of the Environment Conservation Act (No 73 of 1989), and the DWEA

permitting procedures. This process was initiated in 2000 and is due for

completion in early 2010. The process followed to date and that is currently

being undertaken is outlined below.

2. PROCESS TO DATE

A d etailed d escription of th e p rocess f ollowed to d ate m ay b e f ound in th e

following documents:

• Environmental Scoping Report and Appendices (July 2003)

• Project Background Information Document (2004)

• Final Footprint Ranking Report (November 2006)

• Final Feasibility Report (December 2007)

All of these documents are available in electronic format upon request at the

following location: www.bohlweki.co.za

• Scoping Phase

The first phase of work (2000 - 2003) culminated in the production of the

scoping report and its associated appendices in July 2003. The process leading

up to the release of the scoping report provided extensive opportunities for

I&APs to b ecome involved and comment on the results and process (e.g.

workshops, document review, focus group meetings and background

information documents). On release of the scoping report there were also



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 vii

further meetings and presentations as well as opportunities to review reports

at a number of local venues e.g. libraries.

The key objectives of the scoping phase were:

∗ Establishing the key issues associated with the development of a General

and Hazardous waste management facility;

∗ Undertaking a site selection process in order to establish the preferred

areas f or f urther research. This i nvolved a s ystematic p rocess of

evaluating p otential s ites a nd establishing which a reas w ere m ost

suitable; and

∗ Involving I&APs in the entire process.

Outlined below is a chronological overview of the process up to completion of

the Scoping Report:

∗ Early 2000 - ‘Windows’ identified (i.e. areas that are most suitable for the

development of the site)

∗ Early 2000 – Farms/sites of suitable size identified within the ‘windows’

∗ Mid 2000 - Top candidate sites selected after environmental scan

∗ Late 2000 – Initial land acquisition negotiations

∗ Mid 2002 - Top 6 potential sites identified for further investigation

∗ Mid 2002 - Environmental Scoping Study commences

∗ Mid 2003 - Scoping study completed and approved - 2 s ites selected for

further work, namely:

Coega Kammas Kloof Portion 1-6 (Excluding remainder)

Blauw Baatjies Vley portions 2 - 3 (Including Grassridge 190 Portion 3)

• Final Footprint Ranking Report (2006)

The screening of six potential footprints within the s ites identified as

warranting further investigation through the scoping report was undertaken

within the Footprint Ranking report. The objective of this process was to

select preferred facility footprints for further investigation. The fine screening

process involved:

∗ Sensitivity mapping

∗ Field investigations

∗ Ranking exercises

∗ Criteria weighting exercises

∗ Workshops

The ranking report was made available for review by I&APs and the

authorities d uring M arch 2 006. T he F ootprint Ra nking Re port n ominated



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 viii

footprints C and F as the preferred facility footprints for further investigation

and concept design, however, footprint E was also highlighted as being a

potential site depending on the outcome of further studies.

• Final Feasibility Report (2007)

The feasibility phase (fine screening) of the process outlined the conceptual

designs, l ayout o f the f acilities, si ze o f the waste p rocessing facility and the

current projections on expected waste volume and types. The Final Feasibility

Report included a preliminary EIA that provided the results of further

investigations of the three preferred facility footprints, including conceptual

designs, preliminary geohydrological evaluations. An important function of the

Feasibility Report was to highlight any fatal flaws, i f any, associated with the

three alternative sites that focussed on the following:

* In addition to the sites identified as part of the scoping process additional

sites on the PPC properties (Grassridge 190/RE and Grassridge 227/RE)

were motivated for inclusion in the fine screening process by the Sundays

River Valley Community Forum (SRVCF);

* Assess the three preferred footprints (i.e. footprints C, E and F) identified

during the footprint ranking exercise for fatal flaws:

Footprint C

: Grassridge 190 Portion 3.

Footprint E

: Grassridge 227 Remainder.

Footprint F

* Conduct a preliminary Environmental Impact Assessment on the

preferred three footprints;


* Prepare concept designs for the potential footprints;

* Evaluate the identified facility footprints within the sites on which concept

facility designs can be produced. In short, this process aimed to identify

a single footprint for more detailed studies which were then conducted

during the detailed EIA phase; and

* Update I&APs as t o t he process undertaken thus far and outline the

process to be followed until completion of the study.

The F easibility Re port was m ade a vailable to I &APs i n O ctober/November

2007. I &APs w ere a fforded t he op portunity t o re view t he re port on t he

feasibility of the facility. The purpose of this feasibility report was to allow the

authorities to establish whether the proposed facility and alternative positions

thereof are viable for detailed engineering and environmental studies.

While the f easibility report was designed to establish whether there are any

fatal f laws, the authorities do not give f inal approval for the facility until the

detailed s tudies, w hich form part o f th e detailed d esign a nd f ull E IA, a re

completed and confirm the final desirability of the site and facility design.



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 ix

3. CURRENT ACTIVITIES (2008-2010)

Based on Edition 2 of the DWEA Minimum Requirements for Waste Disposal by

Landfill (DWEA, 1998) the activities currently taking place can be divided into two

sections. Firstly, a detailed EIR (the Revised Draft EIR being this report) has been

completed on the candidate site, Footprint F, which was identified as being the

preferred a lternative in the Final Feasibility Report. This E IR has t aken into

consideration the proposed design and operation of the facility.

Secondly, the detailed EIR will form part of the required PAR (See DWEA

minimum requirements – Edition 2 , 1998) that w ill be reviewed by DWEA. This

PAR report will contain the following components:

• Detailed site investigation

• Detailed Environmental Impact Assessment

• Landfill design

• Operating Plan

• End land-use plan

• Air and Water Monitoring Plan

The relevant delegated authorities will only authorise the proposed facility and

issue a permit for it once they are confident that the above criteria have been

met.

4. GENERAL APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY

The EIA process is an obligatory component of the DWEA minimum requirements.

Therefore the EIA must be undertaken in a manner that is also in accordance with

the p rinciples discussed i n S ection 7 o f th e M inimum Re quirements ( DWEA,

1998). As per agreement with the relevant authorities, the structure and content

of the EIR (this report) was based on the requirements of Edition 2 of the Waste

Management Series (DWEA, 1998). As part of the overall project planning

process, this EIR aims to achieve the following:

• to provide an overall assessment of the social and biophysical aspects of the

area a ffected b y th e proposed establishment o f a r egional g eneral a nd

hazardous waste processing facility on Footprint F;

• to revisit the environmental s iting criteria investigated during the Feasibility

Report (preliminary environmental impact assessment phase);

• to confirm that identified critical factors can be addressed;

• to confirm that there are no fatal flaws; and

• to undertake a public participation process to ensure that I&AP issues and

concerns are recorded.



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 x

Although specialists were given free reign on how they conducted their research

and obtained information, they were requested to provide the reports in a specific

layout and structure, so that a uniform specialist report volume could be

produced. A s th e r esults o f th e Feasibility Report (preliminary e nvironmental

impact assessment) were to be used as a basis for the selection of the preferred

footprint (Footprint F) to be i nvestigated in more detail in the full EIA phase, i t

was necessary that the same impact rating system be used for all issues.

To ensure a direct comparison between various specialist studies, six standard

rating scales are defined and used to assess and quantify the identified impacts.

The rating system used for assessing impacts (or when specific impacts cannot be

identified, t he b roader t erm issue should a pply) is b ased on t hree c riteria,

namely:

• The relationship of the impact/issue to temporal scales;

• The relationship of the impact/issue to spatial scales; and

• The severity of the impact/issue.

These t hree c riteria a re c ombined t o d escribe t he o verall importance rating,

namely the significance. In addition, the following parameters are used to

describe the impact/issues:

• The risk or likelihood of the impact/issue occurring; and

• The degree of confidence placed in the assessment of the impact/issue.

A detailed description of the abovementioned assessment criteria is

included in Chapter 2 of this EIR.

5. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

The Public Participation Process for the identification of a new Regional General

and Hazardous Waste Management Facility was initiated in 2000 (nine years ago)

with Bohlweki - SSI Environmental as the lead consultant. The Public Participation

Process can be divided into the following three phases with Sandy and Mazizi

Consulting taking lead responsibility for the last two phases:

• Phase One: Identification of Potential Windows and Sites (2000/2)

• Phase Two: E nvironmental Scoping of Potential Sites including Site Ranking

(2003/6):

* Environmental Scoping Public Consultation Process

* Footprint Ranking Report Consultation Process – Part 1


• Phase Three: Environmental Impact Assessment Phase (present stage in the

process):



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 xi

* Preliminary EIA (Feasibility Report) Consultation Process

* Draft EIA and PAR Consultation Process (February 2009)

* Revised Draft EIA and PAR Consultation Process (April 2010)

* Notification of Record of Decision

The P ublic P articipation P rocess i s b ased o n th e g uidelines p rovided i n th e

Minimum Requirements for Waste Disposal by Landfill (DWEA, Version 2, 1998),

and was developed in consultation with Bohlweki - SSI Environmental, Coega

Development Corporation, Sandy & Mazizi Consulting, DWEA, Eastern Cape

Province Department of E conomic Development a nd Environmental Affairs

(DEDEA) and NMBM.

The current stage in the process will entail consultation with I&APs around the

Revised Draft EIR as well as the Draft Permit Application Report. It i s proposed

that the consultation process for these two reports runs in parallel as for the prior

release of these documents during 2009 and that all registered I&APs be informed

in w riting o f th e a vailability o f th e d raft reports. It m ust b e n oted th at a n

extensive round of public and stakeholder meetings occurred during February and

March 2009. The salient issues and concerns relating to the proposed facility

emerging as unresolved from that round of consultation mostly pertain to the

current landowner (PPC) and the SRVCF. The following participation opportunities

are proposed during the current review process:

• Written Notification to all I&APs on the project database (Letter 12 to I&APs)

including an invitation to attend Focus Group Meetings

• Advertising in two local and two regional newspapers

• Report d istribution, includes Draft EIR and PAR to all p reviously used public

review venues

• Full report to targeted key I&APs (PPC and SRVCF)

• All reports placed on the project website (www.bohlweki.co.za)

• Focus Group Meetings (Sunlands and Port Elizabeth)

The participation process is designed in such a manner that it has the flexibility to

respond to and include I&AP groups as they emerge over time. A combination of

both passive and active participation techniques, verbal and written

communication is used in order to meet the varying and sometimes conflicting

needs of I&APs. Capacity building will continue to form an integral component of

the process and is viewed not as a once off event but as a series of events over

time, which develops understanding on the project and capacity to participate in

the process. This process will be supported by a proactive process of ongoing

consultation with key groups and communication with I&APs.

In addition to th is, consultation meetings and presentations w ill a lso be held a t

the request of I&APs. The I&AP database will be updated throughout the process



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 xii

to r eflect I&AP p articipation a nd input. A t t he c onclusion o f th e process th e

comments raised by I&APs will be included in the issues and responses t rail for

inclusion in the Final EIR as well as Permit Application Report.

More details regarding the public participation undertaken to date and

planned in the future is available in chapter 3 of this EIR.

6. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The conclusions of this EIR are the result of comprehensive studies and specialist

assessments. These studies were based on issues identified through the Scoping,

Footprint Ranking and Final Feasibility Reports and the parallel process of public

participation. T he public consultation p rocess has been rigorous and extensive,

and every effort has been made to include representatives of all stakeholders

within the process.

6.1. Flora

Based on specialist analysis of the floral composition of the preferred footprint

throughout the course of the EIA process the following has been concluded:

• Presence of Rare and Endangered species: Although the diversity in habitat

is low and the Mesic Succulent Thicket is in a poor condition there is still

potential for Rare and Endangered species to occur within this vegetation

type. Several healthy specimens of the sensitive species Syncarpha striata

were recorded within Bontveld in a good condition which is located along the

northern boundary of the site. This portion of the site should therefore be

regarded as sensitive. However, due to the low species diversity of the Mesic

Succulent Thicket (MST) vegetation on-site compared to pristine MST the

impact of the proposed GHWMF on existing MST vegetation is deemed to be

of low negative significance. Due to the limited availability of good condition

Bontveld in the area surrounding the proposed GHWMF site as compared to

the more prevalent MST, the impacts on the Bontveld habitat w ill be of

increased negative significance at a Regional level.

• Ecological function: The vegetation within the area of the proposed GHWMF

footprint is providing the basic functions within the greater ecological

system. Vegetative cover is medium. Although some limited erosion does

occur within the game/livestock paths as well as on the old lands, the soil on

the rest of the footprint is adequately covered and protected.

• Uniqueness/conservation value: In general the footprint displays no specific

or important features different from the vegetation in the surrounding area.

The only area of real concern is the ecotone boundary between MST and



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 xiii

Bontveld as well as the small section of Bontveld along the northern

boundary of the site that needs to be protected.

Overall the impacts on f loral h abitat a re deemed to be of low significance if

appropriate mitigation measures are put in place for the construction and

operational phases of the project.

6.2. Fauna

Based on specialist analysis of the faunal composition of the p referred footprint


• Loss a nd f ragmentation o f h abitats: P roject a ctions a ssociated with th e

construction of the proposed GHWMF and the development of transport links

will result in the loss and fragmentation of sensitive habitats. The proposed

waste facility on Footprint F will impact a variety of habitats, particularly

Bontveld a nd MST. As th e l oss and f ragmentation o f h abitats w ill b e

localised, and careful siting of the proposed GHWMF has directly avoided

intact Bontveld habitat, the impact after mitigation will be low.

• Loss of faunal diversity: Although the region for the proposed GHWMF has a

rich faunal diversity, some vertebrate groups in the region are now

characterised by reduced faunal diversity due to direct and indirect effects of

previous and current l and use. The loss of faunal diversity will be localised

and the fauna i s a lso relatively impoverished. T he unmitigated impact will

therefore be moderate, but with the possible rehabilitation of MST on closure

this may be reduced to low significance.

• Barriers to animal movement: The proposed GHWMF will result in habitat

fragmentation and the construction of linear developments (road linkages

and power l ines). T hese w ill f orm barriers to animal movement w ithin the

region, both for terrestrial fauna and to the aerial f light routes of migrating

birds. Impacts on animal movements will be greatest in regions with high

habitat fragmentation, or where linear developments such as roads transect

migratory paths. A s the barriers to animal movements will be localised and

many of the transport linkages already exist, the impact of the additional

development will be of low significance.

• Loss of Species of Special Concern (SSC): Project actions associated with the

proposed G HWMF m ay re sult in the loss of Species of S pecial C oncern.

Project actions impacting SSC include the destruction and loss of sensitive

habitats, particularly Bontveld, and increased mortality and disturbance due

to increased road traffic and the possibility of bird species flying into

powerlines during operation of the facility. T he possible loss of SSC will be



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 xiv

localised and usually of low impact for most SSC. Ho wever, because of the

close proximity and possible p resence of a Globally Critically Endangered

species (the Albany adder) the impact will be of potentially moderate to high

significance.

• Increase in problem animals and alien species: Project actions associated

with th e c onstruction o f t he p roposed G HWMF a nd th e d evelopment o f

transport links will result in an increase in problem animals and alien species.

Their numbers in the area surrounding the proposed GHWMF may displace

local fauna from its habitat; cause increased predation on local fauna and

introduce or spread wildlife diseases. As the potential impact can be

effectively controlled it will be of low significance.

• Increased disturbance and mortality due to road traffic: Although the new

roads associated with access to the proposed GHWMF are short, the

operational phase of the facility will involve a significant increase in road

traffic to and from the facility on existing roads. This will result in increased

disturbance and faunal mortality due to increased road traffic over the long-

term. An increase in faunal mortality due to increased road traffic will not be

entirely avoided, but the impact will be of low significance.

• Changes in natural fire regime: Changes in water flow dynamics following

road construction and other developments that reduce vegetation cover, may

reduce the water t able locally, drying vegetation to unnatural levels and

making it m ore s usceptible t o f ire. C onstruction a nd planning o f r oads

should anticipate an increased fire ri sk, a nd increased h uman population

growth in the area will also lead to an increase in accidental fires.

• Pollution: Pollution may result from periodic accidents, or from slow, ongoing

contamination. Operation of the proposed GHWMF, particularly in relation to

the use of liquid fuels, could result in periodic spillages. Heavy vehicle traffic

is also associated with increased local pollution resulting from exhaust

fumes, oil spillage and accumulation of rubber compounds from tyre wear.

These pollutants can cause localised impacts. However, the impact on fauna

will be low if correctly mitigated during the operational phase.

• Loss or reduction of ecosystem functioning: Although there is a long history

of agricultural use and transformation in the region, i t still retains relatively

high faunal and floral diversity and contributes to local ecosystem

functioning. The impact can be proactively avoided and partially mitigated by

avoiding direct loss of Bontveld habitat, wetlands, steep valley sides, and the

limestone ‘rubble edge’ often associated with the ecotone between Bontveld

and adjacent MST in the final siting of the GHWMF.



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 xv

6.3. Geohydrology

Based on the available geological and geohydrological information for the

proposed site and the immediate surrounding farms, the preferred footprint is

considered s uitable f or t he d evelopment of the G HWMF waste p rovided th e

design, c onstruction a nd op erational re quirements a s s pecified i n t he DWEA

guideline document are adhered to. The main reasons for the site being regarded

a suitable area, are the following:

• The g eological c onditions o f th e u nderlying f ormations, b oth i n te rms o f

lithology and depth extent are very favourable.

• The static groundwater level in the vicinity of the site is of the order of 70 m

below surface.

• Borehole yields are generally very low as illustrated by the four recently

drilled boreholes that were all dry on completion of drilling.

• The groundwater quality in the region is generally poor to very poor and as a

result v ery l ittle u se i s b eing m ade of g roundwater for d omestic, s tock

watering or irrigation. The poor water quality is a direct result of the marine

depositional conditions that existed during the formation of the geological

formations hosting the groundwater.

• The und erlying f ormations, t he S undays R iver a nd Ki rkwood f ormations,

comprise o f a v ery thick s uccession ( estimated t o b e > 300 m) of

predominantly siltstone and mudstone, with minor interlayered sandstone

layers. These f ormations have a v ery low hydraulic conductivity and will

prevent the migration of contaminants in the case of liner system failure.

• The deep artesian aquifer associated with the Table Mountain Group

sediments, is well protected from any contamination by the thick succession

of Uitenhage Group sediments. T hat the latter sediments form an effective

barrier to groundwater flow to the deeper aquifer.

• The site is situated close to a local surface water divide and none of the

drainage lines at or upstream of the site represent perennial flow conditions.

• The Waste-Aquifer Separation Principle (WASP) analysis, which takes into

consideration a number of geological, geohydrological, water use and design

criteria, also indicated that the site can be classified as “suitable”.

• No geological or geohydrological conditions within the study can be regarded

as “fatal flaws” according to the definitions described in the DWEA guideline

documents.



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 xvi

6.4. Tourism

Based on specialist analysis of tourism in the area throughout the course of the

EIA process the following has been concluded:

• The Sundays River Valley is an important tourism destination that depends

heavily o n its image as a n e co/wildlife de stination. T he A ddo E lephant

National Park is the key attraction in the a rea and is being marketed on

environmental grounds i.e. the animals are free to roam across a large area,

and the p ark has a range of b iodiversity. The area thus a ppeals to t he

environmentally conscious tourist.

• Internationally tourists are becoming more environmentally conscious and are

basing their decision to visit a destination on environmental grounds. T hese

tourists m ay th us d ecide n ot to v isit th e S undays Ri ver V alley a rea i f a

GHWMF is l ocated i n th e a rea d ue to th e p erception t hat th ese t ypes of

facilities are harmful to the environment.

Based on the above it should be stated that none of the footprints assessed

during the course of the EIA process, including Footprint F , are i deal for such a

facility as they are located in a tourism area that markets itself as an eco/wildlife

destination that is environmentally sensitive. Although potential Visual, Odour and

Traffic impacts a re p redicted t o b e of l ow s ignificance a s i t re lates t o t heir

relationship with the overall predicted Tourism impacts, perceptions of the facility

prior to, a nd d uring, a visit to t he area a re deemed to be of h igh negative

significance. Similarly, the development potential of any tourism related facilities

in the GHWMF area will be limited as a result

6.5. Visual

Footprint F is a valley infill site and ranks as the preferred location for the GHWMF

from a visual impact perspective for the following reasons:

• It has the most contained area of visual impact and lends itself to the highest

level of successful impact mitigation measures. This is due to the enclosed

nature of t he v alley w ithin w hich it re sides. T he f act t hat t he f acility is

theoretically visible from the R335 is not a major cause for concern. The

likelihood of it ever being noticed or recognised as a landfill from a distance of

6 km is slim to negligible, as the site would never appear in its entirety.

• The selection of Footprint F as the preferred alternative, even with its own

associated visual impact concerns, highlights the need to shield the facility

from ob servers t ravelling along th e R3 35. T he b enefit o f th is f ootprint

placement is that no one travelling from Port Elizabeth to Addo, or the Greater



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 xvii

Addo Elephant National Park, would even be aware of the existence of this

facility th rough a ccidental o bservation. T his i s d ue t o th e f act t hat th e

footprint is far removed from the R335 and because of the hidden nature of

the infill site.

• The associated benefits o f placing the w aste p rocessing facility o n m ining

land, where borrow materials could be sourced without breaking new ground

and c learing large tracts of l and, counts in Footprint F ’s favour. Th e mining

and quarrying activities a nd a waste processing facility are complimenting

land-uses, as opposed to the potential conflict between waste processing and

agriculture/cattle and game farming/tourism and eco-tourism.

• Another clear benefit of this footprint's placement is its closer proximity to

Port Elizabeth from where most of the waste to be treated will be transported.

The distance of 4 km does not sound like much, but over a period of 20 years

it would translate to a considerable amount of kilometres. This, and the fact

that access will be afforded by a private road, minimises the visual impacts

associated with the increase in heavy vehicle t raffic to and f rom the facility.

This increase in heavy vehicle traffic might raise awareness of the fact that

such a facility exists in the vicinity.

6.6. Air Quality

The o dour, nu isance, dust a nd h ealth impacts o f th e c andidate s ite f or th e

GHWMF were assessed. The main findings of the study are as follows:

• Particulates (P M10): N o e xceedances of th e c urrent o r p roposed a mbient

South A frican standards f or P M10 w ere p redicted t o oc cur a t a ny of t he

sensitive receptors included in the study for any of the scenarios. The impacts

from landfill activities associated with the Scenario 1 transport option (refer to

Chapter 13) were predicted to be the least significant and will result in the

lowest g round l evel P M10 c oncentrations a t t he m ajority of t he sensitive

receptors. The highest PM10 concentrations predicted as a result of emissions

associated with the four scenarios were predicted to occur at Rooidam.

• Particulates (Dustfall): Slight dustfall levels (<250 mg/m²/day) were

predicted to occur at the all of the sensitive receptors located around the

proposed GHWMF s ite. Overall, the impacts from landfill activities associated

with Scenario 1 were predicted to be the least significant and will result in the

lowest dustfall levels at the majority of the sensitive receptors. Dust

emissions from of activities associated with Scenario 2 transport option were

predicted to r esult i n the h ighest d ustfall levels a t m ost o f th e sensitive

receptors. The highest dustfall levels as a result of emissions associated with

Scenarios 1 and 2 w ere p redicted to occur at Ro oidam while the highest



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 xviii

dustfall levels as a result of emissions associated with Scenarios 3 and 4 were

predicted to occur at Centlivres.

• Non-carcinogenic exposures: None of the pollutants considered in this study

flagged for the proposed GHWMF. The hazard quotient for chronic exposures

for the proposed landfill was predicted to be 0.012. T he hazard quotient for

the site was therefore predicted to be less than 1.0 for all exposure periods.

• Cancer risks: Total maximum incremental cancer risk levels were predicted to

be less than ~ 1 in 3.5 million for the proposed landfill operations and would

therefore b e r egarded a s a cceptable b y t he r egulatory a uthorities. Th e

maximum cancer risk at the sensitive receptors as a result of emissions from

the pr oposed l andfill s ite w as p redicted to o ccur at Ro oidam (~ 1 i n 4 5

million).

• Odour impacts: No odour threshold exceedances were predicted to occur due

to on-site concentrations of odoriferous gasses. Off-site odour impacts were

predicted to far below the acceptable 3 OU/m³ odour unit level at all the

sensitive receptors.

6.7. Heritage

The study has shown that Footprint F was suitable for the proposed facility as

potential impacts on heritage resources are deemed to be of low significance.

6.8. Land Use

The a ssessment o f possible land us e impacts included t he p otential f or

resettlement of individuals, fatal flaws associated with the proximity to airfields,

rezoning issues and potential impacts on the citrus industry. The key f indings of

this aspect of the study were that:

• Footprint F will require the resettlement of one household but the number of

people involved is small and if the recommendations are implemented it could

be undertaken in a satisfactory manner.

• Although it has not yet been confirmed that the site can be rezoned for waste

disposal, no reasons have been given as to why this should not be possible.

• The proximity of registered airfields would not constitute a fatal flaw.

• Any future land use planning or development in the a rea w ill have to be

cognizant o f th e c onstraints th e G HWMF a nd a ssociated b uffer z one m ay

impose on certain land uses. Similarly, should the facility be authorised, these



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 xix

constraints must be incorporated into any future spatial planning frameworks

that are developed or revised at local and regional level.

• Based on a review of the EUREPGAP®

regulations, it is considered unlikely that

the establishment of a regional waste disposal facility would impact negatively

on the certification of citrus farms to the north-east of the site.

6.9. Transport

The transport study has estimated the costs for the transportation of waste to the

proposed regional general and hazardous waste d isposal facility by road and by

rail with the following findings:

• A cost comparison between these two modes of transport concluded that the

road o ptions a re f ar more e conomical t han t he r ail o ptions. T he c ost o f

upgrading the roads to Footprint F were estimated at R 16,0 million and R

24,2 million for gravel and tar respectively. The Province is committed to

upgrading Addo Road regardless of the proposed waste site development and

once upgraded to the recommended design standard it will be able to

accommodate t he heavy v ehicle t raffic t hat w ill b e g enerated b y t he

operational waste facility. It can therefore be concluded that transportation of

waste by road is the better option.

• If an environmental authorisation is not given to extend the l ife of the Aloes

hazardous waste facility beyond 2016, the new site at Grassridge will need to

become operational prior to this. As PPC will still be mining their land north of

the P1954 road until a fter 2012, it is recommended that the P1958 be

regravelled for use by construction phase vehicles t ravelling to the site f rom

the R335 (Addo Road).

• A new 0,5 km access road should be constructed from P1958 to the site to

replace the currently d isused skew junction where P1954 joins P1958. It i s

essential that the Addo Road (R335) be upgraded from the R334 to P1958

junction b efore t he w aste f acility b ecomes o perational. S imilarly, it is

recommended that the P1958, as well as all other haul routes to the facility

that are currently gravel roads, are upgraded to b itumen standard and fulfil

the same design criteria as that proposed for the R335 (Addo Road).

• If an environmental authorisation is granted to extend the life of the Aloes

hazardous waste facility, the decision on whether to upgrade P1954 or

regravel P1958 can be delayed until it is known when PPC will complete their

mining operations north of P1954. I f these operations are completed by the

time th e n ew w aste f acility is r equired, th e u pgrading o f P 1954 and th e

relocation of i ts j unction on R 335 i s p referred, b ecause it will result in a



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 xx

shorter travel distance than via P1958 for the majority of waste vehicles that

will use the R335 coming from Port Elizabeth and the Coega IDZ.

• It can therefore be concluded that transportation of waste by road is the

better option, provided that the Addo Road between the R334 and P1958

junctions is upgraded before the operation of the waste facility commences.

6.10. Social

Based on the findings of the SIA, it can be concluded that the social environment

in g eneral p oses n o f atal flaws t o t he development of t he proposed regional

GHWMF provided that the identified mitigation measures, as recommended for

inclusion in the EMP, are implemented and adhered to, particularly where

construction activities either take place or pass through in close proximity to

residential areas. It is believed that such activities could affect the quality of lives

of these households in terms of noise, dust, safety and security. In summation:

• The pre-construction and construction phase of the proposed project is

characterised by a number of negative impacts. This is mainly due to the

nature of the activities that take place during these phases. The same holds

true for the operational phase of the p roposed project. Most of the negative

impacts within these various phases can be mitigated successfully. There are

also a number of positive impacts, which could be further enhanced if

managed effectively. These impacts mostly relate to a temporary change in

the employment and economic profile of the local area by means of

employment opportunities, which in turn leads to a positive economic impact

on local households.

• The g eographic, d emographic, b iophysical a nd s ocio-cultural p rocesses a ll

have a number of negative impacts. However all of these impacts can be

mitigated successfully if effectively managed. Economic impacts as a result of

the project are for the most part positive in nature, which is mainly due to the

economic investment and development that will take place in the community

as a result of the project. Although the expected construction impacts across

all the change processes are mostly negative, these impacts are for the most

part only temporary in nature and only expected to last over the construction

period, which is approximately 12 months.

• Operational impacts are expected to last over the longer term and therefore

would have a prolonged effect on especially the biophysical environment in

terms of an effective waste management strategy. People are more inclined to

get “used” to the facility in their area if waste management strategies are

applied effectively and with due diligence. Based on the findings of this report,



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 xxi

it c an b e c oncluded that the overall si gnificance o f i mpacts o n t he social

environment will be low.

7. INTERESTED AND AFFECTED PARTY ISSUES, CONCERNS AND

COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT EIR

The major areas of I&AP concern relating to the establishment of the facility are

as follows:

• Waste incineration

• Potential impacts on the citrus industry

• Traffic and transport corridor impacts owing to the current state of the R335

• Illegal dumping and litter along transport routes

• Tourism impacts

• Impacts on PPC’s operations

• Overall management and monitoring of the operational facility

It is anticipated that these concerns have been suitably addressed in this revised

report. These issues and concerns have been incorporated in the Draft EMP as

well as the recommendations for conditions of environmental authorisation

contained in Chapter 17. For a detailed account of these issues and concerns

please refer to Chapter 16, as well as the Issues and Responses Register that is

included as an appendix to this report.

8. OVERALL CONCLUSION

This report has investigated the preferred footprint (F) on Grassridge 190

Remainder for the siting of the GHWMF. Footprint F was selected as the most

preferable site for the proposed facility as the result of an extensive screening

and preliminary assessment process that culminated in a Final Feasibility Report

that d etermined t hat t his s ite w as t he l east e nvironmentally s ensitive of a ll

alternatives taken into consideration.

The results of the studies undertaken within this report provide an assessment of

both the potential benefits and potential negative impacts anticipated as a result

of the proposed GHWMF. T he studies conclude that there are no environmental

fatal flaws that should prevent the proposed project from proceeding and that the

majority of impacts should be regarded as either low or moderate provided that

the recommended mitigation and management measures are incorporated into

the Final C onstruction a nd O perational EMP’s and effectively implemented. It

must b e mentioned that the Draft EM P w ill h ave t o b e f urther r efined a nd

submitted for authority approval once detailed design information is made

available, and the preferred operator and construction contractor appointed.



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 xxii

Based o n th e b alance o f a dvantages a nd d isadvantages associated with th e

proposed facility, there would not appear to be any s ignificant reasons why the

proposed development should not proceed. It is hoped that all significant issues

and concerns raised by I&APs have been addressed through the revision o f the

EIR where relevant, and more specifically, in the recommendations for conditions

of environmental authorisation put forward by the EAP.

I&APs have been afforded the opportunity to review this Revised Draft EIR on the

significance of the potential impacts associated with the proposed facility. The

purpose of t his re port i s t o provide a f ull environmental a ssessment of t he

proposed GHWMF in order to fulfil the requirements of informed decision making

by the relevant authorities in terms of their respective authorisation and

permitting mandates. It should be noted that the more technical details to the

design and operation of the proposed facility are contained in the Draft Permit

Application Report and, as such, both documents should be read i n conjunction

with each other.



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 xxiii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION 1

1.1. Introduction 1

1.1.1. Rationale 1

1.1.2. Objectives 1

1.2. Process Overview 4

1.2.1. Process to date 4

1.2.2. Current activities 8

1.3. Summary of Process Phases 11

2. GENERAL APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY 13

2.1. Impact Rating Scales 13

2.1.1 Temporal Scale 14

2.1.2. Spatial Scale 14

2.1.3. Severity/Beneficial Rating Scale 13

2.1.4. Significance Scale 16

2.1.5. Risk or likelihood 18

2.1.6. Degree of confidence or certainty 18

2.2. Authority Consultation 19

2.3. Specialist Studies 19

3. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 20

3.1. Introduction 20

3.2. Phase One: Identification of Potential Windows and Sites

(2000 – 2002) 21

3.3. Phase Two: Environmental Scoping of Potential Sites 23

3.4. Ranking Report Consultation Process 27

3.5. Footprint Ranking Report Consultation Process 29

3.6. EIA Stage Public Consultation Process

(Present Stage in the Process) 31

3.7. Draft Environmental Impact Assessment Report and Permit

Application Report 35

3.8. Revised Draft EIR notification and Distribution

(current stage in the process) 38

3.9. Final EIR and Permit Application Report 41

3.10. Environmental Authorisation and Appeal Period 42

3.11. Concluding Remarks 42

4. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA 43

4.1. Locality of the Study Area 43

4.2. Biophysical Environment 43

4.2.1. Topography 43



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 xxiv

4.2.2. Climate 44

4.2.3. Geology 47

4.2.4. Soils 47

4.2.5. Hydrology and Geohydrology 48

4.2.6. Flora 48

4.2.7. Fauna 48

4.2.8. Protected Areas 49

4.3. Social Environment 51

5. FLORA 52


5.2. Description of the Floral Habitat 52

5.3. Vegetation characteristics 55

5.4. Main Potential Impacts on the Natural Vegetation 58

5.4.1. Integrity and functioning of sensitive vegetation types 58

5.4.2. Loss of endemic, protected and rare/endangered

species 59

5.4.3. Introduction and spread of alien plant species, weeds

and invader plants 59

5.5. Impact Assessment 60

5.6. Conclusion 62

5.7. Recommendations 63

6. FAUNA 67


6.2. Methodology 68

6.2.1. Survey 68

6.2.2. Faunal diversity 68

6.2.3. Species of special concern (SSC) 68

6.2.4. Habitat Associations 68

6.3. Faunal diversity 71

6.3.1. Protected Areas 71

6.3.2. Invertebrates 71

6.3.3. Amphibians 73

6.3.4. Reptiles 74

6.3.5. Birds 76

6.3.6. Mammals 77


6.4.1. Loss and fragmentation of habitats 79

6.4.2. Loss of faunal diversity 80

6.4.3. Barriers to Animal movement 81

6.4.4. Loss of Species of Special Concern 83

6.4.5. Increase in problem animals and alien species 84

6.4.6. Increased disturbance and mortality due to



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 xxv

road traffic 85

6.4.7. Changes in natural fire regime 87

6.4.8. Pollution 87

6.4.9. Loss or reduction of ecosystem functioning 88

6.5. Conclusion 91


7. GEOLOGY AND GEOHYDROLOGY 94

7.1. Background 94

7.2. Terms of Reference 94

7.3. Description of the Affected Environment 95

7.3.1. General Description of larger area served by

the proposed GHWMF 95

7.3.2. Local geological and geohydrological conditions at

Footprints F 100

7.3.3. Results of the geophysical survey and additional

exploration drilling 105

7.3.4. Groundwater use and quality 107

7.4. Risk Assessment 108

7.4.1. Aquifer classification and vulnerability 108

7.4.2. Risk of Contamination of Coega and Sundays Rivers 110

7.4.3. Evaluation of the site for a waste disposal facility 110

7.4.4. Identification of Risk Sources 111

7.4.5. Groundwater monitoring 112

7.5. Impact Description and Assessment 113

7.5.1. General Comments 113

7.5.2. Impact Assessment 113

7.6. Conclusion 121


8. TOURISM 126


8.2. Scope of Work 126

8.3. Method 127

8.3.1. The tourism experience 127

8.3.2. Potential tourism impacts 129

8.4. Site Assessment 131


8.5.1. Perception before decision to visit 132

8.5.2. Perception of experience in the area 132

8.5.3. Visual 133

8.5.4. Wind/Smell 134

8.5.5. Traffic 134

8.5.6. Limitation of future tourism development 134



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 xxvi

8.6. Conclusion and Recommendations 137

9. VISUAL IMPACT 138


9.2. Methodology 138

9.2.1. General 138

9.2.2. Assessment Methodology 139

9.3. Site Description 141

9.3.1. The affected environment 141

9.3.2. Footprint F 142

9.3.3. Visual impact assessment 142

9.4. Results 148

9.4.1. Visual impact index 148

9.4.2. Visual impact severity 148

9.4.3. Impact Analysis 150


10. AIR QUALITY 153


10.2. Scope of Study 153


10.3.1. Emissions Inventory and Dispersion Simulations 154

10.3.2. Landfill Gas Concentrations, Health and Odour

Impacts 157

10.3.3. Significance of Impacts 158

10.3.4. Buffer Zone Projection 159

10.4. Results and Conclusions 159

10.5 Impact Assessment 167

10.6. Summary and Recommendations 171

11. HERITAGE 174


11.2. Scope of Work 174


11.4. Site Assessment 176


11.6. Conclusions 178

12. LAND USE AND RESETTLEMENT 179


12.1.1. Resettlement 179

12.1.2. Land availability and rezoning 179

12.1.3. Land Use 180

12.1.4. Aviation 180



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 xxvii

12.1.5. Scope and Limitations 180

12.2. Methods and Results 180

12.2.1. Resettlement 180

12.2.2. Land availability and rezoning 181

12.2.3. Surrounding Land Use 184

12.2.4. Aviation 186


13. TRANSPORT STUDY 188


13.2. Site Location and Existing Roads 188

13.3. Rail Transport 192

13.4. Traffic Analysis 193

13.4.1. Approach and Methodology 193

13.4.2. Data obtained 194

13.4.3. Predicted waste disposal volumes 195

13.4.4. Trip generation and distribution 196

13.4.5. Structural Pavement Analysis 196

13.4.6. Road and Intersection capacity Analysis 198

13.5. Existing and Future road Infrastructure 202

13.5.1. Condition of Road Infrastructure 202

13.5.2. Cost of upgrading road infrastructure 202

13.6. Site Access Options and PPC Mining Activity 203

13.7. Anticipated Transport Corridor and Traffic Impacts 204

13.8. Conclusions and Recommendations 206

16. SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 208


14.1.1. Definition of a SIA 208

14.1.2. Objectives of the SIA 209

14.1.3. Approach and Methodology 210

14.1.4. Preliminary Findings of the SIASR 210

14.1.5. Findings of the Footprint Ranking Report 214

14.1.6. Findings of the Feasibility Report 214

14.1.7. Preferred Footprint 215

14.1.8. Assumptions and Limitations of Study 215

14.2. General Overview of the Affected Area 216

14.3. Social Change Processes and Impact Assessment 218

14.4. Demographic Processes 219

14.4.1. Demographic Change Processes and Resultant Impacts 222

14.5. Economic Processes 227

14.5.1. Economic Change Processes and Resultant Impacts 229

14.6. Institutional and Empowerment Processes 232

14.6.1. Institutional and Empowerment Change Processes



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 xxviii

and Resultant Impacts 234

14.7. Socio-Cultural Processes 236

14.7.1. Socio-Cultural Change Processes and

Resultant Impacts 236

14.8. Geographical Processes 237

14.8.1. Geographical Change Processes and


14.9. Biophysical Processes 243

14.9.1. Biophysical Change Processes and


14.10. Summary 246


14.11.1. Demographic Change Processes 252

14.11.2. Economic Change Processes 253

14.11.3. Institutional and Empowerment Change Processes 254

14.11.4. Socio-Cultural Change Processes 256

14.11.5. Geographical Change Processes 257

14.11.6. Biophysical Change Processes 258

15. PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN 259


15.2. Terms of Reference and Deliverables 259

15.3. Site Description 261

15.4. Geotechnical and Geohydrological Aspects 263

15.5. Site Classification 264

15.6. Design Philosophy 265

15.6.1. Constraints and Factors Affecting Design 266

15.6.2. Access and Infrastructure 267

15.6.3. Landfill Design 270

15.6.4. Drainage Systems 272

15.6.5. Contaminated water drainage and management 273

15.6.6. Leachate Drainage 275

15.6.7. Landfill Gas Management Systems 278

15.7. Closure and Rehabilitation 281

15.7.1. Proposed final landform 282

15.7.2. Phased capping 282

15.7.3. Capping design 283

15.7.4. Storm water management post-closure 285

15.7.5. Maintenance and Monitoring 285

16. SALIENT ISSUES AND CONCERNS RAISED BY I&AP’S AND

STAKEHOLDERS

16.1. Issues related to roads and transportation of hazardous waste 286

16.2. Potential Impacts on Addo Elephant National Park 292



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 xxix

16.3. Potential Impacts on Air Quality 292

16.4. Potential Impacts on Ground and Surface water 293

16.5. Socio Economic Impacts of Concern 293

16.6. Impact on PPC Operations 294

16.7. Project Implementation and Monitoring 295

16.8. EIA Process and Public Participation 298


17. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 306

17.1. Final Conclusions of the Specialist Studies 306

17.1.1. Flora 306

17.1.2. Fauna 307

17.1.3. Geohydrology 309

17.1.4. Tourism 310

17.1.5. Visual 311

17.1.6. Air Quality 312

17.1.7. Heritage 313

17.1.8. Land Use 313

17.1.9. Transport 313

17.1.10. Social 314

17.2. Recommendations for Mitigation and Management Measures 315

17.2.1. Flora 315

17.2.2. Fauna 318

17.2.3. Geohydrology 319

17.2.4. Tourism 321

17.2.5. Visual 321

17.2.6. Air Quality 322

17.2.7. Transport 323

17.2.8. Social 324

17.3. Overall Conclusion 330

17.4. Recommendations for Conditions of Environmental

Authorisation 331

18. REFERENCES 333



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 xxx

LIST OF TABLES

2.1. Proposed specialist team and their areas of expertise 20

4.1. Temperature data for Port Elizabeth, Addo and Uitenhage 45

4.2. Average Rainfall and Evaporation data from Addo, Groendal Dam and

Uitenhage 46

4.3. The geology of the study area 7

5.1. Floral impact assessment of Footprint F 61

6.1. Faunal impact assessment of Footprint F 90

7.1. The geological sequence in the Port Elizabeth/Uitenhage/Addo area 97

7.2. Geological legend for the geological map shown in Figure 7.1 100

7.3. Geological formations present on the farm Grassridge 190 103

7.4. Stratigraphic correlation between boreholes 106

7.5. Geohydrological impact assessment of Footprint F during the design

and construction phase 114

7.6. Geohydrological impact assessment of Footprint F during the

operational phase 116

7.7. Geohydrological impact assessment of Footprint F during the

decommissioning phase 119

7.8. Proposed mitigation actions to reduce geohydrological impacts

during the lifespan of the GHWMF 123

8.1. Tourism impact assessment of Footprint F 136

9.1. Severity of the visual impact 148

9.2. Visual impact assessment of Footprint F 151

10.1. Synopsis of estimated fugitive emissions 163

10.2. Summary of predicted cancer risks at the sensitive receptors 165

10.3. Air quality impact assessment for the construction and

operational phases 169

10.4. Air quality impact assessment for the post-closure phase 170

11.1. Assessment of the archaeological impacts on Footprint F and proposed

access roads without mitigation 177

13.1. Alternative routes to the three sites 189

13.2. Rail infrastructure establishment costs 193

13.3. Predicted Traffic Loading 197

13.4. Current and future traffic volumes 199

13.5. Average vehicle delay 200

13.6. Road upgrade costs 203

13.7. Comparative costs of road versus rail transport of waste 205

14.1. Scoping phase impact variables in relation to social change processes

in the impact assessment phase 211

14.2. Justification for the selection of Footprint F as the preferred site 214

14.3. Summary of population characteristics 221

14.4. Overview of Employment and Economic Sectors 228

14.5. Overview of Municipal Services 233



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 xxxi

14.6. Socio-economic impact assessment of Footprint F

(Pre Construction/Construction) 248


(Operational) 250


(Decommissioning) 251

15.1. Airspace provided by phases 270

LIST OF FIGURES

1.1. Sites assessed in the Footprint Ranking Report 6

1.2. Sites assessed in the Final Feasibility Report 7

1.3. Proposed extent of Footprint F 9

1.4: Corner point co-ordinates for Footprint F

1.5. Process phases 11

1.6. Conceptual figure of the process to arrive at a preferred facility

location (Footprint F) selected for EIA 12

4.1. Map of the Port Elizabeth area showing the approximate position of

Footprint F 43

4.2. Wind roses for the period 18 May 2005 – 31 May 2006 44

4.3. Hourly average temperature recorded for the period 18 May 2006

to 31 May 2006 45

4.4. Google earth image showing the approximate distance between

Footprint F and the closest current boundary of the Addo Elephant

National Park 50

5.1. Google image with Footprint F development boundary indicating

the vegetation condition on site 54

5.2. Cultivated lands on Footprint F 56

5.3. Highly degraded Mesic Succulent Thicket in foreground with

vegetation in poor condition in the background 56

5.4. Example of Mesic Succulent Thicket in a degraded poor condition 57

5.5. A small patch of Bontveld in the foreground and remainder of the

site in the background 57

5.6. A healthy specimen of Syncarpha striata found on site 58

5.7. Ecotone boundary between MST and the Bontveld area to be

excluded from development 63

6.1. Natural Bontveld grassland with bush clumps in the Grassridge area 69

6.2. Exposed limestone bedrock in Bontveld habitat in the northern section

of Footprint F 70

6.3. Bush clump in Bontveld grassland in the northern section of

Footprint F 70

6.4. Cleared and degraded Mesic Succulent Thicket habitat in the southeast

section of Footprint F 71

6.5. The Critically Endangered Albany adder (Bitis albanica) 75



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 xxxii

6.6. Tasman’s Girdled Lizard (Cordylus tasmani) 75

7.1. Portion of the 1:50 000 Geological map 3325DA Addo showing

the geology on the farms Grassridge 190, Grassridge 227 and

Grassridge 228 and the approximate location of Footprint F 101

9.1. Visual exposure of Footprint F to surrounding area 144

9.2. Visual distance and viewer incidence of Footprint F to the

surrounding area 146

9.3. Visual Impact Index of Footprint F 149

10.1. Alternative access routes to the proposed landfill site 157

10.2. Scenario 1 – Predicted annual average PM10 concentrations 160

10.3. Scenario 1 – Predicted highest daily average PM10 concentrations 160

10.4. Scenario 1 – Predicted average daily dustfall 162

10.5. Scenario 1 – Predicted maximum daily dustfall 162

10.6. Predicted odour impact areas 165

10.7. Projected 500 m buffer zone around the proposed GHWMF site 167

11.1. Footprint F: View facing north-east 175

11.2. Footprint F: View facing north-west 176

11.3. Footprint F: Collection of stone tools 176

12.1. Letter from the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality regarding the

potential rezoning of Footprint F for a waste disposal facility 182

12.2. Letter from the Commission of Restitution of Land Rights confirming

that no land claims have been lodged on any of the farms 183

12.3. Location of airfields within the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality 186

13.1. R75 – MR00470 - P1958 – P1954 access route 190

13.2. R75 – MR00470 - P1958 – R335 - P1954 access route 190

13.3. R335 – P1954 access route 191

13.4. R335 – P1958 – P1954 access route 191

14.1. Approximate location of the preferred site depicting the land use of

the surrounding area 217

14.2. Access roads to the various farmlands in vicinity of the proposed site 219

14.3. Educational profile (Grouped) for affected areas 222

14.4. House located in close proximity to the proposed site 223

14.5. Overview of Annual Household Income 229

15.1: Preliminary general layout of the GHWMF 262

15.2: Preliminary infrastructure layout of the GHWMF 269

15.3: Preliminary leachate and storm water dam layout for the GHWMF 274

15.4: Preliminary leachate collection and drainage plan for the GHWMF 277

15.5: Conceptual gas extraction layout for the GHWMF 280

15.6: Conceptual final rehabilitation plan for the GHWMF 283



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 xxxiii

APPENDICES

A: DWEA approval of the Plan of Study for EIA

B: I&AP Database

C: Draft EIR availability advertisements

D: Issues and Responses Register (including minutes of public meetings and

written correspondence received from I&APs)

E: Geological and Geohydrological Assessment

F: Letter from Grant Thornton

G: Air Quality Assessment

H: Comments from the South Africa Heritage Resources Agency (SAHRA)

I: Social Impact Assessment

J: Draft Environmental Management Plan



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 xxxiv

ACRONYMS

ADT - Average Daily Traffic

ADTT - Average Daily Truck Traffic

CBO - Community Based Organisation

CDC - Coega Development Corporation

CITES - Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species

DANCED - Danish Co-operation for Environment and Development

DEDEA - Eastern Cape Province Department of Economic Development and

Environmental Affairs

DME - Department of Minerals and Energy

DOT - Department of Transport

DTM - Digital Terrain Model

DWEA - Department of Water and Environmental Affairs

EC - Electrical Conductivity

ECA - Environment Conservation Act

ECDRT - Eastern Cape Department of Roads and Transport

ECP - Eastern Cape Province

EIA - Environmental Impact Assessment

EIR - Environmental Impact Report

EMP - Environmental Management Plan

EO - Environmental Officer

ESAL’s - Equivalent Standard Axle Loads

ESS - Environmental Scoping Study

ESR - Environmental Scoping Report

GHWMF - General and Hazardous Waste Management Facility

GIS - Geographic Information System

GWCA - Government Water Control Areas

HCM - Highway Capacity Manual

I&AP – Interested and Affected Party

IDP - Integrated Development Plan

IDZ – Industrial Development Zone

IRIS - Integrated Risk Information System

IUCN - International Union for Conservation of Nature

IWM - Integrated Waste Management

LA – Local Authority

LFG - Landfill Gas

LOS - Level of Service

LUV’s - Light Utility Vehicles

MST – Mesic Succulent Thicket

NEMA - National Environmental Management Act

NGO - Non-Government Organisation

NMBM - Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality

NMMU - Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University



Bohlweki-SSI Environmental June 2010 xxxv

NWMS - National Waste Management Strategy

PPC – Pretoria Portland Cement

PPP - Public Participation Process

ROD - Record of Decision

SAHRA - South African Heritage Resources Agency

SANParks - South African National Parks

SANRAL - South African National Roads Agency Limited

SARCA - Southern African Reptile Conservation Assessment

SDF - Spatial Development Framework

SGWCA - Subterranean Government Water Control Area

SIA - Social Impact Assessment

SSC - Species of Special Concern

SRVCF - Sundays River Valley Community Forum

TSP - Total Suspended Particulates

US-EPA - United States Environmental Protection Agency

VOCs - Volatile Organic Compounds

WASP - Waste-Aquifer Separation Principle

WELC - Coega Waste Environmental Liaison Committee

WHO - World Health Organisation



Ch 1 - Introduction June 2010 1

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Introduction

1.1.1. Rationale

The C oega D evelopment C orporation ( CDC) a nd t he N elson M andela B ay

Municipality (NMBM) have identified the need for the establishment and operation

of a new Regional General and Hazardous Waste Management Facility (GHWMF)

in the Eastern Cape to serve the Municipality and surrounding areas. General

waste generated in the NMBM is presently disposed of at Arlington (G:L:B-) and

other general waste disposal sites, while hazardous waste is disposed of at the

privately o wned A loes I I h igh h azard (H :H) w aste facility o r the municipally

owned Koedoeskloof low hazard (H:h) waste facility. EnviroServ’s Aloes II H:H

landfill site has limited available airspace and it is expected to be at capacity by

mid-2011 (an e nvironmental impact a ssessment is currently underway f or a n

extension to this site that will increase i ts lifespan to beyond 2016, with a lease

extension f rom t he N MBM r ecently g ranted). The K oedoeskloof ( H:h) w aste

facility is also limited in the types and volumes of hazardous waste that may be

disposed of there. It is further anticipated that the development of the Coega

Industrial Development Zone (IDZ) and associated industries will significantly add

to the demand for hazardous waste disposal facilities within the proximity of the

NMBM area. Therefore, the proposed GHWMF is required in order to serve the

region, N MBM a nd th e C oega IDZ. T he GHWMF s ite u nder i nvestigation is

proposed to be a H:H s ite. T he site will be a co-disposal si te ( i.e. i t will accept

both hazardous and general waste) and although it is a regional waste site it will

primarily serve the greater NMBM.

The GHWMF site under investigation is proposed to be a H:H site. The site will be

a co -disposal s ite (i .e. i t w ill a ccept both hazardous a nd general waste) and

although it is a regional waste site it will primarily serve the greater NMBM.

1.1.2. Objectives

The disposal of all waste in South Africa is managed in terms of the Environment

Conservation Act (Act 73 of 1989) and the recently promulgated National

Environmental M anagement Waste Act (Act 59 of 2008). Section 20 o f the

Environment Conservation Act stipulates that all waste disposal sites require a

permit issued by the Minister of Water Affairs and Forestry. Chapter 5 of the

National Environmental Management Waste Act also s tipulates the requirements

for licensing waste sites. The proposed activity is subject to the Environmental

Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations (R1184 - R1186) of 5 September 1997

published in terms of the Environment Conservation Act (No 73 of 1989) as the

application was initiated when these regulations were still in effect, as well as the




Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations (GN. R 385-387 of 2006)

published in terms of Section 24(5) read with Section 44 of the National

Environmental Management Act (NEMA), 1998 (Act No 107 of 1998 as amended).

Also applicable as of 3 July 2009 is GN. R 718 which lists the waste management

activities which are likely to have a detrimental effect on the environment, as well

as the required environmental reporting and waste permitting processes to be

adhered to in attaining approval for new waste management facilities.

Accordingly, a full EIA has been carried out for this project in terms of

Regulations R 1184 - R1186 a s t he a pplication p rocess f or e nvironmental

authorisation was initiated prior to the promulgation of the NEMA EIA Regulations

in June 2006 and GN. R 718 in July 2009.

The Department of Water and Environmental Affairs (DWEA) was mandated to

devise a permitting system that would improve waste disposal in South Africa. In

1994 DWEA published the f irst edition of the 'Minimum Requirements for Waste

Disposal by Landfill' (referred t o a s t he M inimum R equirements). The se cond

edition of the Minimum Requirements was published in 1998, and the third edition

published i n draft f orm i n 2005. T he m ain o bjectives o f t he M inimum

Requirements are: to improve the standard of waste disposal in South Africa, to

facilitate the enforcement of the landfill permitting system provided for in the

Environment Conservation Act, and to take steps to prevent the degradation of

water quality and the environment. Hazardous waste disposal sites are classified

as either high hazard (H:H) or low hazard (H:h) in terms of DWEA Minimum

Requirements for Waste Disposal to Landfill. In addition to the EIA, the Permit

Application Report (PAR) Procedure outlined in the Minimum Requirements

(Version 2, 1998) will be adhered to, in order to obtain a conceptual landfill

permit for the proposed GHWMF.

The National Environmental Management Act No. 107 of 1998 (NEMA) builds on

the Environment Conservation Act and provides a link between new developments

and environmental protection. One of the main principles proposed in NEMA is

that o f Integrated Waste M anagement (I WM) which p romotes t he a voidance,

minimisation, recycling and treatment of waste in preference to its disposal to

landfill. T he N ational W aste M anagement Strategy ( NWMS), a j oint p roject

between DWEA and the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism

(DWEA), and funded by the Danish Co-operation for Environment and

Development (DANCED), was published in July 1999. The NWMS implements the

government’s IWM policy on waste, and the action plans arising from it have

considerable implications for the approach that should be used to address the

waste m anagement n eeds of t he C oega IDZ a nd t he g reater P ort E lizabeth

Region. The s trategy includes short, medium, and l ong-term action plans that,

once implemented, will lead to greatly improved waste management practices in

South Africa.




In order to fulfil the DWEA Minimum Requirements for Waste Disposal by Landfill

(Version 2, 1998), the main purpose of this Revised Draft Environmental Impact

Assessment Report (EIR) is to further assess project specific impacts, mitigation

measures, alternatives a nd p otential fatal flaws a ssociated with the p referred

footprint (Footprint F – on the Farm Grassridge 190 Remainder that is currently

owned by Pretoria Portland Cement - PPC) for the siting of the proposed facility.

These were previously identified and subjected to initial assessment during the

site s election s tages of th e pr ocess and t he r esults p resented in th e F inal

Footprint Ranking Report dated November 2006 and a lso in the Final Feasibility

Report dated December 2007 prepared by Bohlweki-SSI Environmental. It must

be noted that the EIA and PAR processes are separate application processes but

are conducted in parallel with each other. Accordingly, there is some overlap in

these p rocesses with both t he W ater a nd E nvironmental A ffairs line f unction

Departments of DWEA being obliged to review the Final EIR within the context of

their respective decision making processes, and with the EIR being an obligatory

minimum requirement of the PAR application process.

The p roposed facility provides a n opportunity f or th e region to d evelop a n

approach to the management of its waste that takes into account the NWMS. The

final design of the proposed waste processing facility depends on the nature of

the waste that needs to be managed. Determination of the actual waste disposal

requirements of the region over the long-term (<12 years) is extremely difficult,

due in part to changes in industry types and the possibility of new technologies

for disposal recovery or treatment of waste. However, in order to determine the

required capacity for the proposed waste processing facility, as well as to

determine the types o f t reatment facilities that may be needed, an initial waste

market survey was conducted in 2000 by Chemical Marketing and Consulting

Services. T he results are summarised in an Inception Report that was compiled

for the CDC by Bohlweki Environmental in 2000. Subsequently, a waste

inventory covering the expected waste volumes and types likely to be generated

by the Coega IDZ was prepared by Arcus Gibb in 2007. The proposed landfill will

be developed in phases but will function as a total waste management facility that

could, in future, include a combination of the following:

• a l eachate m anagement s ystem i ncluding t reatment b efore d ischarge t o

sewer or, if appropriate, to water course;

• a short-term co-disposal landfill cell;

• a small waste stabilisation, immobilisation and micro-encapsulation plant;

• a small chemical treatment plant for the neutralisation of acids and alkalis,

precipitation o f h eavy m etals, oxidation o f c yanide a nd r eduction o f

chromate;

• a t hermal t reatment f acility f or h igh h azard org anic waste, a nd p ossibly

difficult wastes such as abattoir waste;

• a mono-disposal area for stabilised inorganic wastes;




• a medical waste treatment facility to support facilities already available in

Port Elizabeth, if quantities warrant it; and

• a recovery plant for heavy metals and other valuable materials, if quantities

warrant it.

It is important to note that the current design does not include certain of the

abovementioned future options such as a thermal treatment facility, a medical

waste treatment facility or a recovery plant for heavy metals. Should the

development of certain of the above be proposed then this would be subject to a

separate EIA application process. It i s important to note that the Sundays River

Valley Community Forum (SRVCF), a significant and constructive stakeholder in

the process to date, has indicated that they are vehemently opposed to any

incineration of waste on site. Accordingly, it is recommended that no incineration

of any classification be allowed at the facility during its l ifespan, and that this is

included as a condition of environmental authorisation.

Bohlweki-SSI Environmental was appointed by the CDC and NMBM to undertake

the required environmental studies according to the Environmental Impact

Assessment (EIA) Regulations (R1184 - R1186) of 5 S eptember 1997, published

in terms of the Environment Conservation Act (No 73 of 1989), and the DWEA

permitting procedures. This process was initiated in 2000 and is due for

completion in early 2010. The process followed to date and that is currently

being undertaken is outlined below.

1.2. Process Overview

1.2.1. Process to date

A d etailed d escription of th e p rocess f ollowed to d ate m ay b e f ound in th e

following documents:

• Environmental Scoping Report and Appendices (July 2003)

• Project Background Information Document (2004)

• Final Footprint Ranking Report (November 2006)

• Final Feasibility Report (December 2007)

All of these documents are available in electronic format upon request at the

following location: www.bohlweki.co.za

• Scoping Phase

The first phase of work (2000 - 2003) culminated in the production of the

scoping report and its associated appendices in July 2003. The process leading

up to the release of the scoping report provided extensive opportunities for




I&APs to become involved and comment on the results and process (e.g.

workshops, document review, focus group meetings and background

information documents). On release of the scoping report there were also

further meetings and presentations as well as opportunities to review reports

at a number of local venues e.g. libraries.

The key objectives of the scoping phase were:

∗ Establishing the key issues associated with the development of a General

and Hazardous waste management facility;

∗ Undertaking a site selection process in order to establish the preferred

areas for further research (see Figure 1.4). This involved a systematic

process of evaluating potential sites and establishing which areas were

most suitable; and

∗ Involving I&APs in the entire process.

Outlined below is a chronological overview of the process up to completion of

the Scoping Report:

∗ Early 2000 - ‘Windows’ identified (i.e. areas that are most suitable for the

development of the site)

∗ Early 2000 – Farms/sites of suitable size identified within the ‘windows’

∗ Mid 2000 - Top candidate sites selected after environmental scan

∗ Late 2000 – Initial land acquisition negotiations

∗ Mid 2002 - Top 6 potential sites identified for further investigation

∗ Mid 2002 - Environmental Scoping Study commences

∗ Mid 2003 - Scoping study completed and approved - 2 s ites selected for

further work, namely:

Coega Kammas Kloof Portion 1-6 (Excluding remainder)

Blauw Baatjies Vley portions 2 - 3 (Including Grassridge 190 Portion 3)

• Final Footprint Ranking Report (2006)

The screening of s ix potential footprints (refer to F igure 1 .1 overleaf) within

the sites identified as warranting further investigation through the scoping

report was undertaken within the Footprint Ranking report. T he objective of

this process was to select preferred facility footprints for further investigation.

The fine screening process involved:

∗ Sensitivity mapping

∗ Field investigations

∗ Ranking exercises

∗ Criteria weighting exercises

∗ Workshops




The ranking report was made available for review by I&APs and the

authorities d uring M arch 2 006. T he F ootprint Ra nking Re port n ominated

footprints C and F as the preferred facility footprints for further investigation

and concept design, however, footprint E was also highlighted as being a

potential site depending on the outcome of further studies.

Figure 1.1: Sites assessed in the Footprint Ranking Report

• Final Feasibility Report (2007)

The feasibility phase (fine screening) of the process outlined the conceptual

designs, l ayout o f the f acilities, si ze o f the waste p rocessing facility and the

current projections on expected waste volume and types.

The F inal F easibility Re port i ncluded a p reliminary E nvironmental Impact

Assessment (EIA) that provided the results of further investigations of the

three preferred facility f ootprints (refer t o F igure 1 .2 ov erleaf), i ncluding

conceptual designs, preliminary geohydrological evaluations.

An important function of the Feasibility Report was to highlight any fatal flaws,

if any, associated with the three alternative sites.




Figure 1.2: Sites assessed in the Final Feasibility Report

* In addition to the sites identified as part of the scoping process additional

sites on the PPC properties (Grassridge 190/RE and Grassridge 227/RE)

were motivated for inclusion in the fine screening process by the Sundays

River Valley Community Forum (SRVCF);

* Assess the three preferred footprints (i.e. footprints C, E and F) identified

during the footprint ranking exercise for fatal flaws:

Footprint C

: Grassridge 190 Portion 3.

Footprint E


Footprint F

* Conduct a preliminary Environmental Impact Assessment on the

preferred three footprints;


* Prepare concept designs for the potential footprints;

* Evaluate the identified facility footprints1

* Update I&APs as t o t he process undertaken thus far and outline the

process to be followed until completion of the study.

within the sites on which

concept facility designs can be produced. In short, this process aimed to

identify a s ingle footprint f or more d etailed s tudies w hich were t hen

conducted during the detailed EIA phase; and

1 A footprint is the actual area that the facility will cover and will thus only be a small portion of a site. The areas investigated by the specialists are slightly bigger than expected footprint size to allow for flexibility in the siting of infrastructure.




The F easibility R eport was m ade a vailable t o I &APs i n O ctober/November

2007. I &APs w ere a fforded t he op portunity t o re view t he re port on t he

feasibility of the facility. The purpose of this feasibility report was to allow the

authorities to establish whether the proposed facility and alternative positions

thereof are viable for detailed engineering and environmental studies. W hile

the feasibility report was designed to establish whether there are any fatal

flaws, th e a uthorities d o n ot gi ve f inal a pproval f or th e f acility until th e

detailed s tudies, w hich form p art o f th e detailed d esign a nd f ull E IA, a re

completed and confirm the final desirability of the site and facility design.

1.2.2. Current activities (2008-2009)

Based on Edition 2 of the DWEA Minimum Requirements for Waste Disposal by

Landfill (DWEA, 1998) the activities currently taking place in 2008 can be divided

into two sections.

Firstly, a detailed EIR (current report) has been completed on the candidate site,

Footprint F (refer to Figures 1.3 and 1.4), which was identified as being the

preferred a lternative in the Final Feasibility Report. This E IR took i nto

consideration the proposed design and operation of the facility.

Secondly, the detailed EIR will form part of the subsequent Permit Application

Report (PAR) (See DWEA minimum requirements – Edition 2, 1998) that will be

reviewed by DWEA. This PAR report will contain the following components:

• Detailed site investigation

• Detailed Environmental Impact Assessment

• Landfill design

• Operating Plan

• End land-use plan

• Air and Water Monitoring Plan

The relevant delegated authorities will only authorise the proposed facility and

issue a permit for it once they are confident that the above criteria have been

met.

Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Proposed Regional General and Hazardous Waste Management Facility in the Eastern Cape


Figure 1.3: Proposed extent of Footprint F (yellow border: final landform boundary; blue border: footprint

boundary; green border: leachate and stormwater dams)



Figure 1.4: Corner point co-ordinates for Footprint F




1.3. Summary of Process Phases

In summary, according to the key objectives the process to date has entailed

three main components (refer to Figure 1.5 below):

Figure 1.5: Process phases

Figure 1 .6 overleaf p rovides a s chematic/conceptual f igure o f th e S creening,

Scoping a nd A ssessment p rocesses c onducted to d ate f or th e siting o f th e

preferred footprint for the proposed Regional GHWMF.

SCOPING (COMPLETED) Timing - 2000 to 2003 Objective - Identify best sites for a facility Involve I&APs Deliverable - Scoping report and associated appendices

DETAILED STUDIES & AUTHORISATION (IN PROGRESS) Timing - 2007 to late 2009 Objective - Conduct detailed EIA studies and examine the no

go option. (Completed) Involve I&APs (In Progress) Deliverable - Detailed site investigation (Completed) Detailed EIA (In Progress) End land-use plan (In Progress) Operating plan (In Progress)

Air & Water monitoring plan (In Progress) Permit Application Report (In Progress)

SITE RANKING & FEASIBILITY (COMPLETED) Timing - 2004 to early 2007 Objective - Identify best facility footprints within the sites

that warranted further investigation. Confirm the lack of possible fatal flaws

Involve I&APs Deliverable - Final Footprint Ranking Report Final Feasibility Report – Preliminary EIA



Figure 1.6: Conceptual figure of the process to arrive at a preferred facility location (Footprint F) selected for EIA.

Exclusionary a nd c autionary c riteria a re overlaid on a regional map.

Farms of over 2000 hectares which fall outside of the exclusionary zones were identified.

The n umber of f arms was s ystematically re duced through an environmental screening process. The scoping process resulted i n Coega Kammas Kloof, Blauw Baatjies Vlei and Grassridge 190/3 being selected f or f urther s tudies. I n a ddition t wo P PC properties were identified by IAP’s for further study.

Within C oega Ka mmas Kl oof, B lauw Baatjies Vlei, Grassridge 190/3, PPC Grassridge 190/RE & PPC Grassridge 227/RE s ix facility footprints were selected and evaluated as part of the fine screening.

From these six footprints three were examined as part of the feasibility report stage.

In the feasibility report stage - Concept design and a preliminary E IA were u ndertaken on t he t hree footprints to establish the feasibility of the designs and positions of the proposed facility. This Draft EIA Report assesses the preferred candidate site (Footprint F) that emerged form the feasibility report stage to establish the final suitability of the design and location of the facility. T hese s tudies w ere u ndertaken from 2007 - 2009

Excluded areas

Selected farms

Farms excluded through the review process

Potential facility

Facility footprints excluded through the fine screening process

Concept landfill design

Tree screening

Possible facility road

Facility infrastructure

SCOPING (2000 - 2003)

SITE RANKING & FEASIBILITY 2004 to 2007

Legend



Ch 2 – General Approach and Methodology June 2010 13

2. GENERAL APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY

The Environmental Impact Assessment i s an obligatory component of the DWEA

minimum requirements. Therefore the EIA must be undertaken according to the

principals discussed in Section 7 of the Minimum Requirements (DWEA, 1998).

As per agreement with the relevant authorities, the structure and content of the

EIR (this r eport) w as based o n th e r equirements o f Edition 2 o f th e W aste

Management Series (DWEA, 1998). As part of the overall project planning

process, this EIA aims to achieve the following:

• to provide an overall assessment of the social and biophysical aspects of the

area a ffected b y t he proposed establishment of a regional g eneral a nd

hazardous waste processing facility on Footprint F;

• to revisit the environmental s iting criteria investigated during the Feasibility

Report (preliminary environmental impact assessment phase);

• to confirm that identified critical factors can be addressed;

• to confirm that there are no fatal flaws; and

• to undertake a public participation process to ensure that I&AP issues and

concerns are recorded.

2.1. Impact Rating Scales

Although specialists were given free reign on how they conducted their research

and obtained information, they were requested to provide the reports in a specific

layout and structure, so that a uniform specialist report volume could be

produced.

As the results of the Feasibility Report (preliminary environmental impact

assessment) were to be used as a basis for the selection of the preferred footprint

(Footprint F ) to b e investigated i n m ore d etail in t he f ull E IA p hase, i t w as

necessary that the same impact rating system be used for all issues.

To ensure a direct comparison between various specialist studies, six standard

rating scales are defined and used to assess and quantify the identified impacts.

The rating system used for assessing impacts (or when specific impacts cannot be

identified, t he b roader t erm issue should a pply) is b ased o n th ree c riteria,

namely:

• The relationship of the impact/issue to temporal scales (Box 2.1);

• The relationship of the impact/issue to spatial scales (Box 2.2); and

• The severity of the impact/issue (Box 2.3).




These t hree criteria a re c ombined t o d escribe t he o verall importance r ating,

namely the significance (Box 2.4). In addition, the following parameters are used

to describe the impact/issues:

• The risk or likelihood of the impact/issue occurring (Box 2.5); and

• The degree of confidence placed in the assessment of the impact/issue

(Box 2.6).

2.1.1. Temporal Scale

The temporal scale defines the significance of the impact at various time scales,

as an indication of the duration of the impact.

Box 2.1: Temporal scale used in assessing issues

• Short term

•

- less than 5 years. Many construction phase impacts will be of a

short duration.

Medium term

• - between 5 and 15 years.

Long term

• - between 15 and 30 years

Permanent

- over 30 years and resulting in a permanent and lasting change

that will always be there.

The spatial scale defines physical extent of the impact.

Box 2.2: Spatial scale used in assessing issues

• Individual

• - this scale applies to person/s in the area.

Household

• - this scale applies to households in the area.

Localised

•

- small scale impacts- from a few hectares in extent to e.g. the

local district area.

Regional

• - Provincial

National

• - South Africa

International

- Trans boundary

2.1.3. Severity/Beneficial Rating Scale

The severity scale is used in order to scientifically evaluate how severe negative

impacts w ould be, o r how be neficial po sitive impacts would be on a particular

affected system or a particular affected party.

It i s a methodology that a ttempts t o re move a ny v alue j udgements f rom t he

assessment, although it relies on the professional judgement of the specialist.




Box 2.3: Severity/beneficial scale use in the EIA

Very severe Very beneficial

An irreversible and permanent change to

the a ffected s ystem(s) or p arty ( ies)

which cannot be mitigated. For example,

the p ermanent c hange t o t opography

resulting from a quarry.

A permanent and very substantial

benefit to the affected system(s) or

party(ies), with no real alternative to

achieving t his benefit. F or example,

the creation of a large number of long

term jobs.

Severe Beneficial

Long t erm i mpacts on t he a ffected

system(s) or p arty(ies) t hat c ould b e

mitigated. However, this mitigation would

be d ifficult, expensive or t ime consuming

or s ome c ombination of t hese. F or

example, the clearing of forest vegetation.

A l ong term impa ct and s ubstantial


party(ies). A lternative w ays of

achieving t his be nefit w ould be

difficult, expensive or time

consuming, or s ome c ombination of

these. F or example, a n increase i n

the local economy.

Moderately severe Moderately beneficial

Medium to long term impacts on the

affected system(s) or party(ies), which

could be mitigated. For example

constructing a narrow roa d t hrough

vegetation with a low conservation value.

A medium to long term impact of real


party(ies). Other ways of optimising

the beneficial effects are equally

difficult, e xpensive a nd t ime

consuming (or some c ombination of

these), as achieving them in this way.

For example a s light improvement in

the (local) roads.

Slight Slightly beneficial

Medium or short term impacts on the

affected s ystem(s) or p arty(ies).

Mitigation is very easy, cheap, less time

consuming or not necessary. For example,

a temporary fluctuation in the water table

due to water abstraction.

A short to medium term impact and

negligible benefit to the affected

system(s) or party(ies). Other ways

of optimising the beneficial effects are

easier, cheaper and quicker, or some

combination of these. For example, a

slight increase in the amount of goods

available for purchasing.

No effect Don’t know/Can’t know

The system(s) or party(ies) is not

affected by the proposed development.

In certain cases it may not be

possible to determine the severity of

an impact.




2.1.4. Significance Scale

The environmental significance scale is an attempt to evaluate

the importance of a

particular impact. T his evaluation needs to be undertaken in the relevant context,

as an impact can either be ecological or social, or both. The evaluation of the

significance of an impact relies heavily on the values of the person making the

judgement. For this reason, impacts of especially a social nature need to reflect the

values of the affected society. A five-point significance scale has been applied (see

Box 2.4).

Box 2.4: The significance rating scale

Very High

These impacts would be considered by society as constituting a major and usually

permanent change to the (natural and/or social) environment, and usually result

in severe or very severe effects, or beneficial or very beneficial effects.

Example: The loss of a species would be viewed by informed society as being of

VERY HIGH significance.

Example: The establishment of a large amount of infrastructure in a rural area,

which previously had very few services, would be regarded by the affected parties

as resulting in benefits with a VERY HIGH significance.

High

These impacts will usually result in long term effects on the social and/or natural

environment. Impacts rated as HIGH will need to be considered by society as

constituting an important and usually long term change to the (natural and/or

social) environment. Society would probably view these impacts in a serious light.

Example: The loss of a diverse vegetation type, which is fairly common

elsewhere, would have a significance rating of HIGH over the l ong term, as the

area could be rehabilitated.

Example: The change to soil conditions will impact the natural system, and the

impact on affected parties (in this case people growing crops on the soil) would

be HIGH.

Moderate

These impacts will usually result in medium- to long-term effects on the social

and/or natural environment. Impacts rated as MODERATE will need to be

considered by society as constituting a fairly important and usually medium term

change to the (natural and/or social) environment. These impacts are real but not

substantial.

Example: The loss of a sparse, open vegetation type of low diversity may be

regarded as MODERATELY significant.

Example: The provision of a clinic in a rural area would result in a benefit of

MODERATE significance.

Low




These impacts will usually result in medium to short term effects on the social

and/or natural environment. Impacts rated as LOW will need to be considered by

the public and/or the specialist as constituting a fairly unimportant and usually

short term change to the (natural and/or social) environment. These impacts are

not substantial and are likely to have little real effect.

Example: The temporary changes in the water table of a wetland habitat, as

these systems are adapted to fluctuating water levels.

Example: The increased earning potential of people employed as a result of a

development would only result in benefits of LOW significance to people who live

some distance away.

No Significance

There are no primary or secondary effects at all that are important to scientists or

the public.

Example: A change to the geology of a particular formation may be regarded as

severe from a geological perspective, but i s of NO significance in the overall

context.

In many cases scientists have to produce an assessment in the absence of all the

relevant and necessary data. Where there is incomplete or unavailable

information, i t is i mportant t o a lways m ake c lear th at c ertain i nformation i s

lacking, if the incomplete information is essential to a re asoned c hoice a mong

alternatives.

There are two acceptable procedures to follow to compensate for a shortage of

data:

• It is more important to identify likely environmental impacts than to

precisely evaluate the more obvious impacts

All assessors (the different specialists) try to evaluate all the significant impacts,

recognising that precise evaluation is not possible. It is better to have a possible

or unsure level of c ertainty on important issues t han t o b e definite about

unimportant issues (see Box 2.6).

• It is important to be conservative when reporting likely environmental

impacts

Because of the fact that assessing impacts with a lack of data is more

dependable on your own scientific judgement, the rating on the certainty scale

cannot be too high. If the evidence for a potential type of impact is not definitive

in either direction, the conservative conclusion is that the impact cannot be

ruled out with confidence, not that the impact is not proven. It is for these

reasons that a degree of certainty scale has been provided, as well as the

categories DON’T KNOW and CAN’T KNOW.




2.1.5. Risk or likelihood

The risk or likelihood of all impacts taking place as a result of project actions differs.

