REVISIONS TRACKING TABLE - CESNET Special Economic Zone SEZ...Figure 3.18: A solar array and group station showing the typical layout of the structures (Suntech Power Holdings Co.,

Environmental Impact Assessment Report – June 2017

EOH Coastal & Environmental Services Special Economic Zone, Upington iii

This Report should be cited as follows: EOH Coastal & Environmental Services, June 2017: The Development of a Special Economic Zone (SEZ) in Upington, Environmental Impact Assessment Report, EOH CES, East London.

REVISIONS TRACKING TABLE

EOH Coastal & Environmental Services

Report Title: The Development of a Special Economic Zone (SEZ) in Upington, Northern Cape Province,

Environmental Impact Assessment

Report Version: Final

Project Number: 077

Name Responsibility Date

Jaclyn Smith Report Writer June 2017

Roy de Kock Project Manager June 2017

Dr Alan Carter Reviewer June 2017

COPYRIGHT INFORMATION

This document contains intellectual property and proprietary information that is protected by

copyright in favour of Coastal & Environmental Services (Pty) Ltd and the specialist consultants.

The document may therefore not be reproduced, used or distributed to any third party without the

prior written consent of Coastal & Environmental Services. Although this document is prepared

exclusively for submission to NCEDA in the Republic of South Africa, Coastal & Environmental

Services (Pty) Ltd retains ownership of the intellectual property and proprietary information

contained herein, which is subject to all confidentiality, copyright and trade secrets, rules

intellectual property law and practices of South Africa.


EOH Coastal & Environmental Services iv Special Economic Zone, Upington

THE PROJECT TEAM The following table provides the names and responsibilities of the project team.

EOH Coastal & Environmental Services team and responsibilities

Name Role/Responsibility

Dr Alan Carter

Environmental Assessment Practitioner (EAP)

Project Leader

Report Review

Mr Roy de Kock Project Manager

Client Liaison

Ms Jaclyn Smith Report Writer


EOH Coastal & Environmental Services Special Economic Zone, Upington v

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background to the Study ................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Special Economic Zone ................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Environmental Authorisation in South Africa .................................................................... 1 1.4 Environmental Impact Assessment Process .................................................................... 2 1.5 The Scoping Phase ......................................................................................................... 3 1.6 The Environmental Impact Assessment Phase ................................................................ 3 1.7 The Nature and Scope of this Report ............................................................................... 5 1.8 Assumptions and Limitations ........................................................................................... 5 1.9 Details and Expertise of the Environmental Assessment Practitioner .............................. 5

1.9.1 Details of the EAP........................................................................................................ 5 1.9.2 Expertise of the study team ......................................................................................... 5

2 LOCATION OF ACTIVITY ...................................................................................................... 8 2.1 Property Description ........................................................................................................ 8

3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................... 11 3.1 Description of Proposed Activity .................................................................................... 11

3.1.1 Phases of development ............................................................................................. 13 3.1.2 Provision of bulk services .......................................................................................... 13 3.2.3. Photovoltaic Facility ..................................................................................................... 24

3.2 Listed activities triggered ............................................................................................... 28 4 RELEVANT LEGISLATION AND POLICY ........................................................................... 30

4.1 Relevant Legislation and Guidelines used in the Compilation of this Environmental Impact Assessment Report ....................................................................................................... 30 4.2 Relevant policy used in the compilation of this Environmental Impact Assessment Report 32

4.2.1 National Policy ........................................................................................................... 32 4.2.2 Municipal By-Laws ..................................................................................................... 34

5 PROJECT NEED & DESIRABILITY ..................................................................................... 35 5.1 Strategic Infrastructure Projects (SIPs) .......................................................................... 35 5.2 Renewable Energy Development Zones (REDZ) ........................................................... 35

6 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES ................................................................................................. 36 6.1 Reasonable and Feasible Alternatives ........................................................................... 36 6.2 Fundamental Alternatives .............................................................................................. 36 6.3 Incremental Alternatives ................................................................................................ 38 6.4 No-Go development ...................................................................................................... 44 6.5 Analysis of alternatives .................................................................................................. 44

7 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION .................................................................................................... 47 7.1 Notification of Interested and Affected Parties ............................................................... 47

7.1.1 Public Participation .................................................................................................... 47 7.1.2 Newspaper advertisement ......................................................................................... 47 7.1.3 On-site notice ............................................................................................................ 47 7.1.4 Stakeholders and I&AP’s ........................................................................................... 47 7.1.5 Background information document ............................................................................ 48 7.1.6 Proof of notification .................................................................................................... 48 7.1.7 Issues raised by stakeholders/ I&APs ........................................................................ 48

8 DESCRIPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT ............................................................................. 51 8.1 Current land use ............................................................................................................ 51 8.2 Climate .......................................................................................................................... 52 8.3 Topography ................................................................................................................... 52 8.4 Geology ......................................................................................................................... 53 8.5 Hydrology ...................................................................................................................... 53 8.6 Vegetation and Floristics ............................................................................................... 54 8.7 South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI) ..................................................... 54 8.8 Site Sensitivity ............................................................................................................... 55 8.9 Socio-Economic Profile.................................................................................................. 56


EOH Coastal & Environmental Services vi Special Economic Zone, Upington

8.9.1 Population ................................................................................................................. 56 8.9.2 Income and Poverty Levels ........................................................................................ 57 8.9.3 Employment ............................................................................................................... 57

9 APPROACH TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT .................................... 58 9.1 General Impact Assessment .......................................................................................... 58 9.2 Specialist Impact Assessments ..................................................................................... 58 9.3 Methodology for Assessing Impacts and Alternatives .................................................... 58

9.3.1 Description of criteria ................................................................................................. 59 10 KEY FINDINGS OF THE SPECIALIST STUDIES ................................................................. 62

10.1 Specialist studies ........................................................................................................... 62 10.1.1 Air Quality Impact Assessement ............................................................................ 62 10.1.2 Ecological Impact Assessment .............................................................................. 64 10.1.3 Heritage Impact Assessment ................................................................................. 68 10.1.4 Hydrogeological Baseline Assessment .................................................................. 72 10.1.5 Noise Impact Assessment ...................................................................................... 73 10.1.6 Socio-Economic Impact Assessment ..................................................................... 75 10.1.7 Surface water and Wetland Assessment ................................................................ 76 10.1.8 Tourism Impact Assessment .................................................................................. 79 10.1.9 Traffic Impact Assessment ..................................................................................... 81 10.1.10 Agricultural Impact Comment ................................................................................. 82 10.1.11 Visual Impact Comment ......................................................................................... 82

10.2 Sensitivity assessment .................................................................................................. 82 11 IMPACT ASSESSMENT ....................................................................................................... 86

11.1 Possible Environmental Issues and Impacts .................................................................. 86 11.1.1 General Impact Assessment .................................................................................. 86 11.1.2 Specialist Impact Assessment ............................................................................... 87 11.1.3 Summary of findings .............................................................................................. 87

12 IMPACT STATEMENT ........................................................................................................ 100 12.1 Environmental Impact Statement ................................................................................. 100 12.2 Comparative assessment of impacts ........................................................................... 102 12.3 Overall site sensitivity .................................................................................................. 107 12.4 Consideration of alternatives ....................................................................................... 107

12.4.1 Location alternatives ............................................................................................ 107 12.4.2 Technology alternatives ....................................................................................... 108 12.4.3 Layout alternatives ............................................................................................... 108

13 CONCLUSION, EAP OPINION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................ 109 13.1 Description of the proposed activity ............................................................................. 109 13.2 Assumptions, uncertainties and gaps .......................................................................... 109 13.3 Opinion of the EAP ...................................................................................................... 110 13.4 Recommendations of the EAP ..................................................................................... 110 13.5 Recommended mitigation measures ............................................................................ 110 13.6 Declaration by the EAP................................................................................................ 126

14 APPENDICES ..................................................................................................................... 127 14.1 APPENDIX A: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION DOCUMENTS ............................................ 127 14.2 Appendix B .................................................................................................................. 161

14.2.1 Impact Assessment.............................................................................................. 161 14.3 Appendix C: Specialist Volumes .................................................................................. 183 14.4 Appendix D: Environmental Management Programme ................................................ 185

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1 The Full Scoping and EIA Process flow chart 3 Figure 2.1: Locality of the proposed SEZ. 9 Figure 2.2: Property ownership of the proposed SEZ. 10 Figure 3.1: Proposed layout plan of the Upington SEZ 12 Figure 3.2: The proposed phases of the development of the Upington SEZ 13


EOH Coastal & Environmental Services vii Special Economic Zone, Upington

Figure 3.3: Existing bulk water supply in Upington 15 Figure 3.4: Existing water reticulation in Upington 15 Figure 3.5 The proposed water reticulation layout for the Upington SEZ 17 Figure 3.6: The existing Upington sewerage reticulation network 18 Figure 3.7: The main sewerage infrastructure elements in Upington 18 Figure 3.8: Alternative option 1 for the reticulation and treatment of sewage generated by the proposed

Upington SEZ 19 Figure 3.9: Alternative option 2 for the reticulation and treatment of sewage generated by the proposed

Upington SEZ 20 Figure 3.10: Alternative option 3 (preferred option) for the reticulation and treatment of sewage generated by

the proposed Upington SEZ 21 Figure 3.11: Demarcating the urban edge of Upington as per the //Khara-Hais Local Municipality SDF (2012)

22 Figure 3.12: The existing road infrastructure that borders the proposed Upington SEZ 23 Figure 3.13: The proposed internal road infrastructure of the Upington SEZ 23 Figure 3.14: Examples of commercial scale solar PV array layouts 24 Figure 3.15: Schematic description of the makeup of a photovoltaic array. 25 Figure 3.16: Schematic showing solar energy capture and electricity generation. 25 Figure 3.17: Schematic showing the solar panel array proportions. 26 Figure 3.18: A solar array and group station showing the typical layout of the structures (Suntech Power

Holdings Co., Ltd.). 27 Figure 3.19: A photovoltaic array in Masdar (United Arab Emirates) showing typical concrete “foot”

structures. 27 Figure 6.1 Structurally favourable soils map of the proposed SEZ. 37 Figure 6.2: NPAES Focus Areas map of the proposed SEZ and surrounding areas. 38 Figure 6.3: Alternative option 1 for the reticulation and treatment of sewage generated by the proposed

Upington SEZ 39 Figure 6.4: Alternative option 2 for the reticulation and treatment of sewage generated by the proposed

Upington SEZ 40 Figure 6.5: Alternative option 3 (preferred option) for the reticulation and treatment of sewage generated by

the proposed Upington SEZ 41 Figure 6.6: The existing road infrastructure that borders the proposed Upington SEZ. 42 Figure 6.7: The proposed internal road infrastructure of the Upington SEZ. 42 Figure 6.8: Examples of commercial scale PV solar array layouts. 43 Figure 6.9: Existing CSP facilities (Eskom, 2017). 44 Figure 8.1: Land Use Map indicating the current land use surrounding the proposed SEZ in Upington. 52 Figure 8.2: (a) Graph of the average monthly rainfall; (b) Graph of the average monthly midday

temperatures; and (c) Graph of the average monthly night-time temperature (SA Explorer; 2015). 52 Figure 8.3: General topography of the proposed SEZ. 53 Figure 8.4: Map indicating the hydrology of the proposed SEZ 54 Figure 8.5: SANBI Vegetation Map representing the vegetation within and surrounding the proposed SEZ 55 Figure 8.6: Sensitivity map of the proposed SEZ and surrounding areas. 56 Figure 10.1: Indicative primary buffer zone for the proposed SEZ 64 Figure 10.2 Ecological and Biodiversity Sensitivity map for the proposed new Upington SEZ 66 Figure 10.3: Heritage occurrences within the vicinity of the development 71 Figure 10.4: Aquatic sensitivity map for the proposed Upington SEZ. 77 Figure 10.4: Ecological and Biodiversity Sensitivity map for the proposed new Upington SEZ. 83 Figure 10.5: Heritage occurrences within the area of the proposed new Upington SEZ. 83 Figure 10.6: Aquatic sensitivity map for the proposed new Upington SEZ. 84 Figure 10.6: Overall sensitivity map for the proposed SEZ. 85 Figure 12.1 Sensitivity map of the study area. 107

LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1: Listed activities triggered by the proposed SEZ ................................................................................. 28 Table 4.1: Environmental legislation considered in the preparation of the SEZ Environmental Impact

Assessment Report ........................................................................................................................................ 30 Table 7.1 Issues raised by either Stakeholders or registered I&AP’s with the relevant responses ................. 49 Table 9.1: Significance Rating Table .................................................................................................................... 59


EOH Coastal & Environmental Services viii Special Economic Zone, Upington

Table 9.2 Impact Severity Rating .......................................................................................................................... 59 Table 9.3 Overall Significance Rating ................................................................................................................... 60 Table 11.1: Mind map of the issues indentified within the Environmental Impact Assessment phase of the

proposed new SEZ. ....................................................................................................................................... 88 Table 11.2 Summary of the issues identified and their applicability in each phase .......................................... 89 Table 11.3. Summary of all General and Specialist Impacts. ............................................................................. 92 Table 12.1 High impacts identified for the proposed SEZ. ................................................................................ 100 Table 12.2 Comparative Assessment of General Impacts occuring in all phases for the proposed SEZ. .... 103 Table 12.3 Comparative Assessment of Agricultural Impacts in all phases for the proposed SEZ. .............. 103 Table 12.4 Comparative Assessment of Air Quality Impacts in all phases for the proposed SEZ. ................ 103 Table 12.5 Comparative Assessment of Ecological Impacts in all phases for the proposed SEZ. ................ 104 Table 12.6 Comparative Assessment of Geohydrological Impacts occuring in all phases for the proposed

SEZ. .............................................................................................................................................................. 104 Table 12.7 Comparative Assessment of Heritage Impacts occuring in all phases for the proposed SEZ. ... 104 Table 12.8 Comparative Assessment of Noise Impacts occurring in all phases for the proposed SEZ. ....... 105 Table 12.9 Comparative Assessment of Socio-economic Impacts occurring in all phases for the proposed

SEZ (+ = beneficial impact). ........................................................................................................................ 105 Table 12.10 Comparative Assessment of surface water and wetland impacts occuring in all phases for the

proposed SEZ. ............................................................................................................................................. 105 Table 12.11 Comparative Assessment of tourism impacts occuring in all phases for the proposed SEZ. ... 106 Table 12.12 Comparative Assessment of traffic impacts occurring in all phases for the proposed SEZ. ..... 106 VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT ....................................................................................................................... 106 The Visual Impact Assessment identified impacts in the planning and design and construction phases. .... 106 Table 12.13 Comparative Assessment of visual impacts occurring in all phases for the proposed SEZ. ..... 106 Table 12.14 Impacts associated with the No-go alternative.............................................................................. 107


EOH Coastal & Environmental Services Special Economic Zone, Upington ix

LIST OF ACRONYMS The following acronyms have been used in this report:

BID Background Information Document

CA Competent Authority

Ca Calcium

CBA Critical Biodiversity Area

DAFF Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries

DENC Department of Environment and Nature Conservation

DSR Draft Scoping Report

DWS Department of Water and Sanitation

EAP Environmental Assessment Practitioner

EAPSA Environmental Assessment Practitioners of South Africa

ECO Environmental Control Officer

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

NCPHRA Northern Cape Provincial Heritage Resources Authority

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

EIR Environmental Impact Report

EMPr Environmental Management Programme

GN Government Notice

HIA Heritage Impact Assessment

I&AP Interested and Affected Party

IDP Integrated Development Plan

IEMP Integrated Environmental Management Plan

MEC Member of the Executive Council

N North

NC Northern Cape

NCEDA North Cape Economic Development Agency

NEMA National Environmental Management Act

NEM:WA National Environmental Management Waste Act

NEM:AQA National Environmental Management Air Quality Act

NFEPA National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Area

NDP National Development Plan

PoS Plan of Study

PPP Public Participation Process

PV Photo Voltaic

S South

SACNASP South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions

SAHRA South African Heritage Resources Agency

SANBI South African National Biodiversity Institute

SANRAL South African National Roads Agency SOC Limited

SEZ Special Economic Zone

SDF Spatial Development Framework

SIA Social Impact Assessment

SCC Species of Conservation Concern

SG Surveyor General

WULA Water Use License Application

WWTW Waste Water Treatment Works


EOH Coastal & Environmental Services Special Economic Zone, Upington 1

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to the Study The Northern Cape Economic Development, Trade and Investment Promotion Agency (NCEDA) propose the establishment of a new Special Economic Zone (SEZ) located within the urban edge of Upington in the Northern Cape Province. The proposed project entails the development of 440ha of land located in Upington, Northern Cape as a new SEZ as well as the provision of bulk and internal services (electricity, water, sewer and road/street infrastructure) within the SEZ. Electricity for the SEZ will be provided through the development of a new Photo Voltaic (PV) Facility with an output of up to 50MW, located on 72 hectares within the SEZ while water bulk services will be provided from the existing municipal services in Upington. A new onsite Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP) is also being proposed. The development will occur in six (6) phases with Phase 1 already approved. An Environmental Authorisation (EA) for Phase 1 has been issued by the Department of Environment and Nature Conservation (DENC) on in December 2010 (DENC Reference: MNO 25/19).

1.2 Special Economic Zone SEZs are geographically designated areas of a country set aside for specifically targeted economic activities, supported through special arrangements (that may include laws) and systems that are often different from those that apply in the rest of the country. The proposed Upington SEZ is driven by the anticipated positive outlook for the renewable solar energy power demand in South Africa within the context of the IRP 2016 plan of the South African Government. It is anticipated that the increased utilization of renewable energy as a source of electricity generation will drive the establishment of new industries. The objective of the SEZ in Upington is to become an industrial node that will attract not only solar related manufacturing, assembly and supporting services in support of South Africa’s renewable energy strategy but Mining beneficiation and Agro-processing as well.

1.3 Environmental Authorisation in South Africa The regulation and protection of the environment within South Africa occurs mainly through the application of various items of legislation, within the regulatory framework of the Constitution (Act 108 of 1996). The primary legislation regulation for Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) within South Africa is the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA, Act 107 of 1998). NEMA makes provision for the Minister of Environmental Affairs to identify activities which may not commence prior to authorisation from either the Minister or the provincial Member of the Executive Council (MEC). In addition, NEMA provides for the formulation of regulations in respect of such authorisations. The EIA Regulations, 2014 (as amended 2017) allow for a Basic Assessment process for activities with limited environmental impact (listed in GN R. 327 and GN R.324, as amended in 2017) and a more rigorous two-tiered approach to activities with potentially greater environmental impact (listed in GN R. 325, 2017). This two-tiered approach includes both a Full Scoping and EIA Process (Figure 1.1). The proposed Upington SEZ triggers a Full Scoping and EIA Process due to listed activities triggered from Listing Notice 1 (GN R. 327), 2 (GN R. 325) and 3 (GN R. 324). The proposed development requires a Full Scoping and EIA due to the following triggers:


EOH Coastal & Environmental Services 2 Special Economic Zone, Upington

Government Notice

Activity Number

Activity Description Relevance to this project

GN R 325 6

The development of facilities or infrastructure for any process or activity which requires a permit or license or an amended permit or license in terms of national or provincial legislation governing the generation or release of emissions, pollution or effluent, excluding- (iii) the development of facilities or

infrastructure for the treatment of effluent, polluted water, wastewater or sewage where such facilities have a daily throughput capacity of 2000 cubic meters or less.

The proposed Upington SEZ development includes the construction of effluent, wastewater and sewage treatment infrastructure which may have a daily throughput capacity of 2000 cubic meters or more.

GN R 325 15

The clearance of an area of 20 hectares or more of indigenous vegetation.

The proposed Upington SEZ development will occur on an area of approximately 440ha of previously undeveloped land.

GN R 325 25

The development and related operation of facilities or infrastructure for the treatment of effluent, wastewater or sewage with a daily throughput capacity of 15000 cubic meters or more.


It is important to note that the proposed new PV Solar Plant that will be located within the SEZ does not trigger any listed activities as it will be located within the urban edge of Upington. This is in accordance with Activity number 1 of GN R. 325 which states the following: “The development of facilities or infrastructure for the generation of electricity from a renewable resource where the electricity output is 20 megawatts or more, excluding where such development of facilities or infrastructure is for photovoltaic installations and occurs within an urban area.” The Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) is the Competent Authority for this application.

1.4 Environmental Impact Assessment Process The EIA process is guided by regulations made in terms of Chapter 4 of NEMA, published as Government Notice No R 326 in Government Gazette No 40722 of 7 April 2017. The regulations set out the procedures and criteria for the submission, processing and consideration of decisions on applications for environmental authorisation.



Figure 1.1 The Full Scoping and EIA Process flow chart

1.5 The Scoping Phase A detailed description of the Scoping Phase for the proposed SEZ and the outcomes thereof is included in: “EOH Coastal and Environmental Services, The Development of a Special Economic Zone (SEZ) in Upington, Northern Cape Province, Scoping Report, EOH CES, East London”. A Plan of Study (PoS) for the detailed EIA phase was submitted to DEA together with the Final Scoping Report (FSR), in fulfilment of Appendix 2 in GNR 326 of the EIA Regulations (2014) (as amended 2017). The PoS and FSR was accepted by DEA on 29th May 2017.

1.6 The Environmental Impact Assessment Phase The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a comprehensive evaluation and study phase that addresses all the issues raised in the Scoping Phase. It is a substantial phase that has seven key objectives:

Describe the biophysical and socio-economic environment that is likely to be affected by the proposed SEZ.

Assess the significance of impacts that may occur from the proposed SEZ.

Assess the alternatives proposed during the Scoping Phase.

Provide details of mitigation measures and management recommendations to reduce the significance of impacts.

Landowner, Stakeholder & I&AP Notification

Submit Application Form

Prepare Draft Scoping Report

Public Review Period (30 days)

Finalise & Submit Scoping Report

DEA Review, Comment & Decision

Specialist Studies, Prepare Draft EIR & EMPr

Public Review Period (30 days)

Finalise & Submit EIR & EMPr

DEA Review, Comment & Decision

Notify I&APs & Explain Appeals Process

WE ARE HERE



Provide a framework for the development of the Environmental Management Programme (EMPr).

Continue with the public participation process. This EIA phase includes the following steps: 1. Specialist studies Specialist studies are undertaken to provide a detailed and thorough examination of key issues and environmental impacts. Specialists gather relevant data to identify and assess environmental impacts that might occur on the specific component of the environment that they are studying (for instance waste management, air quality, noise, vegetation, water quality, pollution, waste management). Once completed, these studies are synthesised in, and presented in full as appendices to the Environmental Impact Report (EIR). 2. The Public Participation Process The public participation process (PPP) initiated at the beginning of the Scoping Phase continues into the EIA Phase. Once again the PPP provides a platform from which all I&AP’s are able to voice their concerns and raise issues regarding the project. 3. Assessment of the Significance of Impacts

It is necessary to determine the significance, or seriousness, of any impacts on the natural or social environment. It is common practice in the EIA Phase to use a significance rating scale that determines the spatial and temporal extent, and the severity and certainty of any impact occurring, including impacts relating to any project alternatives. This allows the overall significance of an impact or benefit to be determined. The overall intent of undertaking a significance assessment is to provide the competent authority with information on the potential environmental impacts and benefits, thus allowing them to make an informed, balanced and fair decision. 4. Mitigation Measures and Recommendations

Critical to any EIA is the recommendation of practical and reasonable mitigation measures and recommendations. These recommendations relate to the actions that are needed in order to avoid, minimise or offset any negative impacts from the proposed SEZ. 5. Planning input An effective EIA process should actively engage and contribute to the project planning process so as to mitigate environmental impacts through improved design and layout. 6. Environmental Impact Report The above-mentioned tasks are synthesised in the EIR. This will allow the assessment of the relationship of environmental impacts to project actions, as well as to assess the overall significance of these impacts. The EIR will also provide sufficient information to allow the competent authority to make an informed decision.



1.7 The Nature and Scope of this Report This EIR fulfils the requirement of the EIA Regulations (2014) (as amended 2017) for the documentation of the EIR phase. The structure of this report is based on APPENDIX 3 of GNR No. 326, of the EIA Regulations (2014) (as amended 2017), which clearly specifies the required content of an Environmental Impact Assessment Report.

1.8 Assumptions and Limitations This EIR is based on currently available information and, as a result, the following limitations and assumptions are implicit:

The report is based on project information provided by the client.

Descriptions of the natural and social environments are based on limited fieldwork, relevant specialist studies and available literature.

1.9 Details and Expertise of the Environmental Assessment Practitioner In fulfilment of the above-mentioned legislative requirement the details of the Environmental Assessment Practitioner (EAP) who prepared the report as well as the expertise of the individual members of the study team are provided below. 1.9.1 Details of the EAP Dr Alan Carter Alan is the executive of the EOH East London Office. He holds a PhD in Marine Biology and is a Certified Public Accountant, with extensive training and experience in both financial accounting and environmental science disciplines with international accounting firms in South Africa and the USA. He has 25 years’ experience in environmental management and has specialist skills in sanitation, coastal environments and industrial waste. Dr Carter is registered as a Professional Natural Scientist under the South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions (SACNASP). He is also registered as an EAP with the Environmental Assessment Practitioners of South Africa (EAPSA) interim EAP certification body. 1.9.2 Expertise of the study team

In terms of APPENDIX 3(3)(1) of the EIA Regulations (2014) (as amended 2017), an Environmental Impact Assessment Report must include – (a) Details of– (i) The EAP who prepared the report; and (ii) The expertise of the EAP, including a curriculum vitae.



EOH Coastal and Environmental Services (EOH) was established in 1990 as a specialist environmental consulting company and has considerable experience in terrestrial, marine and freshwater ecology, the Social Impact Assessment (SIA) process, State of Environment Reporting (SOER), Integrated Waste Management Plans (IWMP), Environmental Management Programme (EMPr), Spatial Development Frameworks (SDF), public participation, as well as the management and co-ordination of all aspects of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) processes. EOH has been active in all of the above fields, and in so doing have made a positive contribution towards environmental management and sustainable development in the Eastern Cape, South Africa and many other African countries. We believe that a balance between development and environmental protection can be achieved by skilful, considerate and careful planning. Mr Roy de Kock Roy is a Senior Consultant holding a BSc Honours in Geology and an MSc in Botany from the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University in Port Elizabeth. His MSc thesis focused on Rehabilitation Ecology using an open-cast mine as a case study. He has been working for EOH since 2010, and is based at the East London branch where he focuses on Ecological and Agricultural Assessments, Geological and Geotechnical analysis, Environmental Management Plans, mining applications and various environmental impact studies. Roy has worked on numerous projects in South Africa, Mozambique and Malawi. He is registered as a Natural Scientist under the South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions (SACNASP; No: 400216/16). Roy will assume the role of project manager, as well as biodiversity specialist on the project team. Ms Jaclyn Smith Jaclyn Smith is an Environmental Consultant holding a BSc degree with majors in Geology and Environmental Science from Rhodes University and a BSc Honours degree in Geology from Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University. Jaclyn’s honours thesis focused on the sediment disturbance depth over two beaches in Port Elizabeth. Jaclyn has over three years’ experience as an environmental consultant and has undertaken various environmental impact studies and Environmental Management Plans. Other team members include:

EOH Team

Caitlin Smith Surface Water and Wetland Study

Cherie-Lynn Mack Surface Water and Wetland Study (Reviewer)

Nande Suka Socio-Economic Impact Assessment

Rosalie Evans Tourism Impact Assessment

Roy de Kock Ecological and Biodiversity Impact Assessment

External Specialists

Airshed Air Quality Impact Assessment

Exigo Sustainability Groundwater Impact Assessment

Exigo Sustainability Heritage Impact Assessment

Emonti Traffic Impact Assessment

Enviro Acoustic Research Noise Impact Assessment





2 LOCATION OF ACTIVITY

2.1 Property Description The proposed SEZ is located within the urban edge of Upington, in the Dawid Kruiper Local Municipality (DKLM) (previously //Khara Hais and Mier LMs). The DKLM falls within in ZF Mgcawu District Municipality (previously Siyanda DM), in the north of the Northern Cape Province. The site is bounded by the N10 in the east and the north and by the R360 to the west. The Upington Airport is located directly east of the site (Figure 2.1). The land upon which the SEZ will be located is currently owned by the David Kruiper Local Municipality and the National Government of South Africa (Figure 2.2). A portion of the land is also still unsurveyed. The property ownership details are as follows: Erf 6009 SG Code: C02800070000600900000

Landowner: Republic Of South Africa

Contact person: Mziwonke Dlabantu

Postal address: Private Bag x 65, Pretoria

Postal code: 0001 Cell:

Telephone: (012) 406 1000 Fax:

E-mail: [email protected]

Erf 5645 SG Code: C02800070000564500000

Landowner: Republic Of South Africa

Contact person: As above

Postal address:

Postal code: Cell:

Telephone: Fax:

E-mail:

Allotment Area: Upington Town Code: C0280007

Landowner: Khara Hais Local Municipality

In terms of APPENDIX 3(3)(1) of the EIA Regulations (2014)(as amended 2017), an Environmental Impact Assessment Report must include –

b) The location of the development footprint of the activity on the approved site as contemplated in the accepted scoping report, including –

(i) The 21 digit Surveyor General code of each cadastral land parcel; (ii) Where available, the physical address and farm name;

(iii) Where the required information in terms of (i) and (ii) is not available, the coordinates of the boundary of the property or properties;

c) A plan which locates the proposed activity or activities applied for as well as the associated structures and infrastructure and appropriate scale, or, if it is-

(i) A linear activity, a description and coordinates of the corridor in which the proposed activity or activities is to be undertaken;

(ii) On land where the property has not been defined, the coordinates within which the activity is to be undertaken.

mailto:[email protected]



Contact person: Mr D Ngxanga (Municipal Manager)

Postal address: Po Box X6003, Mark Street, Upington

Postal code: 8800 Cell:

Telephone: 054 338 7002 / 054 338 7001 Fax:

E-mail: [email protected]

Figure 2.1: Locality of the proposed SEZ.



