Upload
corey-atkinson
View
214
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
PUBLIC OPEN DAY:12 April 2012
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berth 203 to 205, Container Terminal,
Pier 2, Port of Durban
2
WELCOME & INTRODUCTIONWELCOME & INTRODUCTION
WELCOME!Thank you for taking the time to attend the Public Open Session.Your presence is appreciated ...Please take a seat and watch the
presentation.After the presentation you will have an opportunity to ask the
technical and environmental teams questions. Should you have any comments please complete a reply form. We value your
contribution to the EIA process.
3
VENUE LAYOUTVENUE LAYOUT
4
MEET THE PROJECT TEAMMEET THE PROJECT TEAM
Proponent
RepresentativeRepresentative ResponsibilityResponsibility OrganisationOrganisation
Ivan Moonsamy Senior Project ManagerTransnet National Ports Authority (TNPA)
Miriam Haffejee Environmental Manager
Paris Foolchand Project ManagerTransnet Capital Projects (TCP)
Joe McMahon Environmental Manager
Consultants
RepresentativeRepresentative ResponsibilityResponsibility OrganisationOrganisation
Vanessa BruetonEnvironmental Assessment Practitioner
Nemai ConsultingAnn Burke Conservation Specialist
Nicky Naidoo Project Manager
5
1. To provide an introduction, background and
overview to the project to you;
2. To discuss the environmental authorisation
processes; and
3. To provide an opportunity for you to submit and
raise your comments for consideration by the
project team.
WHY HAVE A PUBLIC OPEN DAY???WHY HAVE A PUBLIC OPEN DAY???
6
1. The current quay walls at Berth 203 to 205 are over 50 years old and is
beyond its original design limits. Hence, the quay walls are considered
unsafe and need to be upgraded.
2. At the same time the Port of Durban has experienced a steady growth in
container numbers and vessel sizes. Therefore, the design for the upgrade
to the existing quay walls needs to take into account the larger vessels
entering the Port.
3. As the berth channel is not deep enough, large vessels can only enter and
leave the Port at high tide which negatively impacts the efficiency of the
Port. Further, the Port of Durban is considered a ‘hub’ port and to maintain
this status, it needs to accommodate the larger vessels which will improve
its efficiency.
4. Hence, the upgrade of the unsafe quay walls presents an opportunity to
improve the safety and efficiency of the Port of Durban.
WHY IS THIS PROJECT NECESSARY???WHY IS THIS PROJECT NECESSARY???
DURBAN CONTAINERTERMINAL
PIER 1PIER 2
FOCUS OF THE PROPOSEDPROJECT IS PIER 2
COMPRISES OF 15 BERTHS
CAN ACCOMADATE 8 POST PANAMAX VESSELS
WHERE IS THE PROJECT LOCATED???WHERE IS THE PROJECT LOCATED???
203
204
205
EXISTING CRANEASSEMBLEY AREA
WATER DEPTH -12.8m CDP
EXISTING SANDBANK
TOTAL EXISTING BERTH LENGTH OF 914m
WHERE ARE BERTHS 203 to 205 LOCATED? WHERE ARE BERTHS 203 to 205 LOCATED?
9
WHAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH THE EXISTING QUAY WALLS??? WHAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH THE EXISTING QUAY WALLS???
1. It was built in the 1960s and does not meet the minimum Eurocode 7 Safety Standards;
2. The berth channel is not deep enough as a result scour holes have formed which has undermined the structural stability of the existing quay wall;
3. The berths are only 914m long and it needs to be 1190m to accommodate three Super Post Panamax vessels; and
4. The current quay wall cannot safely accommodate the larger Ship to Shore cranes.
10
WHAT EXACTLY IS THIS PROJECT ABOUT???WHAT EXACTLY IS THIS PROJECT ABOUT???
The project involves: 1. The westward lengthening of Berth 205 by 170m;2. The eastward lengthening of Berth 203 by 100m;3. The widening of Berths 203 to 205 by 50m; 4. The deepening of the Berth channel, approach
channel, and vessel turning basin from the current -12.8m CDP to -16.5m CDP;
5. Excavating the trench for the new quay wall structure from -12.8m CDP to -19m CDP (for caisson option only);
6. The offshore disposal of dredge material;7. The offshore sand winning for infill material; and8. The installation of new Ship to Shore (STS) cranes
and associated infrastructure.