There is no doubt that some impacts would occur if the project goes ahead, but

certain other (usually secondary) impacts are not as likely, and may or may not

result from the project. Although these impacts may be severe, the likelihood of

them occurring may affect their overall significance and will be taken into account.

The rating scale is shown in Box 2.5.

Box 2.5: The risk or likelihood scale

• Very unlikely to occur

– the chance of these impacts occurring is extremely

slim, e.g. an earthquake destroying a bridge.

• Unlikely to occur

– the risk of these impacts occurring is slight. For example

an impact such as an increase in a lcoholism and associated family v iolence

as a result of increased wealth is unlikely to occur

• May occur

– the risk of these impacts is more likely, although it is not definite,

for example the chance that a road accident may occur during the construction

phase

• Will definitely occur

– there is no chance that this impact will not occur, for

example the clearing of vegetation.

2.1.6. Degree of confidence or certainty

It is also necessary to state the degree of certainty or confidence with which one

has predicted the significance of an impact. For this reason, a ‘degree of certainty’

scale has been provided (Box 2.6) to enable the reader to ascertain how certain

we are of our assessment of significance:

Box 2.6: The degree of certainty or confidence used in this EIA

• Definite

- More than 90% sure of a particular fact. To use this one will need to

have substantial supportive data.

• Probable

- Over 70% sure of a particular fact, or of the likelihood of that impact

occurring.

• Possible

- Only over 40% sure of a particular fact or of the likelihood of an

impact occurring.

• Unsure

- Less than 40% sure of a particular fact or the likelihood of an impact

occurring.




2.2. Authority Consultation

Consultation with Supervisory Authorities

The relevant a uthorities required t o r eview t he proposed project and p rovide

Environmental Authorisation were consulted from the outset of this study, and

have been engaged throughout the project to date. These supervisory (decision-

making) authorities include DWEA and DWEA, who are the lead authority for this

project, and the Eastern Cape Province Department of Economic Development

and Environmental Affairs (DEDEA) who are the commenting authority for this

project. To date authority c onsultation has included the following specific

activities:

• Review a nd a cceptance o f th e p receding r eporting s tages o utlined in t he

previous chapter;

• Consultation regarding project specifics, and the receipt of Authority approval

of the Plan of Study for EIA dated 8 April 2004 (refer to Appendix A);

• Meeting with Mr Leon Bredenhann (DWEA) in October 2007 to confirm the

way forward for the remainder of the project (EIR and Permit Application);

• Ongoing presentations to the Coega Waste Environmental Liaison Committee

(WELC). Members of this committee include provincial and national authorities

(DWEA, DEDEA & DWEA) and representatives from NMBM and the CDC.

Consultation with other Relevant Authorities

Consultations with other authorities were undertaken. The following departments

were inter alia were consulted:

• Department of Minerals and Energy (DME)

• South African Heritage Resources Agency (SAHRA)

• South African National Roads Agency Limited (SANRAL)

• Various Provincial Departments

• Local and District Municipalities

• South African National Parks (SANParks)

Background information regarding the proposed project was provided to these

departments, together with a registration and comment form formally requesting

their input into the EIA process.

2.3. Specialist Studies

The CDC have requested Bohlweki-SSI Environmental to undertake all required

studies to achieve a new permitted hazardous (H:H) waste processing facility to

serve t he E astern C ape R egion. T he following s pecialists (Table 2.1) were

appointed by Bohlweki-SSI Environmental to assist in the s ite selection and the

environmental impact assessment processes:




Table 2.1: Proposed specialist team and their areas of expertise

Name and Organisation Specialist study to be undertaken

Mark Freeman of B ohlweki-SSI

Environmental

Project D irector - provide s trategic

advice a nd r eview of EIA p rocess

documentation

Dr Kevin Whittington-Jones of

Coastal and Environmental Services

Review of EIA process documentation

Marc H ardy of Coastal a nd

Environmental Services

Project Manager - collection and review

of data, authority consultation, and the

compilation of all project documentation

Airshed Planning Professionals Air quality assessment

Dr William Branch (Bayworld) Assessment of potential impacts on

fauna

Joggie van Staden of Bohlweki – SSI

Environmental

Assessment of potential impacts on flora

Reinhard M eyer (Geotechnical

consultant)

Assessment of geological, hydrological

and geohydrological impacts

Dr Angus Paterson and Dr Kevin

Whittington-Jones of Coastal and

Environmental Services

Assessment of all issues related to land

such as resettlement, land availability

and rezoning, land use and aviation

Lourens du Plessis of MetroGIS Assessment of all potential visual

impacts and compilation of all

environmental GIS maps

Danie Brink and Riva Nortje of Jones

and Wagener

Assessment of potential geotechnical

impacts and responsible for preliminary

design of the waste facility

Stewart Scott International (SSI) –

Port Elizabeth office

Responsible for the traffic impact and

transport study assessments

J. Kaplan of the Agency for Cultural

Resource Management

Assessment of potential impacts on

palaeontological s ites a nd h eritage

impact assessment

Martin Jansen van Vuuren of Grant

Thornton.

Assessment of potential impacts on

tourism

Anita Bron of Master Q Research Responsible for the EIA phase Social

Impact Assessment

Sandy Wren of Public Process

Consultants

Responsible f or the public p articipation

processes



Ch 3 – Public Participation June 2010 21

3. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

3.1. Introduction

The Public Participation Process for the identification of a new Regional General

and Hazardous Waste Management Facility was initiated in 2000 with Bohlweki -

SSI Environmental as the lead consultant. The Public Participation Process can be

divided into the following three phases with Sandy and Mazizi taking lead

responsibility for the last two phases:

• Phase One: Identification of Potential Windows and Sites (2000/2)

• Phase Two: Environmental Scoping of Potential Sites including Site Ranking

(2003/6):

* Environmental Scoping Public Consultation Process



• Phase Three: Environmental Impact Assessment Phase (present stage in the

process):

* Preliminary EIA (Feasibility Report) Consultation Process

* Draft EIA and Permit Application Report Consultation Process

* Notification of Record of Decision

The P ublic P articipation P rocess i s b ased on th e g uidelines p rovided i n th e

Minimum Requirements for Waste Disposal by Landfill (DWEA, Version 2, 1998),

and was developed in consultation with Bohlweki-SSI Environmental, Coega

Development Corporation, Sandy & Mazizi Consulting, DWEA, DEDEA and NMBM.

The f ollowing p rovides a n ov erview of t he procedure f ollowed t hus f ar and

outlines t he p roposed p rocess t o b e i mplemented f or t he P hase Three:

Environmental Impact Assessment Phase of the process.

3.2. Phase One: Identification of Potential Windows and Sites (2000 –

2002)

The following provides an overview of the Public Participation Process

implemented f or th e i dentification o f p otential s ites a nd w indows for f urther

investigation in the Environmental Scoping Phase of the Project.

• Advertising of Proposed Project

Eight advertisements were placed in local and national newspapers to

announce Open Days, three weeks prior to the scheduled Open Days. I&APs

were also informed of the proposed project through flyers, press releases and

street posters. Street posters advertising the Open Day were erected 1 week

before the first Open Day in different areas in and around Port Elizabeth.




• Identification of I&APs

I&APs were identified during a process of advertising, networking meetings

and w ord-of-mouth, a nd included N ational a nd L ocal G overnment,

Community Based Organisations, Non-Government Organisations,

Environmental Forums, the business community and members of the general

public. The names and contact addresses of all identified persons, groups

and institutions were entered into a database to form a preliminary list of

I&APs. This database grew to 544 registered I&APs at the conclusion of

Phase One of the process and now presently stands at 1 098 I&APs, reflecting

ongoing interest being expressed and contact being made with I&APs. It i s

important to note that the registration of I&APs has not been restricted to the

two week period given to I&APs to register their interest in the project but is

an iterative process with the database constantly being updated to reflect

attendance at meetings.

• Distribution of First Briefing Paper

The first briefing paper was faxed, mailed or e-mailed to all registered I&APs

during the initial phase of the project in January and February 2000.

Depositing these briefing papers into post boxes at the post office proved to

be a very e ffective means of d istributing these documents. The briefing

paper was available at the Open Days, Networking and Public Meetings.

• Open Days

Four Open Days were held on 21, 22, 23 and 25 February 2000 respectively.

Formal i nvitations w ere s ent t o k ey I&APs, and I& APs w ho h ad already

registered on the p roject database. The main purpose o f these Open Days

was to d isseminate information on the proposed p roject, answer a ny

questions regarding the project and process, note any issues and concerns

from I&APs and receive input regarding possible sites for the GHWMF.

• Question and Answer Book

A 20 page Question and Answer book raising and responding to some key

issues around hazardous waste management and the site identification

process was produced. This was made available at all the Open Days and

mailed to all I&APs on the database.

• Ongoing Distribution of Information

I&APs were updated regarding the environmental and site identification

processes through the distribution of a series of letters.




• Networking Meetings

Networking m eetings a re one o n one m eetings b etween th e p articipation

consultant and a specific I&AP grouping and/or individual. I&APs are

proactively identified by the participation consultant to participate in these

meetings. T he p urpose of t hese m eetings is to p rovide I &APs w ith th e

opportunity to receive background information on the project, EIA and Public

Participation process as well as raise issues and/or concerns. These meetings

play a key r ole in developing the c apacity of I &APs to p articipate in the

process through the sharing of key project and process information.

• Site Ranking Meetings

A key aspect of the Public Participation Process has been the participation of

key I&AP groups in the ranking of potential sites. Guideline site selection

criteria were identified from the Minimum Requirements and presented to

I&APs during the Site Ranking Meeting. Three site ranking meetings were

held for broad generic I&AP groupings. T he purpose of these meetings was

to provide participants with an overview o f the s ite ranking criteria and the

opportunity to comment on these criteria as well as rank the proposed sites.

Participation at these meetings was as follows:

* environmental, business, farming associations and NGO sector (7);

* community based organisations and labour (15); and

* authorities (6).

3.3. Phase Two: Environmental Scoping of Potential Sites

The first phase of the Public Participation Process (outlined above) was conducted

from the beginning of 2000 to the end of 2002, a period of two years. Th is

process is characterized by the active participation of I&APs through numerous

meetings that were held at the outset of the process with a subsequent lull in

active participation of over a year. The lull in participation is as a direct result of

land a cquisition n egotiations d uring w hich t ime I&APs w ere u pdated on th e

process in writing.

Since the initiation of the process a number of changes took place within society

which impacted on the process, namely, the establishment of the Nelson Mandela

Metropolitan Municipality, changes in leadership within organisations, the

emergence o f n ew o rganisations a s w ell a s t he d isbanding of ot hers. These

changes necessitated a revision of the Public Participation Process to ensure that

all n ew a nd/or e merging organisations w ere p rovided th e o pportunity to

participate in the process. In order to accommodate these changes the following

occurred prior to commencing Phases Two and Three of the Public Participation

Process:




• Detailed database revision;

• Re-advertising of the Project;

• Networking Meetings; and

• Development of a Briefing Paper in English, Afrikaans and Xhosa

At the time of production of the Draft Scoping Report 733 I&APs were registered

on the database. T his number increased to 962 I&APs at the conclusion of the

Scoping Phase. The following provides more detail on the process implemented.

• Advertising

Newspaper a dvertisements w ere p laced i n local, re gional, p rovincial a nd

national newspapers notifying I&APs of the Environmental Impact

Assessment Process as follows:

* Die Burger 4 April 2003

* The Eastern Cape Herald 4 April 2003

* The Weekend Post 5 April 2003

* Sunday Times 6 April 2003

* Daily Dispatch 7 April 2003

The advertisement notified I&APs of the EIA and Public Participation Process

and again requested t hem t o r egister t heir interest i n t he p roject. T he

advertisements p layed a key role i n creating the opportunity for new I&APs

not yet on the database to register their interest in the project. Additional

newspaper advertisements were placed notifying I&APs of the release of the

Draft Environmental Scoping Report and its availability in various libraries

around the Metropole and other centers. These advertisements further

notified I&APs of Public Meetings that were to be held as part of the release

of the Draft Environmental Scoping Report.

• Briefing Paper 2 and Communication with I&APs

To update I&APs on the project, EIA and Public Participation Process a second

Briefing Paper was developed in English and translated into Xhosa and

Afrikaans. The purpose of the Briefing Paper was to assist in bridging the

information gap between I&APs that have been part of the process from the

outset and I&APs that had recently registered their interest in the project.

The B riefing Paper was mailed to a ll I&APs on the database together w ith a

brief covering letter in April 2003. In May 2003 a second letter was

distributed to a ll I&APs on the database. Included with this correspondence

was an Executive Summary of the Draft Environmental Scoping Report,

Comment Form as well as a Question and Answer B ook on the proposed

Regional General Hazardous Waste Processing Facility.





Networking Meetings were held with key I&AP groups prior to the re lease of

the Draft Scoping Report in March and April 2003. The purpose of these

meetings was to update them on the process, disseminate EIA, Public

Participation and Project information, as well as present candidate landfill sites

and selection criteria. I &APs were p rovided with the opportunity to raise

issues and concerns for consideration in the Draft Scoping Report.

Approximately 100 I&APs were personally met and consulted directly as part

of the networking process prior to the release of the Draft Scoping Report.

Upon the release of the Draft Scoping Report additional networking meetings

were held with I&APs. At the conclusion of the Scoping Process a total of 151

I&APs are registered as having participated in networking meetings. Copies of

registration forms are available for all meetings.

• Issues Report

Issues received in writing or raised at networking meetings during the Scoping

Phase Public P articipation w ere i ncluded i n the Issues Trail of t he D raft

Scoping Report. The Issues Trail was compiled by the PPP consultant and

forwarded to B ohlweki Environmental for them to coordinate t he response

from the relevant parties. Once the Final Issues and Response Trail has been

completed all I&APs that submitted written comments on the project were

provided with a letter of acknowledgement and a copy of the Final Issues and

Response Trail.

• Distribution of Draft Scoping Report

The Draft Scoping Report was made available to I&APs for comment at various

libraries and educational institutions within the Metropolitan area on 16 May

2003. The report was made available for a period of 30 days that is until 17

June 2003. In addition, the Draft Scoping Report was also placed on the

Internet at www.bohlweki.co.za for review and comment. I&APs attending

either the Public Meetings or Site Ranking Meetings were given a presentation

on the Draft Report and the opportunity to raise any additional concerns or

comment on the outcome of the site ranking process. I &APs were notified of

the a vailability of t he report i n w riting. T he a vailability t hereof w as a lso

advertised i n local, r egional a nd n ational newspapers. T he Draft S coping

Report was placed in the following locations:

* Nelson Mandela Metro Libraries: Govan Mbeki Avenue Main Library,

Uitenhage Library, Despatch L ibrary, Motherwell Library, New B righton,

Library and Newton Park Library




* National L ibraries: U CT G overnment P ublications D epartment a nd East

London Main Library

* Other: Agri Eastern Cape, Fitzpatrick Library - Addo and Sundays River

Citrus Company

• Public Meetings

Upon release of the Draft Scoping Report, a series of Public Meetings were

advertised and held as follows:

* 2 June 2003, PE City Hall Auditorium – attendance 38

* 2 June 2003, Raymond Mhlaba Sports Centre, Motherwell – attendance 41

* 3 June 2003, Valentine Hall, Addo – attendance 9

* 3 June 2003, Babs Madlakane Hall, Uitenhage – attendance 78

Additional requests were received from various organisations for Public

Meetings and were held as follows:

* 09 June 2003, Valencia Community Hall, Addo – attendance 71

* 09 June 2003, Nomathamsanqa Community Hall, Addo – attendance 9

* 09 June 2003, James Ndulula Primary School, Kwa Langa Uitenhage –

attendance 12

* 11 June 200, Sunday’s River Irrigation Board, Addo - attendance 30

A to tal o f 2 88 I &APs a re registered a s h aving p articipated i n the P ublic

Meetings. The presentation at the Public Meetings included an overview of the

candidate landfill sites together with the site ranking criteria for comment and

input by I&APs. The Public Meetings were advertised in local and regional

newspapers and all I&APs on the database were sent written notification of the

meetings.

• Focus Group Meetings

Additional s ite ranking meetings were held. A ll I&APs on the database were

notified of these meetings in advance and were provided the opportunity to

book a space to attend. In addition, key I&APs were identified to participate

in these meetings and were sent a separate invitation to remind them of these

meetings and encouraging them to attend. This reminder was followed up

with a telephone call. A t the meetings the key findings of the Draft Scoping

Report and the site ranking criteria were presented for comment by I&APs and

an o pportunity w as p rovided f or I&APs to rank th e p roposed s ites. T he

following Focus Group Meetings were held:

* 4 June 2003, PE City Hall, Civil Society, NGOs and Environmental Groups –

attendance 35

* 5 June 2003, PE City Hall, Business, Farmers, Land Owners, Local

Authorities – attendance 21




• Final Scoping Report

At t he c onclusion o f t he S coping P hase c omment p eriod, t he Issues a nd

Response Trial was amended to include any additional issues raised by I&APs

and the responses to the issues raised was co-ordinated by Bohlweki

Environmental. I&APs were notified in writing of the submission of the Final

Scoping Report to the DWEA for their consideration and decision making. The

Final Scoping Report will a lso be made available on the p roject website and

placed at strategic locations around the Metropole for viewing by I&APs.

3.4. Ranking Report Consultation Process

Public consultation around the Site Ranking Report was initiated in June 2004.

The following provides an overview of opportunities for public input prior to the

release of the site ranking report.


To c reate a l ink b etween t he S coping P hase a nd E IA P hase, a s eries o f

networking meetings were held with key I&APs. These meetings are one-on-

one meetings between the public participation consultant and key I&APs. The

purpose of the meetings was to provide them with an update on the project

and participation process as well as to proactively create the opportunity for

I&APs to issues and concerns that directly affect them. The following I&APs

were targeted for consultation during this stage of the project:

* PERCCI,

* SANParks (including Addo National Elephant Park),

* Democratic Alliance,

* Wildlife and Environment Society of SA,

* Worktops Trust,

* EC Agriculture Union,

* Sundays River Irrigation Board,

* Cicada Municipality,

* East Cape Clean Air Initiative,

* PE Tourism,

* ANC Regional Executive Committee,

* SACP Community Based Structures,

* COSATU PE,

* SANCO,

* Sundays River Valley Municipality,

* Sundays River Valley Tourism,

* Sundays River Valley Citrus Company,

* Affected Landowners,

* Nomathamsanqua Community




A total of 59 I&APs are recorded as having participated in the networking

meetings. All networking meetings were held prior to the Ranking Workshops.

• Ongoing Distribution of Information

In late August 2004 I&APs were updated on the EIA and site identification

process through the distribution of a letter which included the third briefing

paper. A t th is s tage of th e p rocess 1 006 I&APs w ere r egistered on th e

database. This was followed up w ith a second letter i n S eptember 2 004

inviting all I&APs on the database to attend Site Ranking Meetings proposed

for later in the same month.

• Distribution of Third Briefing Paper

The t hird b riefing p aper was d eveloped a nd m ailed t o a ll I &APs on t he

database together with the summary letter noted above. T his briefing paper

provided I&APs with an overview of the process to date and included two

maps, outlining the exclusionary and cautionary criteria for the i dentification

of potential sites and the Phase 1 EIA site map.

• Site Ranking Meetings

The legislation requires public input into the site ranking process. In line with

this I&APs have been included in site ranking throughout the process

(meetings h eld d uring th e Scoping Phase). In k eeping w ith these

requirements a ll 1 006 I &APs r egistered on the d atabase w ere i nvited to

attend one of the five site ranking workshops proposed. The purpose of these

workshops was to provide I&APs with the results of field studies conducted on

the sites, update them on the process and provide them with the opportunity

to rate the criteria used for ranking of the sites. Workshops were held as

follows:

* 20 September 2004, Valentine Hall, Addo

* 21 September 2004, Valentine Hall, Addo

* 21 September 2004, Nomathamsanqa Community Hall

* 22 September 2004, PE City Hall Auditorium

* 23 September 2004, PE City Hall Auditorium

In response to requests received f rom I&APs, the workshops held on the 22

and 23 September 2004 included a site visit to the proposed sites. A total of

98 I&APs are recorded as having participated in the Site Ranking Workshops.

The Workshop proposed on 21 September in Nomathamsanqua was poorly

attended. In order to ensure that this community is kept updated on the

process, a meeting was held with the local leadership on 14 October 2004.




The I&AP database was updated in line with the participation at these

meetings.

• Advertising

Newspaper a dvertisements w ere p laced b y th e C oega D evelopment

Corporation outlining the EIA and DWEA process and listing all the site ranking

workshops held. These advertisements were placed as follows:

* Die Burger 21 September 2004

* The Herald 21 September 2004

• Strategically Targeted Consultations

The consultation process allows for additional meetings with key I&AP groups.

The purpose of these meetings is to ensure that key I&APs are updated on the

process and that their issues and concerns are included in the EIA process.

Two additional meetings were held with SANParks and the newly constituted

Sundays River Valley Community Forum which will form an additional key

I&AP grouping to be included in the ongoing consultation process.

3.5. Footprint Ranking Report Consultation Process

Following the Ranking Consultation Process (as outlined in section 3.4 above) in

September 2004 a submission was made by the Sundays River Valley Community

Forum (SRVCF) motivating for the inclusion of two additional sites located on PPC

land for consideration. Based on the submission of the SRVCF a decision was

made t o d elay t he re lease of t he S ite R anking R eport t o a llow f or further

assessment and consideration of these sites. I&APs on the project database were

notified in writing of this delay in the process. The assessment of the additional

footprints p roposed b y the S RVCF t ook l onger than o riginally anticipated and

I&APs were again updated on the process in writing on 25 September 2005. The

Footprint Ranking Report was released on 10 April 2006 for public comment with

the original date for closure for comment being 25 May 2006. Due to the number

of public holidays during the comments period an extended comments period was

provided. I&APs were encouraged to submit their comments via fax, email, in

writing or by attending one of the public meetings held. K ey I&APs were sent a

reminder notification of the closure date on 18 May 2006.

• Notification of I&APs to Comment

The database of I&APs, which has been maintained since 2000 and regularly

updated th roughout th e p rocess, w as u sed as th e starting p oint for th e

notification o f I&APs. I &APs on th e p roject da tabase w ere s ent written

notification of the process, which indicated the availability of the Footprint




Ranking Report for comment, the closure period for comments and notification

of Public Meetings to be held.

• Advertising

In addition to the written notification provided to I&APs newspaper

advertisements w ere placed in one P rovincial newspaper, one regional

newspaper and two local newspapers, as follows:

* Daily Despatch, Monday 10 April 2006

* Weekend Post of the 15 April 2006

* The Herald, Monday 10 April 2006

* Die Burger, Monday 10 April 2006

• Information Dissemination and Availability (Capacity Building)

All I&APs were notified of the availability of the Footprint Ranking Report as

follows:

* Copies of the report were made available on the following website

www.bohlweki.co.za as well as at the following libraries:

− Nelson Mandela Metro Libraries: Govan Mbeki Avenue Main Library,

Uitenhage Library, Despatch Library, Fitzpatrick Library - Addo,

Motherwell Library, New Brighton Library, Newton Park Library

− National Libraries: UCT Government Publications Department and East

London Main Library

− Other: Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University Library (UPE) as well as

the former Technicon campus and Vista Campus libraries

• Public Meeting and Focus Group Meetings

In order to further develop the understanding of I&APs on the process being

followed as well as the Footprint Ranking Report the following Public Meetings

were held:

* 8 May 2006, Addo Valentine Hall (20)

* 8 May 2006 Addo, Nomathamsanqa (0)

* 9 May 2006, PE City Hall, (13)

The Public Meeting scheduled to be held at the Addo Nomathamsanqa

Community Hall on the 8 May was not successful with only 2 participants

arriving to attend the meeting. A previous meeting scheduled in September

2004 at the Nomathamsanqua Hall was also not successful. In order to attract

participants to th e meeting p amphlets a nnouncing th e m eeting w ere

distributed to schools i n the a rea and l oudhailer announcements were made

on th e S unday p rior to th e m eeting. T o e nsure t he p articipation of t his

community i n the p rocess a delegation of 11 representatives f rom the Addo

http://www.bohlweki.co.za/�




community attended the Civil Society Focus Group Meeting held on the 10

May 2006 at the PE City Hall (see below). A follow up public meeting in this

area was not rescheduled.

• Focus Group Meetings

In a ddition th e p ublic m eetings o utlined a bove th e f ollowing f ocus g roup

meetings were held as part of the public review process:

* 9 May 2006, PE City Hall, Environmental Sector (12)

* 10 May 2006, PE City Hall, Civil Society (52)

A c opy of th e e xecutive summary of t he F ootprint Ra nking Re port w as

available for I&APs at all the Public as well as Focus Group Meetings. The

issues raised by I&APs were compiled into an Issues and Response Trail and

included in the Final Footprint Ranking report.

• Ongoing Communication with I&APs

On the 8 December 2006 all I&APs were notified in writing of the availability

of the Final Footprint Ranking Report. T he report was again placed in public

libraries and on the project website for I&AP viewing.

3.6. EIA Stage Public Consultation Process

This s tage i n t he C onsultation P rocess f ocuses on p ublic c onsultation f or t he

following reports:

• Preliminary E nvironmental I mpact A ssessment (F easibility Re port, October

and November 2007)

• Draft Environmental Impact Assessment and Permit Application Report

• Preliminary Environmental Impact Assessment (Feasibility Report)

This section of the report provides an overview of the public consultation process

implemented from 3 October to 5 November 2007 for I&AP review of the Draft

Feasibility Report for the proposed project.

• Written Notification to I&APs and Project Database

A key component of the public consultation process is the maintenance of a

database of I&APs. A t the time of the release of the Draft Feasibility Report

for the project 1 049 I&APs were registered on the project database. Written

correspondence was mailed to all 1 049 I&APs notifying them of the release

of the Draft Feasibility Report for comment and inviting them to a ttend the

Public Meetings to be held during the review process. Appendix S of the Final




Feasibility Report contained copies of the correspondence sent to I&APs, to

notify them of the public review process which was held from the 3 October

2007 to the 5 November 2007. At the conclusion on the public review process

for the Feasibility Report the database was amended and 1 117 I&APs were

registered on the project database. Subsequent to the conclusion of this

stage of the process the database has been amended and currently includes

1118 registered I&APs.

• Advertising

In a ddition to th e written c orrespondence s ent to I &APs n ewspaper

advertisements were placed as follows:

* Herald 3 October 2007

* Die Burger 3 October 2007

* Weekend Post 6 October 2007

* Daily Despatch 3 October 2007

The newspaper advertisements placed included a list of venues where the

Draft Feasibility Report could be viewed, notification of the public meetings as

well as the project website where copies of the report could be downloaded,

namely, www.bohlweki.co.za. Appendix U of the Final Feasibility Report

contained a copy of the newspaper advertisements placed.

• Report Distribution and Access to Information

Access to information by I&APs plays an important role in the sharing of

information for the public consultation process. In addition to the project

website, where copies of the report could be downloaded, the Draft Feasibility

report was placed at the following public venues:


Uitenhage L ibrary, Despatch L ibrary, S ir Percy F itzpatrick L ibrary - Addo,

Motherwell Library, New Brighton Library, Newton Park Library


London Main Library

* Other: Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University Library (UPE) as well as

former Technicon and Vista campus libraries

In addition to the above the following key I&APs were provided with a hard

copy of the Draft Feasibility Report:

* Affected Organs of State (distributed by Bohlweki - SSI Environmental)

* Sundays River Valley Community Forum

* Wildlife and Environment Society

* Sundays River Citrus Company

* Swartkops Trust





Prior to the initiation of the process it was planned that all I&APs on the

project database would be provided with an executive summary of the Draft

Feasibility Re port. H owever d ue to th e s ize o f t he extended e xecutive

summary the distribution of this to all I&APs on the project database was not

possible. It should however be noted that I&APs had access to the report

through the project website. In addition, copies of the extended Executive

Summary were made available and distributed at both Public Meetings as well

as networking meetings that were held.

• Public Meetings

An additional method of providing information on the project, the

environmental assessment process as well as to document comments from

I&APs is the holding of public meetings. All I&APs were invited to attend the

following public meetings which were held during the review process:

* 24 October 2007, 2pm, Sunday River Water Users Association, Sunlands

(12 participants)

* 25 October 2007, 2pm, Edward Hotel Grill Room (26 participants)

The issues raised by I&APs as well as meeting registration forms are

contained in the appendixes to the Final Feasibility Report. The participation

of I&APs at the public meetings was also reflected in the project database.

• Strategically Targeted Consultation Meetings

In addition to the public meetings, targeted consultation meetings were held

with k ey I &AP g roups, th e ta rget o f t hese m eetings w as p redominantly

disadvantaged communities in order to provide them with an overview of the

project in their language. T he following provides a list of meetings held and

participation by community based structures:

* Kwanobuhle and Khayelitsha – 30 October 2007, 7 participants

* Despatch – 29 October 2007, 3 participants

* New Brighton and KwaZakhele – 01 November 2007, 4 participants

* KwaLanga – 29 October 2007, Zero attended

* Motherwell – 31 October 2007, 5 participants

* Wells Estate – 31 October 2007, 7 participants

* Zwide – 01 November 2007, 16 participants

* COSATU PE Local and SACP Regional – Zero attended but this was followed

up with a telephonic consultation to each organisation

* COSATU Uitenhage Local – 30 October 2007, 1 participant

* SANCO Regional – 02 November 2007, 5 participants

* ANC Regional – 05 November 2007, 2 participants

* Sundays River Valley Municipality – The technical department attended the

Addo Public meeting




* Nomathamsanqa (Addo) – 05 November 2007, 5 participants

* Swartkops Trust – 6 November 2007, 5 participants

A total of 60 I&APs were met with through the networking meetings, and all

I&APs were provided with a copy of the extended executive summary at the

meetings with the exception of the Zwartkops Trust which was provided with

a full copy of the Draft Feasibility Report. The notes from the meetings were

included in th e A ppendices to th e F inal F easibility Re port a s w ell a s th e

comments and response trail.

• Public Participation Report and Comments and Responses Trail

Comments on the Draft Feasibility Report were received through the following

mechanisms:

* Comments made at Public Meetings

* Comments made during targeted consultation meetings

* Emails/written comments received

* Comment forms faxed or mailed

The following provides a n ov erview of t he key issues ra ised b y I&APs i n

response to the Draft Feasibility Report:

* Issues related to air quality (20)

* Issues related to traffic and transportation (20)

* Issues related to land use and availability (4)

* Socio Economic related issues (17)

* Issues related to ground water and ground water contamination (7)

* Issues pertaining to the operational phase of the project (46)

* EIA and public participation related issues and comments received (21)

* General issues raised (8)

The detailed Comments and Reponses Trail was included as Appendix W of

the Final Feasibility Report.

• Final Feasibility Report Notification and Distribution

On 12 December 2007, Letter 11 was mailed to all I&APs on the project

database which notified them of the submission of the Final Feasibility Report

to the authorities for their decision making. Copies of the report were placed

at t he v enues i ndicated b elow a s w ell a s being m ade a vailable on t he

following website www.bohlweki.co.za:



Motherwell Library, New Brighton Library, Newton Park Library, Gelvandale

Library, Allenridge Library in the Civic Centre






London Main Library


former Technicon and Vista campus libraries.


copy of the Final Feasibility Report:

* Affected Organs of State (distributed by Bohlweki Environmental)




* Swartkops Trust

3.7. Draft Environmental Impact Report and Permit Application Report

This stage in the process has entailed consultation with I&APs around the Draft

EIR as well as the Draft PAR. The Draft PAR includes detailed facility designs and

operational p lans a nd aims t o address m any o f th e i ssues r aised during th e

previous rounds of public participation.

This section of the report provides an overview of the public consultation process

implemented from 20 January to the 20 February 2009 for I&AP review of the

Draft EIR and PAR. As a direct result of I&AP comment received from the Sundays

River Valley Community Forum during the review of the Draft EIR and PAR a

decision was made to revise the Draft EIR and release this report for an additional

30 day public review period prior to the reports being finalised for submission to

DWEA for their decision making. This section of the report therefore provides an

overview of the process that was followed for the review of the Draft EIR and PAR

and provides an overview of the process to be followed for the additional 30 day

comment period.

• Written Notification to I&APs and Project Database

A key component of the public consultation process is the maintenance of a

database of I&APs. The database was last updated in December 2007, prior

to commencing this stage of the public consultation process, the database

was reviewed and amended which resulted in a database of 1105 I&APs

(Appendix B). The reduction in registered I&APs is due to, amongst others,

requests received from I&APs to be removed from the database, the removal

of organisations no longer in existence and I&APs that may no longer hold

positions in organisations. Written correspondence, dated 20 January 2009,

was mailed to all 1105 I&APs notifying them of the release of the Draft EIR as

well as the PAR for comment and inviting them to attend the Public Meetings

to be held during the review period. A t the conclusion on the public review




process (20 February 2009) the database was amended and 1136 I&APs are

currently registered on the project database.

• Advertising

In a ddition to the w ritten correspondence s ent t o I &APs n ewspaper

advertisements were placed as follows:

* Herald 20 January 2009

* Die Burger 20 January 2009

* Weekend Post 17 January 2009

* Daily Despatch 20 January 2009

The newspaper advertisements p laced included a l ist of venues where Draft

EIA Report could be viewed, notification of the public meetings as well as the

project website where copies of the report could be downloaded, namely,

www.bohlweki.co.za. Appendix C of the Revised Draft EIR contains a copy

of the newspaper advertisements placed.

• Report Distribution and Access to Information

Access to information by I&APs plays an important role in the sharing of

information for the public consultation process. In addition to the project

website, w here copies o f th e r eport c ould b e d ownloaded, th e Draft E IA

report was placed at the following public venues:


Uitenhage L ibrary, D espatch L ibrary, S ir P ercy F itzpatrick L ibrary -

Sunlands, Motherwell Library, New Brighton Library, Newton Park Library,

Allenridge Library in the Civic Centre


London Main Library


former Technicon and Vista campus libraries


copy of the Draft EIR:

* Affected Organs of State (distributed by Bohlweki-SSI Environmental)




* Swartkops Trust

* CETT Committee, Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality

Prior to the initiation of the process it was planned that all I&APs on the

project database would be provided with an executive summary of the Draft





EIR. H owever d ue t o t he s ize of t he e xtended e xecutive s ummary t he

distribution o f th is to a ll 1 105 I &APs on t he p roject d atabase was n ot

possible. It should however be noted that I&APs had access to the report

through the project website, at public meetings as well as networking

meetings.

• Public Meetings

An additional method of providing information on the project, the

environmental assessment process as well as to document comments from

I&APs is the holding of public meetings. All I&APs were invited to attend the

following public meetings which were held during the review process:

* Tuesday, 3 February 2009, 12 Noon, Edward Hotel, Side Bar, Port

Elizabeth (21 participants)

* Wednesday, 4 February 2009, 12 Noon, Sundays River Water Users

Association, Belmont Road, Sunlands (Old Sundays River Irrigation Board

Offices) (18 participants)

The issues raised by I&APs, meeting registration forms and notes from the

public meetings are contained in the appendices to the Revised Draft EIR.

The attendance of I&APs at the public meetings is also reflected in the project

database.

• Strategically Targeted Consultation Meetings

In addition to the public meetings, targeted consultation meetings were held

with key I&AP groups, the target of these meetings are key affected I&AP

groups as well as disadvantaged communities in order to provide them with

an overview of the project in their language. The following provides a list of

meetings held:

* NMBM, Cllr Ward 60, 18 February 2009 (participants 1)

* South African Communist Party(SACP) Nelson Mandela Region, 19

February 2009

* (participants 1)

* Addo Nomathamsanqa Community Based Structures, 20 February 2009

(participants 5)

* Sunday’s River Valley Municipality, 24 February 2009, (participants 6)

* Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality, Cllr. Ward 53, 10 March 2009

(participants 1)

* ANC Nelson Mandela Region, 10 March 2009 (participants 1)

* Motherwell Councillor’s Forum, 10 March 2009 (participants 1)

* SANCO Nelson Mandela Region, 09 March 2009 (participants 1)

* Wildlife and Environment Society of SA, 10 February 2009 (participants 1)

* Swartkops Trust, 19 February (participants 5 )




A total of 23 I&APs were met with through the networking meetings. All

I&APs were provided with a copy of the extended executive summary at the

meetings with the exception of the Zwartkops Trust which was provided with

a full copy of the Draft EIR and PAR at the outset of the comment period. The

notes from the meetings are included in the appendices to the Revised Draft

EIR as well as being summarised in the Issues and Reponses Register.

• Public Participation Report and Comments and Responses Trail

Comments on the Draft Feasibility Report were received through the following

mechanisms:

* Comments made at Public Meetings

* Comments made during targeted consultation meetings

* Emails/written comments received

* Comment forms faxed or mailed

The following p rovides an overview of the k ey i ssues raised by I&APs in

response to the Draft EIR:

* Biophysical Issues of Concern (Fauna and Flora) (8)

* Issues related to roads and transportation of hazardous waste (30)

* Potential Impacts on Addo Elephant National Park (2)

* Potential Impacts on Air Quality (8)

* Potential Impacts on ground and surface water (17)

* Impact on PPC Operations (4)

* Project Monitoring and Detailed Implementation (53)

* EIA and Public Participation (20)

* General (9)

The detailed Issues and Reponses Register is included as Appendix D of this

report, including the minutes of meetings held during the Draft EIR review

period. It is important to note that some of the concerns raised cut across

issues, e.g. issues raised regarding transport may also have an economic

impact. When reading the Issues and Reponses Register it is important to

note that this is a summary of the issues and concerns raised by I&APs and in

order to obtain the full context of the submission the reader is referred to the

copy of the comment submitted by a given I&AP.

3.8. Revised Draft EIR notification and Distribution (current stage in

the process)

As outlined in section 3.7 above a decision was made to revise the Draft EIR and

PAR for a n additional I&AP review p eriod prior to f inalizing these reports for

submission to DEA for decision making. This stage in the process entailed

consultation with I&APs around the Revised Draft EIR.




The following provides more detail on the participation opportunities provided for

the review of the Revised Draft EIA and PAR.

• Written notification to all I&APs (Letter 13)

All I&APs on the project database, 1 131 I&APs, were notified in writing via

letter 13, of the 40 day comment period, which extended from the 30 March

to the 10 April 2010. Included with this correspondence was notification of

the Public Meeting scheduled to be held in Sunlands on the 20th

April 2010, a

comment f orm, a lis t o f lib raries a nd o ther venues ho lding c opies o f t he

Revised Draft EIA and PAR as well as the website through which copies of the

reports could be downloaded. A copy of the correspondence sent to I&APs is

included as an Appendix to this Report.

• Report Distribution and Information Availability

Copies of the Revised Draft EIA and PAR were made available for viewing at

the following public venues:

* Nelson M andela B ay L ibraries

*

: G ovan M beki A venue M ain L ibrary,




National L ibraries

*

: U CT G overnment P ublications D epartment a nd East

London Main Library

Other

: Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University (UPE) Library as well as

former Technicon Campus and Vista Campus Libraries

In addition t he r eports c ould b e d ownloaded through th e website

www.bohlweki.co.za

In a ddition to th e a bove, c opies of t he Re vised D raft E IA and P AR were

provided to the following key I&AP’s, Zwartkops Trust, WESSA, Sundays River

Valley Community Forum and the Sundays River Citrus Cooperative.

• Public Meeting in Sunlands

In order to facilitate public comment and input on the Revised Draft EIA and

PAR a Public Meeting, to which all I&APs on the project database were invited,

was held in Sunlands on the 20th April 2010. P resent at the Public Meeting,

to engage with I&APs, were representatives from Bohlweki-SSI Environmental

(Environmental Consultants) and the Coega Development Corporation (project

applicant).





The issues raised by I&APs, meeting registration forms and notes from the

public meeting are contained in Appendices to this Report. The public meeting

was a ttended by 12 I&APs, their participation at this meeting is re flected i n

the project database contained in an Appendix to this report. The comments

received f rom I&APs h ave b een i ncluded i n t he c omments a nd responses

report included as an Appendix to this Report.

• Strategically Targeted Consultations

A key component throughout the public participation process has been

strategically targeted consultations with community and other organizations.

These meetings have played a key role in sharing information with I&APs and

obtaining their comment on the Revised Reports. These meetings ensured the

ongoing participation of I&APs in the process. The following provides a list of

meetings held and includes the number of participants at each meeting.

*

*

Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality, Cllr. Ward 60, 18 February 2009

(participants 1)

*

South African C ommunist P arty (SACP) Nelson M andela Re gion, 19

February 2009, (participants 1)

*

Addo Nomathamsanqa Community Based Structures, 20 February 2009,

(participants 5)

* Sunday’s River Valley Municipality, 24 February 2009 (participants 6)

*

Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality, Cllr. Ward 53, 10 March 2009,

(participants 1)

* ANC Nelson Mandela Region, 10 March 2009 (participants 1)

* Motherwell Councillor’s Forum, 10 March 2009 (participants 1)

SANCO Nelson Mandela Region, 9 March 2009 (participants 1)

The notes from the meetings, including registration forms have been included

as Appendices to this report. The comments made at the meetings have also

been included in the Comments and Responses Trail for this report. The

project database has also been updated to reflect participation by I&APs at

the meetings. A total of 17 I&APs participated in these meetings.

• Database Maintenance

A key component of the public participation process is the maintenance of the

project database. At the start of this stage of the Public Participation Process

1132 I&APs were registered on the p roject database. In response to Letter

13 mailed to I&APs, 4 requests were received to remove I&APs from the

database and three requests were received to amend I&AP details. I n order

to r eflect th e p articipation o f I &APs a t M eetings a nd P ublic Meetings th e

database has been amended and now includes 1149 registered I&APs. A

copy of the database is included as an Appendix to this Report.




• Comments and Responses Trail

Comments made by I&APs during this stage of the public participation

process have been included in the Issues and Responses Trail included as an

Appendix to this Report. All hard copies of comments received including

notes from meetings held are included as an appendix to this report.

Comments from I&APs have been captured a nd received t hrough the

following mechanisms:

* Faxes, e mails, w ritten c omment f orms, c omments m ade a t th e p ublic

meeting, comments made at targeted I&AP meetings, written

correspondence received.

The following provides a brief overview of the comments received during this

stage of the Public Consultation Process:

*

* Biophysical Issues of Concern (Fauna and Flora) (2)

* Potential Impacts on Groundwater (2)

* Impacts on Air Quality (1)

* Traffic Impacts (8)

* Socio Economic Impacts of Concern (5)

* Heritage related impacts of concern (1)

*

Concerns a nd R ecommendations f or operational M anagement a nd

Monitoring (16)

* Project detail (3)

* EIA and Public Participation (17)

General (6)

3.9. Final EIA and Permit Application Report

The F inal E IA report has b een p repared ta king into a ccount t he c omments

received from I&APs in response to the review of the Revised Draft EIA and PAR.

All I&APs will be notified in writing (via letter 14) of the submission of the Final

EIA and PAR to DEA for their decision making. Key I&APs will again be provided

with a copy of the Final EIA and PAR, and a copy of the report will be available for

downloading through the website www.bohlweki.co.za Copies of the report will

also be made available at the following public venues:

* Nelson M andela B ay L ibraries

*

: G ovan M beki A venue M ain L ibrary,

Uitenhage L ibrary, Despatch L ibrary, S ir Percy Fitzpatrick L ibrary - Addo,



National L ibraries: U CT G overnment P ublications D epartment a nd East

London Main Library





* Other

: Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University (UPE) Library as well as

former Technicon Campus and Vista Campus Libraries

3.10. Environmental Authorisation and Appeal Period

The final stage in the Public Participation Process will entail notification to I&APs

of the outcome of the decision making process, and appeal period, including the

manner of appeal. I&APs will be notified of this in writing via Letter 15. A copy

of the ROD will be made available as follows: through the website and be placed

at Public venues. I&APs will also be able to request a copy in writing.

3.11. Concluding Remarks

The participation process implemented was designed in such a manner that it had

the flexibility to respond to and include I&AP groups as they emerged over time.

A combination of both passive and active participation techniques, verbal and

written communication has been used in order to meet the varying and

sometimes conflicting needs of I&APs. C apacity building has formed an integral

component of the process and is viewed not as a once off event but as a series of

events over time, which develops understanding on the project and capacity to

participate in the process.



Ch 4 – Study Area General Description June 2010 43

4. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA

4.1. Locality of the Study area

The broader study area is located within the greater Port Elizabeth region, within

the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality’s area of jurisdiction. The study area which

encompasses Footprint F (the Remainder of the Farm Grassridge 190,) is depicted

in F igure 4.1. Th is Revises Draft EIR focuses on t he site i dentified a s th e

preferred option (Footprint F) during the Final Feasibility Report exercise.

Figure 4.1: Map of the Port Elizabeth area showing the approximate position of

Footprint F (red circle)

4.2. Biophysical Environment

4.2.1. Topography

Footprint F (Grassridge 190 Remainder) is situated on a plateau at an elevation of

170 to 250 mamsl. This plateau forms the watershed between the Sundays River

and C oega Ri ver catchments a nd b oth f ootprints a re w ithin th e C oega Ri ver

catchment. Footprint F is located within a broad, low slope valley draining in a

southerly direction. No perennial rivers or streams drain the area.




4.2.2. Climate

The greater Port Elizabeth region l ies at the junction of several climatic regions,

resulting in unpredictable variations in wind, rainfall and temperature patterns.

The climate is generally warm and temperate.

A meteorological station was installed on Portion 2 of the Farm Blauw Baaitjies

Vley 189 in May 2005. T he station recorded hourly average temperature, w ind

speed and wind direction, precipitation and solar radiation.

• Wind

The p revailing w ind d irection is f rom th e south-southwest, no rthwest a nd

southeast. Winds are on average strong ranging between 10 and 30 metres

per second. Figure 4.2 shows the period, daytime and night time wind roses.

Figure 4.2: Wind roses for the period 18 May 2005 – 31 May 2006

• Temperature

Table 4.1 shows the average maximum and minimum temperatures as

recorded at the Port Elizabeth Weather Station (1961 – 1990) and Addo (158




– 1984), while Fi gure 4.3 shows the hourly average t emperature ranges f or

the meteorological s tation on Portion 2 of the Farm Blauw Baatjies Vley 189

(18 May 2005 – 31 May 2006). The meteorological station recorded

temperatures ranging between 4ºC and 39ºC. A maximum temperature of

38.77ºC and a minimum temperature of 4.44ºC were recorded.

Table 4.1: Temperature data for Port Elizabeth, Addo and Uitenhage

(SA Weather Services, Port Elizabeth)

Month

Monthly Minimum/Maximum/Average Temperature (°C)

Port Elizabeth Addo Uitenhage

Min Max Ave Min Max Ave Min Max Ave

Jan 17.9 25.4 21.7 16.6 29.2 22.9 17.3 27.8 22.6

Feb 17.9 25.4 21.6 16.6 29.3 22.9 17.5 27.9 22.7

Mar 16.9 24.6 20.7 15.4 28.1 21.8 16.1 27.0 21.5

Apr 14.3 23.0 18.7 12.1 26.2 19.1 13.0 25.8 19.4

May 11.5 21.7 16.6 8.7 24.0 16.3 9.6 24.0 16.8

Jun 9.2 20.3 14.7 6.0 21.9 14.0 6.9 22.3 14.6

Jul 8.8 19.7 14.3 5.2 21.9 13.6 6.4 21.8 14.1

Aug 9.8 19.6 14.7 6.4 22.6 14.5 7.9 22.0 14.9

Sep 11.4 20.0 15.7 8.8 23.6 16.2 10.2 22.7 16.4

Oct 13.1 20.8 17.0 11.0 24.6 17.8 12.3 24.3 17.8

Nov 14.6 22.3 18.5 12.9 26.3 19.6 14.3 24.8 19.6

Dec 16.4 24.3 20.3 14.7 28.1 21.4 15.9 26.8 21.4

Figure 4.3: Hourly average temperature recorded for the period 18 May 2005

to 31 May 2006




• Rainfall and Evaporation

While the South African weather bureau has data for Port Elizabeth, Uitenhage

and Addo in the area, evaporation is no longer measured. DWAF Hydrology

has weather stations at Addo, Groendal Dam and Port Elizabeth which

measure rainfall and evaporation. The data for Addo and Groendal Dam has

been included in Table 4.. The data from Port Elizabeth was not included, as

the coastal conditions were not taken to be representative of climatic

conditions inland. Rainfall data for Uitenhage from the SA Weather Bureau has

also been included in the table.

Table 4.2: Average Rainfall and Evaporation data from Addo, Groendal Dam and Uitenhage

Place Addo Groendal Dam Uitenhage

DWAF Station number

N4E001 M1E001 -

Data Source DWAF Hydrology DWAF Hydrology SA Weather

Bureau

Month Average Rainfall (mm)

Average S Pan

Evaporation (mm)

Average Rainfall (mm)

Average A Pan

Evaporation (mm)

Average Rainfall (mm)

Oct 37.9 126 63.1 138.5 33

Nov 41.7 155.3 69.8 152.4 35

Dec 34 189.2 58.5 182.3 44

Jan 32 188.7 60.7 183.5 41

Feb 33.1 150.6 52.4 144.5 30

Mar 42.7 126.6 68 135.4 23

Apr 39.7 85.2 56.8 100.2 29

May 26.5 63.4 35.6 85.8 36

Jun 22.4 49.6 26.6 73.3 28

Jul 23 53.6 33.9 81.3 42

Aug 33.2 68 55.7 95.2 46

Sep 27.6 91.4 53.5 109.6 30

Annual 395 1345.9 635.2 1480.1 417

Record Period 1959-2008 1959-2008 1950-2006 1958-2006 1964-1990

• Solar Radiation

The meteorological station on Portion 2 of the Farm Blauw Baatjies Vley 189

recorded an annual average solar radiation o f 192.7 W/m2

. This average i s

representative of day and night-time hourly average concentrations measured

during the period under review.




Incoming solar radiation increases from sunrise (07h00) reaching a maximum

of 1094 W/m2 in the afternoon (12h00) then decreasing again until sunset

(18h00) to a minimum of -0.482 W/m2

(Airshed Planning Professionals,

2006).

4.2.3. Geology

The geology of the study area is summarised in Table 4.3. The youngest

sequence is Quaternary and the o ldest is Cape S upergroup. A m ore d etailed

description of the geology is included in Chapter 7 of this report.

Table 4.3: The geology of the study area

Period Group Formation Lithology

Quaternary Fluvial terrace gravel

Bluewater Bay Alluvial sheet gravel and sand

Nanaga Aeolianite

Tertiary Alexandria Calcareous sandstone, shelly

limestone, conglomerate

Cretaceous Uitenhage Sundays River Greenish-grey mudstone, sandstone

Kirkwood Reddish, greenish mudstone,

sandstone

Cape

Supergroup

Witteberg Witpoort White quartzitic sandstone

Bokkeveld Karies Shale, discontinuous sandstone

Gamka Feldspathis sandstone, fossiliferous

Table

Mountain

Nardouw Arenite, quartz sandstone

Peninsula Quartzite, quartz sandstone

Graafwater Arenite, quartz sandstone, Quartzite

4.2.4. Soils

The footprints under investigation are all found within the Mesic Succulent Thicket

vegetation type, which usually occurs on deep, apedal, sandy loams to sandy-clay

loams. Within thickets, soils are richer in organic matter and moister than the

surrounding areas (Allsopp, Fabricius and Burger, 1996). Moreover, Allsopp et al

(1996) emphasised the importance of mycorrhizal symbiotic relationships within

thicket bushclumps.

Since this vegetation is located in the warm temperate climatic zone (Kopke,

1988), organic decomposition is high, enhancing nutrient cycling. This makes

this vegetation system efficient in terms of nutrient cycling. T his symbiosis also

generates a crumbly s oil t exture, w hich i ncreases w ater i nfiltration a nd c an

withstand wind and water erosion effectively (Allsopp et al (1996).




4.2.5. Hydrology and Geohydrology

No perennial rivers or s treams are located within the study area. F ootprint F is

located within the Coega River Catchment.

The most prominent regional aquifer in the area is the Uitenhage Artesian Basin

Aquifer. H owever a ll s ites u nder i nvestigation a re ou tside o f t he proclaimed

boundaries of the Uitenhage Artesian Basin. Although the boreholes in the study

area are considered to be fairly low yielding, groundwater in the area is used to

support basic human needs, stock watering and agriculture.

A more detailed description of the Geohydrology in the study area is included

within Chapter 7 of this report.

4.2.6. Flora

The study area lies within the Thicket Biome (Low and Rebelo, 1996) and consists

predominantly of two broad vegetation types, Valley Thicket and Bontveld. T he

Thicket vegetation contains numerous species that are endemic to the Eastern

Cape, and are mostly succulents and bulb-forming plants.

Bontveld is a unique vegetation type occurring in the Eastern Cape. It consists of

circular clumps of bush up to 3 meters high, which can vary in diameter from 1 to

20 meters. The thicket biome has been identified as being in need of urgent

conservation. Besides the current extensions to the Addo Elephant National Park,

the c onservation s tatus o f t his v egetation is c onsidered to b e r elatively p oor

(Lubke et al 1986; Palmer, 1989).

Conservation of representative areas of the Thicket Biome is important as this

vegetation type has been stressed and/or degraded in many areas and is still

under i ntense p ressure t hrough he avy g razing ( Hoffman a nd C owling, 1 990;

Kerley et al., 1995) and bush clearing for various forms of development (La Cock,

1992).

The vegetation occurring on all three sites considered in the Feasibility Report can

be described as Mesic Succulent Thicket with pockets of Bontveld occurring in

some areas.

A more detailed description flora is included within Chapter 5 of this report.

4.2.7. Fauna

Since the Mesic Succulent Thicket vegetation type supports a high diversity of

species and growth forms, it is correspondingly rich in animal life. The spiny




nature of this vegetation suggests a co-evolutionary process between herbivores

and the vegetation. Kerley et al (1995) suggests that herbivory i s an important

process in structuring communities in this vegetation. Herbivory by

megaherbivores is thought to have been the major source of disturbance in pre-

colonial times (Stuart-Hill, 1992; Kerley et al., 1995).

Historically, th is v egetation w as s ubjected to i ntensive b rowsing by a b road

diversity o f i ndigenous h erbivores (S kead, 1 987; M idgley, 1 991; Stuart-Hill,

1992). These herbivores have created the mosaic structure within the thicket

vegetation (Holmes and Cowling, 1993) through browsing and path formation

(Stuart-Hill, 1992). W ith the arrival of European and Xhosa settlers in the early

1700s, megaherbivores were systematically eradicated (Kerley et al., 1995) and

are presently restricted to a few conservation areas.

The medium and smaller herbivores such as kudu (Tragelaphus strepsiceros),

bushbuck (Tragelaphus scriptus), B lue duiker (Philantomba monticola), common

duiker (Sylvicapra grimmia) and grysbok (Raphicerus melanotis), have persisted

and are still found on farm land outside of protected areas. Kudu in particular

form the basis of an important hunting industry in the Eastern Cape.

This vegetation has a high diversity of insectivorous and frugivous birds. Cowling

(1984) suggests that this thicket relies on mammals and birds for seed dispersal.

The dense nature of this vegetation offers a unique microclimate for reptiles and

invertebrates. Disturbance in the vegetation alters the microclimate and then

presents an unsuitable habitat for a number of these small animals.

It has been confirmed that disturbance has negative impacts on the biodiversity

of animals (Dean and Milton, 1995). A number of the animal species that live in

thickets are dependent on undisturbed vegetation, for example, those that lay

their eggs on litter or are arboreal such as chameleons and tree snakes.

A more detailed description of site specific fauna is included in Chapter 6 of this

report.

4.2.8. Protected Areas

The nearest current boundary of the Greater Addo Elephant National Park

(Colchester section) is situated approximately 14 km from the study area (see

Figure 4.5). T he South African National Parks p lan to expand Addo to 270 000

hectares.

This p ark w ill incorporate re presentative e cosystems from f ive of t he seven

biomes in South Africa and will also boast the Big Seven, namely Rhino, Elephant,

Lion, Leopard, Southern Right Whale and the Great White Shark.




Figure 4.4: Google Maps and Earth image showing the approximate distance

(14km) between Footprint F and the closest current boundary of

the Addo Elephant National Park in the Colchester area




4.3. Social Environment

The study area falls within the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality (NMBM) and the

Sundays River Valley Local Municipality (SRVLM) in the Eastern Cape Province.

The closest towns to the study area are Addo and Uitenhage. All of the potential

alternative sites fall within rural areas with the farms zoned for agricultural or

mining land use. Demographic and socio-economic data such as population

grouping, language, industry, occupation and employment status are provided

and discussed in further detail in Chapter 14.



Ch 5 - Flora June 2010 52

5. FLORA

The findings of the vegetation assessment undertaken by Mr. J van Staden of

Bohlweki–SSI Environmental in his ca pacity as a vegetation specialist for the

Footprint Ranking Report (2006) remain valid for the EIA phase assessment. A

supplementary site visit was undertaken in mid-December 2007 to confirm the

previous assessment findings.

5.1. Introduction

Vegetation can be seen as the first order interface between man and his

environment. V egetation in its natural, undisturbed condition is fully integrated

and in balance with the environment. A pristine plant community therefore has a

built-in resilience to environmental disturbances, enabling it to withstand most

external pressures in the short term (i.e. fires) as well as long term catastrophes

(i.e. p rolonged d rought). Through t he a ges, m an ha s i mpacted o n t he

environment in many ways. Most often, the first and primary impact has been on

the vegetation. M an has altered vegetation to suit his needs in many ways, the

ultimate impact of which we have only begun to understand in recent times. The

loss o f b iodiversity ( especially in S outh A frica w ith its h igh level o f n atural

biodiversity), climate change and desertification are just some of the long-term

impacts we are trying to understand. The impact of human intervention on the

natural vegetation is often severe on a local scale because of the intensity and

persistency thereof ( e.g. cultivation, i nfrastructure development). T herefore, t o

adequately a ssess th e i mpact o f a m anagement i ntervention o n th e n atural

vegetation, it is important to know amongst others:

• Basic species composition and structure of the vegetation impacted upon;

• Current vegetation condition and reasons for degradation;

• Status of conservation and ecological value; and

• Basic ecological processes contributing to the vegetation cover of a specific

area.

5.2. Description of the floral habitat

In order to establish the most suitable footprint for the regional General and

Hazardous Waste Management Facility (GHWMF) in terms of vegetation several

potential sites within the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality were originally

assessed (Refer to F inal Feasibility Report dated December 2007). The status of

the existing natural vegetation, in combination with several other aspects for all

sites (i .e. f auna, g eotechnical, g eohydrology, a ir q uality, l and u se and v isual

impacts etc.), were used to decide where the proposed development was likely to

have the least environmental impact. Based on the outcome of the combined

assessment of several specialists, the current site, Footprint F, was chosen. This




Footprint is located on the farm Grassridge 190 RE. The vegetation occurring on

and s urrounding th e p roposed f ootprint c an b e de scribed a s p rimarily M esic

Succulent Thicket with some Bontveld areas occurring on thick calcareous layers

on the higher lying areas (Figure 5.1).

According to Lubke (1996), the Mesic Succulent Thicket (MST) occurs a long the

coastal areas of Port Elizabeth. I t extends from the Sundays River Mouth to the

Gamtoos Valley, in areas with an annual rainfall varying from 450 to 550 mm per

year and occurring mainly in the winter or spring-autumn months. In their more

detailed d escription o f s ubtropical th icket v egetation, Vlok a nd E uston-Brown

(2002) classify the vegetation of the study area as part of the Sundays Valley

Thicket. Temperatures may range from 10 to 35°C, with a mean maximum of

29°C a nd a m ean minimum o f 5 .9°C. The p redominant s oils m ay v ary

considerably and include consolidated dune sands, as well as lime-rich, sandy

clays derived from the Uitenhage Group. The densest thickets usually occur on

deep, apedal, sandy loams to sandy-clay loams (Hutton and Clovelly forms) and

this is regarded as one of the main factors responsible for the confined

distribution of this vegetation type.

Mesic S ucculent T hicket i n a g ood c ondition c an b e d escribed a s a n a lmost

impenetrable t hicket o f a bout 2 .5 m t o 3 m in h eight. T he c anopy c over is

estimated at approximately 90% and consists mainly of spinescent shrubs, woody

creepers and a variety of succulents. Species diversity is high and a high

proportion of endemic s pecies i s k nown to occur w ithin this v egetation ty pe.

Characteristic woody species include White milkwood (Sideroxylon inerme), Dune

Koko t ree (Maytenus procumbens) and S eptember b ush (Polygala myrtifolia),

while succulent species such as Uitenhage Aloe (Aloe africana), Bitter Aloe (A.

ferox), Noorsdoring (Euphorbia ledienii) and E. grandidens

may be locally

common (Lubke, 1996).

Although t he d ense n ature of p ristine t hicket m akes i t less s uitable f or g oat

farming, large areas have been opened up through intensive stocking of boer

goats a nd a ngora g oats. T his r esulted in s erious d egradation o f t he th icket

vegetation ov er l arge areas, which i s of ten irreversible. L arge areas o f t his

vegetation type were also lost through clearing for agricultural cultivation and

development of urban areas and coastal resorts. According to Lubke (1996), more

than 50% of the Mesic Succulent Thicket has been transformed while

approximately 5% is conserved in nature conservation areas along the Swartkops

River. During the screening process to determine the optimal localities of the

proposed footprints, areas with potentially sensitive vegetation (e.g. along the

main drainage lines, Eco-tones, Bontveld) or vegetation in a good to excellent

condition, w ere e xcluded f rom f urther c onsideration. T he proposed f ootprint,

therefore, occurs within vegetation that is regarded to be in a fair to degraded

condition, at best.



Figure 5.1: Google image with Footprint F development boundary indicating the vegetation condition on site

A – Bontveld B – Mesic Succulent Thicket in a bad to fair condition C – Mesic Succulent thicket in poor to highly degraded condition

D – Cultivated land in varying degrees of re-vegetation




5.3. Vegetation characteristics

The si te has been v isited on several occasions. The l ast two site v isits occurred

during September 2005 and again on 4 December 2007. T he potential footprint

for the GHWMF (Footprint F) is located in a shallow south-facing valley, close to

the watershed. The footprint is currently utilised for game farming.

Habitat diversity: Habitat diversity within the demarcated footprint is low due to

very little variation in the landscape and soils. The outer boundary of the footprint

is formed by a natural ecotone between the Bontveld and the Mesic Succulent

Thicket. This area is characterised by shallow calcareous soils and concretions.

The ecotone though, was excluded from the actual footprint due to i ts sensitive

nature and its potential as microhabitat for rare faunal species.

Species composition/richness: Species diversity of the Mesic thicket

vegetation on-site i s considerably low compared to Mesic Succulent Thicket in a

pristine condition. During the revised Footprint Ranking exercise, Footprint F was

identified as "preferred", and this "preferred" status was confirmed during the

Feasibility Phase

A large percentage (20%) of the footprint was cleared through cultivation (D on

Figure 5.1). A significant area (30%) was opened up through overgrazing with

many l ivestock and game footpaths (C on F igure 5.1). About 40% of the s ite i s

covered with Mesic Succulent thicket in a poor to fair condition (B on Figure 5.1).

In general these areas have been heavily infested with prickly pear.

The most common trees and shrubs include Euclea undulata, Schotia afra,

Portulacaria afra, Euphorbia ledienii, Aloe africana, Sideroxylon inerme, Rhus

robusta, Azima tetracantha, Carissa haematocarpa and Protasparagus

suaveolens. G rasses r ecorded i nclude Panicum maximum, Panicum coloratum,

Eragrostis curvula, Perotis patens and Cynodon dactylon. A small portion (10%)

along the northern boundary of the site is covered by Bontveld in a fair to good

condition (A on Figure 5.1).

Several healthy specimens of the sensitive species, Syncarpha striata were

recorded w ithin this s ection. A ccording to the proposed layout p lan f or th e

development th is patch of Bontveld will be destroyed by the construction of the

site offices and entrance buildings.




Figure 5.2: Cultivated lands on Footprint F

Figure 5.3: Highly degraded Mesic Succulent Thicket in foreground with

vegetation in poor condition in the background




Figure 5.4: Example of Mesic Succulent Thicket in a degraded poor

condition. The exposed areas have been colonised by mainly Aloe

ferox and Acacia karoo

Figure 5.5: A small patch of Bontveld in the foreground and remainder of the

site in the background. Except for the track and evidence of

grazing, the vegetation is in a good condition.




Figure 5.6: A healthy specimen of Syncarpha striata found on site

5.4. Main Potential Impacts on the Natural Vegetation

The main potential impacts of the development of the proposed GHWMF on the

vegetation are:

5.4.1. Integrity and functioning of sensitive vegetation types

All vegetation within the construction area of the actual waste site footprint (40 -

50 hectares) will be permanently removed. Access and service roads have the

potential to fragment even larger sections of vegetation, while dust deposition

around t he w aste s ite a nd a long t he a ccess a nd s ervice roads may h ave a

negative impact on the photosynthesis, transpiration and pollination processes of

most of t he plant s pecies. T his may upset the n atural competition b etween

species and may lead to long term changes in the species composition.

Within th e regional study a rea, th e B ontveld c an b e r egarded a s th e m ost

sensitive in this regard. This vegetation type occurs in a very restricted area and

is very poorly conserved. On Footprint F, Bontveld occurs on t he high-lying

calcrete ridges and is under increased pressure from adjacent mining activities.

This vegetation type could, therefore, be severely impacted by a waste s ite and

its associated infrastructure. Appropriate mitigation measures will be proposed in

the EMP to avoid any unnecessary damage to or loss of this vegetation type.




Mesic Succulent Thicket is the dominant vegetation type in the A lgoa Bay area,

but is also unique in composition and occurrence in the Eastern Cape region.

Urban s prawl, m ining a ctivities, i ndustrial d evelopment and agricultural

cultivation present a constant and ever-increasing threat to this vegetation.

Footprint F falls mainly within the Mesic Succulent Thicket while a small area of

Bontveld will be affected. Both of these vegetation types are regarded as

sensitive in a regional context. Removal of vegetation for the construction of a

waste site will have a similar type of impact on both of the vegetation types with

respect to ecosystem function. However, due to the good condition of the

Bontveld existing on site (Refer to Figure 5.1) and the comparatively smaller

amount of good condition Bontveld remaining in the surrounding area due to

intensive mining of this habitat, the impacts on the Bontveld habitat will be of

increased significance at a local and regional level.

5.4.2. Loss of endemic, protected and rare/endangered species

Recent s tudies r evealed s everal e ndemic, p rotected a nd/or e ndangered p lant

species in the Bontveld. Further studies are urgently needed to map, describe and

clarify Bontveld dynamics. Similarly to Bontveld, Mesic Succulent Thicket is poorly

conserved i n s pite of a h igh n umber of endemic, p rotected a nd e ndangered

species found in this vegetation type. In order to avoid damage to these

vegetation types, sensitive habitats and areas with a high biodiversity and of a

good to pristine condition were avoided as far as possible during the screening

process of potential sites for the proposed waste plant. In both of these

vegetation types, s pecific a ssociations b etween v egetation habitats and

rare/endangered animals occur. Impacts on the vegetation will, therefore, also

have secondary impacts on the sensitive animal species.

The sensitive plant species in especially the Bontveld should not be disturbed. The

relocation of species is not an option with both of these vegetation types due to

the inability of Succulent Thicket and Bontveld to re-establish i tself after severe

disturbance. Conservation of the succulent thicket and Bontveld must, therefore,

be done in situ - meaning that areas where rare and endangered species are

recorded should preferably be avoided.

5.4.3. Introduction and spread of alien plant species, weeds and invader

plants

The development of a waste s ite will cause a s ignificant amount of d isturbance,

especially d uring the c onstruction p hase. D isturbance o f s oil w ithin t he roa d

reserves and along the edges of the waste facility will be long term and the

original vegetation in these areas will be permanently lost. These areas may act




as invasion corridors for alien and invader plant species, which can be devastating

to the surrounding natural vegetation in the long term.

The invasion of large patches of vegetation in the area with Acacia cyclops (in the

Bontveld) and Opuntia ficus-indica or prickly pear (in the Mesic and Succulent

thicket) are just two examples indicating the high level of probability for alien

plant species invasion to occur.

5.5. Impact Assessment

Table 5.1 below provides an evaluation of the potential floral impacts on the

proposed s ite. A t a Local e xtent i t h as b een d etermined t hat site c learing

activities will have permanent impacts on the existing and largely transformed

Mesic Succulent Thicket and Bontveld system functioning and integrity.

However, due to the low species diversity of the Mesic thicket vegetation on-site

compared to pristine Mesic Succulent Thicket the impact of the proposed GHWMF

on existing Mesic thicket vegetation is deemed to be of low negative significance.

Due to the limited availability of good condition Bontveld in the area surrounding

the proposed GHWMF site as compared to the more prevalent Mesic Succulent

Thicket, the impacts on the Bontveld habitat will be of increased negative

significance at a Regional level.

It is predicted that the introduction and/or spread of alien invasive plant species

as a result of the proposed activity is likely, but the significance of this will be low

if adequately mitigated. The impacts on floral habitat are deemed to be of low

significance if the recommended mitigation measures (refer to Section 5.7 and

the Draft EMP) are implemented for the construction and operational phases of

the project.



Table 5.1: Floral impact assessment of Footprint F

Potential Impact Status Extent Duration Probability

Severity /

Intensity

scale

Significance

Post

mitigation

significance

Integrity and

functioning of Mesic

Succulent Thicket

Negative Local

Permanent

Improbable

Moderate

Low Low -

Integrity and

functioning of

Bontveld

Negative Local

Permanent

Probable

Moderate

Moderate Low -

Loss of endemic,

protected and

rare/endangered

species – Mesic

Succulent thicket

Negative Regional

Permanent

Improbable

Moderate

Low Low -

Loss of endemic,

protected and

rare/endangered

species – Bontveld

Negative Regional

Permanent

Definite

Moderate

Moderate Low -

Introduction and

spread of alien plant

species, weeds and

invader plants

Negative Local

Permanent

Highly

Probable

Moderate

Moderate Low -




5.6. Conclusion

From the above findings the following conclusions about the potential impacts of

the proposed GHWMF on the various aspects of the floral habitat are deemed to

be the following:

Presence of Rare and Endangered species: Although the diversity in habitat

is low and the Mesic Succulent Thicket is in a poor condition there is still potential

for Rare and Endangered species to occur within this vegetation type. Several

healthy specimens of the sensitive species Syncarpha striata were recorded within

Bontveld in a good condition which is located along the northern boundary of the

site and should be regarded as sensitive.

Ecological function: The vegetation within the area of the proposed GHWMF

footprint is providing the basic functions within the greater ecological system.

Vegetative cover is medium. Although some limited erosion does occur within the

game/livestock paths as well as on the old lands, the soil on the rest of the

footprint is adequately covered and protected.

Uniqueness/conservation value: In general Footprint F displays no specific or

important features different from the vegetation in the surrounding area. The only

area of real concern is the ecotone boundary between Mesic Succulent Thicket

and Bontveld as well as the small section of Bontveld along the northern

boundary of the site that needs to be protected (Figure 5.7).

The current preliminary layout and design detail for the GHWMF on Footprint F

will not infringe on the sensitive Bontveld area and ecotones boundary identified

during specialist assessment of the area. These areas should be fenced off during

the construction phase of the project



Figure 5.7: Ecotone boundary between MST and the Bontveld area to be excluded from development




5.7. Recommendations

Any development within this area should be approached with caution with regard

to the potential site specific sensitivity of patches of the composite vegetation

cover existing on site. The following recommendations are put forward:

Bontveld: Development on the Bontveld area along the northern boundary of the

site should not be allowed at all. Due to the available space on the proposed site,

a change in layout in order to exclude this Bontveld from all construction and

operational activity is required. This recommendation has been accommodated in

the preliminary layout and design detail for the GHWMF.

Loss of rare, endangered and/or protected species: The actual lay-out of

the site to be developed, along with the access routes and associated structures

should be marked clearly with hazard tape before commencement of construction.

This would allow a proper search and rescue effort to be executed. The

indigenous plants within these areas should be removed to an established nursery

(or one set out on the s ite) for use in the rehabilitation of disturbed areas after

construction. The plant search and rescue operation can be done with the help of

the local botanical society, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University (NMMU) and

Eastern Cape Nature Conservation.

Loss of Mesic Succulent Thicket: The permanent loss of vegetation within the

footprint area cannot be prevented. It can, however, be minimised by ensuring:

• Construction activities should be restricted to the minimum area needed.

• Complete r emoval of a ll e xcavated m aterial a nd c onstruction ru bble a fter

construction is completed.

Rehabilitation of disturbed areas: According t o c urrent e nvironmental

legislation, it has to be rehabilitated to resemble the surrounding and historical

vegetation. The establishment of a waste site provides an opportunity to recreate

the previous landscape to a large extent. This is possible by using landscaped

cells to conform to the general landscape of the area instead of the traditional

square cells with flat tops used at waste facilities.

Stormwater drainage: Stormwater from within the developed site should be

properly contained and should not be allowed drain off-site at all. Stormwater

flow p atterns a fter construction s hould b e c arefully c ontrolled to p revent

alteration of natural water flow patterns of the receiving vegetation downslope

from the site as far as possible.

Disturbance of vegetation: Due to t he difficulty to restore Mesic Succulent

Thicket a nd B ontveld v egetation, d isturbance o f n atural v egetation a long th e




access routes and around the site through trampling or compaction by motor

vehicles must be minimised through proper management. Accordingly:

• Optimal use should be made of existing access roads.

• Construction of new access roads should be minimised.

• After completion of construction, all access roads that will not be used during

the operational phase, should be rehabilitated and re-vegetated i f necessary

to blend in with the surrounding vegetation.

• Areas on the construction site that were notably compacted by construction

activities should be ripped to allow re-establishment of natural vegetation.

Alien Invasive Control: An alien plant control and monitoring programme must

be developed starting during the construction phase and to be carried over into

the o perational p hase. T he f ollowing e lements s hould b e i ncluded i n s uch a

programme:

• The active control of a ll a lien invasive species by means of manual removal,

ring-barking, chemical control or a combination of these methods.

• The bigger trunks and branches should be removed while the smaller

branches can be used as a soil stabiliser against wind erosion in exposed

areas, while providing micro-habitat for seedling establishment.

• Rehabilitation of the cleared areas, starting with the establishment of a grass

cover and phasing in the re-establishment of shrub species by sowing in of

appropriate seed mixes.

• All emergent alien plant seedlings must be removed by hand and re-sprouting

from existing rootstock must be chemically treated in a continual monitoring

and follow-up programme.

Soil pollution: Pollution of the surface and or ground water with petrol, d iesel,

oil, cement, paint, litter etc., secondarily affecting the vegetation of the receiving

environment must be prevented. Appropriate measures include:

• Construction activities should be l imited to the Hazardous Waste s ite a nd

servitude areas.

• Movement by construction personnel outside of the demarcated development

areas should be strictly prohibited.

• Adequate n umbers a nd p lacement of p ortable c hemical t oilet f acilities a t

construction sites is crucial to prevent unnecessary pollution of the

surrounding vegetation. A ratio of one toilet per fifteen persons is proposed.

• During c onstruction, littering, s pecifically o f t he n atural a reas, s hould b e

prevented. Adequate containers for l itter removal should be supplied on site.

These c ontainers s hould b e e mptied on a regular b asis a nd t he c ontents

removed to an appropriate and licensed waste disposal site.




• During operation specific care should be taken to prevent the spread of a ir-

blown and other litter from the site. Screening of the site with diamond mesh

fences of appropriate height may help to contain most of the air-blown litter.

Regular cover with soil and compaction of the waste layer should also be

implemented.

Risk of fire: The risk of accidental fires to occur during the construction phase is

considered to b e h igh, e specially d uring th e d ry s ummer m onths and w indy

periods. F ires could s pread to vegetation o n p roperties a djacent t o th e s ite,

especially t o t he p rivate G rassridge n ature r eserve w hich c ould lead l oss of

biodiversity. Accordingly:

• Accidental fires should be prevented through proper sensitisation of the

contractors a nd t heir workers t owards t he associated r isks, d angers a nd

damage of property.

• An emergency preparedness plan should be in place to fight accidental veld

fires, should they occur. The adjacent land owners/users/managers should

also be informed and involved in the establishment of a Fire Protection Agency

according to the Veld and Forest Fire Act.

• Enclosed areas for food preparation must be provided. The use of open f ires

for cooking of food by construction personnel should be strictly prohibited.

• Use of branches of trees and shrubs for fire making purposes must be strictly

prohibited.



Ch 6 – Fauna June 2010 67

6. FAUNA

This faunal assessment was undertaken and compiled by Dr William Branch from

the Port Elizabeth Museum (Bayworld), in his capacity as a faunal specialist. This

chapter has been revised to be specific to Footprint F , but remains re flective of

the specialist report conducted for the Footprint Ranking Report (2006).

6.1. Introduction

The terrestrial fauna of the proposed site for the GHWMF was discussed in an

earlier assessment of p otentially suitable footprints (Branch 2 004) during the

Screening p hase of t he p roject. The f ollowing d iscussion o f f aunal d iversity

focuses on the preferred site, Footprint F.