Figure 2.2: Property ownership of the proposed SEZ.



3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

3.1 Description of Proposed Activity The proposed project entails the development of 440ha of land located within the urban edge of Upington, Northern Cape as a new SEZ as well as the provision of bulk and internal services (electricity, water, sewer and road/street infrastructure) within the SEZ (Figure 3.1). Electricity for the SEZ will be provided through the development of a new PV Facility with an output of up to 50MW, located on 72 hectares within the SEZ while water will be provided from the existing municipal services in Upington. A new onsite Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP) is also being proposed. The proposed SEZ will consist of the following land use areas in square meters:

Land use Surface area (m2) % area

Heavy industry 311,256

54% Medium Industry 776,539

Light Industry 842,728

PV facility 512,257

Hub – offices, business and retail 349,556 8%

Educational – University 145,929 3%

Hotel 33,278 1%

Services 72,510 2%

Sports fields 167,985 4%

Open spaces 541,378 12%

Roads 802,708 18%

In terms of APPENDIX 3(3)(1) of the EIA Regulations (2014)(as amended 2017), an Environmental Impact Assessment Report must include -

d) A description of the scope of the proposed activity, including – (i) All listed and specified activities triggered and being applied for;

(ii) A description of the associated structures and infrastructure related to the development.



Figure 3.1: Proposed layout plan of the Upington SEZ



3.1.1 Phases of development The development will occur in six (6) phases with Phase 1 already approved (Figure 3.2): Phase 1: The first phase of the SEZ development is the area is ready for development. The area shown in Figure 3.2 as Phase 1 has already received town planning approval (town planning, geotechnical investigation and land surveying) to a point where civil and electrical services can be installed. This area is adjacent to an existing industrial area and civil and electrical services are close by. The provision of these bulk services for Phase 1 was discussed with //Khara Hais Municipality and has been approved in principle. Written confirmation from //Khara Hais Municipality must still been obtained to verify this. An EA has already been issued by DENC in 2010 and construction has commenced. Phase 2-6: The land designated for Phases 2 - 6 of the SEZ development still has to go through a rezoning process. The EIA, which will take 12-18 months to complete, has to include bulk services infrastructure. After completion of the town planning, EIA, geotechnical investigation and land surveying process, construction of civil and electrical bulk and internal services can start. This will take a further nine to twelve months to complete.

Figure 3.2: The proposed phases of the development of the Upington SEZ 3.1.2 Provision of bulk services Currently, there are no bulk services in place within the proposed Upington SEZ. The following bulk services will be constructed: Electrical infrastructure Bulk Water Infrastructure Sewerage Infrastructure Road networks



PV Solar Plant Electrical Infrastructure The proposed Upington SEZ is an energy intensive development and will add a considerable load to the existing installed capacity of the David Kruiper Municipal network (approximately 41.6%). It is proposed that the development of a new PV Solar facility with a maximum output of up to 50MW located within the SEZ will supplement the electrical requirements of the new SEZ. More details into the new Solar PV Plant is provided in Section 3.2.3 below. The planned electrical network for the proposed Upington SEZ will be a completely new addition to the 132kV distribution network of the Municipality and entails a new 132/11kV step-down facility, Foxtrot Substation, to be constructed inside the Upington SEZ development and connected to the existing 132kV ring feeder between the Alpha and Charlie Substations. Additional electricity will be supplemented by a new Solar PV plant with a maximum planned output of up to 50MW that will be located with the proposed Upington SEZ. A Load Centre, referred to as SEZ S/S, is also proposed to provide ring feeder capabilities and switching options to the planned Solar SEZ electrical distribution network. The proposed Upington SEZ development is bordered by the area of supply of Delta Substation on the western side and Charlie Substation on the south-eastern side. Two overhead ACSR Hare conductor lines, connected to the load centre DS1, run parallel to the western boundary of the development in Swartmodder Road. One of these lines forms a ring feeder to the Airports Company of South Africa (ACSA) Site but will have to be removed if the proposed Upington SEZ development goes ahead as planned as this line crosses the proposed development in a north-eastern direction. The second line forms part of a ring feeder to the Upington Industrial area. On the eastern side of the planned development a ring feeder, consisting of cable and overhead conductor sections and connected to the load centre CS1, also runs parallel to the development and forms part of a ring feeder to 8SAI, Correctional Services, ACSA and other consumers. The total expected after diversity maximum demand (ADMD) was calculated for the proposed Upington SEZ by allocating to each facility description a typical demand (Watt/m2) to calculate the total load and by applying a diversity factor then obtain the total maximum demand after diversity. The total expected ADMA was calculated to be 22.879 MVA. David Kruiper Municipality has limited spare capacity on their network and is further curtailed by the fact that Eskom cannot increase the municipal notified maximum demand of 44 MVA due to the current energy situation in the country. In order to provide a medium voltage supply to the proposed development, the following approaches will be considered:

Utilising the spare capacity available at Charlie Substation for Phase 1 of the development, and

Creation of Foxtrot Substation, a new 132/11kV, 25MVA, step-down facility and SEZ Load Centre, both to be constructed on areas earmarked for services as indicated in Figure 3.1.

No further information has been provided as yet with regards to method statements for the construction of the electrical infrastructure associated with the proposed Upington SEZ. Bulk Water Infrastructure Figure 3.3 below shows the location of the existing Upington bulk water supply infrastructure in relation to the proposed Upington SEZ. Water is withdrawn from the Orange River and purified in centre of town.



From there it is pumped through the water distribution network (Figure 3.4) to three storage reservoirs, acting as tail-end dams. Water stored in these reservoirs is distributed to end-users through the water reticulation network shown below.

Figure 3.3: Existing bulk water supply in Upington

Figure 3.4: Existing water reticulation in Upington



The capacity of the Upington water treatment works (WTW) is 85Ml /day and the peak summer daily demand is 82% (70 Ml/day). The water treatment plant was upgraded recently with an addition of a facility to remove algae from the raw water. Water is pumped in 400mm and 600mm main lines, used to distribute water to the Central and Pabalello reservoirs respectively. The water reticulation network is in a serviceable condition. Minor problems are experiences with asbestos cement pipe bursts mostly during winter when the water pressure is higher. The capacity of the current bulk water supply system is adequate for the already approved Phase 1. However, additional bulk water supply infrastructure is needed for Phases 2 – 6. It is difficult to determine the expected water use as the detailed information on the type of development is not yet known in detail. The following were used as guidelines:

Actual water usage figures of industries in Upington adjacent to the SEZ development area. However, these figures may differ from the actual proposed SEZ demand

Ninham Shand Report on the operation and future needs with regards to the Upington Water Supply system compiled 1996

No bulk water supply infrastructure will be required for Phase 1. The current bulk water supply system is sufficient and the water reticulation network supplies water to the edge of this area. Only an internal water reticulation network, serving all the stands in the Phase 1 area, will be constructed. In order to supply water to the rest of the phases, a booster pump station, 250mm rising main, storage reservoir, lifting pump station and high level storage needs to be constructed as part of Phase 2 (Figure 3.5). Details are as follows:

A booster pump station at the intersection of Dakota and Diedericks streets.

A 3500m long 250mm diameter pipeline from the booster pump station running along Diedericks street (N10) to the highest point next to the N10 as indicated on the drawing below.

A 2000 kl storage reservoir at the end of the rising main.

A lifting pump station next to the storage reservoir.

Pressure tower on the same level as the Central and Pabalello reservoir.



Figure 3.5 The proposed water reticulation layout for the Upington SEZ No further information has been provided as yet with regards to method statements for the construction of the bulk water reticulation infrastructure associated with the proposed Upington SEZ. Sewage infrastructure Some of the main components of the Upington sewer system are running at full, or close to, full capacity. The capacity of the Subway Pump Station in terms of storage size and pump capacity are under pressure. The last part of the main line from this pump station to the treatment works occasionally overflows due to a lack of capacity and causes spillages of raw sewage. The waste water treatment works (WWTW) has a capacity of 16Ml per day and is operated at full capacity to cope with the demand and needs upgrading. A gravity fed main line from Pabalello to the WWTW was constructed years ago in order to help relieve the pressure on other parts of the sewer network. The overall condition of the sewer network can be described as good. Figure 3.6 shows the existing Upington sewerage reticulation network and Figure 3.7 indicates the main sewer infrastructure elements in Upington in relation to the proposed Upington SEZ development area. All sewage from the north-eastern half of Upington is handled by the Subway Pump Station. This pump station pumps the sewage in the direction of the CBD to the watershed from where it gravitates to the waste water treatment works.



Figure 3.6: The existing Upington sewerage reticulation network

Figure 3.7: The main sewerage infrastructure elements in Upington



The expected sewage flow figures are expected to be between 5-10ML for the Upington SEZ. The exact type of industries are not yet known which makes it difficult to ensure that the calculations area accurate. The Phase 1 sewage contribution is small in relation to the load that the current sewerage system handles. Therefore, no new bulk infrastructure, or changes to the existing infrastructure is needed. Internal sewerage lines will be connected to existing lines adjacent to the area known as Phase 1. Further development (Phases 2 – 6) in the proposed Upington SEZ all require the development of bulk infrastructure which must be constructed as part of Phase 2. Three alternate options have been proposed to manage the wastewater produced from these phases of the project (Figure 3.8). Option 1

The construction of a new sewer pump station to the south of the SEZ target area (See Figure 3.8).

All sewage produced by the proposed Upington SEZ area will flow through a gravity fed system (red lines in Figure 3.8) to the sewer pump station.

Sewage will then be pumped offsite to the municipal WWTW (green line in Figure 3.8).

All transportation pipelines will be located within the urban edge (Figure 3. 11)

Figure 3.8: Alternative option 1 for the reticulation and treatment of sewage generated by the proposed Upington SEZ Option 2

All sewage will be conveyed and treated by new infrastructure constructed as part of the SEZ development.

This includes the construction of:

Gravity fed

Gravity fed

Pumped offsite



- A sewerage pump station to the south of the SEZ target area where all the sewage drains through the gravity network to a pump line (green line in Figure 3.9)

- This pump line will be constructed from this pump station to convey the waste water through the industrial area to a new sewer treatment works adjacent to the pump station.

- Treated water will be pumper to a reservoir located at the highest point onsite (in the northern section)(green line in Figure 3.9)

In this case treated water can be used as raw water in the SEZ area for toilets and gardens. The following will apply:

The proposed new WWTW will not exceed a daily throughput capacity of more than 2 000 m3.

The proposed new WWTW will be located within the urban edge (Figure 3.11)

Figure 3.9: Alternative option 2 for the reticulation and treatment of sewage generated by the proposed Upington SEZ Option 3 (Preferred alternative) This is considered as the preferred alternative.


This includes the construction of: - A sewerage pump station to the south of the SEZ target area where all the sewage drains through

the gravity network to a pump line (red lines in Figure 3.10) - This pump line will be constructed from this pump station to convey the waste water through the

industrial area to a new sewer treatment works located in the northern section of the site (green lines in Figure 3.10)

Gravity fed Gravity fed



- Treated water will be pumped to a reservoir located in close vicinity to the treatment works.

In this case treated water can be used as raw water in the SEZ area for toilets and gardens. The following will apply:

The proposed new WWTW will not exceed a daily throughput capacity of more than 2 000 m3.

The proposed new WWTW will be located within the urban edge (Figure 3.11)

Figure 3.10: Alternative option 3 (preferred option) for the reticulation and treatment of sewage generated by the proposed Upington SEZ

Gravity fed



Figure 3.11: Demarcating the urban edge of Upington as per the //Khara-Hais Local Municipality SDF (2012) Road network The following existing roads are located along the boundaries of the proposed Upington SEZ (Figure 3.12):

The N10 in a northerly direction of Upington Airport, which is located approximately 2 km from the SEZ area.

The N10 from the Airport Road, heading in a westerly direction to Namibia.

The road going to the Kgalagadi Trans Frontier Park crossing the N10 on the western corner of the proposed Upington SEZ area.

Roads that border the proposed Upington SEZ area are in sufficient condition to withstand the traffic generated by the proposed Upington SEZ. The preliminary road and street layout for the proposed Upington SEZ, as seen in Figure 3.13, was developed by professional town planners and reviewed by the David Kruiper (//Khara Hais) Town Planning Division. The only potential road related infrastructure upgrades on the current road infrastructure outside the Upington SEZ are deceleration and acceleration lanes at the turnoff points to the Upington SEZ area.



Figure 3.12: The existing road infrastructure that borders the proposed Upington SEZ

Figure 3.13: The proposed internal road infrastructure of the Upington SEZ No further information has been provided as yet with regards to method statement for the construction of the internal road network associated with the proposed Upington SEZ.



3.2.3. Photovoltaic Facility The proposed Solar PV Facility associated with the Upington SEZ will to use PV panels which will harness solar energy. The proposed solar PV facility is anticipated to produce up to 50 MW of electricity. The installation is estimated to cover a footprint of approximately 75 hectares.

Figure 3.14: Examples of commercial scale solar PV array layouts PV Arrays An array consists of multiple PV panels, which are made up of individual modules, which in turn comprises PV cells (see Figures 3.15 below).



Figure 3.15: Schematic description of the makeup of a photovoltaic array. Each array will be raised to a maximum of about 2.0 – 2.5 metres above the ground and fixed to frames to slope at an angle to the horizontal. Each of the arrays will be placed in a series with a gap of about 5m between each row. An example of the photovoltaic components is shown in Figure 3.16 below.

Figure 3.16: Schematic showing solar energy capture and electricity generation.



Photovoltaic modules An individual PV module is made up of layers of polycrystalline silicone, which act as a semi-conductor. When light shines on the cell it creates an electric field across the layers, causing electricity to flow. Higher light intensity will increase the flow of electricity. This charge is discharged via the module’s transparent conductive front layer and metallic rear layer. The direct current generated within the module is fed into the electrical grid via an inverter (Figure 3.17). The proposed thin-film PV modules are 1.9m² (0.99m x 1.96m) in size, and comprise four panels. Each module is mounted on a metal supporting structure, no more than 1m off the ground, and has a potential output of up to 380W. There are a number of options regarding the structures and their anchoring to the ground. Typically this is done by means of a small concrete “foot” at the base of the pole supporting the structure (Figure 3.17).

Figure 3.17: Schematic showing the solar panel array proportions. Modules will be organized into 10 arrays of 1.0 MW (approximately 1.5 ha), with each group connected to a “group station” (a cabin of approximately 2.5 x 4 m containing transformers and inverters). Each “group station” is then connected with a “main station” of approximately the same size, which is connected to the closest substation via an 11 kV power line. It is expected that the PV installation would have a total of about 5 “group stations” and a single “main station”.



It is also proposed that the PV facility be fenced for security reasons. A small control cabin will be built at the entrance to the solar facility.

Figure 3.18: A solar array and group station showing the typical layout of the structures (Suntech Power Holdings Co., Ltd.).

PV array supporting structures

The PV panels will be secured to metal framework, the design of which is yet to be finalized. However, the supporting frames will be secured to concrete footings in the ground as shown in Figures 3.19 below.

Figure 3.19: A photovoltaic array in Masdar (United Arab Emirates) showing typical concrete “foot” structures.



3.2 Listed activities triggered The Upington SEZ construction activities trigger the need for a Full Scoping and EIA process under the NEMA EIA Regulations of 2014 (as amended in 2017) in Listing Notice 1, Listing Notice 2 and Listing Notice 3 and published in Government Notices No. R. 327, R. 325 and R. 324, respectively. The listed activities that have been applied for are provided in Table 3.1 below. Table 3.1: Listed activities triggered by the proposed SEZ

Listed Activity Number

Description Description of project activity that triggers listed activity

GN R 327 (13)

The development of facilities or infrastructure for the off-stream storage of water, including dams and reservoirs, with a combined capacity of 50 000 cubic meters or more, unless such storage falls within the ambit of activity 16 in Listing Notice 2 of 2014.

The proposed Upington SEZ development may require the off-stream storage of water, including dams and reservoirs, with a combined capacity of 50000 cubic meters or more.

GN R 327(14)

The development and related operations of facilities or infrastructure, for the storage, or for the storage and handling, of a dangerous good, where such storage occurs in containers with a combined capacity of 80 cubic meters or more but not exceeding 500 cubic meters.

The proposed Upington SEZ will host industries which may require the storage, or the storage and handling of dangerous goods.

GN R 327 (19)

The infilling or depositing of any material of more than 10 cubic meters into, or the dredging, excavation, removal or moving of soil, sand, shells, shell grit, pebbles or rock of more than 10 cubic meters from a watercourse.

The proposed Upington SEZ development may require the construction of culverts and other infrastructure within an existing drainage system which runs through the proposed site.

GN R 327 (25)

The development and related operation of facilities or infrastructure for the treatment of effluent, wastewater or sewage with a daily throughput capacity of more than 2000 cubic meters but less than 15000 cubic meters.

The proposed Upington SEZ development includes the construction of effluent, wastewater and sewage treatment infrastructure. It is anticipated that the Upington SEZ will generate approximately 5000-10000 cubic meters of sewage daily.

GN R 327 (28)

Residential, mixed, retail, commercial, industrial or institutional developments where such land was used for agriculture, game farming, equestrian purposes or afforestation on or after 01 April 1998 and where such development:

(i) will occur inside an urban area, where the total land to be developed is bigger than 5 hectares.

The proposed Upington SEZ development occurs within the urban edge, on land previously zoned for agriculture.

GN R 325 (6)

The development of facilities or infrastructure for any process or activity which requires a permit or license or an amended permit or license in terms of national or provincial legislation governing the generation or release of emissions, pollution or effluent, excluding-

(iii) the development of facilities or infrastructure for the treatment of effluent, polluted water, wastewater or




Listed Activity Number

Description Description of project activity that triggers listed activity

sewage where such facilities have a daily throughput capacity of 2000 cubic meters or less.

GN R 325 (15)

The clearance of an area of 20 hectares or more of indigenous vegetation.

The proposed Upington SEZ development will occur on an area of approximately 440ha of previously undeveloped land.

GN R 325(25)



GN R 324 (14)

The development of- (ii) infrastructure or structures with a physical

footprint of 10 square meters or more; (g) In the Northern Cape:

(iii) In urban areas: (aa) Areas zoned for use as public open space.

The proposed Upington SEZ development may require the construction of a bridge exceeding 10 square meters in size across the river which runs through the site. The development will also include the construction of numerous buildings and structures exceeding 10 square meters, which may occur within 32 meters of the watercourse.

Applications for activities listed within GN R. 327 and GN R.324 require a Basic Assessment, while applications for activities listed within GN R. 325 require a Full Scoping and EIA process. The proposed SEZ construction triggers at least one listed activity from GN R. 325; it will therefore require a full Scoping and EIA. This process (indicated in Figure 1.1) is regulated by Chapter 4, Part 3, of the EIA Regulations (2014) (as amended 2017).



4 RELEVANT LEGISLATION AND POLICY

4.1 Relevant Legislation and Guidelines used in the Compilation of this Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Table 4.1 summarises the legislation that is relevant to the proposed SEZ construction. Table 4.1: Environmental legislation considered in the preparation of the SEZ Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Title of Environmental

Legislation Implications for the Proposed SEZ

Constitution Act (Act No. 108 of

1996)

This is the supreme law of the land. As a result, all laws, including those pertaining to the proposed development, must conform to the Constitution. The Bill of Rights - Chapter 2 of the Constitution, includes an environmental right (Section 24) according to which, everyone has the right: a) To an environment that is not harmful to their health or well-being. b) To have the environment protected for the benefit of present and future generations, through reasonable legislative and other measures that: (i) Prevent pollution and ecological degradation. (ii) Promote conservation. (iii) Secure ecologically sustainable development and use of natural resources while promoting justifiable economic and social development.

National Environmental

Management Act (NEMA) (Act No.

107 of 1998)

The developer must be mindful of the principles, broad liability and implications associated with NEMA and must eliminate or mitigate any potential impacts. The developer must also be mindful of the principles, broad liability and implications of causing damage to the environment. The developer must also comply with the EIA Regulations (2014) in the terms of the Act which specifies when an environmental authorisation is required and the nature of the EIA process.

National Environmental Management:

Biodiversity Act (Act No. 10 of

2004)

The National Environment Management: Biodiversity Act (No. 10 of 2004) (NEMBA) provides for the management and conservation of South Africa’s biodiversity and the protection of species and ecosystems that warrant national protection. The objectives of this Act are to:

a) Provide, within the framework of the National Environmental Management Act;

b) Manage and conserve of biological diversity within the Republic; and c) Promote the use of indigenous biological resources in a sustainable manner.


Protected Areas Act (NEMPA) (Act No. 57 of

2003)

The National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act (No. 57 of 2003) (NEMPAA) mainly provides for the following:

a) Declaration of nature reserves and determination of the type of reserve declared;

b) Cooperative governance in the declaration and management of nature reserves;

c) A system of protected areas in order to manage and conserve biodiversity and


e) A description of the policy and legislative context within which the development is located and an explanation of how the proposed development complies with and responds to the legislation and policy context.





Utilization and participation of local communities in the management of protected areas.

National Heritage Resources Act (Act No. 25 of

1999)

The protection of archaeological and paleontological resources is the responsibility of a provincial heritage resources authority and all archaeological objects, paleontological material and meteorites are the property of the State. “Any person who discovers archaeological or paleontological objects or material or a meteorite in the course of development must immediately report the find to the responsible heritage resources authority, or to the nearest local authority offices or museum, which must immediately notify such heritage resources authority”.

National Water Act (Act No. 36 of

1998)

The National Water Act (No. 36 of 1998) (NWA) provides for fundamental reform of the law relating to water resources in South Africa. The purpose of the Act amongst other things is to:

Ensure that the national water resources are protected, used, developed, conserved, managed and controlled in ways which take into account amongst other factors: o Promoting equitable access to water; o Promoting the efficient, sustainable and beneficial use of water in the

public interest; o Facilitating social and economic development; o Protecting aquatic and associated ecosystems and their biological

diversity; and o Reducing and preventing pollution and degradation of water resources.

The NWA is concerned with the overall management, equitable allocation and conservation of water resources in South Africa. To this end, it requires registration of water users and licenses to be obtained for water use except for certain limited instances set out in the Act. These instances include domestic use, certain recreational use, where the use occurs in terms of an existing lawful use or where the Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS) has issued a general authorisation that obviates the need for a permit. Water use for which a permit is required: For the purposes of this Act, water uses for which a permit is required (amongst other), are defined in Section 21 as follows:

Taking water from a water resource.

Storing water.

Impeding or diverting the flow of water in a watercourse.

Discharging waste or water containing waste into a water resource through a pipe, canal, sewer, sea outfall or other conduit.

Disposing of waste in a manner which may detrimentally impact on a water resource.

Altering the bed, banks, course or characteristics of a watercourse.


Waste Act (59 of 2008)

The purpose of this Act relates to the proper disposal of waste. The Act also provides for the waste related activities where a Waste Licence is required. This includes the recycling and refining of waste.

National Environmental

This Act requires that listed activities be operated within the conditions of an Air Emissions License, which has implications related to emissions monitoring and





Management: Air Quality Act (39 of

2004)

minimisation.

4.2 Relevant policy used in the compilation of this Environmental Impact Assessment Report

4.2.1 National Policy National Development Plan The National Development Plan (NDP) (also referred to as Vision 2030) is a detailed plan produced by the National Planning Commission in 2011 that is aimed at reducing and eliminating poverty in South Africa by 2030. The NDP represents a new approach by Government to promote sustainable and inclusive development in South Africa, promoting a decent standard of living for all, and includes key focus areas. Those that are relevant to the current proposed Upington SEZ development includes: Electricity Move to less carbon-intensive electricity production through procuring at least 20 000MW of renewable energy, increased hydro-imports from the region and increased demand-side measures, including solar water heating. The White Paper on Renewable Energy Policy (Renewable Energy White Paper, 2003) The White Paper on the Renewable Energy Policy (Renewable Energy White Paper) complements the White Paper on Energy Policy discussed in section 3.2.8 above, by pledging “Government Support for the development, demonstration and implementation of renewable energy sources for both small and large scale applications”. It sets out the policy principles, goals and objectives to achieve, “An energy economy in which modern renewable energy increases its share of energy consumed and provides affordable access to energy throughout South Africa, thus contributing to sustainable development and environmental conservation”. The Department of Minerals and Energy (DME) (now the Department of Energy) embarked on an Integrated Energy Plan (IEP) to develop the renewable energy resources, while taking safety, health and the environment into consideration. The government set a target of, “10 000 GWh (0.8Mtoe) renewable energy contribution to final energy consumption by 2013, to be produced mainly from biomass, wind, solar and small-scale hydro”. Four strategic areas that needed to be addressed to create the appropriate enabling environment for the promotion of renewable energy were identified. These included:-

Financial instruments;

Legal instruments;

Technology development, and;

Awareness raising, capacity building and education.

Integrated Resources Plan 2016 The IRP 2010-30 identified the preferred generation technology required to meet expected demand growth up to 2030. The policy adjusted IRP incorporated a number of government objectives, including affordable electricity, carbon mitigation, reduced water consumption, localisation and regional development,



producing a balanced strategy toward diversified electricity generation sources and gradual decarbonisation of the electricity sector in South Africa There has been some progress over the past three years, since the promulgation of the IRP 2010-30, in executing the programmes identified in the plan. A number of Ministerial Determinations have been issued and these include renewable energy, nuclear, coal and gas. While the IRP 2010-30 remains the official government plan for new generation capacity until it is replaced by an updated plan, there are a number of assumptions that have changed and they include:

The changed electricity landscape over the past three years, in particular in electricity demand and the underlying relationship with economic growth;

New developments in technology and fuel options (locally and globally);

Scenarios for carbon mitigation strategies and the impact on electricity supply up to 2050; and

The affordability of electricity and its impact on demand and supply. Relevance to the proposed Upington SEZ:

The proposed SEZ and associated Solar PV Plant project is in line with the IRP 20160 and can contribute up to 50 MW of solar energy to the total requirement.

The SEZ will supply solar renewable energy in the area.

National Climate Change Response White Paper (2012) South Africa, taking into account equity and the common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities of all nations as well as the inter-generational commitment of the Environmental Right contained in Section 24 the country's Constitution, has the climate change response objective of:

Making a fair contribution to the global effort to achieve the stabilisation of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that prevents dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system; and

Effectively adapt to and manage unavoidable and potential damaging climate change impacts through interventions that build and sustain.

Strategies South Africa will implement the following selected strategies (amongst others) in order to achieve its climate change response objective:

The prioritisation of mitigation interventions that significantly contribute to a peak, plateau and decline emission trajectory where greenhouse gas emissions peak in 2020 to 2025 at 34% and 42% respectively below a business as usual baseline, plateau to 2035 and begin declining in absolute terms from 2036 onwards, in particular, interventions within the energy, transport and industrial sectors.

The prioritisation of mitigation interventions that have potential positive job creation, poverty alleviation and/or general economic impacts. In particular, interventions that stimulate new industrial activities and those that improve the efficiency and competitive advantage of existing business and industry.

Acknowledging that, with the energy intensive nature of the South African economy, the mitigation of greenhouse gases is generally not going to be easy or cheap and that Government must support and facilitate the mitigation plans of, in particular, the energy, transport and industrial sectors.

Relevance to the proposed Upington SEZ:



The proposed project is in line with the IRP 2016 and can contribute up to 50 MW of solar energy to the total requirement. This is in line with mitigation commitments.

Other relevant national legislation Other national legislation that may be relevant to the proposed Upington SEZ includes:-

The Telecommunication Act (1966) which has certain requirements with regard to potential impacts on signal reception.

Green Economy Accord. The Green Economy Accord is an agreement between government, business and labour, committing each to tangible targets in achieving low carbon based economic development growth through renewable energy.