11
WHAT ALTERNATIVES WERE CONSIDERED?WHAT ALTERNATIVES WERE CONSIDERED?
The EIA Regulations require that we consider different alternatives. For this
project no location alternatives were considered as the upgrade is
confined to the existing unsafe quay walls. Instead, technical
alternatives were identified. Initially, seven different technical quay wall
types were assessed and the following three were found to be most
feasible:
1. Deck on Pile Quay Wall;
2. Sheet Pile Quay Wall; and
3. Caisson Quay Wall.
12
TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF THE PROJECTTECHNICAL ASPECTS OF THE PROJECT
Now that you understand where the project is located, why it is necessary and what it will entail, please
welcome Mr. Ivan Moonsamy, Project Manager from TNPA who will take you through the technical aspects of
the project. Please raise all questions at the technical table and not during the presentation. All questions will be recorded and included in the final Scoping Report.
13
The original quaywall was designed to accommodate a 1000 TEU vessel with wharf cranes
DCT is presently operating vessels of 6000 TEU and greater
VESSEL SIZES AT DCTVESSEL SIZES AT DCT
14
170m Extension ofBerth 205
100m Extension of
Berth 203
EXTENSIONSEXTENSIONS
15
Lot 10 Casting Yard and Storage Area to be used during the proposed project
BAYHEAD LOT10BAYHEAD LOT10
16
PROJECT DESCRIPTION - ALTERNATIVESPROJECT DESCRIPTION - ALTERNATIVES
Deck On Pile Quay Wall
17
DECK ON PILEDECK ON PILE
18
PROJECT DESCRIPTION - ALTERNATIVESPROJECT DESCRIPTION - ALTERNATIVES
Sheet Pile Quay Wall
19
SHEET PILESHEET PILE
20
PROJECT DESCRIPTION - ALTERNATIVESPROJECT DESCRIPTION - ALTERNATIVES
Caisson Quay Wall
21
CAISSONCAISSON
203
205
204
DCT BERTH DEEPENING PROJECT – BERTHS 203 TO 205
PHASE 1 – JULY 2013 TO DECEMBER 2014 EXTEND BERTH 205 AND DREDGE APPROACH CHANNEL AND BASIN
PHASE 3 – AUG 2016 TO DECEMBER 2017 EXTEND BERTH 203
PHASE 2 – JAN 2015 TO JULY 2016
HOW WILL THE PROJECT BE PHASED???HOW WILL THE PROJECT BE PHASED???
23
Approach Channel and basin will be deepened from existing -12.8m CDP to -16.5m CDP by dredging.
Lot 10 Casting Yard and Storage Yard
Estimated 4.5 million m3 of material will be dumped offshore
DREDGINGDREDGING AND OFFSHORE DISPOSALAND OFFSHORE DISPOSAL
24
• Disposal of material at current offshore
disposal site
DREDGINGDREDGING AND OFFSHORE DISPOSALAND OFFSHORE DISPOSAL
25
• Disposal of material at current offshore
disposal site
DREDGINGDREDGING AND OFFSHORE DISPOSALAND OFFSHORE DISPOSAL
OFFSHORE BORROW AREASOFFSHORE BORROW AREAS
27
Thank you Ivan. By now you should have a better understanding of the
details of this project. The following slides are about the environmental process that will be followed. If you are
not interested in watching the remaining 12 slides, please proceed to the technical table.
28
ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION PROCESSESPROCESSES
29
1. Proposed Approach NEMA - EIA
2. Proposed Approach MPRDA –
Offshore Borrow Pits
3. Proposed Approach NEM: ICM –
Dumping at Sea Permit
ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION PROCESSESPROCESSES
To date the following as been undertaken:
The landowner (Transnet) was notified;
A focus group was convened;
A random survey was conducted;
Adjacent landowners within 100m were notified;
On site notices and adverts were placed; and
A project specific website domain was registered.