The terms of reference for the EIA phase specialist faunal study required the

faunal assessment of the following in more detail for Footprint F:

• areas of high biodiversity;

• the presence of faunal species of special concern, including sensitive, endemic

and protected species;

• the presence of areas sensitive to invasion by alien species; and

• the presence of conservation areas and sensitive habitats where d isturbance

should be avoided or minimised.

The faunal study had to investigate mammals, avifauna, reptiles, amphibians,

and insects. The deliverables resulting from these studies have included:

• A report detailing the following for footprint F:

∗ faunal diversity;

∗ habitat associations and conservation status of the identified fauna;

∗ an assessment of the potential direct and indirect impacts resulting from

the p roposed d evelopment, both o n th e f ootprint a nd th e i mmediate

surrounding area; and

∗ a discussion of monitoring and mitigatory measures that can be adopted

to reduce negative impacts for each phase of the project, where required.

These measures have also been included within the Environmental

Management Plan.

• Checklists o f faunal g roups i dentified i n th e r egion to da te, h ighlighting

sensitive species and their possible areas of distribution.

• A sensitivity map of the areas highlighting sensitive areas that should be

avoided during planning and construction, or recommending specific

mitigatory measures that may alleviate impacts.




6.2. Methodology

6.2.1. Survey

A supplementary site visit was undertaken in mid-December 2007. It

supplements earlier visits to the site (Branch 2004). Visual surveys were

undertaken of the varied habitats. Birds were recorded visually, and some reptiles

collected opportunistically. Most faunal diversity was assessed on the basis of the

presence of suitable habitat. In some cases the presence of species was

confirmed by d irect observation o r i nference of p resence f rom i ndirect evidence

(e.g. t racks, faeces, nest si tes, etc.), o r a fter discussion w ith PPC (current l and

owners) personnel and land owners in adjacent areas.

6.2.2. Faunal diversity

The f ollowing r eview o f f aunal d iversity e xpands a nd u pdates th at of B ranch

(2004), which was based on published accounts summarized in: Branch (1998),

Channing (2001), Minter et al (2004), Harrison et al (1997), and Skinner and

Smithers (1990). Relevant updates include Branch (2008), Skead (2007) and

Skinner & Chimimba (2005).

6.2.3. Species of Special Concern (SSC)

Species of Special Concern (SSC) are species that are:

• known to be endemic to the region;

• considered to be of conservation concern; or

• in commercial trade (CITES listed species).

Endemic species (derived from references above) are considered to be species

with at least 90% of their range restricted to the Algoa Bay region. Species of

conservation concern are those South African Red Data Listed Threatened Species

(using IUCN categories) detailed in: Amphibians (Harrison et a l. 2004), Reptiles

(Branch 19 88, a nd SA RCA o ngoing r evision), B irds ( Barnes 20 00), M ammals

(Friedmann and Daly 2004), and butterflies (Henning and Henning 1989).

Species whose international trade is regulated are derived from the CITES

appendices (http://www.cites.org/eng/resources/species.html).

6.2.4. Habitat Associations

Abiotic (wetlands, rock outcrops) and biotic (vegetation types) habitats are

important to different faunal groups. Footprint F contains relatively few habitats,

and these include:




• Bontveld

• Bontveld limestone outcrops

• Mesic Succulent Thicket

• Wetlands

Bontveld: Patches of open Bontveld (Figure 6.1) are located in the northern

section of Footprint F. More extensive areas of Bontveld are traversed by the

major road l inkages between Footprint F and the municipal and industrial areas

that the proposed GHWMF will serve.

Figure 6.1: Natural Bontveld grassland with bush clumps in the Grassridge

area - Note the threatened Blue Crane foraging in habitat

Bontveld limestone outcrops: A characteristic feature of Bontveld habitat is

patches of exposed l imestone bedrock. These are important for a suite of small

reptiles, including the critically endangered Albany adder.

Mesic Succulent Thicket (MST): Patches of MST occur in drainage lines where

erosion has removed the limestone layer that prevents the development of large

shrubs and t rees. Bush clumps d evelop where b reaks i n this l ayer occur in

Bontveld grassland. Much of the MST on Footprint F has been cleared for

agriculture and is now heavily degraded.




Figure 6.2: Exposed limestone bedrock in Bontveld habitat in the northern

section of Footprint F

Figure 6.3: Bush clump in Bontveld grassland in the northern section of

Footprint F




Figure 6.4: Cleared and degraded Mesic Succulent Thicket habitat in the

southeast section of Footprint F

Wetlands: No permanent or significant temporary wetlands occur on Footprint F

as the site is situated at the head of a drainage l ine to avoid potential f looding.

The c atchment b elow F ootprint F d rains in a s outherly d irection t owards th e

Coega River. This catchment, potentially affected by discharge from the proposed

GHWMF, does not contain any wetlands of significance for water birds or other

aquatic fauna. The Coega River is small and its water is not used for irrigation or

as a municipal water source.

6.3. Faunal diversity

The Algoa Bay region in which Footprint F is situated has a relatively diverse

fauna, and for reptiles, it is a minor centre of endemism (Branch 1988).

6.3.1. Protected areas

Footprint F does not fall in an official national, provincial or municipal protected

area, or Important Bird Area (Barnes 1998), or Ramsar wetland site (Ramsar

2007).

6.3.2. Invertebrates

Due t o t heir s heer n umbers i nvertebrates a re ra rely c onsidered i n d etail in

environmental impact assessments. Butterflies are an exception, but this reflects

the charisma of the group, the easy availability of field guides (e.g. Migdoll, 1987;

Woodhall, 2005), and a recent synopsis of threatened taxa (e.g. Henning and

Henning, 1989). However, it does not reflect any greater importance, or any

exceptional or seminal role that they play in ecosystem functioning relative to




other invertebrate groups, such as beetles or ants. Velvet Worms (Onychophora,

Hamer et al. 1997) and dragonflies (Odonata, Tarboton & Tarboton 2002) are

some of the few invertebrate groups whose conservation status has been

assessed. No threatened or endemic species for these groups are found in the

Algoa Bay region.

• Butterfly Diversity:

Over 1 20 b utterfly s pecies m ay occur i n t he r egion, b ased on W oodhall’s

(2005) ma ps. T his d iversity is do minated by t he f amilies Lycaenidae,

Nymphalidae, Pieridae, Hesperiidae and Papilionidae.

• Habitat associations:

Butterfly habitat associations are usually linked to the f ood plants of their

larval stages, and/or their symbiotic associations. M ore butterflies are l inked

to M esic S ucculent T hicket (M ST) th an Bontveld d ue t o t he g reater p lant

diversity of the former habitat. However, the more sensitive butterflies are

associated with Bontveld grasslands.

• Conservation status:

In S outhern A frica t he b utterflies m ost a t e nvironmental ri sk a re t he

myrmecophilous (ant-associated) Lycaenidae. These species are often quite

local and rare, as they require the presence both of the host ant and host plant

as well as optimal climatic conditions. Due to the complex interaction between

the co-adapted ant, caterpillar and host plant these species are particularly

vulnerable to disturbance of their preferred habitat. Two such species occur in

the Grassridge region, although only one has an important breeding site. The

small blue lycaenid butterfly Lepidochrysops bacchus is known from widely-

scattered localities in the Western and Northern Cape, as well as from four

localities in the Eastern Cape (Henning and Henning, 1989). O ne of these is

reported to occur in the “general area” of Grassridge (Pringle, 1999), where its

preferred habitat is given as “well-vegetated, rocky mountain slopes” (Henning

and Henning, 1989). There i s no evidence t hat this ra re butterfly occurs on

Footprint F or that suitable habitat for the species exists in the area. The rare

lycaenid b utterfly Aloeides clarki inhabits c oastal flats to th e north of P ort

Elizabeth and along the Sundays River. It has a complex life cycle. The female

lays her eggs on the food plant, a species of Aspalanthus. After emergence

the larva feeds on the leaves of the plant, hiding themselves by spinning small

shelters between the leaves. The larva only develops a honey gland from the

third instar stage and it is probable that from this stage onwards the larvae

cohabit with their host ant, Acantholepis capensis in the ant nest. The larva

pupates and the butterfly can be found throughout the warmer months f rom

September to April (Clark 2006). The species is rare, but colonies still exist

near Barkley Bridge in the Sundays River Valley and also in Butterfly Valley

within the Coega IDZ. The scientifically important type locality for the species




(Aloes, Coega Flats, Cape Province) has been destroyed by development in the

region, particularly of the Aloes waste disposal facility. Other known sites

include (Clark 2006):

* Coega Flats – type locality, unlocated (possibly near Aloes waste facility)

* Butterfly V alley, C oega I DZ. A ‘ No Go’ p rotected a rea w ithin t he IDZ,

comprising approximately 1km of l imestone edge on the west bank of the

Coega River valley, south of the N2 (between 33˚ 47’26.61”S,

25˚39’49.94”E and 33˚47’19.81”S, 25˚40’12.69”E).

* Coega R iver v alley e dge, n ortheast of C oega B rickworks clay p it, IDZ

(33˚44’45”S, 25˚40’14”E). It lies approximately 4.96km northeast of

Butterfly Valley.

* Coega q uarry (33̊43’43.5”S, 25˚39’06.2” E), north of Coega Brickworks,

IDZ.

* Sunday River Mouth (33̊ 43’01.45”S, 25˚51’23.96”E), approximately 20km

east of Butterfly Valley.

No potential habitat for this species occurs on Footprint F. The Coega

Development C orporations’ Open S pace M anagement P lan p rovides f or t he

conservation of Butterfly Valley, w here the rare lycaenid butterfly Aloeides

clarki has previously been found (Bullet 2 above).

6.3.3. Amphibians

The Eastern Cape has a diverse amphibian fauna, with a total of 32 species and

subspecies present (Channing 2001).

• Diversity:

Amphibians a re t he l east s pecious g roup of t errestrial v ertebrates i n t he

proposed GHWMF region, and 16 species may occur. This represents almost a

sixth of the species known from South Africa. However, none are endemic to

the Algoa Bay region. Fortunately most species are probably widely distributed

throughout the coastal regions. However, amphibian populations are declining

globally under a variety of local and global threats, and they have been aptly

termed b io-indicator s pecies f or e cosystem s tability. D ue t o t he lack of

permanent water on Footprint F, few amphibians are likely to be present.


Due to the limestone substrate Bontveld has few permanent aquatic habitats,

and thus has lower amphibian diversity than adjacent MST. However, it is

used temporarily by many amphibians out of the breeding season (e.g. toads,

Amietophrynus sp.) and by the rain frog ( Breviceps adspersus) which is a

terrestrial breeder, not dependent upon standing water for reproduction.





No t hreatened a mphibians o r a mphibian S SC o ccur i n t he r egion o f t he

proposed GHWMF.

6.3.4. Reptiles

Of 421 reptiles recorded from South Africa, at least 144 occur in the Eastern Cape

(Branch, 1998, plus subsequent studies). This diversity is greater than that of

Western Europe, and reptiles form an important component of vertebrate

diversity w ithin t he P rovince. T hey a lso h ave lo w m obility a nd h igh h abitat

specificity, particularly lizards and tortoises.

• Diversity:

Reptile diversity in the Algoa Bay region is high, with 52 species known or

likely to occur (Branch, 1998; Branch and Braack, 1987). This includes 26

snakes, 22 lizards, and 4 chelonians. Only 12 species were confirmed in the

general vicinity of Footprint F, although the presence of two-thirds (66.7%) of

these have been confirmed as occurring on or within 15 km of the site (Branch

unpublished observation). They represent a lmost half of a ll reptiles recorded

from the Eastern Cape.


The majority of reptiles within the region are found in MST (45: 86.5%), but

many also occur in the Bontveld grassland and bush clump mosaic

(35: 67.3%).


The most important threatened reptile in the region is the Albany dwarf adder

(Bitis albanica) (B ranch 1999). This s mall adder (Fig. 6.5) w as described

initially from the vicinity of Grahamstown (Hewitt 1937). Subsequently it is

only known from the Sundays River area, particularly in the Grassridge area.

The species is known from less than 20 specimens, and the Grassridge area

contains the only extant known population.

The s pecies i s of P riority C onservation i mportance, a nd current k nowledge

indicates that it is Globally Critically Endangered. The species is not recorded

from any conserved area, and has only been collected in some of the few

remaining patches of Bontveld habitat. Although not previously recorded on

Footprint F, it has been found on PPC land within 1km of Footprint F and is

likely to occur in the northern part of the site in Bontveld habitat. In addition,

access roads t o a nd f rom t he si te w ill p ass t hrough si tes f rom w hich t he

species has been recorded.




Figure 6.5: The Critically Endangered Albany adder (Bitis albanica)

Three other reptiles are endemic to Algoa Bay and also occur in the region of

the proposed GHWMF, including:

* Tasman's girdled lizard (Cordylus tasmani): A small, arboreal girdled lizard

(Fig. 6.6) restricted to MST in the Algoa Bay region. I t has a preference

for sheltering under dead bark on trees and in the apron of dead leaves of

large Aloe species, particularly A. ferox. It i s th reatened by habitat loss

from farming activities resulting in large scale clearance of MST for the

production of pasture and arable land. The informal and formal collection

of aloe leaves for their sap also destroys its specific habitat, although the

aloe plants themselves remain. Although not listed in the SA RDB for

reptiles and amphibians (Branch, 1988), international trade in the species

is controlled by CITES legislation. It is well protected in a number of

conserved areas, including the Addo Elephant National Park (Branch and

Braack, 1987).

Figure 6.6: Tasman’s Girdled Lizard (Cordylus tasmani)




* Tasman’s l egless sk ink (Acontias tasmani): A thin legless skink restricted

to leafy, humic, surface soils in the Algoa Bay region. It is well protected

in a number of conserved areas, including the Addo Elephant National Park

(Branch and Braack, 1987).

* Algoa dwarf burrowing skink (Scelotes anguineus): Another thin, gracile

legless skink restricted to sandy soils in the Algoa Bay region. It is well

protected in a number of conserved areas, including the Addo Elephant

National Park (Branch and Braack, 1987).

A number of species probably present on Footprint F are a lso l isted in CITES

Appendix II, including the rock monitor (Varanus albigularis), the water

monitor (Varanus niloticus), the southern dwarf chameleon (Bradypodion

ventrale), Tasman’s g irdled l izard ( Cordylus tasmani), l eopard t ortoises

(Stigmochelys pardalis), a ngulate to rtoise ( Chersina angulata) a nd th e

common p adloper ( Homopus areolatus). All a re c ommon th roughout t he

Eastern Cape, and well protected in existing conserved areas with no evidence

of illegal or unsustainable exploitation in the region.

6.3.5. Birds

South Africa has a very rich avifauna, comprising resident breeders and migrants

(including Intra-African migrants and Palaearctic migrants).

• Diversity:

A total of approximately 120 common bird species can be expected in the

region of the proposed GHWMF site. Of these, 70 were recorded during the

site surveys. Nearly 200 bird species have been recorded from the core Addo

Elephant National Park, which comprises mainly MST habitat with Bontveld

patches (Urquart & Klages, 1997).


The majority of birds within the region are found in MST (95, 80.5%), but

many also occur in the Bontveld grassland and bush clump mosaic

(74, 62.7%).


Three threatened bird species, the martial eagle, Stanley’s bustard and Blue

Crane, all listed as Vulnerable in the SA RDB (Barnes 2000), occur in the

vicinity of the p roposed GHWMF. A ll species a re scarce with a d iscontinuous

breeding r ange and h ave d eclined t hroughout m uch o f t heir r ange d ue t o

habitat a lteration, h unting, s naring a nd c ollisions w ith p ower l ines ( Barnes

2000). Stanley’s bustard and the blue crane both use open habitats such as

Bontveld grassland, and both were observed during the site surveys, and are

frequently recorded i n the a rea. T he b lue c rane has undergone a noticeable




decline in numbers over most of its range in southern Africa, with poisoning by

farmers and afforestation of grasslands given as the major reasons. In the

Eastern Cape the decline has been particularly dramatic, with numbers falling

from about 8000 birds in the early 1980’s to around 1500 birds by the late

1980’s (Vernon et al. 1992). One other bird species is considered to be of

regional conservation concern. T he secretary bird is a widespread but scarce

resident species, and on e w as ob served i n Bontveld g rassland a djacent to

Footprint F during t he first site survey. An overall decrease in numbers is

ascribed to loss of habitat due to overgrazing, bush encroachment,

disturbance, a fforestation and cu ltivation. The species i s presently considered

Near Threatened (Barnes 2000).

6.3.6. Mammals

Despite the emphasis placed on large mammals in the conservation literature

they make up less than 15 percent of the total mammal diversity in South Africa.

The majority of mammals are small or medium-sized, with rodents being the

most successful of all living mammals. Swanepoel (1988) noted that of 292

terrestrial mammal species in southern Africa, 128 (44%) were recorded from the

Eastern Cape. Although these figures are now somewhat out of date they do

demonstrate the mammalian diversity of the Province. Few of the large and

medium-sized mammal fauna that previously occurred in the region now occur

naturally in t he w ild. Most a re locally extinct or occur in s mall, f ragmented

populations usually in forest reserves or in protected areas.

• Diversity:

In developed and farming areas, such as the region for the proposed GHWMF,

mammal f aunas a re g reatly r educed, w ith t he v ast m ajority o f m ammals

present being small or medium-sized. Rodents are without doubt the most

successful of all living mammals and most rodent species are small. However,

what they lack in size, they make up for in numbers and the biomass of small

mammal communities is often significant. The mammal fauna of the nearby

Addo Elephant National Park (69 species; Urquhart & Klages 1997), indicates

the type of d iversity h istorically occurring in the region. O nly about half (35

indigenous, 2 introduced) of this diversity probably r emains, and it is

disproportionately represented by small to medium-sized species. D uring the

field s urveys t he p resence o f 1 5 m ammal s pecies ( two i ntroduced) w ere

confirmed, including:

Vervet Monkey Cercopithecus aethiops

Black-backed Jackal Canis mesomelas

Yellow Mongoose Cynictis penicillata

Small Grey Mongoose Galerella pulverulenta

Rock Hyrax Procavia capensis




Aardvark Orycteropus afer

Cape Grysbok Raphicerus melanotus

Steenbok Raphicerus campestris

Kudu Tragelaphus strepsiceros

Scrub Hare Lepus saxatilis

Porcupine Hystrix africaeaustralis

Common Molerat Chryptomys hottentotus

House Rat (introduced) Rattus rattus

House mouse (introduced) Mus musculus

Striped mouse Rhabdomys pumilo


The m ajority o f m ammals w ithin t he r egion a re f ound in M ST ( 36 o f 3 7

species, 97.3%), with fewer favouring open Bontveld habitat (15 of 37 species,

41.2%). M ost species i n B ontveld h abitat a re n octurnal f oragers i n th e

grasslands, sheltering during the day in the bush clump mosaic.


The f ew ma mmal s pecies s urviving i n t he re gion g enerally c onsidered of

conservation c oncern a re t he A frican wild c at, aardvark and honey badger

(previously classified as Vulnerable; Smithers 1986). However, neither the

African wild cat nor the aardvark are now considered threatened (Least

Concern, Friedmann & King 2004), whilst the honey badger is classified as

Near Threatened (Friedmann & King 2004). The African wild cat is threatened

by hybridisation with domestic cats. Besides the loss of habitat that would be

caused if the proposed development of the GHWMF went ahead, it is

anticipated that there would be an influx of feral domestic cats which would

threaten the population of African wild c at in the surrounding a reas. The

aardvark i s a w idespread s pecies b ut i s locally t hreatened b y d irect

persecution. The proposed development would lead to a loss of habitat as well

as i ncreased p redation b y h umans, e specially a s t his sp ecies i s p rized i n

traditional medicines. The honey badger or ratel is threatened by habitat loss

and direct persecution.


A variety of impacts will be associated with the construction and operation of the

proposed GHWMF on Footprint F. These can be summarised as:

• Loss and fragmentation of habitats

• Loss of faunal diversity

• Barriers to animal movement

• Loss of Species of Special Concern

• Increase in problem animals and alien species




• Increased disturbance and mortality due to road traffic

• Changes in natural fire regime

• Air pollution

• Loss or reduction of ecosystem functioning

These impacts are assessed in detail below, and summarised in Table 6.1.

6.4.1. Loss and fragmentation of habitats

Phase

: Construction

Discussion

: Footprint F is situated in a complex of habitats that have been termed

Grass Ridge Bontveld, and can be considered as a mixture of Mesic Succulent

Thicket (MST), Bontveld and Grassy Fynbos. MST and Bontveld are both

considered sensitive habitats, with Bontveld containing the greater number of

threatened fauna. The most sensitive part of Footprint F is along the northern

boundary where Bontveld exposures occur.

Nature

Mesic Succulent Thicket habitat is under severe pressure in the Eastern Cape due

to extensive bush clearance. It is the major habitat occupied by the endemic

Tasman’s g irdled lizard ( Cordylus tasmani) and T asman’s b urrowing s kink

(Acontias tasmani). It also supports the greatest diversity of mammals, birds and

reptiles. Bontveld vegetation has been classified as highly sensitive and the total

extent o f t his unique vegetation t ype is v ery l imited. T he G rassridge a rea

contains one of the largest intact regions of Bontveld, but is already under severe

threat f rom m ining a ctivities b y P PC. B ontveld is th e m ain habitat f or th e

endemic and Globally Critically Endangered Albany adder (Bitis albanica), and the

karst formation in the limestone pavement may provide essential refugia for other

: Project actions associated with the construction of the proposed GHWMF

and the development of transport links will result in the loss and fragmentation of

sensitive habitats. The proposed waste facility on Footprint F will impact a variety

of habitats, particularly Bontveld and MST. D ifferent and often specialized fauna

are associated with these habitats, and they may be impacted in different ways.

Both habitats are naturally fragmented by topographic and edaphic factors. In

general, any development process that results in habitat fragmentation can affect

faunal diversity in a number of ways. It can lead to the loss of viable populations,

especially in animals requiring large home ranges (e.g. birds of prey, bovids,

carnivores, p rimates, e tc). In addition to i ncreased mortality o f animals moving

between habitat fragments, the disruption to gene flow between isolates reduces

biological fitness in the long-term, compromising the ability of a population to

adapt to future environmental perturbation. T errestrial fauna obviously differ in

the extent to which they are dependant upon specific habitats. S pecies may be

habitat specialists in terms of their need for specific resources.




hibernating re ptiles a nd invertebrates. I ts op en g rassland a lso s upports

threatened birds such as Stanley’s bustard, blue crane and secretary bird.

Impact summary

• Status: Loss and f ragmentation of MST and Bontveld habitats will occur and

will form a negative impact.

:

• Extent: The impact will be local and l imited to the footprint of the proposed

GHWMF.

• Duration: The impact will occur over the lifetime of the proposed GHWMF

(long term, > 15 years), but for MST this need not be permanent with full

rehabilitation on closure.

• Probability: The impact will definitely occur.

• Severity/beneficial scale: The impact w ill be moderately severe as i t i s long-

term, but for MST habitat can be mitigated by rehabilitation on closure.

• Proposed mitigation: The impact has proactively been partially mitigated by

avoiding d irect l oss o f intact B ontveld habitat. A ll p roject a ctions d uring

construction and subsequent operation of the proposed GHWMF should avoid

Bontveld habitat. After closure of the facility all habitats, where possible,

should b e r ehabilitated to th e e xisting v egetation type. T his is p robably

attainable f or M ST, b ut B ontveld is a g rowth f orm d ependent u pon t he

underlying limestone pavement, and once this has been removed it cannot be

re-habilitated.

• Significance (after mitigation): As the loss and fragmentation of habitats will

be l ocalised, and careful s iting o f the proposed GHWMF has d irectly avoided

intact Bontveld habitat, the impact will be Low, after mitigation.

6.4.2 Loss of faunal diversity

Phase

: Construction and operation

Discussion

: Although the r egion f or th e p roposed GHWMF has a r ich faunal

diversity, some vertebrate groups in the region are now characterised by reduced

faunal diversity due to direct and indirect effects of previous and current land use.

This is p articularly n oticeable f or la rge ma mmals that h ave b een la rgely

extirpated. The a vifauna re mains re latively ri ch, a lthough n umbers of c ertain

groups ( e.g. ra ptors and large t errestrial birds) a re r educed. T he l ess

conspicuous reptile and amphibian fauna remains re latively unaffected. There i s

no information on whether certain invertebrate groups have undergone reductions

in population numbers. T he highest faunal diversity occurs in MST habitats, but

bush clumps in Bontveld serve as refugia for many species, and Bontveld

grasslands are home to a number of specialist species. Highest faunal diversity is

associated with the habitat mosaics occurring along and adjacent to drainage

lines.




Nature

: P roject a ctions a ssociated with the c onstruction a nd operation of t he

proposed GHWMF will result in the loss of faunal diversity. This w ill occur in

numerous ways, including increased mortality, loss of habitat and disturbance.

The extent o f the impact will vary in the d ifferent groups due to their ability to

migrate to and from the area, to tolerate disturbance, and/or to re-colonize the

region. T he greatest impact will occur with diurnal, visible species such as large

mammals, b irds s uch as r aptors a nd b ustards, etc., a nd l arge s nakes, e.g.

cobras.

Impact summary

• Status: Loss of faunal diversity will occur and will form a negative impact.

:

• Extent: The impact will be local and limited to the immediate area of the

proposed GHWMF.


(long term, > 15 years), but need not be permanent if mitigation is

implemented.

• Probability: The impact is highly probable.

• Severity/beneficial scale: The impact will be moderately severe as it will occur

over a relatively long-term period, but can be mitigated on closure.

• Proposed mitigation: The impact can be mitigated in various ways, including:

* restricting disturbance to degraded MST habitat;

* prohibiting hunting, disturbance and collection of animals in the area; and

* promoting an undeveloped buffer zone around the proposed GHWMF to

serve as reservoir of fauna for future rehabilitation.

• Significance (after mitigation): the loss of faunal diversity will be localised and

the fauna is also relatively impoverished. The unmitigated impact will

therefore be Moderate, but with possible rehabilitation of MST on closure this

may be reduced to Low significance.

6.4.3 Barriers to Animal movement

Phase


Discussion

: The proposed GHWMF and the construction of linear developments

(road linkages and power lines) will result in habitat fragmentation. These will

form barriers to animal movement within the region, both for terrestrial fauna

and to the aerial flight routes of migrating birds.

Nature: Linear developments such as roads may disrupt the movement of species

within their normal home ranges, or the seasonal movement of migratory

species. Habitat fragmentation may require species to make long movements

between patches of suitable habitat in search of mates, breeding sites or food. At

such times they may suffer increased mortality, e ither d irectly by road vehicles,

or from their natural predators due to unnatural exposure. The disruption of gene




flow between small mammals in fragmented habitats can rapidly lead to genetic

divergence, l oss o f genotypic f itness and i ncreased extinction potential (Gerlach

and Musolf, 2000).

Impacts o n a nimal m ovements w ill b e g reatest i n r egions w ith h igh h abitat

fragmentation, or where linear developments such as roads transect migratory

paths. Most large mammals that may have undertaken seasonal movements are

mainly extirpated throughout the region. However, kudu and other small game

survive a nd m ove b etween h abitat pa tches, p articularly a t n ight in a djacent

Bontveld grassland from MST.

Reptiles and amphibians do not undertake long distance migrations, but both

groups may undertake short seasonal movements. T he m ini-karst formation o f

Bontveld limestone provides many small underground cavities and caves in which

small vertebrates and invertebrates can over-winter. Similarly, many frogs move

to wetlands during the breeding season, and when moving en masse to breeding

ponds may suffer heavy casualties whilst crossing roads (Langton, 1989; Fahrig,

et al., 1995).

Impact summary

• Status: B arriers t o a nimal m ovement w ill oc cur a nd w ill f orm a n egative

impact.

:


proposed GHWMF and the approach transport links.


(long term, > 15 years), and the impact of transport linkages will probably

continue after closure.


• Severity/beneficial s cale: T he i mpact w ill b e m oderately s evere a s i t is a

relatively long-term impact, and is difficult to mitigate.

• Proposed mitigation: Mitigation of the impact is difficult. M easures to reduce

speeds o n r oads t o min imise m ortalities t o wildlife a re u sually d ifficult t o

enforce. Most deaths occur at night, and restricting operations to day light

hours will r educe th e impact. For small a mphibians migrating t o breeding

sites, various solutions have been proposed (summarised in Langton, 1989).

However, no suitable breeding ponds for amphibians occur on the site.

Mortalities on roads, particularly of threatened species such as the Albany

adder, should be monitored by the site Environmental Officer. If certain areas

are found to involve unusually high mortality rates then suitable mitigation

(e.g. the erection of low fences alongside the problem area) may be required.

• Significance (after mitigation): As the barriers to animal movements will be

localised and many of the transport l inkages already exist, the impact of the

additional development will be Low.




6.4.4 Loss of Species of Special Concern (SSC)

Phase

: Construction

Discussion

: A number of SSC occur in the region. Among invertebrates, colonies

of the threatened Myrmecophilous lycaenid butterfly Aloeides clarki occur in close

proximity, and possibly on Footprint F (Clark 2006). The species is rare, but is not

strictly e ndemic to th e p roposed GHWMF site, a nd a s pecial re serve f or t he

species has already been established (‘Butterfly Valley’) in the Coega IDZ.

Studies on the species’ biology are currently underway (Clark 2006). A number

of reptilian SSC occur in the region, including a Globally Critically Endangered

snake (A lbany a dder, Bitis albanica), t hree endemic l izard s pecies ( Tasman’s

girdled lizard, Cordylus tasmani; Tasman’s legless skink, Acontias tasmani; and

the A lgoa d warf b urrowing s kink, Scelotes anguineus), a nd s ix C ITES-listed

species. W ith t he e xception of t he A lbany a dder, a ll t he ot her re ptiles a re

relatively common, w idespread i n the region, and protected w ithin the adjacent

Addo Elephant National Park. The lack of protection for the Albany adder is

critical and is of urgent national conservation concern. A number of birds of

special concern occur in the region, e.g. Stanley’s Bustard, Blue Crane, Martial

Eagle and Secretary bird. Most appear to be occasional visitors to the region and

no b reeding p opulations of t hese s pecies a re k nown i n the re gion. A mong

threatened mammals, only the honey badger (Nationally Near Threatened) may

occur in the region.

Nature

: Project actions associated with the proposed GHWMF may result in the

loss of Species of Special Concern. Project actions impacting SSC include the

destruction and loss of sensitive habitats, particularly Bontveld, and increased

mortality and disturbance due to increased road traffic and the possibility of bird

species flying into powerlines during operation of the facility.

Impact summary

• Status: Loss of SSC may occur and would form a negative impact.

:

• Extent: The impact would be local and limited to the proposed GHWMF and

immediate surrounds.

• Duration: The impact may occur over the lifetime of the proposed GHWMF

(long term, > 15 years), but need not be permanent if on closure habitat

reclamation and faunal re-colonisation occurs.

• Probability: The impact will probably occur.

• Severity/beneficial scale: The impact may be High to Moderately severe as i t

occurs over a relatively long-term.

• Proposed mitigation: The impact can be mitigated in various ways, including:

* avoiding disturbance in Bontveld habitat;

* prohibiting hunting, disturbance and collection of animals in the area;




* promoting a b uffer z one a round th e p roposed GHWMF to serve a s a

reservoir for faunal recolonization;

* the possible presence and population status of adjacent threatened

species, particularly the Albany adder and butterfly Aloeides clarki, should

be regularly monitored by specialists; and

* a viable and committed conservation plan for the Albany Adder must be

developed by the proponents of major projects that impact endangered

Bontveld habitat and its threatened fauna. Since the adder’s description in

1937, the Grassridge area is the only known site in which a small

population of the species has been found.

• Significance (after mitigation): The possible loss of SSC will be localised and

usually of low impact for most SSC. However, because of the close proximity

and possible presence of a Globally Critically Endangered species (the Albany

adder) the impact will be of potentially Moderate to High significance.

6.4.5 Increase in problem animals and alien species

Phase


Discussion

: P roject a ctions a ssociated w ith t he co nstruction o f t he proposed

GHWMF and t he d evelopment o f t ransport l inks w ill re sult in a n increase i n

problem animals and a lien species. Problem animals including jackal, feral dogs

and cats, grey-headed gulls, various crows, and introduced rats and mice that are

attracted to refuse disposal areas. In addition to social impacts such as the

spread of d isease, e.g. plague carried by rat f leas, they are a lso responsible for

various faunal impacts. Their numbers in the area surrounding the proposed

GHWMF may displace local fauna from i ts habitat; cause increased predation on

local fauna and introduce or spread wildlife diseases.

Nature: Both plant and animal invasives may be accidentally introduced and

impact on faunal diversity. Alien vegetation may be poisonous to the native

fauna, or m ay r eplace e xisting indigenous v egetation. T here a re f ew a lien

reptiles and no alien amphibian invasives in South Africa. The tropical house

gecko (Hemidactylus mabouia) has expanded its range throughout much of the

KwaZulu-Natal south coast (Bourquin, 1987) and scattered towns in the Eastern

Cape and Free State, including Port Elizabeth (Branch, 1998). It is thought to be

directly responsible for the decline in coastal populations of the Pondoland flat

gecko, Afroedura pondolia (Lambiris and Bourquin, 1993). Alien birds, such as the

house sparrow (Passer domesticus), European starling (Sturnus vulgaris), Indian

myna (Acridotheres tristis), and House crow (Corvus splendens) have also

actively expanded their range in association with urbanization along road routes

(Harrison et al., 1997). The latter two species are aggressive aliens that have

recently been observed in the Port Elizabeth region, and are likely to become

established in disturbed areas. Urban rodent pests such as the house mouse




(Mus musculus) and house rat (Rattus rattus) are now widespread. The Norway

rat (Rattus norvegicus) is larger and more aggressive than the house rat, but is

currently restricted to major c ities and towns in the coastal region (Skinner and

Smithers, 1990). It may prove a greater danger to indigenous small mammals

than its cousin. Both rats can serve as carriers of plague. Once introduced, alien

species are often difficult and costly to eradicate.

Impact summary

• Status: An increase in problem animals and alien species may occur and will

form a negative impact.

:

• Extent: The impact will be local and limited to the proposed GHWMF and

adjacent areas.


(long term, > 15 years), but need not be permanent if aliens and problem

species are adequately controlled.


• Severity/beneficial scale: The impact could be moderately severe as it is an

ongoing threat over a relatively long-term.

• Proposed mitigation: The increase in problem animals and alien species is

difficult to mitigate, and requires adequate monitoring of the arrival of a lien

species and the development of humane and effective protocols for the control

of problem species. These should be incorporated into the Environmental

Management P lan f or the proposed GHWMF. T he n ecessity fo r co ntrol is

ongoing; the House Crow was successfully controlled in Durban from 1989-

1991, when control was curtailed after which crow numbers increased rapidly.

This species, l ike rodent pests, has the potential to become a human health

hazard at the proposed GHWMF and in adjacent areas. To restrict attraction

and a ccess t o t he proposed G HWMF the p erimeter of t he site s hould b e

surrounded with suitable fencing to restrict the movement of problem

animals, such as jackal and vervet monkeys, onto the site. D omestic waste

should a lso b e c overed a s s oon as p ossible t o r educe t he a ttraction o f

scavenging animals, e.g. gulls.

• Significance (after mitigation): As the potential impact c an b e e ffectively

controlled the impact will become Low.

6.4.6 Increased disturbance and mortality due to road traffic

Phase


Discussion: A lthough t he ne w r oads associated w ith a ccess t o t he p roposed

GHWMF are short, the operational phase of the facility will involve a significant

increase in transport to and from the facility on existing roads. This will result in

increased disturbance and faunal mortality due to increased road traffic over the

long-term.




Nature

: Ve hicle t raffic is n oisy a nd a t n ight a lso in volves c onsiderable li ght

pollution from car headlights or lighting in peri-urban areas. Together t hese

factors ca n d epress l ocal p opulations o f se nsitive birds a nd large m ammals.

Animals differ in the degree to which they tolerate such disturbance. Most large

breeding birds do not tolerate continuous disturbance, particularly raptors and

large t errestrial b irds ( bustards, c ranes, e tc). I ncreased n oise a nd motor

vibrations in wetlands may a lso impact amphibian breeding choruses, which are

also intolerant of increased light levels (Buchanan, 1993). Many animals are killed

or injured whilst crossing roads. This may occur during normal movements within

a sp ecies h ome ra nge, e .g. v iverids, s nakes ( Rosen a nd L owe, 1 994), a nd

hedgehogs (Huijser and Bergers, 2000); during annual breeding migrations (e.g.

frogs; Fahrig et al., 1995) or seasonal migrations (e.g. many birds); or when

attracted t o r oads either f or w armth (s nakes a nd l izards) o r for f ood f rom

previous road kills (e.g. v ultures, crows and carnivores) or wind-accumulated

seeds (many small granivorous passerines and rodents).

Mortalities on roads, particularly in pristine areas, may impact significantly on

long-lived, wide-ranging species. Tortoises in North America occur in significantly

lower numbers in areas transected by busy roads than they do in comparable

habitats w ith n o r oads ( Nicholson, 19 78). Si milarly, s hort-lived, e xplosive

breeders, i .e. species t hat undertake mass m igrations to well-defined and l ong-

established breeding sites (e.g. many amphibians) are very susceptible to

vehicles when crossing roads during their mass breeding migrations. Populations

can be easily decimated at such times, and massive road mortality can soon lead

to local extinction. Noise pollution and physical disturbance associated with road

traffic c an a lso d isturb m any l arge m ammals. Increased f ire r isks a re a lso

associated with road traffic.

Impact summary

• Status: Increased mortality due to increased road traffic will occur and will

form a negative impact.

:


proposed GHWMF and transport linkages.


(long term, > 15 years).


• Severity/beneficial scale: The impact will be moderately severe as it will occur

over a relatively long-term and cannot easily be mitigated.

• Proposed mitigation: Disturbance and road mortalities can be reduced by:

* limiting road activity to daylight working hours;

* by maintaining low speed limits (<40km) on site; and

* by maintaining wide road margins with low vegetation cover.

• Significance (a fter m itigation): A s a n i ncrease i n f aunal m ortality d ue t o

increased road traffic cannot be avoided, the impact will be Low.




6.4.7 Changes in natural fire regime

Phase


Discussion

: Fire in many ecosystems, particularly grasslands, is a natural

phenomenon and prevents thicket development. However, industrial

developments may directly increase the danger of accidental fires, as well

indirectly leading to adjacent developments and increased urbanisation that also

increase the fire risk. Climate change, via global warming, also has the potential

to increase the existing fire risk.

Nature

: Changes in water flow dynamics following road construction and other

developments that reduce vegetation cover, may reduce the water table locally,

drying vegetation t o u nnatural levels and m aking it more s usceptible to f ire.

Construction and p lanning of roads should anticipate an increased f ire r isk, and

increased human population growth in the area will also lead to an increase in

accidental fires.

Impact summary

• Status: An increase in fire risk may occur and will form a negative impact.

:

• Extent: The impact is local.

• Duration: The probability of the impact will occur over the lifetime of the

proposed GHWMF (long term, > 15 years).


• Severity/beneficial scale: The impact w ill be low, although it will probably

occur over a relatively long-term, i t can be mitigated during the operational

phase.

• Proposed mitigation: Sections of the road running through, or adjacent to

sensitive habitats (e.g. Bontveld), should have sufficient buffer zones to allow

the presence of suitable f ire breaks. T hese should be maintained at regular

intervals t o ensure t heir e fficacy. R oad b orders s hould b e re gularly

maintained to ensure that vegetation remains short and that they therefore

serve as an e ffective f irebreak. S uitable f irebreaks should surround s torage

depots of f lammable materials, which should be bunded, s ituated away from

sensitive habitats, and equipped with adequate fire control facilities.

• Significance (after mitigation): Low.

6.4.8 Pollution

Phase


Discussion: Many faunal groups are sensitive to pollutants. Lead concentrations

are higher in small terrestrial mammals collected alongside roads than in bats

caught in the same areas (Clark, 1979). Frog diversity in ponds affected by




pollution from road run-off is depressed (Hecnar and Mcloskey, 1996), and the

accumulation of herbicides and their residues in adjacent wetlands can lead to

developmental abnormalities in tadpoles and metamorphosing froglets. Traffic on

unpaved road sections generates dust that can negatively impact vegetation in

the region.

Nature

: P ollution m ay r esult f rom p eriodic accidents, o r f rom slow, o ngoing

contamination. Operation of the proposed GHWMF, particularly in relation to the

use of liquid fuels, could result in periodic spillages. Heavy vehicle traffic is also

associated with increased local pollution resulting from exhaust fumes, oil spillage

and accumulation of rubber compounds from tyre wear. These pollutants can

cause localised impacts.

Impact summary

• Status: An increase in local air and water pollution could occur and will form a

negative impact.

:

• Extent: The impact is local, although increased road traffic will cause a low

regional impact.


(long te rm, > 1 5 y ears), b ut n eed n ot b e p ermanent i f m itigation a nd

rehabilitation on closure occurs.


• Severity/beneficial scale: The impact on fauna will be low if correctly

mitigated during the operational phase.

• Proposed mitigation: Sensitive wetlands o r patches of th reatened vegetation

may need protection from road surface water run-off containing pollutants,

and the application of herbicides to control plant growth in road reserves and

around the proposed GHWMF should be monitored.

• Significance (after mitigation): Low.

6.4.9 Loss or reduction of ecosystem functioning

Phase


Discussion

: P roject a ctions a ssociated w ith t he c onstruction o f th e proposed

GHWMF and the development of transport links will result in the loss or reduction

of ecosystem functioning. The general region of the proposed GHWMF comprises

a mosaic of vegetation and abiotic habitats, on an elevated region with drainage

into the nearby Coega and Brak River catchments. Although there is a long

history of agricultural use and transformation in the region, it still retains

relatively high f aunal and f loral d iversity a nd c ontributes t o l ocal e cosystem

functioning (e.g. nutrient cycles and transfer, maintenance of biodiversity, the

biological components of hydrological cycles, etc.).




Nature

: The distribution of biodiversity within the region is not uniform.

Different habitats have different carrying capacities, and biodiversity in grassland

is usually low. H ighest levels of biodiversity occur in habitat mosaics and at the

ecotones between habitats.

Impact summary

• Status: Negative impacts on ecosystem functioning will occur.

:

• Extent: The impact will be local and limited to the immediate area of the site;


(long term, > 15 years).


• Severity/beneficial scale: T he impact w ill be moderate provided m itigation

measures are implemented.

• Proposed mitigation: The impact has proactively been partially mitigated by

avoiding direct loss of Bontveld habitat, wetlands, steep valley sides, and the

limestone ‘rubble edge’ often associated with the ecotone between Bontveld

and adjacent MST. All project actions during construction and subsequent

operation o f the proposed GHWMF must a void t hese e cologically sensitive

areas. O n c losure a ll affected habitats (mainly MST) should be rehabilitated

to the existing vegetation type.

• Significance (after mitigation): As the impact will be localised, the significance

will be Low.



Table 6.1: Faunal impact assessment of Footprint F


Severity /

Intensity

scale

Significance

Post

mitigation

significance

Loss and

fragmentation of

habitats

Negative Local

Long-term

Definite

Moderate

Low Low -

Loss of faunal

diversity

Negative Local

Long-term

Probable

Moderate

Moderate Low -

Barriers to Animal

movement

Negative Local

Long-term

Definite

Moderate

Low Low -

Loss of Species of

Special Concern

Negative Local

Long-term

Probable

Moderate

High Moderate -

Increase in problem

animals and alien

species

Negative Local

Long-term

Probable

Moderate

Moderate Low -

Increased disturbance

and mortality due to

road traffic

Negative Local

Long-term

Definite

Moderate

Low Low -

Changes in natural fire

regime

Negative Local

Long-term

Probable

Low

Low Low -

Pollution Negative Local

Long-term

Probable

Low

Low Low -

Loss or reduction of

ecosystem functioning

Negative Local

Long-term

Definite

Moderate

Moderate Low -




6.5. Conclusion

Project actions associated with the construction of the proposed GHWMF and the

development of transport links will result in the loss and fragmentation of

sensitive habitats at a local extent. The resulting habitat f ragmentation and the

construction of linear developments (road linkages and power lines) will form

barriers to animal movement within the region, both for terrestrial fauna and to

the aerial flight routes of migrating birds. Impacts on animal movements will be

greatest in regions with high habitat fragmentation, or where linear developments

such as roads transect migratory paths. As the barriers to animal movements will

be localised and many of the transport l inkages already exist, the impact of the

additional d evelopment w ill b e of low significance w ith r egard to habitat

fragmentation and loss of faunal diversity. Overall, losses in faunal diversity can

be expected, but the impact w ill be localised and limited to the footprint o f the

proposed GHWMF.

A number of Species of Special Concern occur in the region such as the

threatened Myrmecophilous lycaenid butterfly Aloeides clarki occur in close

proximity, and possibly on Footprint F (Clark 2006). The species is rare, but is not

strictly e ndemic to th e p roposed GHWMF site, a nd a s pecial re serve f or t he

species h as a lready b een established (‘Butterfly Valley’) in th e Coega I DZ. A

number of reptilian SSC occur in the region, including a Globally Critically

Endangered snake (Albany adder, Bitis albanica), three endemic lizard species

(Tasman’s gi rdled l izard, Cordylus tasmani; T asman’s l egless sk ink, Acontias

tasmani; a nd th e A lgoa d warf b urrowing s kink, Scelotes anguineus), a nd s ix

CITES-listed s pecies. With th e e xception o f th e A lbany a dder, a ll th e o ther

reptiles are relatively common, widespread in the region, and protected within the

adjacent Addo Elephant National Park. Project actions impacting SSC include the

destruction and loss of sensitive habitats, particularly Bontveld, and increased

mortality and disturbance due to increased road traffic and the possibility of bird

species flying into powerlines during operation of the facility. The possible loss of

SSC will be localised and usually of low impact for most SSC. However, because

of the c lose p roximity and possible p resence of a G lobally C ritically Endangered


significance.

The construction of the proposed GHWMF and the development of transport links

will result in an increase in problem animals and alien species. Problem animals

including j ackal, f eral dogs a nd c ats, g rey-headed g ulls, v arious c rows, a nd

introduced rats and mice that are attracted to refuse disposal areas. In addition

to social impacts such as the spread of disease, e.g. plague carried by rat fleas,

they are also responsible for various faunal impacts. Their increased numbers in

the area surrounding the proposed GHWMF may displace local fauna from its

habitat, cause increased predation on local fauna and introduce or spread wildlife




diseases. As the potential impact can be effectively controlled through the

implementation o f a ppropriate m itigation measures the overall impact is

considered to be of low significance.

Changes in water flow dynamics following road construction and other

developments that reduce vegetation cover, may reduce the water table locally,

drying vegetation to unnatural levels and making it more susceptible to fire, but

this is deemed to be of low significance.

Pollution m ay r esult f rom p eriodic a ccidents, or from slow, o ngoing

contamination. Operation of the proposed GHWMF, particularly in relation to the

use of liquid fuels, could result in periodic spillages. Heavy vehicle traffic is also

associated with increased local pollution resulting from exhaust fumes, oil spillage

and accumulation of rubber compounds from tyre wear. These pollutants can

cause localised impacts of low significance.

The general region of the proposed GHWMF comprises a mosaic of vegetation and

abiotic habitats, on an elevated region with drainage into the nearby Coega and

Brak River catchments. A lthough there i s a long h istory of agricultural use and

transformation in t he r egion, it s till r etains relatively h igh f aunal and f loral

diversity and contributes to local ecosystem functioning (e.g. nutrient cycles and

transfer, maintenance of biodiversity and the biological components of

hydrological cy cles). The d istribution o f b iodiversity w ithin t he r egion is not

uniform. D ifferent habitats have different carrying capacities, and biodiversity in

grassland i s u sually l ow. The h ighest le vels o f b iodiversity o ccur in h abitat

mosaics and at the ecotones between habitats. The proposed GHWMF will result

in the loss or reduction of ecosystem functioning, but due to the localised extent

of these impacts, the overall significance thereof will be low.


Over and above the mitigation measures proposed in Section 6.4 of this report,

the following recommendations should be incorporated into the Environmental

management Plan (EMP) for the proposed project.

• Due to known presence of threatened fauna in Bontveld habitat in areas

adjacent to Footprint F, and the presence of similar habitats in the northern

section o f F ootprint F a nd a longside tr ansport l inkages to th e p roposed

GHWMF, a detailed and committed conservation plan for the critically

endangered Albany Adder must be developed by a suitably qualified specialist

for implementation prior to the commencement of construction activities. A

thorough site inspection must be conducted on the entire Footprint to

ascertain whether the species is present on site. Where necessary

appropriate search and rescue operations should be conducted prior to the




initiation of construction activities. The potential for in situ conservation, if

possible, m ust b e a ssessed for a ny species th at m ay b e found on th e

periphery or adjacent to the site. The plan must incorporate a similar plan for

the adjacent PPC lands, on which the only known population of the Albany

Adder is situated. The conservation plan will be binding on the developer,

contractor and all operational personnel involved with the construction and

operation of the facility.

• The Environmental Officer (EO) for the proposed GHWMF should be familiar

with the other threatened and endemic fauna detailed in this report. The EO

should record the presence in the area of any breeding populations or large

congregations o f such s pecies, a nd b ring th ese to th e a ttention o f l ocal

conservation authorities.

• The quality of sensitive habitats, particularly Bontveld, should be monitored.

Any i ndications o f d egradation, p ollution o r c ontamination o f t his habitat

should be recorded and the causative agents identified for

correction/mitigation.

• There has been little research done with regard to how successfully MST can

be fully rehabilitated. However, there is also a degree of confusion ov er

habitat from a faunal and floristic perspective. The continued presence of so

many f aunal g roups i n d egraded M ST h abitat s hows th at ‘ functional

rehabilitation’ is possible, even if recovery of full floristic diversity may be

very difficult or take a long time. Accordingly, the impact can be partially

mitigated b y a voiding direct l oss o f i ntact MST a nd Bontveld h abitat. All

project actions during construction and subsequent operation of the proposed

GHWMF should avoid MST and Bontveld habitat where possible. After closure

of th e f acility a ll habitats, w here p ossible, s hould b e r ehabilitated to th e

existing vegetation type. This is probably attainable for MST, at least in

terms of functional rehabilitation for faunal groups, but Bontveld is a growth

form dependent upon the underlying limestone pavement, and once this has

been removed it cannot be re-habilitated.

• GHWMF staff should be informed of the need for environmental protection,

and the diverse impacts that the GHWMF activities may have on the

environment.

• The GHWMF operation will be l imited to the site. However, off-site impacts

will occur on the proposed access roads. T hese secondary impacts must be

monitored to assess whether potential cumulative effects may need to be

addressed.

• Rehabilitation of f aunal d iversity on c losure of t he p roposed GHWMF will

require h abitat corridors a long w hich f auna can m igrate f rom refugia

retaining ori ginal f auna. T he l icense h older or operator of t he p roposed

GHWMF should t herefore i ntegrate t heir EM P, p articularly f or t hreatened

species (e.g. the Albany Adder) with neighbouring properties to ensure

successful faunal rehabilitation on closure.



Ch 7 – Geology and Geohydrology June 2010 94

7. GEOLOGY AND GEOHYDROLOGY

The geological and geohydrology components of this report were compiled by

Reinhard Meyer. The full specialist report is contained in Appendix E.

7.1. Background

A report evaluating four potentially suitable sites for the development of a new

waste management facility north of Port Elizabeth was issued in 2004 (Meyer,

2004). These four sites were identified following an earlier Geographic Information

System (GIS) based study of the Greater Port Elizabeth area during which

potentially su itable fa rms o n w hich su ch a f acility co uld b e e stablished w ere

identified (Godfrey et al, 2000). During 2004, suitable areas located on four of the

identified farms were selected for further investigation.

During 2 005 tw o a dditional p otentially s uitable s ites o n tw o a djacent f arms,

Grassridge 1 90 ( Remainder) a nd G rassridge 2 27 ( Remainder) were b riefly

investigated. In the report by Meyer (2004) the original four sites, referred to as

Footprints A to D, were evaluated and ranked in terms of their suitability for the

development of a regional general and hazardous waste p rocessing facility. In a

subsequent report by Bohlweki Environmental (Pty) Ltd (2005) the two additional

sites, referred to as Footprints E and F, were also provisionally evaluated and

ranked based on very limited information and according to the same criteria as

the original four sites.

The Final Feasibility Report (December 2007) describes the more detailed

information collected during the geohydrological investigation of the two farms

Grassridge 190 and 227 and describes the impacts associated with the three sites

on th ese f arms (F ootprints C , E a nd F ) p rovisionally identified a s p otentially

suitable sites. Based on the original information, Footprint C on the farm

Grassridge 190, Portion 3 was identified as the most suitable of the four original

sites (Footprints A-D) that was then compared with Footprints E and F in the Final

Feasibility Study with Footprint F emerging as the preferred site. This Chapter

focuses o n F ootprint F a s th e p referred option f or f ull e nvironmental impact

assessment.

7.2. Terms of Reference

The t wo f arms G rassridge 1 90 R emainder (Footprint F ) and G rassridge 2 27

(Footprint E) are owned by the cement manufacturing company PPC (Pretoria

Portland Cement). Their interest in the two farms stems from the large economic

deposits of calcrete used in the manufacturing of cement on the farms and which

are currently actively mined on the farm Grassridge 227. Further geotechnical and

geohydrological investigations were done with the permission of PPC.




Bohlweki-SSI E nvironmental appointed Reinhard M eyer, Geohydrological

Consultant, to conduct the geohydrological investigation. He has been involved in

the selection and development of a new Regional General and Hazardous Waste

Disposal F acility since the i nception o f t he p roject. This se ction of t he report

reviews t he geological and geohydrological conditions around the farm

Grassridge 190 based on previously accumulated information as well as

information collected during a recent geophysical survey and exploration drilling

programme on the farm. This chapter describes climatic conditions in the

catchment area, the physiography, geology and geohydrological conditions in the

area, and an evaluation of the suitability of Footprint F as a GHWMF site. Finally,

environmental impacts and mitigation actions are described.

7.3. Description of the Affected Environment

7.3.1. General description of larger area served by the proposed GHWMF

• Physiography (or biophysical environment)

The farm Grassridge 190 RE is located approximately 35 km north of Port

Elizabeth and 15 km southwest of Addo. The farm is located within the Nelson

Mandela Bay Metropolitan Municipality's area of jurisdiction. The main access

route from Port Elizabeth is from the R335 towards Addo, while from

Uitenhage following the R75 towards Kirkwood, and taking the gravel road

turnoff towards Addo, provides access to the farm.

The farm is situated in a broad valley with gentle rolling topographic features

and flanked on the sides by hills that reach an elevation of approximately 300

mamsl. Topographically Footprint F is within the elevation range of 200 to

250 mamsl. No perennial rivers or streams drain the area under investigation.

• Climate and Hydrology

The Remainder of the farm Grassridge 190 is located within the Quaternary

catchment of M30B. T his catchment drains into the secondary catchment of

the Coega River to the south. Footprint F is very c lose to the surface water

divide between the drainage areas of the Sundays and Coega Rivers.

Quaternary catchment N40F is part of the secondary catchment of the

Sundays R iver b asin, while d rainage f rom t he Q uaternary s ub-catchments

M30A a nd M 30B i s to wards th e C oega Ri ver to th e s outh. The n orthern

boundary o f F ootprint F a lmost c oincides w ith the b oundary b etween

quaternary catchment N40F of the Sundays River (north) and the quaternary

catchment M30B of the Coega River (south). The preferred site is located at

the upper reaches of a small stream and within one kilometre south of the

DWEA defined catchment boundary between the Quaternary Catchments




M30B and N40F. Because of the proximity to catchment boundaries and the

local topographic conditions, no perennial rivers or streams occur in close

proximity t o t he s ite a nd t herefore 1 :50 y ear f lood l ines a re n ot re ally

applicable. Nevertheless an assessment of the 1:50 year flood conditions for

the stream flowing through the broad valley in which the site is located, has

been done. Two assumed catchment areas (100 ha and 200 ha) and existing

rainfall records for the area (Rain gauge 0034762, Uitenhage district) were

used in the simulation. C alculations show that a peak 24 hour rainfall event

of 149 mm would result in a 50-year peak flow of 7.7 m/s and 11.1 m/s for a

100 ha and 200 ha catchment size respectively. This flow would result in a

water depth of 0.7 m and 0.8 m in a 30 m wide channel of concave shape for

the 100 ha and 200 ha catchment areas respectively.

Should the area be approved for further development, these calculations have

to be revised once the geometry of the channel has been established more

accurately. P reliminary designs for the waste disposal site have taken these

predicted flow rates and water depths into account.

• Geology

The geology of the larger study area (i.e. the Uitenhage - Port Elizabeth –

Addo area) is summarized in Table 7.1, with the youngest sequence being of

Quaternary age a nd the oldest being Cape S upergroup (information taken

from the 1:250 000 geological map 3324 of Port Elizabeth). A prominent

feature of the area is a basin structure formed by the erosion of the folded

basement of the Cape Supergroup sedimentary succession. During the late-

Jurassic period pebble and boulder alluvial deposits accumulated in the basin

being w ashed f rom t he s urrounding m ountains under a h igh energy

environment to form the Enon Formation. A thick succession of clays was

then deposited unconformably onto the Enon Formation forming the

mudstones and siltstones of the Kirkwood formation. Subsequently marine

and estuarine clays were deposited in the basin during a transgression period

forming the Sundays River formation.

During t he T ertiary n umerous t ransgressions p eriods o ccurred t o f orm

terraces in the Cretaceous sediments while calcareous sandstones were

deposited d uring t hese t imes. Intense east-southeast t rending f olding

characterises the Cape Supergroup rocks to form the Elands River Syncline

towards the south and the Swartkops River anticline in the north (Toerien and

Hill, 1 989). Apa rt f rom t he do minant f olding, t he other ma jor s tructural

feature i s t he n ormal t ensional C oega f ault t raceable e astwards f rom th e

Groendal Dam to the coast. Vertical southward displacement along this fault is

substantial; Maclear (2002) cites a value of 1 800 m, while Marais and

Snyman (1965) report the average displacement to be of the order of 550 m.




As part o f an oi l exploration drilling programme, deep d rilling north o f Addo

indicated a t hickness of 1 8 63 m f or t he Sundays R iver f ormation. T he

combined thickness of the Sundays River and Kirkwood formations over large

parts of the area, is in excess of 1 000 m. Due to intense folding and the

presence of an anticlinal s tructure underlying the specific farms i nvestigated

during this phase, the combined thickness of these two formations is however

significantly less in the area under investigation.

Table 7.1: The geological sequence in the Port Elizabeth/Uitenhage/Addo area

Period and

age range

(Ma)

Group Sub-

Group

Formation Lithology

Quaternary

(1.65-0 Ma)

Algoa

Fluvial terrace gravel

Bluewater Bay Alluvial sheet gravel and

sand

Nanaga Aeolianite

Tertiary

(67-1.65Ma)

Alexandria Calcareous sandstone,

shelly limestone,

conglomerate

Cretaceous/

Jura

(210-67 Ma) Uitenhage

Sundays River Greenish-grey mudstone,

sandstone

Kirkwood Reddish, greenish

mudstone, sandstone

Enon Conglomerate

Devonian

(410-360 Ma) Witteberg

Witpoort White quartzitic

sandstone

Bokkeveld

Traka Adolphspoort Shale and siltstone with

sandstone at base.

Karies Shale, discontinuous

sandstone

Ceres Gamka Feldspathic sandstone,

fossiliferous

Table

Mountain

Nardouw Baviaanskloof/

Skurweberg/

Goudini

Arenite, quartz sandstone

Peninsula Quartzite, quartz

sandstone

Graafwater Arenite, quartz

sandstone, quartzite

Note:

Outcrops p resent n ear t he i nvestigated a rea on

Grassridge 190




Apart from the anticlinal structure described above, there are no other

significant structural features mapped within the study area. The geophysical

exploration programme of the late 1960s also did not reveal any deep

structural features in this area (Winter, 1973). Hattingh and Goedhart (1997)

reported on structural evidence of Neogene to Quaternary period (23 - 2 Ma)

tectonic activity in the Algoa Basin. Observations of displacement in Neogene

age strata near the Coega fault in the south suggest that some older faults in

the Algoa Basin may have been rejuvenated.

They a lso propose that the Eastern Cape area experienced renewed tectonic

activity as recent as the Holocene triggered by tectonic activity along the

offshore Agulhas Fracture Zone. A lthough seismic events are recorded f rom

time t o t ime along t he south-eastern A frican c ontinental m argin, t he

epicentres a re l ocated far northeast of the A lgoa Basin and are according to

Hartnady (1990), linked to extension of the East African Rift system.

Hattingh and Goedhart (1997) report that no modern seismic a ctivity has

been recorded in the southern part of the Eastern Cape by either of the two

seismic stations located at Grahamstown and Port Elizabeth.

• Geohydrology

The coastal sands, alluvial and aeolianite deposits and selected formations in

the Table Mountain Group host the more important aquifers in the larger area

around Port Elizabeth. The most prominent aquifer in the area is the

Uitenhage Artesian Basin Aquifer (UAB) with an estimated total sustainable

yield of 80 l/s (Venables, 1985).

Yields f rom i ndividual boreholes a re generally in excess of 5 l/s. The natural

boundaries of the UAB are formed by the Indian Ocean to the southeast, the

Table Mountain Group-Bokkeveld Group contact in the vicinity of the Coega

River to the north, the Great Winterhoek Mountains to the west and the St

Albans Flats in the south.

According to Maclear (2001) the Coega fault divided the UAB into two main

aquifers: the Coega Ridge Aquifer (to the north of the fault) and the deeper

Swartkops A quifer t o t he s outh. He s uggests a f urther s ubdivision o f th e

Swartkops aquifer into two units, the Kruisrivier and the Bethelsdorp Units.

The Coega Ridge, Kruisrivier and Bethelsdorp aquifers are artesian to sub-

artesian, intensely fractured secondary aquifers in the quartzites of the Table

Mountain Group. Groundwater quality of the artesian aquifer is excellent, with

electrical conductivity generally less than 15 mS/m (Maclear, 2001). The work

by Maclear (2001) confirms the earlier statement that the combined thickness




of the Uitenhage Group formations that act as confining layers exceeds 500 m

at G rassridge 1 90. T he U AB a quifer p rovides t hrough, for example t he

Uitenhage spring, significant baseflow in places to the surface water drainage

systems. Groundwater is a lso used to a limited extent within the larger area

to support basic human needs, stock watering and agriculture.

As a result of over–exploitation of the artesian aquifer, a portion of the UAB

covering an area of 1 125 km2, was declared a Subterranean Government

Water Control Area (SGWCA) in 1957. This controlled area has been described

in more detail in earlier reports (Godfrey et al, 2000; Bohlweki Environmental,

2003). The farms that were investigated are located outside the boundaries of

the Control Area (Bohlweki Environmental, 2003) as the southern boundary of

the farms Grassridge 190 and 227 form the part of the northern edge of the

old Uitenhage SGWCA (Maclear, 2001).

Under the old Water Act (Act 54 of 1956) Government Water Control Areas

(GWCA) were proclaimed, two of these within the broader study area,

namely:

* The Sundays River GWCA (surface water); and

* The Uitenhage Subterranean GWCA

These GWCA’s were e stablished to control and manage the abstraction of

water for, amongst others, irrigation purposes. Under the current National

Water Act (Act 36 of 1998) where both surface and ground water are now

regarded as public water, GWCAs effectively have been extended to include

the entire country. The GWCAs declared under the previous Water Act (1956)

have t herefore b een d issolved. H owever, a n umber o f s o c alled 'water-

stressed' areas or catchments have since been identified and relate closely to

the previous GWCAs.

The use of water within these stressed areas is closely regulated and excluded

from the General Authorisations issued by DWEA. The Sunday's River

downstream of the Darlington Dam is seen as a water-stressed area and is

excluded from the General Authorisations for surface water abstraction. As

such any water use within this area, as defined by the National Water Act

(1998), w ill require a water use licence, which in turn will require that a

Reserve Determination be undertaken for the area.

As the area under investigation is directly underlain by rocks of the Uitenhage

Group, the geohydrological characteristics of the rocks forming part of this

Group are of particular interest. M eyer (1998) reports that c lose to 40% of

the boreholes on record drilled into these formations have a groundwater yield

of less than 0.5 l/s. T he percentage of low yielding boreholes is expected to




be even higher, as it is known that numerous unsuccessful boreholes have

been drilled in the area, but no records of these exist.

In addition, the electrical conductivity (EC) of the water from these formations

is generally in excess of 300 mS/m, with sodium, calcium, magnesium,

chloride and, occasionally sulphate often exceeding the maximum allowable

drinking water limits (SABS 241, 2006; Meyer, 1998).

The high salt content is a reflection of the marine conditions under which

these formations were deposited. Generally high yields (up to 15 l/s) can be

obtained from the coastal sand and alluvial aquifers associated with the flood

plains of the major rivers draining the area. Water quality is variable, but

mostly below 300 mS/m (Meyer, 1998).

7.3.2. Local geological and geohydrological conditions at Footprint F

• Local geology

The geological conditions underlying the present study area is discussed in

this section. A portion of the 1:50 000 scale geological map 3325DA Addo

(CGS, 2000) showing the surface geological conditions in the study area is

presented as Figure 7.1 overleaf. The legend for the map is presented in Table

7.2 below.

Table 7.2: Geological legend for the geological map shown in Figure 7.1

Symbol Colour Formation name Lithology

T-Qn Brown Nanaga Aeolianite/Calcareous sandstone/sand

Ta Pink Alexandria Calcareous m arine/ e stuarine/

lagoonal s andstone, c onglomerate,

coquinite

Ks Plum Sundays River Grey mudstone, siltstone, sandstone

J-Kk Yellow Kirkwood Reddish and greenish mudstone,

sandstone and conglomerate




Figure 7.1: Portion of the 1:50 000 Geological map 3325DA Addo showing the

geology on the farms Grassridge 190, Grassridge 227 and Grassridge 228

and the approximate location of Footprint F

Footprint F



Chapter 7 – Geology and Geohydrology June 2010 102

A prominent E-SE plunging anticlinal structure (generally referred to as the

Addo Ridge) is shown on isopach maps of the Sundays River and Kirkwood

formations prepared by Winter (1973). The associated synclinal structure to

the south is referred to as the Coega Embayment by Winter (1973). Footprint

F is located along the axis of this syncline where prominent aeolianite

outcrops of the Nanaga formation, flanked by calcareous marine and estuarine

sandstones of the Alexandria formation, occur.

These t wo f ormations a re u nderlain b y t hick s edimentary successions of

Sundays River and Kirkwood formations. Both these formations consist

predominantly of mudstone and siltstone, with minor sequences of sandstone

and conglomerate. F rom a deep oi l exploration borehole (Borehole CK1/68 -

approximately 4 k m n orth o f A ddo), i t is k nown th at t he S undays Ri ver

formation has a thickness of 1863 m (le Roux, 2000). However, from the

isopach maps prepared by Winter (1973) the thickness of the Sundays River

formation i s interpolated to be approximately 300 m on the farm Grassridge

190. At another deep oil exploration borehole (AD1/68) some 7 km east-

north-east of the farm Grassridge 190, and on the north-eastern flank of the

Addo Ridge anticline only 203m of Sundays River Formation was intersected.

Based on th e i sopach m aps p repared b y W inter (1 973) a nd th e s ynclinal

structure (Coega Embayment), it is concluded that the Sundays River

formation should be at least 300 m thick in the study area.

Isopach maps for the underlying Kirkwood formation (Winter, 1973) indicate

that th is f ormation i s a t l east 2 00m th ick. I t i s th erefore concluded th at

surface calcrete and calcareous sandstones outcrops at Grassridge 190 are

underlain b y a t least 500 m o f m udstone, s iltstone a nd m inor s andstone

layers of the Sundays River and Kirkwood formations. The Kirkwood formation

is a gain un derlain b y another t hick s edimentary s uccession o f s hale a nd

sandstone formations deposited in a moderately shallow marine environment

to form what is known as the Bokkeveld Group. From these thickness

estimates it is clear that the Table Mountain Group rocks hosting the

strategically important artesian aquifer, and occurring stratigraphically below

the B okkeveld Group, is o verlain by a t least 1 000 m of l ow pe rmeability

sedimentary rocks largely deposited in a marine environment.

Within the boundaries of the preferred site located on Grassridge 190

Remainder, outcrops of three geological formations are present (Figure 7.2).

These formations, with a short description of the lithology, are listed in the

table below, i n order of i ncreasing age (Table 7.3). B ased on the 1:50 000

geological map of the area it appears that the Sundays River formation is

often exposed in the topographically lower lying areas where the overlying

Nanaga and Alexandria formation have been removed by erosion. Outcrops of

Alexandria f ormation a re found a long t he valley slopes, while t he Nanaga




formation often occupies the local higher topographic f eatures. N o l inear

structural features have been mapped in the area. It also appears that the

densely vegetated areas are mostly associated with outcrops of the Sundays

River formation, while the open grasslands developed on outcrop areas of the

Nanaga formation.

Table 7.3: Geological formations present on the farm Grassridge 190

Age period Formation Lithology

Estimated

thickness

(m)

Pliocene to Early

Pleistocene (~ 5

to ~1 Ma)

Nanaga

Formation

Calcareous sandstone/sandy

limestone, aeolianite, <25

Miocene to

Pliocene (~22 to

~2 Ma)

Alexandria

Formation

Calcareous marine/estuarine/

lagoonal sandstone,

conglomerate, coquinite

<20

Late Cretaceous

(~145 to ~110

Ma)

Sundays

River

Formation

Grey mudstone, siltstone,

sandstone >300

• Local geohydrology

Over large portions of the farms Grassridge 190, 227 and 228 outcrops of the

Alexandria and Nanaga Formations are present. These are only a few metres

thick and are extensively mined on the farm Grassridge 227. While closer to

the coast the Alexandria formation is often regarded as a separate aquifer

unit, in the present study area i t appears to be mostly developed above the

regional static water level and is therefore not regarded as a separate aquifer

unit. As described i n the p revious section, the s tudy a rea i s underlain by a

thick succession of argillaceous rocks, predominantly mudstones and

siltstones of the Sundays River and Kirkwood Formations. The fine grained

sedimentary rocks of the Cretaceous Sundays River formation were shown by

Bush (1985) and Venables (1985) to be the confining layer in the Uitenhage

artesian aquifer system. This is also an indication of the low hydraulic

conductivity (or permeability) of the succession. A further indication of its low

permeability is shown by the use of the term “Uitenhage Aquiclude” for the

combination o f t hese two f ormations ( Parsons, 1 994; M aclear, 20 01). I n

addition, the underlying sediments of the Bokkeveld Group are

hydrogeologically described by Maclear (2001) as an “aquitard”. W iid (1990)

reports on laboratory permeability te sts o n shale from the S undays River

Formation near Aloes which indicated permeability values around 1 x 10-9

cm/sec or ~8.6 x 10-7 m/d.




To put this value in perspective, the liner requirements at waste disposal sites

specified in the DWEA Minimum Requirements for Waste Disposal by Landfill

(1998), should have a permeability of the order of 1 x 10-7 cm/sec (8.6 x 10-5

m/d). The dominant clay mineral group in these argillaceous rocks is

montmorilionite, a clay mineral that is characterized by i ts swelling in water.

From these descriptions it is clear that the geological formations underlying

the proposed site all have a very low hydraulic conductivity. The outcrops of

limestone and calcareous sandstone of the Nanaga Formation form a relatively

thin cover and are in turn underlain by thin marine deposits of calcareous

sandstone of the Alexandria Formation. Both of these formations are not

regarded as aquifers in the study area.

From the information supplied by PPC, the maximum yield of the boreholes

drilled on the farms Grassridge 190 and 227 is approximately 2 l/s, but this

would however, be an exception rather than the ru le. Many boreholes in the

area are only equipped with wind pumps, which often is a reflection of low

yield conditions. The observed l ow borehole y ields are typical o f the type of

basement g eology (‘ tight’ o r m assive m udstone a nd s iltstone). Parsons

(1983) f ound th e b orehole y ield in th e K irkwood a nd S undays Ri ver

formations to range between 0.1 and 1.5 l/s with 0.5 l/s being the average.

Meyer (1998) reports that close to 40% of the boreholes drilled into

formations of the Uitenhage Group have a groundwater yield of less than 0.5

l/s. L ow yielding or “ dry” boreholes in these formations is further confirmed

by the recent drilling of four exploration boreholes at the site under

investigation. All four boreholes were dry at completion. It must also be

emphasised t hat n o g roundwater i s c urrently u sed, w hether f or d omestic,

stock watering or irrigation purposes, within a radius of 2-3 km around the

site.

Depth to static water level as measured in 20 boreholes on surrounding farms,

ranges between 4 m and >120 m below ground level. The shallower water

levels are mostly confined to topographically lower areas such as in valleys or

near drainage courses. The distribution of water level information was used to

construct a g round w ater l evel m ap s hown i n F igure 1 0 of t he S pecialist

Report.

This map c learly shows a g round water d ivide near the surface water d ivide

and that groundwater flow is in a north-easterly and south-easterly direction.

Several of the boreholes are situated on a plateau area close to the watershed

between Quaternary catchments N40F (Sundays River), and M30A and M30B

(Coega River) where static groundwater levels are generally deeper than 75 m

below surface. Static groundwater levels around the proposed site are

between 69 m and 73 m below surface.




7.3.3. Results of the geophysical survey and additional exploration

drilling

According to the DWEA Minimum Requirements for Site Investigations (DWEA,

1998) o f a H :H type la ndfill it is a requirement to dr ill a minimum of t hree

exploration boreholes as part of the site investigation. It is a further requirement

that a n a ppropriate g eophysical s urvey b e conducted t o d etermine w hether

geological structures that may influence geohydrological conditions are present

and to guide the selection of drilling sites. Accordingly a geophysical services

company, Engineering and E xploration G eophysical S ervices c c ( E&EGS), w as

appointed to conduct a ground magnetic and electromagnetic survey of Footprint

F. Ground m agnetic surveying w as u sed to d etermine w hether m agnetic

geological structural features such as dykes traverse the area, while the

electromagnetic method is sensitive to changes in weathering depth, conductive

strata, faults a nd l ithological c ontacts. T hese te chniques w ere c onsidered th e

most appropriate given the local geological conditions.

The magnetic and electromagnetic measurements were done at station spacing of

20 m a long profile lines covering Footprint F. The magnetic profiling revealed a

very constant magnetic field across the entire area with no anomalous regions

that could b e a ssociated with linear s tructures. T his was in a greement w ith

expectations. The electromagnetic profiling showed large variations in electrical

conductivity o f th e s ubsoil, f rom ~ 30 mS/m t o 12 0 mS/m (F igure 5 of t he

Specialist Report). Interpretation of these results suggested the following

correlation between electrical conductivity and surface mapped geology:

• High conductivity - Sundays River formation

• Intermediate conductivity - Alexandra formation

• Low conductivity - Nanaga formation

A prominent feature of Footprint F is the low conductivity zone extending across

the site towards the south-eastern corner of the survey area flanked by ridges of

very high conductivity. Based on the initial interpretation of the geophysical

survey results, and taking cognisance of the local geological conditions and the

preliminary design of the disposal cells (Jones & Wagener, 2008), four drilling

targets were identified for the drilling of the exploration boreholes.

Four boreholes were drilled during the period 14-19 May 2008 c lose to the four

selected p ositions b ased on th e geophysical su rvey results t o d epths ranging

between 69 m and 93 m (Boreholes GR190/6 to GR190/9). It is important to

note t hat in no ne o f t hese b oreholes w as water encountered d uring d rilling,

although some water d id accumulate i n three of the boreholes and water l evels

could be measured in these a few days after completion of the drilling.




The dominant lithology in all boreholes was mudstone with interlayered thinner

sandstone l ayers. T he u pper s ections ( 0-15 m ) a re of ten c alcareous. T he

maximum t hickness of sandstone l ayers ob served w ithin t he S undays R iver

formation was about 20 m and occurred in boreholes GR190/7, GR190/8 and

GR190/9. A provisional stratigraphic interpretation of the geological succession in

each borehole is given in Table 7.4.

Although the 1 :50 0 00 g eological m ap indicates o utcrops of the N anaga

Formation at borehole GR190/6, i t is proposed that the surface calcrete l ayer i s

directly underlain by the older Alexandra Formation. Similarly, at borehole

GR190/8 where according to the map, Alexandria Formation rocks should

outcrop, the 20 m thick sandstone layer underlying the 3 m thick clay layer, is

interpreted to be part of the upper Sundays River formation and not the

Alexandria formation. Borehole GR190/9 in the south and in the valley floor only

intersected the Sundays River formation. The calcareous nature of the upper

14 m may suggest that this material has been transported and deposited into

lower lying areas of a deeply eroded palaeo-topography.