In addition to the above, aside from the environmental authorisation, there are other permits, contracts and licenses that will need to be obtained by the project proponent for the proposed project some of which fall outside the scope of the EIA. However, for the purposes of completeness, these include:-

o Local Municipality: Land Rezoning Permit o National Energy Regulator of South Africa (NERSA): Generation License

4.2.2 Municipal By-Laws Certain activities related to the proposed development may, in addition to National legislation, be subject to control by municipal by-laws. These will need to be confirmed with the David Kruiper Local Municipality prior to construction. At this stage in the EIA process this list should not be regarded as definitive or exhaustive, and it is probable that additional legislative requirements will be identified as the process progresses. In this regard, the Terms of Reference for most of the specialist studies include the need for a review of all relevant legislation pertaining to the proposed development.



5 PROJECT NEED & DESIRABILITY NCEDA proposes the establishment of a SEZ in Upington, which has been driven by the anticipated positive outlook for the renewable solar energy power demand in South Africa within the context of the IRP 2016 plan of the South African Government. It is anticipated that the increased utilization of renewable energy as a source of electricity generation will drive the establishment of new industries. The objective of the Solar SEZ in Upington is to become an industrial node that will attract solar related manufacturing, assembly and supporting services in support of South Africa’s renewable energy strategy.

5.1 Strategic Infrastructure Projects (SIPs) The South African Government adopted a National Infrastructure Plan in 2012 that is intended to transform the economic landscape of South Africa, create significant numbers of new jobs, and strengthen the delivery of basic services. It sets out the challenges and enablers who South Africa needs to respond to in the building and developing of infrastructure. The Presidential Infrastructure Coordinating Commission (PICC) is a body set up to integrate and coordinate the long-term infrastructure build. Strategic Infrastructure Projects (SIPs) have been developed and approved to support economic development and address service delivery in the poorest provinces. The proposed Upinton SEZ and associated Solar PV Plant fall within the following Energy SIPs:

SIP 8: Green Energy in support of the South African Economy (Support sustainable green energy initiatives on a national scale through a diverse range of clean energy options as envisaged in the IRP 2010 and to support biofuel production facilities);

SIP 9: Electricity Generation to support socio-economic development (Accelerate the construction of new electricity generation capacity in accordance with the IRP 2016 to meet the needs of the economy and address historical imbalances).

5.2 Renewable Energy Development Zones (REDZ) The DEA has been mandated to undertake a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) process for renewable energy development zones in South Africa. The wind and solar photovoltaic SEAs are being undertaken in order to identify geographical areas most suitable for the rollout of wind and solar photovoltaic energy projects and the supporting electricity grid network. The DEA and CSIR have released a map with focus areas best suited for the roll-out of wind and solar photovoltaic energy projects in South Africa. Although CSP technology has not been specifically considered in the SEA, it follows that all solar technologies would be focused in similar areas. The aim of the assessment is to designate renewable energy development zones (REDZs) within which such development will be incentivised and streamlined. The proposed facility falls within the identified geographical areas / focus area most suitable for the rollout of the development of solar energy projects (called "Upington Solar priority area") within the Northern Cape Province. Coupled to the Renewable Energy SEA, Eskom's Electricity Grid infrastructure Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) is also underway. The area where the facility is proposed is currently within the corridor planned to be strengthened by Eskom.


f) A motivation for the need and desirability for the proposed development including the need and desirability of the activity in the context of the preferred development footprint within the approved site as contemplated in the accepted scoping report.



6 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES One of the objectives of an EIA is to investigate alternatives to the proposed project. There are two types of alternatives: Fundamental Alternatives and Incremental Alternatives.

6.1 Reasonable and Feasible Alternatives Alternatives should include consideration of all possible means by which the purpose and need of the proposed activity could be accomplished. The no-go alternative must also in all cases be included in the assessment phase as the baseline against which the impacts of the other alternatives are assessed. The determination of whether site or activity (including different processes etc.) or both is appropriate needs to be informed by the specific circumstances of the activity and its environment. “Alternatives”, in relation to a proposed activity, is defined as different means of meeting the general purpose and requirements of the activity, which may include alternatives to; - a) the property on which or location where it is proposed to undertake the activity; b) the type of activity to be undertaken; c) the design or layout of the activity; or d) the option of not implementing the activity.

6.2 Fundamental Alternatives Fundamental alternatives are developments that are totally different from the proposed project description and usually include the following:

Alternative property or location where it is proposed to undertake the activity.

Alternative type of activity to be undertaken.

Alternative technology to be used in the activity. The following fundamental alternatives were considered: Special Economic Zone (SEZ, Preferred alternative) The preferred land use alternative on Upington Erf 6009, Upington Erf 5645, and a section of the Upington Allotment Area is the development of a SEZ. SEZs are geographically designated areas of a country set aside for specifically targeted economic activities, supported through special arrangements and systems that are often different from those that apply in the rest of the country.

In terms of APPENDIX 3(3)(1) of the EIA Regulations (2014) (as amended 2017), an Environmental Impact Assessment Report must include –

g) A motivation for the preferred development footprint within the approved site as contemplated in the accepted scoping report;

h) A full description of the process followed to reach the proposed development footprint within the approved site as contemplated in the accepted scoping report, including –

(i) Details of the development footprint alternatives considered; (ix) If no alternative development footprints for the activity were investigated, the

motivation for not considering such; and (x) A concluding statement indicating the location of the preferred alternative

development footprint within the approved site as contemplated in the accepted scoping report.



The proposed Upington SEZ is driven by the anticipated positive outlook for the renewable solar energy power demand in South Africa within the context of the IRP 2010 plan of the South African Government. It is anticipated that the increased utilization of renewable energy as a source of electricity generation will drive the establishment of new industries. The objective of the SEZ in Upington is to become an industrial node that will attract not only solar related manufacturing, assembly and supporting services in support of South Africa’s renewable energy strategy but mining beneficiation and agro-processing as well. Agriculture Agriculture was considered as an alternative land use to the proposed SEZ on Upington Erf 6009, Upington Erf 5645, and a section of the Upington Allotment Area. Figure 6.1 indicates the structurally favourable soils (ARC, 2017) on the proposed properties and surrounding areas. The soils on the proposed site and the surrounding properties are classified as scarce or absent soils with structure favouring arable land use. The proposed SEZ properties are therefore not suitable for agriculture and agriculture will not be assessed further as a fundamental alternative.

Figure 6.1 Structurally favourable soils map of the proposed SEZ. Conservation Conservation was considered as an alternative land use to the proposed SEZ on Upington Erf 6009, Upington Erf 5645, and a section of the Upington Allotment Area. Figure 6.2 indicates the National Protected Area Expansion Strategy (NPAES) focus areas on the proposed properties and surrounding areas. No focus areas are situated within 50 km from the proposed site. The closest focus areas to the site are the Augrabies Focus Area, which is situated 83 km to the west of the proposed site and the Gariep Focus Area, which is situated 118 km southeast of the proposed site (NPAES, 2009).



The vegetation that was identified on the proposed site is largely degraded and few faunal species were identified during the site survey. The proposed SEZ site is not earmarked for future conservation development. The proposed SEZ properties are therefore not suitable for conservation and conservation will not be assessed further as a fundamental alternative.

Figure 6.2: NPAES Focus Areas map of the proposed SEZ and surrounding areas.

6.3 Incremental Alternatives Incremental alternatives are modifications or variations to the design of a project that provide different options to reduce or minimise environmental impacts. There are several incremental alternatives that will be considered during the EIA Phase of the project, including:

The design or layout of the activity;

The technology to be used in the activity; and

The operational aspects of the activity. The following incremental alternatives, specifically technology alternatives, have been considered for the proposed SEZ wastewater, road networks and energy facilities. The operational alternatives of the proposed SEZ will be assessed during EIA phase. Three alternate options have been proposed to manage the wastewater produced from these phases of the project (Figure 6.3). Wastewater Option 1 The construction of a new sewer pump station to the south of the SEZ target area (See Figure 6.3).



All sewage produced by the proposed Upington SEZ area will flow through a gravity fed system (red lines in Figure 6.3) to the sewer pump station. Sewage will then be pumped offsite to a municipal WWTW (green line in Figure 6.3).

Figure 6.3: Alternative option 1 for the reticulation and treatment of sewage generated by the proposed Upington SEZ Wastewater Option 2



the gravity network to a pump line (green line in Figure 6.4) - This pump line will be constructed from this pump station to convey the waste water through the

industrial area to a new sewer treatment works adjacent to the pump station. - Treated water will be pumper to a reservoir located at the highest point onsite (in the northern

section)(green line in Figure 6.4)

In this case treated water can be used as raw water in the SEZ area for toilets and gardens.



Figure 6.4: Alternative option 2 for the reticulation and treatment of sewage generated by the proposed Upington SEZ Wastewater Option 3 (Preferred alternative) This is considered as the preferred alternative.



the gravity network to a pump line (red lines in Figure 6.5) - This pump line will be constructed from this pump station to convey the waste water through the

industrial area to a new sewer treatment works located in the northern section of the site (green lines in Figure 6.5)

- Treated water will be pumped to a reservoir located in close vicinity to the treatment works.

In this case treated water can be used as raw water in the SEZ area for toilets and gardens.



Figure 6.5: Alternative option 3 (preferred option) for the reticulation and treatment of sewage generated by the proposed Upington SEZ Road Network Option 1 The following existing roads are located along the boundaries of the proposed Upington SEZ (Figure 6.6):

The N10 in a northerly direction of Upington Airport, which is located approximately 2 km from the SEZ area.

The N10 from the Airport Road, heading in a westerly direction to Namibia.

The road going to the Kgalagadi Trans Frontier Park crossing the N10 on the western corner of the proposed Upington SEZ area.

Roads that border the proposed Upington SEZ area are in adequate condition to withstand the traffic generated by the proposed Upington SEZ. The preliminary road and street layout for the proposed Upington SEZ, as indicated in Figure 6.7, was developed by professional town planners and reviewed by the David Kruiper (//Khara Hais) Town Planning Division. The only potential road related infrastructure upgrades on the current road infrastructure outside the Upington SEZ are deceleration and acceleration lanes at the turnoff points to the Upington SEZ area.



Figure 6.6: The existing road infrastructure that borders the proposed Upington SEZ.

Figure 6.7: The proposed internal road infrastructure of the Upington SEZ. No further information has been provided as of yet with regards to method statement for the construction of the internal road network associated with the proposed Upington SEZ. This information will be included in the EIR.



Energy Option 1: Photovoltaic (PV) Facility (Preferred alternative) The proposed PV Solar Facility associated with the Upington SEZ will to use PV panels which will harness solar energy. The proposed solar PV facility is anticipated to produce up to 50 MW of electricity. The installation is estimated to cover a footprint of approximately 75 hectares.

Figure 6.8: Examples of commercial scale PV solar array layouts. Energy Option 2: Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) Facility CSP facilities consist of technologies that concentrate the sun's energy through large mirrors and utilise concentrated thermal energy to produce steam to drive a conventional steam turbine for electricity generation. There are numerous different types of technologies that can be used for CSP facilities, such as the Central Receiver, Parabolic Trough, Linear Fresnel and the Parabolic Dish technology. The technologies are similar to conventional power plants in that steam is used to power a turbine and generator, but the fossil fuel combustion is replaced with free, non-polluting solar energy (Eskom, 2017). The high tower, to which the mirrors concentrate the thermal energy, is visually intrusive and this is likely to have a very high impact on the Upington International Airport, which is situated close to the proposed SEZ and solar facility site, due to the glare that is caused by the tower. The CSP Facility alternative, as an energy option, is therefore not going to be assessed further in the EIR.



Figure 6.9: Existing CSP facilities (Eskom, 2017).

6.4 No-Go development The EIA process is obligated to assess the status quo (i.e. the “No-Go” option). The No-Go alternative provides the assessment with a baseline against which predicted impacts resulting from the proposed development may be compared. A “No-Go” alternative has been assessed for the proposed development. A summary of the different alternative options are provided in Table 6.1 below:

6.5 Analysis of alternatives Table 6.1 overleaf illustrates the methodology used to assess the identified alternatives. The table assesses the advantages and disadvantages, and provides further comments on the selected alternatives. It should be noted that the assessment of alternatives does not consider those alternatives that are not deemed to be either reasonable or feasible.



Alternative level Alternatives Advantages Disadvantages Reasonable and feasible

Further assessment

Comment

Property or location This refers to the fundamental route options, and the environmental risks and impacts associated with such options.

Site alternative 1 (only alternative)

Located within the Upington urban edge

Close proximity to the existing industrial areas

Close proximity to the airport

Easy access of the site from various points.

Land is currently undeveloped and consists mostly of natural veld

YES YES

The site location has been finalised during the Feasibility stage.

NCEDA is already negotiating with the existing landowners to obtain the land

Type of technology This refers to the fundamental technology options.

Waste water treatment technology 1 – Offsite treatment

The SEZ will link up to the existing municipal system.

No additional approval is required

The additional waste water input will put pressure on an already capacitated system

The existing WWTW may require an upgrade (not assessed in this EIA)

YES YES

Various off site route alternatives are proposed but will not be assessed in this EIA.

Waste water treatment technology 2 – Package plant

Waste water will be treated and managed onsite

No Waste permit required as plant will be located within the urban edge and throughput will be below 2 000m3

Increased risk of leakage Requires specialist

management skills

YES YES

The specific package plant technology has not been finalised and will therefore not be discussed.

Design or layout This relates mostly to alternative ways in which the proposed development or

Site layout 1 (Sewage infrastructure) – Offsite treatment of sewage – Option 1

Does not require a new treatment plant

Offsite treatment

Existing system already under pressure and may not be able to accommodate additional inflow.

YES YES

This may not be a feasible alternative as the Municipal system is running at almost maximum capacity

Site layout 2 Onsite treatment plant Requires the construction YES YES Refer to Section



Alternative level Alternatives Advantages Disadvantages Reasonable and feasible

Further assessment

Comment

activity can be physically laid out on the ground to minimise or reduce environmental risks or impacts. Refer to Section 3.2.3, page 22 for detailed descriptions of each Option indicated here.

(Sewage infrastructure) – Onsite treatment of sewage – Option 2

Updated technologies will be incorporated

of a new plant. 3.2.3, page 22 for detailed descriptions of each Option indicated here.

Site layout 1 (Sewage infrastructure) – Onsite treatment of sewage – Option 3

Onsite treatment plant Updated technologies

will be incorporated

Requires the construction of a new plant.

YES YES

Refer to Section 3.2.3, page 22 for detailed descriptions of each Option indicated here.

This is the preferred option

Construction and Operational aspects This relates mostly to alternative ways in which the development or activity is constructed and operated in order to reduce environmental risks or impacts.

Alternative operational activities

Construction and Operational Management alternatives will be informed by specialist input (e.g. ecological, aquatic, social, Noise, Air quality, groundwater and heritage studies). No Construction and Operational Management alternatives have been identified yet.

N/A YES YES N/A

No-go option This refers to the current status quo and the risks and impacts associated to it.

Current land uses. The environment will remain relatively undisturbed.

No contribution towards an industrial hub in Upington.

No job opportunities. No development

opportunities

YES YES

The no-go option will be assessed in the impact assessment process



7 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

7.1 Notification of Interested and Affected Parties 7.1.1 Public Participation Public consultation is a legal requirement throughout the EIA process. The proponent is required to conduct public consultation throughout the Scoping and EIR phase. Formal EIA documents are required to be made available for public review and comment by the proponent, these include the Project Brief, Scoping Report and Terms of Reference for the EIA, the draft and final EIA reports and the decision of the Environmental Authority. The method of public consultation to be used depends largely on the location of the development and the level of education of those being impacted on by the project. Required means of public consultation include:

Site notice(s);

Newspaper advertisement(s);

Letter of Notification and information to affected landowner(s), stakeholders and registered I&APs (Proof: e-mail, fax, registered letters to DEA);

Background Information Document (BID) distribution;

Public meeting (Attendance register and meeting minutes); and

Authority and Stakeholder engagement (DEA, DWS, SAHRA, NBKB, DENC, etc.). 7.1.2 Newspaper advertisement The proposed development was advertised in English and Afrikaans in the Volksblad on 4 November 2016 and 21 November 2016 respectively. This advert included notification of the environmental impact assessment process, an invitation to register as an I&AP and notification of the public meeting. Another English and Afrikaans advert was placed in the Volksblad on 27 April 2017. This included the notification of environmental impact assessment and release of the Draft Scoping Report for public review (Appendix A). 7.1.3 On-site notice Visible signage was placed near the proposed SEZ(Appendix A). 7.1.4 Stakeholders and I&AP’s During the EIA for the propsed SEZ certain stakeholders were identified based on their potential interest in the project. These stakeholders were contacted either via e-mail or telephone for comment and were sent a Letter of Notification (LoN) and a BID. A full list of stakeholders and I&APs (who registered or attended public meetings) is available in Appendix A.



(ii) Details of the public participation process undertaken in terms of regulation 41 of the Regulations, including copies of the supporting documents and inputs;

(iii) A summary of the issues raised by interested and affected parties, and an indication of the manner in which the issues were incorporated, or the reasons for not including them.



7.1.5 Background information document A BID was distributed to identified stakeholders and I&APs (Appendix A). 7.1.6 Proof of notification Stakeholders and I&APs were notified via email/registered mail/ telephonically about the EIA process for the proposed SEZ as well as of the availability of the draft EIR for review (Appendix A). 7.1.7 Issues raised by stakeholders/ I&APs The Issues and Response Trail was updated throughout the EIA process and includes all comments received until submission of the Draft EIR to the competent authority. A public meeting was held on 17 November 2016 for the proposed SEZ. No issues were raised regarding the proposed SEZ. The attendance registers for the public meetings is provided in Appendix A. A meeting was held with DEA on the 16th of March 2017. This meeting is summaries in Table 7.1 below.



Table 7.1 Issues raised by either Stakeholders or registered I&AP’s with the relevant responses

COMMENTS & RESPONSES

Initial & Surname Organisation/

Association Comments Responses

Pre-Application meeting with DEA (16th March 2017)

C Agenbach DEA

Conrad enquired whether Phase 1 of the project had already been approved and whether construction had commenced.

Babalwa Mbobo (NCEDA) confirmed that an Environmental Authorisation (EA) was already issued by the provincial Department of Environment and Nature Conservation (DENC). Babalwa confirmed that Phase 1 construction has commenced in the form of clearing and preparing the site for the installation of basic infrastructure.

Conrad enquired whether a PV plant with a total output of 50MW is proposed. He further explained that 50MW cannot be achieved on 72ha. On average 3ha is permitted per megawatt.

Roy and Babalwa confirmed that 50MW is the maximum output that will be applied for, as the exact output is currently unknown. Conrad suggested that it must be specified in the application that 50MW is applied for as a maximum output. Roy confirmed that this will be done.

Conrad suggested that since the proposed SEZ site is located so close to the National Route 10, comment must be obtained from SANRAL as they usually require buffer zones around national roads.

Noted. Comment will be requested from SANRAL

Conrad enquired whether the intention of this application is to obtain an authorisation for the SEZ area and bulk infrastructure only, or whether it will include the different industries proposed within the SEZ as well.

Roy confirmed that the current application will only cover the SEZ area and the proposed bulk infrastructure. All other internal industries would have to conduct their own assessments, if required. However, as part of this assessment there is a suit of specialists who will be assessing the types of industries that can be permitted within certain zones at the SEZ.

Conrad enquired whether the project was registered as a SIP project. He further explained that all renewable energy projects are potentially SIP projects, however they need to be registered as such.

Babalwa indicated that she would enquire from DTI whether the proposed project is registered as a SIP project.

Conrad advised that a Traffic Impact Assessment is important for the project, and must be conducted.

Roy confirmed that a TIA has been commissioned.

Conrad suggested that maybe an Agricultural Specialist Assessment is not necessary; however a letter of opinion from an Agricultural Specialist is required and will suffice.

Roy confirmed that this will be done

Conrad expressed a concern on visual intrusion, especially the proximity of the PV panels to a National Route. Reflection from the panels may result in visual intrusion.

Roy confirmed that the issue of PV panels will be assessed within the EIA. However, a comment from a visual specialist will be included in the EIA.

Conrad enquired whether there are no waste triggers for the proposed project.

Roy confirmed that both proposed sewage treatments facilities are below the threshold. As such, no waste license is required.

M Shubane DEA

Mahlatse Shubane (DEA) enquired what the proposed site is currently being used.

Roy confirmed that the site is zoned as open space, and is currently not being used for any specific activity, although illegal solid waste dumping was observed in some areas on site.

Mahlatse enquired why the PV trigger was excluded in the proposed application

Roy indicated that the proposed site is within an urban edge and thus the PV trigger is inapplicable. Roy further indicated the above as one of the main items requiring clarity from DEA as part of the pre-application meeting.



Conrad suggested that all triggers will be assessed when the application form is submitted to DEA (not during the pre-app meeting). The form must concisely describe the project elements that are being applied for and how they implicate the listed activities. Conrad further advised to rather apply for all anticipated listed activities, even if there is uncertainty about their applicability, DEA will scrutinise and remove the inapplicable listed activities. Conrad also advised that an urban edge map must be attached to the application form for motivating the exclusion of the PV listed activity.

R de Kock EOH

Roy enquired whether National DEA is indeed the competent authority for the proposed project. Also considering that it is a SIP project.

Conrad confirmed DEA as the competent authority since NCEDA, an organ of state, is the applicant.

Roy enquired on the assessment of alternatives, how they should be addressed in the EIA. Considering that there are no site alternatives.

Conrad advised Roy to check with the EMF to see if there were no site alternatives in the initial stages of the project. If so, they can be used as site alternatives for the benefit of the EIA. Where there are no alternatives, good motivation must be provided. Roy will check the EMF and address alternatives as suggested.

Roy enquired about the level of assessment of impacts and provision of mitigation measures in the Scoping phase.

Conrad advised that impacts must be assessed and mitigation measures must be provided (where possible), even if it’s at a low scale, detailed assessment is only required at EIR phase.

N Suka EOH

Nande Suka (EOH) enquired whether the project should be indicated as a SIP project in the application form, even though it is still uncertain whether it is registered or not.

Conrad advised that it should be indicated as a SIP project, the application form cannot be rejected in that regard, and rather, additional information will be requested to prove the SIP status.

Issues raised during EIR Phase

STILL TO BE UPDATED



8 DESCRIPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT The following section describes the current land use, climate, topography, geology and hydrology within the proposed Upington SEZ study area.

8.1 Current land use Figure 8.1 below indicates the land uses that are currently taking place within the proposed SEZ site and the surrounding areas. The following land use features are evident in close proximity to the SEZ:

Orange areas: Built up areas that have been classified as areas of high urban density. These areas indicate the town of Upington.

Yellow areas: Areas containing settlements that are classified as having low urban density; these include informal settlements and smallholdings.

Grey areas: Includes all mixed urban areas (High & Low urban) and includes industrial, residential and retail areas.

Light green and light yellow area: Gordonia Duneveld and Kalahari Karroid Shrubland vegetation respectively, as classified by Mucina and Rutherford (2012) in the South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI).

Red and white spotted lines: Existing major road, including the R360.

Green and white spotted lines: Arterial roads including the N10 and N14

Light brown lines: Existing roads; including secondary roads and streets.

Black and white spotted lines: Railway lines.

Blue lines and areas: Depict the rivers and river areas. The main river that is in close proximity to the road route is the Orange River.

Light blue areas: Represent the wetlands as classified by the National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas (NFEPA).

The following land use features are evident in the surrounding areas of the proposed SEZ

Light grey areas: Indicated mixed urban areas

Drake Grey areas: Indicates commercial areas

Dark grey/blue areas: Indicated industrial areas

Bright Pink areas: Bright pink areas on the map indicate cemeteries.

Green areas: Indicated rifle ranges.

Light Purple: The light purple areas on the map indicate the extent of the Upington Airport.

Dark purple: Indicated the airport runway, taxi areas and parking areas and terminal buildings.


h) A full description of the process followed to reach the proposed development footprint within the approved site as contemplated in the accepted scoping report, including–

(iv) The environmental attributes associated with the development footprint alternatives focusing on the geographical, physical, biological, social, economic, heritage and cultural aspects;



Figure 8.1: Land Use Map indicating the current land use surrounding the proposed SEZ in Upington.

8.2 Climate Upington normally receives about 94mm of rain per year, with most rainfall occurring mainly during autumn. Figure 8.2 below (lower left) shows the average rainfall values for Upington per month. It receives the lowest rainfall (0mm) in June and the highest (29mm) in March. The monthly distribution of average daily maximum temperatures (centre figure below) shows that the average midday temperatures for Upington range from 19.8°C in June to 33°C in January. The region is the coldest during July when temperatures drop to 2.8°C on average during the night.

Figure 8.2: (a) Graph of the average monthly rainfall; (b) Graph of the average monthly midday temperatures; and (c) Graph of the average monthly night-time temperature (SA Explorer; 2015).

8.3 Topography The topography surrounding the proposed SEZ indicated that the site is located high above sea level with the landscape being fairly flat (840m – 820m above sea level) (Figure 8.3).



Figure 8.3: General topography of the proposed SEZ.

8.4 Geology According to Cornell et al. (2006) the site is located in the Namaqua-Natal Metamorphic Province (Namaqua Sector) of rocks where metasediments, gneisses and granites, ranging between 2000-1000 Ma in age, comprise of unfossiliferous bedrock or calcrete of the Mokalanen Formation (Fm) occur. This bedrock is exposed underneath Kalahari Group sediments due to erosion. Overlying the calcretes are red aeolian sands of the Gordonia Fm.

8.5 Hydrology The Orange River is the primary river along the proposed preferred route (Figure 8.4). The data from the National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas (NFEPA) indicates that two wetlands are located within the proposed SEZ site. These wetlands and rivers have been mapped in Figure 8.4; the wetlands have been buffered by 500m and the rivers have been buffered by 32m due to their sensitivity. Development within 500m from the wetland areas and within 32m of the rivers will require licencing from the DWS.



Figure 8.4: Map indicating the hydrology of the proposed SEZ

8.6 Vegetation and Floristics This section focuses on desktop information of the vegetation and floristics of the proposed SEZ site although the ecological impact specialist will undertake a thorough assessment of the vegetation and floristics.

8.7 South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI) The South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI) vegetation map for the proposed SEZ is provided in Figure 8.5 below. The map indicates that the proposed SEZ site falls within the Kalahari Karroid Shrubland vegetation type. This vegetation type typically forms belts, alternating with belts of Gordonia Duneveld on plains north west of Upington. Other patches occur around Kakamas and north of Grobershoop. The landscape typically consists of flat gravel plains. Karoo-elemants (shrubs) meet here with northern floristic elements indicating a transition to the Kalahari region and sandy soils. Mucina and Rutherford (2006) classify the Kalahari Karroid Shrubland as Least Threatened.



Figure 8.5: SANBI Vegetation Map representing the vegetation within and surrounding the proposed SEZ

8.8 Site Sensitivity Figure 8.6 indicates the environmental sensitivity of the proposed SEZ. The red areas indicate features with high environmental sensitivity, the orange areas indicate features with moderate environmental sensitivity and the light green areas indicate features that have low environmental sensitivity.

Alternative Bypass Road Route Type of Moderate Sensitivity Type of High Sensitivity

SEZ and surrounds Azonal Lower Gariep Alluvial Vegetation (Endangered)

Rivers (including 32m buffer)

Wetlands (including 500m buffer)



Figure 8.6: Sensitivity map of the proposed SEZ and surrounding areas.

8.9 Socio-Economic Profile The proposed Upington SEZ is located within the Dawid Kruiper Local Municipality, which is a Category B municipality that forms part of the ZF Mgcawu District (previously Siyanda District). The ZF Mgcawu District Municipality is the second-largest district in the Northern Cape. It was established by the amalgamation of the Mier and //Khara Hais Local Municipalities in August 2016. The municipality borders with Namibia in the west, the Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park in the north and Botswana in the north-east. It consists of small towns and the !Khomani San community within its jurisdiction. Rietfontein, which is one of the main towns, is situated approximately 280km north-west from the nearest big town of Upington. Upington is situated 400km west of Kimberley, and has an airport and a landing strip. Natural boundaries provide a unique aspect to the town – one is the Kalahari Desert and another is the Orange River, South Africa's largest river, which it straddles. The municipality is the acknowledged commercial, educational, military, agricultural, medical, transport and tourism centre of the area. 8.9.1 Population Upington has a total population of 57,220 inhabitants with a population density of 99.02 inhabitants per square kilometre. Based on a population survey that was conducted for the Dawid Kruiper Local Municipality in 2016 StatSA, the population has shown a steady growth over the years. It has grown from 100,498 in 2011 to 107,161 in 2016 (6.22% growth rate). The Upington population demographic, based on the 2011 StatSA Census, was 7.09% Black African, 77.96% Coloured, 13.18% White, 0.73% Indian or Asian and 1.03% other. The population consists of 51.04% female and 48.96% male. The primary language spoken in Upington is Afrikaans.