30
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS TO DATEPUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS TO DATE
PROOF OF LANDOWNER NOTIFICATIONPROOF OF LANDOWNER NOTIFICATION
32
OUTCOME OF RANDOM SURVEYOUTCOME OF RANDOM SURVEY
33
PROOF OF SITE AND ADVERT NOTIFICATIONPROOF OF SITE AND ADVERT NOTIFICATION
34
LOCATION OF DRAFT SCOPING REPORTLOCATION OF DRAFT SCOPING REPORT
The draft Scoping Report was made available at the following venues for
review. I&APs on the Durban Bay Estuarine Management Plan
Database were notified and encouraged to review the scoping report.
Seafarers Club
Central Library
In addition, the draft Scoping Report was made available on the project
website : www.berth203to205expansioneia.co.za
The draft Scoping Report is available for public review from 9 March 2012
to 30 April 2012 (50 days)
The following authorities were invited to a
meeting held on 29 February 2012 to discuss
the project:
35
AUTHORITIES MEETINGAUTHORITIES MEETING
• DEADEA • SAHRA- Maritime ArchaeologySAHRA- Maritime Archaeology• KZN DAEARDKZN DAEARD • eThekwini Metropolitan eThekwini Metropolitan
Municipality Municipality • Ezemvelo KZN WildlifeEzemvelo KZN Wildlife • KZN Department of TransportKZN Department of Transport• KZN DMRKZN DMR • DAFFDAFF• DWA Regional OfficeDWA Regional Office
A Mining permit for the offshore borrow pit will
be made to DMR in terms of the MPRDA.
A Dumping At Sea Permit for the offshore
disposal site for the dredge material will be
made to the DEA in terms of the NEM:ICM.
36
OTHER LICENSING PROCESSESOTHER LICENSING PROCESSES
37
SPECIALIST STUDIES TO BE UNDERTAKENSPECIALIST STUDIES TO BE UNDERTAKEN
1. Estuarine/Marine Biodiversity Assessment;
2. Marine Archaeology Assessment;
3. Local Economic Impact Assessment;
4. Sediment and Chemical Analysis of Dredge Material;
5. Ecological Assessment of Impacts on the Central Sandbank;
6. Assessment of Indirect Impacts on the Little Lagoon;
7. Sediment Plume Analysis for Offshore Sand Winning;
8. Shoreline Stability for Offshore Sand Winning;
9. Wave Energy Analysis as part of Technical Studies; and
10.Geotechnical Study as part of Technical Studies.
38
WHAT IMPACT DOES THIS PROJECT HAVE ON THE 1999 RoD???WHAT IMPACT DOES THIS PROJECT HAVE ON THE 1999 RoD???
Phase 1, which would have
involved the westward
expansion of Pier 2 to create
berths 206/207 and the
dredging of the channel
through the central banks
Not granted 1. Stakeholders consulted throughout the IEM process recommended that phase 1 should be deferred;
2. Phase 1 is proposed within the most ecologically sensitive parts of the Bay;
3. The findings of the EIR indicate that the ecological impacts of phase 1 are irreversible and significantly high
4. The ecological impacts of the phase will result in:
a. Permanent loss of habitat for juvenile fish and migrant wading birds. South Africa is a signatory to
the Bonn Convention and therefore should put measures in place to honour her commitment to the
convention
b. Dredging of the channel would separate the remaining sandbanks from the mangroves leading to
the destruction of the Natural Heritage Site which lies within the Little Lagoon
5. Future approval of Phase 1 would dependent of the outcome of a habitat, rehabilitation, creation and
monitoring programme led by Portnet.
In 1999, the latter was clarified with the Authorities:
“Successful outcome of the habitat rehabilitation, creation and monitoring programme
referred to Paragraph 5, means that the Department would assess the success
based on future evidence to be provided in a possible application.”
Phase 3, which entailed the
creation of Deepwater Berths
‘D’ to ‘G’ at the Point and the
relocation of breakbulk
business from Pier 1 to the
new terminal;
Authorised “Authorisation is granted on condition that there is to no further loss of water area in the future as a result
of infilling.”
This point was clarified with the Authorities in 1999. The Clarification states that the
“no further loss of water area” means that there should be no further infill of the sea to
the order of magnitude of phase 3.
39
This brings us to the end of the presentation. We trust that you have sufficient information on the project.
Please raise all questions at the technical station. We encourage you to complete a reply form before you leave if you have any comments. Should you prefer,
please free comment anonymously.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.