Table 7.4: Stratigraphic correlation between boreholes

GR190/6 GR190/7 GR190/8 GR190/9

Depth

interval Formation

Depth

interval Formation

Depth

interval Formation

Depth

interval Formation

Str

ati

gra

ph

ic S

eq

uen

ce

0-3 m Surface

calcrete 0-5 m

Surface

calcrete 0-5 m

Weathered

Sundays

River

formation

0-3 m Soil

3-13 m Alexandria

formation 5-75 m

Sundays

River

formation

5-75 m

Sundays

River

formation

3-14 m

Transported

(valley fill)

material or

weathered

Sundays

River

formation

13-69

m

Sundays

River

formation

14-93m

Sundays

River

formation

Slightly moist conditions were encountered in boreholes GR190/6, GR190/7 and

GR190/9, while much dryer conditions were observed, especially in the upper

sections, during the drilling of GR190/8. This is believed to be a contributing

reason f or t he low e lectrical c onductivity re flected i n t he g eophysical re sults.

Despite th e fact th at all b oreholes w ere d ry o n c ompletion, th e s light m oist

conditions encountered during drilling is believed to have been responsible for

some water seepage into the borehole to eventually establish a water level a few




metres above the base of the borehole. It i s suspected that the slight seepage

originates mainly from the thinner sandstone horizons and not the mudstone.

Except in the case of borehole GR190/6 (69 m deep), which remained completely

dry four days after drilling was completed, seepage along the borehole sides

resulted in the formation of a tight clay making it very difficult to lower any

probes into the boreholes for the measurement of water levels or to collect water

samples. T his i s a n i ndication t hat t he m onitoring b oreholes t o be i nstalled

(should the permit application be successful and the site be developed into an

operating waste disposal facility) will have to be constructed very carefully to

prevent formation collapse and clogging of screened sections. T his will probably

involve the drilling of a larger diameter borehole to accommodate the installation

of a suitable gravel pack and uPVC screened sections.

7.3.4. Groundwater use and quality

A borehole census of the farms Grassridge 190 (including Grassridge 190 Portion

3), Grassridge 227, Grassridge 228, Coega Kammas Kloof 191 and a part of

Blaauw Baatjies Vley 189, with a minimum radius of 3 km around the proposed

site, was done during the different stages leading up to the permit application. Of

the 43 existing boreholes on the farm Grassridge 190 and surrounding farms,

only two were found to be used currently for domestic or stock watering

purposes. Both of these are on the farm Grassridge 190 Portion 3; a distance of

approximately 4 km from the proposed waste disposal site.

The m ain re asons f or t he v ery l imited u se of g roundwater i n t he a rea a re

threefold:

• The general very poor quality of the groundwater

• The low yield of boreholes, and

• The reliable and e asy access f armers have t o v ery g ood quality water a t

affordable cost from the Sundays River / Port Elizabeth pipeline that traverses

the area.

Water samples could b e obtained from 17 of the boreholes on t he surveyed

farms, including three from the recently drilled boreholes. W ith the exception of

one borehole (GR190/3/1), none of the boreholes are equipped with pumps that

are still in operation, and therefore all samples could only be obtained from those

open boreholes accessible with a bailer. Water quality information is captured in

Table 8 of the Specialist Report. For reference purposes the SABS 241 (2006)

Drinking Water Standard for Class I (Ideal condition) and Class II (Maximum

allowable), as well as the analysis of a water sample taken from the reservoir

supplied from the Sundays River pipeline on the farm Grassridge 227, are l isted

in Table 8 of the Specialist Report.




The sediments of the Sundays River F ormation w ere d eposited u nder marine

conditions. Sea water and salts trapped during the depositional process, explain

the general poor quality of the groundwater in the area. This has been recognised

in reports by Maclear (1994), Bush (1985), Venables (1985) and Parsons (1983).

Maclear (1 994) compiled a m ap s howing t he e lectrical c onductivity (E C)

distribution of groundwater between Uitenhage and Addo. According to this map

EC values of >500 mS/m are the dominant feature. In the present study area,

his map shows values i n the range of 70 to 1500 mS/m. EC measurements on

samples collected during the recent borehole census are shown in Table 8 of the

Specialist Re port, and r ange be tween 9 9 a nd 80 4 mS/ m. T his c onfirms th e

observations by Maclear (1994). From the above it is clear that the Sundays

River and Kirkwood geohydrological units in terms of the groundwater quality,

and have no strategic potential or value as a water resource.

As referred to earlier, the most prominent regional aquifer of strategic importance

in the area is the Uitenhage Artesian Basin Aquifer (UAB) with an estimated total

sustainable yield of 80 l/s (Venables, 1985) and yields from individual boreholes

often in excess of 5 l /s. The artesian nature of this aquifer is mainly due to two

factors:

• the n atural re charge a rea i s t he h igh g reat Winterhoek M ountains to t he

north, and

• the Sundays River and Kirkwood formations overlying this aquifer and forming

the confining layer.

At the site under investigation and in the immediate surrounding area, the deeper

Table Mountain sandstone aquifer is however not exploited for its groundwater

potential due to the excessive depth (estimated to be i n the order of 300 m to

500 m below surface).

7.4. Risk Assessment

7.4.1. Aquifer classification and vulnerability

Parsons (1995) developed a South African aquifer system management

classification consisting of two parts: (i) a weighted aquifer class classification and

(ii) a groundwater quality management index, that when combined, provides a

decision support tool to define the required level of protection of the aquifer. The

Ground Water Management Classification System ratings are given in Table 9 of

the Specialist Report.

The two hydrogeological units or aquifers present in the area, the upper aquifer

associated w ith the S undays Ri ver a nd K irkwood F ormations, a nd a d eeper

aquifer (>200 m below surface) associated with the Table Mountain Group




formations, have already been classified as a Non-Aquifer System and a Major

Aquifer System respectively, while the Uitenhage Artesian Basin (which is

regarded as part of the Table Mountain Aquifer System) would be classified as a

Special Aquifer System.

Non-aquifer Systems are d efined a s f ormations o r p otentially f ractured rocks

which do not have a high primary permeability, or other formations of variable

permeability. Aquifer extent may be variable and water quality variable.

Major aquifer Systems on t he other h and, are d efined a s h ighly p ermeable

formations, usually with a known or probable presence of significant fracturing.

They may be highly productive and able to support large abstractions for public

supply and other purposes (Parsons, 1995).

The Uitenhage Artesian Basin is part of the Table Mountain Group Aquifer System,

and although it is situated to the south of the study area, could be classified as a

Special A quifer S ystem, b ecause i t h as p reviously b een cl assified a s a n

Underground Water Control Area. The deeper Table Mountain Group aquifer is

artesian where overlain by the Uitenhage Group due to the argillaceous nature of

the overlying succession. This geological composition and the associated very low

hydraulic conductivity create a very thick natural protection layer that will ensure

that no potential contamination originating at the proposed waste disposal site

will reach the artesian aquifer. According to this classification system the aquifers

underlying the proposed s ite on the farm Grassridge 190 can be described as a

‘Non-Aquifer System’ (score = 0) w ith a ‘Low Aquifer Vulnerability’ (score = 1),

and requiring only a limited degree of protection (score = 0).

On the adjacent farm (Grassridge 227) and approximately one kilometre east of

the proposed waste d isposal facility PPC i s mining surface calcrete. The mining

operation covers an area of approximately 1.5 km x 1.5 km, while the thickness

of the deposit is on average about 3 m. The calcrete layer is broken into smaller

blocks with l arge m echanical e xcavators and then t aken to a crushing p lant.

Occasionally hard calcrete layers are encountered at a depth of approximately 1.5

m that cannot be broken up by the normal mining technique.

According to Mr Erasmus of PPC, blasting using 3 m deep drill holes is

occasionally used (approximately once every two years) to mine these layers.

These hard calcrete deposits sometimes have to be mined to ensure the

availability of a continuous supply of ore to the crushing plant at times when

mechanical f ailure of e xcavating e quipment is e ncountered. T he m ining

techniques applied in this mining operation, are totally different to deep level

underground and some open cast mining operations, and therefore mining

induced s eismicity a nd e arth tr emors a s a risk to th e s tability o f the w aste

disposal cells, can be ruled out.




Hattingh and Goedhart (1997) report that no modern seismic activity has been

recorded in the southern part of the Eastern Cape by either of the two seismic

stations located at Grahamstown and Port Elizabeth.

7.4.2. Risk of Contamination of Coega and Sundays Rivers

As all the footprints are underlain by low permeability soils and aquifer material,

deep groundwater levels, very low groundwater movement rates, there is no risk

for contamination by groundwater entering the surface water drainage systems of

the Coega and Sundays Rivers.

Similarly, b ecause of t he p osition of t he s ites i n re lation t o t he catchment

boundaries and surface drainage lines, contamination of the Coega and Sundays

Rivers by surface waters originating at the proposed waste disposal facility can be

ruled out.

7.4.3. Evaluation of the site for a waste disposal facility

The re sults of t he g eological a nd g eohydrological investigation w ere u sed in

assessing the Waste-Aquifer Separation Principle (WASP) index of Footprint F, i.e.

a risk assessment of the proposed landfill site with respect to the groundwater

environment (Parsons and Jolly, 1994). T he WASP index is an indication of the

suitability of a site for waste disposal, which takes into account:

• The threat factor, i .e. the threat o f the s ize and type of waste facility to the

ground water;

• The barrier factor, i.e. the potential for pollutant attenuation in the upper

unsaturated zone and the resultant potential for ground water pollution; and

• The r esource factor, i .e. t he s ignificance of t he a quifer f or l ocal a nd/or

regional water supply.

Threat Factor

The size of the landfill (final landfill footprint) is estimated to be approximately 25

ha and will be classified as a H:H site. According to the DWEA Minimum

Requirements (DWEA, 1998) such a landfill should be designed, engineered and

operated to the most stringent standards and must be a containment landfill with

a liner and leachate detection and collection system.

Barrier Factor

The underlying siltstone and the significant depth to groundwater, is shown to

have a g ood b arrier effect a gainst the vertical movement o f p ossible ground

water pollutants. E stimated t ravel ti me, b ased on h ydraulic p arameters a nd




water level typical for the area, from on-surface to the aquifer are calculated to

be ~566 days. Due to the l ack of water i n t he n ewly d rilled b oreholes, no

pumping tests could be done and travel times were calculated using the

estimated p ermeability o f th e u nderlying g eological f ormations a nd d epth to

water level.

Resource Factor

The site overlies a non-aquifer system containing very poor quality water and

with a low potential for use. Groundwater is currently not used in the immediate

vicinity of the site.

The results of the WASP assessment determine Footprint F to be ‘suitable’ for the

development of a landfill site, in terms of the geology and geohydrology of the

area.

7.4.4. Identification of Risk Sources

Poorly constructed waste disposal facilities and poor management of waste

disposal s ites a nd o perations p ose a g reat risk o f g round a nd surface w ater

contamination. The potential for groundwater and surface water contamination

resulting from waste disposal activities must therefore be minimised at all costs.

Therefore identifying and managing the sources of risk to water contamination

are crucial to the successful operation of a waste disposal facility and in particular

the planned new Regional general and hazardous waste treatment facility to be

developed for the Coega Industrial Development Zone, the Greater Port Elizabeth

and wider areas.

Some of the main sources of ground and surface water contamination are:

• Poor design of waste disposal facilities

• Poor construction of liner system

• High leachate production rate and poor leachate control measures

• Poor storm water control and management

• Insufficient water quality monitoring (storm, surface and groundwater)

• Poor management of waste handling and storage, including illegal dumping of

waste

• Bad housekeeping on site

• Poor capping of disposal cells when full capacity is reached

• Poor management, monitoring and control after closure of site

Accordingly, appropriate management and mitigation actions that address the

above potential risk sources have been incorporated in the EMP for the project.




7.4.5. Groundwater monitoring

In the documents Minimum Requirements for Waste Disposal by Landfill (DWEA,

2nd edition, 1998 and draft 3rd edition, 2005a) and the Minimum Requirements

for Water Monitoring at Waste Management Facilities (DWEA, 2005b, 3rd edition)

issued by the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, specifications for the

monitoring o f g roundwater at w aste d isposal f acilities are discussed.

Groundwater monitoring can be described as the repetitive and continued

observation, measurement and evaluation of geohydrological information such as

water level and groundwater quality to follow changes over a period of time to

assess the e fficiency of control measures. I n essence, monitoring serves as an

early w arning s ystem s o t hat a ny c orrective a ctions re quired c an b e t aken

promptly. A detailed account of the proposed monitoring specifications, including

that for groundwater, is contained in the report entitled “Draft Operating Manual

for the proposed Hazardous Waste Disposal Facility” prepared by Jones &

Wagener (2008b) for the Coega Development Corporation.

Should t he s ite re ceive a p ermit, it is re commended t hat t he n ewly d rilled

boreholes GR190/6 to GR190/9 as well as the existing borehole GR190/5 be used

as monitoring boreholes. Apart from obtaining geological and geohydrological

information, it was also the intension to use borehole GR190/6 as a background

monitoring borehole. However, no water was encountered in the borehole during

drilling and even a few days after completion it was still dry. Should this borehole

remain dry, and depending on the final approved design of the site, a position for

a new background monitoring borehole may have to be selected. According to

the 3rd edition draft of the Minimum Requirements for Water Monitoring at Waste

Management Facilities (2005), between five and ten boreholes would typically be

required for a hazardous waste disposal site. It is therefore possible that

additional boreholes will be required for monitoring.

The e xisting e xploration b oreholes h ave a lso n ot b een e quipped t o s erve a s

monitoring boreholes. Therefore, in the event of the proposed site being

approved f or f urther development, th e d esign o f th e g roundwater monitoring

network will have to be revised. Some of the existing boreholes may be included

in this design provided suitable uPVC casing can still be installed. Because of

unstable f ormation c onditions, s ome m inor w ater seepage i nto t he b oreholes

shortly a fter dr illing a nd th e f act th at th e b oreholes w ere n ot c ased, some

collapse of the boreholes was already recognised shortly after completion. It is

therefore recommended that the groundwater monitoring network be reviewed

should a permit be issued for the site. This may include the re-drilling of some of

the existing boreholes due to e ither collapse of the existing boreholes, or i f t he

final design and layout of the different components of the facility necessitate that

these boreholes be moved.




In the draft operating manual prepared by Jones & Wagener (2008b) a detailed

account of the proposed monitoring specifications, including that for groundwater,

can be found. In this preliminary specification it is recommended that ground

water monitoring and sampling should be done on a quarterly basis (January,

April, July and October), with detailed analyses to be undertaken once a year

(July). In their report (Jones & Wagener (2008b) only pH, electrical conductivity

and chemical oxygen are required during the ot her three s ampling exercises.

Field m easurements f or a ll s ample ru ns m ust i nclude t emperature, p H a nd

electrical conductivity, and must be recorded on a log sheet while on site. P ost-

closure monitoring is to continue for 30 years following closure of the site, unless

otherwise motivated, and authorised by the authorities. A l ist of constituents to

be analysed during the July sampling is also included in the Jones and Wagener

(2008) draft operating manual. This list is based on sampling for Holfontein

Hazardous Waste Disposal Facility in Gauteng. Although this list can be used as a

guideline, the f inal list of constituents to be analysed for at the Grassridge s ite,

will however depend on the type of waste accepted for d isposal at this s ite and

when the site-specific a uthorizations a re issued. In the following sections

potential impacts on ground and surface water are identified.

7.5. Impact Description and Assessment

7.5.1. General comments

The aquifers present in the area can be described as being of low significance,

deep, and with an extremely poor water quality and generally low y ield, except

for in the low lying areas along drainage lines. There are no known perched

aquifers of any significance. There are no perennial drainage systems on any of

the sites.

7.5.2. Impact assessment

Potential impacts on the ground and surface water environment are described

under three headings:

• Site construction phase

• Operational phase

• Decommissioning phase

The impacts described only pertain to operations on the waste s ite itself and in

the immediate vicinity, but does not include for example impacts on ground and

surface water along the access routes to the site. In the impact assessment tables

(Tables 7.5 - 7.7) an indication is given of the severity of the impacts before and

after mitigation. Recommended mitigation measures are put forward in Table

7.8.



Table 7.5: Geohydrological impact assessment of Footprint F during the design and construction phase

Potential Impact Nature Status Extent Duration Probability

Severity/Intensity

scale Significance

Before

mitigation

After

mitigation

Excavation and site

preparation

resulting in the

disruption of natural

runoff conditions

Excavations may cause

interception and/or

disruption of natural

runoff resulting in less

surface water entering

natural drainage lines

Negative Local

Short term

Improbable

Low Low

Low -

Groundwater

contamination of

existing boreholes

Development of a site

over an existing open

borehole

Negative Local

Long term

Probable

Very high

Low

Moderate -

Storage and

stockpiling areas for

construction

material resulting in

soil and

groundwater

contamination

Uncontrolled storage of

harmful products used

during construction

resulting in possible soil

and groundwater

contamination

Negative Local

Short term

Probable

Low

Low

Low -

Construction camp

and temporary

infrastructure such

as workshops, wash

bays. - soil, surface

water and

Disposal of domestic

and construction

process waste water

and effluent affecting

surface water quality

Negative Local

Short term

Probable

Low

Low

Low -



groundwater

contamination

Domestic sewage -

soil, surface and

groundwater

contamination

Irresponsible disposal of

domestic sewage

eventually affecting soil,

surface and

groundwater quality

Negative Local

Long term

Probable

Low

Low

Low -

Storm water on and

around site

impacting on

natural surface

water flow in

drainage lines

Natural storm water

runoff pattern disrupted

and end destination

affected through

excavations and

stockpiling areas

Negative Local

Permanent

Probable

Low

Low

Low -

Groundwater

recharge -

Improving

groundwater

recharge

Excavations for

construction and liner

material may leave

open pits that can

enhance infiltration of

rainfall

Positive Local

Long term

Probable

Low

Low

Low +

Fuel storage and

distribution point -

soil and

groundwater

contamination

Irresponsible

housekeeping around

fuel depot and

distribution point can

contaminate shallow soil

profile through spillages

Negative Local

Long term

Probable

Low

Low

Low -



Table 7.6: Geohydrological impact assessment of Footprint F during the operational phase


Severity/Intensity

scale Significance

Before

mitigation

After

mitigation

Waste disposal -

soil, surface and

groundwater

contamination

Poor liner design/

construction and

ineffective leachate

collection system

causing leakage through

liner resulting in

leachate infiltration into

ground

Negative Local

Long term

Possible

High

Low

Moderate -

Leachate holding

dams Surface and

groundwater

contamination

Poor design and/or

construction or

insufficient capacity

causing leakage

resulting in leachate

infiltration into ground,

storm water or natural

drainage systems

Negative Local

Long term

Probable

High

Low

Moderate -

Leachate treatment

facilities - soil and

surface water and

eventually

groundwater

contamination

Spillages affecting soil

conditions

Negative Local

Medium

term

Probable

Low

Low

Low -



Leachate seepage

from disposal cells.

Soil, surface and

groundwater

contamination

Too high volumes of

leachate generated in

cells resulting in high

leachate levels in waste

pile and eventual

seepage from waste pile

Negative Local

Short term

Probable

Low

Low

Low -

Waste storage

areas (temporary

storage, recycling

facilities). Soil,

surface and

groundwater

contamination

Inappropriate storage

facilities resulting in

leaching of

contaminated effluent

into ground and storm

water system

Negative Local

Medium

term

Probable

Low

Low

Low -

Sewage disposal

(septic tank

systems) Surface

and groundwater

contamination

Inappropriately

designed/constructed

sewage disposal

systems and bad

maintenance resulting

in groundwater

contamination

Negative Local

Long term

Improbable

Low

Low

Low -

Runoff and storm

water management

on and around site.

Surface and

groundwater

contamination

Insufficient storage

capacity causing

overflow of storm water

holding facilities and

impacting negatively on

stream water quality

and eventually

groundwater

Negative Local

Medium

term

Improbable

Low

Low

Low -



Washing areas

(Vehicles, re-

useable containers,

etc) Surface and

groundwater

contamination

Inappropriate design

and/or construction of

wash bays, bunded

areas and effluent

control resulting in soil

contamination

Negative Local

Medium

term

Probable

Low

Low

Low -

Workshops Surface

and groundwater

contamination

Bad housekeeping and

irresponsible disposal of

workshop waste

products (oil, cleaning

agents, etc.) resulting

in soil contamination

through leaching.

Negative Local

Long term

Probable

Low

Low

Low -



Table 7.7: Geohydrological impact assessment of Footprint F during the decommissioning phase


Severity/Beneficial

scale Significance

Before

mitigation

After

mitigation

Closure/ capping of

individual waste

disposal cells

Uncontrolled

leachate generation

and build-up of

leachate level

Insufficient /

inappropriate cover

construction resulting in

rainwater infiltration,

leachate generation and

eventually leachate

seepage from disposal

cells

Negative Local

Medium

term

Probable

High

Low

Moderate -

Treating / disposal

of surplus leachate

and storm water in

holding dams at

final closure

Contamination of

ground and surface

water resources

Poor leachate

management resulting

in surplus at closure

Negative Local

Medium

term

Probable

High

Low

Moderate -

Maintenance of

storm water control

system. Soil erosion

at closed disposal

cells

Erosion of cells resulting

in collapse and

exposure of waste

material

Negative Local

Medium

term

Probable

High

Low

Moderate -

Maintenance of Capping losing its low Negative Local Medium Probable High Low Moderate -



capping

Uncontrolled

leachate generation

permeability character

resulting in rainwater

infiltration and leachate

generation

term

Maintenance of

water monitoring

systems (boreholes

and surface water)

and maintaining a

sampling and

analysis programme

after closure

according to permit

conditions Quality

deterioration of

water resources

Poor maintenance and

control of groundwater

and surface water

monitoring points and

boreholes, as well as

neglecting regular

sampling and analyses

as stipulated in permit

conditions.

Negative Local

Long term

Probable

High

Low

High -




7.6. Conclusion


proposed site and the immediate surrounding farms, the identified site on the

Remainder of the farm Grassridge 190 is considered suitable for the development

of a large H:H type waste disposal facility provided the design, construction and

operational requirements as specified in the DWEA guideline document are

adhered to. The main reasons for the site being regarded a suitable area, are the

following:

• The geological conditions of the underlying formations, both in terms of



below surface.



• The groundwater quality in the region is generally poor to very poor and as

a result very little use is being made of groundwater for domestic, stock




• The underlying formations, t he Sundays River and Kirkwood formations,

comprise of a v ery thick s uccession ( estimated t o b e > 300 m) of


layers. These formations have a very low hydraulic conductivity and will


• The deep artesian aquifer associated with the Table Mountain Group


of Uitenhage Group sediments. That the latter sediments form an effective

barrier t o g roundwater f low is i llustrated b y t he a rtesian n ature o f t he

deeper aquifer.



• The WASP analysis, which takes into consideration a number of geological,

geohydrological, water use and design criteria, a lso i ndicated that the s ite

can be classified as “suitable”.

• No g eological o r geohydrological conditions w ithin th e s tudy can b e

regarded as “fatal flaws” according to the definitions described in the DWEA

guideline documents.


From the tables above it will be noticed that the impacts related to ground and

surface water are in most cases rated as of low environmental significance. This




rating is applicable in the case of the extent of the impact, the duration, the

probability, the severity and the significance. The reason for the expected low

impact on the groundwater environment is due to the favourable geological and

geohydrological conditions. Similarly, the impact on surface water is also

expected to be low, as the proposed site is located outside important and high

yielding surface water catchment areas. Nevertheless, this should not lead to

compromises on mitigation and management actions during the design,

construction, operation and closure phases of the project.

The recommended mitigation and management actions for the different phases of

the project are listed in Table 7.8.



Table 7.8: Proposed mitigation actions to reduce geohydrological impacts during the lifespan of the GHWMF

Phase Activity Impact description Proposed mitigation

Design and

construction

Installation o f r equired

infrastructure f or water q uality

(surface and groundwater)

monitoring a nd d esign o f

monitoring programme

Approval o f w ater q uality m onitoring s ystems b y th e

relevant government authorities

Design of site Design to be d one according to th e l atest Minimum

Requirement documents and specifications of the

Departments of Water and Environment Affairs (DWEA).

Approval o f a ll d esigns to b e o btained f rom the r elevant

National and Regional/Provincial regulatory authorities.

Closure of boreholes Sealing of all boreholes with cement and final bentonite at

the top. Sanitary seal consisting of a bentonite and sand

mixture around the upper 4 m of the borehole.

Excavation and site preparation,

storm water control on and around

site

Proper storm water control measures must be implemented

to m inimize s torm w ater collection w ithin t he e xcavated

areas and to reduce erosion.

Construction a nd i nstallation o f

liners a nd l eachate c ollection a nd

drainage systems.

Selection of good quality natural clay for liner construction,

alternatively addition of bentonite to l iner material to attain

the prescribed permeability for l iners. Regular i nspection of

construction and testing of liner permeability and

compaction ch aracteristics d uring co nstruction. P roper

control and supervision during the placement of synthetic

liners, and testing after completion.



Construction camp a nd temporary

infrastructure such a s w orkshops,

wash bays, fuel storage and

distribution point, etc.

Proper management of all construction material storage

areas and bunding of facilities where required.

Operation Leachate g eneration c ontrol a nd

management

Ground and surface water

contamination

Minimize leachate generation through proper landfill

management and control of ratio between liquid and solid

waste disposed in each cell. Proper control of leachate

seepage a nd c ollection th ereof a nd d iverting to p roperly

designed holding and/or treatment facility.

Leachate holding dams Groundwater contamination Approved designed and constructed leachate holding dams.

Waste s torage a reas ( temporary

storage, recycling facilities, storage

for incineration, etc.)

Disruption of natural runoff

conditions, Groundwater

contamination

Bunding of all storage facilities and disposal of all effluent

collected in bunded areas to leachate or storm water holding

dams.

Sewage disposal (septic tank

systems)

Surface a nd g roundwater

contamination

Properly designed and constructed according to building

regulations of all sewage disposal systems on site and

regular removal of sewage from tank to prevent overflow.

Runoff a nd s torm w ater

management on and around site


contamination

Proper storm water control and drainage canals around

disposal area, together with storm water control dams with

sufficient c apacity to s upport a 1 :50 y ear r ainfall e vent.

Monitoring programme for storm water quality and disposal

of storm water to be in place.

Washing areas (Vehicles, re-

useable containers, etc)


contamination

Approved design a nd constructed w ash bays a nd effluent

collection and disposal systems.

Workshops Surface a nd g roundwater

contamination

All workshop waste to be disposed of in accordance with the

relevant regulations.



Decommissioning Closure/capping of individual waste

disposal cells

Uncontrolled l eachate

generation and s eepage,

build-up of leachate level

Proper c apping of e ach c ell a nd re gular m aintenance of

capping according to permit conditions to avoid infiltration of

rainwater a nd th us leachate g eneration w ithin th e w aste

pile. Installation of leachate level monitoring facility for each

cell monitoring point

Treatment/disposal of s urplus

leachate and storm water in

holding dams at final closure

Contamination of ground

and surface water resources

Treatment and/or proper disposal of final leachate volumes

and draining of holding dams.

Maintenance of storm water control

systems

“Soil” and waste pile erosion

after closure

Development a nd i mplementation of a storm w ater

management p lan a s well a s t he p roper m aintenance of

storm water control systems on site after closure according

to pe rmits a nd r egulations issued f rom ti me to t ime b y

relevant authorities. Regular inspections by authorities.

Maintenance of water monitoring

systems (boreholes and surface

water) and programme

Quality deterioration of

water resources

Regular water quality monitoring according to permit

conditions and in c ompliance to M inimum Requirement

documents of DWEA. Reporting of results to the authorities

on a six monthly basis.



Ch 8 – Tourism June 2010 126

8. TOURISM

The tourism assessment was undertaken and compiled by Mr Martin Jansen van

Vuuren of Grant Thornton for the Footprint Ranking Report (2006). The f indings

of this assessment are still deemed to be valid as per correspondence from Mr

Jansen van Vuuren in this regard (Appendix F).

8.1. Introduction

The S undays Ri ver V alley i s a n i mportant to urism d estination t hat de pends

heavily on its image as an eco/wildlife destination. The Sundays River Valley

currently receives an estimated 54 000 overnight tourists and the Addo Elephant

National Park receives around 102 000 tourists per annum. T he Addo Elephant

National Park is the key attraction in the area and is being marketed on

environmental grounds i.e. the animals are free to roam across a large area and

the Park has a range of biodiversity. The area thus appeals to the


Internationally, tourists are becoming more environmentally conscious and are

basing t heir d ecision t o v isit a d estination on e nvironmental c onsiderations.

Tourists may perceive the Regional Hazardous Waste Site as having a negative

impact on the environment and accordingly the following aspects that may affect

tourism could be identified:

• Perception of the area before a tourists decision to visit;

• Perception of the tourists experience of the area while visiting;

• Visual state of an area;

• Wind / smell;

• Volumes/density of traffic; and

• Limitation of future tourism.

8.2. Scope of Work

The purpose was to undertake an analysis of the tourism industry relevant to the

Eastern Cape, followed by establishing the impact that the proposed facility will

have o n t ourism a nd th e m ost suitable f ootprint in te rms o f th e p redicted

impacts. The study included:

• An analysis of existing South African Tourism (SA Tourism) international and

domestic tourism statistics available on the Eastern Cape.

• Interviews with officials at Tourism Boards and local area information offices

to verify the number of visitors to the study area and their perception of the

potential impact of the facility on the local tourism industry.




From the above research the following have been provided:

• Estimated current tourist visitor volumes to destinations near the study area

(with particular emphasis on the Greater Addo Elephant National Park and the

Sundays River Valley);

• Estimated future tourist visitor volumes to destinations near the study area in

the medium to long term;

• Information regarding existing tourism establishments such as guesthouses

and restaurants near the area to determine:

∗ size of establishments;

∗ tourism demand levels;

∗ current markets;

∗ origin;

∗ length of stay; and

∗ issues hampering tourism development such as security and accessibility.

• Predicted impact of the proposed new facility and a ranking of the proposed

footprints in terms of suitability.

8.3. Method

In order to assess the three identified footprints for the proposed regional general

and hazardous waste processing facility the following were conducted:

• A site visit to each of the three sites.

• Interviews with representatives from:

∗ Sundays River Tourism Forum.

∗ Nelson Mandela Bay Tourism.

∗ Addo Elephant National Park.

• Analysis o f the l atest available tourism data f rom South A frica Tourism and

Statistics South Africa.

The analysis was u tilised to i dentify the impact that the proposed facility would

have on tourism and the severity of the identified impact.

8.3.1. The Tourism Experience

In order to understand the impact on tourism of a general and hazardous waste

processing facility it is important to understand how tourists take a decision to

visit a destination, what they purchase at the destination and what influences a

tourist’s experience of a destination.

Firstly, i t is important to understand that a tourist purchases a tourism product

when th ey v isit a d estination. T he d efinition o f a t ourism p roduct i s sh own

overleaf.




A tourist does not only purchase accommodation, car hire and activities, but also

the intangible aspects of these such as how it makes them feel and how it affects

their self-esteem. F or example, a tourist to Cape Town may visit Clifton Beach

because it is the most “trendy” beach in Cape Town. The tourist is not only

visiting the beach for a beach experience but also for the image and symbolic

values.

The same principle applies to tourists that visit for example a township. They

wish to i nteract w ith the l ocal community and feel that they have i n some way

contributed to the upliftment or economic improvement of that community by

purchasing arts and crafts from them. The tourist could have purchased the

same arts and crafts at another venue but because of the image and symbolic

values they rather purchase the arts and crafts in a township.

Just as a tourist decides to purchase a tourism product based on image and

symbolic v alues, t hey m ay d ecide n ot t o p urchase a to urism p roduct. F or

example, a tourist may decide not to visit the Sundays River Valley because the

location of a general and hazardous waste processing facility in the area may be

against their beliefs in environmental issues. Their perception is that the

proposed facility may have a negative impact1

on the environment and may be in

conflict with the tourist’s view on environmental protection.

1 It is widely recognised that Integrated Waste Management is essential in managing the environment and that well managed H:H sites are required. It is however also recognised that people’s perceptions of hazardous waste facilities are negative.

A TOURISM PRODUCT

Is an ensemble of TANGIBLE and INTANGIBLE components

including:

Tourism resources (natural and cultural assets) and attractions

+ Basic Facilities and Infrastructure (airports, roads, trains etc.)

+ Tourism Infrastructure and Services (accommodation, catering,

transport) +

Leisure activities (things to do and see) +

Image and Symbolic Values (to do with development, lifestyle, self-esteem, status, etc.)

which offers BENEFITS that may draw certain types of consumers as it appeals to their specific travel MOTIVATIONS and NEEDS




8.3.2. Potential tourism impacts

Against the background of how a tourist decides to v isit a destination and what

the tourist purchases, a list of the potential impacts on tourism that a general and

hazardous waste processing facility located in the Sundays River Valley could

have, is also provided.

• Perception before decision to visit

Before a tourist visits an area they have a specific perception as to what they

will e xperience d uring their v isit. T his p erception is influenced b y a re al

experience if they have visited an area before, but if it is their first visit to an

area their perception is influenced by word of mouth accounts (mainly from

friends and family), the media (television, radio and newspaper reports) and

marketing material (website, brochures, etc).

The tourist will take the information available and measure it against their

personal m orals, s tandards a nd se lf-esteem. I f t heir p erception of a

destination is in conflict with their morals, standards and self-esteem they will

not visit the destination. This can be most clearly illustrated by the refusal of

tourists to visit South Africa during the apartheid years because, despite the

country’s tourism appeal, the political regime was in conflict with the tourist’s

morals, standards and self-esteem.

The same principle applies to the development of a general and hazardous

waste processing facility in or close to a tourist destination. International

tourists, in particular, have become more environmentally conscious and are

basing more of their decisions to visit a destination on environmental

considerations. For example, tourists may not visit destinations where

deforestation is occurring. T ourists could apply the same principle to visiting

the Sundays River Valley if a general and hazardous waste processing facility

is located in the area. They could view the facility as not environmentally

friendly and accordingly their perception of the area could deter them from

visiting the area.

• Perception of experience in the area

Once a t ourist i s i n a n a rea t heir experience i s i nfluenced b y t he a ctual

tourism product i.e. the actual tourism resources and attractions, basic

facilities a nd i nfrastructure, t ourism i nfrastructure a nd s ervices, leisure

activities and image and symbolic values. T he actual tourism product could

either reinforce or change their perception of the area before their v isit. The

perception of the tourist m ay b e negatively affected s hould they come to




know of the facility in the area, see i t or smell i t because their perception of

the facility is seen as being harmful to the environment.

• Visual

The visual impact is an important, if not the most important factor, in the

experience of a tourist. A tourist is greatly affected by what they see and

that is the main reason why tourists take photographs of a destination.

The visibility of the proposed general and hazardous waste processing facility

may negatively affect a tourist’s experience of the Sundays River Valley area

as it may be in conflict with the natural view of the area.

• Wind / smell

Smell is an important impact on the experience of a tourist. The actual

experience of a tourist may be negatively affected should they be able to

smell p otential od ours f rom t he g eneral a nd h azardous w aste p rocessing

facility.

• Traffic

The R335 i s the m ain access to the S undays Ri ver V alley a nd th e Addo

Elephant National Park from Port Elizabeth. The road would be used by

tourists in passenger vehicles and tour busses as well as trucks to the waste

management facility. The road is a single lane road and overtaking is difficult

due to the various turns in the road and blind rises.

An increase in traffic on the R335 would negatively affect the experience of

tourists to the area if their journey is delayed b y t rucks and if the road

deteriorates due to increased usage by heavy vehicles.

• Limitation of future tourism development

The main type of tourism development in close proximity to the identified

footprints in the Sundays River Valley would be game reserves. T he land is

not suited to too much else and with the proliferation of similar developments

in the area, the footprints could b e incorporated in a g ame re serve

development. The DWEA minimum requirements prohibit the development of

a general and hazardous waste management facility in nature reserves, and

waste facilities cannot be regarded as complimentary land uses. Accordingly

the placement of such a facility would limit future tourism development in

close proximity to the facility.




8.4. Site Assessment

Following the analysis of the tourism industry in South Africa, the Eastern Cape,

Nelson Mandela Bay, Sundays River Valley and the Addo Elephant National Park

the following conclusions can be made:

• NMB, Sundays River Valley and Addo Elephant National Park are established

tourism destinations that have plans to expand and attract more tourists.

• The Sundays River Valley receives approximately 54 000 overnight tourists

per annum, while the Addo E lephant National Park receives 102 000 v isitors

per annum of which 30 000 stay overnight.

• The m ain t ourism p roduct of fered i n t he a rea i s g ame a nd w ildlife

experiences.

• One of the main reasons for tourists to visit South Africa and the Eastern Cape

is f or t he g ame and w ildlife e xperiences a nd t he N MBM h as l aunched a

strategy to attract these tourists by linking with destinations that offer wildlife

experiences.

• Consequently, the Sundays River Valley and the Addo Elephant National Park

are an important part of the marketing of not only their own destination but

the NMBM as well.


In this section we assess the impact that the development of a general and

hazardous waste processing facility would have on tourism in the area. In Table

8.1, we assess each impact for Footprint F. The nature of each impact has been

explained in Section 8.3.2 and is not included again.

Most of the assessments of the potential impacts are similar for all potential sites

assessed during the course of the EIA process to date due to their close proximity

to one another. The tourism impacts would be similar for these footprints as the

experience of a tourist and their perception of an area is not as localised as these

footprints, for example a tourist’s perception of the area before they decide to

visit would not be different due to the location of the proposed waste processing

facility.

The main differentiating factor between the footprints would be the visual impact

of the footprint, i.e. whether the tourist would be able to see the footprint or not.

The a ssessment o f t he p otential impacts on t ourism a s a r esult o f t he

development of a waste management facility on Footprint F is discussed overleaf.




8.5.1. Perception before decision to visit

The main observations relating to the potential impacts of the waste disposal

facility on the perception of tourists prior to visiting the area are:

• The status of the impact would be negative as the knowledge of the waste

processing facility in the area may deter tourists from visiting the area;

• The extent will be regional as their decision not to visit the area would impact

on other destinations that they may have visited during their trip, such as Port

Elizabeth;

• The duration of the impact i s permanent as the tourist i s unlikely to change

their mind once they have decided not to visit the area;

• The likelihood of th e i mpact o ccurring is probable based on the fact that

tourists are becoming more environmentally conscious and are basing their

travel decisions on environmental criteria;

• The severity is severe as the Sundays River Valley is a tourist destination and

a reduction in the number of tourists would lead to a loss in income and

employment;

• The significance is high because the impact would be severe;

• The post mitigation significance c ould be reduced t o moderately s evere if

detailed information is provided to reassure tourists that the proposed facility

would n ot h ave a s ignificant impact o n t he e nvironment. T he following

mitigation measures are suggested:

∗ Regular media re leases i ndicating the actual impact and operation of the

proposed facility and the proposed mitigation measures;

∗ Provision o f detailed information to tourism establishments regarding the

proposed facility and the mitigation measures undertaken to limit potential

impacts regarding visual impacts, smell, etc;

∗ A public participation process to inform all stakeholders of the proposed

facility a nd th e m itigation m easures t o b e employed regarding v isual

impacts, smell, etc.

8.5.2. Perception of experience in the area


facility on the perception of tourists while visiting the area are:

• The status of the impact would be negative as the knowledge of the waste

processing facility in the area may result in a negative perception of the area;

• The extent will be regional as the tourist would have a negative perception of

the whole experience and not just a section of their experience;

• The duration of the impact is permanent as the tourist’s perception would be

permanently affected;




• The likelihood of th e i mpact o ccurring is probable based on the fact that

tourists are becoming more environmentally conscious and are more sensitive

to environmental issues;

• The severity is severe as the Sundays River Valley is a tourist destination and

a negative perception of the area could lead to a reduction in the number of

tourists that would in turn lead to a loss in income and employment;

• The significance is high because the impact would be severe;

• The post mitigation significance could be reduced to moderately severe if the

following mitigation measures could be employed:

∗ Provision of d etailed information t o tourists in t he a rea to explain t he

mitigation measures taken to reduce the potential environmental impacts

of the proposed facility;

∗ Provision o f detailed information to tourism establishments regarding the

proposed facility and the mitigation measures undertaken to limit potential

impacts regarding visual impacts, smell, etc; and

∗ The implementation of mitigation measures to limit environmental impacts

such as visual, doors, etc.

8.5.3. Visual

The visual impact of the potential footprint is the differentiating factor between all

footprints assessed during the course of the EIA process as the footprint that is

the least visible would have less of an impact on tourists than the most visible

footprint. The main observations relating to the potential impacts of the waste

disposal facility on the perception of tourists while visiting the area are:

• The status of the impact would be negative as a visible waste processing

facility would have a negative impact on the experience of a tourist;

• The extent of the impact will be localised to the footprint specific viewshed

area. Strictly speaking the impact would be local, however, the visual impact

is closely related to the perception of the experience of the tourists which

would be regional;

• The duration of the impact is permanent as the facility is likely to remain

visible without mitigation measures;

• The likelihood of the impact occurring is improbable for Footprint F (Valley

Infill) as the site is located within a valley and would not be visible from the

R335;

• The impact i s low for Footprint F (Valley Infill) as the footprint is not visible

from the R335;

• The significance of the impact is low for Footprint F (Valley Infill) as the

footprint is not visible from the R335;

• Even though the visual impact is considered low/negligible, it is recommended

that some mitigation measures be employed in order to further reduce the




visual impact of the proposed facility. These measures could include planting

trees to act as a visual barrier to the footprint; and

• The post mitigation significance of Footprint F (Valley Infill) will be of little to

no effect.

8.5.4. Wind/Smell

The assessment of the identified impact was the same for all footprints assessed

during t he c ourse o f t he EIA p rocess. T he main o bservation r elating to th e

potential impacts of the waste disposal facility on the perception of tourists as a

result of odours are that:

• The status of the impact would be negative as odours from the facility would

have a negative impact on the experience of a tourist; and

• The extent w ill be l ocal as the odours would be in a particular area but any

potential o dours f rom th e f acility w ould h ave a n egative i mpact o n th e

perception of the tourist of the region;

8.5.5. Traffic

The assessment of the identified impact will be the same for all potential

footprints assessed during the course of the EIA process. The main observations

relating to the potential impacts of the waste disposal facility on the perception of

tourists as a result of traffic are:

• The status of the impact would be negative as an increase in traffic on the

R335 to the Sundays River Valley could delay tourists on their trip and be

frustrating and dangerous and would contribute to the deterioration of the

road;

• The extent will be local as mainly the R335 would be effected;

• The duration of the impact is permanent as the usage of the road is unlikely

to decline;

• The likelihood of the impact occurring is highly probable as it is the main

access into the Sundays River Valley and Footprint F;

• The severity is high as the increase in traffic and deterioration of the road

would have a negative impact on tourist’s perception of the area; and

• The si gnificance i s low should a ppropriate m itigation m easures b e

implemented.

8.5.6. Limitation of future tourism development


facility on the future development of tourism are:




• The status of the impact would be negative as the establishment of a general

and hazardous waste processing f acility w ould limit the d evelopment o f a

tourist facility in close proximity to the facility;

• The extent will be regional as the facility could have a negative impact on

tourists d ecision to visit t he a rea a s w ell a s a n egative i mpact on t heir

experience in the area;

• The duration of the impact is permanent as the facility would be permanent;

• The likelihood of the impact occurring is highly probable as it is highly likely

that a new tourism facility would not be placed in close proximity to a general

and hazardous waste processing facility;

• The severity is very severe as the Sundays River Valley is a tourist destination

and a limitation on the expansion of its tourism product would limit potential

revenue and employment creation;

• The significance is high because the impact would be very severe; and

• The post mitigation significance remains very severe as no mitigation

measures could be foreseen. Unless the proposed facility is moved to another

site outside the Sundays River Valley, the impact would remain very severe.


Ch 8 - Tourism June 2010 136

Table 8.1: Tourism impact assessment of Footprint F

Potential

Impact Status Extent Duration Probability

Severity /

Intensity

scale

Significance

Post

mitigation

significance

Perception

before d ecision

to visit

Negative Regional

Permanent

Probable

Very High

High High

Perception of

experience in

the area

Negative Regional

Permanent

Probable

Very High

High High

Visual Negative Local

Permanent

Improbable

Low

Low Low

Wind/Smell Negative Local

Permanent

Improbable

Moderate

Low Low

Traffic Negative Local

Permanent

Highly Probable

High

High Low

Limitation of

future tourism

development in

areas a djacent

to the facility

Negative Regional

Permanent

Highly Probable

Very High

High Very High




8.6. Conclusion and recommendations

Based on the analysis of tourism in the area and assessment of all footprints

assessed during the course of the EIA process the following is concluded:


heavily o n its image a s a n e co/wildlife d estination. T he A ddo E lephant

National P ark is the key attraction i n the area and is being m arketed on

environmental grounds i.e. the animals are free to roam across a large area,

and the p ark has a range of b iodiversity. The a rea th us appeals to the





regional general and hazardous waste processing facility is located in the area

due to the perception that these types of facilities are harmful to the

environment.




destination that is environmentally sensitive. However, the following mitigation

measures can be implemented:

• Provide detailed information regarding the facility to all tourism

establishments in the area so that they can deal with queries from tourists.

• Obtain e ditorial c opy in lo cal a nd r egional media t o in form r esidents a nd

tourists o f th e f acility and its p otential impact o n t ourism a s w ell a s t he

mitigation measures that will be employed to address environmental impacts.

• Ensure the facility is not visible from the R335.



Ch 9 – Visual June 2010 138

9. VISUAL IMPACT

The visual assessment was undertaken by Mr Lourens du Plessis of MetroGIS

(Pty) Ltd for the Footprint Ranking Report (2006). The findings remain valid for

EIA phase assessment.

9.1. Introduction

A visual impact assessment of any structure or facility that is perceived to be

potentially hazardous can often create a perception of impact that is larger than

the actual visual impact itself. People do not want to see something that could be

potentially dangerous, no matter how small the potential threat may be. The

impact often only occurs once the viewer knows what he is looking at. It is,

therefore, i mperative to identify and address these perceived impacts as real

concerns and treat them as critical factors that may override conventional visual

impact criteria.

It was clear from the concerns raised by Interested and Affected Parties, that the

proposed general and hazardous waste processing facility in question would be no

different. Two distinct groups mentioned virtually the same concern, albeit for

different r easons. T he f irst, the tourism industry, mentioned that the p roposed

footprints are situated near the R335, the main connecting route between Port

Elizabeth and the Greater Addo Elephant National Park, and that the view of a

hazardous w aste s ite w ould d etract f rom t he n ature/wildlife e xperience a nd

ultimately impact negatively on the tourism potential of the area. The same

concern w as r aised b y t he c itrus industry, n ear A ddo, w ith re gards t o t he

negative p erception o f l ocating a h azardous w aste s ite i n p roximity t o c itrus

farms. Specific mention was made of t he strict European Union export

accreditation and the possibility of inspectors seeing the waste disposal facility en

route from Port Elizabeth to Addo, whereby farms could be adversely affected i f

importers see the fruit being produced in the same region as a hazardous waste

disposal facility. With this in mind, the conventional visual impact assessment

procedure t ook t he v isibility, or d egree of visibility, of t he w aste p rocessing

facility from the R335, into account as a critical factor regarding the

recommendation of t he p referred s ite. The sco pe of w ork i ncluded a v isual

analysis of Footprint F according to visual sensitivity, visual absorption capacity

and viewshed.

9.2. Methodology

9.2.1. General

The study was undertaken using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) software

as a tool to model the proposed waste processing facility, generate viewshed

analyses and to apply relevant spatial c riteria to Footprint F. A de tailed Digital




Terrain M odel ( DTM) f or t he study a rea w as c reated from t he 5 m i nterval

contours that w ere digitally c aptured f rom 1: 10 0 00 s cale o rtho-photos. The

rectangular extent of these ortho-photos was used to delineate the study area

boundary for the visual impact analysis. Detailed preliminary landform designs of

each footprint with the proposed facility were received from Jones and Wagner

Consulting Civil Engineers and incorporated into the DTM. These landform designs

were u sed to v isualise th e e xtent o f change to th e n atural landform a nd to

accurately calculate the visual exposure of the facility for each footprint. Site

visits w ere u ndertaken t o s ource i nformation re garding land use, vegetation

cover, topography and general visual quality of the affected environment. It

further served the purpose of verifying the results of the spatial analyses and to

identify o ther p ossible m itigating/aggravating c ircumstances r elated to th e

potential visual impact. The results of the spatial analysis and other relevant

orientation data are displayed on a number of figures further on in this chapter.

9.2.2. Assessment Methodology

The f irst step i n u ndertaking a v isual impact a ssessment i s to i dentify a nd

understand the crucial issues related to the specific impact. These issues or

concerns, as stated by Interested and Affected Parties (I&APs) through the public

participation process, highlight the envisaged potential impact and help to identify

the c ritical f actors t hat s hould b e a ddressed. It a lso focuses th e a nalytical

procedures on site-specific issues, rather than to apply general assumptions that

might n ot b e a pplicable to th e a ffected p arties or s tudy a rea. Once a clear

understanding was formed about the perceived visual impact of the proposed

facility, procedures were set in place to firstly, determine the potential visual

impact of the footprint, and secondly, to identify the locations (place) where the

likely impact would occur i s determined by the v iewer i ncidence v iewshed. The

potential visual impact and location of likely impact is indicated by a visual impact

index for the f ootprint. T he v isual impact index comprises the following spatial

criteria:

• Visual exposure (visibility) of the facility

This procedure is generally referred to as the viewshed analysis, indicating all

the areas from which the facility will be visible.

• Proximity to the facility (visual distance)

The principle that visual impact decreases over distance is applied through the

creation of buffer radii around the facility. These buffer radii indicate whether

the observer/viewer has a short, medium or l ong d istance experience of the

footprint. T he concept of visual distance and the determination of the buffer

radii will be discussed in Section 8.4.3.




• Viewer incidence

Visual impacts occur where there are people to be impacted on, and where

more people occur, the potential impact (or frequency of impact) increases.

By this rationale densely populated areas (such as residential areas) or areas

frequented by observers (e.g. roads) would increase viewer incidence a nd

need to be identified.

Once th e p otential impact a nd a rea o f l ikely i mpact h ad b een i dentified,

another set of criteria was applied to footprint F in order to determine the

severity of the impact.

The criteria/elements for the evaluation for Footprint F include:

• The visual exposure (size of the visible area) within the study area

The size of visual exposure of the facility footprint gives a good indication of

the possible area within which a visual impact could occur. The larger the

visual a rea, t he g reater t he p otential f or i mpact a nd t he m ore d ifficult it

becomes to contain or mitigate the impact.

• Viewer perception in area of likely impact

Visual impacts occur where the observer's perception of the proposed facility

is negative. This rationale is applied to the area of likely impact, indicated by

the visual impact index, to determine if the dominant area of impact

constitutes a negative perception.

• Line of sight (approach viewfield) from main roads (R335)

Line of sight approach viewfield indicates areas where the observer is virtually

guaranteed to see the proposed facility when travelling along the R335. It is

an almost forced sighting as apposed to an accidental sighting.

• Line of sight (approach viewfield) from other roads

Line of sight approach viewfield indicates that the observer is virtually

guaranteed t o s ee the p roposed f acility w hen tr avelling a long t he g ravel

roads.

• The distance (length) of road from which a facility is visible

The longer the facility is visible along a stretch of public road, the greater the

likelihood that it will be noticed.




• Distance of the facility from major tar roads (access from the R335)

This element relates to the impact of heavy vehicles travelling to and from the

waste p rocessing fa cility. T he v isual impact o f t rucks t ravelling a long a

secondary road is difficult to quantify, as the frequency of visits and type of

vehicle is not yet known. The rational assumption, in this case, is that the

greater the distance the vehicle travels the greater the potential visual

intrusion.

• The construction of access roads

The study area is criss-crossed by road clearings, servitudes and cutlines that

all create visual scars across the landscape. The construction of new access

roads to the proposed facility would further increase the visual impact of the

facility and lower the overall natural visual quality of the area. T hese access

roads would either be upgrades of existing roads or cutlines, or they would

have to be the construction of new roads.

• The potential to mitigate the impact through vegetation screening

Vegetation screening is a tried and trusted method of mitigating visual

impacts. It is however not always a viable option and depends greatly on the

type of structure you're trying to conceal and the strategic placement of both

the structure and the screening. In this case it seems highly unlikely that

vegetation a lone w ould c onceal a 34 m high landfill s ite, a ssociated

infrastructure and access road at any of the preferred sites. S ometimes it is

possible, if the visual exposure is contained enough and the impact occurring

is localised, to actually shield the observer f rom the structure rather than to

shield the structure from the observer.

9.3. Site Description

9.3.1. The affected environment

The b road t opography o r t errain m orphological u nit f or t his a rea is s trongly

undulating plains and hills. T he vegetation cover in the area i s Mesic Succulent

Thicket with significant infestation of alien invasive species. The natural

vegetation has been altered by farming practises (over-grazing), encroachment of

exotic species, the creation of hundreds of cutlines throughout the region and

quarrying. Citrus and game farming, conservation and nature-oriented tourism

take place north-east of the study area. T he area is sparsely populated, due to

the p redominantly agricultural n ature o f activities, a nd relatively f ar removed

from major urban centres.




9.3.2. Footprint F

It is mainly the orientation/aspect and the height and slope of the GHWMF design

landform that changes to conform to the existing landform. The height is

approximately 32 m at the highest point above ground level. The total functional

area for th e f ootprint, i ncluding a ssociated i nfrastructure (b uildings, s upport

structures, etc.) will not exceed 30 hectares. This does not include access roads

and b orrow a reas. Footprint F is n estled in the to p o f a v alley o n th e f arm

Grassridge 1 90 (a djacent to G rassridge 2 27), a lso o wned b y P PC a nd a lso

earmarked for mining and quarrying. The footprint area has not yet been mined,

but has generally been degraded by cattle and game farming practises. The

orientation of the landfill is south-east along the steepest slope and i t measures

about 720 m by 420 m.

Footprint F has one advantage that sets it apart from all of the other footprints.

This footprint is an infill site, which would greatly reduce its visibility and potential

visual e xposure t o r andom o bservers. It d oes n ot pr otrude a bove th e

Sundays/Coega River watershed boundary and therefore appears to not be

exposed to the north. I t seems that the footprint would theoretically be visible,

due to the valley's south-eastern orientation, from the R335 at a distance of

almost 6 km. The likelihood of it ever being noticed or recognised as a landfill

from a distance of 6 km is slim to negligible, as the site would never appear in its

entirety.

9.3.3. Visual impact assessment

The visual impact assessment is based on the visual exposure (visibility), the

visual distance (proximity of the observer) and the v iewer incidence (number of

observers) o f e ach f acility. I t w as c alculated u sing t he p reliminary l andfill

landform designs and takes into account the size (width, height and length) of

each facility. These spatial criteria will be discussed in the following sections and

are displayed in Figures 9.1-9.3.

• Visual exposure

Figure 9.1 i llustrates t he v isual e xposure o f th e F ootprint F f or th e

construction o f a h azardous waste processing facility. An accurate d igital

terrain model, calculated from the 5 m interval contours, and the preliminary

landform designs, illustrates how the topography of the area and the

placement of the footprints either shield or expose each facility. The effect of

existing vegetation cover, as a potential to absorb the visual exposure, was

not c onsidered, a s th e f acility e xceeds 3 0 m i n h eight a nd th e average

vegetation cover (thicket and bushland) is 2 to 3 m high.




Footprint F h as a m uch s maller a rea o f v isual e xposure th an th e o ther

alternatives assessed. T he extent of its visibility is contained, to a large

degree, to scattered sighting down the valley within which it is situated. It

does not extend above the Sundays/Coega River watershed boundary, and is

therefore not v isible from the north. V isibility from the R335 is theoretically

possible at a distance of approximately 6 km, though it is highly unlikely due

to th e r elatively s mall v isual p orthole a fforded b y th e ridges f lanking the

footprint's valley. T he visibility would further be h ighly interrupted, because

no considerable length of road is ever exposed to the facility.



Figure 9.1: Visual exposure of Footprint F to surrounding area




• Visual distance

The visual distance theory relates to the scale of the proposed landfill site,

and the distance over which it is viewed in order to determine the prominence

of t he s tructure i n r elation t o i ts s urrounding e nvironment. Figure 9 .2

indicates the visual distances as buffer radii from Footprint F.

The buffer distances chosen for this study are 500 m, 1 000 m, 1 500 m,

3 000 m and greater than 3 000 m. The 500 m buffer interval was calculated

from the average maximum width of the landfill sites added to the average

maximum height.

0 - 500 m . T his bu ffer z one i ncludes th e w aste d isposal f acility and its

immediate surroundings. T he structure being viewed f ills and dominates the

frame of vision and constitutes a very high visual prominence.

500 – 1 000 m. At a distance of twice its combined width and height, the

structure is easily and comfortably visible and constitutes a high visual

prominence.

1 000 – 1 500 m. At a distance of three times the combined width and

height, the structure is seen as being framed by its surroundings and becomes

part of the visual environment. This zone constitutes a high to medium visual

prominence.

1 500 – 3 000 m. At a distance of three to six times its combined width and

height, the structure begins to blend into the surroundings and ceases to be

seen as an individual element. This zone constitutes a medium visual

prominence.

Greater than 3 000 m. At a distance greater than six times its combined

width a nd h eight, th e s tructure b egins to f ade i nto i ts s urroundings a nd

constitutes a lower visual prominence.

The above theory was developed by Rodney Brown of Van Riet and Louw

Landscape Architects and has been used successfully in determining the visual

impact of landfill sites and the subsequent mitigation thereof. Variations of

the original theory might occur due to the varying visual natures of structures.



Figure 9.2: Visual distance and viewer incidence of Footprint F to the surrounding area




• Viewer incidence and viewer perception

The number of observers and their perception of a structure determine the

concept of visual impact. If there are no observers or if the visual perception

of the structure is favourable to all the observers, there would be no visual

impact.

It is necessary to identify areas of high viewer incidence and to classify certain

areas a ccording to t he o bserver's v isual s ensitivity to wards th e p roposed

hazardous waste processing facility. I t would be impossible not to generalise

the v iewer i ncidence a nd s ensitivity t o s ome d egree, a s t here a re m any

variables when trying to determine the perception of the observer; regularity

of sighting, cultural background, state of mind, purpose of sighting, etc. which

would create a myriad o f options. For the purpose o f th is s tudy three a reas

were classified as having differing observer incidences and perceptions.

The first area of viewer incidence and perception is indicated as a 500 m

buffer zone around the R335 (see Figure 9.2). The rationale is that this area

is likely to contain the most observers, being the main road between PE and

Addo (and PE and the Greater Addo Elephant National Park), and that the

purpose of these observers would be, either tourism related or associated with

the citrus producing industry near Addo. If the proposed facility were sighted

from this area it would more than likely have a negative impact on the viewer.

The second area of viewer incidence and perception is a 500 m buffer zone

around the other roads (gravel roads) in the study area. The viewer incidence

would be higher than the surrounding cattle and game farming areas, but i t

would be less than the first zone around the main road. The perception or

sensitivity towards the proposed facility would also be less critical than the

first zone, because these roads are more than often frequented by farmers

and farm workers who are going about their daily business. This zone is seen

as having a lower effect on the visual impact of the proposed facility.

The third area is the remainder of the study area (excluding the first two

zones). This area is predominantly devoid of observers, as it covers great

tracts of vacant cattle and game farming land. P ossible exceptions occur on

each farm were the homestead is situated. Even at these homesteads the

perception of the proposed facility is assumed to be predominantly neutral.

This zone is seen as having a very low effect on the visual impact of the

proposed facility.




9.4. Results

9.4.1. Visual impact index

The combined results of the visual exposure, viewer incidence and visual distance

of Footprint F are displayed on Figure 9.3. Here the weighted impact and the

likely areas of impact are indicated as a visual impact index. It must be borne in

mind that in the areas where the proposed facility is visible from the R335, the

impact was considered to be higher. The design and location of Footprint F, being

an infill site, has to a large degree contained the visual impact to the valley in

which it is s ituated a nd a lmost e ntirely to th e t wo P PC m ining p roperties.

Scattered patches of visual exposure could occur along the R335 at a distance of

about 6 km, but it is highly unlikely to raise awareness to potential observers.

This is especially true for southbound traffic, which would not be able to see the

facility. T he footprint and its associated infrastructure would not be visible from

most of the other roads in the study area.

9.4.2. Visual impact severity

Having indicated the potential visual impact and the area of likely impact, another

set of c riteria or e valuation e lements w ere applied to t he p roposed f ootprint

location. These elements analysed other factors, which may either mitigate or

aggravate, the visual impact and create a basis for severity rating. Table 9.1

shows the value rating for the proposed footprint according to the above

evaluation criteria.

Table 9.1: Severity of the visual impact

Aspect Footprint F

Visible Area 15 km2

Viewer Perception

Value = 0

Negative Value = 1

R335 Approach Line of Sight No Value = 0

Other Roads Approach Line of Sight No Value = 0

Visible Stretch of Road 3,3 km Value = 0

Distance from R335 (Access) Private Rd Value = 0

Access Road Construction / Upgrade Existing haul road

Value = 0

Mitigation through Vegetation Screening Possible Value = 0

Total Severity of Impact

00 = Lowest

12 = Highest

01



Figure 9.3: Visual Impact Index of Footprint F




9.4.3. Impact Analysis

Table 9.2 overleaf provides the impact analysis of Footprint F from a visual point

of view.

Footprint F (Grassridge 190) is a valley infill site and ranks as an ideal location for

the hazardous waste processing facility. It has the most contained area of visual

impact a nd lends i tself to t he h ighest l evel o f s uccessful impact m itigation

measures. This is due to the enclosed nature of the valley within which it resides.

The fact that the facility is theoretically visible from the R335 is not a major cause

for concern. The likelihood of it ever being noticed or recognised as a landfill

from a distance of 6 km is slim to negligible, as the site would never appear in its

entirety.

The footprint is situated within a predominantly mining and quarrying area, as

opposed t o c attle a nd g ame f arming. T his l and-use i s b etter s uited to

accommodate a landfill and offers secondary advantages such as the immediate

availability of borrow materials from decommissioned mining areas. The clearing

of vegetation and the quarrying for borrow materials, especially over large tracts

of land, can largely be avoided as a result.



Table 9.2: Visual impact assessment of Footprint F


Severity /

Intensity

scale

Significance

Post

mitigation

significance

Viewer perception in

area of lik ely v isual

impact

Negative Regional

Long term

Possible

Moderate

High High -

View from R335 Negative Local

Long term

Possible

Moderate

Moderate Moderate -

View from other roads Negative Local

Long term

Possible

Moderate to

Low

Moderate Moderate -

Construction of access

roads

Negative Regional

Permanent

Possible

Moderate

Moderate Moderate -




9.5. Conclusion and Recommendations

The s trategic p lacement of any s tructure or w aste p rocessing facility is the f irst

level of visual impact mitigation. T he p lacement should occur with utmost care

and sensitivity towards potential observers and should address both primary and

secondary a ssociated i mpacts. T he s election o f F ootprint F (G rassridge 1 90

Remainder) a s t he p referred a lternative, e ven w ith its ow n a ssociated v isual

impact concerns, highlights the need to shield the facility from observers

travelling along the R335. The benefit of this footprint placement is that no one

travelling from Port Elizabeth to Addo, or the Greater Addo Elephant National

Park, would even be aware of the existence of this facility through accidental

observation. This is due to the fact that the footprint is far removed from the

R335 and because of the hidden nature of the infill site.

The associated benefits of placing the waste processing facility on mining land,

where b orrow m aterials c ould b e s ourced w ithout b reaking n ew g round a nd

clearing large tracts of land, counts in this footprint’s favour. The mining and

quarrying activities and a waste processing facility are complimenting land-uses,

as opposed to the potential conflict between waste processing and

agriculture/cattle and game farming/tourism and eco-tourism. Another clear

benefit of this footprint's placement is its closer proximity to Port Elizabeth from

where most of the waste to be treated will be transported. The distance of 4 km

does not sound l ike much, but over a period of 20 years i t would translate to a

considerable amount of kilometres. This, and the fact that access will be afforded

by the P1954 road, minimises the visual impacts associated with the increase in

heavy vehicle traffic to and from the facility. This increase in heavy vehicle traffic

might raise awareness of the fact that such a facility exists in the vicinity.

Possible mitigation measures for th is footprint would include the upgrade of the

R335 main road to facilitate the overtaking of trucks. Being stuck behind a heavy

vehicle, tr ansporting h azardous w aste c onstitutes a v isual impact a nd

unnecessarily sensitises the observer. The potential screening of the facility,

through the strategic placement of vegetation at the areas of highest impact,

should be investigated and implemented. The placement of site infrastructure

and associated buildings must be carefully planned to further reduce unnecessary

visual clutter. Lighting of the facility should be designed to contain, rather than

spread the light, and avoid potential visual impacts at night. This would apply to

security lighting and operational lighting, should the facility function at night.

Implementation and monitoring of visual impact mitigation measures should be

done throughout the l ifespan of the facility, f rom construction phase through to

decommissioning and rehabilitation phases. A forum should be created through

which affected parties could report any shortcomings or negligence in the

mitigation and containment of the visual impact of the facility.



Ch 10 – Air Quality June 2010 153

10. AIR QUALITY

Airshed Planning Professionals (Pty) Ltd was appointed by Bohlweki-SSI

Environmental to undertake an a ir quality impact assessment for p roposed new

GHWMF in the Eastern Cape. The specialist report is contained in Appendix G.

10.1. Introduction

The m ain ob jective of t he s tudy w as t o u ndertake a n a ir d ispersion impact

assessment using project s pecific d ata to d etermine potential impacts o n th e

surrounding environment and human health associated with Footprint F.

10.2. Scope of Study

The scope of the air quality impact assessment included the following:

• Meteorological data processing for input into dispersion modelling.

• Estimation of fugitive dust and landfill gas emissions emanating from

proposed operations at the landfill phase during which maximum emissions

are expected.

• Simulation o f a mbient a ir p ollution c oncentrations a nd d ustfall r ates

occurring d uring t he period of ma ximum l andfill ga s a nd f ugitive du st

emissions.

• Evaluation of predicted air pollutant concentrations and dustfall rates based

on local and international air quality guidelines and standards, dose–

response relationships and odour thresholds.

• Identification of mitigation and/or management measures aimed at reducing

fugitive dust and landfill gas emissions.

• Buffer zone projection:

* Delineation of health, odour and dust impact areas associated with the

period of maximum emissions associated with the proposed landfill site.

* Recommendation of buffer zones and impact management zones based

on the health, odour and dust impact areas identified.

• A complete impact significance rating.

10.3. Methodology

The establishment of a comprehensive emission inventory forms the basis for the

assessment of the impact of the proposed GHWMF emissions on the receiving

environment. The establishment of a n e missions inventory c omprises t he

identification o f s ources o f e mission, a nd t he q uantification o f e ach s ource’s

contribution to ambient air pollution concentrations. Pollutants of concern in the

current study include fugitive dust and landfill gas emissions.




Fugitive dust emissions can occur as a result of vehicle-entrained dust from the

unpaved road network, wind erosion from open areas and dust generation due to

material handling and pushing (bulldozing) operations. Gaseous emissions from

the landfill emanate from the work face, t renches and covered portions. In the

quantification of fugitive dust emissions use was made of emission factors which

associate the quantity of a pollutant to the activity associated with the release of

that pollutant. Due to the absence of locally generated emission factors, use was

made of the comprehensive set of emission factors published by the US

Environmental Protection Agency (US-EPA) in its AP-42 document Compilation of

Air Pollution Emission Factors. In the estimation of gaseous emissions from open

trenches and working faces of the landfill, the UK Environmental Agency’s GasSim

model w as u sed. This m odel w as d eveloped t o p rovide a s tandard ri sk

assessment methodology for the Agency, operator and consultants. GasSim is

designed to aid landfill gas (LFG) risk assessment, by enabling LFG generation,

emissions, m igration/dispersion a nd i mpact/exposure t o b e a ssessed i n a

reproducible manner by those familiar with the subject, but without the need to

build multiple models.

The simulation of ambient air pollutant concentrations and dust deposition due to

the GHWMF emissions were undertaken through the application of the US-EPA

AERMOD ( version 5 ). T he USA -EPA ( EPA, 1 986) c onsiders t he r ange o f

uncertainty to be -50% to 200%. In the estimation of emissions and the

simulation of patterns of dispersion, a distinction was made between Total

Suspended Particulates (TSP) and inhalable particulates (PM10, particulate matter

with an aerodynamic diameter of less than 10 μm). Whereas TSP is of interest

due to its implications in terms of nuisance dust impacts, the PM10 fraction is

taken into account to determine the potential for human health risks. The

dispersion simulations undertaken for particulate and gaseous emissions

facilitated a preliminary assessment of the health implications of the proposed

landfill site emissions, through the comparison of simulated concentrations with

local and international ambient air quality guidelines and standards. For pollutants

for which no ambient guidelines are available, use was made of health and odour

thresholds from the general literature with preference being given to refereed

sources, e.g. US-EPA Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) data base. The

health risk screening assessment was undertaken for the proposed landfill site.

10.3.1. Emissions Inventory and Dispersion Simulations

The GHWMF is proposed to operate for 20 years. The design capacity is

approximately 5 million m³. For the purposes of the current study the projected

landfill rate was taken to be 122 696 tons per annum in year 1 and gradually

increased to 301 823 tons per annum in year 11 after which it stays constant up

to year 20. Work faces will be covered at t he end of each day. No controls




regarding odour from leachate areas and dust from covered areas were assumed.

The capping of the landfill was taken to be carried out progressively.

• Landfill Gas Emissions

The nature of emissions emanating from a landfill site is dependant on the

following factors:

* composition of the waste to be received at the site;

* design and operational practices (e.g. treatment policies);

* chemical reactions within the landfill; and

* stage of the landfill gas generation process.

For the purpose of estimating LFG emissions, the relative proportions of the

different materials within each of the waste streams expected at the

proposed GHWMF had to be determined or a ssumed. The generation of LFG

for a n i ndividual s ite i s b ased o n th e m ass o f w aste d eposited a nd th e

composition of the waste streams. The waste is degraded following the f irst

order decay model that calculates the LFG generation for up to 200 years.

The emission model of GasSim takes this output and uses it to calculate LFG

emissions, of bulk and trace gases, to the environment after allowing for LFG

collection, f laring, u tilisation ( energy r ecovery) a nd b iological m ethane

oxidation. T he w aste composition w as u sed t o ca lculate t he q uantity o f

carbon that is available for slow, moderate and fast degradation and thus the

quantity and rate LFG production.

The identification of the landfill gasses of concern and the quantification of

these g aseous e missions w ere t herefore b ased on t he w aste s tream

classifications. The GasSim model, used to calculate LFG emissions, requires

various input parameters based on the characterisation of the waste type and

the manner in which the waste is to be stored and managed. The model

makes provision for the input of site-specific gaseous concentrations within

the w aste (i .e. s ubsurface g as c oncentrations) d espite c ontaining default

values b ased on i nformation f rom U K l andfill s ites. W here p ossible,

subsurface gas concentrations used for the Chloorkop general waste l andfill

study in Ekurhuleni (Gauteng Province), from sampling campaigns conducted

by Margot Saner & Associates (Pty) Ltd and Jean Bogner from Landfills Plus,

were used as input in the GasSim modelling. For pollutants for which no data

were available reference was made to the UK landfill figures.

• Fugitive Particulate Emissions

Impacts a ssociated w ith fu gitive d ust e missions, v arious p articulate size

fractions w ere c onsidered, i ncluding r espirable p articles (P M10) a nd to tal

suspended particulates (TSP).The PM10 size fraction was selected due to i ts




implications for human health, with TSP being included in the modelling to

allow for the assessment of dust fall rates, which may pose a nuisance to

sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the l andfill. The following sources of

fugitive dust have been included in the current study:

* Vehicle entrainment from unpaved roads – waste carrying haul trucks from

the main road to the landfill site;

* Vehicle entrainment f rom unpaved roads – cover material t ransport f rom

the borrow pit area;

* Excavation of cover and interim material from the borrow pit;

* Front-end-loader activity in the borrow pit and at the landfill working area;

* Tipping of cover and interim material at the landfill working area; and

* Wind erosion of the covered portions of the landfill.

Four scenarios were considered for the access route to the landfill site (Figure

10.1 – also refer to Chapter 13). The scenarios are as follows:

* Scenario 1

*

: All waste hauling traffic from the R335 onto the P1954 (Route

1);

Scenario 2

*

: All waste hauling traffic from the R335 onto the P1958, an

unpaved road to the north-east of the landfill site (Route 2);

Scenario 3

*

: 80 % w aste h auling traffic f rom the R 335 o nto t he P1954

(Route 1) and 20% of the traffic from the R75 onto the MR00470 and then

the P1958 (Route 3); and

Scenario 4

: 80 % w aste h auling traffic f rom the R 335 o nto the P 1958

(Route 2), an unpaved road to the north-east of the landfill site and 20%

of the traffic from the R75 onto Route 3.

• Particulate Concentrations and Deposition Levels

Particulate concentration and dustfall levels were simulated for four emission

scenarios described a bove. T he s cenarios v aried f rom each ot her w ith

respect to the waste haul roads that are considered. The scenarios subject to

assessment were:

* Scenario 1

*

: Included emissions from wind erosion, materials handling and

vehicle entrainment from the unpaved P1954 (Route 1);

Scenario 2

*


vehicle e ntrainment f rom t he unpaved P1958 to th e n orth-east of t he

landfill site (Route 2);

Scenario 3

*


vehicle entrainment from the P1954 (80% of total traffic on Route 1) and

the unpaved MR00470 / P1958 to the south-west of the landfill site (20%

of total traffic on Route 3); and

Scenario 4: Included emissions from wind erosion, materials handling and

vehicle e ntrainment f rom t he un paved P1958 (80% of t otal t raffic o n

Route 2) and the MR00470 / P1958 (20% of total traffic on Route 3).




Figure 10.1: Alternative access routes to the proposed landfill site

10.3.2. Landfill Gas Concentrations, Health and Odour Impacts

Ambient landfill gas concentrations occurring due to routine landfill operations

were simulated for the proposed GHWMF. Predicted landfill gas concentrations

were compared to respective health and odour threshold and potential cancer

risks estimated.

• Non-carcinogenic health impacts

The potential for non-carcinogenic health impacts were assessed. A synopsis

of the highest hourly, highest daily, highest monthly and annual average

pollutant concentrations predicted to occur were given as a fraction of

relevant n on-carcinogenic health t hresholds. T his was t o highlight the

potential that exists for health impacts. Fractions of greater than 1 represent

threshold exceedances.

• Cancer risks

Cancer risks were estimated based on predicted long-term average on-site

concentrations to determine the potential for cancer risks due to individual




compounds and across all carcinogens simulated. Reference was made to

cancer risk factors published by the World Health Organisation (WHO), US-

EPA and California EPA. U se was made of the strictest risk factors available

for each pollutant when carrying out the assessment of risk. T he maximum

cancer risk calculated for site F was predicted to be 1 in 2.5 million. In order

to determine the levels of cancer risk beyond the landfill boundary such risks

were calculated for operations at the proposed landfill site (taking A, B1 and

B2 carcinogens into account). C ancer risks of < 1: 1 million are frequently

accepted by authorities in countries such as the USA as being negligible with

greater risks receiving attention.

• Odour assessment

A c omprehensive odour a ssessment p rocedure w as adopted b ased on

guidance obtained from the New South Wales (NSW) EPA. In terms of this

procedure hourly average pollutant concentrations were calculated and

compared to odour thresholds obtained from the literature. Concentrations of

odoriferous compounds are given as a fraction of relevant odour thresholds,

with fractions of greater than 1 indicating threshold exceedances and

therefore odour impact potentials. O ff-site, t he potential for odour impacts

depends on the number of persons exposed. It was recommended that the

NSW EPA draft approach be largely adopted for use in the current study given

that it h as re cently b een p ublished a nd is c omprehensively d ocumented.

Odour units at each of the sensitive receptors were for calculated for the

proposed landfill. An odour unit level of 3 OU/m³ is given as being

acceptable for areas comprising between 500 and 2000 people.

10.3.3. Significance of Impacts

This impact assessment addressed emissions from the operational phase when

landfill emissions are expected to be at a maximum. The landfill gas generation is

expected to reach a maximum when the maximum amount of waste is in place,

i.e. y ear 20. Emissions a ssociated w ith the op erational phase of the l andfill

include the following:

• Fugitive dust emissions from vehicle entrainment;

• Fugitive dust emissions from materials handling activities;

• Fugitive dust emissions from wind erosion of exposed areas; and

• Landfill gas emissions.

Possible air quality impacts associated with these emissions are:

• Health r isks associated with predicted inhalable particulate and landfill gas

concentrations;




• Cancer risks associated with predicted landfill gas concentrations;

• Odour impacts associated with predicted landfill gas concentrations; and

• Nuisance impacts as a result of predicted dustfall levels.