8.9.2 Income and Poverty Levels The Dawid Kruiper Local Municipality is characterised by moderate economic growth and a fairly rate of unemployment. Approximately 9.25% of households earn an income of less than R10,000 per month, with 9.75% of all households indicating no income at all. 8.9.3 Employment It is evident that there is a lack of education and low levels of skill in the Dawid Kruiper Local Municipality and a significant portion of Municipality’s potential labour force have not attended school or completed their primary phase. One of the greatest threats to the future development of the Municipality is the lack of appropriate education and skill levels. The 2016 survey found that only 31.8% of the Municipality’s 20-year-and-above population had grade 12 and only 6.4% had post school education. The unemployment rate is estimated at 11.88% with 43.29% of the population not being economically active. The Dawid Kruiper Local Municipality’s main economic sectors include agriculture, business services, game farming, tourism and hospitality, manufacturing, transport, community services, social and personal services.



9 APPROACH TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT In line with the above-mentioned legislative requirement, this chapter of the EIR details the approach to the EIA phase of the proposed SEZ with a particular focus on the methodology that was used when determining the significance of potential environmental impacts.

9.1 General Impact Assessment A general impact assessment was conducted based on site visits and information relating to the planning and design, construction, operation of the proposed SEZ.

9.2 Specialist Impact Assessments A series of specialist studies were conducted during the EIA for the proposed new SEZ. The outcomes will be summarised in this EIR. Specialist studies that will be incorporated in this EIR:

Ecological & Biodiversity Impact Assessment;

Surface-water & Wetland Impact Assessment;

Groundwater Impact Assessment

Heritage Impact Assessment

Social and Tourism Impact Assessment.

Noise Impact Assessment

Air Quality Impact Assessment

Traffic Impact Assessment

Agricultural Assessment (comment from specialist only)

Visual Assessment (comment from specialist only)

9.3 Methodology for Assessing Impacts and Alternatives Introduction Identified impacts will be assessed against the following criteria:

Temporal scale

Spatial scale

Risk or likelihood

Degree of confidence or certainty

Severity or benefits

Significance The relationship of the issue to the temporal scale, spatial scale and the severity are combined to describe the overall importance rating, namely the significance of the assessed impact.


(h) A full description of the process followed to reach the proposed development footprint within the approved site, including: (vi) the methodology used in determining and ranking the nature, significance, consequences,

extent, duration and probability of potential environmental impacts and risks.



9.3.1 Description of criteria Table 9.1: Significance Rating Table

Significance Rating Table

Temporal Scale (The duration of the impact)

Short term Less than 5 years (Many construction phase impacts are of a short duration).

Medium term Between 5 and 20 years.

Long term Between 20 and 40 years (From a human perspective almost permanent).

Permanent Over 40 years or resulting in a permanent and lasting change that will always be there.

Spatial Scale (The area in which any impact will have an affect)

Localised Impacts affect a small area of a few hectares in extent. Often only a portion of the project area.

Study area The proposed site and its immediate environs.

Municipal Impacts affect the local municipality(s), or any towns within them.

Regional Impacts affect the wider district municipality or the province as a whole.

National Impacts affect the entire country.

International/Global Impacts affect other countries or have a global influence.

Likelihood (The confidence with which one has predicted the significance of an impact)

Definite More than 90% sure of a particular fact. Should 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 of the likelihood of an impact occurring.

Table 9.2 Impact Severity Rating

Impact severity (The severity of negative impacts, or how beneficial positive impacts would be on a particular affected system or affected party)

Very severe Very beneficial

An irreversible and permanent change to the affected system(s) or party(ies) which cannot be mitigated. For example the permanent loss of land.

A permanent and very substantial benefit to the affected system(s) or party(ies), with no real alternative to achieving this benefit. For example the vast improvement of sewage effluent quality.

Severe Beneficial

Long term impacts on the affected system(s) or A long term impact and substantial benefit to the



party(ies) that could be mitigated. However, this mitigation would be difficult, expensive or time consuming, or some combination of these. For example, the clearing of forest vegetation.

affected system(s) or party(ies). Alternative ways of achieving this benefit would be difficult, expensive or time consuming, or some combination of these. For example an increase in 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 sewage treatment facility where there was vegetation with a low conservation value.

A medium to long term impact of real benefit to the affected system(s) or party(ies). Other ways of optimising the beneficial effects are equally difficult, expensive and time consuming (or some combination of these), as achieving them in this way. For example a ‘slight’ improvement in sewage effluent quality.

Slight Slightly beneficial

Medium or short term impacts on the affected system(s) or party(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.

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.

Table 9.3 Overall Significance Rating

Overall Significance (The combination of all the above criteria as an overall significance)

VERY HIGH NEGATIVE VERY BENEFICIAL

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 VERY HIGH significance.

HIGH NEGATIVE BENEFICIAL

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 long term, as the area could be rehabilitated. Example: The change to soil conditions will impact the natural system, and the impact on affected parties (such as people growing crops in the soil) would be HIGH.

MODERATE NEGATIVE SOME BENEFITS

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.

LOW NEGATIVE FEW BENEFITS

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 is of NO significance in the overall context.

DON’T KNOW

In certain cases it may not be possible to determine the significance of an impact. For example, the primary or secondary impacts on the social or natural environment given the available information. Example: The effect of a particular development on people’s psychological perspective of the environment.



10 KEY FINDINGS OF THE SPECIALIST STUDIES The following discussion summarises the key findings of the specialist studies. Full reports have been attached in Appendix C of the EIR. The relevant impacts and mitigation measures from these specialist studies have been included in the Impact Assessment of this report.

10.1 Specialist studies The following Specialist Studies have been completed for the EIA Phase:

Air Quality Impact Assessment SEZ and Solar Energy Facility Plant: Mr G Petzer from Airshed Planning Professionals

Ecological Impact Assessment: Mr Roy de Kock from EOH

Heritage Impact Assessment: Mr Nelius Kruger from Exigo Sustainability (PTY) LTD

Hydrogeological Baseline Assessment: Mr Schalk Ferreira from Exigo Sustainability (PTY) LTD

Noise Impact Assessment: Mr Morne de Jager from Enviro Acoustic Research cc

Socio-Economic Impact Assessment: Ms Nande Suka from EOH

Surface water and Wetland Impact Assessment: Ms Caitlin Smith from EOH

Tourism Impact Assessment: Ms Rosalie Evans from EOH

Traffic Impact Assessment: Mr Deon McQuirk from Emonti Consulting Engineers

Agricultural comment from Mr Roy de Kock from EOH

Visual impact comment from Dr Alan Carter from EOH 10.1.1 Air Quality Impact Assessement Air Quality Specialist Gillian Petzer, from Airshed Planning Professionals, was appointed to conduct an air quality impact assessment report for the proposed SEZ. Approach The study follows a qualitative approach, using available meteorological data and pollutants typically associated with the current and proposed activities to evaluate the potential for off-site impacts. The various tasks undertaken as part of the study include:

A brief description of the weather patterns in Upington;

Identification of existing sources of emission and characterisation of ambient air quality within the region based on observational data recorded to date (if available);

The legislative and regulatory context, including ambient air quality standards and dust fall classifications.

Identify possible potential sources of atmospheric emissions associated with the SEZ operations.

Qualitatively assess the potential for impacts from the SEZ.

Recommendations for a dust management plan for the construction phase.

In terms of APPENDIX 3(3)(1) of the EIA Regulations (2014) (as amended 2017), an Environmental Impact Assessment Report must include – (k) A summary of the findings and recommendations of any specialist report complying with

Appendix 6 to these Regulations and an indication as to how these findings and recommendations have been included in the final assessment report.



Results The main findings from the baseline assessment are as follows:

The main sources likely to contribute to cumulative particulate impact are surrounding agricultural activities as well as vehicle entrainment on unpaved road surfaces.

The predominant wind direction within the region is from the northerly and south-westerly sectors. Impacts are anticipated to the northeast and south of the SEZ.

The nearest residential suburbs to the proposed SEZ are Paballelo (south and southwest), Florapark (southeast) and Blydeville (east-southeast)

The main findings from the qualitative assessment of the proposed SEZ project has been summarised below:

No Air Emissions Licence is required for the proposed solar facility.

The closest residential receptors are located less than 100 m from the proposed project location (the proposed training area).

During the construction phase there is a possibility for elevated dustfall rates off-site, as well as PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations due to the close proximity of the proposed SEZ to the residential area of Paballelo.

At the closest residential receptors, the potential exists for exceedances of the residential dustfall limit (600 mg/m2.day), however with mitigation in place, primarily comprising of water sprays, these impacts would be controlled and reduced to be within the dustfall limits. The temporary nature of the construction activities, and the likelihood that these activities will be localised and on small areas at any given time, reduces the potential for significant off-site impacts during this phase.

No detailed information on the type of industries proposed for the SEZ is available in order to define detailed impacts for the operational phase.

An indicative buffer zone has thus been given, but may need revising and refining once more details are available on the specific industries to be included in the SEZ. There is a possibility for elevated concentrations at the proposed residential area east of the SEZ.



Figure 10.1: Indicative primary buffer zone for the proposed SEZ

It should be noted that according to the Australian Environmental Protection Agency on recommended separation distances from various activities, a buffer zone of 300 m from the nearest sensitive receptor is required when quarry type operations occur without blasting and a distance of 500 m when blasting will take place (AEPA, 2000).

In general, it is difficult to estimate the distance of impact but other studies conducted reported that PM10 particles are unlikely to impact on receptors more than 1 km from the source of emissions. Larger particles of between 10 and 30 μm would settle within 500 m with coarse particles (greater than 30 μm) would deposit within 100 m from the source. Recommendations The following recommendations were made:

Air quality management measures must be implemented during the construction phase to ensure the lowest possible impacts on the surrounding environment from proposed construction operations.

A dustfall monitoring network should be established prior to and during construction of the SEZ. Initiation of the dustfall network prior to construction (approximately three months) would give an indication of baseline conditions and should be the target dustfall during construction and operational phases through the application of effective mitigation measures. The responsibility of management of the dustfall network could be subcontracted prior to construction. During and after the construction phase management responsibility of the dustfall network can pass to the Site or Environmental Management team.

The proposed residential area east of the proposed SEZ may need to be revised due to its close proximity to heavy industrial area to the north of the proposed SEZ. Also, with the predominant wind direction being from the southwesterly sector, impacts on this residential area would have to be carefully assessed once more detailed information is available.

The following primary buffer distance from sensitive land uses must be implemented. For heavy industry a 300 m buffer distance must be implemented, for medium industry a 150m buffer distance and light industry a 50m buffer distance.

Once specific industries have been identified for the SEZ, further consideration of the likely nature and extent of their environmental impacts should be established from a simple dispersion modelling exercise which may show that the indicative buffer distance is still acceptable.

The specific industries, which may cause adverse impacts to air quality, may be required to submit an EIA report with an EMP including mitigation measures on air pollution.

10.1.2 Ecological Impact Assessment Ecological Specialist Mr Roy de Kock, from EOH, was appointed to conduct an ecological specialist report. Approach The study site and surrounding areas were assessed using a two-phased approach. A late winter site visit was conducted in August 2016 while a summer survey was done in November 2016. The site visits were used to conduct faunal and floral surveys and to identify potential impacts of the proposed SEZ and associated infrastructure on the surrounding natural environment and to inform the significance of the potential impacts identified. The study area for this report is a 440ha area within the urban edge of Upington, Northern Cape Results



Four (4) distinct vegetation types were identified within the Upington SEZ study site and surrounds (500m buffer) namely: 1. Dry scrubland 2. Highly degraded scrubland 3. Riparian vegetation 4. Urban areas A total of 121 species were identified within and around the proposed Upington SEZ area. Kalahari Karroid Shrubland, the dominant vegetation type onsite consists of low karroid scrubland. Alien & invasive plants are dominant in the drainage systems onsite. Of these 121 species, only seventeen (17) are listed as potential species of conservation concern (SCC). These species are all either schedule 4 species on the Provincial Nature Conservation Ordinance Act 19 of 1974 (PNCO) or species protected by CITES. The implication is that these species will require a permit for their removal or transplant prior to construction. There are a number of alien species present onsite, particularly along the drainage line and existing gravel roads. The CARA alien invasive list is only referenced were an alien invasive species that does not appear on the NEMBA list appears on the CARA list. In this case there were no such species. As alien invasive plants are commonly found onsite, it is advised that an alien invasive management plan is created and implemented during the construction phase and that active management of alien species listed as category 1b in impacted areas is carried out. Various animals (birds, amphibians, reptiles and mammals) were observed within the Upington SEZ as well as within 3km of the site. These include but are not limited to the Namib thread snake, Ground agama, Rough thick-toed gecko, Cape porcupine, Ground squirrel, Egyptian free-tailed bat and Bat eared fox. Animal search and rescue will be required for amphibians, reptiles and mammals prior to commencement of any construction activities onsite. Any species found onsite must be relocated to a similar habitat in the vicinity. Relocation of birds will not be required. In terms of the sensitivity of the study site, all surface waterbodies and drainage areas are classified as high sensitive areas. These include dams, wetlands, drainage systems, rivers & streams. These areas will require authorisation from the Department of Water & Sanitation (DWS) prior to commencement of activities. All intact natural vegetation is considered as “moderately sensitivity” due to the presence of SCC. A Search & Rescue (S&R) exercise must be conducted prior to commencement of activities in these areas. The relevant vegetation permits must also be applied for. All area classified as “low sensitivity” are considered as severely disturbed or transformed by human activities, including dumping and sand removal. These areas are suitable for development but may have some SCC present. An S&R exercise will not be required but any SCC observed during construction must be reported to the appointed ECO.



Figure 10.2 Ecological and Biodiversity Sensitivity map for the proposed new Upington SEZ



The ecological impacts of all aspects for the proposed Upington SEZ were assessed and considered to be ecologically acceptable, provided that the mitigation measures provided in the report are implemented. All impacts are rated as MODERATE to HIGH pre-mitigation; therefore implementation of recommended mitigation measures is an important element of the mitigation strategy. Implementing the recommended mitigations measures will reduce impacts to LOW. None of the proposed alternatives are considered to be Fatally Flawed. Impacts on the natural environment were the same for all alternatives. The No-Go option refers to the proposed Upington SEZ not being constructed. This option will therefore have no impact (positive or negative) on the local vegetation and biodiversity if it is not constructed. The local area is fairly developed with various industrial clusters, roads and medium density urban areas occurring. Constructing a new SEZ will therefore have a negligent cumulative impact on the surrounding environment, provided that all mitigation measures proposed is implemented. Recommendations All the mitigation measures provided below are to be implemented in the Planning and Design, Construction and Operation Phases of the proposed SEZ.

Planning and Design Phase

The development must not exceed the development footprint

All plant SCC must be relocated or removed from the construction footprint by a qualified botanist prior to commencement of activities.

The relevant permits must be obtained from the relevant departments in order to remove plant SCC prior to commencement of activities.

All animal SCC must be relocated or removed from the construction footprint by a qualified specialist prior to commencement of activities.

The relevant permits must be obtained from the relevant departments in order to remove animal SCC prior to commencement of activities.

Construction Phase

Construction activities for each local development project must be limited to the approved designated footprint for that specific development i.e. construction materials, vehicular storage, construction camps etc.

The impacted areas must be surveyed prior to topsoil removal in order to locate and capture any SCC within the area and relocate them.

All identified SCC must be relocated to similar habitats outside the construction and operational footprint.

Removal of both plants and animals must be undertaken by a professional and qualified specialist.

The contractor's workers must not poach or trap wild animals.

The contractor's workers must not harvest natural vegetation.

Any SCC overlooked by Search and Rescue must be reported to the ECO and relocated by a qualified specialist/trained representative

An Alien Management Plan must be developed and implemented during the construction phase to reduce the establishment and spread of undesirable alien plant species. The Alien Management Plan must be approved by the ECO prior to implementation.

Alien plants must be removed from the site through appropriate methods such as hand pulling, application of chemicals, cutting etc. on a regular basis.

Removal must occur prior to plants developing seeds.



All impacted areas must be rehabilitated immediately after construction is completed in that local area.

Only topsoil from the immediate area must be used for rehabilitation. If none available alternative methods must be investigated and implemented like hydro-seeding, planting etc. The method must be approved by the ECO prior to commencement.

All impacted areas must be restored as per a Rehabilitation Management Plan.

Operational Phase

An Alien Management Plan must be developed and implemented during the operational phase to reduce the establishment and spread of undesirable alien plant species.

Alien plants must be removed from the SEZ site through appropriate methods such as hand pulling, application of chemicals, cutting etc. as in accordance to the NEMBA: Alien Invasive Species Regulations.

10.1.3 Heritage Impact Assessment Heritage specialist Mr Nelius Kruger, from Exigo Sustainability (PTY) LTD, was appointed to conduct a archaeological impact report for the proposed Upington SEZ. Approach Data from detailed desktop, aerial and field studies were employed in order to sample surface areas systematically and to ensure a high probability of heritage site recording. Results A localised scatter of Middle Stone Age (MSA) material was documented in a central part of the project area along a drainage line where precipitation and groundwater have exposed the stone tools, originally deposited in red sands and a decomposing calcrete rock layer. Here, the superficial geology is a thin and patchy covering of Hutton Sands overlying calcrete. Formal tools such as points, blades, broken blades and scrapers as well as a number of cores, produced on fine grained raw materials were noted at the site which measures approximately 200m x 100m. Preliminary examinations of some of the lithics which occurs in medium densities in places indicated that flakes displayed facetted platforms, characteristic of the MSA. Prepared cores show evidence of the use of the Levallois technique, where surfaces on the core are shaped in order to generate a specific formal tool when flaked from the core. Use wear and marks and secondary retouch are clearly visible on formal tools and a number of tools show signs of secondary retouch and in some instances cores display peripheral preparation. Artefacts are generally made from locally available fine-grained materials such as ironstone, indurated shale and jasperlite. The location of the scatter corresponds with a general Stone Age site distribution pattern in the area where archaeological sites in the landscape occur near water sources such as the Orange River close to local sources of raw materials in lithic manufacture. This Stone Age representation is of interest due to the medium density of the scatters and the presence of diagnostic tools but the landscape around the site has been altered and transformed which might have compromised site context. The site is of medium scientific value and potential and a specialist analysis of lithics from the site might provide a further understanding of the development and spread of the MSA in the Northern Cape and the Upington Landscape. Two low density lithic occurrences occur to the western and eastern periphery of the project area. The western site (Site EXIGO-SEZ-SA01) occurs next to an old quarry and the eastern site (Site EXIGO-SEZ-SA02) occurs in association with a drainage line near industrial buildings. Single artefacts at the sites show a predominant MSA signature where single highly weathered formal tools such as scrapers and broken blades were noted. Some of the flakes display use wear marks. The raw materials used in the production of



the lithics are mostly iron stone and indurated shale. It is not possible to assign an absolute age estimate without an in-depth analysis of a more representative sample but it could be inferred that these isolated collections probably represent a palimpsest of visits by prehistoric groups up to the MSA. Since few diagnostic tools were noted and the site contexts have generally been disturbed, the site is of medium-low scientific value. No Iron Age farmer sites occurrences were observed in the survey area. The project area is surrounded by industrial areas and regional roads. At least two concrete foundation structures occur towards the east of the project footprint. The foundations measure approximately 3m x 5m respectively. At the site, objects of recent age such as glass, metal, plastic and enamel were noted which suggest that the structures are of recent age. As such, the features are probably not older than 60 years and they are not protected in terms of the NHRA “60 year clause”. In addition, no special cultural or social association for the structures could be established and they are thus of no heritage significance. Impacts related to displacement or destruction of structures or features in the Contemporary Period site (Site EXIGO-SEZ-CP01) has been rated as low significance. Impacts related to displacement or destruction of structures or features in the MSA sites (Site EXIGO-SEZ-SA02 & Site EXIGO-SEZ-SA03) has been rated as of medium-low significance and impacts related to displacement or destruction of structures or features in the MSA site (Site EXIGO-SEZ-SA01) has been rated as of medium significance. No cumulative impacts are anticipated and all impacts can be managed and reduced by adhering to the recommendations. Recommendations

A Palaeontological Desktop Study should be considered for the development. Should fossil remains such as fossil fish, reptiles or petrified wood be exposed during construction, these objects should carefully safeguarded and the relevant heritage resources authority (SAHRA) should be notified immediately so that the appropriate action can be taken by a professional palaeontologist.

A site with Contemporary Period concrete foundation structures (Site EXIGO-SEZ-CP01) are of low significance. The features are located in the project area and it is recommended that the sites and any activities in its surrounds be monitored in order to avoid the destruction of previously undetected heritage remains.

Two low density MSA lithic occurrences (Site EXIGO-SEZ-SA02, Site EXIGO-SEZ-SA03) occurring within the footprint proposed for the project is of medium-low heritage significance due to the small numbers of formal and diagnostic tools, and general loss of context of the lithics. It is recommended that the area be carefully monitored by an informed ECO and / or qualified heritage specialist since previously undetected heritage remains might occur in subsurface calcrete deposits. A procedure for the detection, reporting and conservation of chance finds should be implemented during the construction phases of the project.

A medium density MSA scatter (Site EXIGO-SEZ-SA01) occurs in a central part of the project area along a drainage line. These MSA representations are of scientific interest due to the frequent occurrence of formal diagnostic MSA lithics and it is primarily recommended that impact on the site be avoided, a 100m conservation buffer around the site be implemented and that the site be monitored during construction and operational phases of the development. However, should this measure be unachievable it is recommended that the site be recorded and that the cultural and archaeological context of the heritage resource be established by means of a limited Phase 2 Specialist Study. This study should minimally include a surface sampling and consequent analysis of the stone artefacts by a qualified Stone Age specialist, in order to elucidate the understanding of the development and spread of the MSA in the area. The Specialist should obtain the necessary permits from SAHRA for the in-situ analysis, possible collection and photography of the artefacts during the study. A procedure for the detection, reporting and conservation of chance finds should be implemented during the construction phases of the project.

Generally, a careful watching brief monitoring process is recommended whereby an informed ECO inspect the construction sites on regular basis in order to monitor possible impact on heritage



resources. Should any subsurface paleontological, archaeological or historical material or heritage resources be exposed during construction activities, all activities should be suspended and the archaeological specialist should be notified immediately. Should any subsurface paleontological / archaeological / historical material and /or graves/human remains be uncovered, all activities should be suspended and the archaeological specialist should be alerted immediately.

It is the opinion of the Archaeological specialist that the proposed project may proceed from a culture resources management perspective, provided that mitigation measures are implemented where applicable, and provided that no subsurface heritage remains are encountered during construction.



Figure 10.3: Heritage occurrences within the vicinity of the development



10.1.4 Hydrogeological Baseline Assessment Geohydrologist S Ferreira, from Exigo Sustainability (PTY) LTD, was appointed to conduct a hydro-census survey to evaluate and sample existing surface and groundwater resources, community borehole locations and depths, regional water levels, environmental receptors as well as local springs as part of a baseline assessment for a SEZ in close proximity to Upington and the Photovoltaic Solar Plant Development in the SEZ in the Northern Cape Province of South Africa. Approach The site assessment comprises of a desktop study prior to the site visit for planning purposes to determine certain hydrogeological areas to target during the hydro-census field survey. Different surface and groundwater sites were identified using Arc GIS and Google Earth Pro to optimise the field visit and sites to be visited. Available data on Exigo’s GIS database was used to review and identify possible sensitive receptors like surface water areas, main rivers and drainage lines as well as abstraction points from groundwater resources. For the hydrogeological survey, boreholes within a 5 km radius where targeted for sampling purposes (establishment of baseline standards for future reference) and to measure the water levels. The hydro-census field survey was conducted from 14th November 2016 to the 18th of November 2016. The aim of the field survey was to gather detailed data regarding the groundwater system as well as surface water information. Results The hydro-census field survey indicated that most of the water usage in the area is derived from the Orange River. Very few boreholes were located during the hydro-census. The groundwater quality in and around the project area is poor. Almost all of the boreholes had Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) values which exceeded the South African National Standards (SANS) 241 standards. The groundwater system is very sensitive to contamination due to the geology and soil sediment in the area. The second major receptor to possible contamination is the Orange River to the South of the project area. Secondary drainages and shallow aquifers can create pathways for contaminants to reach the river. Monitoring and proper maintenance, construction of liquid and fluid storage facilities, storm water and waste drainage systems are the most important mitigation measures for contamination. Groundwater boreholes in close proximity to the 72 hectares SEZ where the PV solar plant will be constructed is limited. Boreholes exist upstream on the north and north western side of the PV solar plant on the Spitskop Nature Reserve, on the Kalahari Monate Lodge and downstream on the south and south eastern side. The groundwater quality in the area can be classified as poor according to results received from laboratory. This is definitely a limiting factor when considering it as a water source. A pipeline already exists towards the project area and current lawful allocations to surface water use might be available to purchase. The Orange River is an assured source of water since it is perennial. Recommendations

The monitoring protocol needs to be honoured to effectively detect and mitigate any contaminant migration in the subsurface aquifer systems;

Water supply options, either from groundwater or surface water should be investigated in the next phase. A detailed site water balance should be completed to establish a water make-up requirement to run the proposed operations;

Aquifer tests should be done on the boreholes surrounding the SEZ to determine their aquifer parameters, before the boreholes are considered for water application;



Groundwater resources should be investigated for the construction phase as this could provide adequate volumes without the lengthy approval process required for other sources or installations;

A numerical groundwater model is required as part of the IWUL application to evaluate the impact of abstraction from these boreholes (radius of influence) and the drawdown extent that abstraction will create over time;

A geophysical survey must be conducted to identify borehole locations to drill closer to the PV solar area for monitoring or water use purposes. Geophysics will also help to determine zones which can contribute to pollutant transport. It will be of importance to drill a monitoring site closer to the SEZ in the north west to pick up early transportation of contaminants upstream (clear drainage line visible) and on the south eastern side of the SEZ to detect early transportation of contaminants towards the Orange River; and

The hydro-census should be completed in the dry months as well and results should be compared with the current results. A detailed assessment should also be conducted before construction commences.

10.1.5 Noise Impact Assessment Noise specialist Morne de Jager, from Enviro Acoustic Research cc, was appointed to conduct a noise impact report. Approach The noise emissions from various sources, as defined by the project, were calculated in detail for the operational activities by using the sound propagation models described by SANS 10357 and ISO 9613-2 models. The noise emission into the environment due to road traffic will be calculated using the sound propagation model described in SANS 10210:2004 and Calculation of Road Traffic Noise United Kingdom (CoRTN 1996). Results Business and industry will develop over a number of years as opportunities are realized. The project proposed will consist of a commercial and business as well as industrial areas (light to heavy). It will include amongst others a Photovoltaic (PV) Solar plant, business areas, educational and hospitality industries. The full specifications of each individual area (type of business/industry, processes, activities or potential equipment to be used) are not defined during this land zoning phase and only the footprints of the various areas are available for this assessment. Receptors include eight (8) different types of receptors all which are communities (12 separate community footprints in total) and numbered as 1 – 8 (also referred to as NSD1 – NSD8). Numbering represents the closest dwellings at communities in relation to the project footprint. New receptors are also proposed within the projects footprint area. These include commercial, educational and hospitality facilities. Based on the requirements of the SANS guidelines and Noise Control Regulations a township or noise-sensitive development needs to be assessed if proposed near a potentially noisy area/transportation route. These new receptors will also be considered. Ambient sound levels were measured at various localities from the 24th till 27rd October 2016. One class-1 SLM was used for these measurements. The measurement locations were numbered LZULTM01 and LZULTM02 (long-term measurement locations) and LZUSM01 - LZUSM04 (shorter-term measurements). The results of the full ENIA evaluation the significance of the noise impacts could be:

Negligible during Planning phase;

Negligible during Construction activities;



Low during the Operational phase;

Negligible during Closure and Decommissioning phase; and

Negligible during the Post-Closure Phase. Recommendations Based on the measured baseline, the following rating levels are recommended:

Paballelo and surrounding communities: Urban district daytime rating LReq,d of 55 dBA and night-time rating LReq,n of 45 dBA.

Rand community, show grounds, army base and future development north: suburban district daytime rating LReq,d of 50 dBA and night-time rating LReq,n of 40 dBA.

Based on available layouts the SEZ project will have a negligible noise impact on existing receptors. However the developer proposed numerous noise-sensitive areas/developments near industrial land use. Based on the outcome of the conceptual modelled scenarios (and a projected low impact) some mitigation in the planning and operational phases would be required. The most important mitigation options recommended include the layouts of the industrial land use areas and in relation to proposed receptors, concentrating specifically on the hospitality industry on the eastern project footprint (only likely receptor to be used during the more sensitive night-times). None of the mitigation options should be compulsory, however careful thought into which mitigation options should be selected to minimize the low operational significance. Furthermore if one of the industrial areas proposes a very noisy activity close to receptors, further acoustical investigations (ENIA, Scoping or Screening) are proposed. An Acoustical Measurement & Audit Programme is recommended to be conducted during upon 80% completion (or when a noise complaint is registered). The measurement report will enable the developer to ensure mitigation options selected will be successful, and reduce the limit and assumptions of modelled scenario in this report. Measurements should be collected in 10-minute bins over a min. 48 hour measurement period. Variables and measurement recommended settings to be analysed include LAMin, LAeq, LAMax, LAMin, LA10, LA90 and spectral analysis. Noise measurements must be continued as long as there are potential receptors living within 1,000m from the activities of the SEZ, or as long as any valid and reasonable noise complaints are registered. Feedback regarding noise measurements should be presented to all stakeholders and other Interested and Affected (I&AP’s) parties in the area. The feedback platform and interval periods should be defined by the developer, with an annual feedback period recommended. It should be noted that this does not suggest that the sound from the SEZ should be inaudible under all circumstances - this is an unrealistic expectation that is not required or expected from any other agricultural, commercial, industrial or transportation related noise source, but rather that the sound due to the activities on the SEZ should be at a reasonable level in relation to the ambient sound levels as per regulations. If the layout of the SEZ significantly changes (or assumptions change) as used in this report, that this Environmental Noise Impact Assessment be reviewed with the appropriate information supplied by the developer, including:

Locality of the noise source;

Operational time of the noise source; and

If possible specifications regarding the noise source.