The proposed GHWMF will comprise two phases, namely an operational phase and

a post closure phase. An impact significance rating for each of the phases as well

as an overall significance rating is given in the subsequent sections. Landfill gas

generation is expected to decrease exponentially from year 20. Only landfill gas

emissions are associated with the post cl osure phase. No particulate emissions

are expected during the post closure phase since no materials handling or vehicle

activities will be present and all exposed areas are expected to be closed and

rehabilitated. The proposed GHWMF will comprise two phases, namely an

operational phase and a post closure phase. An impact significance rating for each

of the phases as well as an overall significance rating is given in the subsequent

sections. Landfill gas generation is expected to decrease exponentially from year

20. Only landfill gas emissions are associated with the post closure phase. N o

particulate emissions are expected since no materials handling or vehicle

activities will be present and all exposed areas are expected to be closed and

rehabilitated.

10.3.4. Buffer Zone Projection

A buffer zone is that area defined by the application of a separation distance from

the activity boundary (EPA Australia, 2000). Buffer zone projection is a tool to

assist development proposals to ensure that incompatible land uses are located in

such a way so that impacts caused by noise, odour and polluting air emissions are

minimised. When considering buffer z one p rojection health, odour and nuisance

impacts from the proposed development are usually taken into account. The

distances of exceedance of the various health and odour criteria as a result of

emissions f rom t he p roposed d evelopment a re c ompared a nd t he m aximum

distance of exceedance applied as the buffer zone.

10.4. Results and Conclusions

The main findings of the study were as follows:

Particulates (PM10): No e xceedances o f t he c urrent (Daily A verage – 180

µg/m³; Annual Average – 60 µg/m³) or proposed (Daily Average – 75 µg/m³;

Annual Average – 40 µg/m³) ambient South African standards for PM10 were

predicted to occur at any of the sensitive receptors included in the study for any

of the scenarios. T he impacts from landfill activities associated with Scenario 1

(Figures 10.2 and 10.3 overleaf) were predicted to be the least significant and will

result in the lowest g round l evel PM10 c oncentrations at t he majority o f th e





The highest PM10 concentrations predicted as a result of emissions associated

with the four scenarios were predicted to occur at Rooidam. It is clear that wind

erosion of working faces and vehicle entrainment of dust from unpaved roads is

the m ost s ignificant P M10 i mpacting s ource a t th e m ajority o f th e s ensitive

receptors for all four scenarios.

Figure 10.2: Scenario 1 – Predicted annual average PM10 concentrations

Figure 10.3: Scenario 1 – Predicted highest daily average PM10 concentrations




Particulates (Dustfall): Particulate concentration and dustfall levels were

simulated for the four emission scenarios (Figure 10.1). The scenarios vary from

each other with respect to the waste haul roads that are considered as waste

haulage routes.

Slight dustfall levels (<250 mg/m²/day), were predicted to occur at the all of the

sensitive receptors located around the proposed GHWMF site. Locally, dust

deposition is evaluated according to the criteria published by the South African

Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism ( DWEA). In t erms of these

criteria dust deposition is classified as follows:

• Slight - less than 250 mg/m2/day

• Moderate - 250 to 500 mg/m2/day

• Heavy - 500 to 1200 mg/m2/day

• Very Heavy - more than 1200 mg/m2/day

The Department of Minerals and Energy (DME) uses the uses the 1 200

mg/m2

/day threshold level as an action level. In the event that on-site dustfall

exceeds this threshold, the specific causes of high dustfall should be investigated

and remedial steps taken.

"Slight" dustfall is barely visible to the naked eye. "Heavy" dustfall indicates a fine

layer of dust on a surface; with "Very Heavy" dustfall being easily visible should a

surface not be cleaned for a few days. Dustfall levels of > 2000 mg/m2/day

constitute a layer of dust thick enough to allow a person to "write" words in the

dust with their fingers.

Overall, the impacts from landfill activities associated with Scenario 1 (waste

haulage v ia t he P 1954 road - refer t o F igures 10.4 a nd 10.5 ov erleaf) a re

predicted to be the least significant and will result in the lowest dustfall levels at

the majority of the sensitive receptors.

Dust emissions from of landfill operations associated with Scenario 2 are however

predicted to result in the highest dustfall levels at most of the sensitive receptors.

The highest dustfall levels as a result of emissions associated with Scenarios 1

and 2 were predicted to occur at Rooidam, while the highest dustfall levels as a

result of emissions associated with Scenarios 3 and 4 were predicted to occur at

Centlivres. Dust as a result of wind erosion will have the most significant impact

on sensitive receptors to the north east and south east of the site.




Figure 10.4: Scenario 1 – Predicted average daily dustfall

Figure 10.5: Scenario 1 – Predicted maximum daily dustfall




Total TSP and PM10 emissions calculated for the various source groups for the

landfill site are given in Table 10.1. The table depicts total emission rates from all

activities associated with the expected activities at the proposed GHWMF taking

into account the four access route scenarios.

Table 10.1: Synopsis of estimated fugitive emissions

Scenario Source Group Emissions – Tons per Annum Emissions % Contribution

PM10 TSP PM10 TSP

1

Wind Erosion 162.99 263.51 80.26% 64.02%

Materials Handling 0.25 0.54 0.13% 0.13%

Unpaved Roads 39.83 147.55 19.62% 35.85%

Total - Scenario 1 203.07 411.60 100.00% 100.00%

2

Wind Erosion 162.99 263.51 72.90% 54.04%


Unpaved Roads 60.34 223.53 26.99% 45.84%

Total - Scenario 2 223.58 487.58 100.00% 100.00%

3

Wind Erosion 162.99 263.51 75.71% 57.69%


Unpaved Roads 52.03 192.72 24.17% 42.19%

Total - Scenario 3 215.27 456.78 100.00% 100.00%

4

Wind Erosion 162.99 263.51 70.35% 50.91%


Unpaved Roads 68.44 253.51 29.54% 48.98%

Total - Scenario 4 231.68 517.56 100.00% 100.00%

A comparison of all 4 access road scenario’s indicates that Scenario 1 is the

preferred haul route option in terms of lower respirable particles (PM10) and total

suspended particulates (TSP) impacts, of which wind erosion from the working

faces of the proposed GHWMF s ite will be the largest source of emissions. It i s

clear that vehicle entrainment of dust from unpaved roads is the second most

significant PM10 impacting source at the majority of the sensitive receptors for all

four scenarios. It is recommended that the preferred access road be resurfaced

to bitumen standard in order to reduce the volume of vehicle entrained dust that

will be resultant from the construction and operational phases of the proposed

GHWMF. Appropriate dust suppression measures will have to be developed and

incorporated into the Environmental Management Plan to address this potential

emission source resulting from what will be daily site operations and activities.

Non-carcinogenic exposures: The potential for non-carcinogenic health

impacts were assessed. A synopsis of the highest hourly, highest daily, highest

monthly and annual average pollutant concentrations predicted to occur on-site

due to landfill operations are given in Table 5.4 of the specialist report (Appendix




F). Such concentrations are also given as a fraction of relevant non-carcinogenic

health thresholds in order to highlight the potential that exists for health impacts.

Fractions of greater than 1 represent threshold exceedances and, i f appropriate,

are indicated in the table in bold print and a flag raised to indicate the threshold

exceeded. Although the health thresholds given are intended for public exposures

and are therefore not strictly applicable to on-site pollutant concentrations, the

use o f s uch concentrations in t he he alth s creening p rovides a n e asy w ay of

identifying pollutants that may result in significant off-site impacts. By summing

the ha zard f ractions o btained f or i ndividual pollutants, to a chieve the h azard

quotient or index, the combined non-carcinogenic health risk can be assessed.

The hazard quotient for chronic exposures from the landfill is predicted to be

0.012. The hazard quotients for the landfill are therefore predicted to be less than

1.0 for all exposure periods. Non-carcinogenic health risks are predicted to be

very low at all the sensitive receptors. The highest hazard quotient is predicted to

occur at Rooidam.

Cancer risks: Cancer risks were also estimated based on predicted long-term

average on-site concentrations to determine the potential for cancer risks due to

individual compounds and across all carcinogens simulated. Reference was made

to cancer risk factors published by the WHO, US-EPA and California EPA. Cancer

risks due to inhalation exposures to individual Volatile Organic Compounds

(VOCs) and metals are presented in Table 5.6 of the Specialist Report for the

proposed GHWMF. Use was made of the strictest risk factors available for each

pollutant when carrying out the assessment of risk. Total incremental cancer

risks calculated across all carcinogens considered are given in Table 5.7 of the

specialist report (Appendix 6 of Volume 2). From the information provided in the

tables it is evident that the greatest cancer risks are associated with B2 category

carcinogens (i.e. probable human carcinogens based on animal data). The

maximum cancer risk calculated for the proposed GHWMF is predicted to be 1 in

2.5 million. In order to determine the levels of cancer risk beyond the landfill

boundary s uch risks were c alculated t aking A , B 1 a nd B 2 c arcinogens i nto

account. Cancer ri sks o f < 1:1 m illion a re f requently accepted by authorities i n

countries such as the USA as being negligible with greater risks receiving

attention. Locally, the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DWEA)

has been noted to give an indication of cancer risk acceptability in the case of

dioxin and furan exposures.

According to the DWEA, emissions of dioxins and furans from a hazardous waste

incinerator may not result in an excess cancer risk of greater than 1:100 000 on

the basis of annual average exposure (DWEA, 1994). In the case of the proposed

landfill, excess cancer risks are less than 1:100 000 and would therefore b e

viewed as acceptable by the DWEA. It should be noted that no d ioxin or furan

emissions are expected under routine operating conditions at the proposed landfill

and reference to DWEA’s acceptable cancer risk level for dioxins and furans is




only made in the absence of locally published acceptable cancer risk levels for

other pollutants from the landfill. The cancer risk level is not predicted to be

exceeded for the proposed landfill site. Total maximum incremental cancer risk

levels were predicted to be less than ~ 1 in 3.5 million for the proposed landfill

operations. The maximum cancer risk at the sensitive receptors as a result of

emissions from the proposed landfill site was predicted to occur at Rooidam (~ 1

in 45 million). Predicted cancer risks at the sensitive receptors as a result of

emissions from the site are given in Table 10.2.

Table 10.2: Summary of predicted cancer risks at the sensitive receptors

NOTES: Taking only A, B1 and B2 carcinogens into account

Sensitive Receptor

Calculated Cancer Risk (expressed

as a 1:xxx chance of contracting

cancer)

(a)

KOMMANDOKRAAL113 236 660 052

ADDODRIFTEAST122 211 737 537

F129 214 681 280

TZOETGENEUGD192 145 499 728

F198 148 044 132

AMANZI284 419 061 960

Sandfontein 576 178 922

Centlivres 415 454 022

Glen Mere 571 403 016

Doornkom 275 860 996

Prenticekraal 606 790 125

Heil-lof 373 924 717

Montana 353 905 278

Aloe Ridge 195 048 443

De Windmolen 128 619 937

Graskop 77 180 191

Blaauwbaatjesvley 85 173 391

Hartmanshoop 142 114 518

Rooidam 45 042 340

Kentvale 90 289 054

Alkom 120 126 922

Longhill 126 545 557

Koega Kamma 57 136 919

Eb en Vloed 80 903 654

Olifantskop 82 265 669

Grass Ridge III 291 043 333




Odour impacts: In accordance with the assessment procedure hourly average

pollutant concentrations were calculated and compared to odour thresholds

obtained from the l iterature. Concentrations of odoriferous compounds are given

as a f raction of relevant od our t hresholds, w ith f ractions of g reater t han 1

indicating threshold exceedances and therefore odour impact potentials.

Figure 10.6: Predicted odour impact areas

No odour th reshold e xceedances w ere p redicted to occur d ue to o n-site

concentrations of odoriferous gasses. As per Figure 10.6 above, off-site odour

impacts were predicted to far below the acceptable 3 OU/m³ odour unit level at

all the sensitive receptors.

Buffer Zone projection: For the proposed GHWMF development no exceedances

of the health or odour criteria were predicted to occur off-site, hence providing no

guidance o n d etermining a pplicable b uffer d istances. It w as r ecommended to

implement as good practice a buffer zone around the proposed site.




For this reference was made to the South Australian EPA’s draft document on

“Guidelines for Separation Distances”. Based on these different criteria associated

with health a nd nu isance i mpacts, a s eparation d istance o f 5 00 m f rom t he

operations area was used for the projection of the buffer zone for the proposed

GHWMF site (see Figure 10.7).

Figure 10.7: Projected 500 m buffer zone around the proposed GHWMF site


This impact assessment addressed emissions from the operational phase when

landfill emissions are expected to be at a maximum. The landfill gas generation is

expected to reach a maximum when the maximum amount of waste is in place,

i.e. year 20. Impact significance ratings associated with the construction,

operational and post closure phases of the landfill are indicated in Table 10.3 and

10.4 overleaf.




Landfill gas generation is expected to decrease exponentially from year 20. Only

landfill gas emissions are associated with the post closure phase. No particulate

emissions are expected since no materials handling or vehicle activities will be

present and all exposed areas are expected to be closed and rehabilitated.



Table 10.3: Air quality impact assessment for the construction and operational phases

Potential

Impact Status Duration Extent

Severity/Intensity

scale Probability

Degree of

Confidence

or

Uncertainty

Significance

PM10 Negative Long

Term

Local (a)

(b) Moderately Severe

(c) Definite

(d)

Possible Moderate - (e)

Dustfall

(f)

Negative Long

Term Local

Moderately Severe

Definite

Possible Moderate -

Health Risk Negative Long

Term

Local

Moderately Severe

Definite

Possible Moderate -

Cancer Risk Negative Long

Term Local

Moderately Severe

Definite

Possible Moderate -

Odour Negative Long

Term

Local

Moderately Severe

Definite

Possible Moderate -

NOTES:

(a) Between 15 & 30 years

(b) Small scale impacts – from a few hectares in extent

(c) Medium to long term impacts on the affected system(s) or party (ies) that could be mitigated.

(d) An impact will definitely occur

(e) Over 40% sure of the likelihood of an impact occurring

(f) These impacts will usually result in medium- to long-term effects on the social and/or natural environment. Impacts rated

as MODERATE will need to be considered by society as constituting a fairly important and usually medium term chance to

the environment. These impacts are real but not substantial.



Table 10.4: Air quality impact assessment for the post-closure phase

Potential

Impact Status Duration Extent

Severity/Intensity

scale Probability

Degree of

Confidence or

Uncertainty

Significance

Health

Risk Negative Permanent

Local (a)

(b)

Moderately Severe Definite (c) Possible (d) Moderate (e)

Cancer

Risk

(f)

Negative Permanent Local Moderately Severe Definite Possible Moderate

Odour Negative Permanent Local Moderately Severe Definite Possible Moderate

NOTES:

(a) Between 15 & 30 years

(b) Small scale impacts – from a few hectares in extent

(c) Medium to long term impacts on the affected system(s) or party (ies) that could be mitigated.

(d) An impact will definitely occur

(e) Over 40% sure of the likelihood of an impact occurring

(f) These impacts will usually result in medium- to long-term effects on the social and/or natural environment. Impacts rated

as MODERATE will need to be considered by society as constituting a fairly important and usually medium term chance to

the environment. These impacts are real but not substantial.




10.6. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The main findings of the study were as follows:

Particulates (PM10): No exceedances of the current or proposed ambient SA

standards for PM10 were predicted to occur at any of the sensitive receptors

included in the study for any of the scenarios. The impacts from landfill activities

associated with Scenario 1 were predicted to be the least significant and will

result in the lowest g round l evel PM10 c oncentrations at t he majority o f th e

sensitive receptors. The highest PM10 concentrations predicted as a result of

emissions associated with the four scenarios were predicted to occur at Rooidam.

Particulates (Dustfall): Slight dustfall levels (<250 mg/m²/day), were

predicted t o o ccur a t t he a ll of t he s ensitive r eceptors l ocated around th e

proposed GHWMF site. Overall, the impacts from landfill activities associated with

Scenario 1 were predicted to be the least significant and will result in the lowest

dustfall levels at the majority of the sensitive receptors. Dust emissions from of

activities associated with S cenario 2 w ere however predicted to result in t he

highest dustfall levels at most of the sensitive receptors. The highest dustfall

levels as a result of emissions associated with Scenarios 1 and 2 were predicted

to occur at Rooidam while the highest dustfall levels as a result of emissions

associated with Scenarios 3 and 4 were predicted to occur at Centlivres

Non-carcinogenic exposures: None of the pollutants considered in this study

flagged for the proposed GHWMF. The hazard quotient for chronic exposures for

the proposed landfill was predicted to be 0.012. The hazard quotient for the site

was therefore predicted to be less than 1.0 for all exposure periods.

Cancer risks: Total maximum incremental cancer risk levels were predicted to be

less than ~ 1 in 3.5 mi llion for the proposed landfill operations. The maximum

cancer risk at the sensitive receptors as a result of emissions from the proposed

landfill site was predicted to occur at Rooidam (~ 1 in 45 million).

Odour impacts: No odour threshold exceedances were predicted to occur due to

on-site c oncentrations o f o doriferous g asses. Of f-site od our i mpacts w ere

predicted to far below the acceptable 3 OU/m³ odour unit level at all the sensitive

receptors.

The findings of the air quality assessment have lead to the following

recommendations:

• The p roposed G HWMF op erator should c ontrol on -site f ugitive du st

emissions b y e ffective m anagement a nd m itigation. A t least 7 5% d ust




control efficiency is required on unpaved roads to ensure dustfall rates are

reduced to the levels predicted.

• Based on the air quality impact assessment it is recommended that the PPC

haul road be considered as the access route to the GHWMF since Scenario 1

is predicted to result in the least significant impacts at the sensitive

receptors included in the study. The scenarios are ranked as follows:

(1) Scenario 1 – most preferred

(2) Scenario 3

(3) Scenario 2

(4) Scenario 4 - least preferred

• Cognisance should be taken that the predicted impacts was based on design

criteria and emissions rates based on subsurface gas concentrations. These

subsurface c oncentrations were a combination o f UK d efault g as

concentrations and Chloorkop Landfill measured concentrations. Therefore

sub surface gas concentrations should be analysed to determine t race gas

composition and generation.

• It is also recommended that PM10 and dustfall levels be monitored in order

to:

* confirm the predicted air quality impacts associated with activities from

the landfill site;

* assess compliance o f l andfill e missions a nd associated i mpacts w ith

current air quality standards;

* determine source contributions to ambient air quality in order to

prioritise mitigation measures;

* assess the efficiency of mitigation measures

• It i s r ecommended th at g ravimetric s ampling f or P M10 b e d one using

portable mini high-volume samplers. These are battery-driven and take a

composite sample over a 24 hour period. If sampling is carried out every

third day (including week-ends) a sample series without systematic error,

yet not too labour-intensive is built up.

• It is recommended that at least four deposition gauges be placed on the

landfill site perimeter. The recorded wind field suggests that the dustfall

gauges should be situated to the north-eastern, south-eastern, south-

western and north-western boundaries of the site.

Recommendations concerning the mitigation of emissions, specifically particulate

emissions, from the proposed GHWMF are as follows:

• The haul roads going to and from the site as well as on-site were identified

as a significant source of dust emissions. Three types of measures may be

taken to reduce emissions from unpaved roads:

* measures aimed at reducing the extent of unpaved roads, e.g. paving,

* traffic control measures aimed at reducing the entrainment of material

by restricting traffic volumes and reducing vehicle speeds, and




* measures a imed a t b inding the surface material or e nhancing moisture

retention, s uch a s w et s uppression a nd c hemical s tabilization ( EPA,

1987; Cowhert et al., 1988; APCD, 1995).

Control measures that can be applied to reduce fugitive dust emissions from

exposed s urfaces i nclude t he u se of vegetation c over. V egetal c over retards

erosion by binding the residue with a root network, by sheltering the residue

surface and by trapping material already eroded. Vegetation is also considered

the most effective control measure in terms of its ability to also control water

erosion. In i nvestigating th e f easibility o f v egetation ty pes th e f ollowing

properties are normally taken into account: indigenous plants; ability to establish

and regenerate quickly; proven effective for reclamation elsewhere; tolerant to

the c limatic c onditions o f th e a rea; h igh r ate o f r oot p roduction; e asily

propagated by seed or cuttings; and nitrogen-fixing ability.



Ch 11 – Heritage June 2010 174

11. HERITAGE ASSESSMENT

The archaeological survey was undertaken b y Mr J Kaplan of t he Agency for

Cultural Resource Management in his capacity as a heritage specialist for the

Footprint Ranking Report (2006). The findings remain valid.

11.1. Introduction

According t o D r B inneman ( Pers. c omm.), t he re ceiving e nvironment f or t he

proposed project is not considered to be archaeologically sensitive, vulnerable or

threatened. However, it should be noted that large numbers of well-preserved

animal fossil bones have been found in calcrete and clay deposits in the Aloes

area near Port Elizabeth (Gess 1969). The variety of bones, teeth and horn-

cores, as well as the presence of possible bone tools suggests that prehistoric

people deposited them. T he Aloes footprint has been dated to 37 000 years BP

(Gess 1969:31).

11.2. Scope of Work

The archaeological survey was required to undertake the following:

• Determine w hether t here a re l ikely t o b e any a rchaeological re mains of

significance within the proposed footprints;

• Identify and map any remains of archaeological significance within the

proposed footprints; and

• Assess the sensitivity and significance of archaeological remains within the

proposed footprints.

11.3. Methodology

The heritage assessment adopted the following methodology:

• Two site visits were undertaken; the first from 29 – 30 July 2005 and the

second on 9 June 2006. T he study entailed a baseline archaeological survey

and assessment of each of the proposed footprints. This included the

proposed access roads;

• A desktop study was undertaken;

• Dr Johan Binneman of the Department of Archaeology at the Albany Museum,

Grahamstown was also consulted; and

• The c riteria u sed to a ssess th e p roposed f ootprints a nd to e stablish th e

potential impacts of the construction of a waste site on the proposed

footprints include the following:

* Archaeological sensitivity of the proposed footprint.

* Presence/absence of archaeological remains.




* State of preservation of archaeological remains.

* Range and density of archaeological remains.

* Type of footprint that occurs (e.g. cave, paintings, workshop, and quarry).

* Rarity of occurrence.

* Local, regional and national importance.

11.4. Site Assessment

The p referred f ootprints, i ncluding p roposed access roads w ere searched f or

archaeological remains.

Footprint F displays signs of being overgrazed in places but parts are also infested

with dense thicket vegetation. S ome open spaces occur in places (Figures 11.1

and 11.2). Several footpaths and game tracks cut across the property.

A f ew MSA and L SA tools w ere found i n t he o vergrazed a nd degraded o pen

spaces, among nodules and chunks of calcrete. Several tools were also noted on

a gravel road. The tools include unmodified flakes, chunks and several cores

(Figure 11.3). No formal tools were noted or observed. The tools are all in

rough-grained quartzite. The archaeological finds were located in a disturbed and

degraded context and are not considered to be significant.

Figure 11.1: Footprint F: View facing north-east




Figure 11.2: Footprint F: View facing north-west

Figure 11.3: Footprint F: Collection of stone tools (scale is in cm)




Table 11.1: Assessment of the archaeological impacts on Footprint F and proposed access roads without mitigation

Activity/

Aspect

Significance Nature Status Extent Duration Probability Significance

Construction of a

regional general and

hazardous waste

landfill facility

Low Construction may cause

loss of archaeological

remains

Negative Local Short

term

Improbable Slight




11.6. Conclusions

The archaeological impact a ssessment has r ated t he potential impacts to

archaeological material as being low, provided that:

• An a ppropriate s pecialist i s c ontracted t o i nspect e xcavations fo r p ossible

fossil remains during the construction phase of the project.

• Human burials uncovered during bulk earthworks must not be disturbed or

removed until inspected by an archaeologist.

The study has shown that the proposed Footprint F for the development of a

Regional General and Hazardous Waste Site is suitable for development, with

none of the footprints assessed during the EIA process being more preferable

than another in terms of potential archaeological impacts.

Note: Comments from the South Africa Heritage Resources Agency (SAHRA)

have been received with regards to this report. No additional studies are required

to be undertaken during the EIA phase of the project. The comments from

SAHRA are attached in Appendix H.



Ch 12 – Land Use and Resettlement June 2010 179

12. LAND USE AND RESETTLEMENT

12.1. Introduction

This c hapter d eals w ith a ll issues related t o l and s uch a s r esettlement, l and

availability and rezoning, land use and aviation. The resettlement assessment was

undertaken and compiled by Dr Angus Paterson of Coastal and Environmental

Services. The remaining i ssues were assessed by Dr Kevin Whittington-Jones o f

Coastal and Environmental Services.

It should be noted that due to the scope of the chapter, i.e. to identify potential

fatal flaws associated with land issues, the chapter does not provide an impact

assessment of each of the issues. Where appropriate, the assessment of impacts

is provided in other chapters of the report.

12.1.1. Resettlement

It is well known that projects that displace people involuntarily generally give rise

to severe economic, social, and environmental problems. Involuntary

resettlement m ay c ause s evere l ong-term h ardship, impoverishment, a nd

environmental damage unless appropriate measures are carefully planned and

carried out. In South Africa the issue of resettlement is compounded by the fact

that during the Apartheid era numerous forced removals were undertaken and

resulted in significant hardships for many people and subsequently South Africans

are very sensitive regarding this issue. The proposed facility will require that

people currently residing within the selected areas be relocated.

12.1.2. Land availability and rezoning

Land availability is a key issue in the DWEA Minimum Requirements for Waste

Disposal by Landfill (Second edition, Section 4.5). Land availability in terms of the

proposed regional general and hazardous waste facility can be broken down into

three key issues:

• Are the current owners willing to sell their farms on a willing seller and willing

buyer basis?

• Are there any land claim applications on the farms?

• Can the land be rezoned for waste disposal?

The Minimum Requirements (DWEA, 1998, Section 4.7.1) states that the current

zoning of the proposed sites must be included within the Feasibility Report and it

must be guaranteed that it will be possible to zone it for waste disposal.




12.1.3. Land use

The M inimum R equirements ( DWEA, 19 98, Section 4 .7.1) li st a reas i n c lose

proximity to land-uses which are incompatible with landfilling as a potential fatal

flaw. In the current context, it was considered necessary to consider the

implications for export of fruit by the Addo citrus farming industry with respect to

international export guidelines. For the purpose of the current study the potential

implications for EUREPGAP

certification was assessed.

12.1.4. Aviation

Landfill sites are inherently known to attract a certain amount of birdlife. The

Minimum Requirements (DWEA, 1998) consider the placement of a landfill site 3

km f rom the end of any a irport runway or landing strip in the d irect l ine of the

flight path and within 500m of an airport or airfield boundary as a potential fatal

flaw, due to the fact that the landfill would create the danger of aircraft striking

birds.

12.1.5. Scope and Limitations

• The s tudy w as un dertaken t hrough i nterviews a nd d iscussions w ith f arm

owners.

• The information obtained from land claims commission is qualified in that it

indicates that while all measures have been used to ensure that their

information is correct they cannot be held responsible if additional information

surfaces.

• Aviation field information was obtained from the 2005 – 2007 Airfields

Directory. As such, the study did not consider any unregistered private

airfields in the vicinity of the proposed footprints.

12.2. Methods and Results

12.2.1. Resettlement

Footprint F has a single homestead and possibly a few labourers which would

need to be relocated. As such, use of Footprint F for the regional general and

hazardous landfill will involve resettlement although of only a few individuals.

Based on the above, it can be concluded that the impacts associated with the

resettlement would be permanent but limited to a few individuals and should

therefore not constitute a fatal flaw.

While no resettlement can be viewed as ideal, the possible negative impacts on

the resettled individuals could be mitigated by applying the following measures:




• The process must follow international best practice guidelines i.e. World Bank

Standards.

• The r esettlement m ust b e undertaken b y an independent a gency a nd

extensively monitored prior to operation, during the operation and for at least

3 years after the move.

A social impact assessment is being conducted during the EIA phase for the

further consideration of Footprint F.

12.2.2. Land availability and rezoning

During th e p roduction o f th e F ootprint Ra nking Re port, th e current l and

availability was established by:

• Discussions with the farm owners.

• Discussions with the Land Commission.

• Discussions with the Chief F inancial officer / l and procurement o fficer a t the

Coega Development Corporation (Pty) Ltd.

Subsequently, further discussions were held between Bohlweki-SSI Environmental

and the owners of the three properties and confirmation of the current zoning and

possibility of rezoning each for waste disposal was requested from the Nelson

Mandela Bay Municipality (NMBM).

Footprint F is on Portland Pretoria Cement (PPC) owned land. The property is

currently zoned for agriculture. The NMBM ( refer to F igure 12.1) have i ndicated

that an application for the rezoning of the p referred s ite for a Regional General

Hazardous Waste Management Facility must still be submitted, in terms of

Ordinance 15 of 1985, for consideration by the NMBM. However, no guarantee

can be provided that such an application will be successful as the NMBM must

consider su ch a n a pplication w ith r egard t o a ll fa cts, su ch a s t echnical,

transportation, environmental and social aspects. The formal rezoning application

will be initiated once an authority decision has been taken on the EIA application.

At this time there are no known that no land claims that have been lodged on any

of th e f arms i nvestigated d uring th e F ootprint Ra nking Re port a nd D raft E IR

process. Refer to a copy of the letter from the Commission on Restitution of Land

Rights that is provided in Figure 12.2.




Figure 12.1: Letter from the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality regarding the

potential rezoning of Footprint F for a waste disposal facility




Figure 12.2: Letter from the Commission of Restitution of Land Rights

confirming that no land claims have been lodged on any of the

farms




12.2.3. Surrounding Land Use

The area to the north east of the proposed footprints is regarded as important for

the farming of export citrus fruit. The cultivation and handling of fruit destined for

export m arkets i s c ontrolled b y s trict r egulations a nd c onformance w ith the

requirements of t he EUREPGAP® standard i s re quired f or e xport of f ruit a nd

vegetables to the European market. T he purpose of this review is to determine

whether the establishment of a hazardous waste disposal facility within the same

geographical area as farms growing citrus fruit for export is likely to result in non-

conformance with the EUREPGAP®

regulations. Two key EUREPGAP documents

were considered, specifically the General Regulations: Fruit and Vegetables

version 2.1. and Control Points and Compliance Criteria: Fruit and Vegetables

version 2.1.

• General Regulations: Fruit and Vegetables version 2.1.-Oct 04

Introduction:

The purpose of the EUREPGAP® regulations is to respond to consumer

concerns on food safety, animal welfare, environmental protection and

worker health, safety and welfare. It was considered important to review the

suite of documents related to EUREPGAP®

, specifically with respect to the

possible implications of the location of a hazardous waste disposal facility

within the same geographical area as farms growing citrus fruit for export.

The process of certification involves an individual farmer, farmer group or

farmer and/or farmer group w orking under a s cheme. All certificates are

issued by approved certification bodies. The registration of the farmer / farm

and the proposed crops for the relevant scopes must be re-confirmed with

the C ertification B ody a nnually. I n t he c ase of n on-compliance o f ce rtain

requirements, t he c ertificate m ay b e s uspended f or a s pecified p eriod o r

cancelled.

Scope of the document:

The scope of Fruit and Vegetables covers all those fresh, unprocessed

agricultural p roducts o f p lant o rigin g rown f or hu man c onsumption. T he

document covers the whole agricultural production process of the certified

product, from before the plant is in the ground (seed and nursery control

points) to non-processed end product (produce handling control points). It is

important to recognise that all areas of production and produce handling sites

of the registered crops on the EUREPGAP® registered farms must comply with

EUREPGAP®. The scope of certification can be reduced by making the Produce

Handling Section non-applicable, only for those products where the farmer or

farmer g roup has declared that none of the following post-harvest activities

(excluding th ose f or p rocessed p roducts) a re ever carried o ut: s torage,




chemical treatments, trimming, washing, or any other handling where the

product may have physical contact with other materials or substances.

Compliance levels for EUREPGAP®

Major musts: 100% compliance of all applicable major must control points is

compulsory.

certification:

Minor musts: 95% compliance of a ll applicable minor must control points is

compulsory.

Recommendations: No minimum percentage of compliance is set.

The list of crop plants covered by EUREPGAP® (Annexure 7.12 of the

EUREPGAP®

document) includes citrus such as oranges, grapefruit and

mandarins.

The compliance criteria are provided in the document entitled Control Points

and Compliance Criteria: Fruit and Vegetables version 2.1. (Oct 2004). It was

thus necessary to review the requirements of this document.

• Control Points & Compliance Criteria: Fruit and vegetables version

2.1-Oct 04 (EUREPGAP CPCC FP V2-1 Oct 04)

Scope:

This document sets out a framework for Good Agricultural Practice (GAP) on

farms and provides a list of all major, minor and recommended control points

related to EUREPGAP®

certification. It was thus necessary to identify whether

any of the control points, specifically those regarded as major or minor, were

likely to be affected by the presence of the proposed regional waste facility.

Requirement 4.1 of the document deals with Site History and requires a risk

assessment for new agricultural sites which shows that the site is suitable for

food production. This includes an assessment of prior land use and type of

soil. Annex 1 guidelines for new c rops requires that ri sk assessment covers

smoke, dust & fumes from nearby industrial or t ransport activities. In terms

of the General Regulations this is a major must (see above).

With respect to possible implications of the proposed waste disposal facility,

the deposition of airborne contaminants from the landfill site may impact

negatively on the quality of the soil. The probability of this impact is

considered low due to the distance from the site but could impact on the

establishment of additional orchards closer to the site. This has been

confirmed by the detailed air quality modelling undertaken for the EIA phase

of the study.




12.2.4. Aviation

The 2005 – 2007 Airfields directory was consulted to locate the closest registered

airfields to the proposed waste disposal site. The location of the four closest

airfields was as follows:

• Uitenhage Airfield

* 33º 47’ 0.00” S

* 25º 23’ 0.00” E

• Progress Airfield

* 33º 55’ 30.0” S

* 25º 22’ 20.0” E

• PE International Airport

* 33º 59’ 24.0” S

* 25º 36’ 37.0” E

• Seaview Airfield

* 34º 00’ 09.0” S

* 25º 21’ 10.0” E

• Addo Airfield

* 33º 33’ 05.0” S

* 25º 51’ 30.0” E

Figure 12.3: Location of airfields within the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality




Uitenhage Airfield (Figure 12.3), the closest of the four airfields, lies to the south-

west of the three alternative footprints and is approximately 20km from all three

footprints. The remaining three airfields (Progress, PE International and Seaview)

are also all located to the south / s outh-west of the proposed footprints and are

all more than 30km away. Based on the above, the location of registered airfields

does not constitute a fatal flaw for any of the proposed footprints.

12.3. Conclusions

• Footprint F will require resettlement but the number of people involved is

small and if the recommendations are implemented it could be undertaken in

a satisfactory manner;

• It has been confirmed that the site can be rezoned for waste disposal, and no

reasons have been given as to why this should not be possible;

• The availability of footprint F, which is located on property owned by PPC, will

only be confirmed after submission of the Draft EIR;

• The proximity of registered airfields would not constitute a fatal flaw;

• Any future land use planning or development in the area will have to be

cognizant o f th e c onstraints t he GHWMF and a ssociated b uffer z one m ay

impose on certain land uses. Similarly, should the facility be authorised these


that are developed or revised at local and regional level; and




on the certification of citrus farms to the north-east of Footprint F.



Ch 13 –Transport Study June 2010 188

13. TRANSPORT STUDY

13.1. Introduction

The Final Feasibility Report (December 2007) investigated the preferred facility

footprints C, E and F, in sufficient detail to allow the authorities to establish

whether the facility designs and positions are viable for detailed engineering and

environmental studies. A component of the Feasibility Report was a Transport

study, which was undertaken by the Port Elizabeth office of Stewart Scott

International (SSI) Engineers and Environmental Consultants.

The t erms of reference f or t he T ransport S tudy were to u ndertake a n

investigation of the transport alternatives for conveying general and hazardous

waste to the preferred disposal facilities and include an analysis of both road and

rail options. These findings remain valid for the EIA phase of the study and have

been subject to some revision for the Revised Draft EIR. For comparative

purposes the transport scenarios and associated impacts of Footprints C, E and F

are assessed in this chapter.

13.2. Site Location and Existing Roads

This study focuses on the primary access route between the Coega IDZ and the

proposed new waste facility, namely the R335, known as Addo Road. The section

of Addo Road being investigated is about 15 km in length from the R334 / R335

intersection n orth o f Motherwell t o t he P 1958/R335 i ntersection n orth o f th e

proposed three sites. Three s ites were short-listed as the preferred s ites for the

proposed waste processing facility, namely Footprint C (Grassridge 190 portion

3), Footprint E (Grassridge 227) and Footprint F (Grassridge 190 Remainder).

These sites have undergone full evaluation in the feasibility report phase and

these findings remain valid for EIA phase assessment.

Footprint E ( Grassridge 2 27) i s l ocated on the western s ide of A ddo Ro ad,

approximately 11 km north of the R334 / R335 intersection and approximately 15

km n orth w est o f th e C oega IDZ. F ootprint F (G rassridge 1 90) i s s ituated

adjacent to th e w estern s ite b oundary of F ootprint E . These t wo s ites a re

currently on PPC owned land and are accessed from Addo Road and road P1954,

which passes through both of the sites and connects to road P1958, which passes

between Footprints C and F. Footprint C (Grassridge 190, Portion 3) is located to

the north of Footprint F, alongside the P1958, from which it currently has access

via a gravel track. The conceptual design plans for the three preferred sites show

that access to Footprints C, E and F are proposed to remain at the existing site

accesses as described above. Although the P1954 connects Footprint F to the

P1958, the conceptual designs obtained from Jones and Wagener detail access to

this site as being from the section of P1954 connected to Addo Road.




It should be n oted th at access via the P 1958 to F ootprint E a nd F for tr ips

originating in the Uitenhage – Despatch area, could shorten the overall length of

the route by about 9 km. The route length of trips originating in the Port Elizabeth

area travelling via Addo Road to Footprint C could be shortened by about 5 km if

accessed via the P1954 across sites E and F.

Similarly, the route length to Footprint F could be shortened by about 7,6 km if

accessed via the P1954 across site E. The possible alternative routes to Footprint

F sites from Uitenhage (R75) and Port Elizabeth (Addo Road) are reflected in

Figures 13.1 – 13.4 overleaf, and are shown in Table 13.1 below:

Table 13.1: Alternative routes to the three sites

Footprint Route

Origin Route Description

Km Length

(approx)

C

R75 / R 334

Interchange R75 – MR00470 - P1958 17,7

R334 / R 335

intersection

R335 – P1954 - P1958 21,0

R335 – P1958 26,2

E

R75 / R 334

Interchange

R75 – MR00470 - P1958 – P1954 21,1

R75 – MR00470 - P1958 – R335 - R335 /

P1954 intersection 30,29

R334 / R 335

intersection R335 – R335 / P1954 intersection 13,6

F

R75 / R 334

Interchange

R75 – MR00470 – P1958 – P1954 21,0

R75 – MR00470 - P1958 – R335 – P1954 34,4

R334 / R 335

intersection

R335 – P1954 17,7

R335 – P1958 – P1954 25,3

Trips generated in the Uitenhage – Despatch area can travel to the proposed

waste disposal facility via the R75 for 11 km and then MR00470 (Sunlands road)

for 6 km. Alternatively the site can also be accessed via the R334 and Addo

Road.

Addo Road (R335) and the R75 are both tarred rural roads about 6,5m wide.

Addo Road is an important link between the Sunday’s River Valley area, Addo

Elephant Park and Port Elizabeth. The P1954, P1958 and MR00470 are provincial

gravel roads about 8m wide.




Figure 13.1: R75 – MR00470 - P1958 – P1954 access route

Figure 13.2: R75 – MR00470 - P1958 – R335 - P1954 access route




Figure 13.3: R335 – P1954 access route

Figure 13.4: R335 – P1958 –P1954 access route




13.3. Rail Transport

There is an opportunity for waste disposal to the proposed new regional facility by

rail, but this would require the construction of a new branch line. There are two

possible alternative locations for a branch line:

• from the Uitenhage – Klipplaat railway line, situated to the west of the three

footprints, at a point about 2 km north of the Centlivres station;

• from the Grassridge station which is about a kilometre north of the Coega IDZ

site boundary, along the Port Elizabeth – Addo railway line.

Discussions w ere h eld w ith Transnet regarding th e po ssibility o f t ransporting

waste by the construction of either of these two branch lines. It was learned that

Transnet had previously investigated the construction of a branch line from the

Centlivres s tation a long th e U itenhage – Klipplaat line t o t he P PC q uarry on

Footprint E. Transnet found that this was not feasible as the land in that is area

is too steep and would require grades in excess of that which is suitable for a

railway line. Therefore this option has not been costed or investigated in any

further detail.

The opportunity for rail transportation to the proposed waste site is limited to the

possibility of a branch l ine off the existing railway l ine at the Grassridge station.

The branch line will require a bridge crossing over Addo Road and continue to

Footprints E a nd F . This r oute l ocation w ould include a l evel c rossing o n a

provincial gravel road.

The branch line could be utilised in two ways, namely, for the transport of waste

generated by Coega only or for the transport of all the waste to be disposed of at

the p referred footprint. T he f irst option would require that waste generated by

the NMBM area be transported to the d isposal s ite by road. The second option

would require additional facilities and operations, as the trucks would have to

offload waste at a suitably equipped train loading facility in NMBM and then be

railed to the disposal site where there would have to be equipment to offload the

train wagons and deposit the waste as required.

The estimated costs to construct a branch railway line to each of the proposed

sites from the Grassridge station are summarised in the table below. T he costs

exclude VAT and are based on the following unit rates which were provided by

Transnet for a single track branch l ine that is not electrified: a pproximately R7

million per km of railway line, R5 million for a bridge crossing and R 370 000 for

a level crossing protected with flashing signals. A level crossing without lights

would normally be in the region of R 70 000, whilst the addition of protective

lights which is recommended for safety, can increase the cost by about R 300

000. It should also be noted that Transnet indicated a cost saving of R 300 000 /




km i f second hand ra ils were used instead of new ra ils. A dditional costs will be

incurred for the construction of off loading facilities at the end of the branch line

at the preferred footprint. The costs in Table 13.2 below have been calculated

assuming new rails are to be used and that level crossings will be protected with

signals. Table 13.2: Rail infrastructure establishment costs

Footprint

Km length

of Railway

(approx)

Road Crossings Total Cost

(Million Rand)

C 18,5 2 x Level; 1 x Bridge R 135,2

E 13,5 1 x Level, 1 x Bridge R 100,0

F 15,5 1 x Level, 1 x Bridge R 113,9

This s hows t hat t he construction o f a b ranch l ine to F ootprint F w ould c ost

approximately R113 million. Discussions were held with Transnet and Transnet

regarding the capacity of the railway line and currently there is spare capacity to

accommodate additional rail traffic. H owever, Transnet has predicted that there

will be rail capacity problems when the new container terminal at the Port of

Ngqura is fully operational, which is scheduled to be by 2012. Currently the

export of manganese is done through the Port Elizabeth harbour but once the

Port of Ngqura is completed manganese will also be exported via the port which

will add to the rail capacity problem. T he section of rail between Coega station

and Grassridge station will be fully utilised transporting containers and

manganese, a nd if the waste i s to be transported by rail, it w ill have to go

through this same section which would already be running at capacity.

13.4. Traffic Analysis

13.4.1. Approach and Methodology

The aim of this part of the transport study is to predict the future traffic volumes

for a 2 0 y ear d esign period, i n o rder t o a ssess th e structural s trength a nd

capacity of the road infrastructure to accommodate the future traffic volumes. An

intersection analysis is also required for the R334 / R335 intersection, as the

majority of the generated w aste site trips will pass through this intersection,

affecting its c apacity a nd l evel o f s ervice. The a nalysis o f th e R 334 / R3 35

intersection has been done for a weekday morning and afternoon peak hour.

The approach for the traffic analysis is to first determine the existing traffic flows

along Addo Road as a base from which to predict future volumes, which includes

normal traffic growth as well as tr ips generated by the proposed waste disposal

facility. The heavy vehicle volumes are critical to the assessment of structural

strength of the road pavement since private motor vehicles and light delivery

vehicles have a negligible effect on road pavement life. The total vehicle volumes




(including all vehicle types) are required in assessing the road and intersection

capacity. The road a nd i ntersection c apacity i s a ssessed u sing th e H ighway

Capacity M anual (Transportation Re search B oard, 2 000), w hilst t he s tructural

capacity re quired h as b een d etermined u sing the TRH4 S tructural D esign o f

Flexible Pavement for Interurban and Rural Roads (NDOT) guidelines.

In order to determine the future traffic scenario a conventional four-step process

was used, namely tr ip generation (calculating the number of t rips generated by

the proposed waste site), trip distribution (connecting each trip with an origin and

destination (waste s ite)), modal split (allocating each tr ip to a particular vehicle

type) and trip assignment (assigning each vehicle trip to a particular route).

13.4.2. Data Obtained

• Traffic Data

Historical t raffic d ata has been obtained f rom various s ources i n order to

determine an average annual t raffic growth rate as well as to determine the

percentage volume of heavy vehicles using Addo Road.

Annual traffic count data was obtained from the Nelson Mandela Bay

Municipality (N MBM) and th e E astern C ape D epartment o f Ro ads a nd

Transport (ECDRT). Average Daily Traffic (ADT) figures from 1996 – 2007

indicates that traffic has been growing by an average of 6% per annum over

the last ten years. Heavy vehicles account for approximately 19% of the ADT,

and there is a 50:50 north-bound:south-bound directional split in the daily

traffic volume.

The results of a 24 hour interrupted traffic count survey conducted for the

period of two and a half days between 20 - 25 January 2005 along Addo Road,

were obtained f rom PD Naidoo Associates (PDNA). T he period during which

the survey was conducted excluded seasonal tourism and fruit industry trip

generators, therefore PDNA used additional data obtained through a

consultation p rocess w ith v arious s takeholders t o s upplement t heir c ount

data. The survey was classified by vehicle type, and heavy vehicles were

further classified by number of axles.

• Characteristics of existing waste disposal sites

Information supplied by the local authorities, Enviroserv (private Aloes site

operator) a nd J ones a nd W agener, a nd o bservations a t a ll t hree existing

waste sites in the NMBM area was used to determine the number and types of

vehicles that transport hazardous and general waste.




It is estimated that the Koedoeskloof and Arlington waste sites generate an

average of 133 and 400 vehicle trips per day respectively and the vehicle

types used consist of light utility vehicles (LUV’s), as well as 7 and 10 ton

trucks.

It is estimated that the Aloes waste site generates an average of 24

hazardous waste vehicle trips per day and about 50 municipal solid waste

(MSW) vehicle trips per day. J ones and Wagener supplied information about

the volumes of waste to be transported to the proposed new site to

Enviroserv, in order to obtain information regarding the logistics involved with

this type of operation. The information received indicated that each trip to

the site would dispose of an average 4 ton load. Enviroserv also indicated

that o nly 2 % o f th e hazardous w aste d isposed o f a t A loes i s f rom t he

Uitenhage – Despatch area.

The following assumptions are made from general observations at all three

sites by Jones & Wagener about the vehicles used to carry waste materials:

* 20% of the MSW loads (by number) are in 10 ton 3 axle trucks

* 40% of the MSW loads (by number) are in 7 ton 2 axle trucks

* 40% of the MSW loads (by number) are in 1 ton LUV’s and trailers (light

vehicles)

* 100% of hazardous waste loads are in 10 ton 3 axle trucks

13.4.3. Predicted waste disposal volumes

Information was obtained from Jones and Wagener, regarding the volumes of

hazardous and general municipal waste that will be handled by the proposed

GHWMF. These volumes are reflective of the maximum expected volumes of

waste from Coega (assuming a high tenancy rate within the IDZ of industries

likely to produce the sorts of wastes anticipated to be handled and interned at the

facility) from inception to peak rate of deposition. This data showed that an initial

total volume of 122 696 tons will be generated in the first year of operation,

which will increase annually until the full ramp up of 301 823 tons/annum is

reached in year 11. Thereafter a constant volume of 301 823 tons/annum is

expected annually for the remaining period of the 20 year forecast. It must be

noted however that these volumes were revised during the course of 2008 to be

indicative of the current occupancy of the IDZ by a limited number of hazardous

waste producing tenants and industries (refer to Section 5 of the Waste

Management Philosophy Report contained in the PAR by Jones and Wagener).

According to this revised estimates an in itial volume of 97 116 tons/annum can

be expected to reach a volume of 255 106 tons/annum at full ramp up. However,

the initial and larger waste volume predictions are utilised for the transport study.




13.4.4 . Trip generation and distribution

The number of vehicle trips required to transport the predicted waste volumes

has been determined on the following assumptions:

• 7 and 10 ton trucks are used to transport the waste and each load carries an

average of 4 tons*

• operating days and hours for transport of the waste will be 25 days/month

and 10 hours per day

• all of the generated trips have been assigned to Addo Road, travelling through

the R334 / R 335 intersection

LUV’s, 7 and 10 ton trucks make up the vehicles delivering waste to the Arlington

and Koedoeskloof sites, which are owned and operated by the NMBM. Aloes,

which is a privately operated and controlled facility, receives about 50 MSW 4 ton

average l oads p er d ay, w hich w ould b e s plit b etween 7 a nd 1 0 t on t rucks.

Therefore, it is assumed that because the proposed facility will be a hazardous

waste facility, it will have controlled access and operate similar to the Aloes site.

Bakkie loads of waste will continue to be delivered to the Arlington and

Koedoeskloof sites.

Initially, it is required that 122 696 tons/annum of waste will be transported,

which is converted into an average of 10 loaded trips per hour (100 loaded trips

per day). It has been determined that a total of 25 loaded tr ips per hour (251

loaded trips per day) will be required by full ramp up in year 11 to transport 301

823 t ons/annum. T his is t he maximum number of trips required ( maximum

volume of waste) a nd w ill continue f or the remainder of t he 2 0 year d esign

period. The volume of trucks on the road will be double the loaded trips, because

it is assumed that the trucks will return empty after offloading at the site.

During the construction phase o f th e proposed waste f acility, w hich w ill ta ke

about 12 months, truck loads of sand, stone and concrete will be delivered to the

site daily for a period of 8 months. Based on the number of truck loads required

(2200 of sand, 2800 of stone and 275 of ready mixed concrete) during this period

of 8 months, an average of 30 loaded truck trips per day to the site and 30 empty

truck return trips will take place each weekday (Monday to Friday).

13.4.5. Structural Pavement Analysis

A traffic analysis has been carried out in order to estimate the future loading on

the road pavement using the following assumptions and parameters:




• The base year two way Average Daily Traffic (ADT) and Average Daily Truck

Traffic (ADTT) is 1689 and 405 vehicles per day, respectively, as obtained

from the latest traffic count data on the R335 Addo Road (May 2007).

• A 50:50 directional split is applied as per the existing observed situation.

• Heavy vehicles account for 19% of the total volume of ADT.

• A growth rate of 6% per annum is assumed based on comparison of historical

data.

• A design period of 20 years is used.

• The PDNA traffic survey was used to determine the percentage of each vehicle

type travelling along Addo Road.

• The E80’s * were calculated assuming 3 axle trucks are used to transport the

waste

• The E80’s per heavy vehicle appropriate to each class of vehicle ranges from

0,7 – 2,5.

Mixed traffic has a range of various axle loads which need to be expressed in

terms of a common denominator, which is the 80 kN axle load. The damage

caused by any axle load relative to this 80 kN axle, is defined as the equivalent

standard axle or E80. An E80 value is assigned to each vehicle based on the type

of vehicle and number of axles. T he number of Equivalent Standard Axle Loads

(ESAL’s) i s t hen d etermined b y m ultiplying the n umber of v ehicles i n e ach

category by the E80 assigned to that type of vehicle. T he number of ESAL’s i s

used in order to determine the design traffic class required for the pavement

design. The results of the analyses are summarised in the table 13.3 below:

Table 13.3: Predicted Traffic Loading

Predicted Traffic Loading

First Year

(normal growth

and trips

generated)

20 Year forecast

(normal traffic

growth only)

Generated trips

only

20 Y ear f orecast

(normal traffic

growth a nd

generated trips)

ESAL’s* Traffic

Class ESAL’s*

Traffic

Class ESAL’s*

Traffic

Class ESAL’s*

Traffic

Class

102,000 ES 0.3 3,766,000 ES 10 2,115,631 ES 3 5,881,631 ES 10

* Cumulative ESAL’s

An ES 0.3 traffic design class is able to accommodate between 100 000 and 300

000 cumulative ESAL’s. An ES 3 traffic design class is able to accommodate

between 1 000 000 and 3 00 0 000 cumulative ESAL’s. An ES 10 t raffic c lass is

able to accommodate between 3 000 000 and 10 000 000 cumulative ESAL’s.




The analysis shows that the estimate for the initial scenario is 102 000 cumulative

ESAL’s a nd therefore a design t raffic class ES 0 .3 i s re quired. T he 2 0 year

forecast for a normal traffic growth rate scenario without the development of the

waste site estimates that there will be 3 766 000 cumulative ESAL’s which will

require a design traffic class ES 10. The 20 year forecast for a normal traffic

growth rate scenario including the development of the waste site estimates that

there will be 5 881 631 cumulative ESAL’s which will also require a design traffic

class ES 10. This shows that a 20 year forecast with or without the development

would require a traffic design class ES 10.

A c omparison of t hese s cenarios shows t hat t he d evelopment i tself w ill on ly

account for 2 115 631 cumulative ESAL’s, and even though this increases the

total amount of cumulative ESAL’s estimated, the design traffic class required is

still an ES10. It can be concluded that Addo Road w ill require upgrading to the

same level regardless of the development of the proposed waste disposal facility,

due to normal traffic growth on Addo Road each year.

13.4.6. Road and Intersection capacity analysis

• Road Capacity Analysis

The volume to capacity ratio has been calculated for both the existing

situation a nd f uture s cenario for A ddo Ro ad u sing th e H ighway C apacity

Manual. The effective capacity of Addo Road (section north of the R334 /

R335 intersection) is calculated using the following formula:

Effective capacity C = 2800 x V/CE x fd x fw x fHV

where:

• V/CE

• f

is the ratio of flow rate to ideal capacity for a Level of Service

(LOS) E

d

• f

is the adjustment factor for the directional distribution of traffic

w

• f

is the adjustment factor for narrow lanes and restricted shoulder

widths

HV

is the adjustment factor for the presence of heavy vehicles

The c urrent effective c apacity f or t he e xisting t wo-way r oad w ith a 6, 5m

tarred width and 1,5m gravel shoulders is calculated as follows:

C = 2800 x 0,92 x 1,0 x 0,85 x 0,56

= 1226 vehicles per hour (two way volume)

The future effective capacity after ECDRT has upgraded the road with a 6,8m

tarred width and 2m gravel shoulders is calculated as follows:




C = 2800 x 0,92 x 1,0 x 0,94 x 0,56

= 1356 vehicles per hour (two way volume)

The current volumes are 62 vehicles northbound and 41 vehicles southbound

in the morning peak hour and 66 vehicles northbound and 86 vehicles

southbound in the afternoon peak hour. In the future (2027), the forecasted

volumes are 224 vehicles northbound and 156 vehicles southbound in the

morning peak hour and 236 vehicles northbound and 301 vehicles southbound

in the afternoon peak hour. The current and future volume to capacity ratios

are reflected in Table 13.4 below:

Table 13.4: Current and future traffic volumes

SCENARIO AM PM

V/C LOS V/C LOS

2007 103 / 1226 = 0,08 A 152 / 1226 = 0,12 A

2027 380 / 1356 = 0,28 B 537 / 1356 = 0,40 C

This demonstrates that the R335 has enough spare capacity to easily

accommodate t he t raffic v olumes p redicted for 2 027, w ith t he w orst L OS

being “C” for the afternoon peak hour traffic, which is acceptable.

• Intersection Capacity Analysis

The R334 / R335 intersection has been analysed for the purposes of this study

as most of the waste site generated trips will pass through this intersection. A

typical weekday morning and afternoon peak hour has been analysed for the

existing scenario (2007) and f or the future scenario (2027). The v olumes

derived in the future scenario are based on a normal traffic growth rate of 6%

per annum, and the addition of 25 heavy vehicle trips in the northbound

direction and 25 trips in the southbound direction onto Addo Road, through

the intersection. The R334 / R335 intersection currently operates via stop

control, w ith pr iority o n th e R3 35. B oth th e R 334 a nd R 335 a re s ingle

carriageways with one traffic lane in each d irection. T he existing and future

scenarios have been analysed based on this.

The analysis shows that both the existing morning and afternoon peak hours

currently operate at a Level of Service (LOS) A with no movement operating

at a LOS worse than B. In the future, the morning peak hour will operate at a

LOS B with no movement operating at a LOS worse than C and the afternoon

peak hour will operate at a LOS A with no movement operating at a LOS

worse than D. The ability of an intersection to accommodate t he vehicles

making use of it is assessed by determining the LOS at which that intersection

operates. The LOS is determined according to the average delay (i.e. how

long it takes) experienced by each vehicle moving through the intersection.




The LOS and average vehicle delay for the R334 / R335 intersection has been

calculated u sing t he c omputer S IDRA p rogramme, w hich c alculates th ese

values based on the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) method.

Table 13.5 below shows the LOS / Average vehicle delay categories used by

the SIDRA computer software.

Table 13.5: Average vehicle delay

Level of Service Average Vehicle Delay in seconds

A d ≤ 10

B 10 < d ≤ 15

C 15 < d ≤ 25

D 25 < d ≤ 35

E 35 < d ≤ 50

F d > 50

From this table it can be seen that the worse the LOS is (A – best and F

worst), the higher the average vehicle delay will be. A LOS A – LOS D is

acceptable in terms of intersection efficiency. A LOS E is also acceptable but

indicates that an intersection is approaching its capacity. A LOS E is not

acceptable and indicates that the intersection requires upgrading in terms of

its geometry and / or type of control used (stop / signals) in order to improve

the situation. The worst LOS experienced at the R334 / R335 intersection is a

LOS D (f uture scenario: a fternoon p eak h our), w hich i s c onsidered to b e

acceptable a nd d oes n ot require th e i ntersection to b e u pgraded to

accommodate t he f orecasted p eak h our t raffic v olumes ov er t he 2 0 y ear

design period.

• Traffic Safety Implications

The increase in traffic on Addo Road and the surrounding road network due to

normal traffic growth and the future waste disposal activities means that there

is a potential for more accidents. The only accident data available for Addo

Road i s f rom th e A ddo P olice S tation a nd i s c onsidered to b e d eficient,

therefore it cannot be analysed properly.

The estimation of the number of casualties and fatalities associated with the

increase in traffic on the road network is therefore based on accident statistics

maintained by the Central Statistics Service of the Department of Transport

which indicates 10 0 c asualties a nd 7 f atalities p er 1 00 mi llion k ilometres

travelled per annum in the RSA.




In the f irst year of operation of the waste facility, the number of k ilometres

travelled by trucks conveying waste to the site (including empty return trips)

is estimated to be as follows:

• Municipal solid waste 1 655 500 Km p.a.

• Existing industries 403 200 Km p.a.

• Coega IDZ 5 800 Km p.a.

• Total truck travel 2 064 500 Km p.a.

Using t he D epartment o f T ransport a ccident st atistics, these additional 2

million k ilometres of t ravel per annum from t ruck t rips to and f rom the new

waste facility will result in 2 casualties per annum and one fatality every 7

years. Less than a half percent of the kilometres travelled due to waste truck

trips are estimated to be as a result of the disposal of industrial and

hazardous waste from Coega operations, i.e. the majority is due to disposal of

waste from existing industry and municipal solid waste (MSW) transportation.

Therefore, i t can be said that i nitially the volume of waste generated i n the

Coega IDZ a nd d isposed o f a t th e p roposed w aste facility w ill have a n

insignificant effect on the number of accidents expected to occur on the road

network. By w ay of comparison, the e xisting d aily t raffic o n t he 1 8 k m

section o f th e A ddo Ro ad b etween th e R3 34 intersection a nd the P 1958

junction amounts to 15 milli on k ilometres o f t ravel per annum. Statistically

this indicates that there are 15 casualties and 1 fatality per year on this road.

After 11 years, when the waste facility reaches i ts full operating level, there

will be a total of 31 million vehicle kilometres of travel on the Addo Road.

About 26 million vehicle kilometres travelled per annum at full ramp up is

attributed to the existing traffic plus 6% normal growth per annum on this

road and 5 million vehicle k ilometres per annum are estimated to be due to

waste generated trips, the majority of which is due to the disposal of MSW.

Only 2% of the kilometres travelled due to waste trips are estimated to be as

a result of the disposal of industrial and hazardous waste from Coega

operations, i.e. the majority is due to disposal of waste from existing industry

and MSW transportation. I t i s estimated that only 5 out of the 31 expected

casualties per annum at full ramp up i s due to waste generated tr ips, while

the remaining 26 casualties and 2 f atalities per annum is due to the existing

traffic plus normal growth. Therefore, it can be said that at full ramp up (year

11) the volume of waste generated by the Coega IDZ and disposed of at the

proposed w aste facility w ill be s mall in c omparison w ith the n umber o f

accidents expected to occur on the road network due to other traffic.

However, a greater proportion of accidents are due to the kilometres travelled

by vehicles carrying MSW.




It has been estimated that the ADT will increase at about 6% per annum,

therefore it can b e expected that the accident r ate w ill i ncrease

proportionately. T he number o f accidents per annum caused by waste tr ips

will remain constant every year after year 11 (full ramp up) as the volumes of

waste to be transported will remain constant, i.e. the same number of vehicle

kilometres will be travelled per annum after year 11 by waste trucks.

13.5. Existing and Future Road Infrastructure

13.5.1. Condition of Road Infrastructure

The s ection o f th e R3 35 b etween th e N 2 a nd th e R3 34 has recently b een

upgraded by the construction of an additional traffic lane in each direction. This

upgraded section of road will be able to accommodate the additional loading from

the waste vehicles, provided that routine maintenance is carried out periodically.

The section of Addo Road from the R334 / R335 intersection to the P1958 is

showing serious signs of distress, has a poor riding quality and the overall road

condition can be described as bad. Currently the road cannot accommodate any

additional heavy vehicle loading due to its poor condition and upgrading is needed

before the waste facility becomes operational.

The Eastern Cape Provincial Department of Roads and Transport claims it has

allocated R30 million for repairing potholes and fixing the damaged edges of the

road du ring 2 009/2010. T hese temporary improvements w ill c ope w ith t he

additional 60 tr uck trips per day during th e construction p hase of the w aste

facility at Grassridge, but the road will deteriorate significantly under the 200

truck trips per day once the facility becomes operational. The P1958 is currently

in a fair condition and acceptable for use by light vehicles. The P1954 is of a low

standard and only about 5 ,5m wide making it too narrow for two-way t raffic to

pass each other. The current status of both of these gravel roads is not adequate

to accommodate increased volumes of heavy vehicle traffic. In the event of

either gravel road P1954 or P 1958 being used to provide access to the proposed

waste site; they would require regravelling and a regular blading and

maintenance program thereafter, in order t o accommodate t he heavy vehicle

volumes expected.

13.5.2. Cost of upgrading Road Infrastructure

The c ost of u pgrading a nd m aintaining A ddo Ro ad i s n ot a ttributed to th e

proposed waste facility as it already requires upgrading to accommodate existing

traffic due to i t’s poor condition and will therefore have to be carried out by the

Province in the next five years regardless of the proposed development of the

waste site. Addo Road will be upgraded to a standard that can accommodate the

waste site generated trips, as was shown in the structural pavement analysis.




This section of the report focuses on the costs for the upgrading of gravel roads

P1954 and P1958. The cost to regravel is estimated to be R 0,5 million / km

which ne eds t o b e d one every 5 years. T he c osts t o t ar t hese r oads a re

estimated to be R 4 million / km. The maintenance costs for either option (gravel

or tar) are R 0,1 million per km / year.

The costs have been summarised in Table 13.6 below (R – regravelling cost,

T = tarring cost and M – maintenance cost).

Table 13.6: Road upgrade costs

Footprint

/ Option

P1954 P1958 TOTAL*

(Million Rand)

R M T R M T R + M T + M

E R 4,0 R 3,8 R 8,0 - - - R 7,8 R 11,8

F 1 R 8,2 R 7,8 R 16,4 - - - R 16,0 R 24,2

2 R 2,4 R 2,3 R 4,8 R 12,8 R 12,2 R 25,6 R 29,7 R 44,9

C 1 R 10,6 R 10,1 R 21,2 R 4,2 R 4,0 R 8,4 R 28,9 R 43,7

2 - - - R 17,0 R 16,2 R 34,0 R 33,2 R 50,2

*Total cost includes regravelling and maintenance for 20 years

The table above shows that i t is more economical to regravel P1954 and P1958

than it is to upgrade to tar. The maintenance costs are the same for either

option.

There are two options for providing access to Footprint F, the first option is to

upgrade 4,1 km of gravel road P1954 with direct access to the Addo Road, and

the second option involves upgrading 6,4 km of P1958 and 1,2 km of P1954 with

access from P1958. The first option is cheaper as it will produce a cost saving of

R 13,7 million and R 20,7 million for gravel and tar respectively, compared to the

second option and will also reduce the overall route length by 3,5 km. However,

the f irst o ption r equires u pgrading P 1954 a cross l and th at is c urrently b eing

mined by PPC and will present traffic safety problems if mining operations are still

in progress on this land when the waste facility is required to become operational,

as waste trucks will cross the mining trucks haul road at two locations.

13.6. Site Access Options and PPC Mining Activity

The choice of road access options to the selected site (Footprint F) is affected by

whether an environmental authorisation will be granted for additional air space to

be used at the existing Aloes Hazardous Waste Site, which will provide additional

capacity to extend the life of the Aloes facility from 2012 to about 2019. This will

provide time for PPC to complete mining in the areas affected by the proposed




facility o n F ootprint F . If environmental authorisation is n ot g ranted f or t he

extension of the Aloes Hazardous Waste Site, it is expected to reach capacity by

mid 2012, which means that the proposed waste facility on PPC land will need to

be ready for use by that time. Access to the proposed site can either be provided

from the R335 (Addo Road), using the existing disused gravel road P1954 which

crosses PPC land that is currently being mined, or access can be provided f rom

road P1958 which is a secondary gravel road passing near to the proposed site at

the opposite end of P1954. These options were i llustrated previously in Figures

13.3 and 13.4.

The u se of r oad P 1954 f rom th e R3 35 a s an a ccess r oad to th e p roposed

hazardous waste facility has t raffic sa fety implications, for two reasons. F irstly,

the position of the junction of P1954 at R335 is on a blind rise which renders i t

unsafe for vehicles turning to and from P1954 onto R335 and secondly, with PPC

mining taking p lace north o f P1954 and the limestone processing p lant s ituated

on the s outh s ide of P1954, t rucks carrying limestone will c ross t he p ath of

vehicles carrying general and hazardous waste throughout the day. The first risk

of traffic accidents a t the P1954/R335 junction can be mitigated by moving the

junction about 300 m south of its existing position, away from the blind rise. I t

will then be about 600 m away from the intersection where the PPC haul road

crosses the R335. This spacing between the intersections is sufficient for them to

operate safely. T he second risk of accidents between mining vehicles and waste

vehicles crossing each other’s paths can be mitigated by installing a two-way stop

control a t the c ross roads, which g ives p riority to vehicles on one of the roads.

The cost of upgrading the currently disused P1954 and reconstructing the junction

at the R335 to an 8 m gravel road standard capable of carrying 500 vehicles per

day, is about R6 million. A new tarred road would cost about R20 million.

The alternative to upgrading and reconstructing P1954 from R335 to the site, is

to regravel P1958 from R335 to the western end of P1954 and construct a new

0,5 km gravel access road f rom P1958 to the s ite, to replace the d isused skew

junction between P1954 and P1958. The new 0,5 km gravel access road will cost

about R1 million and the regravelling of P1958 will cost about R3 million which

will need to be repeated every 5 years. Tarring this 6 km section of P1958 will

cost about R30 million. The distance for vehicles travelling to the site from R335

via P1958 and the new access is 5 km longer than via P1954.

13.7. Anticipated Transport Corridor and Traffic Impacts

The anticipated traffic and road condition impacts are reflected in Table 13.7. The

required mitigation measures would be to upgrade the R335 to the appropriate

design standard that will accommodate the operational phase waste transport

vehicle volumes as per the recommendations made at the end of this chapter.



Table 13.7: Assessment of Potential Traffic Impacts


Severity /

Intensity

scale

Significance Post mitigation

significance

Increase in heavy

vehicle traffic

Negative Localised Long-term Definite Moderate Moderate Low -

Increased risk of

vehicle accidents

Negative Localised Long-term Probable Moderate Moderate Low -

Deterioration of

existing road condition

Negative Localised Long-term Definite Moderate Moderate Low -

Impacts on tourist

traffic

Negative Localised Long-term Probable Moderate Moderate Low -




13.8. Conclusions and Recommendations

If an environmental authorisation is not given to extend the life of the Aloes


become operational during 2012. As PPC will still be mining their land north of

P1954 until after 2012, we recommend that P1958 be regravelled for use by

waste vehicles t ravelling to the s ite f rom the R335. A new 0,5 km access road

should be constructed from P1958 to the site to replace the currently disused

skew junction where P1954 joins P1958. It is essential that the Addo Road (R335)

be upgraded from the R334 to P1958 junction before the waste facility becomes

operational. Similarly, it is recommended that P1958, as well as all other haul

routes to the facility that are currently gravel roads, are upgraded to bitumen

standard and fulfil the same design criteria as that proposed for the R335 (Addo

Road).

If an e nvironmental a uthorisation is g ranted t o e xtend t he l ife of t he A loes

hazardous waste facility, the decision on whether to upgrade P1954 or r egravel

P1958 can be delayed until it is known when PPC will complete their mining

operations north of P1954. If these operations are completed by the time the

new waste facility is required, the upgrading of P1954 and the relocation of its

junction on R335 i s p referred, because i t w ill r esult i n a shorter t ravel d istance

than via P1958 for the majority of waste vehicles that will use the R335 coming

from Port Elizabeth and the Coega IDZ.

The Provincial Department of Roads and Transport has stated that it is committed

to upgrading Addo Road regardless of the proposed waste site development and

once upgraded; the recommended design standard of Addo Road will be able to

accommodate t he h eavy v ehicle t raffic t hat w ill be g enerated b y t he w aste

facility. It can therefore be concluded that transportation of waste by road is the

better option, provided that the Addo Road between the R334 and P1958

junctions i s u pgraded before t he op eration o f t he waste f acility c ommences.

Accordingly the following recommended mitigation measures must be

implemented:

• Climbing lanes on hills for heavy vehicles must be incorporated in the

refurbishment design of the R335 to allow other traffic to pass safely;

• All ot her h aul rou tes to t he f acility t hat a re c urrently g ravel roa ds, a re

upgraded to asphalt surface and fulfil the same design criteria as that

proposed for the R335;

• Road safety improvements such as surfaced shoulders, guard rails, signs and

markings must be standard;

• Reconstruction of existing road pavement prior to the facility becoming

operational combined with regular maintenance thereof; and




• Promote use of alternative route via N2 and N10 to Addo Elephant Park for

tourist related traffic, as well as the transport of citrus in the instance of a spill

event by waste vehicles during the operational phase of the facility. This will

result in longer travelling times and an associated increase in tourism and

citrus industry transport costs, but will negate the concerns raised in terms of

potential impacts on these respective industries

The implications of the concerns raised by the SRVCF with regard to the potential

scenario of an accidental spill of waste on the road accompanied by rain, which

could r esult in c ontaminated r ain w ater l anding u p o n f ruit f or i nternational

export, are n oted. It i s t he o pinion o f Bohlweki-SSI E nvironmental t hat

quantifying the risks and likelihood of this scenario occurring will be difficult to

accurately and credibly assess. It should therefore be assumed that a spill event

followed by, or during, a rainfall event is likely to eventuate during the lifespan of

the facility. Accordingly, the decision making authority (DWEA) is urged to apply

the precautionary principle in this regard.

It is therefore imperative that and appropriate emergency response measures are

developed for, and implemented during, the operational phase of the facility for

this scenario and is reflected in the required transport corridor monitoring and

management protocols. In the instance of an accident/spill event it would have to

be communicated quickly and effectively to affected road users, traffic halted and

an alternative transport route utilised until such time as the spill is cleared up.

Trucks transporting fruit should therefore ideally be covered to a degree that will

prevent ingress o f w ater that could potentially be c ontaminated by w et road

surfaces from a spill event when transporting fruit to the Port Elizabeth harbour

once the facility is operational.



Ch 14 – Social Impact Assessment 208 June 2010

14. SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

This report was compiled by Ms Nonka Byker and reviewed by Ms Anita Bron,

both of MasterQ Research. The full specialist report is contained in Appendix H.

14.1. Introduction

In order to determine the most feasible site for such the general and hazardous

waste d isposal fa cility ( GHWMF), a n E nvironmental I mpact A ssessment (E IA)

process had to be undertaken. As part of the EIA process, an Environmental

Scoping Study (ESS) of the study area was completed during 2003. A Social

Impact Assessment Scoping Report (SIASR) was developed and released as part

of the ESS.

The Impact Assessment Phase followed the ESS, and entailed a more detailed

assessment by specialists on the preferred site, Footprint F. This report presents

the results of the Social Impact Assessment (SIA) as part of the EIA for the

construction, o peration a nd d ecommissioning o f t he p roposed GHWMF in t he

Eastern Cape. The S IA documented i n this report builds on the preliminary SIA

conducted as part of the Scoping Phase of the EIA, which was carried out by

Afrosearch (Pty) Ltd.

The f irst subsection below g ives a definition of a SIA, followed by details of the

objectives of the study and details on the approach and methodology that were

followed to meet these objectives.

The section is concluded with the findings of the Scoping Phase and how these

findings have been incorporated into the current study.

14.1.1. Definition of a SIA

The definition of an SIA as defined by Vanclay (2002) gives an understanding of

the backdrop against which the SIA was conducted. According to this definition, a

social impact is defined as follows:

“The consequences to human populations of any public or private actions (these

include policies, programmes, plans and/or projects) that alter the ways in which

people live, work, play, relate to one another, organise to meet their needs and

generally live and cope as members of society. These impacts are felt at various

levels, including individual level, family or household level, community,

organisation or society level. Some social impacts are felt by the body as physical

reality, while other social impacts are perceptual or emotional.”

Whereas a social impact assessment is defined by Vanclay (2002) as follows:




“SIA is the process of analyzing (predicting, evaluating and reflecting) and

managing the intended and unintended consequences on the human environment

of planned interventions (policies, programmes, plans and projects) and any

social change processes invoked by those interventions so as to bring about a

more sustainable and equitable biophysical and human environment.”

According to Vanclay (2002:3-10) one of the pitfalls of many SIAs are that social

change processes are referred to as social impacts within these studies. Vanclay

states: “social change processes are set in motion by project activities or

policies”, w hile s ocial impacts “ refer t o t he impacts a ctually e xperienced b y

humans in e ither a c orporeal ( physical) or c ognitive ( perceptual) s ense.” A

change process can be defined as change that takes place within the receiving

environment as a result of a direct or indirect intervention.

A potential impact follows as a result of the change process. However, a change

process c an only r esult i n a n impact o nce i t i s e xperienced a s s uch b y a n

individual/community o n a p hysical a nd/or c ognitive le vel. T he s pecialists

therefore made a definite distinction between change processes and impacts for

the purposes of this study.

14.1.2. Objectives of the SIA

The primary objective of the SIA was to assess the proposed development from a

social perspective and to reflect the results of the assessment in such a way that

it would assist the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DWEA) to

make an informed decision on the project. The overall purpose of the SIA is

therefore to contribute to the EIA in such a way as to inform the Record of

Decision (ROD).

This SIA specifically focused on the development of the proposed new regional

hazardous waste processing facility on Footprint F. A number of alternative sites

were considered during the scoping phase, but have subsequently been ruled out.

To meet the primary objective, the following activities were conducted:

• Conduct the detailed studies that were identified during the Scoping Phase,

thereby refining the assessment of the probable impacts of the project on the

social environment;

• Rate these impacts along various dimensions (temporal, spatial, etc.) so as to

obtain an overall view of their relative severity and significance; and

• Identify measures that could be implemented to prevent or ameliorate any

negative impacts.




14.1.3. Approach and Methodology

To ensure that the objectives of the study are answered, data had to be collected.

Primary a nd secondary d ata c ollection m ethods w ere u sed. P rimary d ata

collection included a s ite v isit to the area on 4 December 2007. The secondary

data collection mostly centred on a desktop study, in which the following

documents were scrutinised:

• Locality maps;

• Census data (2001);

• Relevant sections of the Integrated Development Plan (IDP) of the NMBM;

• Spatial Development Framework (SDF) of the NMBM;

• Existing project documentation, e.g. the Feasibility Report; and

• The SIA Scoping Report.

Information that was relevant to the project was identified and assessed from

these sources, within the context of the construction, operational and

decommissioning phases of the proposed project. This particular SIA also took

into account the temporal, spatial, severity/benefit, significance, risk or likelihood

and d egree o f confidence th at a p otential impact m ight h ave o n th e s ocial

environment. Impacts can either be negative, neutral or positive. The impacts are

also categorised according to the various project stages, i.e. pre-construction,

construction, post construction (operation), and decommissioning. Mitigation

measures have also been identified with the aim to reduce the potential negative

impacts and to enhance the potential positive impacts.

14.1.4. Preliminary Findings of the SIASR

A comprehensive list of possible social impact variables was developed during the

Scoping P hase, on th e b asis o f g uidelines d erived f rom B urdge (1 995). T he

purpose of this list was to serve as a guide to identify potentially relevant issues

when conducting the investigation. The impact variables which were assessed in

the E SS a re l isted i n Table 14 .. F or th e p urposes o f th is s tudy, t he i mpact

variables that were identified during the ESS are categorised in terms of change

processes as opposed to impact variable themes. A change process can be

defined as change that takes place within the receiving environment as a result of

a direct or indirect intervention. A potential impact follows as a result of the

change process. However, a change process can only result in an impact once it is

experienced as such by an individual/community on a physical and/or cognitive

level.

The change processes that were assessed as per the identified variable themes

during the ESS, and the resultant potential social impacts as a result of these

change processes, are indicated in Table 14. overleaf.




Table 14.1: Scoping phase impact variables in relation to social change

processes in the impact assessment phase

SIASR

Impact

Variable

Anticipated

Impacts

Processes

assessed in

SIA

Expected Change

Processes

Population

Impacts

• Population Change

• Inflow or Outflow

of temporary

workers

• Introduction of

people dissimilar

in age, gender,

racial and ethnic

composition

• Displacement of

people

Demographic

Change Process

• Relocation of

households

and/or

population

segments

• Influx of

construction

workers

• Influx of job

seekers

• Outflow of

labourers

• Disruption in daily

living and

movement

patterns

• Disruption in social

networks

• Change in

leisure/recreationa

l opportunities

Socio-Cultural

Change Process

• Sense of place

• Integration with

local community

• Physical

splintering

• Safety and

security

• Noise pollution

Community

and

Institutional

Arrangements

• Authority

responsibility

• Planning

requirements and

infrastructure

needs

• Attitude towards

the project

Institutional and

Empowerment

Change Process

• Attitude

formation

against the

project (risk for

social

mobilisation)

• Additional

demand on

municipal

services




SIASR

Impact

Variable

Anticipated

Impacts

Processes

assessed in

SIA

Expected Change

Processes

• Interest group

activity

• Disaster

Management

Plan on site

Conflicts

between local

residents and

newcomers

• Presence of an

outside agency

• Introduction of

new social classes

Socio Cultural

Change Process

• As outlined

above

Community

infrastructure

needs

• Change in

community

infrastructure

• Land acquisition

and disposal

Geographical

Change Process

• An increase in

traffic could lead

to a disruption

of local

movement

patterns. An

increase in

(construction)

traffic might

damage the

road network

adding to the

impact of

frustration and

a disruption in

the normal

traffic

movement

patterns.

• The presence of

the site might

limit the

development

potential of

certain areas.

• Effects on known

cultural, historical

and archaeological

Socio-Cultural

Change Process

• As outlined above

in terms of the

socio-cultural




SIASR

Impact

Variable

Anticipated

Impacts

Processes

assessed in

SIA

Expected Change

Processes

resources change process

General

concerns

• Health

• Residential

proximity to

landfill site

• Visual impact

• Air pollution

Biophysical

Change Process

• The impact of

pollution and

fire risk on

construction

workers and the

surrounding

community’s

health and

safety

• Lack of

sanitation

impacts on the

environment,

which could

affect the health

of people

• Noise pollution

• Accessibility of the

site

Socio-Cultural

Change Process

• As outlined

above

Employment

and Economic

Impacts

• Industrial

diversification

• Change in

employment

equity of minority

groups

• Economic

inequities

• Changing

occupational

opportunities

Economic

Change Process

• Compensation

for site

• Direct formal

employment

opportunities to

local

individuals;

• Indirect formal

and/or informal

employment

opportunities to

local individuals.




14.1.5. Findings of the Footprint Ranking Report

A footprint ranking report was completed during December 2006, which involved

the screening of s ix potential footprints w ithin the i dentified s ites. The f ootprint

ranking pr ocess i nvolved s ensitivity m apping, f ield investigations, r anking

exercises, criteria weighting exercises and workshops with stakeholders in order

to select the p referred facility footprints for further i nvestigations. The footprint

ranking report nominated footprints C, E and F as the preferred footprints for

further investigation and concept design.

14.1.6. Findings of the Feasibility Report

A Feasibility Report was completed during December 2007, which investigated the

preferred facility footprints, i.e. footprints C, E and F. These investigations

centred on a concept facility design, preliminary geohydrological evaluations and

a preliminary EIA. The main purpose of the Feasibility Report was to enable the

authorities to establish whether the facility designs and positions were viable for

detailed engineering and environmental studies. The findings of the Feasibility

Report p rovided a n assessment of both th e potential b enefits as well as t he

potential n egative i mpacts a nticipated w ith t he d evelopment of th e p roposed

general a nd h azardous w aste f acility. Although F ootprint E w as f ound to b e

technically flawed, the findings concluded that there were no environmental fatal

flaws, under the condition that the mitigation and management measures were

implemented d uring t he c onstruction a nd o perational p hases o f th e p roposed

project. It was further recommended that detailed assessments were undertaken

on the preferred site (Footprint F) during the EIA phase of the project.

The selection of Footprint F as the p referred s ite was as a result of the various

specialists studies undertaken during the feasibility phase and can be summarised

as follows in Table 14.2 below:

Table 14.2: Justification for the Selection of Footprint F as the Preferred Site

Criteria Preferred

Footprint

Primary Decision Factor

Traffic F The c ost of e stablishment o f th e road t o

Footprint C is approximately double that for the

road to Footprint F.

Visual F Barely visible due to in-fill design.

Land Use F Compatibility w ith l and us e on a djacent

property (mining).




Air Quality C A variety of air quality parameters favour this

footprint.

Technical F Favoured due to proximity to electricity,

availability of borrow material and road access.

Fauna F Both s ites a re s imilar bu t th e c ritically

endangered Albany Adder may be present on

Footprint C.

Flora F Only F ootprint C has v egetation in r elatively

good condition.

The r emaining s pecialist s tudies, n otably g eohydrology, to urism a nd h eritage

regarded all three footprints as relatively equal in terms of potential impacts and

were therefore not included in the table above.

14.1.7. Preferred Footprint

As previously mentioned, Footprint F was identified as the preferred footprint for

the proposed hazardous waste facility. Footprint F is located on a site that is

owned by PPC and has been zoned for agricultural use. However, PPC also have

mining rights on the site. The site is located on a plateau within a broad, low

slope valley draining in a southerly direction. According to the SIASR completed

by Afrosearch during 2003, the closest human settlement from the site is the

residential area of Motherwell (approximately 15km) and an industrial area known

as Markman Industrial (also approximately 15km). Addo is located approximately

31km a way f rom M otherwell a long t he R3 35 (A ddo Ro ad), w hich p asses th e

proposed site. There are also a number of scattered farmhouses around the site.

The site is currently mainly accessed via the R335; a road which travels through

the residential area of Motherwell, and which also serves as the main access

route to the Addo National Park. Access can also be gained f rom U itenhage v ia

the R75.

14.1.8. Assumptions and Limitations of Study

• MasterQ Research was appointed during November 2007 to conduct a SIA on

the preferred footprint and was therefore not involved as social specialists

during the earlier phases o f the p roposed p roject. As a social study was not

conducted d uring th e F easibility p hase, th e a nticipated s ocial impacts

identified by Afrosearch during the Scoping Phase (and as outlined as per

table 14.1), were expanded during the EIA Phase, taking cognisance of the

issues and concerns raised by Interested and Affected parties (I&APs), as well

as additional information that was sourced by the specialist.




• No information was available on potential job losses should the hazardous

waste facility be decommissioned. The expected economic impact as a result

of decommissioning has therefore not been assessed in detail.

• An i nitial e stimate o f a pproximately 1 00 loaded tr ips p er d ay w ould b e

required on commencement of the GHWMF operations, reaching a maximum

of 251 loaded trips per day in year 11, to be transported on a daily basis

through t he M otherwell a rea along the R 335 that is d eemed to be the

preferred access route to the proposed facility. It is further assumed that the

transportation o f hazardous waste by road i s regulated by s trict regulations,

e.g. the trucks will be covered and clearly marked.

• At the time of the study, no information was available on the exact

development limitation that the presence of the facility would place on the

surrounding area, i.e. how far away developments would be allowed in relation

to th e f acility. However, it s hould be n oted that a t p resent th e p roposed

facility is located away from existing urban areas.

• Information received from other specialists indicated that the proposed site for

the facility belongs to PPC. It is believed that negotiations to acquire this

property would be between the landowner and the project proponent and that

such discussions fall outside the current scope of work as it would have no

direct social impacts on the surrounding area.

14.2. General Overview of the Affected Area

The preferred site falls within the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality (NMBM), which

in turn is located within the Eastern Cape Province. Despite the significant role

that the Eastern Cape Province (ECP) has played in the history of South Africa, it

is regarded as one of the poorest provinces in South Africa. A total of 6 district

municipalities can be found within the ECP, which is further subdivided into 38

local municipalities. The ECP covers an a rea of approximately 169 952km2. The

NMBM area is approximately 1 959km2

in size and consists of 60 wards in total.

As the preferred site is 13 km away from the nearest community (Motherwell), it

is believed that the site i tself will not directly impact on this area. However, the

main access route (the R335) passes th rough th is area, which might impact on

this settlement. Motherwell consists of 6 wards in total. Data from these wards

have been combined in order to provide an overall view of the area as opposed to

a fragmented profile.

The other potential access route, the R334, passes north of Motherwell. The R334

becomes Daniel Pienaar Road as i t enters Uitenhage where i t intersects with the

R75. The R75 passes through two residential areas, namely Strelitzia Park and

Winterhoek Park – both these areas fall within ward 51 of the NMBM. Motherwell,

Strelitzia Park and Winterhoek Park (Ward 51) in relation to the NMBM and the

ECP as a whole are discussed in more detail further on in this chapter.




Figure 14.1: Approximate location of the preferred site depicting the land use of

the surrounding area

During t he i nitial c onstruction p hase a ll t he s ite i nfrastructure ( i.e. entrance

facility, w eighbridge, o ffices, a blutions, a ccess roads a nd st ores) will be

constructed. In addition, the first phase of landfill cells, storm water dam and

leachate dam will be constructed. This will involve earthworks and specialised

lining of the dams and cells. The initial construction period will last for

approximately 12 months.

The construction staff will range from unskilled labour, to semi-skilled

construction w orkers s uch a s construction p lant o perators, b ricklayers, l ining

installers and skilled construction workers such as foremen and engineers.

Unskilled labour would be sourced locally, with p robably 30 to 50 individuals

being employed during the peak construction period. As unskilled labour w ill be

local, no accommodation will be required on site.

However, i t i s f oreseen th at d aily t ransport to a nd f rom th e l abour sending

area(s) might be provided. Semi-skilled and skilled workers are normally

permanent e mployees of t he c onstruction f irms. D epending o n w hether t he

construction firm is local or not, the construction firm would provide temporary

accommodation for i ts personnel. Nobody, other than security personnel w ill be

housed on site. At the time of the study it was not clear whether these labourers

will be housed within the community or within a construction village.




In time, approximately every 5 years, additional landfill cells will be constructed.

The construction team will generally be much smaller than the initial construction

team.

14.3. Social Change Processes and Impact Assessment

The fo llowing se ction proceeds t o d iscuss t he v arious ch ange p rocesses a nd

related expected impacts that could be expected as a result of the project. The

change processes which were assessed included the following:

• Demographic processes: changes in the number and composition of people;

• Economic processes: changes in the way in which people make a living and

the economic activities in society;

• Institutional and empowerment processes: changes in the role, efficiency

and operation of governments and other organisations, and people’s ability to

get involved and influence decision making processes;

• Socio-cultural processes: changes in the way in which humans behave,

interact and relate to each other and their environment and the belief and

value systems which guide these interactions.

• Geographical processes: changes in land use patterns; and

• Bio-physical processes: the biological and physical components of the

natural environment.

As previously mentioned, a change process can be defined as change that takes

place within the receiving environment as a result of a direct or indirect

intervention. A potential impact follows as a result of the change process.

However, a change process can only result in an impact once it is experienced as

such by an individual/community on a physical and/or cognitive level.

A SIA takes into account the extent, duration, intensity and probability of

occurrence that a potential impact might have on this social environment.

Impacts can either be negative, neutral or positive. The impacts are also

categorised a ccording t o t he various p roject stages, i .e. p re-construction,

construction, operation and maintenance, and decommissioning. Mitigation

measures have also been identified with the aim to reduce the potential impact of

a negative issue and to enhance the impact of a positive issue. Also included in

the assessment table is a rating of the significance of the impact.

To m eet th e o verall o bjective o f th e p roject, i t was n ecessary t o co mpile a

detailed description of the study area. This detailed baseline social profile had

been compiled as part of the ESS and formed part of the SIASR. As the proposed

site i s l ocated s ome distance a way from a ny f ormal r esidential areas, i t i s

believed that communities along the proposed access routes (the R75, R334 and

R335) would be mostly affected. These communities include Motherwell, Strelitzia




Park, Winterhoek Park and some scattered farming households around the

proposed site.

Figure 14.2: Access roads to the various farmlands in vicinity of the proposed

site

The f irst segment of each subsection below provides an analysis of the baseline

profile of the social processes in terms of geographical, demographic, economic,

institutional, s ocio-cultural a nd b iophysical c onditions in t he a reas m entioned

above. The baseline profile summarises the status quo of these areas followed by

an assessment of the potential impacts with the implementation of the proposed

project.

14.4. Demographic Processes

Demographic processes relate to the number of people and composition of an

area and include an overview of the population size and the educational profile of

the affected areas. Unless otherwise stated, the baseline social profile of the

study area was compiled based on data obtained from the Municipal Demarcation

Board. Note that this data should only be viewed as indicative of the broad trends

within the area and not as a rigid representation of the area.

Population

An overview of the affected areas is reflected in Table 14.4 overleaf. The Eastern

Cape Province covers an area of approximately 169 952km2, with a total

population o f a pproximately 7 2 84 0 66 p eople l iving w ithin its b orders. T his

brings the population density to an average of 44.4 people per km2. The

predominant p opulation g roup i s B lack A frican (8 3.3%) f ollowed b y C oloured




(9.8%). T here a re s lightly mo re f emales ( 53.4%) t han ma les ( 46.6%). T he

majority of the total population is below the age of 19 (47.4%), closely followed

by the segment of the population that can be regarded as economically active

(between the ages of 20 and 64) at 46.4%. The Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality

(NMBM), which is situated within the EC, extends over 1 959km2 and has a total

population of approximately 1 005 769 with a population density of 513.4 people

per km2

. The racial distribution within the NMBM, much like the ECP as a whole,

consisted of a majority of Black African (58.9%) followed by a distribution of

23.5% Coloured. More than half (58.0%) of the total population in the NMBM falls

within the economically active age group of between 20 and 64. Again there are

slightly more females (52.2%) than males (47.8%).

There are three areas within the NMBM that would, in terms of social processes,

potentially be affected by the proposed hazardous waste facility, but mostly in

respect of the fact that the proposed access routes pass through these areas.

These areas are Motherwell (wards 23, 54, 55, 57, 58 and 59 of the NMBM),

Strelitzia P ark a nd Winterhoek Park ( ward 51 of t he N MBM). A s M otherwell

consists of 6 separate wards, data from these wards have been combined in order

to provide an overall view of the area as opposed to a fragmented profile.

The total population of Motherwell is estimated at 102 291 people living in 27 700

separate households, at an average of 3.7 persons per household. Motherwell

accounts for approximately 10.2% of the total population within the NMBM. The

area is approximately 21.6km2 in size with a high population density of

approximately 4 735.7 persons per square kilometre. The predominant population

group is Black African (99.7%), followed by Coloured (0.3%). As is the case with

the NMBM as a whole, more than half (56.5%) of the total population falls within

the age segment that can be regarded as economically active (the ages between

20 and 64). Also, slightly more than half (53.1%) of the total population are

female. In comparison, ward 51 (Strelitzia Park and Winterhoek Park) has a total

population o f a pproximately 1 7 58 6 w ithin a ge ographical a rea o f 6 5.3km2,

resulting in a population density of approximately 269.3 persons per km2

. The

ward has a total number of 5 164 households, with an average of 3.4 persons per

household. The predominant population group is White (73.0%). The age and

gender profile of this ward is similar to that of Motherwell and the NMBM as a

whole.

Table 14.3 below provides a summary of the social demographics of the affected

areas on the access routes and in close proximity to the preferred site. From this

demographic data it can be deducted that the majority o f the population within

the affected area are within the economically active group. In view of the fact

that there are more females than males in this area, cognisance should be taken

of the fact that a large number of job seekers might be female.




Table 14.3: Summary of Population Characteristics

South

Africa

Eastern

Cape

NMBM Motherwell

(Wards 23,

54, 57-59)

Strelitzia

Park &

Winterhoek

Park

(Ward 51)

Area size

(km2

1219912

)

169952 1959 26.1 65.3

Total

population

47390900 7284066 1005769 102291 17 586

Population

density

(people per

km2

38.9

)

44.4 513.4 4735.7 269.3

Total

households

11205705 1771783 265 371 27700 5164

Avg. persons

per household

4.0 4.1 3.8 3.7 3.4

Population

group

Black

African

(79.5%)

Black

African

(83.3%)

Black

African

(58.9%)

Black

African

(99.7%)

White

(73.0%)

Gender Female

(50.8%)

Female

(53.4%)

Female

(52.2%)

Female

(53.1%)

Female

(51.5%)

Age Group ≤19

(42.6%)

≤19

(47.4%)

20-64

(58.0%)

20-64

(56.5%)

20-64

(59.0%)

Education

Close on a third (31.3%) of the adult population in the ECP has completed some

secondary schooling, while 20.2% of the adult population have had no schooling.

A total of 6.7% completed a post school qualification.

The educational profile within the NMBM differs slightly from that of the province

in that more than a third (39.6%) of the adult population has completed some

secondary schooling. Close on a quarter (24.4%) of the adult population have

completed a Grade 12 qualification, whereas close on half (43.7%) of the adult

population within Ward 51 have completed a Grade 12 qualification. A total of




8.7% has completed a post school qualification, whereas only 6.7% have had no

schooling. Within ward 51 a total of 16% of the adult population have obtained a

tertiary education. The educational profile for Motherwell is similar to that of the

NMBM an d t he ECP as a w hole, a s i llustrated b y F igure 14.3 below, wh ich

provides an overview of the educational profile of the affected areas.

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

EC

NMBM

Motherwell

Ward 51

Education (Grouped)

No schoolingSome primaryComplete primarySome secondaryStd 10/Grade 12Higher

Figure 14.3: Educational Profile (Grouped) for Affected Areas

14.4.1. Demographic Change Processes and Resultant Impacts

The construction and operation of the p roposed regional general and hazardous

waste facility c ould lead to a c hange i n th e n umber a nd c omposition o f a

population within the affected area, which in turn could lead to economic, land

use, and socio-cultural impacts. According to the Eastern Cape Department of

Social Development the high population density in the Nelson Mandela Bay area

can be ascribed to migrant labour as Port Elizabeth i s the only large c ity in the

area. M igrant l abour mostly c omprises m embers of rural c ommunities o r

traditional societies who move from these areas to urban areas in order to sell

their labour. It is expected that the bulk of the job seekers who are not from the

area would move i nto Motherwell as opposed to the a reas i n U itenhage, mostly

due to the fact that Motherwell is also in close proximity to the Coega

Development where more and longer term employment opportunities would be

created. Therefore, demographic change processes are mostly expected to occur

within the Motherwell area whereas the areas in Uitenhage might be affected as a

result of access routes passing through these areas.

Pre-Construction & Construction Phases

This su b-section d eals w ith t he e xpected d emographic c hange p rocesses a nd

resultant impacts that can be expected with the introduction of the proposed

project t o t he a ffected a reas. T he d emographic c hange p rocess t hat c an b e




expected a s a re sult of p roposed n ew regional g eneral a nd h azardous w aste

processing facility is as follows:

• Relocation of households and/or population segments;

• Influx of construction workers;

• Influx of job seekers; and

• Outflow of labourers.

• Relocation of households and/or population segments

A resettlement study was undertaken by Coastal and Environmental Services as

part of the Footprint Ranking Report during 2006. This study stated that PPC i s

active in the area and that there is one farmhouse in the area that is permanently

occupied (refer to Figure 14.4). Residents in this single homestead and possibly

some farm workers would have to be relocated. It is therefore believed that less

than 20 people would have to be relocated, which is logistically manageable and

financially feasible.

Figure 14.4: House located in close proximity to the proposed site

The impact of relocation depends on the level of attachment to a place, which in

turn is informed by variables such as age and number of years spent in that

particular area. Where people have been l iving in a specific area for years, they

are used to their surroundings, e.g. the route they travel to work, the amenities

(shops, businesses, leisure) they visit, etc. Apart from their surroundings, one

could also expect that they are attached to their houses and living conditions.

Relocating such households would have an impact on their way of life and the

standard of life they have grown accustomed to. On a broader scale the potential




impact of relocation is regarded as moderately severe due to the fact that there is

only one household that would potentially have to be relocated. The house itself

belongs to PPC, who are also the current landowners of Footprint F. Although this

household might not be directly affected by the proposed facility footprint, it is

still recommended that they be relocated based on the fact that they would live

within very close proximity to the proposed facility. Should they remain on the

property, they may be affected by a range of other impacts, such as visual, noise,

air and health. The impact is rated as low negative after the implementation of

mitigation measures.

• Arrival of construction workers

The arrival of construction workers that might lead to a slight change in the

number and composition of the local community, and impact on the economy,

health, safety and social well-being of the adjacent communities. The impact o f

the arrival of c onstruction w orkers i s m ostly a pplicable t o t he a reas w here

workers spend evenings and weekends. Contact between the local community

and the workers can be expected, which may result in conflict. It should be noted

that o nly a limited n umber of construction w orkers a re required d uring t he

construction phase.

Unskilled labour would comprise of approximately 30-50 individuals during the

peak of construction, which would be sourced from the local area. If construction

workers a re f rom a d ifferent cultural b ackground t han locals, c onflict c an b e

expected where different cultural backgrounds are not respected. This could lead

to locals developing a negative attitude to wards construction workers, w ith a

resultant negative impact on social well-being. A negative attitude can further be

intensified i f c onstruction w orkers a re v iewed a s a g roup th at to ok j ob

opportunities a way f rom l ocals, t hereby c reating a n underlying c onflict ov er

limited resources. This might be further intensified with the arrival of a large

number of construction workers (approximately 50 000) at the Coega IDZ

development, which is in close proximity to the proposed site.

However, depending on the flexibility of the receiving environment, the impact

should not be viewed as purely negative. If the community has the capacity to

accommodate additional people, and are accepting of new people, the presence of

construction workers could lead to a temporary boost in the local economy if

construction workers make use of local services. However, a community that is

unable to meet its own needs would be unable to sustain additional demands on

the local services, which would lead to conflict i f services are depleted (e.g. the

local grocery store running out of supplies due to the extra demand). The impact

is ra ted a s low negative to neutral after the im plementation o f m itigation

measures.




• Influx of job seekers

At the start of the construction period, surrounding communities become aware of

job opportunities that might arise from the construction of the hazardous waste

facility. In response to the possibility of getting a job on site, job seekers might

approach th e s ite o ffice. A lthough a s mall number o f j ob s eekers c ould b e

employed in this way, job seekers mostly loiter around the construction village for

a few days in the hope of securing a job on site. Local individuals could jeopardise

their current employment in leaving their workplace in the hope of earning a

better income in the construction sector.

Job seekers from surrounding communities might normally focus their efforts on

securing a job either at the site office or at the construction village. Normally

employment p rocedures a re d iscussed w ith t he l ocal leaders a nd f ollowed to

ensure t hat t he local re sidents c an re ap t he b enefits from e mployment

opportunities. However, relative to the Coega IDZ development, which is in close

proximity to the proposed site, it is not expected that a large number of job

seekers w ould f ocus t heir a ttention a t t he p roposed f acility during t he

construction p hase. A ccording t o th e C oega w ebsite, m ore th an 2 0 0 00

permanent jobs a nd in excess of 50 000 construction jobs would be created

during the initial phase of the Coega project.

Other than these d irect job opportunities, a further 8 000 temporary and 2 500

permanent jobs would be created in downstream industries such as the local

building industry. As the construction of the proposed facility would only require

between 30-50 unskilled labourers during the peak of construction, it is believed

that job seekers would rather focus their attention on securing a construction

position at the Coega IDZ where more job opportunities are available and would

last o ver a l onger p eriod ( it w as s tated o n the C oega IDZ w ebsite th at th e

development of the Coega IDZ would take place over a 50 year period). The

influx of job seekers into the environment will lead to an increased demand on

local services and will not necessarily lead to a boost in the local economy, seeing

as these job seekers are mostly unemployed. The influx of job seekers might

further lead to conflict with local residents in respect of competition over l imited

job opportunities.

Job seekers who engage in temporary relationships with locals can impact on the

health of the community through the possibility of spreading sexually transmitted

infections such as HIV. Furthermore, if such a temporary relationship results in a

pregnancy, i t might have a further economic impact on the woman in question.

This is as a result of the fact that she would have to care for the infant without

financial a ssistance f rom t he f ather w ho i s unemployed. I t c an t herefore b e

assumed that he has no financial means to care for a baby. The impact is rated as

low negative to neutral after the implementation of mitigation measures.




• Outflow of labourers

An o utflow o f la bourers c ould n egatively impact o n s ocial w ell-being, so cial

relationships, and health. Locals who secure employment with the contractors

might also receive training, thereby enabling them to secure more permanent

employment, which i n t urn m ight c ause t hem t o m ove out o f t he a rea a nd

become part of the migrant labour force. It is believed that construction workers

(notably the unskilled labour force) would focus their attention on securing a

position at the Coega IDZ, which is still located within the area. This means that a

labourer would not l eave the a rea. Securing a position a t the Coega IDZ would

have a po sitive e conomic impact o n b oth t he in dividual a nd h is/her f amily.

Families who have an income are able to unlock more possibilities in terms of

social upliftment (e.g. their living conditions, education opportunities, etc.). The

impact is rated as moderately positive after the implementation of mitigation

measures.

Operational Phase

This su b-section d eals with t he expected d emographic c hange p rocesses a nd

resultant impacts th at c an b e e xpected d uring th e o perational p hase o f th e

proposed new regional general and hazardous waste processing facility.

• Arrival of operational workers

The arrival of operational workers that might lead to slight changes in the number

and composition of the local community, and impact on economy, health, safety

and social well-being thereof. The size of the operational team will depend on the

actual waste tonnages received on site and will include unskilled labourers, semi-

skilled w orkers su ch a s w eigh-bridge o perators, p lant o perators, s ecurity

personnel and skilled workers such as l aboratory technician and s ite supervisor.

Due to the small size of the operational team, no significant impacts are foreseen

on t he d emographic c hange pr ocess d uring th is p hase of t he p roject. It i s

furthermore possible that very few of the operational team would reside in the

local area and that they would rather commute from their area of residence to the

facility and back out again at the end of the day. The impact is rated as having

no effect after the implementation of mitigation measures.

Decommissioning Phase

No significant impacts are foreseen on the demographic change process during

this phase of the project, as only a limited number of people would have been

employed at the facility. The potential impact that a loss of job opportunities

might have on the economic status of such an individual and his/her family has

been assessed in more detail further on in this chapter.




14.5. Economic Processes

Economic processes relate to the way in which people make a living and the

economic activities within that society. The employment status within an area

gives an indication of the economic stability of such an area and also serves as an

indicator of the area’s general well-being. Employment rates and the economic

sectors of the affected area are discussed in relation to the Province and the

broader municipal area, as is followed by a discussion on the household income

profile of the area.

Employment and Economic Sectors

The employment rates reflected in this section are based on the economically

active population in the area. It therefore excludes the “not economically active”

population. The EC has a fairly large unemployment rate with just little over half

(52.7%) of the economically active population that is unemployed. Of the 47.3%

of the adult population that is employed, 87.7% listed the industry in which they

are employed as “undetermined”, which may be indicative of a large and fairly

active i nformal tr ade s egment. O ther d ominant e conomic s ectors within th e

province a re c ommunity s ervices ( 4.8%) a nd t he w holesale a nd retail s ector

(2.0%). The employment situation within NMBM is marginally better than the

overall s ituation of the EC. Slightly more than half (53.6%) of the economically

active population w ithin th e NMBM a re employed. The predominant e conomic

sector has been listed as “undetermined” for 78.8% of those employed, followed

by the community services sector (7.2%) and the manufacturing sector (5.0%).

Motherwell has an employment status similar to that of the Province, where close

on two thirds (60.9%) of the economically active population are unemployed. Of

those employed, the majority are employed within the community services sector

(22.5%), followed by the manufacturing sector (19.1%). The predominant

employment sectors are therefore similar to that of the NMBM as a whole. In

contrast the employment rate in ward 51 is very high and is estimated at 92.9%,

again m ostly in t he c ommunity s ervices s ector (2 6.6%). It c an t herefore b e

expected that l ittle to no residents from this area would be seeking employment

at the proposed facility and that most job seekers would stem from Motherwell

where the employment rate is much lower than that of ward 51. Table 14.5 below

provides a summary of the employment and predominant economic sectors within

the affected area in relation to South Africa, the Province and the municipal area.

As a result of the low employment rate within Motherwell, job seekers can be

expected f rom th is a rea. Coupled w ith th e f act th at th ere a re slightly m ore

females than males in the area, more of these job seekers might be female. Also,

in v iew of the fact that the employment rate within the NMBM in general is not

that high, job seekers from other areas within the NMBM might also be expected

at the site.




Table 14.4: Overview of Employment and Economic Sectors

South

Africa

Eastern

Cape

NMBM Motherwell Ward 51

Employed* 33.7% 22.6% 32.6% 25.8% 54.9%

Unemployed* 24.0% 25.2% 28.2% 40.2% 4.2%

Not

economically

active

42.3% 52.2% 39.1% 34.0% 40.9%

Employment

rate**

58.4% 47.3% 53.6% 39.1% 92.9%

Industry Community

services

(29.1%)

Undeter-

mined

(87.7%)

Undeter-

mined

(78.8%)

Community

Services

(22.5%)

Community

Services

(26.6%)

* This is the percentage employed/unemployed of the entire working age population and should not

be read as the unemployment rate, i.e. the not economically active population is included in this

segment.

** In order to reflect a more accurate employment rate, the not economically active population has

been excluded from this segment.

Household Income

The m ajority o f ho useholds ( 70.5%) i n t he ECP have s ome f orm of i ncome.

However, the levels of income range from below the acceptable minimum

standard (of ±R18 000 p.a.) to affluent. The remainder of households (29.5%)

have no monthly income. The NMBM has a similar profile to that of the province,

but f ewer h ouseholds (2 1.6%) r eported h aving no h ousehold i ncome. In

Motherwell more than a third (35.1%) of the households had no annual income.

From figure 14.5 below it is evident that the majority of households within the

Motherwell lives below the accepted minimum standard, whereas the majority of

households within ward 51 is well above the accepted minimum standard

stipulated as a minimum annual income of R20 000 per household. Low levels of

income in Motherwell correspond with the high unemployment rate in that area.




0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

EC NMBM Motherwell Ward 51

Household Income

> R19 201 p.a. ≤ R19 200 p.a. No income

Figure 14.5: Overview of Annual Household Income

14.5.1. Economic Change Processes and Resultant Impacts

This sub-section deals with the expected economic change processes and

resultant impacts that can be expected with the introduction of the proposed new

regional general and hazardous waste processing facility to the affected area.

Pre-Construction & Construction Phases

The economic change process that can be expected during t his phase of the

project is as follows:

• Compensation for the site;

• Direct formal employment opportunities to local individuals; and

• Indirect formal and/or informal employment opportunities to local individuals.

• Compensation for the site

Compensation for the site might lead to an economic impact over the short to

medium term to the benefit of the l andowner concerned. The owner of the site

(PPC) w ill m ost p robably receive f inancial c ompensation f or th e l oss of l and.

Normally compensation is calculated based on current market related values. The

compensation for loss of land is mainly regarded as a positive impact, but could

also be viewed as negative in the event that PPC is not compensated at all. The

land acquisition process will be negotiated with PPC by the proponents of the

project (in this case the CDC and the NMBM).

The status of the impact is dependant on the negotiation process. A transparent

negotiation process that leads to a positive outcome (i.e. both parties are

satisfied with the agreement) will have a low positive impact.




• Direct formal employment opportunities to local individuals

The construction staff will range from unskilled labour, to semi-skilled

construction w orkers s uch a s construction p lant o perators, b ricklayers, l ining

installers and skilled construction workers such as foremen and engineers.

Unskilled labour would be sourced locally, probably 30 to 50 during the peak

construction p eriod. S emi-skilled a nd s killed workers a re n ormally permanent

employees of the construction firms. Employing local individuals and/or

contractors on the project would also have a positive impact on their families as

money is now available to increase their livelihood, e.g. being able to pay for

school fees enabling children to go to school and thereby increasing their

educational levels and chances of a better future. However, the fact that the job

opportunities are in most instances only temporary is fairly negative in view of

the f act th at t he economic r elief a nd th e a ssociated i mpacts w ould o nly b e

temporary in nature. This impact also depends on the timeframe of the project.

It is therefore believed that only a very limited number of local individuals within

the local area could potentially be employed during construction. This is due to

the fact that mostly skilled or semi-skilled labour is required during construction

and t he l egal re quirements a ttached to employment. D ue to th e skills levels

required for the actual construction of the development, it is not foreseen that a

large number of l ocal l abourers w ill be engaged i n the construction phase. It i s

highly recommended that local individuals be employed on work components that

do not require a substantial amount of skill, e.g. vegetation clearance, erection of

gates, cleaning services, and security guards.

In construction projects commissioned by government, employment requirements

usually include gender quotas, youth quotas and quotas for local labour to be

employed during the project. In addition, a certain proportion o f time for which

construction workers are paid should be spent on skills development initiatives.

According to the Human Resource Manager of SAFCEC (South African Federation

of C ivil Engineering Contractors), the current norm in this industry is to use

between 50–70% local labour during construction. The impact is rated as

moderately positive after the implementation of mitigation measures.

• Indirect formal and/or informal employment opportunities to local individuals

Indirect informal job opportunities mainly relate to services that are not d irectly

linked with the construction activities, e.g. domestic services, food stalls, etc. at

the construction site. Subcontractors and individuals might economically benefit

from the project i f they are a fforded the opportunity. However, the s ize, nature

and location of the construction site will determine the extent of the services

required. In general, informal job opportunities would therefore be limited.




Another potential opportunity is the rental of land for the accommodation of the

construction workers and storage of equipment in return for financial

compensation, a lbeit c onfined to th e l andowner (i n t his c ase P PC). H ousing

construction workers within local communities and the use of local contractors to

supply material should be considered as this increase the economic investment

into the a ffected communities. A lso, construction material such as bricks, p ipes,

concrete, etc. might be sourced from local businesses. New sales would therefore

be g enerated i n t he l ocal e conomy, which i s a d irect r esult of t he c apital

investment from the development. The impact is rated as moderately positive

after the implementation of mitigation measures.

Operational Phase



• Direct formal employment opportunities to local individuals

The size of t he operational t eam w ill d epend o n th e a ctual w aste t onnages

received on site. A first estimate is between 10 and 20 personnel. This will include

up t o 1 0 unskilled labourers, s emi-skilled w orkers su ch a s w eigh-bridge

operators, plant operators, security personnel and skilled workers such as

laboratory technician and site supervisor. Unskilled labour will be used for general

tasks such as cleaning and maintenance of plant. The rest of the team will be

responsible for site operation, e.g. recording and testing of waste, managing the

working f ace of the l andfill, p lacing of c over m aterial and c ompaction of the

waste. Due to the fact that very few local community members are likely to be

employed as operational team members, only l imited tangible economic impacts

are foreseen. However, even i f only a limited number of people are employed in

this manner, it would still have a positive economic bearing on such an individual

and his/her household. The impact is rated as moderately positive after the

implementation of mitigation measures.




• Loss of employment opportunities

Besides disciplinary action, the primary reasons for loss of employment are due to

technological changes, redundancies, retrenchments, operational closure, adverse

economic and trading conditions, and business process streamlining. A loss of

employment implies a loss of income, which in turn implies that people are unable




to sustain their standard of living. A t the time of the study it was assumed that

approximately 1 0-20 job opportunities would be l ost, a s a r esult o f t he

decommissioning of the proposed hazardous site. The impact is rated as low

negative after the implementation of mitigation measures.

14.6. Institutional and Empowerment Processes

Institutional and empowerment processes relate to the role, efficiency and

operation of government sectors and other organisations within the area. It also

investigates the ability of people to engage in decision-making processes to such

an extent that they have an impact on the way in which decisions are made that

would concern them.

Municipal Services

Despite the fact that more than half (54.0%) of all households within the EC have

access to electricity, a significant number of households make use of

paraffin/wood f or c ooking (5 9.6%) a nd h eating (6 4.0%). I n te rms o f o ther

municipal services, the majority (45.3%) of households’ refuse is removed at

least once a week. Less than ha lf o f a ll households (38.6%) have a f lush toilet

that is connected to a waterborne sewerage system. Households predominantly

(29.7%) make use of t he regional local scheme as their source o f water. Again

the municipal services profile in the NMBM differs from that of the ECP as a

whole.

Within t he N MBM t hree q uarters ( 75.2%) of a ll households h ave access t o

electricity and use it for cooking (65.3%), heating (59.8%) and lighting. The

majority of households’ (86.1%) refuse is removed at least once a week. Unlike

the Province as a whole, more than three quarters (77.6%) of all households

have a flush toilet that is connected to a waterborne sewerage system. As is the

case w ith the ECP, just under half (48.6%) of a ll households access their water

through the regional local scheme.

The municipal profile of Motherwell tends toward that of the ECP, where, despite

the fact that close on two thirds of all households have access to electricity, the

majority make use of paraffin for heating (47.8%). Just little over a half (52.9%)

make use of electricity for cooking and lighting (64.2%). Refuse is removed at

least on ce a w eek f rom t he m ajority of h ouseholds ( 84.6%). T he m ajority

(72.6%) also has access to a flush toilet. Again close on a half of all households

(49.3%) access their water through the regional local scheme.

As far as service delivery is concerned, it is not clear to what extent the local

municipality w ill b e re sponsible f or t he s ervice d elivery t o t his p roject. T his

includes municipal services such as the use of municipal waste disposal sites,




sewerage systems ( either d irectly or i ndirectly), w ater d elivery, a nd p ossible

connection to the electricity services network during the construction period (in

the event of a construction village being used). Because of the extent of poverty

in t he a rea, i t f ollows t hat s ervice d elivery i s a p roblem. T able 14.5 below

provides an overview of the municipal services of the affected area in relation to

the province and the metropolitan area as a whole. No data could be obtained for

the overall municipal service delivery in South Africa.

Table 14.5: Overview of Municipal Services

Eastern

Cape

NMBM Motherwell Ward 51

Energy

cooking

Electricity

(34.2%)

Electricity

(65.3%)

Electricity

(52.9%)

Electricity

(96.5%)

Energy

heating

Wood

(35.2%)

Electricity

(59.8%)

Paraffin

(47.8%)

Electricity

(96.3%)

Energy

lighting

Electricity

(54.0%)

Electricity

(75.2%)

Electricity

(64.2%)

Electricity

(96.9%)

Refuse Removed

once a week

(45.3%)

Removed

once a week

(86.1%)

Removed

once a week

(84.6%)

Removed

once a week

(95.4%)

Toilet Flush toilet

(38.6%)

Flush toilet

(77.6%)

Flush toilet

(72.6%)

Flush toilet

(96.4%)

Water Regional local

scheme

(29.7%)

Regional local

scheme

(48.6%)

Regional local

scheme

(49.3%)

Regional local

scheme

(48.7%)

From this table it is evident that the majority of households within Motherwell

lack efficient municipal services infrastructure and delivery, which further impacts

on the already poor living conditions and quality of life for most households in this

area. In contrast, ward 51 seems to be well supplied with municipal services.

However, again it can be expected that construction workers and job seekers

would not flood to this area, but rather to the nearby Motherwell. O verall these

areas appear to be poorly developed and characterised by poverty. This is evident

in the high population density, low education levels, the very high unemployment

rate, the low levels of household income, and the overall lack of proper municipal

services in the area.




14.6.1. Institutional and Empowerment Change Processes and

Resultant Impacts

This sub-section deals with the expected institutional and empowerment change

processes and resultant impacts that can be expected with the introduction of the

proposed project.

Pre-Construction and Construction Phases

The institutional and empowerment change process that can be expected during

this phase of the project is as follows:

• Attitude formation against the project (risk for social mobilisation)

Attitudes a re f ormed by m eans o f p eople’s p erception. I n th is c ase attitude

formation refers to the perception that people in the local community might form

on the proposed project, which in turn would influence their attitude towards the

project. Attitude formation against the project could have economic impacts and

could impact on social well-being, as a result of delays on the project and people

focusing their efforts on mobilising. Where social mobilisation against the project

does occur, it would severely delay the construction process, in terms of the

completion of the project as a whole. If the local community is unsupportive of

the project, it could lead to social mobilisation.

Historically there has been a l ot of resistance towards the project. An extensive

attempt to address stakeholders’ concerns through the public consultation

process has been made and therefore the probability of social mobilisation against

the project is viewed as unlikely after the implementation of mitigation measures,

i.e. the likelihood of the impact materialising is very low, more so upon

implementation o f the suggested m itigation measures. Stakeholders’ response

during the last round of public meetings that was held during November 2007

indicated that they have now accepted the proposed project and was now more

concerned about the facility being developed and operated in the best possible

way.

The ri sk f or s ocial m obilisation g reatly increases i f t he p roject p roponent i s

perceived as distrustful, i.e. if they do not deliver on their undertakings with the

community in t erms o f e mployment c reation, e tc. T o e nsure s upport of t he

project and reduce the risk of social mobilisation, the project proponent should at

all times be seen to care about the local community. The community need to feel

that they receive some tangible benefits from the project, e.g. direct and indirect

employment. The undertakings in the EMP should also be implemented effectively

and with due diligence. The impact is rated as low negative after the





• Additional demand on municipal services

Additional municipal services will be required at the construction site(s) and the

construction camp during the construction phase. Additional demand on municipal

services could impact on health. If a construction village is not managed properly,

it may lead to a lack o f adequate water as well as unhygienic conditions in the

case of w aste a nd s anitation s ervices. T his i n t urn c ould lead t o waterborne

diseases that will not only affect the construction worker, but could also spread to

the local community. The impact is rated as low negative to neutral after the


Operational Phase

The institutional and empowerment change process that can be expected during

this phase of the project is as follows:

• Disaster Management Plan

The implementation of a Disaster Management Plan would reduce the burden on

the a ffected m unicipality’s emergency services a nd t he risk of d isasters a nd

resultant potential impacts, such as impacts on health, well-being and an

economic impact on the NMBM. Disaster management should not only be reactive

but should ideally involve actions aimed at preventing disasters, or mitigating

their impact if they do occur. D isaster management p lans must address actions

before, during and after disasters. They should be compiled on the basis of a

generic plan which includes standard operating procedures and best practice if a

disaster should occur at the development, after which it can be expanded and

adapted to fit particular circumstances. The development and implementation of a

disaster management plan for the proposed hazardous waste facility will not only

increase the overall safety at the site, but would also be in support of the NMBM’s

disaster m anagement framework a s ou tlined i n t heir I ntegrated D evelopment

Plan (IDP), where the following key performance areas were identified:

• Creating sustainable municipal capacity for disaster management;

• Introducing effective and sustainable risk reduction strategies;

• Planning for disaster management and the implementation of such strategies;

• An effective response to a disaster, followed by relief and recovery actions;

• Enhancing the public’s awareness and readiness to react appropriately in the

event of a disaster; and

• Aid in improving th e m unicipality’s a bility f or d isaster m anagement p lan

implementation.

The impact is rated as high positive after the implementation of mitigation

measures.





No significant impacts are foreseen on the institutional and empowerment change

process during this phase of the project.

14.7. Socio-Cultural Processes

Socio-cultural processes relate to the way in which humans behave, interact and

relate t o e ach ot her a nd t heir e nvironment, a s w ell a s t he b elief a nd v alue

systems which guide these interactions.

14.7.1. Socio-Cultural Change Processes and Resultant Impacts

An influx of construction workers and/or job seekers to the area of Motherwell can

be expected, not only as a result of the current project ( where the influx is

expected to be minimal), but also as a result of the larger developments taking

place at the Coega Industrial Development Zone. As these migrant labourers are

not originally from the area, it creates the situation where the dynamics not only

within Motherwell is altered, but also in the area from which the migrant worker

originated from. Traditional cultures normally exist within areas and a newcomer

might not always be accustomed to such a culture, or he/she might stem from a

different cultural background.

Socio-cultural change processes that are associated with the construction and

operation of the proposed development include changes such as health and safety

aspects and sense of place. The concept of ‘health’ is not only limited to physical

health (i.e. the absence of ailments or illness), but also includes mental and social

health. The expected changes that can occur in relation to health and safety

aspects can be as a result of the presence of the development during operation as

well a s t he p resence of construction w orkers a nd/or j ob seekers d uring

construction.


The socio-cultural change process that can be expected during this phase of the


• Sense of place

Sense of p lace goes hand in hand with place attachment, which i s the sense of

connectedness a p erson/community fe els t owards c ertain p laces. P lace

attachment may be evident at different geographic levels, i.e. site specific (e.g. a

house, burial site, or tree where religious gatherings take place), area specific

(e.g. a residential area), and/or physiographic specific (e.g. an attachment to the

look and feel of an area). The concept of sense of place attempts to integrate the




character of a setting with the personal emotions, memories and cultural

activities associated with such a setting.

In some instances the potential presence of the general and hazardous waste

disposal facility might affect residents’ sense of place. In the past they might

have felt safe and secure in the area and therefore stayed in the area for those

specific reasons. As the proposed hazardous waste site might impact on people’s

perception of safety in terms of possible emissions such as smell and dust, these

people might now feel unsafe in the area knowing that the site is located within

the area. Much of what is valuable in a culture is embedded in place, which

cannot be measured in monetary terms. It is because of a sense of place and

belonging that some people loath to be moved from their dwelling place, despite

the fact that they will be compensated for the inconvenience and impact on their

lives.

The potential impact on socio-cultural behaviour and the related perception of

environmental changes could either have a positive or a negative impact on sense

of place (i.e. peace of mind or frustration/anger). It could be viewed as a positive

impact if p eople p erceive t he p roject a s a m eans of j ob c reation, a nd

infrastructural and/or economic development, which is not intrusive on their lives

and does not cause them immediate danger. Potential negative impacts i nclude

the visual impact and the resultant intrusion on sense of place. The impact is

rated as low negative to neutral after the implementation of mitigation

measures.

• Integration with local community

Construction w orkers f orm p art o f a s ignificant s ection o f th e S outh A frican

population known as migratory workers. Due to their unique situation,

construction workers engage in behaviour that makes them vulnerable, such as

risky sexual behaviour (e.g. unprotected sex) and destructive behaviour (e.g.

alcohol abuse, damaging the environment), which could be explained by their

migratory s tatus. W hen t hey a re s eparated from t heir h omes, t hey a re a lso

distanced from traditional norms, prevailing cultural traditions and support

systems that normally regulate behaviour within a stable community.

In a ddition, i t m ight also b e th at c onstruction w orkers w ho a re faced w ith

dangerous w orking c onditions a nd t he r isk of p hysical injury m ight b e m ore

preoccupied by immediate (direct) risks and therefore tend to disregard salient

(more indirect) risks, such as HIV infection. This, together with the fact that the

local population might be uneducated about the risk and transmission of HIV and

would therefore more easily engage in risky behaviour as a result of ignorance,

could facilitate the transmission of HIV. Construction workers’ situations seem to

make them vulnerable to high-risk sexual behaviour.




There are ample research results to indicate that there is a direct link between

temporary m igration a nd H IV i nfection. Re search a lso s eems to i ndicate th at

construction workers might be more at risk of contracting HIV from members of

local communities, as opposed to transmitting the infection to community

members. The duration of this impact is permanent due to the nature of

HIV/AIDS and other STIs that are incurable. The extent is l isted as national due

to the fact that infected persons from the community as well as the construction

team are mobile and could infect more people in other parts of the country. The

impact is rated as high negative after the implementation of mitigation

measures.

• Physical splintering

Any new development has the potential to impact on the movement patterns of

local communities. During construction physical splintering will mostly occur as a

result of the physical space taken up by construction activities at the site, which

in this instance is not deemed to be of significance as the construction site is

located w ell a way f rom t he c losest settlement. H owever, i t i s b elieved th at

construction vehicles us ing the R335 will move through the area and impact on

the local movement patterns of the residents of Motherwell. Construction

activities at the site as well as the construction village take up physical space that

could temporarily splinter communities and affect free flow movement patterns

from one side of the community to the other side. Although movement patterns

will not cease to exist, it would be altered on the short term to move around the

construction activities. The impact is rated as having no effect after the


• Safety and security

Not o nly d o h ealth issues impact on communities, but the p hysical s afety of

communities can also be endangered as a result of the influx of job seekers and

construction workers (e.g. potential increase i n c rime). There i s perception that

crime increases in an area the moment that construction workers arrive on site.

However, it should be noted that in most instances it is not the actual

construction workers who engage in criminal activities but more likely job seekers

who loiter at the site in search of employment.

Because of this perception, occurrences of crime during the time of the project

are likely to be ascribed to the construction workers. This has a mental health

impact, such as fear of criminal activity. The impact is rated as low positive

after the implementation of mitigation measures which should focus on raising

security a wareness, p romoting a ppropriate a ccess control t o the s ite a nd

construction camp and preventing the loitering of outsiders at both.




• Noise Pollution

A constant high level of noise has a prolonged detrimental effect on a person’s

general w ell-being a nd f unctioning. P eople l iving in c lose p roximity t o a

construction s ite w ill be exposed to such a constant level of noise generated by

the construction activities taking place. The experience of an increase in noise

levels because of construction activities will differ from person to person. Not

enough information about the possible mental health impact i s available to rate

the impact, and this impact is therefore not assessed in detail.

However, due to the remote l ocation o f the proposed s ite coupled w ith the fact

that construction will mostly likely only take place during daytime hours, it is

believed th at n oise p ollution w ill not directly affect the closest community o f

Motherwell. Surrounding farmhouses are in closer proximity and might experience

some levels of noise pollution, especially given the fact that the area is fairly quiet

at the moment. The impact is rated as low negative after the implementation of

mitigation measures.

Operational Phase

The socio-cultural change process that can be expected during this phase of the


• Safety risk

The presence of a hazardous waste site does create a sense of unease amongst

certain community members in terms of the safety of such a site, not only in

respect o f a irborne pollution, but a lso in terms of t rucks carrying the hazardous

waste that will pass through the area of Motherwell as well as Strelitzia Park and

Winterhoek Park (via the R75) on a daily basis. The proximity of houses next to

the R335, which will be used as the main access route to the facility, is also a

concern. Although not an everyday occurrence, hazardous waste trucks can be

involved in road accidents, causing spillage which in turn will impact on the safety

of people that can result in serious injury, i llness or death. Although radioactive

waste will not be disposed of at the proposed facility, other significantly

hazardous material will be transported to the site.

Despite this fact it is likely that people have a perception that any hazardous

material is radioactive. The potential impact of a safety risk is therefore based on

a p erception w herein p eople m ay h ave a l ong s tanding f ear of exposure t o

radiation. However, it is believed that such a fear would be based on personal

believes and/or perceptions and would not apply to a community as a whole. The

impact is rated as moderately negative after the implementation of mitigation

measures.





No significant impacts are foreseen on the socio-cultural change process during

this phase of the project.

14.8. Geographical Processes

Geographical processes relate to land use patterns and infrastructure in the area.

This section therefore describes the land use in the study area from a social

perspective. Land use is defined as “the way land is developed and used in terms

of the types of activities allowed (agriculture, residences, industries, etc.) and the

size of buildings and structures permitted. Another definition of land use is as

follows: “Patterns of land use arise naturally in a culture through customs and

practices, but l and use may a lso be formally regulated by zoning, other laws or

private agreements such as restrictive covenants” (Wikipedia).

A general assessment of the land uses in the area indicated the following trends:

• Residential;

• Communal farming;

• Commercial farming;

• Mining;

• Education; and

• Sport and recreation.

The following proposals have been i ncluded in the NMBM’s Spatial Development

Framework (SDF) in order to guide future developments:

• Implementation of an Urban Edge or Urban Growth Boundary: The

urban edge i s not viewed as a rigid regulatory mechanism with the main

objective to curb development. It is, however, a policy aimed at directing

patterns of growth and outlines the following guidelines:

* Land uses within the Urban Edge: Only land uses that are in line with the

relevant local precinct plan, the SDF, land use management plan and town

planning scheme will be permitted. Such developments would further be

subject to n ormal procedures and legislation, e.g. e nvironmental

considerations, etc. Factors such as the availability of services would also

be considered.

* Land uses outside the Urban Edge: Peri-urban developments are viewed as

more favourable, although such developments would still be subject to

local and provincial policies such as the Rural Management Policy.

• Peripheral uses: The peripheral area i s defined as the area d irectly outside

the urban edge. The proposal is to d evelop low-intensity land uses within




these areas, such as agricultural holdings, peri-urban residential uses, low-

intensity s ervice i ndustries a nd u rban a griculture. D evelopments i n t hese

areas should support and protect the urban edge and serve as a barrier for

future ex pansions. O pportunities t o ut ilise urban a griculture s hould b e

optimised, especially in areas close to disadvantages communities.

• Extensive Agriculture: The D epartment o f A griculture h as i dentified t he

areas outside the Urban Edge as prime agricultural land where agricultural

activities should be both protected and promoted.

• Activity nodes: Four activity nodes have been identified, which

accommodates a variety of activities. These activity nodes are Port Elizabeth,

Uitenhage, Despatch and the Coega IDZ.

• Infill Development Priority Areas and Social Housing: Social housing will

be provided in specific localities where it is believed that the poor have limited

access to accommodation (no mention is made of specific areas within the

context o f social housing. However, during the l aunch of the Urban Renewal

Programme for the Eastern Cape during July 2006, specific mention was made

of Motherwell as an area that forms part of this programme).

• Metropolitan Open Space System: The current Metropolitan Open Space

System is currently under review and will be adapted in terms of a Strategic

Environmental Assessment.

• Transportation: The land use framework as outlined above should be

supported by an effective public transport system.

• Strategic Development Areas: The following residential areas have been

identified for future residential development:

* Zanemvula (including the areas of Soweto-on-Sea, Chatty extensions 2-5

and 9-17, and Joe Slovo West);

* Walmer Gqebera, particularly the area surrounding the methane gas site;

* KwaNobuhle South;

* Uitenhage East;

* Motherwell;

* Wells Estate; and

* Hunters Retreat (towards the end of Walker Drive).

As the NMBM is one of the proponents of the proposed project, it is assumed that

future residential development that is planned for Motherwell will not be towards

the proposed site, as it is believed that the NMBM would have taken cognisance of

the location of the proposed site in relation to Motherwell. Major projects that

have been identified by the NMBM and included in their IDP that might have a




bearing on the proposed project as the location of these projects are within the

area, are as follows:

• Coega IDZ and Port of Ngqura: The Coega IDZ is a high-tech industrial

zone to the north of Nelson Mandela Bay. Initially only the Core Development

Area will be developed and will comprise approximately 64 000ha. The Coega

IDZ will develop further from the Core Development Area in a north-westerly

direction.

• Motherwell Urban Renewal Project: This project includes a multi-faceted

approach t o u pgrade amenities a nd s ervices i n M otherwell in a n effort t o

create and promote employment creation and community participation.

• Urban Agriculture: The a im of t his p roject i s t o enable p oor a nd

disadvantaged communities to secure food sources and participate in the city’s

economic a ctivity. A lthough n o m ention h as b een m ade o f s pecific a reas

where this project will be implemented, cognisance should be taken of the

project as Motherwell can be viewed as a disadvantaged community.

14.8.1. Geographical Change Process and Resultant Impacts

In light of the above, potential geographical impacts from a social perspective are

considered within the context of change processes in the use of the land.


The geographical change process that can be expected during this phase of the

project relates to the following:

• Access Roads

Construction activities w ill lead to an increase in t raffic, specifically construction

traffic ( e.g. trucks, m achinery, etc.) An i ncrease in s uch h eavy l oad v ehicles

cannot only affect and impact directly on the local traffic/movement of a

community, but a lso i ndirectly th rough the damaging of the road network. It i s

therefore important that construction traffic be regulated and that the

construction company has a plan in place to address road rehabilitation,

especially in view of the fact that the R335 is currently in need of extensive

maintenance and refurbishment.

Apart from the actual construction vehicles, it is assumed that it is the

contractors’ i ntention to t ransport l ocal construction workers f rom Motherwell to

the s ite by bus. Construction vehicles and busses therefore not only add to the

amount of traffic that already exists within an area, but also adds to hasten the




need for road rehabilitation. Roads that have become impassable as a result o f

construction vehicle damage increases the time spent on the road as well as the

frustration levels of the local traffic. However, it should be noted that the Traffic

Impact Assessment has recommended that the road be upgraded before the site

becomes operational. Currently the R335 is undergoing road rehabilitation and

upgrades (e.g. an additional lane is being added). The impact is rated as

moderately positive after the implementation of mitigation measures that

would entail the upgrading of the R335.

Operational Phase

The geographical change process that can be expected during this phase of the


• Spatial development

As the NMBM is one of the proponents of the proposed project, it is assumed that

future developments planned by the NMBM will not be towards the proposed site,

as i t is be lieved that the NMBM would have taken cognisance o f the l ocation o f

the proposed site. The presence of a hazardous waste site alters the development

plans o f n ot o nly th e l ocal m unicipality, b ut a lso p rivate a gents, s eeing a s

developments are not allowed to encroach upon the site. The buffer zone around

the site will be calculated based on air quality considerations and has been set as

a 500m radius from the perimeter of the proposed site. The municipality and

private agents should therefore plan around the site and buffer zone, as this will

curtail the surrounding land available for c ertain land use developments. The

impact is rated as moderately negative before the implementation of mitigation

measures.

Decommissioning and post-closure Phases

No significant impacts are foreseen on the geographic change process during this

phase of the project. Due to the fact that the proposed facility will be a hazardous

waste site, the site will not be used for any other purposes post-closure.

14.9. Biophysical Processes

The biophysical environment can lead to indirect social impacts. For example,

relocation of people can have an impact on income levels, which can lead to

processes of rural to urban migration, which can result in further impacts on

income levels and changes in food production. Social change processes can also

lead to biophysical change processes. Economic developments to increase tourism

numbers can change land use and water quality, which can have indirect human




impacts because of the reduction in agricultural production, and subsequent lower

income levels (Slootweg et al. 2001).

14.9.1. Biophysical Change Processes and Resultant Impacts

The following sub-sections discusses the biophysical change processes as a result

of the waste facility, and how these change process can lead to health and safety

impacts.


The presence of construction activities and construction workers will lead to a

biophysical change process within the receiving community, which can lead to

indirect health and safety impacts. Poor water and sanitation conditions can affect

ground water that can lead to health impacts. The following change processes

have been assessed:

• Pollution and fire risk; and

• Sanitation.

These change processes will be discussed separately together with a detailed

assessment of the expected impact as a result of the change process taking

place.

• Pollution and fire risk

The presence of construction workers on site might impact on the environment in

terms of littering and possible pollution, which in turn will impact on the

surrounding communities. Littering could also have further impacts on health and

safety. Not only is littering a breeding ground for bacteria, but it could also pose a

fire hazard if it contains flammable elements such as paper and plastic. Air, noise

and dust pollution could be experienced during the construction phase of the

project.

It could be that surrounding communities are of the opinion that migrant labours

might not be concerned by the long term effects of pollution or resource

extraction as they are only in the area temporarily after which they move again.

Apart from the pollution that stems from the actual construction activities,

construction workers themselves can add to the pollution problem through

littering. The potential fire risk also increases if construction workers are allowed

to make f ire (for cooking, heating) in uncontained areas. The impact is rated as

low negative after the implementation of mitigation measures.




• Sanitation

A lack of proper sanitation services could lead to health impacts, not only at the

construction site itself, but also spreading to the surrounding local community and

possibly livestock grazing in the area. Lack of adequate sanitation impacts on the

can lead to health impacts on people and animals alike, which in turn can result in

negative e conomic i mpacts. T he i mpact is r ated a s low negative after t he


Operational Phase

The biophysical change process that can be expected during this phase of the


• Waste Management

The l andfill is p rogressively capped and vegetated over i ts life. The capping will

minimize infiltration of water into the landfill which, if allowed to enter the facility,

would result in the production of additional leachate. A leachate collection will be

in place on top of the lining system at the base of the landfill to intercept all

leachate generated during the operational life. The leachate will be treated in an

on-site leachate treatment plant. If solid waste is not treated properly at the site

or not according to the prescribed standards, it could lead to potential health

impacts via airborne bacteria on the surrounding communities.

Not enough medical information is available on the potential impact and therefore

this impact has not been assessed in detail. While the management of pathogens

associated with the proposed facility is important, it is also important to consider

the potential health impacts associated with the chemical nature of the hazardous

material. Mismanaged w aste b ecomes a b reeding g round f or b acteria.

Communities c an b ecome i nfected t hrough a irborne b acteria a nd b ecome

seriously ill. The impacts could be extremely severe and long-term. Because of

the p ossibility of a irborne transport o f p ollutants, the i mpacts could be quite

widespread (see air quality report). The impact is rated as moderately negative

after the implementation of mitigation measures.


The biophysical change process that can be expected during this phase of the


• Leachate Management

On closure the entire site will have been capped and vegetation established so

that i t w ill b lend r easonably i nto th e n atural e nvironment. T he capping w ill




minimize infiltration into the landfill, thus minimising leachate generation. As was

the case during operation, a leachate collection will be in place on top of the lining

system at the base of the landfill to intercept all leachate generated post closure.

The leachate will be also be treated in a treatment plant, post-closure until no

more leachate is generated.

Monitoring of the facility and the surrounding ground water will continue for at

least 30 years after closure to ensure that any potential impacts on the waste

body or on surface and ground water is addressed. The monitoring protocol will

be documented in the Operational Plan and will form part of the facility’s Permit

Conditions.

If leachate is not t reated properly at the site or not according to the prescribed

standards, a perception might develop amongst community members that the

leachate might infiltrate and contaminate water sources, thereby impacting on

the s urrounding c ommunities’ h ealth. It was assumed t hat t he leachate f rom

hazardous waste sites are likely to be representative of the chemical composition

of the contents of the site, and as such, is likely to be extremely hazardous in

nature and would cause significant impacts on health. Mismanaged leachate can

potentially infiltrate and contaminate water sources. Communities can become

infected through the ingestion of such water and become seriously ill. The impact

is rated as low negative after the implementation of mitigation measures.

14.10. Summary

The p re-construction a nd c onstruction p hase o f th e p roposed pr oject i s

characterised b y a number of negative impacts (refer t o Table 1 4.6). This is

mainly due to the nature of the activities that take place during these phases. The

same holds true for the operational phase of the proposed project. Most of the

negative impacts within these various phases can be mitigated successfully. There

are also a n umber o f p ositive i mpacts, w hich c ould b e f urther enhanced i f

managed e ffectively. These impacts mostly relate to a temporary change in the

employment and economic profile of the local area by means of employment

opportunities, which in turn leads to a positive economic impact on local

households. The g eographic, d emographic, b iophysical a nd s ocio-cultural

processes a ll have a number o f negative impacts. However a ll of these impacts

can b e m itigated su ccessfully if e ffectively m anaged. E conomic i mpacts a s a

result of the project are for the most part positive in nature, which is mainly due

to the economic investment and development that will take place in the

community as a result of the project.

Although the expected construction impacts across a ll the change processes are

mostly negative, these impacts are for the most part only temporary in nature

and only expected to last over the construction period, which is approximately 12




months. In comparison, operational impacts are expected to last over the longer

term and therefore would have a prolonged effect on especially the biophysical

environment in terms of an effective waste management strategy. People are

more inclined to get “used” to the facility in their area if waste management

strategies are applied effectively and with due diligence. It is therefore important

that the waste management strategies at the facility are monitored and evaluated

on a regular basis to ensure the effective management of not only the waste, but

also the transportation of such waste through the area. The regular monitoring

and e valuation o f t he f acility a s a w hole would a lso e nsure t hat c orrective

measures can be taken immediately to prevent adverse effects either on the

facility itself, or on the local area.



Table 14.6: Socio-economic impact assessment of Footprint F (Pre Construction/Construction)


Severity/

Intensity

scale

Significance

Post

mitigation

significance

Relocation of

households and / or

population segments

Negative Individual

Permanent

Definite

Low

Moderate - Low -

Arrival of construction

workers

Negative Local

Short-term

Probable

Low

Moderate - Low – to

neutral

Influx of job seekers Negative Local

Short-term

Probable

Low


neutral

Outflow of labourers Positive Local

Medium to

long-term

Probable

Low

Moderate + Moderate +

economic

impact

Compensation for the

site

Positive Local

Short to

medium-term

Definite

Moderate

Low + Low +

Direct formal

employment

opportunities to local

individuals

Positive Local

Short-term

Probable

Low

Low + Moderate +

Indirect employment


individuals

Positive Local

Short-term

Probable

Low

Low + Moderate +

Sense of place

Negative Local

Medium-term

Probable

Moderate


neutral



Integration with local

community

Negative National

Permanent

Probable

Very High

Very High - High -

Physical splintering Negative Local

Short-term

Probable

Low

Low - No effect

Safety and security Negative Local

Short-term

Probable

Moderate

Moderate - Low +

Noise pollution Negative Local

Short-term

Probable

Moderate

Moderate - Low -

Attitude formation

against the project

(risk for social

mobilization)

Negative Local

Short-term

Probable

Moderate

Moderate - Low -

Additional demand on

municipal services

Negative Local

Short-term

Probable

Moderate

Moderate - Low – to /

Access Roads Negative Local

Short-term

Probable

Moderate

Moderate - Moderate +

Pollution and fire risk Negative Local

Short-term

Probable

Moderate

Moderate - Low -

Sanitation Negative Local

Short-term

Probable

Low

Moderate - Low -



Table 14.7: Socio-economic impact assessment of Footprint F (Operational)


Severity /

Intensity

scale

Significance

Post

mitigation

significance

Arrival of operational

workers

Negative Local

Long-term

Probable

Low

Low - No effect

Direct formal

employment


individuals

Positive Local

Long-term

Probable

Moderate

beneficial

Moderate + Moderate +

The implementation of a

Disaster Management

Plan

Positive Local

Long-term

Probable

Moderate

beneficial

Moderate + High +

Safety risk Negative Local

Long-term

Probable

High

High - Moderate -

Spatial development Negative Local

Long-term

Probable

Moderate


neutral

Waste Management

Negative Local

Long-term

Probable

Very High

Very High - Low -



Table 14.8: Socio-economic impact assessment of Footprint F (Decommissioning)

Potential

Impact Status Extent Duration Probability

Severity /

Intensity

scale

Significance

Post

mitigation

significance

Loss of

employment

opportunities

Negative Local

Short-term

Probable

Low

Low - Low -

Direct formal

employment

opportunities to

local individuals

Positive Local

Long-term

Probable

Moderate

Moderate Moderate +

Leachate

Management

Negative Local

Long-term

Probable

Very High

Very High - Low -



Ch 14 – Social Impact Assessment June 2010 252

14.11. Conclusion and Recommendations

Based on the findings of this report, it can be concluded that the social

environment in general poses no fatal f laws to the development of the proposed

regional general and hazardous waste processing facility. However, this is under

the condition that the identified mitigation measures as recommended for

inclusion in the EMP are implemented and adhered to, particularly where

construction a ctivities either take place or pass t hrough in close proximity to


of these households in terms of noise, dust, safety and security. From a social

perspective, it is recommended that the following mitigation measures be

included in the EMP.

14.11.1. Demographic Change Processes

• Relocation of Households

* Residents should be assisted with the relocation process.

* A formal grievance p rocedure should be implemented and communicated

to these residents to ensure a fair and transparent process.

• Arrival of Construction Workers

* Raise awareness amongst construction workers about local traditions and

practices.

* Depending on the size and origin of construction workers, inform local

businesses to the fact that construction workers will move into the area to

enable local businesses to plan for the extra demand.

* Again, depending on the origin of construction workers, ensure that the

local community communicate their expectations of construction workers’

behaviour with them.

• Influx of Job Seekers

* Ensure that employment procedures / policy are communicated to local

stakeholders, e specially w ard r epresentative org anisations a nd w ard

councillors.

* Have clear rules and regulations for access to the camp / site office to

control loitering. Consult with the local SAPS to establish standard

operating procedures for the control and/or removal of loiterers at the

construction site.

* Construction w orkers s hould b e c learly identifiable b y w earing p roper

construction uniforms displaying the logo of the c onstruction company.

Construction workers could also be issued with identification tags.




• Outflow of Labourers

* Develop s kills tr ansfer p lans (e .g. p ortable s kills tr aining) that w ould

enable a worker to move from one project to another project within the

same area.

* Payment should comply with applicable Labour Law legislation in terms of

minimum wages.

* Where l ocal labourers a re employed on a m ore p ermanent b asis,

cognisance should be taken of the Labour Law in terms of registering the

worker with the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF), Pay as you earn

(PAYE), workman’s compensation and all other official bodies as required

by law. This would enable the worker to claim UIF as a means of

continuous f inancial support when t he worker’s p osition on t he

construction team has e ither become redundant or on ce the construction

phase comes to an end.

• Arrival of Operational Workers

* Depending on t he o rigin of op erational w orkers, ensure t hat t he l ocal

community communicate their expectations of operational workers’


14.11.2. Economic Change Processes

• Compensation for Site

* The land valuator should be experienced in valuating the land in question.

* Both parties should have the option to have contracts reviewed by an

independent body.

• Direct Formal Employment Opportunities to Local Individuals

* Unskilled j ob o pportunities s hould b e a fforded t o l ocal c ommunity

members. Local trade unions could assist with the recruitment process to

counteract the potential for social mobilisation.

* Equal opportunities for employment should be created to ensure that the

local female population a lso have access to these opportunities. Females

should be encouraged to apply for positions.

* Individuals with the potential to develop their skills should be afforded

training opportunities.

* Mechanisms should be developed to provide alternative solutions for

creating job security upon completion of the project. This could include

formal and/or informal training on how to look for alternative employment,




information on career progression, etc. to ensure that people are equipped

to seek other jobs with the skills that they have gained.


minimum wages.



worker with the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF), Pay as You Earn

(PAYE), workman’s compensation and all other of ficial bodies as required


continuous f inancial support when t he worker’s p osition o n t he



• Indirect Formal and/or Informal Employment Opportunities to Local

Individuals

* Develop a procurement policy that is easy to understand and ensure that

local s ubcontractors a lso c omply w ith th e p rocurement p olicy a nd any

other applicable policies.

* Ensure that local subcontractors receive the necessary support in terms of

resources.

* Agree on specific performance criteria prior to appointment.

* Identify t he s egment t hat m ight benefit f rom i nformal i ndirect

opportunities, and assist them with skills development and subsidise

initiatives that are sustainable.

* Encourage construction workers to use local services.

• Loss of Employment Opportunities

* Negotiate and take measures to avoid large-scale job losses.

* Anticipate the possibility of job losses and implement contingency plans.

* Give t imeous warning to a ffected i ndividuals to improve their chances o f

finding alternative employment.

* Discuss industry trends and challenges on an ongoing basis.

14.11.3. Institutional and Empowerment Change Processes

• Attitude Formation against the Project

* Transparent information should be supplied to the community from the

outset of the project.

* The local community should play an active participatory role in the

planning process, especially landowners of neighbouring properties. This

could be achieved by means of establishing a community forum that meet




quarterly or once a month to discuss issues and progress surrounding the

project.

* Employment opportunities should first be offered to the local community if

the skills are available within the community.

* CDC/NMBM should deliver on their undertakings with the community in

terms of employment creation, etc. (tangible benefits to the community).

* The undertakings i n the EMP should a lso be implemented e ffectively and

with due diligence.

• Additional Demand on Municipal Services

* Construction workers should be made aware of the limited capacity of the

municipal services network.

* Negotiations w ith t he N MBM m ust b e conducted a nd a “demand-side

management” should be implemented.


* Integrate risk management programmes with the IDP.

* Establish d isaster p revention p rogrammes that f ocus on th e m ost

vulnerable c ommunities – and, a t th e s ame ti me, s upport s ustainable

livelihoods.

* Establish and maintain fire protection on the urban fringe.

* Establish a culture of scientific risk analysis by investigating possible r isk

scenarios and developing standard operating procedures for such

scenarios.

* Establish and maintain multi-disciplinary co-operation and cooperative

partnerships.

* Establish pro-active media liaison.

* Educate and inform surrounding communities and/or households on the

standard o perating p rocedures t o f ollow d uring a ccidents. E nsure t hat

these communities and/or households know who to contact in case of an

emergency a nd a re a ble t o i mplement a s tep-by-step d isaster

management procedure.

* The way in which the disaster management plan is communicated to the

surrounding c ommunities a nd/or h ouseholds s hould b e j argon-free a nd

outline an easy to follow step-by-step procedure. Cognisance should be

taken of the fact that some members of the s urrounding communities

and/or households are i lliterate – make use of alternative communication

methods (e.g. picture posters) to educate and inform these individuals.




14.11.4. Socio-Cultural Change Processes

• Sense of Place

* Sufficient and transparent information should be supplied to local residents

within the area to enhance their sense of safety and thereby reducing the

negative impact on sense of place.

* An information session with the construction workers and representatives

from t he l ocal a reas ( farmers, M otherwell/Uitenhage re sidents

associations) s hould b e h eld p rior to th e s tart o f c onstruction. L ocal

traditions, m itigation m easures, a nd expectations sh ould b e d iscussed.

The ECO will be responsible for organising this meeting. If need be, these

meetings should be held throughout the construction period.


with due diligence. The ECO should ensure that social mitigation measures

are implemented, a nd g ive monthly feedback to the representative

residents associations.

* Establish a formal grievances procedure:

o Start addressing these grievances within 24 hours.

o Keep record of complaints and how they were dealt with.

o Keep record of feedback to the complainant.

o Minimise complaints received / litigation.

o No conflict between the project team and construction workers and the

local inhabitants.

• Physical Splintering

* Provide a s afe p assage w ay f or c ommunity m embers to m inimise t he

impact on movement patterns.

* Fence off the construction site to prohibited unauthorised access by

community members, thereby placing themselves in potential unnecessary

danger.

• Safety and Security

* Construction workers should be clearly identifiable. Overalls should have

the logo of the construction company on it and/or construction workers

should wear identification cards.

* The construction site should be fenced and access should be controlled by

means of a security access point.

* Loitering of outsiders at the either the construction site or at the

construction village should not be allowed. Loiterers at the site should be

removed in cooperation with the local South African Police Service (SAPS).




• Noise Pollution

* Construction a ctivities sh ould b e r estricted t o d aytime h ours b etween

06:00 and 18:00.

* Adjacent property owners should b e consulted and notified o f a ny

construction activities that could lead to excessive noise levels.

* Adjacent p roperty owners s hould a lso b e c onsulted if a ny n ight t ime

construction activities were to take place.

• Safety Risk

* Educate l ocal co mmunities o n t he safety r isks o f t he h azardous waste

spillage a nd h ow t o min imise t he risk. This should be in cluded in the

emergency a nd p revention p lans th at s hould be c ommunicated to the

community and can be done by distributing pamphlets, having open days

for the public, etc.

* An emergency evacuation plan should be drafted together with the NMBM.

* Trucks should be clearly marked as carrying hazardous waste. Part of this

marking should include where the waste originated f rom together w ith a

contact number that community members can contact in the case of an

emergency.

14.11.5. Geographical Change Processes

• Access Roads

* Road r ehabilitation s hould ta ke p lace d uring a nd o nce c onstruction i s

completed.

* Construction traffic should only make use of an approved route.

* The number of trucks that pass through communities should be kept to a

minimum and should be restricted to certain times of the day, i .e. avoid

peak hours when community members are on their way to or f rom school

and work.

* Traffic s igns s hould w arn c onstruction v ehicles o f t he p resence of

pedestrians a nd s chool c hildren a long th e r oad. L ikewise, tr affic s igns

should warn community road users of the presence of construction

vehicles.

* General road rules should be enforced.

• Spatial Development

* The location of the site should be well known to industries and/or

development a gencies i n th e a rea to a llow th em t o p lan a round th e

presence of the site.




14.11.6. Biophysical Change Processes

• Pollution and Fire Risk

* Refuse on site should be discarded in sealed bins and/or covered skips.

Refuse should be removed from the site on regular intervals (at least once

a week) and disposed of at an approved waste disposal site.

* Contractors are liable for the costs involved with connecting to the

electricity network and the water services network.

* Construction workers should only be allowed to make fire in designated

areas. C onstruction w orkers w ho d o n ot k eep w ithin d esignated a reas

should be fined.