In terms of acoustics it is recommend that the project be approved, however mitigation options should be adhered to. 10.1.6 Socio-Economic Impact Assessment Socio-economic specialist Nande Suka, from EOH, was appointed to conduct a socio-economic impact report. Approach Various data sources were used to obtain information on the social and economic characteristics of the study area. Such data included maps, StatsSA Census 2011 data, internet searches, municipal documents (e.g. IDPs), etc. Where necessary, reference to the various sources is provided in the report. A more qualitative approach was adopted to analyse the data obtained through the community and one-on-one interviews/consultations, fieldwork and municipal discussions. The primary data is often unstructured and is mostly used in the social sciences to construct social trends and identify socio-economic patterns, relying on participant observation and field notes. Information obtained during the public participation process (PPP) for the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) phase of the project is also integrated and used in the SIA analysis and report. Initial community meetings, EIA public meetings, and focus group and key informant interviews are discussed in detail below. Stakeholders were identified during the Scoping phase of the EIA process, especially at local and district level. Stakeholders were notified of the EIA process via email and telephonically. During the Scoping phase, a public meeting was held on Thursday the 17th November 2016 at 17h30, at the BVi Engineers office in Upington. The meeting was advertised and publicised on the Volksblad regional newspaper. The meeting was also publicised via ward councillors. Consultation and fieldwork was conducted from 15th to 17th November 2016 in order to gather data regarding the socio-economic conditions and potential issues and impacts of the proposed SEZ and supporting infrastructure. Questionnaires with open-ended questions were used to guide the meetings. The questions were primarily structured to obtain basic socio-economic information on the study and surrounding areas, particularly data which could not be obtained from StatsSA (e.g. social amenities, living conditions and livelihoods, etc.). The questions were also aimed at eliciting and identifying possible positive or negative project impacts. Refer to the Socio-Economic Report in Appendix C for more detail. Results Although some negative impacts have been identified in this SIA, it is expected of the positive impacts to majorly outweigh the negative. Negative impacts can be sustainably managed through proper monitoring, engagement and the involvement of affected parties from project inception stage. The proposed project may possibly negatively affect surrounding private landowners, particularly for the construction of bulk infrastructure. Further discussions and engagements would then be needed to come into agreement with the landowners. The Socio-Economic Specialist is of the opinion, at this point, that the project will ultimately uplift the economy of the area; from communities, local, regional and district level. No fatal flaws with respect to any of the proposed activities have been raised or identified. It is also the opinion of the Socio-Economic Specialist that the Socio-Economic Impact Assessment Report contains sufficient information to allow the competent authority to make an informed decision and it is recommended that the application for authorisation be approved on condition that the recommended mitigation measures provided in the Socio-Economic Impact Assessment Report are effectively implemented.



Recommendations It is recommended that the mitigation/management and/or enhancement measures contained in the SIA must be actively implemented and incorporated into the EMPr, where applicable. This would assist as much as possible in minimising the negative impacts and enhancing the positive impacts that could possibly arise during the construction and operational phases of the Upington SEZ and supporting infrastructure. 10.1.7 Surface water and Wetland Assessment Aquatic specialist Ms Caitlin Smith, from EOH, was appointed to conduct a surface water and wetland assessment. Approach The study site and surrounding areas were assessed using a two-phased approach. Firstly, a desktop assessment of the site was conducted in terms of current biodiversity programmes and plans. A site visit was conducted in November 2016. The site visit served to inform potential impacts of the proposed project and how significantly it would impact on the surrounding aquatic environment. Results The study area is located within quaternary catchment D73E (primary catchment D) and falls within Water Management Area (WMA) 6, the Orange region. A number of non-perennial tributaries of the Orange River and one intact (artificial) wetland are located within the study area. No riparian vegetation or aquatic habitat was evident at these drainage lines (within the site footprint). According to Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (2007) Level 1 River Ecoregional Classification System, the study area falls within Ecoregion 26: Nama Karoo. According to NFEPA (2014) the non-perennial river that runs through the study site has been classified as an Upstream Management Area. The Orange River (downstream of the site) has been classified as a Fish Support Area (FSA). The remaining fish sanctuaries in rivers lower than an A or B ecological condition have been identified as FSAs. FSAs include sub-quaternary catchments that are important for the migration of threatened fish species. Ideally the river condition should be improved and alien invasive fish should be removed so that these sub-quaternary catchments can maintain their fish populations. No PES data is available for the non-perennial river as assessed by DWS as part of the Desktop PESEIS (2014), but the EI is rated as low and the ES is rated as moderate. The PES of the Orange River is classified as D: Largely Modified (a large loss of natural habitat, biota and basic ecosystem functions have occurred), while the EI is rated as moderate and the ES is rated as high. In terms of the sensitivity of the study site, areas within 32 m of a river/stream/drainage system (EIA buffer) and within the 1:100 year floodline or riparian zone (DWS Water Use Licence Buffer) where classified as areas of high sensitivity. All activities within high sensitivity areas must be closely monitored by a qualified ECO to ensure that all proposed mitigation measures are implemented to manage and minimize potential impacts on the watercourse. The non-perennial river systems in the study area were also given a high sensitivity due to the fact that they transport water into the Orange River system during high rainfall periods, a significant contribution to flood attenuation in the area. All areas within 50 m of the 1:100 floodline (if this has been determined) or within 50 m of the centreline of a river/stream/drainage system and within 100 m of an artificial wetland (or impacted wetland such as wetland 1) have been classified as areas of moderate sensitivity. Wetland 1 and wetland 3 were given a moderate sensitivity. Wetland 2 was not given a sensitivity rating as it no longer exists. Moderate sensitivity areas act as buffers for the high sensitivity areas. Activities that may have an indirect impact on high sensitivity areas are not to occur within these buffer areas. Such activities would include Stockpiling of



topsoil, subsoil, etc, temporary ablution facilities, site camp establishment, temporary laydown areas for equipment/materials, overnight parking of heavy machinery/vehicles and concrete batching All areas that fall outside of the buffers mentioned above were classified as areas of low sensitivity. In addition to the above sensitivities the various preliminary sewage infrastructure options were superimposed over the sensitivity map in order to illustrate the suitability of each alternative.

Figure 10.4: Aquatic sensitivity map for the proposed Upington SEZ. The ecological impacts of all aspects for the proposed Upington SEZ were assessed and considered to be ecologically acceptable, provided that the mitigation measures provided in the report are implemented. All impacts are rated as MODERATE to HIGH pre-mitigation, therefore implementation of recommended mitigation measures is an important element of the mitigation strategy. Implementing the recommended mitigations measures will reduce impacts to LOW. None of the proposed alternatives are considered to be Fatally Flawed. Impacts on the natural environment were the same for all alternatives. The No-Go option refers to the proposed Upington SEZ not being constructed. This option will therefore have no impact (positive or negative) on the local vegetation and biodiversity if it is not constructed. The local area is fairly developed with various industrial clusters, roads and medium density urban areas occurring. Constructing a new SEZ will therefore have a negligent cumulative impact on the surrounding environment, provided that all mitigation measures proposed is implemented. The aquatic impacts of all aspects for the proposed SEZ were assessed and considered to be acceptable, provided that the mitigation measures provided in this report are implemented. All impacts are rated as MODERATE to HIGH pre-mitigation, therefore implementation of recommended mitigation measures coupled with comprehensive rehabilitation and monitoring in terms of re-vegetation and restoration is an



important element of the mitigation strategy. Implementing the recommended mitigations measures will reduce impacts to MODERATE and LOW. Special attention must be given to appropriate placement of the sewage infrastructure in relation to watercourses. It is recommended that the placement of the WWTW in sewage alternative 2 be reviewed and that the WWTW be moved further away from the drainage system and wetland. The proposed sewage pump station must not be placed within the 1:100 year floodline. A Water Use License Application is required for any construction activity within the extent of a watercourse (i.e. riparian and instream habitat (or within 100 m of the watercourse) or the 1:100 year floodline; whichever is the greatest) or within 500 m of a wetland as well as for irrigation with treated waste water in terms of the following triggers from the National Water Act (No. 36 of 1998):

Sec 21 (c) - impeding or diverting the flow of water in a watercourse

Sect 21 (e) – engaging in a controlled activity: irrigation of land with waste or water containing waste

Sect 21 (g) – disposing of waste in a manner which may detrimentally impact on a water resource, and

Sec 21 (i) - altering the bed, banks, course or characteristics of a watercourse.

The relevant WULAs must be obtained from the Department of Water and Sanitation prior to commencement of construction. Recommendations All the mitigation measures provided below are to be implemented in the Planning and Design, Construction and Operation Phases of the SEZ.

Planning and Design Phase - All legal matters pertaining to permitting must be completed prior to any construction activity. - In particular, all necessary Water Use Licences must be in order for any construction activities

within the 1:100 year floodline or within 100 m of a watercourse and within 500 m of a wetland. - Wherever possible, construction activities should be undertaken during the driest part of the year

to minimize downstream sedimentation due to excavation, etc. - When not possible, suitable stream diversion structures (if necessary) must be used to ensure the

non-perennial river is not negatively impacted by construction activity. - During the planning and design phase appropriate stormwater structures must be designed to

minimise erosion and sedimentation of watercourses. - During the planning and design phase a Rehabilitation and Alien Vegetation Management Plan

must be designed to reduce the establishment and spread of undesirable alien plant species. - During the planning and design phase an effective water quality (surface and groundwater)

monitoring programme must be developed to ensure that the quality of treated waste water (discharged/irrigated) during operation is suitable.

- During the planning and design phase the infrastructure should be designed in such a manner that it does not obstruct the natural runoff patterns across the study area.

- The proposed sewerage pump station must not be placed within the 1:100 floodline or within 50 m of a watercourse.

- The planned pump station must have sufficient pumping and storage capacity in order to minimise any potential contamination of surface or ground water.

- A generator must be in place in case of electricity outages. - An appropriate non-permeable overflow facility (at least 24 hour capacity) must be designed in

case of a pump station failure. - It is recommended that the WWTW not be placed in the position indicated for sewage alternative

2.



Construction Phase

- During the construction phase no construction material must be stored within 50 m of a watercourse.

- Stockpiles should not be placed within 50 m of watercourses. - Stockpiles within 100 m of watercourses must be monitored for erosion and mobilisation of

materials towards watercourses. If this is noted by an ECO, suitable cut-off drains or berms must be placed between the stockpile area and the nearest watercourse.

- During the construction phase no concrete mixing must take place within 50 m of any river bank or the wetland.

- A serviced fire extinguisher (to neutralise pH levels if a spill occurs) must be available on site in the event that wet concrete is accidentally spilled into a river.

- The mitigation measures in Appendix A must be used in conjunction with this report. - During the construction phase no machinery must be parked overnight within 50 m of the

rivers/wetland. - All stationary machinery must be equipped with a drip tray to retain any oil leaks. - Chemicals used for construction must be stored safely on bunded surfaces in the construction site

camp. - Emergency plans must be in place in case of spillages. - No ablution facilities should be located within 50 m of any river or the wetland. - Chemical toilets must be regularly maintained/ serviced to prevent ground or surface water

pollution. - During the construction phase stormwater must be managed effectively to minimize the ingress of

sediment-laden stormwater into the rivers/ wetlands. - During the construction phase sensitive wetland vegetation must not be impacted /removed. - Removal of alien invasive vegetation should be prioritised. - Vehicles and machinery should not encroach into areas outside/surrounding the planned project

footprint.

Operational Phase

- During the operation phase, stormwater management measures such as attenuation structures, channels, etc. must be properly maintained and monitored.

- If the stormwater management measures put in place is deemed insufficient, a qualified engineer must be approached to assist with additional storm water attenuation mechanisms and remediation.

- During the operation phase sewage infrastructure must be maintained and pipelines checked for leaks.

- If leaks are identified or reported by the public, immediate actions must be taken to repair these leaks.

- During the operation phase the quality of treated waste water must be continuously monitored. - The use of treated waste water for irrigation must conform to guidelines provided in the

Department of Health’s publication – Guide: Permissible Utilisation and Disposal of Treated Sewage Effluent.

- During the operation phase sewage infrastructure must be regularly monitored for leaks. If any leaks or spills occur immediate actions must be taken to fix the leaks and remedy the spill.

- It is recommended that the position of the WWTW in the sewage alternative 2 be reviewed and the WWTW be moved further away from the drainage system and wetland.

10.1.8 Tourism Impact Assessment Specialist Ms Rosalie Evans, from EOH, was appointed to conduct a tourism impact report.



Approach The tourism assessment is based on available information that was collected using the following methods:

Desktop assessment;

Case studies;

Site investigation; and

Stakeholder consultation. Results The closest boundary of the proposed SEZ and Solar PV facility is situated approximately one and a half kilometres (1.5km) from the boundary of the high tourism area in Upington. The SEZ and Solar PV facility will not be visible from the high tourism area but they could have an impact on the landscape and the “sense of place” that tourists experience when travelling to Upington. Project planners, engineers and other individuals that are attracted to Upington, from other areas, during the various phases of the development will make use of tourism facilities, such as accommodation and restaurants, in Upington during their visit. Individuals that are permanently employed at the SEZ and the Solar PV Facility will also seek accommodation in Upington and possibly relocate to Upington. The SEZ and Solar PV facility are being proposed on land that is not currently being used for agriculture and should therefore not have a direct impact on agricultural tourism opportunities unless future agricultural tourism plans fall within this site. The climate in the Northern Cape is suitable for solar energy and Upington and its surrounds contain numerous solar energy facilities, which includes Africa’s first Concentrated Solar Power (CSP) thermal power plant. This CSP thermal power plant is known as Khi Solar One. The impacts that the Proposed SEZ and Solar PV Facility will have on tourists and the tourism industry are difficult to quantify because the impacts will largely be based on individuals’ opinions of how they perceive the proposed development. Recommendations The following mitigation measures are to be implemented in the construction and operation phase of the SEZ to reduce the significance of the negative impacts and enhance the benefits on tourists and tourism facilities:

Construction Phase

- The footprint of the SEZ and Solar PV Facility must be clearly demarcated and construction activities must be restricted to this area.

Operational Phase

- The Solar PV Facility must be maintained as to prevent the growth of alien vegetation and to ensure that litter does not accumulate near the facility. Indigenous vegetation should be used to revegetate the site where possible; and

- Educational tours of the Solar PV Facility should be considered to attract tourists and educate scholars and other interested individuals.



10.1.9 Traffic Impact Assessment Traffic impact specialist Deon McQuirk, from Emonti Consulting Engineers, was appointed to conduct a noise impact assessment report. Approach Results The Traffic Assessment concluded the following:

The current operating conditions on the road network within the study area were found to be acceptable with no Level of Service (LOS) or capacity failures.

The existing critical peak, in terms of traffic volume, was found to be the PM peak hour while the AM peak hour tested very similar but with marginally lower demands.

Once developed and fully occupied, the proposed development may be expected to generate in the order of 2,400 and 2,800 new vehicle trips in AM and PM commuter peak hours respectively.

The combined critical peak hour of existing and development trips is found to be the PM peak hour.

The network is not overloaded when development trips are assigned for any of the given tested peak hours, subject to the recommended road network improvements being undertaken.

The proposed changes to the layout and road network, the site layout and road network adequately serve the proposed development.

Recommendations

The Traffic Impact Assessment must be submitted to the Dawid Kruiper Local Municipality (DKLM) and South African National Roads Agency Limited (SANRAL) for their perusal and approval.

The development proposal, that is the development of the NCEDA Solar and SEZ Development, as submitted and reflected herein, being approved in principle from a traffic impact perspective by the DKLM and SANRAL.

The site layout changes, as shown in Figure 5.1 of the specialist report, should be made a condition of approval. The required internal road network improvements to be made by the development are as follows:

- building lines, - public transport, - restricted access, - traffic calming, - internal road network, - boundary wall/fence, and - access control.

The road network improvements, (Phase A and Phase B below), should be made a condition of approval and should be undertaken in phases.

Phase “A” road improvements are to be undertaken prior to the development of any phase of the development becoming operational and should include the following:

- The construction of two public transport facilities, together with the associated pedestrian facilities, along the N10 and Anton Lubowski Road in close proximity to each of the proposed accesses to the development.

- The construction of surfaced pedestrian sidewalk along both sides of all internal roads within the development.

- The construction of surfaced pedestrian sidewalk along Anton Lubowski Road between the proposed access “B” and Ds. Aubrey Beukes Street.



- The construction of surfaced pedestrian sidewalk along the N10 between the proposed access “A” and Ds. Aubey Beukes Street.

- The construction of raised pedestrian tables across Anton Lubowski Road in close proximity to each of the proposed accesses.

- A 20m building line being imposed along the N10 road boundary. - No direct vehicular, bicycle or pedestrian access being permitted onto the N10 and Anton

Lubowski Road other than at the proposed accesses. - The speed limit along the N10 in the vicinity of the proposed accesses being reduced to 60km/h

from a point approximately 200m north of the proposed access. - The speed limit along the Anton Lubowski Road in the vicinity of the proposed accesses being

reduced to 60km/h from a point approximately 200m north of the proposed access “B” to the existing 60km/h zone further south.

- Extending of the existing street lighting for some 200m north of access “A” on the N10 and 200m north of access “B” on Anton Lubowski Road.

Phase “B” projects are to be implemented as and when warranted by traffic volumes at a particular time in the future as determined by the road authority and should consider the following:

- The installation of traffic signals, with the lane configuration as illustrated in Figure B.1.C. of the TIA (page 34), being implemented at the N10/Access “A” intersection.

- The introduction of auxiliary lanes, as illustrated in Figure B.2.B. of the TIA (page 37), being implemented at the N10/N10 intersection.

- The introduction of auxiliary lanes, as illustrated in Figure B.3.B. of the TIA (page 39), being implemented at the Anton Lubowski Road/N10 intersection.

- The construction of a stop/priority controlled intersection with auxiliary lanes, as illustrated in Figure B.4.B. of the TIA (page 41), being implemented at the Anton Lubowski Road/Access “B” intersection.

- The construction of a roundabout, with the lane configuration as illustrated in Figure B.5.C. of the TIA (page 44), being implemented at the Anton Lubowski Road/Access “C” intersection.

- The introduction of additional lanes as illustrated in Figure B.6.C. of the TIA (page 47), being implemented at the Ds. Aubrey Beukes Street/N10 traffic signalised intersection.

- The construction of a roundabout, with the lane configuration as illustrated in Figure B.7.B. of the TIA (page 49), being implemented at the Anton Lubowski Road/Dakota Street intersection.

- Parking and load bays being provided as per Tables 5.2, 5.3 and C.1 in the TIA. - Details of parking and loading bays being finalised at the design stage. - Consideration being given to widening Anton Lubowski Road to four lanes between the N10

and where the road currently has four lanes just west of Dakota Street. - All costs associated with the internal and external road network, as indicated in Figures 5.1 and

7.1 of the TIA, being solely to the Developer’s account and must be implemented as the different phases are developed.

It should however be noted that these improvements may change subject to subsequent investigations in consultation with the road authority. 10.1.10 Agricultural Impact Comment 10.1.11 Visual Impact Comment

10.2 Sensitivity assessment The following maps reflect the sensitivity allocation for the ecological and biodiversity study, heritage impact assessment and surface water and wetland study conducted as part of the NCEDA Environmental Impact Assessment process.



Figure 10.4: Ecological and Biodiversity Sensitivity map for the proposed new Upington SEZ.

Figure 10.5: Heritage occurrences within the area of the proposed new Upington SEZ.



Figure 10.6: Aquatic sensitivity map for the proposed new Upington SEZ. An overall site sensitivity map for the project area was developed based on the relevant specialist reports. The majority of the proposed Upington SEZ is considered to have a moderate sensitivity as this area comprises mostly intact natural vegetation with the presence of plant SCC. In terms of the aquatic environment, all areas within 100m of wetlands were given a moderate sensitivity rating and all areas within 50m from the centreline of a river/drainage line/stream were given a moderate sensitivity rating. In terms of heritage, there are 3 sites of moderate significance (two of which are low-moderate significance). Areas of high sensitivity include areas within 32m of a river/stream/drainage line. Areas of low sensitivity include an area where there was one archaeological find. Areas that are considered severely disturbed or transformed by human activities, including dumping and sand removal were also given a low sensitivity rating. These areas are suitable for development but have some SCC present.



Figure 10.6: Overall sensitivity map for the proposed SEZ.



11 IMPACT ASSESSMENT

11.1 Possible Environmental Issues and Impacts The impact assessment for the proposed Upington SEZ was conducted in two parts:

General Impact Assessment

Specialist Impact Assessment The general impact assessment and specialist impact assessments were combined into one table per phase and a detailed assessment of all impacts and mitigation measures is available in Appendix B. 11.1.1 General Impact Assessment The general impact assessment identified and assessed impacts across three phases of the proposed SEZ:

Planning & Design Phase



(v) The impacts and risks identified including the nature, significance, consequence, extent, duration and probability of the impacts, including the degree to which these impacts – (aa) Can be reversed; (bb)May cause irreplaceable loss of resources; and (cc)Can be avoided, managed or mitigated; (vi) Positive and negative impacts that the proposed activity and alternatives

will have on the environment and on the community that may be affected focusing on the geographical, physical, biological, social, economic, heritage and cultural aspects;

i) A full description of the process undertaken to identify, assess and rank the impacts that the activity and associated structures and infrastructure will impose on the preferred development footprint on the approved site as contemplated in the accepted scoping report through the life of the activity, including –

(i) A description of all environmental issues and risks that were identified during the environmental impact process; and

(ii) An assessment of the significance of each issue and risk and an indication of the extent to which the issue and risk could be avoided or addressed by the adoption of mitigation measures.

(j) An assessment of each identified potentially significant impact and risk, including –

(i) Cumulative impacts; (ii) The nature, significance and consequences of the impact and risk; (iii) The extent and duration of the impact and risk; (iv) The probability of the impact and risk occurring; (v) The degree to which the impact and risk can be reversed; (vi) The degree to which the impact and risk may cause irreplaceable loss of

resources; (vii) The degree to which the impact and risk can be mitigated.



Construction Phase

Operational Phase The general impact assessment covered issues that were not covered in the specialist studies such as:

Waste management

Sanitation

Hazardous substances

General construction impacts

Stormwater management

11.1.2 Specialist Impact Assessment The specialist impact assessment covered issues identified by the following specialist studies:

Agriculture Impact Comment

Air Quality Impact Assessment

Ecological Impact Assessment

Heritage Impact Assessment

Hydrogeological Baseline Assessment

Noise Impact Assessment

Socio-Economic Impact Assessment

Surface water and Wetland Impact Assessment

Tourism Impact Assessment

Traffic Impact Assessment

Visual Impact Comment 11.1.3 Summary of findings The various issues and impacts that were identified are summarised in table 11.1 and 11.2 below.



Table 11.1: Mind map of the issues indentified within the Environmental Impact Assessment phase of the proposed new SEZ.

MIND MAP: IMPACTS: PROPOSED FROM SCOPING PHASE

THEMES (From Scoping

Phase)

CATEGORIES (From Scoping Phase)

ISSUES IDENTIFIED PLANNING & DESIGN

PHASE CONSTRUCTION PHASE OPERATIONAL PHASE

Physical Environment

Topography, geology & soils (1) Hazardous substances, (2) waste management and stormwater management, (3)

sanitation facilities (4) rehabilitation of disturbed areas. X X X

Land use (1) Loss of natural scrubland, (2) noise impacts (3) increased traffic. X X X

Top soil & soil erosion (1) Stormwater management, (2) rehabilitation of disturbed areas and (3) material stockpiling.

X

Surface & groundwater resources

(1) Legal and policy compliance, (2) scheduling of construction, (3) stormwater management, (4) invasion of alien species (5) groundwater impacts (6) design of infrastructure for site layout alternative 1 (sewage infrastructure) and (7) water quality.

X X X

Legislative Environment

Environmental, legal and policy compliance

(1) Compliance with relevant environmental legislation and policy. X X X

Biological Environment

Terrestrial ecosystems (1) Loss of natural scrubland, (2) loss of SCC, (3) control of alien plant species, and (4) rehabilitation of disturbed areas

X X X

Aquatic ecosystems (1) Legal and policy compliance, (2) scheduling of construction, (3) stormwater management and (4) invasion of alien species, (5) design of infrastructure for site layout alternative 1 (sewage infrastructure) and (6) water quality.

X X X

Socio-economic Environment

Health & safety (1) Noise pollution, (2) influx of job-seekers and (3) impacts on health and general quality of life.

X X

Archaeological, paleontological & cultural sites

(1) Impacts on sites of archaeological and cultural significance. X

Social benefits from the project (1) Influx of job-seekers, (2) impacts on health and general quality of life and (3) stimulation of economic growth.

X X

Provision of electricity -

Visual intrusion (1) Visually intrusion X X X

Cross Cutting Impacts

Noise (1) Noise pollution and impacts. X X X

Traffic (1) Increased traffic volumes X X X

Air quality (1) Impacts on air quality and dust control X X

MIND MAP: ADDITIONAL IMPACTS

Socio-economic environment

Tourism (1) Use of accommodation and restaurants, (2) sense of place, (3) dust generation, (4) noise pollution and (5) traffic delays.

X X X



Table 11.2 Summary of the issues identified and their applicability in each phase

Issues Applicability to phase

Planning and Design Construction Operation

GENERAL IMPACTS

Legislation and Policy Compliance

Yes. Failure to comply with relevant policies and legal obligations.



Stormwater Yes. Inappropriate stormwater design.

Yes. Inadequate provision of stormwater control.

Yes. Inadequate stormwater control.

Sanitation N/A Yes. Inappropriate siting and servicing of sanitation facilities.

Yes. Inappropriate siting and servicing of sanitation facilities.


Yes. Inappropriate provision for hazardous substances and waste management.

Yes. Inappropriate storing, handling and disposal of hazardous substance during construction.

Yes. Spillages of hazardous substances during operation.

Waste management

Yes. Inappropriate provision for waste management.

Yes. Inappropriate storing, handling and disposal of waste during construction.

Yes. Poor management of waste during operation.

AIR IMPACTS

Impacts on air quality and dust control

N/A Yes. Particulate emissions from land clearing activities, vehicles movement and windblown dust. Tailpipe emissions from vehicles and equipment.

Yes. Emissions from industries operating within the SEZ.

ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS

Loss of natural scrubland

Yes. The planning & design for the clearing of natural vegetation will lead to the permanent loss of natural scrubland.

Yes. During construction the clearing of natural vegetation will lead to the permanent loss of natural scrubland.

N/A

Loss of SCC Yes. The planning & design for the clearing of natural vegetation for the proposed new SEZ may lead to the destruction of habitats and the loss of identified and unidentified plant SCC.

Yes. During construction the clearing of natural vegetation for the proposed new SEZ may lead to the destruction of habitats and the loss of identified and unidentified plant SCC.

Yes. During the operational phase the lack of an effective alien vegetation management plan may lead to the large scale alien plant invasion.

Control of alien plant species

N/A Yes. During the construction

N/A





phase the lack of an effective alien vegetation management plan may lead to the large scale alien plant invasion.

Rehabilitation of disturbed areas

N/A During construction poor rehabilitation of disturbed areas may lead to the permanent degradation of ecosystems as well as allow invading alien vegetation species to expand.

N/A

GEOHYDROLOGICAL IMPACTS

Impact on ground and surface water features

N/A Yes. Accidental spillages from hazardous material or waste storage, vehicles on site and sanitation facilities etc may impact on ground and surface water during construction.

Yes. Spillages from on-site storage tanks and/or underground storage tanks may impact on ground and surface water during construction.

HERITAGE IMPACTS

Impact on sites of archaeological and cultural significance

Yes. Poor planning and consideration of the identified heritage sites.

Yes. Accidental damage to already identified heritage features. Potential unidentified heritage features may be uncovered and damaged.

Yes. Damage to potential heritage features.

NOISE IMPACTS

Noise Yes. Inadequate planning of layout of receptors and service areas may result in excessive noise generation during operation.

Yes. Creation of excessive noise during construction.

Yes. Creation of excessive noise during operation.

SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACTS

Influx of Job-Seekers

N/A Yes. Increased conflicts within communities and between locals and outsiders. Increased social pathologies. Increase and spread of HIV/AIDS and other

Yes. Increased conflicts within communities and between locals and outsiders. Increased social pathologies. Increase and spread of HIV/AIDS and other





communicable diseases. Economic stimulation.

communicable diseases.

Impact on health and general quality of life

N/A Yes. Improved access to infrastructure.

Yes.

Stimulation of Economic Growth

N/A

SURFACE WATER AND WETLAND IMPACTS

Legal and policy compliance

Yes. Non-compliance with the laws and policies of South Africa as they pertain to the aquatic environment.

N/A N/A

Scheduling of construction

Yes. Inappropriate construction scheduling

N/A N/A


Yes. Inappropriate design of stormwater structures.

Yes. Inappropriate routing of stormwater.

Yes. Inadequate/ineffective stormwater infrastructure.

Invasion of alien species

Yes. Failure to plan for the removal and management of alien vegetation.

N/A N/A

Design of infrastructure

Yes. Inappropriate design and placement of SEZ sewage infrastructure.

N/A N/A

Material stockpiling

N/A Yes. Stockpiling of construction material within 50 m of a watercourse leading to erosion and sedimentation.

N/A

Water Quality Yes. Failure to plan for monitoring of treated waste water quality.

Yes. Accidental contamination of wet concrete. Accidental chemical or other spills in the vicinity of watercourses.

Yes. Re-use of poor quality treated waste water. Accidental sewage spills.

Wetland vegetation

N/A Yes. Removal of sensitive wetland vegetation

N/A

Maintenance N/A N/A Yes. Inadequate maintenance of sewage infrastructure.

TOURISM IMPACTS

Impact on tourist features and attractions

Yes. Attract project planners and engineers, some being from outside of Upington, who will make use of accommodation

Yes. Construction activities associated with the proposed SEZ may impact on people’s sense of place and detract them

Yes. The SEZ and Solar PV Facility could detract from the tourists’ experience and sense of place due to the changes





and restaurants in Upington.

from the area as a result of noise, dust and traffic. Construction of the proposed SEZ will attract workers, Contractors and Engineers who will make use of existing accommodation and restaurants.

in the landscape during the Operational Phase. The SEZ and Solar PV Facility could attract tourists and improve their experience and sense of place during the Operational Phase.

TRAFFIC IMPACTS

Impact on traffic Yes. Inadequate planning for traffic within the SEZ could result in traffic congestion during the operation phase.

Yes. Increase in traffic volume.

Yes. Increase in traffic volume.

VISUAL IMPACTS

Visual intrusion Yes. Visually intrusive design.

Yes. Visual intrusion as a result of construction activity.

N/A

AGRICULTURAL IMPACTS

Loss of agricultural land

N/A

Yes Loss of informal grazing land

N/A

Table 11.3. Summary of all General and Specialist Impacts.

Theme Description of impact


GENERAL IMPACTS

For all alternatives

Compliance with relevant environmental legislation and policy

During the planning and design phase failure to comply with existing policies and legal obligations could lead to the project conflicting with local, provincial and national policies, legislation etc. This could result in legal non-compliance, fines, overall project failure or delays in mining activity and undue disturbance to the natural environment.

Stormwater During the planning and design phase inappropriate stormwater design may lead to an increase in surface soil erosion and subsequently sedimentation of the surrounding rivers and streams.

Hazardous substances During the planning and design phase, failure to plan for appropriate storing, handling and disposal of hazardous substances may result in contamination of soil and ground and surface water sources.

Waste management During the planning and design phase failure to plan for appropriate storing, handling and disposal of waste may result in contamination of surrounding environment.

ECOLOGICAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT


During the planning and design phase, clearing of natural vegetation will lead to the permanent loss of natural scrubland.

Loss of SCC During the planning and design phase, clearing of natural vegetation for the proposed new SEZ may lead to the destruction of habitats and the loss of identified and unidentified plant SCC.




During the planning and design phase, clearing of natural vegetation for the proposed new SEZ may lead to the destruction of habitats and the loss of identified and unidentified animal SCC.

HERITAGE IMPACTS


During the planning and design phase, poor planning and consideration of the identified heritage sites could result in the loss of sites of archaeological and cultural significance.

NOISE IMPACTS

Noise impacts During the planning and design phase, any noise generated at the proposed SEZ site is likely to be negligible. However, inappropriate design of the proposed SEZ will impact on how certain receptors (business, educational, hospitality (hotel)) are impacted by service areas (areas where building infrastructure will be placed (eg. Refrigerator condenser units, air-condition units, compressor units, delivery areas etc) within the proposed SEZ.

SURFACE WATER AND WETLAND ASSESSMENT


During the planning and design phase non-compliance with the laws and policies of South Africa as they pertain to the aquatic environment could lead to damage to the aquatic environment, unnecessary delays in construction activities, and potentially criminal cases, based on the severity of the noncompliance, being brought against the proponent and his/her contractors.


During the planning and design phase inappropriate construction scheduling that does not take into account the seasonal requirements of the aquatic environment, e.g. allowing for unimpeded flood events, could lead to short-term (and potentially long-term) impacts on the aquatic environment such as excessive sediment mobilization, etc.

Stormwater management During the planning and design phase the inappropriate design of stormwater structures may result in increased levels of erosion, sedimentation and pollution of the watercourses.

Invasion of alien species During the planning and design phase, failure to plan for the removal and management of alien vegetation could result in the invasion of alien vegetation in riparian and wetland areas during the construction and operation phase. This would have an adverse impact on the aquatic ecosystem.

Water quality During the planning and design phase failure to plan for monitoring of the quality of discharged/irrigated treated waste water could result in ground/surface water pollution during operation of the WWTW.

TOURISM IMPACTS

Accommodation and restaurants

During the planning and design phase, the proposed SEZ and Solar PV Facility will attract project planners and engineers, some being from outside of Upington, who will make use of accommodation and restaurants in Upington.

TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Increased traffic During the planning and design phase, inadequate planning for traffic within the SEZ could result in traffic congestion during the operation phase.

VISUAL IMPACT

Change in the scenic value of the area

During the planning and design phase, developing a SEZ will result in a chance in scenic value.




FOR ALTERNATIVE SITE LAYOUT ALTERNATIVE 1 (SEWAGE INFRASTRUCTURE)

Design of infrastructure for Site Layout Alternative 1, 2 and 3 (sewage infrastructure)

During the planning and design phase inappropriate design and placement of SEZ sewage infrastructure that does not take into account the sensitive aquatic environment (drainage lines, wetland) could have adverse impacts on the downstream aquatic ecosystems.

Construction Phase

GENERAL IMPACTS

Legislation and policy compliance

During the construction phase, failure to comply with existing policies and legal obligations could lead to the project conflicting with local, provincial and national policies, legislation etc. This could result in legal non-compliance, fines, overall project failure or delays in site establishment and undue disturbance to the natural environment.

Stormwater During the construction phase, inadequate and ineffective provision of stormwater control measures could result in erosion of surrounding soils and sedimentation of nearby watercourses.

Sanitation facilities During the construction phase inappropriate siting and servicing of sanitation facilities could result in contamination of surface and ground water.

Hazardous substances During the construction phase, inappropriate storage, use and disposal of hazardous substances and hazardous waste can lead to contamination of surrounding soil and nearby ground and surface water sources.

Waste mangement During construction, poor management of waste during storing, handling and disposal may result in contamination of the surrounding environment. Littering on site may attract vermin and make the construction area aesthetically unappealing.

AGRICULTURAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Loss of agricultural land During construction phase, bulding a new SEZ will result in a permanent loss of informal agricultural grazing land.

AIR QUALITY IMPACTS


During construction of the proposed SEZ and solar plant facility, land clearing activities, grading of cleared land surfaces, windblown dust from exposed surfaces, materials handling and vehicle activity on unpaved roads may result in particulate emission generation. Tailpipe emissions from vehicles and construction equipment may result in gaseous emissions.

ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS


During construction the clearing of natural vegetation will lead to the permanent loss 440ha of natural scrubland.

Loss of SCC During construction the clearing of natural vegetation for the proposed new SEZ may lead to the destruction of habitats and the loss of identified and unidentified plant SCC.

During construction the clearing of natural vegetation for the proposed new SEZ may lead to the destruction of habitats and the loss of identified and unidentified animal SCC.


During construction the clearing of natural vegetation creates ‘open’ habitats that will favour the establishment of undesirable alien plant species in areas that are typically very difficult to eradicate and may pose a threat to neighbouring natural ecosystems.

Rehabilitation of disturbed areas During construction poor rehabilitation of disturbed areas may lead to the permanent degradation of ecosystems as well as allow invading alien vegetation species to expand.





Impact on ground and surface water

During the construction phase, construction activities may lead to erosion of site and siltation of surface water features.

During construction phase, there may be oil, grease and diesel spillages from construction vehicles which may impact on ground and surface water.

During the construction phase there may be flooding of construction camps.

During the construction spillages from any sanitation facilities may pollute ground or surface water.

During construction poor management and storage of chemicals and building materials may result in ground and surface water pollution.

During construction spillages from fuel facilities may result in ground or surface water pollution.

HERITAGE IMPACTS


During the construction phase, digging foundations and trenches into sensitive deposits that are not visible at the surface may involve displacement or destruction of the two Middle Stone Age sites of medium-low significance and Middle Stone Age site of medium significance. During the construction phase, construction activities may involve displacement or destruction of Contemporary Period sites of low significance. Potential unidentified fossils or heritage features may be uncovered and damaged during construction.

NOISE IMPACTS

Noise pollution During the construction phase, construction activities associated with sub-soil works (compaction soils, trenching etc), concrete pouring, development of internal roads (excavations and grading by noisy construction vehicles) and carnage required to move large equipment and components will result in noise pollution. During the construction phase, construction activities may need to take place outside of normal working hours which could cause a nuisance to surrounding communities.


Influx of Job-seekers During the construction phase, there may be an increase in conflicts within communities and between local people and outsiders resulting in tension over perceived preferential treatment.

During the construction phase, the influx of job-seekers may result in an increase in social pathologies. Many people fear that newcomers increase the crime level in the area, increase risky sexual behaviour (mainly prostitution) and substance abuse within the area.

During the construction phase, the influx of job seekers may lead to an increase and spread of HIV/AIDS and other communicable diseases.

During the construction phase, influx of job seekers may lead to economic stimulation of and investment into business and enterprise due to an increase in demand for local services.


During the construction phase, the upgrading of infrastructure may result in the improvement of health and general quality of life for the communities who will benefit from it.

During the construction phase, there may be an increased demand on




existing facilities and social services which could impact on health and general quality of life the people in the area.

During construction, noise and dust generated by construction activities may impact on health and general quality of life of the people in the area.

During the construction phase, construction of the proposed SEZ may result in disruption in daily living and movement patterns of surrounding communities and road users.

Stimulation of economic growth During the construction phase, the SEZ will bring about much needed employment opportunities.

During the construction phase, the buying power of people living in the area will increase due to increased individual and household income. This will increase the demand for goods and services, which presents an opportunity for local businesses to diversify and expand.

During the construction phase, the construction of the SEZ may result in skills development and capacity building of employed workers.


Material Stockpiling During the construction phase, stockpiling of construction materials within 50 m of a watercourse could result in erosion and mobilisation of the materials into the nearby watercourse, resulting in sedimentation and a decrease in water quality and aquatic habitat.

Water Quality During the construction phase, accidental contamination of wet concrete (highly alkaline) in the rivers/wetland could result in flash kills of macro-invertebrates and fish species in the vicinity (see appendix A).

During the construction phase, accidental chemical spills or other spills (sewage, etc.) in the vicinity of the rivers/wetland will result in water pollution, adversely affecting the aquatic ecosystem.

Stormwater management During the construction phase the inappropriate routing of stormwater will lead to stream sedimentation, adversely affecting the aquatic environment.

Wetland vegetation During the construction phase, the removal of sensitive wetland vegetation may adversely affect the aquatic environment.

TOURISM IMPACTS

Sense of place During the construction phase, the SEZ and Solar PV Facility could detract from the tourists’ experience and sense of place due to the changes in the landscape.

Accommodation & Restaurants

The proposed SEZ and Solar PV Facility will attract construction workers and engineers, some being from outside of Upington, who will make use of accommodation and restaurants in Upington during the Construction Phase.

Dust Generation The construction of the SEZ and Solar PV Facility will generate dust which could detract from tourism attractions and facilities.

Noise pollution The construction of the SEZ and Solar PV Facility could produce noise that could become a nuisance to tourist attractions and facilities in proximity to the site.

Traffic delays The increase in the use of roads by heavy vehicles could lead to delays in the travel of tourists near the site; including National Route N10 between the Upington International Airport and Upington.

TRAFFIC IMPACTS

Traffic volume During the construction phase there will be an increase in traffic along existing roads that border the proposed SEZ as well as within




the general area of Upington. This may result in an increase in traffic congestion within the site area.

VISUAL IMPACTS

Visual intrusion During the construction phase construction activity and the presence and use of large machinery on site and along access roads will result in a visual disturbance of the landscape. Storage of materials and general waste on site is generally aesthetical unappealing.

Operation Phase

GENERAL IMPACTS


During the operation phase, failure to comply with existing policies and legal obligations could lead to the project conflicting with local, provincial and national policies, legislation etc. This could result in legal non-compliance, fines, overall project failure or delays in site establishment and undue disturbance to the natural environment.

Stormwater During the operation phase, inadequate stormwater infrastructure may result in soil erosion and sedimentation of nearby watercourses.

Sanitation facilities During the operation phase in adequate sanitation facilities or infrastructure failure as well as lack of maintenance of systems may result in sewage spills or leaks which could contaminate the surrounding soil, surface and ground water.

Hazardous substances During the operation phase, inappropriate storage, use and disposal of hazardous substances and hazardous waste can lead to contamination of surrounding soil and nearby ground and surface water sources.

Waste management During the operation phase, poor management of waste during storing, handling and disposal may result in contamination of the surrounding environment. Littering on site may attract vermin and make the construction area aesthetically unappealing.

AIR IMPACTS


During the operation phase, industries within the SEZ may cause air pollution with the amount, type and severity depending on the type of industry (high risk, heavy, medium or light).

ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS

Control of alien plant species During the operation phase the lack of an effective alien vegetation management plan may lead to the large scale alien plant invasion.



During the operation phase, spillages and leakages from process water containers and tanks may occur and contaminate surrounding ground or surface water.

During the operation phase, there may be spillages from underground holding facilities which may contaminate ground or surface water.

HERITAGE IMPACTS


During the operation phase, digging foundations and trenches into sensitive deposits that are not visible at the surface may involve displacement or destruction of Middle Stone Age sites of medium-low to medium significance. During the operational phase, displacement or destruction of Contemporary Period sites of low significance may occur. During the operation phase, potential unidentified fossils or heritage features may be uncovered and damaged.

NOISE IMPACTS

Noise pollution During the operation phase, the different types of industries will




produce different sound pressure levels. The light industrial zones may cause only levels of noise. the medium industry will likely cause moderate to high noise generating capacities associate with heavy vehicles such as ADT, conveyor belts units, drive train units and pressing/moulding units.


Influx of Job-seekers During the operation phase, there may be an increase in conflicts within communities and between local people and outsiders resulting in tension over perceived preferential treatment.

During the operation phase, the influx of job-seekers may result in an increase in social pathologies. Many people fear that newcomers increase the crime level in the area, increase risky sexual behaviour (mainly prostitution) and substance abuse within the area.

During the operation phase, the influx of job seekers may lead to an increase and spread of HIV/AIDS and other communicable diseases.


During the operation phase, the upgrading of infrastructure may result in the improvement of health and general quality of life for the communities who will benefit from it.

During the operation phase, there may be an increased demand on existing facilities and social services which could impact on health and general quality of life the people in the area.

During operation, noise and dust generated by construction activities may impact on health and general quality of life of the people in the area.

During the operation phase, construction of the proposed SEZ may result in disruption in daily living and movement patterns of surrounding communities and road users.

Stimulation of economic growth During the operation phase, the SEZ will bring about much needed employment opportunities.

During the operation phase, the buying power of people living in the area will increase due to increased individual and household income. This will increase the demand for goods and services, which presents an opportunity for local businesses to diversify and expand.

During the operation phase, the construction of the SEZ may result in skills development and capacity building of employed workers.

During the operation phase, the proposed SEZ may provide real significant economic opportunity in terms of spin-off project and investment opportunities. This includes the consideration of industrial sectors such as renewable energy related manufacturing, assembly and support services in support of South Africa’s renewable energy strategy.


Stormwater runoff During the operation phase stormwater infrastructure might not be adequate or effective and may result in soil erosion and sedimentation of watercourses.

Maintenance of sewage infrastructure

During the operational phase if the sewage infrastructure (WWTW, pump stations, pipelines) is not regularly maintained and checked for leaks or leaks are not repaired timeously this could lead to sewage polluting the aquatic environment.

Water quality During the operational phase the re-use of treated waste water (in the SEZ and for irrigation) that is of a poor quality could result in ground and surface water pollution.




During the operational phase accidental spills from the WWTW, sewage pipelines or pump station could result in ground and surface water pollution.

TOURISM IMPACTS

Sense of place During the operation phase, the SEZ and Solar PV Facility could detract from the tourists’ experience and sense of place due to the changes in the landscape.

During the operation phase, the SEZ and Solar PV Facility could attract tourists and improve their experience and sense of place.

Accommodation & restaurants During the operation phase, the SEZ and Solar PV Facility will attract individuals, from outside of Upington, who will make use of accommodation and restaurants in Upington.

TRAFFIC IMPACTS

Traffic volume During the operation phase there will be an increase in traffic along existing roads that border the proposed SEZ as well as within the general area of Upington. This may result in an increase in traffic congestion, collisions and a reduction in operation capacity.

Theme Description of impacts

NO-GO ALTERNATIVE

AGRICULTURE IMPACTS

Loss of agricultural land The no-go option entails no development which will result in no change in agricultural land use.


Loss of employment opportunities

The no-go option entails no development and would not create any employment opportunities.

Loss of potential economic opportunities and growth

The no-go option entails no development and would not result in any economic or growth opportunities.

Socio-economic benefits If the project does not proceed then this will hinder economic development in the area, and a loss in job opportunities which deprives the local people of improved quality of life

TOURISM IMPACTS

Loss of an opportunity to create a tourism attraction

The no-go option entails no development and would result in the loss of an opportunity to potentially create a tourism attraction.



12 IMPACT STATEMENT

In terms of APPENDIX 3(3)(1) of the EIA Regulations (2014) (amended 2017), an Environmental Impact Assessment Report must include: (l) An environmental impact statement which contains –

(i) A summary of the key findings of the environmental impact assessment; (ii) A map at an appropriate scale which superimposes the proposed activity and its associated

structures and infrastructure on the environmental sensitivities of the preferred development footprint of the approved site as contemplated in the accepted scoping report indicating any areas that should be avoided, including buffers; and

(iii) A summary of the positive and negative impacts and risks of the proposed activity and identified alternatives;

(n) The final proposed alternatives which respond to the impact management measures, avoidance,

and mitigation measures identified throughout the assessment;

In line with the above-mentioned legislative requirement, this chapter of the EIR provides an Environmental Impact Statement which summarises the environmental impact assessment findings. This chapter of the EIR also includes a sensitivity map and a summary of the alternatives investigated.

12.1 Environmental Impact Statement The HIGH negative impacts that were identified are summarised in Table 12.1 below. These impacts can all be reduced through the recommended mitigation measures to LOW or MODERATE post-mitigation impacts. Table 12.1 High impacts identified for the proposed SEZ.




GENERAL IMPACTS


During the planning and design phase failure to comply with existing policies and legal obligations could lead to the project conflicting with local, provincial and national policies, legislation etc. This could result in legal non-compliance, fines, overall project failure or delays in construction activity and undue disturbance to the natural environment.


ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS




Stormwater management During the planning and design phase the inappropriate design of stormwater structures may result in increased levels of erosion, sedimentation and pollution of the watercourses.




Water quality During the planning and design phase failure to plan for monitoring of the quality of discharged/irrigated treated waste water could result in ground/surface water pollution during operation of the WWTW.

For alternative site layout alternative 1 (Sewage infrastructure)

SURFACE WATER AND WETLANDS

Design of infrastructure for Site Layout Alternative 2 (sewage infrastructure)


Construction Phase

GENERAL IMPACTS



Stormwater During the construction phase, inadequate and ineffective provision of stormwater control measures could result in erosion of surrounding soils and sedimentation of nearby watercourses

Sanitation facilities During the construction phase inappropriate siting and servicing of sanitation facilities could result in contamination of surface and ground water.

Hazardous substances During the construction phase, inappropriate storage, use and disposal of hazardous substances and hazardous waste can lead to contamination of surrounding soil and nearby ground and surface water sources.

ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS




Influx of Job-seekers During the construction phase, the influx of job seekers may lead to an increase and spread of HIV/AIDS and other communicable diseases.


During the construction phase, there may be an increased demand on existing facilities and social services which could impact on health and general quality of life the people in the area.

Stimulation of economic growth

During the construction phase, the SEZ will bring about much needed employment opportunities.



Water quality During the construction phase, accidental chemical spills or other spills (sewage, etc.) in the vicinity of the rivers/wetland will result in




water pollution, adversely affecting the aquatic ecosystem.

Operation Phase

GENERAL IMPACTS




Sanitation facilities During the operation phase in adequate sanitation facilities or infrastructure failure as well as lack of maintenance of systems may result in sewage spills or leaks which could contaminate the surrounding soil, surface and ground water.

Hazardous substances During the operation phase, inappropriate storage, use and disposal of hazardous substances and hazardous waste can lead to contamination of surrounding soil and nearby ground and surface water sources


Stormwater runoff During the operation phase stormwater infrastructure might not be adequate or effective and may result in soil erosion and sedimentation of watercourses.

Water quality During the operational phase the re-use of treated waste water (in the SEZ and for irrigation) that is of a poor quality could result in ground and surface water pollution.


12.2 Comparative assessment of impacts Below is an assessment of the impacts in terms of the number of impacts identified for each phase. The breakdown of the impact assessments in Table 12.2 to 12.14 below provides insight into the key issues of all phases (including the no-go option) of the proposed SEZ. GENERAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT An analysis of the distribution of General impacts identified impacts in the planning and design, construction and operation phases. The HIGH impacts identified in the planning and design phase, construction phase and operation phase relate to compliance with legislation, stormwater, servicing of sanitation facilities and management of hazardous substances. Both HIGH and MODERATE identified impacts can be significantly reduced through the recommended mitigation measures resulting in predominantly LOW post-mitigation impacts.



Table 12.2 Comparative Assessment of General Impacts occuring in all phases for the proposed SEZ.

PRE-MITIGATION POST-MITIGATION

LOW MODERATE HIGH VERY HIGH


Planning & Design 0 2 2 0 4 0 0 0

Construction 0 1 4 0 5 0 0 0

Operation 0 1 4 0 5 0 0 0

TOTAL 0 4 6 0 14 0 0 0

AGRICULTURE IMPACT ASSESSMENT The Agriculture Impact Assessment identified impacts in the construction phase. All pre-mitigation impacts identified were rated as LOW NEGATIVE and these impacts will remain LOW NEGATIVE if the recommended mitigation measures are implemented. Table 12.3 Comparative Assessment of Agricultural Impacts in all phases for the proposed SEZ.






Operation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0

AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT The Air Quality Impact Assessment identified impacts in the construction and operation phases. All pre-mitigation impacts identified were rated as MODERATE NEGATIVE and these impacts can be reduced using the recommended mitigation measures to LOW NEGATIVE. Table 12.4 Comparative Assessment of Air Quality Impacts in all phases for the proposed SEZ.






Operation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0

ECOLOGICAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT An analysis of the distribution of impacts illustrated that the bulk of the mitigation effort should be placed on the planning and design and construction phases as these are the highest impacting phases. HIGH impacts identified from the Ecological Impact Assessment related to Loss of plant and animal SCC. HIGH and MODERATE pre-mitigation impacts can be reduced through the recommended mitigation measures to predominantly LOW post-mitigation impacts.



Table 12.5 Comparative Assessment of Ecological Impacts in all phases for the proposed SEZ.






Operation 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0

TOTAL 0 5 4 0 9 0 0 0

GEOHYDROLOGICAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT The Geohydrological Impact Assessment identified impacts in the construction and operation phases. All pre-mitigation impacts identified were rated as either MODERATE or LOW and these impacts can be reduced using the recommended mitigation measures to LOW or NEGLIGIBLE post-mitigation impacts. Table 12.6 Comparative Assessment of Geohydrological Impacts occuring in all phases for the proposed SEZ.






Operation 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0

TOTAL 4 4 0 0 3 0 0 0

HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT The Heritage Impact Assessment identified impacts in the planning and design, construction and operation phases. All pre-mitigation impacts identified were rated as MODERATE and these impacts can be reduced using the recommended mitigation measures to predominantly LOW post-mitigation impacts. Table 12.7 Comparative Assessment of Heritage Impacts occuring in all phases for the proposed SEZ.






Operation 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0

TOTAL 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 0

NOISE IMPACT ASSESSMENT The Noise Impact Assessment identified impacts in the planning and design, construction and operation phases. All pre-mitigation impacts identified were rated as MODERATE and these impacts can be reduced using the recommended mitigation measures to predominantly LOW post-mitigation impacts.



Table 12.8 Comparative Assessment of Noise Impacts occurring in all phases for the proposed SEZ.






Operation 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL 1 2 0 0 2 0 0 0

SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT The Socio-Economic Impact Assessment identified impacts in the construction and operation phases HIGH impacts identified from the Socio-Economic Impact Assessment were related to influx of job seekers, impacts on health and general quality of life and stimulation of economic growth. The HIGH and MODERATE pre-mitigation impacts can be reduced through the recommended mitigation measures to MODERATE and LOW negative and HIGH positive post-mitigation impacts. Table 12.9 Comparative Assessment of Socio-economic Impacts occurring in all phases for the proposed SEZ (+ = beneficial impact).





Construction 0 5 (+2) 4 0 4 2 (+4) 0

Operation 6 (+1) 2 (+2) 0 0 6 (+1) (+3) (+1) 0

TOTAL 6 (+1) 7 (+4) 4 0 10 (+1) 2 (+3) (+5) 0

SURFACE WATER AND WETLAND IMPACT ASSESSMENT The Socio-Economic Impact Assessment identified impacts in the planning and design, construction and operation phase. HIGH impacts identified from the Socio-Economic Impact Assessment were related to stormwater management and water quality. The HIGH and MODERATE pre-mitigation impacts can be reduced through the recommended mitigation measures to predominantly LOW post-mitigation impacts. Table 12.10 Comparative Assessment of surface water and wetland impacts occuring in all phases for the proposed SEZ.






Operation 0 1 3 0 4 0 0 0

TOTAL 1 7 6 0 13 1 0 0



TOURISM IMPACT ASSESSMENT The Tourism Impact Assessment identified impacts in the planning and design, construction and operation phases and the bulk of the mitigation effort should be placed on the construction and operation phases. The MODERATE pre-mitigation impacts can be reduced through the recommended mitigation measures to LOW post-mitigation impacts. Table 12.11 Comparative Assessment of tourism impacts occuring in all phases for the proposed SEZ.






Operation 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0

TOTAL 3 2 0 0 5 0 0 0

TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT The Traffic Impact Assessment identified impacts in the planning and design, construction and operation phases. All pre-mitigation impacts identified were rated as MODERATE and these impacts can be reduced using the recommended mitigation measures to predominantly LOW post-mitigation impacts. Table 12.12 Comparative Assessment of traffic impacts occurring in all phases for the proposed SEZ.






Operation 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0

TOTAL 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 0

VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT The Visual Impact Assessment identified impacts in the planning and design and construction phases. Table 12.13 Comparative Assessment of visual impacts occurring in all phases for the proposed SEZ.






Operation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 0

NO-GO IMPACT ASSESSMENT The impacts identified when assessing the NO-GO alternative related to loss of agricultural land, loss of employment opportunities, loss of economic opportunities and growth, loss of an opportunity to create a tourism attraction and socio-economic benefits.



Table 12.14 Impacts associated with the No-go alternative.




TOTAL 1 2 1 0 1 2 1 0

12.3 Overall site sensitivity The entire site has been assessed by various specialists, and this information has been analysed spatially and then used to inform the most environmentally acceptable layout for the proposed SEZ. This layout will be based on an overall sight rate of LOW sensitivity with small localised areas of HIGH sensitivity surrounding the proposed SEZ (Figure 12.1 below). The final layout will be based on the sensitivity map and impacts and mitigation measures identified throughout the process.

Figure 12.1 Sensitivity map of the study area.

12.4 Consideration of alternatives Chapter 6 provides a detailed comparison of alternatives for the proposed SEZ. It should be noted that the assessment of alternatives does not consider those alternatives that are not deemed to be either reasonable or feasible. 12.4.1 Location alternatives The current location (preferred alternative) is the only alternative assessed in the impact assessment process. Alternative locations for the proposed SEZ are limited and probably not reasonable or feasible.