• Sanitation

* Sufficient portable chemical toilets on site.

* If contractors choose to make use of a construction village, they should

ensure a dequate s anitation s ervices (e .g. s howers) a t th e c onstruction

village with effective drainage facilities to ensure that used water is carried

away from the site.


* Monitoring and evaluation of the waste management at the site.

* Following the operational plan for the facility.

* Consider the u se information s essions to i nform communities of waste

management protocols.


* Monitoring and evaluation of the leachate management at the site.

* Consider the use i nformation sessions to i nform communities of l eachate




Ch 15 – Preliminary Design June 2010 259

15. PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN

This se ction is a s ynopsis of t he re quired Design, Permit Application, Waste

Management Philosophy and Operating Manual reports produced in fulfilment o f

the PAR Minimum Requirements for Waste Disposal by Landfill (DWEA, Second

Edition, 1998) for landfill permitting. These reports have been compiled by Riva

Nortje and Danie Brink of Jones and Wagener Consulting Civil Engineers as stand

alone documents. Where necessary please refer to the full suite of reports.

15.1. Introduction

In terms of the Minimum Requirements (Second Edition, 1998), an estimate of

present w aste g eneration v olumes i s necessary t o f orecast f uture w aste

generation volumes, and hence landfill airspace needs and utilization for a given

waste disposal facility. The second reason for qualifying and quantifying the waste

disposal need i s to correctly cl assify the waste d isposal s ite in terms of DWEA’s

Minimum Requirements. This is necessary to determine the technical and

operational s tandards w ith w hich th e landfill h as t o c omply. DWEA’s l andfill

classification system defines the disposal need according to the:

• waste type, i.e., either general or hazardous;

• size of the waste stream or landfill operation; and

• potential for significant leachate generation and the need for leachate

management.

The following have been developed for the submission of a permit application for

a g eneral a nd h azardous w aste m anagement f acility t o s erve t he i ndustries

currently or to be based in the Coega IDZ, as well as industries of the NMBMM:

• An Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIR), (Bohlweki-SSI)

• Geohydrological Investigation and Report, (Dr R Meyer)

• Geotechnical Investigation and Report, (Jones &Wagener)

• Landfill Design, (Jones & Wagener)

• Site Development Plan, (Jones & Wagener, included in landfill design)

• Operating Plan, including a landfill and water quality monitoring plan, (Jones

& Wagener)

• Closure, Rehabilitation and End-use Plans, (Jones & Wagener, included in

landfill design)

15.2. Terms of Reference and Deliverables

The purpose of the Design Report is to document the technical design for the

Coega regional h azardous w aste m anagement f acility, f or r eview b y t he

interested and affected parties, and subsequently for approval by the authorities.




This report a lso serves as a reference for the environmental impact assessment

and other technical documents in the permit application report. Jones & Wagener

was appointed by the CDC to formulate the design and technical documentation

required for the submission of a permit application for a hazardous waste disposal

facility to serve the Coega industries as well as industries of the Nelson Mandela

Bay area.

The scope of works requirements for the landfill design was to produce a technical

design f or t he G HWMF to a s tandard th at w ould b e s ufficient to obtain th e

required design approval from DWEA and DWEA for permitting purposes. The

proposal included the following deliverables:

• Layout drawings for all site infrastructure (Figure 15.1);

• Preliminary details of site infrastructure, such as buildings, roads, fencing and

storm water management measures (Figure 15.1 and 15.2);

• Details of all critical items such as lining systems of the landfill, leachate

dams, contaminated storm water dams and capping designs (Figure 15.3 and

15.4);

• Preliminary d etails of gas e xtraction a nd g as u tilization s ystems (Figure

15.5);

• Landfill geometry and closure design (Figure 15.6);

• Preliminary process description of possible leachate treatment facility; and

• A Design Report.

The Operating Manual for the facility, for which the preliminary design is

presented in the J ones & Wagener Design Report number JW80/08/B494. An

Operating Plan is site-specific and describes the way in which the landfill should

be operated. This plan is required in terms of Section 10.2.3 of the Minimum

Requirements for Waste Disposal by Landfill, and has been developed in

accordance with these requirements. The scope of the Operating Manual includes

information on the landfill, legal requirements, management system

requirements, health and safety, resource requirements, site development, site

security, a w aste a cceptance p rocedure, site op erational p rocedures, g eneral

environmental considerations, site buffer zone management, site maintenance,

monitoring, a uditing, p ublic i nvolvement re quirements, record-keeping a nd

reporting, as well as rehabilitation and closure requirements.

The scope of this Operating Manual excludes gas extraction and gas utilization

systems or the possible leachate treatment plant, as these will be developed

specifically fo r those systems, once the systems have been designed. P rinciples

relating to gas and leachate management are, however, included. It is noted that

the Operating Manual should be a living document, and should be updated as

additional relevant information b ecomes available. S uch in formation w ould be

forthcoming from, amongst other sources, the public scoping process, the




environmental impact assessment process, the detailed design, updated waste

stream estimates, detailed monitoring plans, approvals from government, and

new or amended legislation or guidelines relevant to the site.

It is clear that the type of waste management facility that is required will be

influenced by the nature of the waste and the quantities that will need disposal.

Waste surveys were conducted by Bohlweki-SSI Environmental as part of the

Inception Report (Bohlweki-SSI Environmental, 2000) and in a report for the

Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality (Bohlweki-SSI Environmental, 2002). A

review of these initial surveys was done by Environmental and Chemical

Consultants (ECC) in 2003, to take into account changed circumstances. In their

review, the types and quantities of wastes and the future projections were re-

evaluated taking the following into account:

• Future legislative developments;

• The impact of waste minimisation implemented at existing industries;

• The predicted expansion of industrial activities in the NMBMM;

• The developments associated with the introduction of primary industries in

the IDZ; and

• Secondary and smaller i ndustries which are l ikely to develop to support the

primary industries, as well as the increased population.

This information was incorporated into a Waste Management Philosophy for the

proposed regional general and hazardous waste management facility in the

Eastern Cape b y J ones & W agener i n 2 004, c ulminating in R eport N o:

JW70/04/8933 Revision 2, dated September 2004. The information was used for

sizing purposes for conceptual designs. Given changes in the expected

developments at the Coega IDZ between 2004 and 2008, however, the report

required updating for use in the design for the permitting of the preferred site

and this has been completed (refer to Report No: JW93/08/B4).

15.3. Site Description

The farm Grassridge 190 RE located approximately 35 km north of Port Elizabeth

and 15 km southwest of Addo, in the Eastern Cape. The farm is located within the

NMBMM area of jurisdiction. Footprint F is situated in a broad valley with rolling

topographic features and flanked on the sides by hills that reach an elevation of

approximately 300 mamsl. T he preferred footprint is within the elevation range

of 200 to 250 mamsl w ithin a wide gu lley h ead which dr ains in a s outherly

direction towards a tributary of the Coega River. No perennial rivers or streams

drain the area of investigation.



Figure 15.1: Preliminary general layout of the GHWMF




15.4. Geotechnical and Geohydrological Aspects

A well developed shallow pedogenic calcrete layer dominates the northern section

and western side of the site. The near surface material that occurs in the basin of

this footprint is considered to be competent as far as strength and compressibility

are concerned. The depth of the calcrete layer increases to the south and east.

However, as the depth increases, the development of the calcrete d ecreases,

allowing easier excavation. In the north-western section of the site, excavation

reached a depth of 200mm until calcrete was encountered. Excavation depth

gradually increased to 2.0m to the south and east and was characterised by

calcretised silty fine sand.

To the south-eastern corner o f the s ite refusal was encountered on the residual

siltstone at a depth of 3m. Permeability of the in situ soil profile in the area

covered by the alluvial sand is relatively high with low clay content. This may

pose a problem for the containment of leachate and contaminated stormwater on

the waste site if a spillage occurs or if a liner failure occurs. However, the depth

of the alluvial sand is generally less than 3m and it will be feasible to construct

drains to intercept seepage that may occur within the sand horizon.

The Minimum Requirements specify a liner design and layer requirements for the

range of si te cl assifications, i ncluding H :H landfills. The p ermeability of t he

siltstone material was tested a nd found t o suitable f or u se i n a liner b arrier

system on a hazardous landfill site. Given that the site is located at the head of

the valley, and the depth of the siltstone is likely to increase beyond the position

of the dams, there is sufficient material on site for lining, starter berms and final

capping of the landfill. The calcretised silty fine sand will be adequate material for

general earthworks. Sufficient calcrete suitable for the construction of access

roads is available on site. In order to conserve airspace for the disposal of waste,

it is proposed that inert wastes will be used for daily cover rather than soil.

Based on the geological and geohydrological conditions of the area investigated,

the Draft Geological and Geohydrological Report by R. Meyer dated June 2008

(refer to Chapter 6) the identified site is regarded as suitable for the development

of a H:H class waste disposal site for the following reasons:




below surface.

• Borehole yields are generally very l ow a s illustrated by the four r ecently



result v ery l ittle u se i s b eing m ade of g roundwater f or d omestic, s tock




watering or i rrigation. The poor water quality is a direct result of the marine



• The u nderlying f ormations, t he S undays R iver and Ki rkwood f ormations,

comprise o f a v ery thick su ccession ( estimated t o b e > 300 m) o f

predominantly s iltstone a nd m udstone, w ith minor interlayered s andstone

layers. T hese f ormations h ave a very l ow h ydraulic c onductivity a nd w ill


• The d eep a rtesian a quifer a ssociated w ith t he T able M ountain Gr oup


of U itenhage Group sediments. T hat the l atter sediments form an e ffective

barrier to groundwater flow is illustrated by the artesian nature of the deeper

aquifer.



• The WASP analysis, which takes into consideration a number of geological,

geohydrological, water use and design criteria, also indicated that the site can

be classified as “suitable”


as “fatal f laws” according to the definitions described in the DWEA guideline

documents.

Based on the above factors and provided that the site will be designed,

constructed a nd o perated a ccording to th e M inimum Re quirements, it is

concluded that the identified site is suitable from a geotechnical and

geohydrological perspective for the development of a new waste management

facility.

15.5. Site Classification

In terms of the Minimum Requirements, landfills are classified in terms of the

type of incoming waste, the size of the operation, and the climatic water balance

or site specific water balance, depending on the case. However, while the CDC is

actively marketing the IDZ for the development of certain industry sectors, i t i s

not currently possible to predict exactly which businesses will establish in the IDZ

and what their waste streams will be. Given this uncertainty, the GHWMF has

been classified as an H:H site. This classification is based on the classification of

the Aloes hazardous waste disposal facility, from which the waste stream could be

diverted in future, as well as on the predicted waste streams from industries that

could be established in the Coega IDZ.

Although not required for the classification of a hazardous waste disposal site, a

climatic w ater b alance h as b een d etermined, u sing information f rom t he

Department of W ater Affairs & F orestry’s w eather s tation n umber N 4E001 a t




Addo. Rainfall and evaporation data was obtained for January 1960 to May 2008.

The wettest s ixth months of the year for Addo are November to May. Using the

methodology given in the Minimum Requirements, none of the ten wettest years

of the 47 year record result in a positive water balance for the study area. The

site is therefore situated in a climatic water balance deficit (B-

) area.

15.6. Design Philosophy

The d esign is a imed a t p roviding s ufficient a irspace f or the d isposal o f th e

predicted incoming waste streams for the Coega regional hazardous waste

disposal facility for a 20 year period. The estimated size of the waste body is

5,000,000m3

, divided into four phases, each with an operational life of five years.

The overall design philosophy i s t o meet t he Minimum R equirements

specifications. As su ch, t he d esign process ascribes to th e philosophy o f

responsible containment.

In order to separate the waste body from underlying ground waters, a composite

liner i s to b e i nstalled. T he l iner h as b een d esigned to c ontain a l eakage

detection l ayer, s o t hat leakage w hich m ay occur t hrough t he p rimary l ining

system can be intercepted. Drainage systems are to be installed to intercept and

drain contaminated water and leachate and channel them separately towards the

leachate and stormwater dams, which are to be constructed. Clean, upslope

runoff is to be diverted around the site by trapezoidal drains. D rainage systems

have b een d esigned to b e f ree-draining. It is impractical to c ontain the

contaminated stormwater and leachate that could be generated from the site over

a 20 year s ite l ife. T he design has therefore included a leachate dam based on

the first three years’ expected waste stream, taking average rainfall and

evaporation into account. Should the w aste stream differ, or above average

rainfall occur, the dams could fill up in a shorter time. The intention is t hat

monitoring of leachate quality and quantity will take place during the first year of

operation, treatability tests, design and pilot treatment studies will take place in

the s econd y ear, a nd th e l eachate tr eatment p lant w ill b e c onstructed a nd

commissioned by the middle of the third year of operation. It w ould be an

advantage to design a modular system that can easily be expanded as the need

arises, given current uncertainties in the expected waste stream composition.

The leachate dam would then continue to provide sufficient buffer capacity to

accommodate seasonal peaks in order to match the rate of treatment. Future

leachate dams could be constructed on site, but it would be preferable to refrain

from storing significant volumes of leachate on site.

The contaminated storm water dam has a lso been s ized on average rainfall and

evaporation, with an expected take out of 2 300m3 per month, for dust

suppression, to maintain the levels as low as possible in the dam. The

contaminated dam sizing also includes for the capping of each phase within five




years o f c ompletion o f th at p hase. I f th is i s n ot c arried o ut, then a dditional

stormwater storage, and/or additional take outs, will be required. Should the

waste stream differ, or above average rainfall occur, the dam could fill up in a

shorter time.

Landfill gas (LFG) can be managed by passive or active venting from a l andfill,

depending on the quantities generated. The design has included for the

installation of horizontal LFG collection wells, to be installed during the operation

at a pproximately 1 0m v ertical a nd 30 m h orizontal s pacing. These w ells a re

relatively easy to install, and are to be i nstalled by the operator on an ongoing

basis. Gas collection in the wells is to be monitored, and if necessary and/or

financially viable, the installation of an active extraction system and gas flare or

utilisation system is to be considered. Depending on the timing of the installation

and the future of carbon credits trading, selling of carbon credits for the LFG

burnt or used could be a viable option.

15.6.1. Constraints and Factors Affecting Design

There are a number of constraints and factors that affect the design.

Powerlines

The eastern side of the site is restricted by the presence of power lines. The

footprint of the facility was positioned at least 50 m from the power lines, while

the storm water and leachate dams were positioned at least 25 m from the power

lines, t o a llow f or s ervitudes. F encing of t he s ite i nfrastructure, the l andfill

footprint and the dams has been allowed for separately, so as not to interfere

with the powerline servitudes.

Soil availability

The underlying geology of the site and the resulting excavatability negated the

use of deep-set basins in the design. The excavation and shaping of the first

phase’s basin was kept to a shallow depth, in order to minimise the quantity of

hard rock excavation. T he basins of the dams were also designed to be shallow

for the same reason. The site is located at the head of the valley, and the depth

of the siltstone is likely to increase beyond the position of the dams. There is

therefore sufficient material for lining, starter berms and final capping, that could

be excavated beyond the dams. Given the depth of underlying soils, however,

limited material is available for daily cover. In order to conserve airspace for the

disposal of waste, it is proposed that inert wastes will be used for daily cover

rather than soil. This is currently the case at several hazardous waste disposal

sites operating in South Africa.




Site geometry

The site is located in a steep sloped valley. The sides of the valley impacted the

shape o f the waste body as the geometry takes a chieving e fficient storm water

management i nto account. As the c layey material is found in the south eastern

corner of the site, the storm water and leachate dams are placed approximately

350m downstream of the waste body. T he dams were designed to be mostly in

cut to provide clay lining for both of the dams and the first phase of the facility.

Possible waste stream variations

While t he C DC i s a ctively m arketing t he IDZ f or t he d evelopment of c ertain

industry sectors, it is not currently possible to predict exactly which businesses

will establish in the IDZ, what their waste streams will be and when businesses

will s tart up. W hile the i ncoming wastes have been estimated as accurately as

possible at this stage, there may be significant variations in the waste streams in

future. Some aspects of the design may therefore require revision at the detailed

engineering stage.

15.6.2. Access and Infrastructure

Existing access and infrastructure

The main access route from Port Elizabeth is from the R335/P1954 towards Addo;

while from Uitenhage, the main access is from the R75/MR00470/ P1958 towards

Kirkwood, taking the gravel road turnoff towards Addo (refer to Chapter 13).

Aside from the above mentioned powerlines there is little other infrastructure on

the site currently, except for a farm homestead, a small farm reservoir and some

fencing.

Proposed access and infrastructure

A tr ansport s tudy w as u ndertaken b y S tewart S cott International (SSI), a nd

included in the Draft Environmental Impact Assessment Report for the Proposed

Regional General and Hazardous Waste Management Facility in the Eastern Cape,

for the three top-ranking candidate sites for the Coega regional hazardous waste

disposal facility. The study estimated the costs for the transportation of waste to

the proposed regional general and hazardous waste disposal facility by road and

by rail. Footprint F is given as the second most economical option, with re-

surfacing and maintenance estimated at R 16,0 million and R 24,2 million for

gravel and tar respectively. The study states that the Province is committed to


once upgraded the design standard of Addo Road will be able to accommodate




the heavy vehicle traffic that will be generated by the waste facility. It was

therefore concluded that transportation of waste by road is the better option.

As per the findings of air quality impact assessment report was prepared for the

site by Airshed Planning Professionals (refer to Chapter 10) it has been

determined that the impacts associated with waste haulage via the R335/P1954

(Scenario 1) will be the least significant and will result in the lowest dustfall levels

at th e m ajority o f the s ensitive r eceptors c onsidered. On si te a ccess roads

include a r ing road around t he landfill, a ring road a round the leachate a nd

stormwater dams, and a road linking the landfill to the storm water and leachate

dams. Access to the site monitoring boreholes must also be ensured, however,

this can be addressed in the detailed design once the extent of the water quality

monitoring network is established.

The site infrastructure, including weighbridges, a weighbridge office, s ite offices,

a laboratory, stores, a plant shed and workshop and a washday, will be located

on the relatively flat area above and to the north-east of the landfill area (refer to

Figure 15.2 overleaf). The access road from the site infrastructure to the landfill is

approximately 0.5 km long and is at a fairly gentle gradient. The landfill operation

will be visible from the site infrastructure.

A 1.8m high security fence will be erected around the site infrastructure, the

landfill footprint, and the dams. The fence lines do not cross the Eskom powerline

servitude, s o t hat s eparate f encing of t he i nfrastructure from t he l andfill is

required. This could be revisited in the detailed design phase, by making an

application to Eskom for placing certain infrastructure within the powerline

servitude. Lockable 1.8m h igh security gates w ill be p laced at the entrance and

exit of the site infrastructure, at the entrance to the landfill, at the access road to

the dams, and at the entrance to the dams.



Figure 15.2: Preliminary infrastructure layout of the GHWMF




15.6.3. Landfill Design

Site development

The GHWMF will be developed in four phases to provide a 20 year site life, given

current w aste s tream p redictions. E ach p hase w ill p rovide a pproximately f ive

years of site life. Table 15.1 below indicates the airspace provided by each phase:

Table 15.1: Airspace provided by phases

Phase Airspace provided [m3

Phase 1

]

1’230’000 m

Phase 2

3

1’290’000 m

Phase 3

3

1’260’000 m

Phase 4

3

1’220’000 m

Total

3

5’000’000 m

3

Following the initial development of Phase 1 and its associated infrastructure, the

development o f th ree subsequent p hases w ith a dditional dr ainage s ystems i s

planned; the development of a leachate treatment plant is likely; while the need

for and financial viability of a landfill gas extraction and utilisation or destruction

facility could be assessed.

Given that there are currently unknowns regarding the industries that will

establish in the IDZ as well as start up times, actual waste streams may vary

considerably from current predictions. It is therefore necessary that regular data,

calculation and planning updates be undertaken for further site development.

Site geometry – Phase 1

The site is located in a valley with steep slopes. The base of the valley heads in a

south eastern d irection at an average gradient of 1:35. T he south facing s lope

has a n a verage g radient o f 1 :30 a nd th e e ast f acing s lope h as a n a verage

gradient of 1:20. Phase 1 has been shaped to allow upslope runoff to be diverted

around the phase, and to appear as natural as possible.

Basin design – Phase 1

The basin of Phase 1 is formed by two sloping planes that mimic the natural

topography. The depth of the phase is restrained by the shallow calcrete profile

and the slopes of the basin. The depth of the basin at excavation level varies from

2.0m below ground level at its lowest excavation level to 0.17m above ground at

its h ighest section o f fill required to keep the constant s lope. The s lope of the

sidewalls of the basin is 1:3.




The south facing slope has a gradient of 1:40 and the east facing slope a gradient

of 1:35. The different slopes coincide at the middle of the basin, in which a

leachate collection trench is to be constructed that bisects the basin. The trench is

designed to be 1m below the western edge while the depth of the eastern edge

varies from 2.14m to 0.7m. The slope of the trench side walls is 1:2.

Liner design

The m aterial p roperties re quired f or a c lay l iner, i n t erms of t he M inimum

Requirements, are as follows:

• Plasticity Index (PI) greater than 10%.

• No particles larger than 25mm.

• Gravel size fraction must not exceed 10%.

• Saturated permeability must be less than 1 x 10-7

cm/sec for H:H landfills.

A constant head triaxial permeability test was carried out on a sample from depth

2.2m in a test pit on site, which is representative of the siltstone material on site.

The permeability stabilised at 1.2 x 10-9

cm/s following close to 26 days of testing,

which is almost two orders of magnitude lower than required, necessary to allow

for laboratory testing/ field performance discrepancies.

From the geotechnical testing carried out, the plasticity index of the sample was

27%, the maximum particle size was less than 4.75mm, and the gravel fraction

was less than 1%. The material is therefore suitable for lining material. For

detailed test results, the reader is referred to Jones & Wagener Report number

JW15/08/B494, dated February 2008.

The landfill liner h as been designed to meet the Minimum Requirements

specifications, incorporating a d ouble lined system of w hich t he p rimary liner

comprises a c omposite g eosynthetic a nd c lay l iner, a nd t he s econdary l iner

comprises a conventional clay liner. A detail of the landfill liner is included on

Drawing B494-00-007 of the Design Report. Starting from the waste body, the

liner system is formed from the following in descending order:

• Waste body;

• Separation geotextile;

• 300mm layer of 53mm stone;

• Protection geotextile (minimum weight 1,5kg/m2);

• 2mm high density polyethylene (HDPE) geomembrane liner;

• 4 x 150mm thick layers of selected clay compacted to minimum 98% MOD

AAHSTO at optimum moisture content (omc) to omc + 2%;


• 150 mm layer of coarse sand (with particles less than 3mm in diameter);




• 2 x 150mm thick layers of selected clay compacted to minimum 98% MOD

AAHSTO at optimum moisture content (omc) to omc + 2%;and

• In situ ripped and re-compacted layer.

15.6.4. Drainage Systems

Site liquids balance

The liquid balance on a landfill site is dependent on incident precipitation,

evaporation, t ranspiration, t he m oisture c ontent of i ncoming w aste s treams,

liquid by-products f rom decomposition processes within the waste body, and on

any other liquids entering or leaving the site.

Typically, little vegetation is present on the waste body itself prior to capping,

liquid by-products from decomposition processes within the waste body are of low

volume, and additional sources o f water should not enter the waste body i f the

site is properly designed, constructed and operated, so that these factors are

ignored.

The liquid balance is usually used to estimate the size of the contaminated water

and leachate dams required, as well as required take out and treatment rates. A

conceptual site-specific liquids balance has been developed for the Coega regional

hazardous waste m anagement facility, u sing a verage r ainfall a nd e vaporation

data from the Aloes H:H landfill, on a monthly basis. This was used in the sizing

of the contaminated water dam, as well as in determining the average take out

rate required to keep volumes acceptable. The dam was also sized by estimating

the s torage r equired f or ru noff f rom t he 1 i n 1 00 y ear re currence 2 4 h our

duration storm event.

Upslope runoff drainage and management

Upslope runoff is diverted around the waste body by a system of storm water

diversion trenches. T he system consists of temporary measures and permanent

measures. The temporary trenches serve individual phases and are later covered

by subsequent phases. The permanent measures will service the entire waste

body. The progression of required stormwater drainage measures as the phases

are developed is shown on Drawing B494-00-008 of the Design Report. T

The drains were sized using the rational method. The mean annual precipitation

was estimated to be the same as at the Aloes Waste Facility at 560mm per

annum. T he uncontaminated s torm w ater d rains into the en vironment

downstream of the waste facility. A typical detail of the uncontaminated runoff

diversion drains is included on Drawing B494-00-007 of the Design Report.




15.6.5. Contaminated water drainage and management

Contaminated water drainage

The contaminated storm water drainage system also incorporates a similar trench

system t o t he u pslope m anagement s ystem. T he d rains a re s maller a s t he

catchment area consists of the waste body only. The progression of required

storm water drainage measures as the phases are developed is shown on

Drawing B494-00-008 of the Design Report. A typical detail of the contaminated

water drains i s i ncluded on D rawing B 494-00-007 of th e Design Re port. The

confluence of the system is in the south eastern corner of the site where the

diversion trenches meet in a drop inlet formed from manhole rings. The drop inlet

leads to a pipe that connects the drainage system to the contaminated storm

water dam south of the site (refer to Figure 15.3).

Storm water dam

The 1 in 100 year 24 hour duration storm event was used to size the storm water

dam, by calculating the storage required for rain falling on the area of various

phases. The most severe case was found to be rain falling on the site once the

fourth p hase was b eing c onstructed. H owever, i t w as assumed t hat p artial

capping w ould m itigate th e a mount o f storm water b eing c ontaminated.

Therefore, the dam was s ized for the next severe case of the storm falling over

the site during the construction of the third phase. The required storage volume

was 24 000 m3. The dam has been sized at approximately 32 000m3, to allow for

some c ontaminated w ater to b e h eld in s torage, a nd s till allow f or the

containment of the expected runoff from the 1 in 100 year 24 hour duration

storm event. The contaminated storm water dam has also been sized with an

expected take out of 2 300m3

per month, for dust suppression, to maintain the

levels as low as possible in the dam. The dam will therefore require active

management. A plan of the dam is shown on Drawing B494-00-010 and the

cross-sections shown on Drawing B494-00-011 of the Design Report. A detail of

the storm water dam liner is included on Drawing B494-00-007 of the Design

Report. The liner for the contaminated storm water dam incorporates a single

composite geosynthetic and clay l iner as described below starting at the surface

of the dam:

• 200 mm thick layer of <3 mm sand stabilised with 5% cement 1 32.5;

• Protection geotextile;

• 1.5 mm high density polyethylene (HDPE) geomembrane liner;

• 2 x 150 mm thick layers of selected clay compacted to minimum 98% MOD

AAHSTO at optimum moisture content (omc) to omc + 2%; and




Figure 15.3: Preliminary leachate and storm water dam layout for the GHWMF




It is noted that this liner does not strictly comply with the specifications given in

the Minimum Requirements for Waste Disposal by Landfill third edition draft, but

is based on the successful use of lesser l iners at several other hazardous waste

management facilities.

15.6.6. Leachate Drainage

The l eachate drainage system i s d ivided into the l eachate collection system and

the leakage detection system. The leachate collection system is located above

the primary liner and its functions are to drain leachate out of the landfill before it

penetrates the liner and prevent excessive volumes of leachate being stored in

the waste body. The leakage detection system is constructed between the

primary and secondary clay liners. The purpose of this system is to detect if

leachate has penetrated the primary lining system, to allow measurement of flow

in the leakage detection system, and to prevent a build up of hydrostatic head on

the secondary c lay liner. The leachate collection system will comprise a 300mm

thick 53mm stone layer, containing perforated pipes, on the landfill footprint.

Solid pipes will penetrate the side walls, and allow leachate to drain from the

landfill phases into leachate collection manholes and into a solid leachate collector

pipeline.

The leakage detection system will comprise a 150mm thick coarse sand layer,

including smaller perforated pipes. Again, solid pipes will penetrate the side walls,

and allow any leakage to drain from the landfill phases into leakage detection

manholes and into a solid leakage pipeline. Both systems will be extended as

future phases are developed (see proposed layout on Drawing B494-00-009 of

the Design Report). The confluence of the leachate collection and the leakage

detection systems is located in the south eastern corner of the site where the

pipes of each system meet in one large sump which will have one outlet pipe

leading to the leachate dam (refer to Figure 15.4).

Leachate Dam

Given uncertainties in the future waste streams from the Coega IDZ, the sizing of

the leachate dam was not based on the site liquids balance. Instead, this was

sized by assuming that a maximum co-disposal ratio o f 1 part l iquid to 6 parts

solid by mass was used, and that 20% of the liquids in the waste percolate out as

leachate, from experience on similar sites. This calculation was cross-checked by

assuming that 20% of expected liquid wastes and 10% of all expected sludges

from the Coega IDZ as well as 20% of the existing waste stream to Aloes would

percolate out as leachate. The latter figure was lower than the former, as the

currently predicted co-disposal ratio for the Coega regional and hazardous waste

disposal facility is less than 1 in 6.




The calculation resulted in a smaller s torage requirement than f or the storm

water dam, in the order of 24’000m3

. Further leachate storage dams are planned

for construction if needed after Phase 1; these are shown on the plans

downstream of the current dam.

A plan of the dam is shown on Drawing B494-00-010 and cross-sections shown

on Drawing B494-00-011 of the Design Report. The liner for the leachate storage

dam i s d esigned a ccording to M inimum Requirements, incorporating a double

composite geosynthetic and clay liner as specified for hazardous lagoons. A detail

of the leachate dam liner is included on Drawing B494-00-007 of the Design

Report. The liner system is described below starting at the surface of the dam:

• 200 mm thick layer of <3 mm sand stabilised with 5% cement 1 32.5;

• Protection geotextile (minimum weight 1,5 kg/m2);

• 2 mm high density polyethylene (HDPE) geomembrane liner;


AAHSTO at optimum moisture content (omc) to omc + 2%;


• 150 mm layer of coarse sand (with particles less than 3 mm in diameter) for

leakage detection system;

• Protection geotextile (minimum weight 1,5 kg/m2);

• 1.5 mm high density polyethylene (HDPE) geomembrane liner;


AAHSTO at optimum moisture content (omc) to omc + 2%; and


Leachate Treatment

It is impractical to contain the leachate that could be generated from the Site

over a 20 year site life. The design has therefore included a leachate dam based

on t he f irst t hree y ears’ e xpected w aste s tream, t aking a verage r ainfall a nd

evaporation into account. The intention is that monitoring of leachate quality and

quantity will take place during the first year of operation, treatability tests, design

and pilot t reatment studies will take p lace in the second year, and the leachate

treatment plant will be constructed and commissioned by the middle of the third

year of operation. It would be an advantage to design a modular system that can

easily be expanded as the need arises, given current uncertainties in the

expected waste s tream composition. T he l eachate dam would then continue to

provide sufficient buffer capacity to accommodate seasonal peaks in order to

match the rate of treatment.



Figure 15.4: Preliminary leachate collection and drainage plan for the GHWMF



Chapter 15 – Preliminary Design June 2010 278

Future leachate dams could be constructed on site, but it would be preferable to

refrain from storing significant volumes of leachate on site, as this would increase

environmental risk, contribute to site odour and have significant associated costs.

It i s a nticipated t hat the l eachate q uality w ill b e r easonably s imilar to th at

generated at Aloes, with a high Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) count of 40 000 to

50 000 mg/l. The TDS will predominantly be made up of Chloride and Sodium.

The F ishwater F lats Sewage Works w ill not accept such h ighly saline waste and

therefore direct discharge to sewer will not be an option. In addition, as no sewer

connection is a vailable c lose to th e pr oposed Re gional W MF it w ould m ean

transporting the leachate to the closest sewer connection which could be 20km

away. The recommended options for the GHWMF would be to treat the leachate

to a standard that will allow discharge directly into the environment or for re-use

on site for dust control, for irrigation of vegetated areas and for fire-water. The

quality of water to be discharged should comply with the quality objectives set by

DWEA for the catchment and should ensure that the downstream water remain fit

for the purposes it is used for. This aspect should be agreed with DWEA.

Likely steps in a treatment process could include the following (Ardeer, personal

communication with T. Hopkins of J&W, April 2004):

• Pre-treatment (pH adjustment and removal of suspended solids);

• Ultra filtration;

• High pressure reverse osmosis step; and

• Low pressure reverse osmosis step.

Should the leachate at the Regional WMF contain a higher organic content, an

additional step to address this component, e.g. biological treatment, would be

needed. The anticipated treatment technologies listed above are well established

technologies that are currently used for the treatment of waste water and which

will ensure that the required discharge standard is achieved. An accurate

prediction of leachate generation rates is not possible at this stage, as it will

depend on many factors, including the stage of landfill development, cell

geometry, co-disposal ratio, operational controls and waste characteristics.

Ideally, the cell should be operated for a period before determining the size and

design of the treatment facility required.

15.6.7. Landfill Gas Management Systems

LFG can be managed by passive or active venting f rom a landfill, depending on

the quantities generated. The design has included for the installation of

horizontal LFG collection wells, to be installed during the operation at

approximately 10m vertical and 30m horizontal spacing, see proposed layout and



Chapter 15 – Preliminary Design June 2010 279

typical horizontal well detail on Drawing B494-00-014 of the Design Report (refer

to Figure 15.5 overleaf). T hese wells are relatively uncomplicated to install, and

are to be installed by the operator on an ongoing basis. Gas collection in the wells

is to be monitored, and if necessary and/or f inancially viable, the installation of

an active extraction system and gas flare or utilisation system is to be

considered.

Given that a bed of waste of 10m thick is required prior to the installation of

these wells, it is likely to be in the region of 2 years before the wells can be

installed, and probably 4 years before suction can commence. If installed, the

gas management system will need to be carefully managed, as per the

instructions of the design engineers.



Figure 15.5: Conceptual gas extraction layout for the GHWMF




15.7. Closure and Rehabilitation

The Minimum Requirements defines that the objectives of landfill closure are:

• To ensure public acceptability of the implementation of the proposed End-use

Plan; and

• To rehabilitate the landfill so as to ensure that the site is environmentally and

publicly acceptable and suited to the implementation of the proposed end-

use.

Where i t i s i ntended to c lose a l andfill, th e P ermit H older m ust i nform th e

permitting authority of this intention at least one year prior to closure. This is

because certain procedures must be implemented and criteria met before closure.

It i s o bvious th at p rior to a s ite b eing c losed, a lternative a irspace m ust b e

provided for the waste streams. Extensions could be possible on the site, and

could be investigated at that time. The landfill must then be investigated before

rehabilitation a nd c losure can c ommence, s o a s t o i dentify any c losure

requirements that must be implemented. Based on the results of the

investigations, a closure or upgrade design must be drawn up and presented in a

Closure Report. Written acceptance of both the Closure Design and the Closure

Report must be obtained from the authority. In order to obtain this, an inspection

of the landfill by the Responsible Person and a representative of the authority will

be required.

Once t he Closure Design and the Closure Report have been accepted by the

authority and the I&APs, site rehabilitation may commence. Once the landfill has

been rehabilitated in accordance with the Closure Report, it is a Minimum

Requirement th at th e P ermit H older n otifies th e a uthority i n w riting o f th e

intended closure of the site, at least 60 days prior to the event. Should the

authority approve the condition of the landfill, the Permit Holder will be provided

with written permission to close the site. The s ite may then be c losed and the

end-use p lan i mplemented. Thereafter, t he s ite m ust b e m onitored on a n

ongoing b asis, f or w hich t he P ermit H older i s r esponsible. Provided th at th e

landfill has been well operated, rehabilitation and closure are relatively straight

forward, as no significant compaction and re-shaping exercises are required.

Monitoring of adherence with the final landform shape during the operation is

crucial in ensuring that major re-shaping is not required. Rehabilitation that may

be required includes:

• Repair of any erosion damage

• Compaction of low density areas

• Repairs to diversion drains

• Filling in of low areas that have resulted from differential settlement




• Filling in areas where the final landform has not been achieved, and cutting in

areas of overfill

• Liner repairs in storage dams, and so forth

However, the above items should be addressed on an ongoing basis as part of

site maintenance. Once the final landform has been achieved, it will be possible to

cap the landfill site.

15.7.1. Proposed final landform

The proposed final landform is shown on Drawing B494-00-013 of the Design

Report (refer to Figure 15.6 overleaf). After 20 years of operation the waste body

will be rehabilitated by shaping the final landform and placing a capping system

above the surface of the body. The landform will be shaped to have side slopes

with a gradient of 1:3 and the landfill plateau above the crest will have a slope of

1:20. The corners of the landform will be rounded to suit the natural surroundings

of the area.

15.7.2. Phased capping

Final capping is frequently delayed for the following reasons:

• To allow LFG generation and extraction to continue, which a low permeability

cap hinders; and

• To allow significant settlement to take place before capping, and thus avoid

the large stresses induced by ongoing differential settlement.

An alternative to capping at the end of the l ife of the landfill is phased capping.

This involves capping portions of the waste body that are at final height. The

main motivation for phased capping is given below:

• Capping the site will ensure no additional l iquids enter the waste body from

surface, which reduces the quantities of leachate generated.

• Seepage from the side slopes will be minimised.

• Partial rehabilitation will result in the removal of large areas from the

contaminated catchment resulting in less contaminated water requiring

management.

• It will help prevent oxygen entering the site once the gas wells are placed

under suction, improving yield and reducing the risk of a landfill fire.

• Vegetation of the side slopes will mitigate sedimentation of the storm water

infrastructure.



Figure 15.6: Conceptual final rehabilitation plan for the GHWMF




The advantages and disadvantages of applying final capping must therefore be

weighed to determine the optimal timing for final capping placement. Phased

rehabilitation and capping is recommended, so that capping of a phase should

take place within five years of a phase being complete. This will reduce

contaminated stormwater and leachate generation, spread rehabilitation and

closure costs during the life of the site, and allow for initial settlement to take

place before final capping is placed. It will also improve the site aesthetics if

suitably vegetated. It is noted that the design of the dams includes for final

capping placement on each phase within five years of completion.

15.7.3. Capping design

The material properties required for a clay cap, in terms of the Minimum

Requirements for Waste Disposal by Landfill, are as follows:

• Plasticity Index (PI) of between 5 and 15%.

• No particles larger than 25 mm.

• Saturated permeability must be less than 1.585 x 10-6

cm/sec.

The si ltstone m aterial t ested on s ite more t han m eets t he p ermeability

requirements, but the plasticity index is higher than allowable, at 27%. Other

material on site may be suitable, such as the calcrete material. While calcrete

has b een i ncluded i n the c apping d esign, i t i s r ecommended th at a dditional

material testing take place to source suitable capping material. The site is to be

capped in accordance to Minimum Requirements incorporating a shaping layer

followed by a gas drainage layer and composite geosynthetic and clay liner. A

detail of the proposed landfill capping is included on Drawing B494-00-014 in the

Design Report. Starting from the vegetation placed in the topsoil, the capping is

described below:

• Vegetation;

• Topsoil;

• 2 x 150 mm thick compacted calcrete layers;

• 1 mm linear low density polyethylene (LLDPE) geomembrane liner;

• 1 x 150 mm thick compacted calcrete layer;


• 19 mm stone gas drainage and capillary break layer;


• 1 x 150 mm thick compacted calcrete layer for foundation and shaping; and

• Waste body.




15.7.4. Storm water management post-closure

Once the site has been rehabilitated, closed and final capping constructed, storm

water runoff from the site will be uncontaminated and will be drained into the

environment off site. A s part of construction, drainage systems should allow for

the f low of c lean s tormwater runoff f rom c apped a reas off site. Accordingly,

stormwater drains, berms and downchutes would typically be constructed.

15.7.5. Maintenance and Monitoring

Once rehabilitated, closed and capped, ongoing monitoring and maintenance will

be required to ensure that the capping integrity is maintained required as

stipulated in the Operating Manual. D amage by erosion, d ifferential settlement,

and, on occasion, fauna such as moles, can occur.



Ch 16 – I&AP Issues and Concerns June 2010 286

16. SALIENT ISSUES AND CONCERNS RAISED BY I&AP’S AND

STAKEHOLDERS

This section highlights what are deemed by Bohlweki-SSI Environmental to be the

salient issues and concerns raised by I&AP’s and stakeholders throughout the EIA

process to date, as well as the comments received on the Draft EIR released for

public review during January and February 2009. The full Issues and Responses

Register is contained in Appendix D. The numbering reflected in each instance

corresponds with the relevant issue in the full Issues and Responses Register. The

issues, concerns and comments are italicized, with Bohlweki-SSI Environmental’s

response in normal font.

16.1. Issues related to roads and transportation of hazardous waste

2.1. A traffic impact assessment must be done for the entire route. Nadia

Wessels, Swartkops Trust

A transport study for the entire route has been conducted for t he p receding

phases of the study. It has concluded that the Addo Road (R335) will have to be

upgraded to an appropriate standard if it is to accommodate the additional heavy

vehicle traffic volumes associated with the operational facility. A revised transport

study section (Chapter 13 of this report) indicating the extent and significance of

the anticipated traffic impacts resulting from increased heavy vehicle traffic, as

well as the implications of the current deteriorated state of the R335 for

construction and operation of the facility has been incorporated.

2.5. The R335 needs to be upgraded to meet the demand for this project. Thulani

Grootboom, Addo Alliance

It has been concluded that the road in its current condition cannot accommodate

the significantly increased heavy vehicle traffic volumes expected with the

operational facility until it is refurbished. However, the transport specialist has

concluded that i t will be able to accommodate construction phase vehicle traffic

as this is expected to be of minimal significance. The Eastern Cape Department of

Roads and Transport notified the public during the course of August 2009 of an

open meeting to discuss the proposed upgrade and special maintenance works to

be undertaken on the Main Road MR0450 (R335) between Motherwell and Addo.

It appears that this will not be an extensive upgrade to the standards likely to be

required t o a ccommodate t he i ncreased v ehicular t raffic a ssociated w ith t he

operational facility, but more of a temporary improvement measure. Accordingly,

it will be a recommendation for a condition of environmental authorisation that

the road is upgraded to a standard deemed suitable to accommodate operational

phase vehicle traffic prior to the facility becoming operational.




2.11. The report indicates on a map the extent of the facility. Our experience has

shown that with the transportation of waste, there can be all kinds of spills and/or

accidents. Thus the extent of the facility and the impacts it will have are not just

confined to the facility but extend for the entire transportation corridor. Thus the

map for the facility should be amended to reflect that the facility includes its

transportation corridors. This should be carried through the report; monitoring

and management of the facility as well as the assessment of impacts should

include the access roads to the facility. Keith Finnemore, SRVCF

The assessment of t he road conditions and transport corridors has b een

addressed in the Transport Study (Chapter 13 of the Draft EIR). The maps of the

various transport route options to the facility are also depicted the in the Draft

EIR. It i s noted and accepted that the impacts of the t ransport corridors cannot

be separated form the impact of the facility itself, and this has been assessed as

such in the Draft EIR in the air quality, tourism, visual, heritage, fauna, flora and

SIA specialist studies. The impacts resulting from, the ut ilisation of the existing

transport c orridors a nd a ccess routes t o t he fa cility w ill b e si gnificant i f n ot

appropriately m anaged, m onitored and prevented a s f ar a s p ossible. A s

recommended by Mr. Finnemore the monitoring and management of these

transport c orridors to reduce th e s ignificance o f p otential s pill, r oad s afety,

increased traffic volumes, air quality and litter impacts that are l ikely to occur is

crucial. At this time it is not known who the eventual operator of the facility will

be or w hat the detailed design for the required road upgrade will require. In the

opinion of Bohlweki-SSI Environmental it would be far more beneficial for these

monitoring and management protocols for the transport corridors to be developed

in conjunction with the successful operator, the CDC, Eastern Cape Department of

Roads a nd T ransport and a ll ot her I&AP’s a nd stakeholders e ngaged i n t he

process. An Environmental Monitoring Committee (EMC) for the facility will have

to be established prior to the commencement of construction activities that is

appropriately constituted by the above mentioned individuals and organisations.

The development of the required transport corridor monitoring and management

protocols for these transport corridors must be developed in conjunction with, and

ultimately approved by, the EMC. It i s recommended that these monitoring and

management protocols be subject to a public participation process to ensure that

all issues, concerns and inputs as they relate to transport corridors are captured

and incorporated into the development thereof.

2.13. What happens on these roads affects tourism and the citrus industry. This

road is used by trucks transporting fruit to the PE harbour for exports, all you

need is one accidental spill of waste on the road accompanied by rain, which

could result in contaminated rain water landing up on fruit for international

export. If this contaminated fruit landed up in the international market/stores it

would be a disaster for the local citrus industry. The assessment process must

therefore assess and identify impacts on the transport routes as well as include




management and monitoring mechanisms for these routes. Keith Finnemore,

SRVCF

The implications of this scenario are noted. It is the opinion of Bohlweki-SSI

Environmental that quantifying the risks and likelihood of this scenario occurring

will be difficult to accurately and credibly assess. It should therefore be assumed

that a spill event followed by, or during, a rainfall event is likely to eventuate

during th e lifespan o f th e f acility. Accordingly, th e d ecision m aking a uthority

(DWEA) is urged to apply the precautionary principle in this regard. It is therefore

imperative that and appropriate emergency response measures are developed

for, and implemented during, the operational phase of the facility for this scenario

that is reflected in the required transport corridor monitoring and management

protocols referred to above. In the instance of an accident/spill event it would

have to be communicated quickly and effectively to affected road users, traffic

halted and an alternative transport route utilised until such time as the spill is

cleared up. Trucks transporting fruit should therefore ideally be covered to a

degree that will prevent ingress of water that could potentially be contaminated

by w et r oad surfaces from a spill e vent w hen t ransporting f ruit t o the P ort

Elizabeth harbour once the facility is operational.

2.14. The R335 has collapsed, Province has committed to building it in 5 years,

the design and construction plan is for the road is finished and will entail closing

the road for 2 years. This directly impacts on your timeframe for construction of

the facility. The R335 is fundamental to the facility and must be built before

construction on the facility takes place, what can be done about this? Keith

Finnemore, SRVCF

In light of the poor state of the R335 it is imperative that all stakeholders and

authorities responsible for the required upgrade that will accommodate

operational phase traffic volumes begin engaging on this issue as soon as possible

to allow for appropriate budgetary allocations and the timely commencement of

the re quired t ender p rocess f or t his re furbishment. It i s n ot a nticipated th at

construction p hase t raffic fo r t he f acility w ill r esult in s ignificant increases in

heavy vehicle traffic as per the findings of the transport study. Accordingly, it will

be a recommendation for a condition of environmental authorisation that the road

is upgraded to a standard deemed suitable to accommodate operational phase

vehicle traffic prior to the facility accepting its first waste deliveries.

2.18. Traffic impacts – the issue of dust generation, spill and congestion are of

concern to us. We hold that the approach road/s to the site from the R335

and/or R75 impacts need to be tarred to minimise dust generation. The Aloes H:H

waste site has shown that without this ‘mitigation’, considerable management is

needed to suppress dust by trucks approaching the site; recognising that tipping,

spreading and covering activities also produce much dust. Considering the




lifespan of the GHWMF and impacts (biological, social and visual-dust clouds), we

believe the expense of hard-surfacing the road up to the site is justified. The

incoming and outgoing lanes of the R335 from Port Elizabeth should be double-

carriage or at least have hard shoulders to facilitate overtaking on this important

tourist route. Morgan Griffiths, WESSA EP

These recommendations will be carried through to the EMP. This will also included

as a recommended condition of authorisation that all possible access roads to the

facility that are currently gravel standard, and will be used to transport waste, are

upgraded to asphalt standard prior to the facility becoming operational.

2.20. Traffic impacts – A major concern to us is the event of a vehicle accident

resulting in a hazardous spill on the R335, R75 or approach roads. What will the

emergency response plan be, what might be the worst-case scenario be and what

impact might such a spill have on the transport of people and the citrus industry.

This issue has not been adequately dealt with in these reports. Morgan Griffiths,

WESSA EP

A d etailed e mergency response p lan s till needs to b e d eveloped prior t o the

facility b ecoming o perational as referred t o previously. This w ould in part b e

contingent on who the preferred bidder/operator of the facility will be and will

have t o b e i nformed b y a ll s takeholder and I &AP i ssues, c oncerns a nd

requirements. T he c ontent and development of this emergency response plan

should ideally b e a pproved by the as yet to be established EMC that will be

constituted by, and representative of, a ll these parties and stakeholders. Mobile

spill response teams - provided by the operator of the facility and/or private

contractors - will have to be available and permanently on call, ideally at the

proposed facility as well as at a location closer to Port Elizabeth.

2.24. The P1954 is a small secondary gravel road that has not been used by the

public for the last 10 years. The P1954 runs directly through the PPC mining area

and there are currently 2 crossings that are continually used by off-road mining

vehicles travelling between the PPC crushing plant and the working faces of the

mine. The safety of these vehicles, when there are up to 502 waste vehicles

travelling through the mining area in a 10 hour period (50 trips per hour) on a

daily basis, is a definite concern to PPC. Colin Jones, PPC,

Subsequent engagement with PPC on this issue has h ighlighted the need to use

an alternate access route to the north of the proposed facility. Accordingly, it has

been put forward that the R335 – P1958 – P1954 access route be utilised in order

to reduce the disruption to PPC vehicle movements.

2.26. An alternative route using the P1958 as considered in the documentation

would be more acceptable as it would not impact on PPC’s mining operation as




much as the recommended route and would use an existing secondary road that

is currently in use. This alternative would still have the problem of significantly

increased traffic on the R335 and this would impact on the PPC haulage contract

that moves limestone from the mine on the left side of the R335 to a Transnet

Freight Rail siding on the right of the R335. We have an authorized crossing on

the R335 which would be subject to significantly increased traffic volumes. An

alternative using the R75 and the P1958 would eliminate any impact of the traffic

to the waste site on the PPC operation. Colin Jones, PPC

The use of t he R75 for vehicles w ould significantly increase t he a verage trip

distance for waste vehicles servicing the Coega IDZ and the Port Elizabeth area in

general. A t th is t ime i t is a nticipated th at o nly v ehicles f rom th e

Uitenhage/Despatch area will utilise the R75 access route.

2.27. From the outset of the discussions about the waste site, it was always

understood that this would be a world class hazardous waste site, with minimal

impact on the local community. It is pleasing to note in the PAR, Waste

Management Philosophy Report, page 21, ‘The proposed Grassridge waste

disposal facility should be operated to the highest national and international

waste management standards. The objective for the operation for the Grassridge

waste disposal facility will be to ensure that the waste is managed in an

environmentally and socially acceptable manner.’ The reality of waste site

management, especially in the NMBMM area, leaves a lot to be desired. Access

roads are littered with waste, trucks carry loads without covers, fallen waste is

never picked up. Trucks simply dump their loads on the side of the road or in a

nearby side road if they cannot enter a waste site. Monitoring and punitive

measures against transgressing operators are obviously not carried out. The

entire waste management sector, including engineers, site operators and owners

are in a state of collective denial about the waste process. It is as if waste is

produced at a factory, and then magically appears at the waste disposal site,

without any impact or potential impact on the entire transport corridor. This

denial runs like a fault line throughout the study – the PAR, SIA, EMP and EIR all

ignore it, in spite of our highlighting the problem in our previous submission, and

in spite of the engineers and operators own experience of the state of access

roads around waste sites countrywide. SRVCF

These concerns are noted, however, it is beyond the ambit of this EIA process to

make a credible assessment, or draw conclusions, about the manner in which the

site will be operated in the future by the NMBM or the private operator who

successfully secures the r ights to manage the facility. While the i llegal dumping

issues highlighted here are valid and often the case in the Port Elizabeth area, as

well as countrywide, appropriate enforcement of the relevant statutes and by-

laws i s r equired to p revent th is. I t i s c onceded th at th is is v ery difficult to

prevent, however, as it is only registered waste removal service providers, or




municipal waste vehicles, u tilizing the proposed facility it is not anticipated that

illegal dumping f rom these vehicles w ill be a concern. Similarly, monitoring and

enforcement of best practice waste management and disposal procedures will

have to b e t he standard f or t he p roposed f acility a nd b inding o n a ll p arties

involved i n the m anagement, operation a nd servicing thereof. A s previously

noted, the transport corridors to the facility are a fundamental a spect under

assessment. Where relevant it has been factored into specialist studies conducted

for the EIA process.

2.29. In addition, a Transport Risk Assessment (TRA) for all products that may be

transported along the transport corridors to this facility needs to be undertaken.

This TRA will need to consider a) the elevated risk to export fruit and other food

travelling through the same corridor to the harbour and local consumers and b)

the effects on tourists and tourism. These two aspects need to be evaluated in

terms of both upgrading the R335 as well as not upgrading the road. SRVCF

In the opinion of Bohlweki-SSI Environmental – as informed by transport

engineer specialist study findings - the upgrading the R335 has to take place prior

to t he c ommencement of operational activity f or th e f acility to th e s tandard

proposed by the relevant specialists study. As stated in 2.13 above, it is the

opinion o f t he EAP t hat q uantifying t he r isks a nd l ikelihood o f t his s cenario

occurring will be difficult to accurately and credibly assess. It should therefore be

assumed that a spill event followed by, or during, a rainfall event is likely to

eventuate during the lifespan of the facility. It is therefore imperative that and

appropriate emergency response measures are developed prior to, and

implemented during, the operational phase of the facility for this scenario. It has

also been noted that increased vehicular traffic resulting from waste truck

movements would have a significant impact on the integrity of the existing R335

road that is in poor condition. An increased traffic volume on the R335 that is

utilised by tourist vehicles to access the Addo area is highly likely to be significant

if the road is not upgraded prior to the commencement of construction activities,

possibly r esulting in longer t raveling t imes t o t heir d estinations, a nd a n

associated increased risk of accidents as the road becomes more heavily used.

Accordingly, as per the findings of the Tourism Study (Chapter 8 of the Draft EIR)

an increase i n t raffic on t he R 335 w ould n egatively a ffect t he e xperience of

tourists to the area if their journey is delayed by trucks and if the road

deteriorates d ue t o i ncreased u sage b y h eavy v ehicles s hould it n ot be

refurbished. Bohlweki-SSI is of the opinion that should the road be upgraded to

double l ane s tandard (f rom M otherwell to th e f acility a t l east) p rior to th e

commencement of operational activity at the facility, this would be more

beneficial for tourism and tourists traveling along the R335 in the long term

despite the increase in operational phase traffic volumes. As it stands it is unlikely

that future trips along an upgraded, double lane standard road would be

significantly longer, if at all, in comparison to an average trip length along the




road in its existing condition. In the opinion o f Bohlweki-SSI Environmental the

actual road upgrading construction period and activities are more likely to detract

from the tourist e xperience during this period, than t hat of t ourists traveling

along a suitably upgraded double lane road once the facility is fully operational.

16.2. Potential Impacts on Addo Elephant National Park

3.1. The site is 20km’s from Addo’s main gate, but it is closer to the actual

boundary of the park, how has this been taken into account in the assessment

process? Chris Morley

The nearest boundary to Addo is approximately 14 km away from Footprint F. The

Colchester section of the park is the closest boundary that is apparent as per the

existing and proclaimed boundary of the park. As such it is not deemed likely that

the facility will result in direct impacts on the Park. The proximity to the Park has

been taken into account in the transport, tourism, visual, air quality and SIA

components of the study.

16.3. Potential Impacts on Air Quality

4.2. I have identified a fatal flaw in this process. The Draft EIA Report states that

air quality impacts will be of minimal significance and that it is probably unlikely it

will have a negative impact on the citrus industry in Addo. The data I have

indicates that hydrogen sulphide can be detected up to 142km away from the

facility. Sue Hoffman

Hydrogen sulphide gas is generated in the anaerobic phase of landfill

decomposition, and can be odorous and toxic above certain concentrations. It can

also be generated by chemical re actions b etween wastes, which are t ypically

avoided by controlling co-disposal of incompatible waste types. Monitoring of a

number of hazardous waste sites in South Africa indicates that hydrogen sulphide

gas is not detected at a considerable distance from hazardous waste landfills.

Hydrogen sulphide is g enerated by other s ources, such a s tanneries, sewage

works, petroleum refineries, coke ovens, pulp mills and diesel engines. Odour and

health impact zones were modelled for the proposed Grassridge site. No

exceedances of t he h ealth or od our criteria w ere p redicted t o o ccur of f-site.

Accordingly, Bohlweki-SSI Environmental cannot agree with the statement that

this assertion constitutes a fatal flaw.




16.4. Potential Impacts on ground and surface water

5.4. Treatment of H:H wastes – We also hold that the treatment facility also

needs to be lined or bunded, to facilitate clean-up and prevent ground

contamination in the event of spills. Morgan Griffiths, WESSA EP

This has been addressed in the Operational Manual contained in the PAR.

16.5. Socio Economic Impacts of Concern

6.4. What are the economic benefits of this project to the Sundays River Valley

Municipality? Will the project impact negatively on the economy of the Sundays

River Valley Municipality in future? Mthetheleli Nkohla, Sundays River Valley

Municipality

It i s not anticipated that there w ill be a negative impact on the l ocal economy.

The facility w ill lead to the provision of limited employment opportunities for

residents of t he a rea. T hese i ssues a re a ddressed i n t he S ocial I mpact

Assessment (SIA) report – Chapter 14 of the Draft EIR.

6.9. How do you implement the buffer surrounding the site? I understand the

site has been identified as it is far away from people but how will you stop people

coming to the site and settling around the site? This quite often happens when

people are looking for employment and construction commences. Primrose

Madikizela, Portnet

The proposed 500m buffer around the site will have to be strictly enforced, as will

access to the site in general. The buffer in effect prohibits any other development

within this zone. The restrictions imposed on development by the buffer zone

around the facility must be noted and incorporated into local Spatial Development

Frameworks that will dictate future land uses for the area in question. By virtue of

the existing mining land uses occurring on site this 500m buffer zone is already in

de facto enforcement.

6.11. The metro has historically placed residential development on old dump

sites. This could constitute a health risk. Goodman Prince

Once the facility is decommissioned it will be subject to strict access control. Due

to the nature of the facility it will never be an option to develop residential units

on the s ite as an end use once the s ite i s rehabilitated. The s ite w ill be not be

developed a t a ll o n c losure and r ehabilitation. I t s hould a lso b e n oted t hat

Footprint F is far removed from any residential areas.




6.12. What are the long term plans for community engagement to ensure

appropriate waste management and sustainable development? Goodman Prince

It is recommended in the EMP that as part of the Environmental Management

Committee (E MC) f unctions (w hich m ust be pa rtly c onstituted b y I &APs a nd

stakeholders) C ommunity L iaison F orums s hould a lso b e e stablished th at will

allow for ongoing engagement with the surrounding communities for the lifespan

of the facility. All issues pertaining to the facilities operation and performance will

be addressed through these structures.

6.13. Buffer zone – We caution the NMBMM to vigorously enforce the proposed

buffer zone, not allowing new activities to start in these zones, where inhabitants

or workers could become exposed to elevated health risks. Morgan Griffiths,

WESSA EP

The enforcement of this buffer zone and prohibiting free access to the site in

general will have to be enforced. As noted above the fact that it is currently

owned PPC mining land has a lready s terilized the buffer zone a rea for potential

development. Should the potential land transfer go ahead it is recommended that

this be inclusive of the proposed buffer zone area in the transfer agreement.

16.6. Impact on PPC Operations

7.2. Impact on PPC’s Mining operation - The site including buffer would impact on

up to 1 000 000 tons of PPC limestone reserves. Pre-mining this reserve is

possible but at significantly increased costs. Colin Jones, PPC

Noted. However, it is preferable that the area in question is not mined as the

existing soil/limestone cover will be utilised in the construction band eventual

capping of the landfill.

7.3. Impact on PPC’s Mining operation - Although most of the limestone reserves

are soft enough for free digging with an excavator, some areas may need to be

blasted. How would the proximity of the waste facility impact on possible blasting

activities? Colin Jones, PPC

According to Mr. Erasmus of PPC, blasting using 3 m deep drill holes is

occasionally used (approximately once every two years) to mine these layers.

These hard calcrete deposits sometimes have to be mined to ensure the

availability of a continuous supply of ore to the crushing plant at times when

mechanical f ailure of e xcavating e quipment is e ncountered. T he m ining

techniques applied in this mining operation, are totally different to deep level

underground and some open cast mining operations, and therefore mining

induced seismicity a nd e arth tr emors a s a risk to th e s tability o f the w aste




disposal cells, can be ruled out. (As per Reinhard Meyer’s – geohydrology

specialist - findings in Chapter 7 of the Revised Draft EIR).

7.4. Consideration of Alternatives - Surely the EIA for the Aloes facility should be

completed and an ROD obtained before a new site is considered? If the Aloes

extension is successful the construction of a new facility could be delayed by a

number of years. This would allow PPC sufficient time to mine those areas that

could be impacted by the proposed site and move the operation out of the way.

Colin Jones, PPC

Due to the length of time involved in identifying suitable landfill sites and the

associated authorisation and reporting processes involved it was not feasible to

wait for the Aloes extension ROD prior to embarking on a new process for the

proposed facility. It must be reiterated that the Aloes extension will only extend

its lifespan for a few years and the region requires the additional capacity that the

proposed facility will provide regardless of the capacity and anticipated lifespan of

existing facilities in the region. It is hoped that the likely delays that will be

experienced by the recommendation that the R335 be upgraded in its entirety

prior to the commencement of construction activity will allow for a 2-3 year lead

time for PPC to priotitise its mining operations. It must be reiterated however

that it is preferable that the Footprint F area is not pre-mined in order to allow for

as much in situ cover material as possible to be made available for construction of

the facility, as well as the operational and decommissioning (capping and

rehabilitation) phase requirements.

16.7. Project Implementation and Monitoring

8.6 Who is responsible for monitoring the facility? Nadia Wessels, Swartkops

Trust

A range of entities and institutions will be responsible. The operator themselves,

NMBM, the yet to be established EMC, independent third party auditors as well as

mandated r egulatory a uthorities (D EA, DWA etc) w ill f ulfill t hese c ompliance

monitoring functions and oversight functions. It will be a condition of

authorisation th at a ppropriate m onitoring a nd c orrective a ction p rocesses b e

developed and implemented for the duration of the facilities lifespan; including

end use monitoring once the facility is decommissioned.

8.12. Who will operate the facility and when is the facility expected to commence

operation? Councilor Frans, Motherwell Councillors Forum

The operation of the facility will go out to tender. It is anticipated that one of the

established waste management companies would be the successful bidder. The

approvals process, detailed design, tender, construction and commissioning




phases could take 5 to 6 years. Development would also depend on when the

required road refurbishment is completed.

8.21. Is there a mechanism to double check the type of waste transported to and

received at the site for disposal? This will help in identifying medical waste and

ensuring that it is not accepted at the facility? Mike Bonya, SANCO Regional

Yes. The Operating Manual for the site includes waste acceptance procedures,

which include sampling and testing a waste stream while still at the generator’s

premises, and then re-sampling the waste stream and testing indicators in the

site laboratory to confirm the waste type before disposal, for hazardous waste.

Medical waste would not be accepted on site, and where i t i s detected (such as

mixed in with general waste streams), appropriate procedures will be in place to

alert authorities and remove and dispose of the waste in the correct manner and

at the correct facility.

8.26. The use of a Waste Management Plan to reduce the amount of waste

produced must be encouraged as well as recycling of waste to create more jobs,

this will also result in less waste being transported and reduced transport costs.

Rudi Herholdt Sundays River Valley Municipality

Noted. This requirement i s evident in the Waste Management Philosophy Report

contained i n the PAR which advocates waste minimization, recycling and re-use

as essential to minimizing the waste volumes having to be interred at the landfill.

8.40. If the site is going to impact on Rooidam as we don’t want a disaster

situation because monitoring and auditing does not extend to this area. Keith

Finnemore

The air quality impacts on the immediately surrounding areas in general, are

predicted to be of minimal significance. It will be a recommendation for condition

of authorisation that communities and sensitive areas in close proximity to the

facility be actively monitored and audited for compliance to best practice, or the

required m inimum s tandards f or a g iven environmental aspect a s, and i f, these

are applicable.

8.43. Fire Risks – a recent spontaneous combustion episode at the Aloes (II)

waste site has highlighted the need to have adequate fire-fighting equipment,

staff training, emergency plans and municipal fire-fighting support. This site is

far removed from the nearest fire-station and hence will need to have adequate

resources of its own. This area is generally dry, and predicted to get drier due to

Global warming, so the provision and maintenance of fire-breaks around the site

will need careful attention. Morgan Griffiths, WESSA EP




Noted. This recommendation will be carried over to the EMP.

8.47. Appointment of GHWMF operator – WESSA’s experiences from being a

member of the Roundhill H:h waste site (East London) EMC, have convinced us

that only a company or entity with a track-record of expertly managing a H:H

waste site should be appointed to operate the site. The tender for such

appointment needs to be restricted from any ‘wannabe’ operators! The

management of Roundhill had been fraught with serious problems because of the

appointment of inappropriate managers/operators. We hold that DEAT and DWAF

need to vet the tendering and selection process to ensure that an experienced

operator is appointed. Morgan Griffiths, WESSA EP

It is anticipated that the tender process will be judging potential operators on

their technical ability and past track record. The recommendation that the

authorities are involved in the scrutiny of potential operators will be

recommended as a condition of authorisation.

8.48. Monitoring mechanism – WESSA requires that an independent monitoring

body is appointment for this GHWMF, namely an EMC, with independent auditors

reporting to it (as per the Aloes H:H waste site situation). The proposed EMP and

EMS, with its appropriate ISO internal monitoring regime, are not adequate

without independent oversight and checking. We urge DEAT to require the

formation of an EMC with appropriate public representation on it, as part of any

authorisation Record of Decision. Morgan Griffiths, WESSA EP

The establishment of the EMC and CLF’s w ill be recommended as a condition of

authorisation. Third party review of the management and monitoring processes

will be a requirement by the regulating authority and w ill a lmost certainly be a

condition of authorisation.

8.49. Heat treatment facility – WESSA does not object to any proposed autoclave

facility at the GHWMF in the future, but would be opposed to any incinerator that

would burn any wastes that gave off toxic compounds such as dioxins and furans.

While the organic components of abattoir or veterinary wastes could safely be

burned, were theses wastes mixed with other wastes, particularly plastics, then

unacceptable amounts of dioxins and furans would be released. Morgan Griffiths,

WESSA EP

It will be a recommendation for condition of authorisation that no incineration of

any classification be allowed at the facility during its lifespan.

8.51. Illegal dumping and wind scatter - A significant problem will arise with wind

blown litter from the site contaminating the surrounding area. At Aloes certain

control measures are used but the surrounding area up to several kilometers from




the site is significantly polluted with wind blown litter. How would this be

controlled/eliminated? Colin Jones, PPC

Regular clearing/cleaning operations along haul routes will have to be

implemented as standard procedure. This will be a recommendation for condition

of authorisation.

8.52. Adherence to conditions of the ROD - Should a positive ROD be obtained

with significant mitigation measures listed, what control measures would be in

place for neighbours (i.e. PPC) to monitor compliance and ensure rectification of

non-compliance? Colin Jones, PPC

PPC would have to be permanently represented o the EMC in order to ensure that

issues can be appropriately and timeously addressed.

8.53. Studies were done on the community surrounding the existing Aloes site

and they identified that the site had no effect on this community but medical

records of the nearby community reveal they die of terrible cancers. Regular

monitoring and checks should be done. An annual external audit should be done

and corrective measures put in place. A monitoring committee should be set up

to include I&APS from near and far. Sue Hoffman

Bohlweki-SSI Environmental has no knowledge of the studies referred to. The air

quality s tudies conducted for this assessment have indicated that d ue to the

relatively large distance from any communities around Footprint F these cancer

risks are considered minimal and within the maximum acceptable range proposed

by the authorities. An EMC will be established to ensure that the monitoring of the

facility is as transparent and inclusive as possible.

16.8. EIA Process and Public Participation

9.5. I have identified a fatal flaw in this process, in 2007 at the Public Meeting I

requested specialists to contact me with regards to historical data on air quality

and health impacts related to the Aloes Facility and no specialists have contacted

me to date. I am still available to provide this information and request that a

specialist on this project come and talk to me and view the documentation

available. I also said there were fatal flaws based on statements made at this

meeting namely:

• Pollution deemed to be of minimal significant problem

• It was unlikely that the facility would impact negatively on the surrounding

citrus farms

• Odor impacts, cancer risks and risks of carcinogenics exposure would affect

1:3 million




• No buffer zones were necessary

• These assessments have been established through desk top studies.

Pollution will affect nearby communities if the bar is not raised. Odours from the

chemical composition do impact the surrounding areas. Buffer zones are required

by law. I have since met with the consultant Marc Hardy. Waste sites are

unfortunately a requisite with industries today. The very real problem of

complaints from communities must be clearly taken into consideration as all lives

are important and standards must be First World. Sue Hoffman

Bohlweki-SSI Environmental is of the opinion that the air quality studies

conducted f or th e E IA process i s of t he re quired s tandard a nd a ppropriately

reflects th e s ite specific c ontext o f th e pr oposed facility. With regard t o t he

perceived fatal flaws the following responses are put forward:

• All p otential p ollution so urces from d eposited w astes associated w ith th e

proposed facility are designed to be contained within Footprint F. Appropriate

stormwater, gr oundwater a nd a ir q uality management a nd m onitoring

systems have been incorporated in the Operating Manual included in the PAR.

• It is not anticipated that the operational facility will have a direct impact on

the adjacent c itrus farming industry due to the d istance o f the facility f rom

these citrus growing areas that will ensure that gaseous emissions from the

site have very little chance of contaminating these crops.

• The air quality studies have indicated that total maximum incremental cancer

risk levels were predicted to be less than ~ 1 in 3.5 million for the proposed

landfill operations. The maximum cancer risk at the sensitive receptors as a

result of emissions from the proposed landfill s ite was predicted to occur at

Rooidam (~ 1 in 45 million). No odour threshold exceedances were predicted

to occur due to on-site concentrations of odoriferous gasses. Off-site odour

impacts were predicted to far below the acceptable odour unit level at all the


• A 500m buffer zone around the facility has been recommended by the air

quality specialist.

These a ir quality assessments are by definition desk top exercises that use well

established computer modelling processes, and take the area’s climatological data

and topographical aspects into account in the assessment process. The yet to be

established EMC (if appropriately constituted) will serve as the appropriate forum,

along with the Community Liaison Forum initiatives, to ensure that public issues

and concerns regarding the facility are given due attention and action.

9.10. The report states that there is the potential for thermal treatment at the

facility in future, this is incineration. We have been previously reassured and it

has previously been stated that there will be no incineration. If incineration does




take place we will oppose the project, we have stated this from the beginning of

the process. The project will not proceed if it includes thermal treatment at any

stage. Once the facility is there you may be forced to accept a thermal

treatment/incineration component at a later stage if it is applied for. It has been

the view of the Sundays River Valley Community Form from the beginning that

incineration will not be acceptable. Paul Hansen

No incineration capacity is planned for the facility to the knowledge of Bohlweki-

SSI Environmental. It will be a recommendation for condition of authorisation that

no incineration of waste be permitted at the facility during its lifespan. It must be

noted that thermal treatment can be in the way of an autoclaving technology as

well (medical wastes) that does not incinerate wastes as such but uses heat

treatment to render these wastes inert.

9.14. Future planning – WESSA reiterates the suggestion that the NMBM consider

acquiring or otherwise setting in place land use restrictions in this area, so that

Footprint C can be held in reserve as a future waste site. Considering the time

and resources that have already gone into studying this site, acquiring it for

future use could well be cost and time effective. Morgan Griffiths, WESSA EP

Noted. This will be carried through to the EMP as a recommendation

9.15. Consideration of Alternatives - The current waste site at Aloes near Port

Elizabeth has approximately 7 years of life left at current volumes according to

the manager on site. There is currently an EIA in progress for an extension to the

life of this waste site by infilling between the two current cells. This will extend

the life by a further 10 years according to the manager on site. Surely this EIA

should be completed and an ROD obtained before a new site is considered? If the

Aloes extension is successful the construction of a new facility could be delayed

by a number of years. Colin Jones, PPC

The fact remains that additional H:H landfill capacity will have to be acquired in

the short term future to cater for the Coega IDZ, as well as the region in general.

Owing to the original projections of Aloes running out of capacity sooner than

what is now anticipated the EIA process for the proposed new facility was initiated

prior to the decision being made to apply for an extension to the A loes facility.

Due to the l ength o f t ime to date (approximately 7 years) that the current s ite

selection, ranking and EIA reporting process has required it would not have been

sensible to what for authorisation of the Aloes extension.

9.16. Inaccuracies in the Reports - The investigation of the waste site are costing

the South African taxpayer a huge amount of money. It is expected that the

quality of the reports would reflect the considerable amounts of money being paid

to the Engineering Consultants. And yet, we find that basic errors are still being




made, which effectively casts a shadow on the entire volume, rendering it suspect

from an accuracy point of view. For example:

• The weather data in the draft EIA, Table 4.1 page 38, is obviously wrong. It

implies that Port Elizabeth’s summer temperatures are higher than Addo, and

that winter temperatures are lower. (Jones & Wagener PAR page 14 table 2 is

correct)

• The draft EMP, glossary, page iii, states Contractor: Persons / organizations

contracted by the Developer to carry out parts of the work for the proposed

pipeline. This clearly indicates that the EMP has been largely lifted from

another study. Hardly encouraging for any I & AP’s, never mind the due

diligence required.

• On page 43 of the draft EIR, there is a map showing the distance from the

site F to the Addo Elephant National Park. This is stated as approximately

30km. Why the distance to the park main camp is important, and not the

distance to the nearest conservation area, (about 14km) is a mystery to us.

In our last submission, we raised precisely this issue, but no correction was

made. Was this in order to mislead anyone not familiar with the area who

might review this report? (30 kilometers Sounds a lot better than 14.)

• The Map (fig. 1.1) on Page 6 of the introduction has sites E and F reversed.

This too was pointed out in the previous feedback to I & AP’s and has also

gone uncorrected.

In the brief period allocated to I & AP’s to review these extensive documents, we

were able to identify a number of misleading inaccuracies. It is highly probable

that these extensive and technical documents contain many more such errors and

inaccuracies which need to be corrected by qualified people. Many of these

studies are very complex and require specialist knowledge to understand their

implications within a development of this nature before being able to determine

the veracity of such information. For example the benchmark values for

carcinogens in an air pollution study, or what is considered adequate substrate in

a geo-hydrological or engineering interpretation. It would be absolute Greek to

most lay people, yet it has been expected to date that we the public and the

I&AP’s must review and correct these documents. We talk about due diligence

often, but this is now bordering on undue negligence. Sundays River Valley

Community Forum

The errors referred to above have been corrected as follows:

• The w eather d ata h as b een c orrected t o a ccurately r eflect t he a mbient

temperature and precipitation data for the areas in question.

• The references to he proposed pipeline are as result of utilizing an existing

EMP format (pipeline EIA application) for this project that was not edited

correctly b y t he EAP. T he EMP i tself is co ntext a nd p roject specific as i t

relates to the proposed GHWMF phasing and operations. It must be reiterated




that is a Draft EMP that will have to be further refined and submitted for

authority approval once detailed design information is made available, the

preferred operator and construction contractor appointed.

• The map referred to on page 43 of the Draft EIR has been amended to reflect

the c losest di stance to a currently proclaimed park boundary as opposed to

the distance to the Addo main gate. In this instance it is 14 km as the crow

flies from Footprint F to the boundary in the Colchester section of the park.

The i nitial d istance of 30 km depicted on the ori ginal map was re flective of

the distance from the facility to the main visitor’s gate at Addo.

• The m ap on p age 6 has b een revised t o r eflect t he c orrect l ocations of

Footprints E and F.

The technical reports produced by the relevant specialists are reflective of the

technical assessment methodologies and scientific terminology and jargon that

are associated with these f ields of expertise. Bohlweki-SSI is of the opinion that

these reports are of an appropriate standard, and adequately assess the given

specialist aspects under consideration. Accordingly, it is difficult to “dumb down”

– in the most respectful sense of the word - these technical reports in a manner

that d oes n ot d etract f rom the a ssessment m ethodology, gu idelines a nd

requirements o f these specialized assessments. It must be noted that a project

and application of this nature is highly likely to be subject to peer review by the

authorities once the application is submitted to them for decision making.

9.20. This community will strongly oppose any development on this site until such

time as the following issues have been dealt with satisfactorily:

• The possibility of a thermal processing treatment plant/incinerator is removed

permanently from the proposal.

• Road reconstruction has been completed to a point where it can

accommodate the additional traffic.

• The footprint is extended to include the access roads that feed the site, and

management/operational plans have been comprehensively revised to include

the monitoring and cleaning of these roads.

• The PAR, SIA, EMP and the EIR reports be rejected until they have been

amended to include the increased footprint.

• A Transport Risk Assessment is undertaken to study the risk to tourists,

export and local food by transporting waste under conditions of a) no road

improvement and b) rebuilt roads. Sundays River Valley Community Forum

Bohlweki-SSI Environmental’s response:

• As indicated previously in this document it will be a recommendation for a

condition o f a uthorisation t hat n o incineration o f a ny s ort w hatsoever b e




permitted at the facility during its entire lifespan. This will also be a

recommendation for condition of authorisation.