12.4.2 Technology alternatives The technology alternatives considered in Chapter 6 are for wastewater treatment options, road networks and energy facilities. Three wastewater treatment options are proposed with the preferred option being the construction of wastewater treatment infrastructure within and around the SEZ including a pump station to the south of SEZ which will convey sewage to a new sewer treatment works located in the northern section of the site. The existing road network that borders the proposed SEZ is in adequate condition to withstand traffic generated by the proposed SEZ. Two energy options are proposed for the proposed SEZ, a Photovoltaic Facility (preferred alternative) and Concentrating Solar Power Facility. 12.4.3 Layout alternatives The current layout (preferred alternative) of the SEZ is the only layout alternative assessed in the impact assessment. There are three layouts discussed in Chapter 6 that are proposed for the wastewater treatment (sewage infrastructure) with the onsite sewage treatment being the preferred option.



13 CONCLUSION, EAP OPINION AND RECOMMENDATIONS In line with the above-mentioned legislative requirement, this Chapter of the EIR provides the recommended mitigation measures, uncertainties or gaps in knowledge, the EAP’s opinion as to whether or not the activity should be authorised and the reason(s) for this opinion as well as an undertaking by the EAP.

13.1 Description of the proposed activity The proposed project entails the development of 440ha of land located north of Upington, Northern Cape as a new SEZ as well as the provision of bulk and internal services (electricity, water, sewer and road/street infrastructure) within the SEZ. Electricity for the new SEZ will be provided through the development of a new PV Facility with an output of up to 50MW, located on 72 hectares within the SEZ while water will be provided from the existing municipal services in Upington. A new onsite Waste Water Treatment (WWTP) is also being proposed. The development will occur in six (6) phases with Phase 1 already approved. Three location alternatives as well as two technology alternatives for the new WWTW is being proposed. The onsite plant (Option 3) is considered as the preferred layout alternative.

13.2 Assumptions, uncertainties and gaps The following assumptions have been made during the EIA process:

The report is based on project information provided by the client.

Descriptions of the natural and social environments are based on limited fieldwork, relevant specialist studies and available literature.

The layout provided by NCEDA might undergo changes in response to the recommendations contained in this report.

In terms of APPENDIX 3(1) of the EIA Regulations (2014) (amended 2017), an Environmental Impact Assessment Report must include –

(m) Based on the assessment, and where applicable, recommendations from specialist reports, the recording of proposed impact management outcomes for the development for inclusion in the EMPr as well as for inclusion as conditions of authorisation;

(o) Any aspects which were conditional to the findings of the assessment either by the EAP or specialist which are to be included as conditions of authorisation.

(p) A description of any assumptions, uncertainties and gaps in knowledge which relate to the assessment and mitigation measures proposed;

(q) A reasoned opinion as to whether the proposed activity should or should not be authorised, and if the opinion is that it should be authorised, any conditions that should be made in respect of that authorisation;

(r) Where the proposed activity does not include operational aspects, the period for which the environmental authorisation is required and the date on which the activity will be concluded and the post construction monitoring requirements finalised;

(s) An undertaking under oath or affirmation by the EAP in relation to-

The correctness of the information provided in the reports;

The inclusion of comments and inputs from stakeholders and I&APs;

The inclusion of inputs and recommendations from the specialist reports where relevant; and

Any information provided by the EAP to interested and affected parties and any responses by the EAP to comments or inputs made by interested or affected parties;



13.3 Opinion of the EAP Although a number of significant impacts are associated with the proposed SEZ, it is the professional opinion of EOH CES and the specialists that:

The vast majority of environmental impacts identified can be adequately mitigated to reduce the impacts to an acceptable level, provided mitigation measures recommended in this report are implemented and maintained throughout the life of the project.

The implementation of mitigation measures and recommendations must be consistently monitored by an independent Environmental Control Officer (ECO) during construction.

The recommendations made by all specialists and the EAP in the EMPr (Appendix D) must be implemented.

The information in the report is sufficient to allow DEA to make an informed decision. It is the opinion of EOH CES that NO FATAL FLAWS are associated with the proposed SEZ.

13.4 Recommendations of the EAP It is the opinion of EOH CES that the proposed SEZ should be approved provided that appropriate mitigation measures are implemented and that the Environmental Management Programme (EMPr) is implemented, maintained and adapted to incorporate relevant legislation, standard requirements and audit reporting, throughout the life of the proposed SEZ. The mitigation measures for all impacts identified in the EIA are provided in the detailed impact assessment in Appendix B and have been incorporated into the EMPr (Appendix D). The EMPr must be implemented by the relevant parties during all phases of development of the project i.e. Planning & Design, Construction and Operation phase. Inclusions, additions and adaptations of the EMPr, as well as all final plan drawings and maps must be submitted to DEA for final approval.

13.5 Recommended mitigation measures

Theme Mitigation measures


GENERAL


All relevant legislation and policy must be consulted and the

proponent must ensure compliance with such legislation and

policy.

These should include (but are not restricted to): NWA, NEMA, NFA,

Local and District Spatial Development Frameworks, Local

Municipal bylaws.

Stormwater Appropriate stormwater structures must be designed and

implemented.

All stormwater structures must be designed in line with DWS

requirements.

Hazardous substances An appropriate hazardous materials and waste management plan

must be developed for storage, disposal and handling of hazardous

materials and waste during the construction and operation phases.

Waste management An appropriate waste management system must be developed for

storing, handling and disposal of waste on site for the construction




and operation phases.

ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS

Loss of natural scrubland The development must not exceed the development footprint

Loss of SCC All plant SCC must be relocated or removed from the construction

footprint by a qualified botanist prior to commencement of

activities.

The relevant permits must be obtained from the relevant

departments in order to remove plant SCC prior to commencement

of activities.

All animal SCC must be relocated or removed from the construction

footprint by a qualified specialist prior to commencement of

activities.

The relevant permits must be obtained from the relevant

departments in order to remove animal SCC prior to

commencement of activities.

HERITAGE IMPACTS


A recommended buffer zone of 100m around the Middle Stone Age

scatter of medium significance must be included in design plans for

the SEZ. If this measure is unachievable it is recommended that the

site be recorded and that the cultural and archaeological context of

the heritage resource be established by means of a limited Phase 2

Specialist Study prior to construction taking place.

A recommended buffer zone of 100m around the two Middle Stone

Age scatters of medium-low significance must be included in the

design plans for the SEZ. If this is not possible then the relevant

permits or authorisations must be obtained from SAHRA prior to

destruction.

NOISE IMPACTS

Noise impacts Mitigation options for proposed industrial areas within the proposed SEZ:

Services areas (areas where building infrastructure will be placed

(eg. Refrigerator condenser units, air-condition units, compressor

units, delivery areas etc)) should be designed enclosed with a wall.

If a receptor (business, educational, hospitality (hotel)) will be

implemented directly adjacent to a service area (and the receptor

will be double storey or higher) then noisy service area equipment

need to be fully enclosed. A single or double brick wall or acoustical

screen will suffice.

If feasible, services areas should not face receptors. The above

point is specifically relevant for the all proposed receptors (training,

educational facility, office/business/retail and hotel).

If ventilation stacks or large fans are required to be placed on the

facility walls/facade they must not face any receptors (and within

500m). If stacks are to be placing upwards (skywards) the stacks

should be considered with silencers.

Noisy equipment should be situated indoors or be sufficiently

enclosed.

Boundary walls between facilities or surrounding entire project

footprint must be built to act as a screen.




Any equipment alarms should be placed away from hotel facilities

on the eastern façade.

If feasible, night time noisy activities should be limited.

The developer should investigate the use of white-noise generators.

Layout of receptors adjacent to noisy areas:

Receptors near noisy areas should have no bedroom windows

facing equipment areas.

Receptors that will be in use during the day could have double

glazing windows allowing the receptor the option to block out noisy

activities.

The developer could consider internal design elements (it should be

noted that these costs can be expensive and should not be

compulsory on the developer). These include making use of

acoustical ceiling tiles and consulting with an indoor acoustical

consultant (relevant for internal noise levels due to electrical

equipment, internal air-conditioning ducting etc.).

Mitigation measures for the transportation network:

Recommended that no haul routes to and from industrial areas are

planned past the hotel.



All legal matters pertaining to permitting must be completed prior to any construction activity.

In particular, all necessary Water Use Licences must be in order before any construction activities take place within the 1:100 year floodline or within 100m of a watercourse and within 500m of a wetland.


Wherever possible, construction activities should be undertaken during the driest part of the year to minimize downstream sedimentation due to excavation, etc.

When not possible, suitable stream diversion structures (if necessary) must be used to ensure the non-perennial river is not negatively impacted by construction activity.

Stormwater management During the planning and design phase appropriate stormwater structures must be designed to minimise erosion and sedimentation of watercourses.

Invasion of alien species During the planning and design phase a Rehabilitation and Alien Vegetation Management Plan must be designed to reduce the establishment and spread of undesirable alien plant species.

Water quality During the planning and design phase an effective water quality (surface and groundwater) monitoring programme must be developed to ensure that the quality of treated waste water (discharged/irrigated) during operation is suitable.

TRAFFIC IMPACTS

Increased traffic During the planning and design appropriate planning should take place for the increased traffic to, from and within the SEZ.

The Traffic Impact Study (TIS) must be submitted to the Dawid Kruiper Local Municipality (DKLM) for their perusal with the complete development proposal, and that the DKLM in turn forward the TIS, with their comments, to the South African National Roads Agency Limited (SANRAL) for their perusal.




All final road design drawings will need to be submitted to the relevant road authority officials prior to construction.

Refer to the traffic impact assessment study for recommendations for internal road reticulation, parking and loading facilities, vehicular access onto existing main roads, pedestrian and bicycle access, access control, traffic calming measures, building lines, road reserves and street lighting.

VISUAL IMPACTS

Visual intrusion All components of the SEZ must take place within the proposed footprint.



During the planning and design phase the infrastructure should be designed in such a manner that it does not obstruct the natural runoff patterns across the study area.

The proposed sewerage pump station must not be placed within the 1:100 floodline or within 50 m of a watercourse.

The planned pump station must have sufficient pumping and storage capacity in order to minimise any potential contamination of surface or ground water.

A generator must be in place in case of electricity outages.

An appropriate non-permeable overflow facility (at least 24 hour capacity) must be designed in case of a pump station failure.


Same as above.

It is recommended that the WWTW not be placed in this position.







Construction Phase

GENERAL


All relevant legislation and policy must be complied with during

construction.

These should include (but are not restricted to): NEMA, NWA, NFA, Local

and District Spatial Development Frameworks, Local Municipal bylaws.

Stormwater Appropriate stormwater management structures must be installed during

the construction phase.

All stormwater management structures installed must be in line with DWS

requirements.

Sanitation facilities Sanitation facilities must NOT be located within 50m of any water

resources or water drainage areas.

Sanitation facilities must only be located within the proposed SEZ

footprint.

The facilities must be regularly serviced to reduce the risk of surface or



Theme Mitigation measures groundwater pollution.

The facilities must be firmly secured to the ground.

Hazardous substances All hazardous substances must be placed in secondary impermeable

containers 110% the volume of the contents within it. The containers must

be on an impermeable concrete surface protected from the ingress of

stormwater from surrounding areas.

All hazardous materials must be placed/stored at least 100m away from

any watercourse or wetland.

Drip trays must be used for stationary plant and refuelling of construction

vehicles.

Spill kits must be provided on site to use in the event of spill or leakage of

hazardous substances.

All staff should know procedures to implement should a spillage of

hazardous substances occur.

Waste management Ensure there are sufficient containers for collecting waste.

No waste must be buried on site.

Waste must be collected on a regular basis and disposed of at a licensed landfill site.

Regular litter patrols must be implemented.

AGRICULTURAL IMPACTS

Loss of agricultural land There is other land available for informal grazing in the area

Agricultural potential is considered as low

Development is within the urban edge and will not result in the loss of formal agricultural land

AIR QUALITY IMPACTS


A stakeholder communications plan must be developed.

Record of all dust and air quality complaints must be kept.

A dust management plan must be developed.

All cleared or exposed surfaces must be dampened down to reduce dust generation.

Dampening of topsoil will reduce the potential for dust generation when tipped onto stockpiles.

ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS


Construction activities for each local development project must be

limited to the approved designated footprint for that specific

development i.e. construction materials, vehicular storage,

construction camps etc.

Loss of SCC The impacted areas must be surveyed prior to topsoil removal in

order to locate and capture any SCC within the area and relocate

them.

All identified SCC must be relocated to similar habitats outside the

construction and operational footprint.

Removal of both plants and animals must be undertaken by a

professional and qualified specialist.

The contractor’s workers must not poach or trap wild animals.

The contractor’s workers must not harvest natural vegetation.

Any SCC overlooked by Search and Rescue must be reported to the

ECO and relocated by a qualified specialist/trained representative


An Alien Management Plan must be developed and implemented

during the construction phase to reduce the establishment and




spread of undesirable alien plant species. The Alien Management

Plan must be approved by the ECO prior to implementation.

Alien plants must be removed from the site through appropriate

methods such as hand pulling, application of chemicals, cutting etc.

on a regular basis.



All impacted areas must be rehabilitated immediately after

construction is completed in that local area.

Only topsoil from the immediate area must be used for

rehabilitation. If none available alternative methods must be

investigated and implemented like hydro-seeding, planting etc. The

method must be approved by the ECO prior to commencement.

All impacted areas must be restored as per a Rehabilitation

Management Plan.


Impacts on ground and surface water

Construction should preferably take place during the dry season.

Excavations should be open for as short period as practically

possible.

Unpaved areas should be vegetated as soon as possible.

Construction vehicles and machines must be maintained properly

to ensure that oil spillages are kept at a minimum.

Spill trays must be provided if refuelling of construction vehicles are

done on site.

Construction should take place during the dry season

The construction camp should be constructed on high ground.

Chemical sanitary facilities must be provided for construction

workers. Construction workers should only be allowed to use

temporary chemical toilets on the site. Chemical toilets shall not be

within close proximity of the drainage system. Frequent

maintenance should include the removal without spillages.

Adequate fuel containment facilities to be used during construction

phase.

The use of all materials, fuels and chemicals which could potentially

leach into underground water must be controlled.

All materials, fuels and chemicals must be stored in a specific and

secured area to prevent pollution from spillages and leakages.

No uncontrolled discharges from the construction camp shall be

permitted.

Chemical storage areas should be sufficiently contained, and the

use of chemicals should be controlled.

Adequate fuel containment facilities to be used during construction

phase.

The use of all materials, fuels and chemicals which could potentially

leach into underground water must be controlled.

All materials, fuels and chemicals must be stored in a specific and

secured area to prevent pollution from spillages and leakages.

HERITAGE IMPACTS

Impact on sites of The developer or qualified heritage specialist must implement a




archaeological and cultural significance

heritage conservation buffer of at least 100m around the two

heritage receptors of medium-low significance and the one heritage

receptor of medium significance. Where possible redesign

infrastructure to avoid the heritage resources and conservation

buffer.

If this measure is unachievable for sites of medium significance, the

site must be recorded and cultural and archaeological context of

the heritage resource be established by means of a limited Phase 2

Specialist Study by a qualified stone age Specialist. The necessary

permits from SAHRA will be required prior to in-situ analysis,

possible collection of photography of artefacts.

Permits/authorisations will need to be obtained for sites of

medium-low significance if destruction is required.

Regular examination of trenches and excavations by a qualified

Stone Age Specialist. Chance find procedure for the location of

previously undetected heritage remains.

No mitigation required for sights of low significance however,

frequent monitoring of construction is this area is recommended in

order to detect possible marginal impact of the site.

A paleontological Desktop Study should be considered for the

development.

If any fossils are exposed during construction, the objects should be

safeguarded and the relevant heritage resources authority (SAHRA)

notified immediately so that appropriate action can be taken by a

professional palaeontologist. If any paleontological, archaeological,

historical material or heritage resources be exposed during

construction activities then all activities must be suspended and

SAHRA must be notified immediately.

NOISE IMPACTS

Noise pollution Construction activities must be restricted to normal working hours

as far as possible.

Receptors proposed for the SEZ (such as business, educational or

hospitality facilities) should be implemented after major

construction works have been completed. Surrounding buildings to

these receptors should be in their finishing phase and not concrete

phase where heavy equipment is required.

Good working relationship and communication channels between

project representative and potentially sensitive receptor needs to

be established to ensure prior notice to work taking place close to

them.

Refer to the Noise Impact Assessment for more details regarding

the mitigation measures.


Influx of job-seekers A project steering committee (PSC) consisting of NCEDA, contractor,

Community Liaison Officer (CLO), recruitment agency, community leaders,

elders, and youth, ward councillors and the ZF Mgcawu DM and DKLM LED

departments must be established in order to:

o Conduct an audit of the affected communities in terms of

employment capacity.

o Identify potential workers from the affected and surrounding



Theme Mitigation measures communities.

o Identify possible conflicts in and between communities.

o Set up a central labour desk where all workers register and only

workers registered on the database should be considered for

employment.

o Recommend support programmes that would assist with conflict

minimisation and resolution. Contractually oblige sub-contractors to

only employ workers through the labour force desk.

All construction workers must be clearly identifiable and wear easily

recognisable uniforms. They need to carry identification cards issued by

the contractor.

The SAPS must have access to construction sites.

Local communities should be encouraged to report suspicious activity to

the community liaison or nearest site officer.

The use of local labour will minimise safety and security concerns to a

great extent.

The contractor must prevent loitering around the construction camp by

providing transport to and from the camp sites.

Implement on site safety and security measures, such as electrical fencing,

24 hour security guards, CCTV cameras and access control.

A Health and Safety Officer must be appointed on site and must comply

with the Occupational Health and Safety policies.

A HIV/AIDS, non-discrimination, awareness, prevention and health care

support policy must be implemented.

Condoms must be made easily accessible to all workers.

An HIV/AIDS education and behaviour change programme for all

contracted workers should be developed.

The above program must extend to the communities located near the

study area.

Existing public health care centres must be involved in HIV/AIDS

campaigns and monitoring of HIV/AIDS prevalence should be undertaken

in collaboration with these agencies.

Voluntary counselling and testing should be encouraged for all workers.

NCEDA is limited in its capacity to enhance the benefits of this

impact, as the development of the communities and town will

occur in response to the needs and demands of construction

workers. NCEDA can however play a role in facilitating the skills

required to recognise the need and respond appropriately.

NCEDA must link the Local and District Municipal LED programmes

and local business chambers with small to medium enterprises

(including communities) in the area so that a state of “readiness” to

optimise economic benefits is achieved. This may involve training in

the following sectors: business, tourism, catering etc.


Service providers associated with DKLM, clinics, schools and the

SAPS must be made aware of the potential increase in demand for

services, and the anticipated increased pressure to provide services

for new households.

This will require the establishment of direct contact between LM,

DM, the Department of Health, SAPS, Department of Education,

etc. The channels of communication must be established as

permanent points of contact throughout the construction phase of

the project.




Regular monitoring of schools and clinics must be undertaken in

order to determine whether there are sufficient resources. When

resources are insufficient, NCEDA must communicate, through

established channels, with the relevant departments for assistance.

Surrounding communities must have access to a grievance

reporting mechanism, e.g. through a project steering committee.

Disruptions and road closures must be announced throughout the

municipal area, and especially in the communities surrounding the

construction area.


Equal jobs opportunities for women and men must be promoted.

Culture and tradition must be considered when planning the

division of labour for construction.

Employment must be managed by a recruitment agency/labour

desk that uses a selection system that ensures recruitment of semi

and unskilled workers from all local impacted communities in

accordance with recent government policies related to local

procurement. This must ensure a fair and equitable recruitment

process.

Where appropriate, employees involved in the construction phase

should be incorporated into the permanent maintenance staff for

the operational phase; and

Particular attention must be paid to employment opportunities for

women and disabled persons.

NCEDA must ensure that the principle of utilising local business

resources (suppliers and SMMEs), in accordance with recent

government policies related to local procurement, forms part of the

procurement specifications.

NCEDA must implement a skills development programme which will

also include training in business, project management, monitoring

and evaluation.


Material stockpiling During the construction phase no construction material must be

stored within 50 m of a watercourse.

Stockpiles should not be placed within 50 m of watercourses.

Stockpiles within 100 m of watercourses must be monitored for

erosion and mobilisation of materials towards watercourses. If this

is noted by an ECO, suitable cut-off drains or berms must be placed

between the stockpile area and the nearest watercourse.

Water quality During the construction phase no concrete mixing must take place

within 50 m of any river bank or the wetland.

A serviced fire extinguisher (to neutralise pH levels if a spill occurs)

must be available on site in the event that wet concrete is

accidentally spilled into a river.

Refer to Appendix A of the Surface Water and Wetland Assessment

for mitigation measures associated with concrete works.

During the construction phase no machinery must be parked

overnight within 50 m of the rivers/wetland.

All stationary machinery must be equipped with a drip tray to retain




any oil leaks.

Chemicals used for construction must be stored safely on bunded

surfaces in the construction site camp.

Emergency plans must be in place in case of spillages.

No ablution facilities should be located within 50 m of any river or

the wetland.

Chemical toilets must be regularly maintained/ serviced to prevent

ground or surface water pollution.

Stormwater management During the construction phase stormwater must be managed

effectively to minimize the ingress of sediment-laden stormwater

into the rivers/ wetlands.

Wetland vegetation During the construction phase sensitive wetland vegetation must

not be impacted /removed.

Removal of alien invasive vegetation should be prioritised.

Vehicles and machinery should not encroach into areas

outside/surrounding the planned project footprint

TOURISM IMPACTS

Sense of place The footprint of the SEZ and Solar PV Facility must be clearly

demarcated and construction activities must be restricted to this

area.


No mitigation required.

Dust Generation No mitigation. The high tourism area in Upington is situated more

than 1.5km from the study area and should not be impacted by

dust generation during the Construction Phase.

Noise pollution No mitigation. The high tourism area in Upington is situated more

than 1.5km from the study area and should not be impacted by

noise pollution during the Construction Phase.

Traffic delays No mitigation required.

TRAFFIC IMPACTS

Traffic volume During the construction phase local residents should be made

aware of the presence of construction vehicles by making use of

high-visibility signage.

Whenever possible construction vehicles should be limited to low-

volume periods.

Road condition should be recorded prior to construction vehicles

making use of the roads and any damage caused by construction

vehicles should be repaired immediately.

VISUAL IMPACTS

Visual intrusion All construction activity should take place during daylight working

hours (i.e. 7 – 5pm).

All construction activity and equipment must be limited to the

demarcated areas.

Good housekeeping measures must be implemented throughout

the construction phase.

Operation Phase

GENERAL IMPACTS

Legislation and policy The proponent must ensure that the operation of the SEZ is in line




compliance with relevant legislations and policies.

These should include (but are not restricted to): NEMA, NWA, NFA,

Local and District Spatial Development Frameworks, Local

Municipal bylaws.

Stormwater All stormwater management measures and infrastructure must be

properly maintained and monitored.

If stormwater measures that have been put in place prove to be

inadequate then new or additional stormwater infrastructure and

measures must be put in place.

Sanitation facilities All sanitation infrastructure must be maintained and regularly

inspected and monitored to ensure that there are no leakages.

Any leaks, spillages and failure of infrastructure must be fixed

immediately and any contaminated areas remediated immediately.

Hazardous substances All hazardous substances must be placed in secondary impermeable

containers 110% the volume of the contents within it. The

containers must be on an impermeable concrete surface protected

from the ingress of stormwater from surrounding areas.

No hazardous substances must be placed outside of the proposed

SEZ footprint.

All businesses storing, handling or disposal of hazardous waste

must have spill kits kept on site.

All staff should know procedures to implement should a spillage of

hazardous substances occur.

Waste management During the operational phase a waste management plan must be

implemented to ensure the appropriate storage, handling and

disposal of waste generated at the proposed SEZ.

Central waste collection points should be located throughout the

SEZ.

Re-use and recycling of waste should be promoted.

AIR IMPACTS

Impacts on air quality Generic buffer zones for the type of industry must be implemented which are 300m for heavy industry, 150m for medium industry and 50m for light industry.

Recommended separation distance between industrial and sensitive land uses has been provided in the Air Impact Assessment and should be implemented once the type of industry becomes known.

The proposed residential area east of the proposed SEZ may need to be revised due to its close proximity to the heavy industrial area planned to the north of the proposed SEZ.

Appropriate emergency preparedness and prevention plans as well as liaison with local fire and emergency services must be put in place.

A number of good environmental practices for industrial estates are stipulated in the Air Quality Impact Assessment.

It is recommended that once specific industries have been identified for the SEZ, further consideration of the likely nature and extent of their environmental impacts be established from a simple dispersion modelling exercise which may show that the indicative buffer distance is still acceptable.




The specific industries, which may cause adverse impacts to air quality, may be required to submit an EIA report with an EMP including mitigation measures on air pollution

Refer to the detailed mitigation measures described in the Air Quality Impact Assessment.

ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS

Control of alien plant species An Alien Management Plan must be developed and implemented during the operational phase to reduce the establishment and spread of undesirable alien plant species. The Alien Management Plan must be approved by the ECO prior to implementation.




The use of all detergents, oil, fuels and chemicals which could

potentially leach into underground water must be controlled.

The dirty water system should be discharged into a licensed holding

facility and not into any streams, rivers, or open fields. This facility

will be designed accordingly and during the construction phase.

Chemical storage areas should be sufficiently contained, and the

use of chemicals should be controlled.

Storm water should be redirected around the site. Storm water can

be detrimental due the gradient op the topography. High Elevation

in the West and low Elevation in the east towards the proposed PV

solar plant.

Rainwater falling on the site should be contained and included in a

dirty water system.

Underground storage facilities and tanks should be properly

installed and maintained to prevent possible leakage into ground.

Monitoring electronic gauges should be employed below and above

ground to detect any leakages and seepage.

The transfer of fluids to and from the underground facilities should

be accounted for and metered, for the early detection of leakages.

HERITAGE IMPACTS

Identification of archaeological and sites of cultural significance

The developer or qualified heritage specialist must implement a heritage conservation buffer of at least 100m around the two heritage receptors of medium-low significance and the one heritage receptor of medium significance. Where possible redesign infrastructure to avoid the heritage resources and conservation buffer.

If this measure is unachievable for sites of medium significance, the site must be recorded and cultural and archaeological context of the heritage resource be established by means of a limited Phase 2 Specialist Study by a qualified stone age Specialist. The necessary permits from SAHRA will be required prior to in-situ analysis, possible collection of photography of artefacts.

Permits/authorisations will need to be obtained for sites of medium-low significance if destruction is required.

Regular examination of trenches and excavations by a qualified Stone Age Specialist. Chance find procedure for the location of




previously undetected heritage remains. No mitigation required for sights of low significance however,

frequent monitoring of construction is this area is recommended in order to detect possible marginal impact of the site.

A paleontological Desktop Study should be considered for the development.

If any fossils are exposed during construction, the objects should be safeguarded and the relevant heritage resources authority (SAHRA) notified immediately so that appropriate action can be taken by a professional palaeontologist.

If any paleontological, archaeological, historical material or heritage resources be exposed during construction activities then all activities must be suspended and SAHRA must be notified immediately.

NOISE IMPACTS

Noise pollution The developer or qualified heritage specialist must implement a heritage conservation buffer of at least 100m around the two heritage receptors of medium-low significance and the one heritage receptor of medium significance. Where possible redesign infrastructure to avoid the heritage resources and conservation buffer.



Regular examination of trenches and excavations by a qualified Stone Age Specialist. Chance find procedure for the location of previously undetected heritage remains.

No mitigation required for sights of low significance however, frequent monitoring of construction is this area is recommended in order to detect possible marginal impact of the site.





Influx of job seekers A project steering committee (PSC) consisting of NCEDA, contractor, Community Liaison Officer (CLO), recruitment agency, community leaders, elders, and youth, ward councillors and the ZF Mgcawu DM and DKLM LED departments must be established in order to: o Conduct an audit of the affected communities in terms of

employment capacity.




o Identify potential workers from the affected and surrounding communities.

o Identify possible conflicts in and between communities. o Set up a central labour desk where all workers register and only

workers registered on the database should be considered for employment.

o Recommend support programmes that would assist with conflict minimisation and resolution. Contractually oblige sub-contractors to only employ workers through the labour force desk.

The SAPS must have access to the proposed SEZ.

Local communities should be encouraged to report suspicious activity to the community liaison or nearest site officer.

The use of local labour will minimise safety and security concerns to a great extent.

Implement on site safety and security measures, such as electrical fencing, 24 hour security guards, CCTV cameras and access control.

A HIV/AIDS, non-discrimination, awareness, prevention and health care support policy must be implemented.


An HIV/AIDS education and behaviour change programme for all contracted workers should be developed.

The above program must extend to the communities located near the study area.

Existing public health care centres must be involved in HIV/AIDS campaigns and monitoring of HIV/AIDS prevalence should be undertaken in collaboration with these agencies.



Service providers associated with DKLM, clinics, schools and the SAPS must be made aware of the potential increase in demand for services, and the anticipated increased pressure to provide services for new households.