• The management and maintenance of these roads will be integral to ensuring

that spill, litter, and traffic disruption events are kept to a minimum. The

footprint of the facility is defined as, and limited to, the actual physical s ite

boundaries of the total area to be developed. The access roads to the facility

are therefore not included in this footprint.

• The EAP does not agree with this statement as we are of the opinion that

transport a nd e xisting r oad qu ality c onsiderations h ave b een a dequately

addressed.

Final PPC comments on the proposed facility resulting from the Revised Draft EIR

review period were as follows:

11.1. Fauna: We disagree with the assertion the Albany Adder may be present on Site C only as PPC is currently mining at Site E and is finding the Albany Adders. This which implies that the likelihood of the occurrence of the Albany Adder at Site F is high due to the close proximity. PPC requires a scientific motivation for Site F having a lower likelihood for the occurrence of the Albany Adder than Site C. With regard to the Albany Adder issue the EAP remains in agreement with Doctor Bill B ranch th at n one w ere i dentified o n s ite (F ootprint F ) d uring n umerous inspections thereof during the process to date. He states in the relevant chapter that that it has been positively identified on neighboring land portions (as has been the PPC experience to date for Footprint E). This does raise the very strong possibility that it will be present on Footprint F as well, however, a complete search and rescue operation for fauna and flora, where relevant, will be conducted prior to the commencement of construction activity as per the environmental specification and recommendations stemming from the specialist studies and incorporated in the Draft EMP. Once again the EAP can only refer you to Bill Branch’s (who is probably SA’s leading herpetologist, most definitely one of them) findings who is based in PE and has extensive knowledge of the region. 11.2. Transport: PPC understands that R335 – P1958 – P1954 access route will be utilised and that this will be a condition of the environmental authorisation. The cost differential for Site C for road establishment must be explained as it cannot be “double” that of site F if the proposed route as shown in Figure 13.4 (Annexure 1) is utilised. The safety risks of additional vehicles on future haul roads (North West of the landfill site) are higher than that at Site C due to the increased volumes on the roads. Further additional haulage distances (and cost) would be incurred by PPC due to the need to circumvent the proposed hazardous waste site. These important factors are not discussed in the site selection section of the report. The required roads upgrade costs that were used i n the Justification table were premised on the assumption that the existing haul road on site would be utilized for waste facility vehicles in which case the upgrade of the R335 – P1958 – P1954 would be approximately twice the cost of upgrading the existing haul road. Safety issues around the use of the existing haul road raised by Colin Jones in PPC’s previous submission led to the recommendation that the R335 – P1958 – P1954 access route b e u tilized i nstead. A s su ch t he c osts w ould n ow b e si milar a s Footprint C w ould a lso h ave to u se th is a ccess r oute, h owever, F ootprint C




remains more expensive (albeit marginally) due to the extra couple of kilometers of bitumen standard road required. I must reiterate that the R335 – P1958 – P1954 access route is a public (provincial) road and will not therefore impinge on additional vehicle movements in this area. The same applies to the short length of road immediately north of the existing haul road (just south of the R335 marker on the image below) that as the EAP understands is a provincial road as well. It further understood that this gate/access to this road portion has been secured and access thereto controlled by PPC with provincial road authority permission. 11.3. Seismic testing: No seismic testing has been undertaken to establish the potential risks to the proposed landfill site. The reserves to the east of site F at a distance of ± 900m and the reserve to the west of the proposed site of <50m will require blasting due to the hard nature of the calcrete. Seismic tests will have to be done to establish any risks to the integrity of the proposed landfill on site F site prior to the confirmation of site selection. Please note that Mr Erasmus is a land owner in the area and does not represent PPC. He is a contractor on site with no knowledge of our future activities. His assessment on the mining induced seismicity is therefore his personal view with no scientific basis and not that of PPC. PPC understands that the process for site establishment is in the region of 10 years. Please note that PPC has existing reserves in close proximity (< 50 m) to Site F and a date sooner than 12 years will impact negatively on the PPC operations. As re quested w e h ave c onsidered t he i ssue of s eismicity a nd t he affect t hat blasting in close proximity to the facility could have. Our comments are as follows as per Jones and Wagener’s response to these issues: 1. According to PPC they have minable calcrete reserves within 50m and to the

west of the proposed facility. 2. The calcrete occurs as a surface or near-surface deposit of limited depth,

overlying w eathered s edimentary r ocks. T he c alcrete i s h ard a nd w ould require blasting to be able to excavate economically.

3. A portion of the proposed site layout is located on a remnant of the calcrete deposit as it pinches out in the valley within which the site will be developed. The facility will be developed in a phased manner and the initial cells, which are estimated to have a 10 year life, are not underlain by calcrete.

4. The potential for b lasting to cause damage to existing infrastructure, such as d ams or p lastic lined fa cilities or cause i nstability of a waste p ile is dependent on a number of factors; including the following: • Geology

•

: in this instance i t can be expected that seismic shocks will be transmitted laterally through the hard calcrete layer Blasting m ethodology

•

: The m agnitude o f se ismic sh ock t hat ca n be transmitted through the calcrete will depend on the blast charge per delay; this is something that can be controlled to reduce the risk of damage to adjacent facilities. In addition the b lasting methodology can be d esigned i n s uch a w ay t hat a n i nitial v oid i s c reated th rough controlled b lasting a nd e xcavation; s ubsequent b lasts th en d isplaces material into the voided area with limited seismic shock being transmitted. Proximity

•

: obviously t he c loser th e b lasting to existing f acilities th e greater the potential for damage. The nature of the facility under threat: the more flexible the nature of the facility the less the risk of damage. Waste facilities which incorporate plastic liners and clay liners are designed to be relatively flexible and, in our opinion the risk of loss of integrity due to seismic activity is low. The




stability of the waste pile however needs to be considered. Should the waste pile have a relatively steep outer slope and a high phreatic surface (ie. elevated liquid level in the waste), the stability of the waste pile could be of concern during a seismic event.

5. The overall r isk o f b lasting to th e f acility c an b e q uantified t hrough a technical study and appropriate measures designed to prevent damage or instability. However in our opinion this is not required at this point for the following reasons: • As part of the design, storm water cut-off t renches have been included

to divert storm water past the western and eastern part of the landfill. If required, these trenches can be excavated through the relatively thin calcrete, thereby creating an effective “void” that will prevent the transmission of seismic shocks into the landfill

• Due to their flexible nature, landfill linings are not sensitive to seismicity • The stability of the landfill can be improved in a potentially affected area

by simply flattening the outer slope from (say) 1 in 3 to 1 in 4. • The timing is such that the part of the landfill that could potentially be

affected by blasting will only be in use in 20 years or more. By that time mining activities in the area may have been concluded, in which case it is no longer an issue.

6. If blasting is carried out close to the site there is a danger of damage to infrastructure or people due to fly rock. Coordination and planning will be required to manage this aspect.

In conclusion, i t is our opinion that a lthough b lasting c lose to the waste facility could pose a risk, we believe that the r isk can be adequately addressed by the construction of cut-off trenches and localized flattening of slopes. The issue of fly rock c an b e m anaged th rough c oordination a nd pr oper m anagement o f th e blasting operation. As the site may only be developed once mining operations have been concluded, we believe that no additional study work should be carried out at this stage. It would be premature to design detail control measures (if required) at this stage. 16.9. Conclusions

It i s a pparent fr om t he a bove l isted I &AP i ssues a nd co ncerns, as w ell a s

comments on the D raft E IR, that the major areas of concern relating t o the

establishment of the facility are as follows:

• Waste incineration

• Potential impacts on the citrus industry

• Traffic and transport corridor impacts owing to the current state of the R335

• Illegal dumping and litter along transport routes

• Tourism impacts

• Impacts on PPC’s operations

• Overall management and monitoring of the operational facility

It is anticipated that these concerns have been suitably addressed in this report. These issues and concerns have been incorporated in the Draft EMP as well as the recommendations for conditions of environmental authorisation contained in Chapter 17.



Ch 17 – Conclusion and Recommendations June 2010 306

17. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The c onclusions o f t his Environmental I mpact R eport are t he re sult o f

comprehensive studies and specialist assessments. These studies were based on

issues i dentified t hrough t he S coping, Footprint Ra nking a nd Final Fe asibility

Reports and the parallel process of public participation

17.1. Final Conclusions of the Specialist Studies

17.1.1. Flora

Based on specialist analysis of the floral composition of the preferred footprint


• Presence of Rare and Endangered species: Although the diversity in habitat

is low and the Mesic Succulent Thicket is in a poor condition there is still

potential for Rare and Endangered species to occur within this vegetation

type. As mentioned in Chapter 5, several healthy specimens of the sensitive

species Syncarpha striata were recorded within Bontveld in a good condition

which is located along the northern boundary of the site. This portion of the

site should therefore b e regarded as sensitive. However, due to the low

species diversity of the Mesic thicket vegetation on-site compared to pristine

MST the i mpact o f the p roposed G HWMF o n e xisting MST vegetation i s

deemed to be of low negative significance. Due to the l imited availability of

good condition Bontveld i n the area surrounding the proposed GHWMF s ite

as compared to the more prevalent MST, the impacts on the Bontveld habitat

will be of increased negative significance at a Regional level.

• Ecological function: The vegetation within the area of the proposed GHWMF

footprint is providing the basic functions within the greater ecological

system. Vegetative cover is medium. Although some limited erosion does

occur within the game/livestock paths as well as on the old lands, the soil on

the rest of the footprint is adequately covered and protected.

• Uniqueness/conservation value: In general the footprint displays no specific

or important features different from the vegetation in the surrounding area.

The only area of real concern is the ecotone boundary between MST and

Bontveld as well as the small section of Bontveld along the northern

boundary of the site that needs to be protected.

Overall t he impacts on f loral h abitat a re deemed to be of low s ignificance if

appropriate mitigation measures are put in place for the construction and

operational phases of the project.




17.1.2. Fauna

Based on specialist analysis of the faunal composition of the p referred footprint


• Loss a nd f ragmentation o f h abitats: P roject a ctions a ssociated w ith th e

construction of the proposed GHWMF and the development of transport links

will result in the loss and fragmentation of sensitive habitats. The proposed

waste facility on Footprint F will impact a variety of habitats, particularly

Bontveld a nd M ST. As th e l oss and f ragmentation o f h abitats w ill b e

localised, and careful siting of the proposed GHWMF has directly avoided

intact Bontveld habitat, the impact after mitigation will be low.

• Loss of faunal diversity: Although the region for the proposed GHWMF has a

rich faunal diversity, some vertebrate groups in the region are now

characterised by reduced faunal diversity due to direct and indirect effects of

previous and current land use. Highest faunal diversity is associated with the

habitat m osaics o ccurring a long a nd a djacent t o d rainage l ines. P roject

actions a ssociated with th e c onstruction a nd o peration o f th e pr oposed

GHWMF will result in the loss of faunal diversity. This will occur in numerous

ways - including increased mortality, loss of habitat and disturbance. The

extent of the impact w ill vary in the d ifferent groups due to their ability to

migrate to and from the area, to tolerate disturbance, and/or to re-colonize

the region. The greatest impact will occur with diurnal, visible species such

as l arge m ammals, b irds such a s raptors a nd b ustards, etc., a nd l arge

snakes, e.g. cobras. The loss of faunal diversity will be localised and the

fauna is also relatively impoverished. T he unmitigated impact will therefore

be moderate, but with the possible rehabilitation of MST on closure this may

be reduced to low significance.

• Barriers to animal movement: The proposed GHWMF will result in habitat

fragmentation and the construction of linear developments (road linkages

and power l ines). T hese w ill f orm barriers to animal movement w ithin the

region, both for terrestrial fauna and to the aerial flight routes of migrating

birds. Impacts on animal movements will be greatest in regions with high

habitat fragmentation, or where linear developments such as roads transect

migratory paths. Most large mammals that may have undertaken seasonal

movements are mainly extirpated throughout the region. Reptiles and

amphibians do not undertake long distance migrations, but both groups may

undertake short seasonal movements. As the barriers to animal movements

will be localised and many of the transport linkages already exist, the impact

of the additional development will be of low significance.




• Loss of Species of Special Concern (SSC): Project actions associated with the

proposed G HWMF m ay re sult in the loss of Species of S pecial C oncern.

Project actions impacting SSC include the destruction and loss of sensitive

habitats, particularly Bontveld, and increased mortality and disturbance due

to increased road traffic and the possibility of bird species flying into

powerlines during operation of the facility. T he possible loss of SSC will be

localised and usually of low impact for most SSC. Ho wever, because of the

close proximity and possible p resence of a Globally Critically Endangered


significance.

• Increase in problem animals and alien species: Project actions associated

with th e c onstruction o f t he pr oposed G HWMF a nd th e d evelopment o f

transport links will result in an increase in problem animals and alien species.

Problem animals including jackal, feral dogs and cats, grey-headed gulls,

various crows, and introduced rats and mice that are attracted to refuse

disposal areas. I n addition to social impacts such as the spread of disease,

e.g. plague carried by rat fleas, they are also responsible for various faunal

impacts. Their numbers in the area surrounding the proposed GHWMF may

displace l ocal fa una fr om i ts h abitat; ca use increased p redation o n local

fauna and introduce or spread wildlife diseases. As the potential impact can

be effectively controlled the impact will be low.

• Increased disturbance and mortality due to road traffic: Although the new

roads associated with access to the proposed GHWMF are short, the

operational phase of the facility will involve a significant increase in transport

to a nd f rom t he f acility on e xisting roa ds. T his w ill re sult in increased

disturbance and faunal mortality due to increased road traffic over the long-

term. These factors can depress local populations of sensitive birds and large

mammals. Animals differ in the degree to which they tolerate such

disturbance. Most large b reeding birds do not tolerate continuous

disturbance, particularly raptors and large terrestrial birds (bustards, cranes,

etc). Increased n oise and m otor v ibrations i n w etlands m ay a lso i mpact

amphibian breeding choruses, which are also intolerant of increased light

levels. As an increase in faunal mortality due to increased road traffic will not

be entirely avoided, the impact will be low.

• Changes in natural fire regime: Changes in water flow dynamics following

road construction and other developments that reduce vegetation cover, may

reduce the water t able locally, drying vegetation to unnatural levels and

making it m ore s usceptible t o f ire. C onstruction a nd planning o f r oads

should anticipate an increased fire ri sk, a nd increased human p opulation

growth in the area will also lead to an increase in accidental fires.




• Pollution: Pollution may result from periodic accidents, or from slow, ongoing

contamination. Operation of the proposed GHWMF, particularly in relation to

the use of liquid fuels, could result in periodic spillages. Heavy vehicle traffic

is also associated with increased local pollution resulting from exhaust

fumes, oil spillage and accumulation of rubber compounds from tyre wear.

These pollutants can cause localised impacts. However, the impact on fauna

will be low if correctly mitigated during the operational phase.

• Loss or reduction o f ecosystem functioning: P roject actions associated w ith

the construction of the proposed GHWMF and the development of transport

links w ill r esult i n t he l oss or reduction o f ecosystem f unctioning. T he

general region of the proposed GHWMF comprises a mosaic of vegetation

and abiotic habitats, on an elevated region with drainage into the nearby

Coega a nd B rak Ri ver c atchments. A lthough th ere i s a l ong h istory of

agricultural use and transformation in the region, it still retains relatively

high faunal and floral diversity and contributes to local ecosystem functioning

(e.g. nutrient cycles and transfer, maintenance of biodiversity, the biological

components of hydrological cycles, etc.). The impact can be proactively

avoided and partially mitigated by avoiding direct loss of Bontveld habitat,

wetlands, st eep valley s ides, a nd th e l imestone ‘rubble edge’ o ften

associated with the ecotone between Bontveld and adjacent MST in the final

siting of the GHWMF.

17.1.3. Geohydrology


proposed site and the immediate surrounding farms, the preferred footprint is

considered s uitable f or t he d evelopment of the G HWMF waste p rovided th e

design, c onstruction a nd op erational re quirements a s s pecified i n t he DWEA

guideline document are adhered to. The main reasons for the site being regarded

a suitable area, are the following:




below surface.




result v ery l ittle u se i s be ing m ade of g roundwater for d omestic, s tock







• The und erlying f ormations, t he S undays R iver a nd Ki rkwood f ormations,

comprise o f a v ery thick s uccession ( estimated t o b e > 300 m) of


layers. These f ormations have a v ery l ow hydraulic conductivity and will


• The deep artesian aquifer associated with the T able Mountain Group


of Uitenhage Group sediments. T hat the latter sediments form an effective

barrier to groundwater flow is illustrated by the artesian nature of the deeper

aquifer.



• The WASP analysis, which takes into consideration a number o f geological,

geohydrological, water use and design criteria, also indicated that the site

can be classified as “suitable”.


as “fatal flaws” according to the definitions described in the DWEA guideline

documents.

17.1.4. Tourism

Based on specialist analysis of tourism in the area throughout the course of the

EIA process the following has been concluded:


heavily o n its image as a n e co/wildlife de stination. T he A ddo E lephant

National P ark is the key attraction in the area and is being marketed o n

environmental ground i .e. the animals are free to roam across a l arge area,

and the p ark h as a range of b iodiversity. The area thus a ppeals to t he





GHWMF is l ocated i n th e a rea d ue to th e p erception th at th ese t ypes of

facilities are harmful to the environment.







destination that is environmentally sensitive. Although potential Visual, Odour and

Traffic impacts a re p redicted t o b e of l ow s ignificance a s i t re lates t o t heir

relationship with the overall predicted Tourism impacts, perceptions of the facility

prior to , and d uring, a visit to t he area a re deemed to be of h igh negative

significance. Similarly, the development potential of any tourism related facilities

in the GHWMF area will be limited as a result

17.1.5. Visual

Footprint F is a valley infill site and ranks as the preferred location for the GHWMF

from a visual impact perspective for the following reasons:

• It has the most contained area of visual impact and lends itself to the highest

level of successful impact mitigation measures. This is due to the enclosed

nature of t he v alley w ithin w hich it re sides. T he f act t hat t he f acility is

theoretically visible from the R335 is not a major cause for concern. The

likelihood of it ever being noticed or recognised as a landfill from a distance of

6 km is slim to negligible, as the site would never appear in its entirety.

• The selection of Footprint F as the preferred alternative, even with its own

associated visual impact concerns, highlights the need to shield the facility

from ob servers t ravelling a long t he R 335. Th e b enefit o f t his f ootprint

placement is that no one travelling from Port Elizabeth to Addo, or the Greater

Addo Elephant National Park, would even be aware of the existence of this

facility th rough a ccidental o bservation. T his i s d ue to th e f act t hat th e

footprint is far removed from the R335 and because of the hidden nature of

the infill site.

• The associated benefits o f placing the w aste p rocessing facility o n m ining

land, where borrow materials could be sourced without breaking new ground

and clearing large tracts of l and, counts in Footprint F ’s favour. Th e mining

and quarrying activities a nd a w aste processing f acility are c omplimenting

land-uses, as opposed to the potential conflict between waste processing and

agriculture/cattle and game farming/tourism and eco-tourism.

• Another clear benefit of this footprint's placement is its closer proximity to

Port Elizabeth from where most of the waste to be treated will be transported.

The distance of 4 km does not sound like much, but over a period of 20 years

it would translate to a considerable amount of kilometres. This, and the fact

that access will be afforded by a private road, minimises the visual impacts

associated with the increase in heavy vehicle t raffic to and f rom the facility.




This increase in heavy vehicle traffic might raise awareness of the fact that

such a facility exists in the vicinity.

17.1.6. Air Quality

The odour, nuisance dust and health impacts of the candidate site for the GHWMF

were assessed. The main findings of the study are as follows:

• Particulates (P M10): N o e xceedances of th e c urrent o r p roposed a mbient

South A frican standards f or P M10 w ere p redicted t o oc cur a t a ny of t he

sensitive receptors included in the study for any of the scenarios. The impacts

from landfill activities associated with Scenario 1 were predicted to be the

least significant and will result in the lowest ground level PM10 concentrations

at the majority of the sensitive receptors. T he h ighest PM10 concentrations

predicted as a result of emissions associated with the four scenarios were

predicted to occur at Rooidam.

• Particulates (Dustfall): Slight dustfall levels (<250 mg/m²/day) were

predicted to occur at the all of the sensitive receptors located around the

proposed GHWMF s ite. Overall, the impacts from landfill activities associated

with Scenario 1 were predicted to be the least significant and will result in the

lowest dustfall levels at the majority of the sensitive receptors. Dust

emissions fr om o f a ctivities a ssociated w ith Scenario 2 w ere p redicted to

result in the highest dustfall levels at most of the sensitive receptors. The

highest dustfall levels as a result of emissions associated with Scenarios 1 and

2 were predicted to occur at Rooidam while the highest dustfall levels as a

result of emissions associated with Scenarios 3 and 4 were predicted to occur

at Centlivres

• Non-carcinogenic exposures: None of the pollutants considered in this study

flagged for the proposed GHWMF. The hazard quotient for chronic exposures

for the proposed landfill was predicted to be 0.012. T he hazard quotient for

the site was therefore predicted to be less than 1.0 for all exposure periods.

• Cancer risks: Total maximum incremental cancer risk levels were predicted to

be less than ~ 1 in 3.5 million for the proposed landfill operations and would

therefore b e r egarded a s a cceptable b y t he r egulatory a uthorities. Th e

maximum cancer risk at the sensitive receptors as a result of emissions from

the pr oposed l andfill s ite w as p redicted to o ccur at Ro oidam (~ 1 i n 45

million).

• Odour impacts: No odour threshold exceedances were predicted to occur due

to on-site concentrations of odoriferous gasses. Off-site odour impacts were




predicted to far below the acceptable 3 OU/m³ odour unit level at all the


17.1.7. Heritage

The study has shown that Footprint F was suitable for the development of a

GHWMF in terms of its potential impacts on heritage which are deemed to be of

low significance.

17.1.8. Land Use

The assessment of land use included the potential for resettlement of individuals,

fatal flaws associated with the proximity to airfields, rezoning issues and potential

impacts on the citrus industry. The key findings of this assessment were that:

• Footprint F will require resettlement but the number of people involved is

small and if the recommendations are implemented it could be undertaken in

a satisfactory manner.

• Although it has not yet been confirmed that the site can be rezoned for waste

disposal, no reasons have been given as to why this should not be possible.

• The proximity of registered airfields would not constitute a fatal flaw.

• Any future land use planning or development in the a rea w ill have to be

cognizant o f th e c onstraints th e GHWMF and a ssociated b uffer z one m ay

impose on certain land uses. Similarly, should the facility be authorised, these


that are developed or revised at local and regional level.




on the certification of citrus farms to the north-east of the proposed

footprints.

17.1.9. Transport

This study has estimated the costs for the transportation of waste to the

proposed regional general and hazardous waste d isposal facility by road and by

rail, as well as the current and desired state of road conditions, with the following

findings:

• A cost comparison between these two modes of transport concluded that the

road o ptions a re f ar more e conomical t han t he r ail o ptions. T he c ost o f




upgrading the roads to Footprint F were estimated at R 16,0 million and R

24,2 million for gravel and tar respectively. The Province is committed to


once upgraded the design standard of Addo Road will be able to accommodate

the heavy vehicle traffic that will be generated by the waste facility. It can

therefore be concluded that t ransportation o f waste by road is t he better

option.

• If an environmental authorisation is not given to extend the l ife of the Aloes


become operational during 2012. As PPC will still be mining their land north

of P1954 until after 2012, we recommend that P1958 be regravelled for use

by waste vehicles travelling to the site from the R335.

• A new 0,5 km access road should be constructed from P1958 to the site to

replace the currently d isused skew junction where P1954 joins P1958. It i s

essential that the Addo Road (R335) be upgraded from the R334 to P1958

junction b efore t he w aste f acility b ecomes o perational. S imilarly, it is

recommended that theP1958, as well as all other haul routes to the facility

that a re currently gravel roads, are upgraded to b itumen standard and fulfil

the same design criteria as that proposed for the R335 (Addo Road).

• If an environmental authorisation is granted to extend the life of the Aloes

hazardous waste facility, the decision on whether to upgrade P1954 or

regravel P1958 can be delayed until it is known when PPC will complete their

mining operations north of P1954. I f these operations are completed by the

time th e n ew w aste f acility is r equired, th e u pgrading o f P 1954 and th e

relocation o f its junction o n R3 35 is p referred, b ecause it w ill r esult in a

shorter travel distance than via P1958 for the majority of waste vehicles that

will use the R335 coming from Port Elizabeth and the Coega IDZ.

• The Pr ovincial D epartment o f Ro ads a nd T ransport h as s tated t hat it is

committed to upgrading Addo Road regardless of the proposed waste site

development and once upgraded; the recommended design standard of Addo

Road w ill b e a ble to accommodate th e h eavy v ehicle tr affic th at w ill b e

generated by the w aste f acility. It c an therefore b e c oncluded th at

transportation of waste by road i s the better option, provided that the Addo

Road between the R334 and P1958 junctions is upgraded before the operation

of the waste facility commences.

17.1.10. Social

Based on the findings of the SIA, it can be concluded that the social environment

in g eneral p oses n o f atal flaws t o t he development of t he proposed regional




GHWMF provided that the identified mitigation measures, as recommended for

inclusion in the EMP, are implemented and adhered to, particularly where

construction activities either take place or pass through in close proximity to


of these households in terms of noise, dust, safety and security. In summation:

• The pre-construction and construction phase of the proposed project is

characterised by a number of negative impacts. This is mainly due to the

nature of the activities that take place during these phases. The same holds

true for the operational phase of the p roposed project. Most of the negative

impacts within these various phases can be mitigated successfully. There are

also a number of positive impacts, which could be further enhanced if

managed effectively. These impacts mostly relate to a temporary change in

the employment and economic profile of the local area by means of

employment opportunities, which in turn leads to a positive economic impact

on local households.

• The g eographic, d emographic, b iophysical a nd socio-cultural p rocesses a ll

have a number of negative impacts. However all of these impacts can be

mitigated successfully if effectively managed. Economic impacts as a result of

the project are for the most part positive in nature, which is mainly due to the

economic investment and development that will take place in the community

as a result of the project. Although the expected construction impacts across

all the change processes are mostly negative, these impacts are for the most

part only temporary in nature and only expected to last over the construction

period, which is approximately 12 months.

• Operational impacts are expected to last over the longer term and therefore

would have a prolonged effect on especially the biophysical environment in

terms of an effective waste management strategy. People are more inclined to

get “used” to the facility in their area if waste management strategies are

applied effectively and with due diligence. Based on the findings of this report,

it c an b e c oncluded th at the overall si gnificance o f i mpacts o n t he social

environment will be low.

17.2. Recommendations for Mitigation and Management Measures

17.2.1. Flora

Any development within this area should be approached with caution with regard

to the potential site specific sensitivity of patches of the composite vegetation

cover existing on site. The following recommendations are put forward:




• Bontveld: Development on the Bontveld area along the northern boundary of

the s ite s hould n ot b e a llowed a t a ll. D ue t o th e a vailable s pace on the

proposed site, a change in layout in order to exclude this Bontveld from all

construction and operational activity is regarded as feasible and necessary.

• Loss of rare, endangered and/or protected species: The actual lay-out of the

site to be developed, a long with the access routes and associated st ructures

should b e m arked c learly w ith h azard t ape b efore commencement o f

construction. This would allow a proper search and rescue effort to be

executed. The indigenous plants within these areas should be removed to an

established nursery (or one set out on the site) for use in the rehabilitation of

disturbed areas after construction. The plant search and rescue operation can

be done with the help of the local botanical society, NMMU (University) and

Eastern Cape Nature Conservation.

• Loss of Mesic Succulent Thicket: The permanent loss of vegetation within the

footprint area cannot be prevented. It can, however, be minimised by

ensuring:

* Construction activities should be restricted to the minimum area needed.

* Complete removal of a ll excavated material and construction rubble after

construction is completed.

• Rehabilitation of disturbed areas: According to current environmental

legislation, it has to be rehabilitated to resemble the surrounding and

historical vegetation. The establishment of a waste site provide an opportunity

to recreate the previous landscape to a large extent. This is possible by using

landscaped cells to conform to the general landscape of the area instead of

the traditional square cells with flat tops used at waste facilities.

• Stormwater drainage: Stormwater from within the developed site should be

properly contained and should not be allowed drain off-site at all. Stormwater

flow p atterns a fter construction s hould b e c arefully c ontrolled to p revent

alteration of natural water flow patterns of the receiving vegetation downslope

from the site as far as possible.

• Disturbance of vegetation: Due to the difficulty to restore Mesic Succulent

Thicket and Bontveld vegetation, disturbance of natural vegetation along the

access routes a nd a round th e s ite e tc. th rough tr ampling, c ompaction b y

motor vehicles etc. must be minimised through proper management:

* Optimal use should be made of existing access roads.

* Construction of new access roads should be minimised.

* After completion of construction, all access roads that will not be used

during the operational phase, should be rehabilitated and re-vegetated i f

necessary to blend in with the surrounding vegetation.




* Areas on the construction site that were notably compacted by

construction activities should be ripped to allow re-establishment of

natural vegetation.

• Alien Invasive Control: An alien plant control and monitoring programme must

be developed starting during the construction phase and to be carried over

into the operational phase. The following elements should be included in such

a programme:

* The a ctive c ontrol o f all a lien in vasive s pecies b y me ans of m anual

removal, ri ng-barking, c hemical c ontrol o r a c ombination o f t hese

methods.

* The b igger t runks a nd b ranches should b e removed w hile t he smaller

branches can be used as a soil stabiliser against wind erosion in exposed

areas, while providing micro-habitat for seedling establishment.

* Rehabilitation of the cleared areas, starting with the establishment of a

grass cover a nd p hasing in th e r e-establishment o f sh rub sp ecies b y

sowing in of appropriate seed mixes.

* All e mergent a lien p lant s eedlings m ust b e re moved b y h and a nd re -

sprouting from existing rootstock must be chemically treated in a continual

monitoring and follow-up programme.

• Soil pollution: Pollution of the surface and or ground water with petrol, diesel,

oil, c ement, p aint, litter etc., secondarily a ffecting th e v egetation o f th e

receiving environment must be prevented.

* Construction activities should be l imited to the Hazardous Waste site and

servitude areas.

* Movement b y c onstruction p ersonnel o utside o f th e d emarcated

development areas should be strictly prohibited.

* Adequate numbers and placement of portable chemical toilet facilities at

construction sites is crucial to prevent unnecessary pollution of the

surrounding vegetation. A ratio of one toilet per fifteen persons is

proposed.

* During construction, littering, specifically of the natural areas, should be

prevented. Adequate containers for litter removal should be supplied on

site. T hese c ontainers s hould b e e mptied on a re gular b asis a nd t he

contents removed to an appropriate and licensed waste disposal site.

* During operation specific care should be taken to prevent the spread of

air-blown and other litter from the site. Screening of the site with diamond

mesh fences of appropriate height may help to contain most of the air-

blown litter. Regular cover with soil and compaction of the waste layer

should also be implemented.

• Risk of fire: The risk of accidental fires to occur during the construction phase

is considered to be high, especially during the dry summer months and windy




periods. Fires could spread to vegetation on properties adjacent to the site,

especially to the private Grassridge nature reserve which could lead loss of

biodiversity.

* Accidental fires should be prevented through proper sensitisation of the

contractors and their workers towards the associated risks, dangers and

damage of property.

* An emergency preparedness plan should be in place to fight accidental

veld fires, should they occur. The adjacent land owners/users/managers

should a lso b e i nformed a nd i nvolved i n th e e stablishment o f a Fire

Protection Agency according to the Veld and Forest Fire Act.

* Enclosed areas for food preparation must be provided. The use of open

fires for cooking of food etc. by construction personnel should be strictly

prohibited.

* Use of branches of trees and shrubs for fire making purposes must be

strictly prohibited.

17.2.2. Fauna

The following recommendations are put forward:

• Due t o k nown p resence o f t hreatened f auna i n B ontveld habitat in a reas

adjacent to Footprint F , and the presence of s imilar habitats in the northern

section of Footprint F and alongside transport linkages to the proposed

GHWMF, a d etailed and c ommitted c onservation p lan f or th e c ritically

endangered Albany Adder must be implemented. The plan must incorporate a

similar plan for the adjacent PPC lands, on which the only known population of

the Albany Adder is situated.

• The Environmental Officer (EO) for the proposed GHWMF should be familiar

with the other threatened and endemic fauna detailed in this report. The EO

should record the p resence i n the a rea of any b reeding populations or l arge

congregations o f su ch sp ecies, a nd b ring these to th e a ttention o f l ocal

conservation authorities.

• The quality of sensitive habitats, particularly Bontveld, should be monitored.

Any i ndications o f d egradation, p ollution o r c ontamination o f t his habitat

should b e re corded a nd t he causative a gents i dentified f or

correction/mitigation.

• There has been l ittle research done with regard to how successfully MST can

be f ully r ehabilitated. However, there i s a lso a d egree of confusion over

habitat from a faunal and floristic perspective. The continued presence of so

many f aunal g roups i n degraded M ST h abitat s hows th at ‘ functional

rehabilitation’ is possible, even if recovery of full floristic diversity may be very




difficult or take a long time. Accordingly, the impact can be partially mitigated

by avoiding direct loss of intact MST and Bontveld habitat. All project actions

during construction and subsequent operation of the proposed GHWMF should

avoid MST and Bontveld habitat where possible. After closure of the facility all

habitats, where possible, should be rehabilitated to the existing vegetation

type. This i s p robably attainable f or MST, at least i n terms of f unctional

rehabilitation for faunal g roups, b ut Bontveld is a growth form dependent

upon the underlying limestone pavement, and once this has been removed it

cannot be re-habilitated.

• GHWMF staff should be informed of the need for environmental protection,

and the diverse impacts that the GHWMF activities may have on the

environment.

• The GHWMF operation will be l imited to the s ite. However, off-site impacts

will occur on the p roposed access roads. These secondary impacts must be

monitored to assess whether p otential cumulative effects may need to be

addressed.

• Rehabilitation o f f aunal d iversity o n c losure of th e p roposed GHWMF will

require habitat corridors along which fauna can migrate from refugia retaining

original fauna. The license holder or operator of the proposed GHWMF should

therefore integrate their EMP, particularly for threatened species (e.g. the

Albany Adder) with neighbouring properties to ensure successful faunal

rehabilitation on closure.

17.2.3. Geohydrology

The following mitigation measures have been recommended:

• Design and Construction Phase:

* Approval of water quality monitoring systems by the relevant government

authorities

* Design to b e d one a ccording to th e latest M inimum Re quirement

documents and s pecifications of th e D epartments of Water A ffairs and

Forestry (DWEA) and Environment and Tourism (DWEA). Ap proval of a ll

designs to be obtained from the relevant National and Regional/Provincial

regulatory authorities

* Sealing o f a ll b oreholes with c ement a nd final b entonite a t th e top.

Sanitary seal consisting of a bentonite and sand mixture around the upper

4 m of the borehole.

* Proper storm water control measures must to be implemented to minimize

storm water collection within the excavated areas and to reduce erosion.




* Selection of good quality natural clay for liner construction, alternatively

addition of bentonite to liner material to attain the prescribed permeability

for l iners. R egular i nspection o f c onstruction a nd t esting of l iner

permeability a nd c ompaction c haracteristics d uring c onstruction. P roper

control a nd s upervision d uring the p lacement o f s ynthetic liners, a nd

testing after completion.

* Proper management of all construction material storage areas and bunding

of facilities where required

• Operation:

* Minimize l eachate g eneration t hrough p roper l andfill m anagement a nd

control of ratio between liquid and solid waste disposed in each cell. Proper

control of leachate seepage and collection thereof and diverting to properly

designed holding and/or treatment facility

* Approved designed and constructed leachate holding dams.

* Bunding of all storage facilities and disposal of all effluent collected in

bunded areas to leachate or storm water holding dams

* Properly designed and constructed according to building regulations of all

sewage disposal systems on site and regular removal of sewage from tank

to prevent overflow

* Proper s torm w ater c ontrol a nd d rainage c anals around d isposal a rea,

together with storm water control dams with sufficient capacity to support

a 1:50 year rainfall event. Monitoring programme for storm water quality

and disposal of storm water to be in place

* Approved design and constructed wash bays and effluent collection and

disposal systems

* All w orkshop waste t o be disposed of i n accordance with the re levant

regulations

• Decommissioning:

* Proper capping of each cell and regular maintenance of capping according

to permit conditions to avoid infiltration of rainwater and thus leachate

generation within the waste pile. Installation of leachate level monitoring

facility for each cell monitoring point

* Treatment and/or proper disposal of final leachate volumes and draining of

holding dams

* Development and implementation o f a s torm water management p lan as

well as the proper maintenance of storm water control systems on site

after closure according to permits and regulations issued from time to time

by relevant authorities. Regular inspections by authorities

* Regular water quality monitoring according to permit conditions and in

compliance to Minimum Requirement documents of DWEA. Reporting of

results to the authorities on a six monthly basis




17.2.4. Tourism

It was concluded that none of the sites assessed in the penultimate phases of the

assessment process, including Footprint F, are ideal for such a facility as these

footprints are located in a tourism area that markets itself as an eco/wildlife

destination that is environmentally sensitive. As such, it is strongly

recommended that the following mitigation measures be implemented:

• Provide detailed information regarding the facility to all tourism

establishments in the area so that they can deal with queries from tourists.

• Obtain e ditorial c opy i n l ocal a nd r egional media to i nform residents a nd

tourists o f th e f acility and its p otential impact o n to urism a s w ell a s th e

mitigation measures that will be employed to address environmental impacts.

• Ensure the facility is not visible from the R335.

17.2.5. Visual

Possible mitigation measures for footprint F would include:

• The upgrade of the R335 main road to facilitate the overtaking of trucks.

Being stuck behind a heavy vehicle, transporting hazardous waste constitutes

a visual impact and unnecessarily sensitises the observer.

• The potential screening of th e facility, t hrough th e strategic placement o f

vegetation at the areas of highest impact, should be investigated and

implemented.

• The placement of site infrastructure and associated buildings must be carefully

planned to further reduce unnecessary v isual c lutter. L ighting of the facility

should be designed to contain, rather than spread the light, and avoid

potential visual impacts at night. This would apply to security lighting and

operational lighting, should the facility function at night.

• Implementation and monitoring of visual impact mitigation measures should

be d one t hroughout t he l ifespan o f t he f acility, f rom c onstruction p hase

through to decommissioning and rehabilitation phases.

• A forum should be created through which affected parties could report any

shortcomings or negligence in the mitigation and containment of the visual

impact of the facility.




The broad recommendations mentioned above should be developed in greater

detail during the further iterative development and implementation of the EMP for

the proposed GHWMF.

17.2.6. Air Quality

The findings of the air quality assessment have lead to the following

recommendations:

• The proposed GHWMF operator should control on-site fugitive dust emissions

by effective management and mitigation. At least 75% dust control efficiency

is required on unpaved roads to ensure dustfall rates are reduced to the levels

predicted.

• Based on the air quality impact assessment it is recommended that the P1954

unpaved road be considered as the access route to the GHWMF since Scenario

1 is p redicted t o r esult in t he least s ignificant impacts a t t he s ensitive

receptors included i n th e study. It is recommended that this road be

upgraded to bitumen standard.

• Cognisance should be taken that the predicted impacts was based on design

criteria and emissions ra tes based on subsurface gas concentrations. T hese

subsurface concentrations were a combination of UK default gas

concentrations and Chloorkop Landfill measured concentrations. Therefore

sub surface gas concentrations should be analysed to determine trace gas

composition and generation.

• It is also recommended that PM10 and dustfall levels be regularly monitored

in order to:

* confirm the predicted air quality impacts associated with activities from

the landfill site;

* assess compliance of landfill emissions and associated impacts with

current air quality standards;

* determine source contributions to ambient air quality in order to prioritise

mitigation measures;

* assess the efficiency of mitigation measures

• It is recommended that gravimetric sampling for PM10 be done using portable

mini high-volume samplers. These are battery-driven and take a composite

sample over 24 hours. If sampling is carried out every third day (including

week-ends) a s ample series without systematic error, yet not to o labour-

intensive is built up.




• It is recommended that a t l east four deposition gauges be placed on the

landfill site perimeter. The recorded wind field suggests that t he dustfall

gauges should be situated to the north-eastern, south-eastern, south-western

and north-western boundaries of the site.

Recommendations concerning the mitigation of emissions, specifically particulate

emissions, from the proposed GHWMF are as follows:

• The haul roads going to and from the site as well as on-site were identified as

a significant source of dust emissions. Three types of measures may be taken

to reduce emissions from unpaved roads:

* measures aimed at reducing the extent of unpaved roads, e.g. paving,

* traffic control measures aimed at reducing the entrainment of material by

restricting traffic volumes and reducing vehicle speeds, and

* measures aimed at binding the surface material or enhancing moisture

retention, such as wet suppression and chemical stabilization (EPA, 1987;

Cowhert et al., 1988; APCD, 1995).

• Control measures that can be applied to reduce fugitive dust emissions from

exposed surfaces include the use of vegetation cover. Vegetal cover retards

erosion by binding the residue with a root network, by sheltering the residue

surface and by trapping material already eroded. Vegetation is also considered

the most effective control measure in terms of its ability to also control water

erosion.

• In investigating the feasibility of vegetation types the following properties are

normally taken into account: indigenous plants; ability to establish and

regenerate quickly; proven effective for reclamation elsewhere; tolerant to the

climatic conditions of the area; high rate of root production; easily propagated

by seed or cuttings; and nitrogen-fixing ability.

17.2.7. Transport

The following recommended mitigation measures must be implemented:

• Climbing lanes on hills for heavy vehicles must be incorporated in the

refurbishment design of the R335 to allow other traffic to pass safely.

• All ot her h aul rou tes to t he f acility t hat a re c urrently g ravel roa ds, a re

upgraded to bitumen s tandard and f ulfil th e s ame d esign c riteria as th at

proposed for the R335.

• Road safety improvements such as surfaced shoulders, guard rails, signs and

markings must be standard.




• Reconstruction of existing road pavement prior to the facility becoming

operational combined with regular maintenance thereof.

• Promote use of alternative route via N2 and N10 to Addo Elephant Park for

tourist related traffic, as well as the transport of citrus in the instance of a spill

event by waste vehicles during the operational phase of the facility. This will

result in longer travelling times and an associated increase in tourism and

citrus industry transport costs, but will negate the concerns raised in terms of

potential impacts on these respective industries

The implications of the concerns raised by the SRVCF with regard to the potential

scenario of an accidental spill of waste on the road accompanied by rain, which

could r esult in c ontaminated r ain w ater l anding u p o n f ruit f or i nternational

export, a re n oted. It i s t he op inion of Bohlweki-SSI E nvironmental t hat

quantifying the risks and likelihood of this scenario occurring will be difficult to

accurately and credibly assess. It should therefore be assumed that a spill event

followed by, or during, a rainfall event is likely to eventuate during the lifespan of

the facility. Accordingly, the decision making authority (DWEA) is urged to apply

the precautionary principle in this regard. It is therefore imperative that and

appropriate emergency response measures a re developed for, and implemented

during, the operational phase of the facility for this scenario and is reflected in the

required t ransport corridor m onitoring a nd m anagement p rotocols. In t he

instance of an accident/spill event it would have to be communicated quickly and

effectively to affected road users, traffic halted and an alternative transport route

utilised until such time as the spill is cleared up. Trucks transporting fruit should

therefore ideally be covered to a degree that will prevent ingress of water that

could potentially be contaminated by wet road surfaces f rom a spill event when

transporting fruit to the Port Elizabeth harbour once the facility is operational.

17.2.8. Social

From a social perspective, it is recommended that the following mitigation

measures be included in the EMP.

Demographic Change Processes

• Relocation of Households

* Residents should be assisted with the relocation process.

* A formal grievance p rocedure should be implemented and communicated

to these residents to ensure a fair and transparent process.

• Arrival of Construction Workers

* Raise awareness amongst construction workers about local traditions and

practices.




* Depending on the size and origin of construction workers, inform local

businesses to the fact that construction workers will move into the area to

enable local businesses to plan for the extra demand.

* Again, depending on the origin of construction workers, ensure that the

local community communicate their expectations of construction workers’


• Influx of Job Seekers

* Ensure that employment procedures / policy are communicated to local

stakeholders, e specially w ard r epresentative org anisations a nd w ard

councillors.

* Have clear rules and regulations for access to the camp / site office to

control loitering. Consult with the local SAPS to establish standard

operating procedures for the control and/or removal of loiterers at the

construction site.

* Construction w orkers s hould b e c learly identifiable b y w earing p roper

construction uniforms displaying the logo of the construction company.

Construction workers could also be issued with identification tags.

• Outflow of Labourers

* Develop s kills t ransfer p lans (e .g. p ortable s kills tr aining) that w ould

enable a worker to move from one project to another project within the

same area.


minimum wages.



worker with the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF), Pay as you earn






• Arrival of Operational Workers

* Depending o n the o rigin of op erational w orkers, ensure t hat t he l ocal

community communicate their expectations of operational workers’


Economic Change Processes

• Compensation for Site

* The land valuator should be experienced in valuating the land in question.




* Both parties should have the option to have contracts reviewed by an

independent body.

• Direct Formal Employment Opportunities to Local Individuals

* Unskilled j ob o pportunities s hould b e a fforded t o l ocal c ommunity

members. Local trade unions could assist with the recruitment process to

counteract the potential for social mobilisation.

* Equal opportunities for employment should be created to ensure that the

local female population a lso have access to these opportunities. Females

should be encouraged to apply for positions.

* Individuals with the potential to develop their skills should be afforded

training opportunities.

* Mechanisms should be developed to provide alternative solutions for

creating job security upon completion of the project. This could include

formal and/or informal training on how to look for alternative employment,

information on career progression, etc. to ensure that people are equipped

to seek other jobs with the skills that they have gained.


minimum wages.



worker with the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF), Pay as You Earn






• Indirect F ormal a nd/or Informal E mployment O pportunities to L ocal

Individuals

* Develop a procurement policy that is easy to understand and ensure that

local s ubcontractors a lso c omply w ith th e p rocurement p olicy a nd any

other applicable policies.

* Ensure that local subcontractors receive the necessary support in terms of

resources.

* Agree on specific performance criteria prior to appointment.

* Identify t he s egment t hat m ight benefit f rom i nformal i ndirect

opportunities, and assist them with skills development and subsidise

initiatives that are sustainable.

* Encourage construction workers to use local services.

• Loss of Employment Opportunities

* Negotiate and take measures to avoid large-scale job losses;

* Anticipate the possibility of job losses and implement contingency plans;




* Give t imeous warning to a ffected i ndividuals to improve their chances o f

finding alternative employment; and

* Discuss industry trends and challenges on an ongoing basis.

Institutional and Empowerment Change Processes

• Attitude Formation against the Project

* Transparent information should be supplied to the community from the

outset of the project.

* The local community should play an active participatory role in the

planning process, especially landowners of neighbouring properties. This

could be achieved by means of establishing a community forum that meet

quarterly or once a month to discuss issues and progress surrounding the

project.

* Employment opportunities should first be offered to the local community if

the skills are available within the community.

* CDC/NMBM should deliver on their undertakings with the community in

terms of employment creation, etc. (tangible benefits to the community).

* The undertakings i n the EMP should a lso be implemented effectively and

with due diligence.

• Additional Demand on Municipal Services

* Construction workers should be made aware of the limited capacity of the

municipal services network.

* Negotiations w ith t he N MBM m ust b e conducted a nd a “demand-side

management” should be implemented.


* Integrate risk management programmes with the IDP;

* Establish d isaster p revention p rogrammes that f ocus on th e m ost

vulnerable c ommunities – and, a t th e s ame ti me, s upport s ustainable

livelihoods;

* Establish and maintain fire protection on the facility fringe;

* Establish a culture of scientific risk analysis by investigating possible r isk

scenarios and developing standard operating procedures for such

scenarios;

* Establish and maintain multi-disciplinary co-operation and cooperative

partnerships;

* Establish pro-active media liaison;

* Educate and inform surrounding communities and/or households on the

standard o perating p rocedures t o f ollow d uring a ccidents. E nsure t hat

these communities and/or households know who to contact in case of an

emergency a nd a re a ble t o i mplement a s tep-by-step d isaster

management procedure;




* The way in which the disaster management plan is communicated to the

surrounding c ommunities a nd/or h ouseholds s hould b e j argon-free a nd

outline an easy to follow step-by-step procedure. Cognisance should be

taken of th e fact that some members of the s urrounding communities

and/or households are i lliterate – make use of alternative communication

methods (e.g. picture posters) to educate and inform these individuals.

Socio-Cultural Change Processes

• Sense of Place

* Sufficient and transparent information should be supplied to local residents

within the area to enhance their sense of safety and thereby reducing the

negative impact on sense of place.

* An information session with the construction workers and representatives

from t he l ocal a reas ( farmers, M otherwell/Uitenhage re sidents

associations) s hould b e h eld p rior to th e s tart o f c onstruction. L ocal

traditions, m itigation m easures, a nd expectations s hould b e d iscussed.

The ECO will be responsible for organising this meeting. If need be, these

meetings should be held throughout the construction period.


with due diligence. The ECO should ensure that social mitigation measures

are implemented, a nd g ive monthly feedback to the representative

residents associations.

* Establish a formal grievances procedure:

o Start addressing these grievances within 24 hours.

o Keep record of complaints and how they were dealt with.

o Keep record of feedback to the complainant.

o Minimise complaints received / litigation.

o No conflict between the project team and construction workers and the

local inhabitants.

• Physical Splintering

* Provide a s afe p assage w ay f or c ommunity m embers t o m inimise t he

impact on movement patterns.

* Fence off the construction site to prohibited unauthorised access by

community members, thereby placing themselves in potential unnecessary

danger.

• Safety and Security

* Construction workers should be clearly identifiable. Overalls should have

the logo of the construction company on it and/or construction workers

should wear identification cards.

* The construction site should be fenced and access should be controlled by

means of a security access point.




* Loitering of outsiders at the either the construction site or at the

construction village should not be allowed. Loiterers at the site should be

removed in cooperation with the local South African Police Service (SAPS).

• Noise Pollution

* Construction a ctivities s hould b e re stricted t o d aytime h ours b etween

06:00 and 18:00.

* Adjacent property owners should b e consulted and notified o f a ny

construction activities that could lead to excessive noise levels.

* Adjacent p roperty owners s hould a lso b e c onsulted if any n ight t ime

construction activities were to take place.

• Safety Risk

* Educate l ocal co mmunities o n t he safety r isks o f t he h azardous waste

spillage a nd how t o min imise t he risk. This should be in cluded in the

emergency a nd p revention p lans th at s hould be communicated to th e

community and can be done by distributing pamphlets, having open days

for the public, etc.

* An emergency evacuation plan should be drafted together with the NMBM.

* Trucks should be clearly marked as carrying hazardous waste. Part of this

marking should include where the waste originated f rom together w ith a

contact number that community members can contact in the case of an

emergency.

Geographical Change Processes

• Access Roads

* Road r ehabilitation s hould ta ke p lace d uring a nd o nce c onstruction i s

completed.

* Construction traffic should only make use of an approved route.

* The number of trucks that pass through communities should be kept to a

minimum and should be restricted to certain times of the day, i .e. avoid

peak hours when community members are on their way to or f rom school

and work.

* Traffic s igns s hould w arn c onstruction v ehicles o f t he p resence of

pedestrians a nd s chool c hildren a long th e r oad. L ikewise, tr affic s igns

should warn community road users of the presence of construction

vehicles.

* General road rules should be enforced.

• Spatial Development

* The location of the site should be well known to industries and/or

development a gencies i n th e a rea to a llow th em t o p lan a round th e

presence of the site.




Biophysical Change Processes

• Pollution and Fire Risk

* Refuse on site should be discarded in sealed bins and/or covered skips.

Refuse should be removed from the site on regular intervals (at least once

a week) and disposed of at an approved waste disposal site.

* Contractors are liable for the costs involved with connecting to the

electricity network and the water services network.

* Construction workers should only be allowed to make fire in designated

areas. C onstruction w orkers w ho d o n ot k eep w ithin d esignated a reas

should be fined.

• Sanitation

* Sufficient portable chemical toilets on site.

* If contractors choose to make use of a construction village, they should

ensure a dequate s anitation s ervices (e .g. s howers) a t th e c onstruction

village with effective drainage facilities to ensure that used water is carried

away from the site.


* Monitoring and evaluation of the waste management at the site.

* Following the operational plan for the facility.

* Consider the u se information s essions to i nform communities of waste



* Monitoring and evaluation of the leachate management at the site.

* Consider the use i nformation sessions to i nform communities of l eachate


17.3. Overall Conclusion

This report has investigated the preferred footprint (F) on Grassridge 190

Remainder for the siting of the GHWMF. Footprint F was selected as the most

preferable s ite for the proposed GHWMF as the result of an extensive screening

and preliminary assessment process that culminated in a Final Feasibility Report

that d etermined t hat t his s ite w as t he l east e nvironmentally s ensitive of a ll

alternatives taken into consideration. The findings of the studies undertaken

within th is r eport p rovide a n a ssessment of b oth th e p otential b enefits a nd

potential negative impacts anticipated as a result of the proposed GHWMF.

I&APs will be afforded the opportunity to review this Draft EIR on the significance

of the potential impacts associated with the proposed facility. The purpose of this

report i s to provide a full environmental assessment of the proposed GHWMF in




order t o f ulfil t he re quirements of i nformed d ecision m aking b y t he r elevant

authorities in terms of their respective authorisation and permitting mandates. It

should b e n oted th at th e m ore technical d etails r elated to th e d esign a nd

operation of the proposed facility are contained in the Draft Permit Application

Report and, as such, both documents should be read in conjunction with each

other.

The findings of these studies conclude that there are no environmental fatal flaws

that should prevent the proposed project from proceeding and that the majority

of i mpacts s hould b e regarded a s e ither l ow or m oderate provided th at th e

recommended mitigation and management measures are incorporated into the

Draft EMP (Appendix J) and implemented.

It is important to note that the Draft EMP will have to be revised and further

developed once detailed design for the facility is made available, the eventual

operator for the facility identified and appointed, and the required management,

monitoring and emergency response plans incorporated therein. While the bulk of

the environmental specifications and mitigation requirements have been identified

and listed in the Draft EMP and PAR they will have to be further developed in

collaboration with all stakeholders in the project once the above knowledge gaps

have been clarified. As such, the Draft EMP is the framework from which the Final

EMP for the construction, operation and decommissioning phases (that will be

subject to authority, I&AP and stakeholder approval) will be developed. Based on

the b alance o f a dvantages a nd d isadvantages a ssociated w ith th e p roposed

facility, there would not appear to be any s ignificant reasons why the proposed

development should not proceed.

17.4. Recommendations for Conditions of Environmental Authorisation

Aside from the specialist recommendations regarding required mitigation

measures f or i mplementation listed in the b ody of t his re port t he f ollowing

recommendations for conditions of environmental authorisation are proposed:

• No waste incineration of any type or will be permitted at the facility during its

lifespan.

• The R335 m ust be upgraded to the design standard recommended in the

Transport Study prior to the facility becoming operational and receiving its

first consignments of waste. Similarly, all potential road access routes to the

facility that will be utilised for waste transport must be upgraded to bitumen

standard prior to the facility becoming operational. Regular c learing/cleaning

operations along haul routes will have to be implemented as standard

procedure during the operational phase.




• Should the f acility b e g ranted a p ositive a uthorisation, a n E nvironmental

Monitoring Committee (EMC) for the facility must be established prior to the

commencement of construction activities. The EMC must be constituted by

appropriately qualified and knowledgeable persons, as well as representatives

of t he key s takeholders w ho h ave b een e ngaged t hroughout t he

environmental reporting process. These must include but not be limited to the

Sundays River Valley Community Forum, Pretoria Portland Cement, The

Swartkops Trust, Wildlife and Environmental Society of South Africa and other

locally representative community based and non governmental organisations.

Community L iaison F orums s hould a lso b e established th at w ill a llow f or

ongoing engagement with the surrounding communities for the lifespan of the

facility. All issues pertaining to the facilities operation and performance will be

addressed through these structures.

• The monitoring ,management and e mergency r esponse protocols f or t he

facility in general, and the transport corridors in particular, need to be further

developed in conjunction with the successful tendering operator, the CDC,

Eastern Cape Department of Roads and Transport and all other I&AP’s and

stakeholders engaged in the process. The development of these protocols for

these t ransport c orridors m ust b e d eveloped i n c onjunction with, a nd

ultimately approved by, the EMC. It is recommended that these protocols be

subject to a public participation process to ensure that all issues, concerns

and inputs as they relate to transport corridors and the facility in general, are

captured and incorporated into the development thereof.

• The enforcement of this buffer zone and prohibiting free access to the site in

general will have to be enforced. As noted above the fact that i t i s currently

owned PPC mining land has already sterilized the buffer zone area for

potential d evelopment. S hould t he p otential l and transfer g o a head i t is

recommended that this be i nclusive o f the proposed buffer zone area i n the

transfer agreement.

.



References June 2010 333

18. REFERENCES

AIHA, (1989). Odor Thresholds for Chemicals with Established Occupational

Health Standards, Akron, Ohio, American Industrial Hygiene Association.

AMOORE JE (1985). The Perception of Hydrogen Sulfide Odor in Relation to

Setting and Ambient Standard, F inal Report prepared by Olfacto-Labs for the

California Air Resources Board.

BALL J. A ND ASSO CIATES. ( 2001). A Waste S tream A nalysis of t he G eneral

Waste Stream, Prepared for City of Johannesburg.

BARNES, K. N. (ed.), 1998. The Important Bird Areas of Southern Africa. Birdlife

South Africa, Johannesburg, 394 p.

BARNES, K.N. (ed.), 2000. T he Eskom Red Data Book of Birds of South Africa,

Lesotho and Swaziland. Birdlife South Africa, Johannesburg, 169p.

BATCHVAROVA A. E. AND GRYNING S-E. (1990). Applied model for the growth of

the daytime mixed layer, Boundary-Layer Meteorology, 56, 261-274.

BOHLWEKI ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (PTY) LTD. 2007. Final Feasibility Report

for the Proposed Regional Hazardous Waste Processing Facility in the Eastern

Cape.

BOHLWEKI ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (PTY) LTD. 2005. Footprint Ranking

Report f or th e P roposed Re gional H azardous W aste Processing Facility i n th e

Eastern Cape. Bohlweki Environmental Services (Pty) Ltd., Midrand.

BOHLWEKI ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (PTY) LTD (2004). Plan of Study for an

Environmental Impact Assessment for the proposed Regional General and

Hazardous Waste Processing Facility in the Eastern Cape. Coega Development

Corporation. Submitted to the national department of Environmental Affairs and

Tourism, the Eastern Cape Department of Economic Affairs, Environment and

Tourism, and the National Department of Water Affairs and Forestry. Bohlweki

Environmental (Pty) Ltd, March, 2004

BOURQUIN, O. 1987. The recent geographical range extension of Hemidactylus

mabouia. Lammergeyer 38: 12-14.

BRANCH, W.R. (ed.) 1988. South African Red D ata Book - Reptiles and

Amphibians. S. Afr. Nat. Sci. Prog. Rpt 151: i-iv, 242p.




BRANCH, W.R., 1998. Field Guide to the Snakes and other Reptiles of Southern

Africa. Rev. ed. Struiks Publ., Cape Town, 399 pp, num. maps, 112 col. pls.

BRANCH, W. R., 1999. Save our Species. Threatened small adders. Africa

Environment and Wildlife 7(4): 36-37.

BRANCH, W. R. and H. Braack, 1987. T he reptiles and amphibians of the Addo

Elephant National Park. Koedoe 30: 61 112.

BUCHANAN, B.W. 1993. Effects of enhanced lighting on the behaviour of

nocturnal frogs. Animal Behaviour. 43, 893-899.

BUSH, R. A. 1985. A geohydrological assessment of the Kruisrivier / Bethelsdorp

Systems, U itenhage. T echnical R eport G h 3 458, D irectorate of Geohydrology,

Dept. of Water Affairs, Pretoria.

Cal/EPA (1996). A Review of the California Environmental Protection Agency's

Risk Assessment Practices, Policies, and Guidelines, Report of the Risk

Assessment Advisory Committee, October 1996.

CASTLEY, J.G., BOSHOFF, A.F. AND KERLEY, G.H. 2001. Compromising South

Africa’s natural biodiversity – inappropriate herbivore introductions. S. Afr. J.Sci.

97: 344-348.

CEPA/FPAC Working Group (1998). National Ambient Air Quality Objectives for

Particulate M atter. P art 1 : S cience A ssessment D ocument, A Re port b y th e

Canadian E nvironmental P rotection A gency (C EPA) F ederal-Provincial A dvisory

Committee (FPAC)on Air Quality Objectives and Guidelines.

CEQA (1993). California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Air Quality Handbook,

South Coast Air Quality Management District, Diamond Bar, California.

CHANNING, A. 2001. Amph ibians of Central and Southern Africa, Protea Books,

Pretoria, 470p.

CHOW J.C. AND WATSON J.G. (1998). Applicability of PM2.5 Particulate

Standards to Developed and Developing Countries, Paper 12A-3, Papers of the

11th World Clean Air and Environment Congress, 13-18 September 1998,

Durban, South Africa.

COSIJN C. (1995). Elevated Absolutely Stable Layers: A Climatology for South

Africa, Unpublished MSc. Proposal submitted to the Department of Geography and

Environmental Studies, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.




COUNCIL FOR GEOSCIENCE, SOUTH AFRICA 2000. Geological Map Sheets

3325DC a nd DD, P ort Elizabeth, 3325 C D a nd 3425 AB Ui tenhage, 3 325 CB

Uitenhage North and 3325 DA Addo (Scale 1:50 000). Council for Geoscience,

Pretoria.

COWHERD C., MULESKI G. E. AND KINSEY J. S. (1998). Control of Open Fugitive

Dust Sources, EPA-450/3-88-008, United States Environmental Protection

Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

DEPARTMENT OF W ATER A FFAIRS AND F ORESTRY (1 998a). S econd E dition.

Waste Management Series. Minimum Requirements for the Waste Disposal by

Landfill.

DEPARTMENT O F WATER AFFAI RS AN D F ORESTRY ( 1998b). Se cond E dition.

Waste M anagement Series. Minimum R equirements f or t he H andling,

Classification and Disposal of Hazardous Waste.

DEVOS M, PATTE F, ROUAULT J, LAFFORT P AND VAN GEMERT LJ (Eds) (1990).

Standardized Human Olfactory Thresholds, New York, Oxford University Press.

DIAB R.D. (1975). Stability and Mixing Layer Characteristics over Southern Africa,

Unpublished MSc Thesis, University of Natal, Durban, 203 pp.

DOCKERY D. W. AND POPE C. A. (1994). Acute Respiratory Effects of

Particulate Air Pollution, Annual Review of Public Health, 15, 107 - 132.

EPA (1986). Air Pollution: Improvements Needed in Developing and Managing

EPA's Air Quality Models, GAO/RCED-86-94, B-220184, General Accounting

Office, Washington, DC

EPA ( 1992). F ugitive D ust B ackground D ocument a nd T echnical I nformation

Document for Best Available Control Measures, EPA-450/2-92-004, U.S.

Department of Commerce, Springfield, VA, September 1992.

EPA (1995). C ompilation o f Ai r Pollution Emission Factors (AP-42), 6 th Edition,

Volume 1, as contained in the AirCHIEF (AIR Clearinghouse for Inventories and

Emission Factors) CD-ROM (compact disk read only memory), US E nvironmental

Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

EPA (1996). Users Guide for the Industrial Source Complex (ISC3) Dispersion

Models., EPA-454/B-95-003a, US-Environmental Protection Agency, Research

Triangle Park, North Carolina




FAHRIG, L.; PEDLAR, J.H.; POPE, S.E.; TAYLOR, P.D.; WEGNER, J.F. 1995. Effect

of road traffic on amphibian density. Biol. Conserv. 74, 177-182.

FARMER. A.M. 1993. The effects of dust on vegetation - a review. Environmental

Pollution 79: 63-75.

FRIEDMANN, Y . AND DALY, B . (eds.) 2004. Red Data Book o f the Mammals o f

South A frica: A Conservation Assessment. C BSG Southern A frica, Conservation

Breeding Specialist Group (SSG/IUCN), Endangered Wildlife Trust, South Africa.

722p.

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, SOUTH AFRICA (1989). G eological Map Sheet 3324 Port

Elizabeth (1:250 000). Geol. Surv., Pretoria.

GERLACH, G. and MUSOLF, K. 2000. Fragmentation of landscape as a cause for

genetic subdivision in bank voles. Conserv. Biol. 14, 1066-1074.

GODFREY, L., MEYER, R., CONRAD, J., S ILINGA, A AND HUGHES, S. (2000).

Report on the Identification o f potentially suitable areas for the development o f

the proposed regional, general and hazardous waste processing facility within the

Eastern Cape. A GIS Approach. Division of Water, Environment and Forestry

Technology, CSIR, Confidential Report No. ENV-P-C 2000-024, March 2000.

GODFREY, L., AND MEYER, R. ( 2000A). Report on the preliminary identification

of farms for the development of a regional, general and hazardous waste

processing facility within the Eastern Cape. Division of Water, Environment and

Forestry T echnology, CSIR, C onfidential Re port n o: E NV-P-C 2 000-051, M ay

2000.

GODFREY, L., AND MEYER, R. (2000B). Report on the selection of the most

suitable farms for the development of a regional, general and hazardous waste

processing facility within the Eastern Cape. Based on a pre-feasibility assessment

of geohydrological and geological criteria, transport logistics and fauna and flora.

preliminary identification of farms for the development of a regional, general and

hazardous waste processing facility within the Eastern Cape. D ivision of Water,

Environment and Forestry Technology, CSIR, Confidential Report no: ENV-P-C

2000-059, August 2000.

HARRISON, J.A., D.G. ALLAN, L.G. UNDERHILL, M. HERREMANS, A.J. TREE, V.

PARKER AND C.J. BROWN, 1997. T he At las of southern African bi rds, including

Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland and Zimbabwe. Vol. 1

Non-passerines, 785 pp; Vol. 2 Passerines, 732 pp. BirdLife South Africa,

Johannesburg.




HENNING, S. F. AN D HENNING, G .A. 1 989. So uth Af rican R ed D ata B ook -

Butterflies. S. Afr. Nat. Sci. Prog. Rpt 158: I-vi, 173p.

HILTON-TAYLOR, 2000. Red List 2000 IUCN List of Threatened Animals. IUCN,

Glands, Switzerland.

HORDEQUIN, M. 2000. Introduction: ecological effects of roads. Conservation

Biology 14:16—17.

HUIJSER, M.P. and BERGERS, P.J.M. 2000. The effect of roads and traffic on

hedgehog (Erinaceus europaeus) populations. Biol. Conserv.

INSTITUTO INQUINAMENTO ATMOSFERICO (1998). Council Directive on Ambient

Air Quality Assessment and Management Working Group on Benzene.

IRIS (1998). US-EPA's Integrated Risk Information Data Base, available from

www.epa.gov/iris (last updated 20 February 1998).

JUNKER A. AND SCHWELA D. (1998). Air Quality Guidelines and Standards Based

on Risk Considerations, Paper 17D-1, Papers of the 11th World Clean Air and

Environment Congress, 13-18 September 1998, Durban, South Africa.

KLETZ T.A. (1976). The application of hazardous analysis to risks to the public at

large, World Congress of Chemical Engineering, Amsterdam.

LAMBIRIS, A.J.L. and BOURQUIN, O . 1993. C onservation Importance Va lues o f

Worm-lizards and Lizards in Natal. Ducument 1, Phase 1. Programme to prevent

man-induced e xtinction o f i ndigenous s pecies in N atal. I nternal Re port, N atal

parks Board, 86p.

LANGTON, T. E.S. ( ed.), 1989. A mphibians on Roads. Proceedings o f the toad

tunnel conference, ACO Polymers, Shefford, United Kingdom, 202 p.

LEES F .P. (1 980). L oss P revention in the Process Industries, B utterworths,

London, UK.

LE R OUX, F G ( 2000). The g eology o f th e P ort E lizabeth-Uitenhage area.

Explanation of Sheets 3325DC and DD, Port Elizabeth, 3325 CD and 3425 AB

uitenhage, 3325 CB Uitenhage North and 3325 DA Addo. Council for Geoscience,

Pretoria.

MACLEAR, L G A ( 1993). A g roundwater h ydrocensus a nd w ater q uality

investigation of th e Swartkops Ri ver b asin – Uitenhage. Technical R eport




Gh 3817, Directorate of Geohydrology, Department of Water Affairs and Forestry,

Pretoria.

MACLEAR, L G A (2001). The hydrogeology of the Uitenhage Artesian Basin with

reference to the Table Mountain Group Aquifer. Water SA, 27(4), 499-506.

MARAIS, A J AND SAAYMAN, C H (1965). ‘n Geologies-Geofisiese ondersoek van

die Uitenhage artesiese kom. Department of Water Affairs and Forestry,

Technical Report Gh1516, Pretoria.

MEYER, R (2004). Report on proposed new regional hazardous waste site for

Coega and the Eastern Cape. – EIA Phase 1. The identification and evaluation of

four proposed and potentially suitable areas for the development of a new waste

site. Geohydrological Specialist report. Confidential CSIR report Number ENV-P-C

2004/021.

MEYER, P S (1998). An explanation of the 1:500 000 General Hydrogeological

Map Port Elizabeth 3324. Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, Pretoria.

MIDGLEY, D C, P ITMAN, W V A ND MIDDLETON, B J ( 1994). Surface w ater

resources of South Af rica 1990. Volume V, B ook of Maps. Water Research

Commission Report No. 298/5.1/94.

MIGDOLL, I. 1987. Field Guide to the Butterflies of Southern Africa, Struik Publ.,

Cape Town, 254p.

MINTER, L.R., B URGER, M ., H ARRISON, J .A., B RAACK, H.H., BISHOP, P.J &

KLOEPFER, D. (eds.) 2004. Atlas and Red Data Book of the Frogs of South Africa,

Lesotho and Swaziland, SI/MAB Series 9. Smithsonian Institute, Washington D.C.,

360p.

NICHOLSON, L., 1978. The effects of roads on desert tortoise populations. In: M.

Trotter (ed.), The Desert Tortoise Council Proceedings of the 1978 Symposium,

pp 127-129. San Diego, California.

NSW EPA (2001a). Draft Policy - Assessment and Management of Odour from

Stationary Sources in NSW, New South Wales Environmental Protection Authority,

January 2001.

NSW EPA (2001b). Technical Notes. D raft Policy: Assessment and Management

of O dour f rom S tationary S ources i n N SW, N ew S outh W ales E nvironmental

Protection Authority, January 2001.




OKE, T.T. (1990). Boundary Layer Climates, Routledge, London and New York,

435 pp.

PARSONS, R (1983). A Geohydrological Investigation of the Coegakop Area of the

Uitenhage Artesian Area. Unpublished BSc (Hons.) Thesis, Dept. of Geopgraphy,

Rhodes University, Grahamstown.

PARSONS, R (1994). A Review of the Impact of the Aloes Waste Disposal Site on

the Hydrogeological Regime in the Area. Confidential unpublished report by the

CSIR, Stellenbosch, Report No. 33/94.

PARSONS, R (1995). A South African Aquifer System Management Classification.

Water Research Commission Report No KV77/95, Water Research Commission,

Pretoria.

PASQUILL F. AN D S MITH F. B. ( 1983). At mospheric D iffusion: St udy o f t he

Dispersion of Windborne Material from Industrial and Other Sources, Ellis

Horwood Ltd, Chichester, 437 p

PRESTON-WHYTE R.A. AND TYSON P.D. (1988). The Atmosphere and Weather

over South Africa, Oxford University Press, Cape Town, 374 pp.

PRESTON-WHYTE, R.A., DIAB, R.D. AND TYSON, P.D. (1977). Towards an

inversion climatology of southern Africa: Part II, Non-surface inversions in the

lower atmosphere, South African Geographical Journal, 59 (1), 45-59.

PRINGLE, E. L. 1999. Report on the Butterflies (Order Lepidoptera) of the Coega

Region. unpubl. rpt to Coega Development Corporation.

QUEENSLAND DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND HERITAGE (1994). I nterim

Guidelines for Odours from New Developments, Draft, 12 April 1994.

ROSEN, P.C. and LOWE, C.H., 1994. Highway mortality of snakes in the Sonoran

Desert of southern Arizona. Biol. Conserv. 68, 143-148.

SABS (2003). South African Standard. Specification: Drinking Water. SABS

241-2003, Edition 5. South African Bureau of Standards, Pretoria.

SABS (2004). South African National Standards: Ambient air quality – Limits for

common pollutants. Standards So uth Af rica (a division of SAB S). SANS

1929:2004, Edition 1.

SAUNDERS, D.A., HOBBS, R.J. AND MARGULES, C.R., 1991. Biological

consequences of ecosystem fragmentation: a review. Conserv. Biol. 5 (1), 18-32.




SCHULZE B. R. (1986). C limate of South African: Climate Statistics up to 1984,

WB 4 0, W eather B ureau, D epartment of Environmental A ffairs a nd To urism,

Pretoria, 474 pp.

SCHWELA D. (1998). Health and Air Pollution – A Developing Country’s

Perspective, Paper 1A-1, Papers of the 11th World Clean Air and Environment

Congress, 13-18 September 1998, Durban, South Africa.

SHAW R.W. AND MUNN R.E. (1971). Air Pollution Meteorology, in BM McCormac

(Ed), Introduction to the Scientific Study of Air Pollution, Reidel Publishing

Company, Dordrecht-Holland, 53-96.

SIMELANE, T. S., 1 996. Th e t raditional u se o f i ndigenous ve rtebrates. M.Sc.

thesis, University of Port Elizabeth, Port Elizabeth.

SKINNER, J.D. AND SMITHERS, R. H. N., 1990. The mammals of the southern

African subregion. new ed. University of Pretoria, Pretoria. 769p

SMITHERS, R. H. N., 1986. South African Red Data Book - Terrestrial Mammals.

S. Afr. Nat. Sci. Prog. Rpt. 125, 214p.

TALJAARD J.J. (1972). Synoptic meteorology of the southern hemisphere, in C.W.

Newton (E d.), Meteorology of the southern hemisphere, M eteorological

monographs, 35, 139-213.

TOERIEN, D K AND HILL, R S (1989). The geology of the Port Elizabeth area.

Explanation: Sheet 3324 (1:250 000). Geological Survey of South Africa,

Pretoria.

TRAVIS C.C., R ICHTER S .A., C ROUCH E .A., WILSON D .E. A ND K LEMA A .D.

(1987). Cancer Risk Management, Environmental Science and Technology, 21,

415.

TYSON P.D. (1986). Climatic change and variability in southern Africa, Oxford

University Press, Cape Town.

TYSON, P.D., PRESTON-WHYTE, R.A. AND DIAB, R.D. (1976). Towards an

inversion climatology of southern Africa: Part I, surface inversions, South African

Geographical Journal, 58, 151-163.

URQUHART, C. & KLAGES, N. 1997. Addo. More than just Elephants. Bluecliff

Publishing, Port Elizabeth. 120p.




VEGTER, J R (1995). An Explanation of a set of National Groundwater Maps.

Water Research Commission Report TT74/95, Pretoria.

VENABLES, A G (1985). The geology, geohydrology and hydrochemistry of the

Uitenhage-Coega Artesian System. Department of Water Affairs and Forestry

Technical Report Gh3437, Pretoria.

VERNON, C .J., B OSHOFF, A .F. A ND S TRETTON, W .S. 1 992. Th e s tatus a nd

conservation of cranes in the Eastern Cape Province. pp 47-72. In: Porter, D.J. et

al. (eds). Proceedings of the First Southern African Crane Conference. Durban:

Southern African Crane Foundation.

VERSCHUEREN K (1 996). H andbook o f E nvironmental D ata o n O rganic

Chemicals, John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York, 2064 pp.

VOWINCKEL, E. (1956). Southern Hemisphere weather map analysis. five year

mean pressures, Part II, Notos, 4, 204-218.

WEATHER BUREAU (1984). Climate of South Africa. Climate Statistics up to

1984. Report WB 40, Weather Bureau, Pretoria.

WHO (2000). Guidelines for Air Quality, World Health Organisation, Geneva.

WIID, B L (1991). Report on the Ground and Geohydrological Conditions with

Specific Reference to the Extended Mnitoring System at the Wells Estste (A loes

and Martins) Disposal Sites, Port Elizabeth. Confidential and Unpublished Report,

B L Wiid, Consulting Engineering Geologist, Pretoria.

WINTER, H D E LA R ( 1973). Ge ology of the A lgoa B asin S outh A frica. I n

Sedimentary Basins of the African coasts, 2nd Part, South and East Coast, (G

Blant, ed.): Assoc. Afr. geol. Survs., Paris, p. 17-48.

REVISED DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) …rhdhv.co.za/media/Final EIR 06.10.pdf · Revised...

Documents

Transcript of REVISED DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) …rhdhv.co.za/media/Final EIR 06.10.pdf · Revised...