This will require the establishment of direct contact between LM, DM, the Department of Health, SAPS, Department of Education, etc. The channels of communication must be established as permanent points of contact throughout the operation phase of the project.

Service providers associated with DKLM, clinics, schools and the

SAPS must be made aware of the potential increase in demand for

services, and the anticipated increased pressure to provide services

for new households.

This will require the establishment of direct contact between LM,

DM, the Department of Health, SAPS, Department of Education,

etc. The channels of communication must be established as

permanent points of contact throughout the operation phase of the

project.

Regular monitoring of schools and clinics must be undertaken in

order to determine whether there are sufficient resources. When

resources are insufficient, NCEDA must communicate, through

established channels, with the relevant departments for assistance.




Surrounding communities must have access to a grievance

reporting mechanism.

Disruptions and road closures must be announced throughout the

municipal area, and especially in the communities surrounding the

propose SEZ.



Employment must be managed by a recruitment agency/labour

desk that uses a selection system that ensures recruitment of semi

and unskilled workers from all local impacted communities in

accordance with recent government policies related to local

procurement. This must ensure a fair and equitable recruitment

process.

Where appropriate, employees involved in the construction phase

should be incorporated into the permanent maintenance staff for

the operational phase; and

Particular attention must be paid to employment opportunities for

women and disabled persons.

NCEDA must ensure that the principle of utilising local business

resources (suppliers and SMMEs), in accordance with recent

government policies related to local procurement, forms part of the

procurement specifications.

NCEDA must implement a skills development programme which will

also include training in business, project management, monitoring

and evaluation.

NCEDA is limited in terms of their input regarding the spin-off

business opportunities as these depend on investor interest and

market demand; however they play a key role in permitting sectors

within the SEZ. NCEDA should therefore, in their consideration of

industrial sectors, consider the benefit to local communities and

ensure that equitable benefits are realised and readily facilitate

sectors that will benefit the communities and region at large.

SURFACE WATER AND WETLAND

Stormwater runoff During the operation phase, stormwater management measures

such as attenuation structures, channels, etc. must be properly

maintained and monitored.

If the stormwater management measures put in place is deemed

insufficient, a qualified engineer must be approached to assist with

additional storm water attenuation mechanisms and remediation.

Maintenance of sewage infrastructure

During the operation phase sewage infrastructure must be

maintained and pipelines checked for leaks.

If leaks are identified or reported by the public, immediate actions

must be taken to repair these leaks.

Water quality

During the operation phase the quality of treated waste water must

be continuously monitored.

The use of treated waste water for irrigation must conform to

guidelines provided in the Department of Health’s publication –

Guide: Permissible Utilisation and Disposal of Treated Sewage

Effluent.

During the operation phase sewage infrastructure must be regularly




monitored for leaks. If any leaks or spills occur immediate actions

must be taken to fix the leaks and remedy the spill.

It is recommended that the position of the WWTW in the sewage

alternative 2 be reviewed and the WWTW be moved further away

from the drainage system and wetland.

TOURISM IMPACTS

Sense of place The Solar PV Facility must be maintained as to prevent the growth

of alien vegetation and to ensure that litter does not accumulate

near the facility. Indigenous vegetation should be used to

revegetate the site where possible.

Educational tours of the Solar PV Facility should be considered to

attract tourists and educate scholars and other interested

individuals.

Accommodation and Restaurants

No mitigation required.

TRAFFIC

Traffic volume During the operation phase regular road maintenance must take place.

Appropriate pedestrian accommodation measures must be in place.

Soil erosion Bank restoration, re-vegetation and stabilisation must be implemented and inspected regularly during the operation phase and must include the use of gabions for bank stabilisation if required.

Control of alien species A Rehabilitation and Alien Management Plan must be developed and implemented during the operation phase to reduce the establishment and spread of undesirable alien plant species.

Alien plants must be removed from the site through appropriate methods such as hand pulling, application of chemicals, cutting etc. This must be done under the supervision of the ECO.


All impacted areas must be rehabilitated back to Ngongoni veld after construction.

Only topsoil from the immediate area must be used for rehabilitation. If none available alternative methods must be investigated and implemented like hydro-seeding, planting etc.

All mined areas must be restored as per the Rehabilitation and Alien Management Plan.

NO-GO ALTERNATIVE

Not constructing the proposed SEZ.

No mitigation.



13.6 Declaration by the EAP I, Dr. Alan Carter declare that:

I act as the independent environmental practitioner in this application;

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

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

I have expertise in conducting environmental impact assessments, including knowledge of the Act, regulations and any guidelines that have relevance to the proposed activity;

I will comply with the Act, Regulations and all other applicable legislation;

I have no, and will not engage in, conflicting interests in the undertaking of the activity;

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

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

I realise that a false declaration is an offence in terms of regulation 48 and is punishable in terms of section 24F of the Act.

Signature of the EAP: Name of company (if applicable): Date:



14 APPENDICES

14.1 APPENDIX A: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION DOCUMENTS EIR Phase documents still to be added NEWSPAPER ADVERTISEMENTS:









Proof of placement:





SITE NOTICES: Copy of site notice placed onsite:

Notice is hereby given in terms of Regulation 41(2) published in GN R. 982 under Chapter 5 of the National EnvironmentalManagement Act (NEMA) (No. 107 of 1998) Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations (2014) of the intention toapply for environmental authorization from both the national Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) for the SolarFacility as well as the provincial Department of Environment and Nature Conservation (DENC, Northern Cape) for the SEZ.The process will also include the submission of Water Use License Applications to the Department of Water and Sanitation(DWS) as regulated by the National Water Act (Act No. 36 of 1998).

Proponent, Project Activities and Location: The Northern Cape Economic Development, Trade and Investment PromotionAgency (NCEDA) is proposing the rezoning of 440ha of land located north of Upington, Northern Cape for the developmentof a new SEZ as well as the provision of bulk and internal services (electricity, water, sewer and road/street infrastructure)within the SEZ including a new Solar Energy Facility located on 72ha within the SEZ with an electricity output of over20MW. The proposed project requires a FULL SCOPING AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT (EIA) due to thefollowing activity listed in terms of GN R. 984 (15): The clearance of an area of 20 hectares or more of indigenousvegetation and GN R. 984 (1): The development of facilities or infrastructure for the generation of electricity from arenewable resource where the electricity output in 20 MW or more.

For more information, registration as an I&AP or submission of written comments contact by post, phone, fax or e-mail: Mr. Roy de Kock: PO Box 8145, Nahoon, 5210

Tel: 043 726 7809 | Fax: 043 726 8352 | e-mail: [email protected]

NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

ASSESSMENT

Kennis work hiermee gegee ingevolge Regulasie 41(2) van die Omgewings Impak Regulasies (2014) gepubliseer inStaatskennisgewing 982 onder Hoofstuk 5 van die Nasionale Wet op Omgewingsbestuur (Wet 107 of 1998) van die intensieom aansoek te doen vir omgewings goedkeuring van beide die Nasionale Departement van Omgewingsake vir diekonstruksie van n nuwe sonkragaanleg en die Provinsiale Departement van Omgewingsbestuur en Natuurbeskerming(Noord Kaap) vir n nuwe Spesiale Ontwikkelingsone (SO) in Upington, Noord Kaap. Die proses sluit n aansoek virwatergebruik van die Departement van Water en Sanitasie in, soos gereguleer deur die Nasionale Water Wet (Wet 36 of1998).

Projekinligting: Die Noord Kaapse Ekonomiese Ontwikkelings Agentskap (of die Northern Cape Economic Development,Trade and Investment Promotion Agency; NCEDA) stel die hersonering van 440ha land noord van Upington, Noord Kaapvoor vir die ontwikkeling van n nuwe SO wat beide grootmaat en interne dieste insluit (elektriseteit, water, padinfrastruktuur en riool). Insluitend hierin is n nuwe sonkragaanleg met n uitvoervermoe van 20MW, wat op 72ha grondbinne die SO gelee gaan wees. Die voorgestelde projek vereis n Volledige Omgewingsinvloedbepalingsproses as gevolg vandie volgende gelyste aktiwiteite soos voorgeskryf in Staatskennisgewing 984, aktiwiteit 15: Die skoonmaak van 'n gebied van20 hektaar of meer van inheemse plantegroei; en Staatskennisgewing 984, aktiwiteit 1: Die ontwikkeling van fasiliteite ofinfrastruktuur vir die opwekking van elektrisiteit uit hernubare hulpbronne waar die elektrisiteit produksie 20 MW of meeris.

KENNISGEWING VAN OMGEWINGSAKEIMPAKSTUDIE

Ten einde meer inligting te bekom en om op die projek se databasis the registreer , verstrek asseblief u naam, kontakbesonderhede en belang by die projek aan: Mr. Roy de Kock: Posbus 8145, Nahoon, 5210

Tel: 043 726 7809 | Faks: 043 726 8352 | epos: [email protected]



Proof of site notices placed onsite:

VISIBLE SIGNAGE NEAR THE PROPOSED SITE

Coordinates: 32°51'13.05" S ; 27°25'55.75" E

Coordinates: 32°53'27.54" S ; 27°24'15.20" E

Coordinates: 32°53'14.64" S ; 27°25'37.85" E

Coordinates: 32°53'14.64" S ; 27°25'37.85" E

Coordinates: 32°53'14.64" S ; 27°25'37.85" E

Coordinates: 32°53'14.64" S ; 27°25'37.85" E



BACKGROUND INFORMATION DOCUMENT (BID): BID’s sent to Landowners, Stakeholders and I&AP’s on the 8th of June 2016.

• BACKGROUND INFORMATION DOCUMENT AND INVITATION TO COMMENT

Development of a new Special Economic Zone (including a Solar Energy Facility) in Upington, Northern Cape Province

BACKGROUND

The Northern Cape Economic Development, Trade and Investment Promotion Agency (NCEDA) has appointed EOH Coastal & Environmental Services (EOH) to obtain Environmental Authorisation (EA) for the development of a Special Economic Zone (SEZ) which will include a Solar Energy Facility as well as other industrial and commercial development in Upington located in the Northern Cape Province. The SEZ development will require an EA from Provincial DENC while the Solar Energy Facility will require a separate EA from National DEA, as required by South Africa’s environmental legislation. It was decided that the two processes will be seperated in order to obtain two separate EAs. Details of the relevant laws and an overview of the two EIA processes are provided on the next page.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The proposed project entails the development of 440ha of land located north of Upington, Northern Cape as a new SEZ as well as the provision of bulk and internal services (electricity, water, sewer and road/street infrastructure) within the SEZ (Figure 1). Electricity for the new SEZ will be provided through the development of a new Photo Voltaic Solar Plant (PV) with an output of over 20MW, located on 72 hectares within the SEZ (Figure 2) while other bulk services (water and sewage) will be upgraded from the existing services in Upington. The development will occur in six (6) phases with Phase 1 already approved.

AIM OF THIS DOCUMENT

The aim of this Background Information Document (BID) is to provide people affected by and interested in the proposed project with information about this project, the process being followed and to provide them with an opportunity to be involved in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process.

The findings of the EIA for the current project will be submitted to the both the National Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) for the Solar Energy Facility as well as the Northern Cape Department of Environmental and Nature Conservation (DENC) for the Special Economic Zone development, for a final decision as to whether or not the project should go ahead and if so under what conditions.

Return address for comments: EOH Coastal & Environmental Services Mr Roy de Kock 25 Tecoma Street, Berea P.O Box 8145, Nahoon, 5210 Tel: (043) 726 7809 Fax: (043) 726 8352 Cel: 076 281 9660




RELEVANT LEGISLATION

Government Notice R. 982 in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA, Act No. 107 of 1998) Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations (updated in 2014) identifies activities, which may not commence without an EA from the relevant competent authority (DEA & DENC). The current SEZ and Solar Energy Facility require that two separate Full Scoping and EIA’s are carried out for the proposed activities. In order to apply for authorisation for the development, the assessment and communication of potential impacts of activities must follow the procedure as described in Appendix 2 and Appendix 3 of the EIA Regulations (2014). The process will also include the submission of a Water Use License Application to the Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS) as regulated by the National Water Act (Act No. 36 of 1998).

Figure 1: Location of the proposed SEZ development in Upington, Northern Cape.



Figure 2: Layout of the proposed SEZ development in Upington, Northern Cape.



ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT PRACTITIONER

EOH Coastal and Environmental Services (EOH) was established in 1990 as a specialist environmental consulting company and has considerable experience in terrestrial, marine and freshwater ecology, the Social Impact Assessment (SIA) process, State of Environment Reporting (SOER), Integrated Waste Management Plans (IWMP), Environmental Management Programme (EMPr), Spatial Development Frameworks (SDF), public participation, as well as the management and co-ordination of all aspects of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) processes. EOH has been active in all of the above fields, and in so doing have made a positive contribution towards environmental management and sustainable development in South Africa and many other African countries. We believe that a balance between development and environmental protection can be achieved by skilful, considerate and careful planning. The proposed project requires TWO SEPARATE Full Scoping and EIA processes in terms of listed activities, one for the SEZ and a separate EIA process for the Solar Energy Facility. The following table summarises the listed activities relevant to each project:

LISTED ACTIVITIES FOR THE SEZ DEVELOPMENT:

LISTED ACTIVITIES FOR THE SOLAR ENERGY FACILITY DEVELOPMENT:

Activity number Activity Description

GN R 983 (11)

(ii) The development of facilities or infrastructure for the transmission and distribution of electricity-

inside urban areas or industrial complexes with a capacity of 275 kilovolts or more.

GN R 983 (13)

The development of facilities or infrastructure for the off-stream storage of water, including dams and reservoirs, with a combined capacity of 50000 cubic meters or more, unless such storage falls within the ambit of activity 16 in Listing Notice 2 of 2014.

GN R 983 (14)

The development of facilities or infrastructure, for the storage, or for the storage and handling, of a dangerous good, where such storage occurs in containers with a combined capacity of 80 cubic meters or more but not exceeding 500 cubic meters.

GN R 983 (19) The infilling or depositing of any material of more than 5 cubic meters into, or the dredging, excavation, removal or moving of soil, sand, shells, shell grit, pebbles or rock of more than 5 cubic meters from 077a watercourse.

GN R 983 (25)

The development and related operation of facilities or infrastructure for the treatment of effluent, wastewater or sewage with a daily throughput capacity of more than 2000 cubic meters but less than 15000 cubic meters.

GN R 983 (27) The clearance of an area of 1 hectare or more, but less than 20 hectares of indigenous vegetation.

GN R 983 (28)

Residential, mixed, retail, commercial, industrial or institutional developments where such land was used for agriculture or afforestation on or after 01 April 1998 and where such development:

(ii) will occur inside an urban area, where the total land to be developed is bigger than 5 hectares.



LISTED ACTIVITIES FOR THE SEZ DEVELOPMENT:

LISTED ACTIVITIES FOR THE SOLAR ENERGY FACILITY DEVELOPMENT:

Activity number Activity Description

GN R 984 (1)

The development of facilities or infrastructure for the generation of electricity from a renewable resource where the electricity output is 20MW or more.

GN R 984 (6)

The development of facilities or infrastructure for any process or activity which requires a permit or license in terms of national or provincial legislation governing the generation or release of emissions, pollution or effluent, excluding-

(iii) the development of facilities or infrastructure for the treatment of effluent, wastewater or sewage where such facilities have a daily throughput capacity of 2000 cubic meters or less.

GN R 984 (15) The clearance of an area of 20 hectares or more of indigenous vegetation.

GN R 984 (25)


GN R 984 (27)

The development of –

(iii) a road with a reserve wider than 30 meters;

(iv) a road catering for more than one lane of traffic in both directions.

GN R 985 (14)

The development of- (iv) bridges exceeding 10 square metres in size; (x) buildings exceeding 10 square metres in size; (xii) infrastructure or structures with a physical footprint of 10 square metres or more;

where such development occurs- a) within a watercourse; c) if no development setback has been adopted, within32 metres of a watercourse,

measured from the edge of a watercourse (h) In Free State, Limpopo, Mpumalanga and Northern Cape:

(iv) In urban areas: Areas zoned for use as public open space.

APPROACH TO THE FULL SCOPING AND EIA PROCESS

THE SCOPING PHASE Both EIAs for the proposed project are presently in the SCOPING phase. This phase primarily serves to inform the public and relevant authorities about the proposed project and to determine any impacts. These impacts will then be extensively addressed by specialists in the field during the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) phase.



THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT PHASE This phase is more complex and more detailed than the Scoping phase because it focuses on undertaking specialist studies that may be identified during the Scoping phase. These studies provide expert input into the EIA process based on scientific information. I&APs will be consulted again during this phase, and will be given an opportunity to comment on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for each development, that will contain the specialist reports. During this phase an Environmental Management Programme (EMPr) must also be prepared for each of the two the projects. The two final EIR’s must be submitted to the Provincial DENC (for the SEZ development) & National DEA (for the Solar Energy Facility) respectively for decision on whether or not to authorise the development. The authorisation of a development carries a number of legally binding conditions, which will be contained in the Environmental Authorisation document for each project. This document will be circulated to all registered I&APs within two weeks of receipt from the respective competent authority.

HOW CAN YOU BE INVOLVED

A Public Participation Process (PPP) is being conducted as part of the EIA processes. The aim of the PPP is to allow everyone who is interested in, or is likely to be affected by, the proposed development to provide input into the process.

Notify I&AP & Appeals Process

Competent Authority Review, Comment & Desicion

Finalise & Submit EIR & EMPr

Public Review Period (30 Days)

Specialist Studies, Prepare Draft EIR & EMPr

Competent Authority Review, Comment & Desicion

Finalise & Sumit Scoping Report

Public Review Period (30 Days)

Prepare Draft Scoping Report

Submit Application Form

Landowner, Stakeholder & I&AP Notification

Sco

pin

g P

hase

EIR

Ph

ase

We Are Here



The Public Participation Process will include:

Advertisements in a Local & Regional newspaper;

Notice Boards on site;

Circulation of the BID (this document) to all I&APs and stakeholders; and

Review of all reports by registered I&APs and stakeholders. If you consider yourself an interested and/or affected person/party, it is important that you become and remain involved in the PPP. In order to do so please follow the steps below in order to ensure that you are continually informed of the project developments and opportunities to raise issues and concerns pertaining to the project. STEP 1: Please register by responding to our notification and invitation, with your name and contact details (details provided on cover page and below). As a registered I&AP you will be informed of all meetings, report reviews and project developments throughout the EIA process. STEP 2: Register by returning the slip at the back of this document to EOH. STEP 3: Attend meetings that will be held throughout the EIA process. As a registered I&AP, you will be invited to these meetings. EOH is required to engage with all private and public parties that may be interested and/or affected by either or both the proposed SEZ Development and the Solar Energy Facility Development, in order to distribute information for review and comment in a transparent manner. It is important for I&APs to note the following: 1. In order for EOH to continue engaging with you, please ENSURE that you register on our database by

contacting the person below. 2. As the EIA process is regulated by specific review and comment timeframes, it is your responsibility to

submit your comments within these timeframes



I hereby wish to register as an Interested and Affected Party (I&AP) for either or both the

NCEDA Upington SEZ Development and the Solar Energy Facility EIA processes

Name:

_________________________________________________________________________________

Organization:

_________________________________________________________________________________

I wish to register for (please indicate either or both):

The NCEDA Upington SEZ Development EIA The NCEDA Upington Solar Energy Facility EIA

Postal address:

_________________________________________________________________________________

Email:

_________________________________________________________________________________

Phone #: __________________________________Fax #:__________________________________

My initial comments, issues or concerns are:

_________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________

Other individuals, stakeholders, organisations or entities that should be registered are:

Name:

_________________________________________________________________________________

Organization:

_________________________________________________________________________________

Postal address:

_________________________________________________________________________________

Email:

_________________________________________________________________________________

Phone #: ________________________________ Fax #: _________________________________

Please return details to: Mr Roy de Kock: P.O. Box 8145, Nahoon, 5210 Telephone: (043) 726 7809 Fax: (043) 726 8352 Email: [email protected]




FLYERS THAT WERE DISTRIBUTED IN UPINGTON – November 2016



LETTER OF NOTIFICATION LANDOWNER: Letter of Notification 8th June 2016



PROOF OF INITIAL I&AP AND STAKEHOLDER NOTIFICATION, October 2016















PROOF OF DEA CORRESPONDENCE STILL TO BE UPDATED.



PROOF OF NORTHERN CAPE NCEDA CORRESPONDENCE STILL TO BE UPDATED.



PROOF OF DEA: BIODIVERSITY CORRESPONDENCE STILL TO BE UPDATED



PUBLIC MEETING Meeting minutes – 17 November 2016: STILL TO BE UPDATED.



Presentation – 17 November 2016: 1 2

3 4

5 6

7 8



9 10

11 12

13 14



15 16

17 18

19 20



21 22

23



ATTENDANCE REGISTER



14.2 Appendix B 14.2.1 Impact Assessment Impacts associated with the planning and design of the proposed SEZ.

ISSUE DESCRIPTION OF IMPACT NATURE OF IMPACT

SPATIAL SCALE (EXTENT)

TEMPORAL SCALE (DURATION)

CERTAINTY SCALE (LIKELIHOOD)

SEVERITY / BENEFICIAL SCALE

SIGNIFICANCE PRE-MITIGATION

MITIGATION MEASURES SIGNIFICANCE POST-MITIGATION

PLANNING & DESIGN PHASE

GENERAL IMPACTS


Compliance with relevant

environmental legislation and

policy

During the planning and design phase failure to comply with existing policies and legal obligations could lead to the project conflicting with local, provincial and national policies, legislation etc. This could result in legal non-compliance, fines, overall project failure or delays in construction activity and undue disturbance to the natural environment.

DIRECT CUMULATIVE

Localised Long-term Possible Severe HIGH NEGATIVE All relevant legislation and policy must be consulted and the proponent must ensure compliance with such legislation and policy.

These should include (but are not restricted to): NWA, NEMA, NFA, Local and District Spatial Development Frameworks, Local Municipal bylaws.

LOW NEGATIVE


DIRECT CUMULATIVE

Study area Long-term Probable Severe HIGH NEGATIVE Appropriate stormwater structures must be designed and implemented.

All stormwater structures must be designed in line with DWS requirements.

LOW NEGATIVE


During the planning and design phase, failure to plan for appropriate storing, handling and disposal of hazardous substances may result in contamination of soil and ground and surface water sources.

DIRECT CUMULATIVE

Localised Long-term Probable Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

An appropriate hazardous materials and waste management plan must be developed for storage, disposal and handling of hazardous materials and waste during the construction and operation phases.

LOW NEGATIVE

Waste management

During the planning and design phase failure to plan for appropriate storing, handling and disposal of waste may result in contamination of surrounding environment.

DIRECT CUMULATIVE

Localised Medium-term Possible Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

An appropriate waste management system must be developed for storing, handling and disposal of waste on site for the construction and operation phases.

LOW NEGATIVE



During the planning and design phase, clearing of natural vegetation will lead to the permanent loss of natural scrubland.

DIRECT/INDIRECT CUMULATIVE

Study area Permanent Definite Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

The development must not exceed the development footprint

LOW NEGATIVE



Study area Permanent Probable Moderately severe HIGH NEGATIVE All plant SCC must be relocated or removed from the construction footprint by a qualified botanist prior to commencement of activities.

The relevant permits must be obtained from the relevant departments in order to remove plant SCC prior to commencement of activities.

LOW NEGATIVE



Study area Permanent Probable Moderately severe HIGH NEGATIVE All animal SCC must be relocated or removed from the construction footprint by a qualified specialist prior to commencement of activities.

The relevant permits must be obtained from the relevant departments in order to remove animal SCC prior to commencement of activities.

LOW NEGATIVE

HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Impact on sites of archaeological

During the planning and design phase, poor planning and consideration of the

DIRECT INDIRECT

Localised Long-term Possible Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

A recommended buffer zone of 100m around the Middle Stone Age scatter of

LOW NEGATIVE










and cultural significance

identified heritage sites could result in the loss of sites of archaeological and cultural significance.

medium significance must be included in design plans for the SEZ. If this measure is unachievable it is recommended that the site be recorded and that the cultural and archaeological context of the heritage resource be established by means of a limited Phase 2 Specialist Study prior to construction taking place.

A recommended buffer zone of 100m around the two Middle Stone Age scatters of medium-low significance must be included in the design plans for the SEZ. If this is not possible then the relevant permits or authorisations must be obtained from SAHRA prior to destruction.

NOISE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Noise impacts During the planning and design phase, any noise generated at the proposed SEZ site is likely to be negligible. However, inappropriate design of the proposed SEZ will impact on how certain receptors (business, educational, hospitality (hotel)) are impacted by service areas (areas where building infrastructure will be placed (eg. Refrigerator condenser units, air-condition units, compressor units, delivery areas etc) within the proposed SEZ.

DIRECT Localised

Long-term Unsure Slightly severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

Mitigation options for proposed industrial areas within the proposed SEZ:

Services areas (areas where building infrastructure will be placed (eg. Refrigerator condenser units, air-condition units, compressor units, delivery areas etc)) should be designed enclosed with a wall. If a receptor (business, educational, hospitality (hotel)) will be implemented directly adjacent to a service area (and the receptor will be double storey or higher) then noisy service area equipment need to be fully enclosed. A single or double brick wall or acoustical screen will suffice.

If feasible, services areas should not face receptors. The above point is specifically relevant for the all proposed receptors (training, educational facility, office/business/retail and hotel).

If ventilation stacks or large fans are required to be placed on the facility walls/facade they must not face any receptors (and within 500m). If stacks are to be placing upwards (skywards) the stacks should be considered with silencers.

Noisy equipment should be situated indoors or be sufficiently enclosed.

Boundary walls between facilities or surrounding entire project footprint must be built to act as a screen.

Any equipment alarms should be placed away from hotel facilities on the eastern façade.

If feasible, night time noisy activities should be limited.

The developer should investigate the use of white-noise generators.

Layout of receptors adjacent to noisy areas:

Receptors near noisy areas should have no bedroom windows facing equipment areas.

LOW NEGATIVE










Receptors that will be in use during the day could have double glazing windows allowing the receptor the option to block out noisy activities.

The developer could consider internal design elements (it should be noted that these costs can be expensive and should not be compulsory on the developer). These include making use of acoustical ceiling tiles and consulting with an indoor acoustical consultant (relevant for internal noise levels due to electrical equipment, internal air-conditioning ducting etc.).

Mitigation measures for the transportation network:

Recommended that no haul routes to and from industrial areas are planned past the hotel.



During the planning and design phase non-compliance with the laws and policies of South Africa as they pertain to the aquatic environment could lead to damage to the aquatic environment, unnecessary delays in construction activities, and potentially criminal cases, based on the severity of the noncompliance, being brought against the proponent and his/her contractors.

DIRECT CUMULATIVE

Study area Short-term Probable Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

All legal matters pertaining to permitting must be completed prior to any construction activity.

In particular, all necessary Water Use Licences must be in order before any construction activities take place within the 1:100 year floodline or within 100m of a watercourse and within 500m of a wetland.

LOW NEGATIVE


During the planning and design phase inappropriate construction scheduling that does not take into account the seasonal requirements of the aquatic environment, e.g. allowing for unimpeded flood events, could lead to short-term (and potentially long-term) impacts on the aquatic environment such as excessive sediment mobilization, etc.

INDIRECT CUMULATIVE

Study area Medium-term Possible Moderately severe LOW NEGATIVE Wherever possible, construction activities should be undertaken during the driest part of the year to minimize downstream sedimentation due to excavation, etc.

When not possible, suitable stream diversion structures (if necessary) must be used to ensure the non-perennial river is not negatively impacted by construction activity.

LOW NEGATIVE


During the planning and design phase the inappropriate design of stormwater structures may result in increased levels of erosion, sedimentation and pollution of the watercourses.

DIRECT CUMULATIVE

Study area Long-term Possible Severe HIGH NEGATIVE During the planning and design phase appropriate stormwater structures must be designed to minimise erosion and sedimentation of watercourses.

MODERATE NEGATIVE

Invasion of alien species

During the planning and design phase, failure to plan for the removal and management of alien vegetation could result in the invasion of alien vegetation in riparian and wetland areas during the construction and operation phase. This would have an adverse impact on the aquatic ecosystem.

INDIRECT CUMULATIVE

Study area Long-term Probable Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

During the planning and design phase a Rehabilitation and Alien Vegetation Management Plan must be designed to reduce the establishment and spread of undesirable alien plant species.

LOW NEGATIVE

Water quality During the planning and design phase failure to plan for monitoring of the quality of discharged/irrigated treated waste water could result in ground/surface water pollution during


Study area, downstream

Long-term Possible Severe HIGH NEGATIVE During the planning and design phase an effective water quality (surface and groundwater) monitoring programme must be developed to ensure that the quality of treated waste water (discharged/irrigated)

LOW NEGATIVE










operation of the WWTW. during operation is suitable.

TOURISM IMPACTS

Accommodation and restaurants

During the planning and design phase, the proposed SEZ and Solar PV Facility will attract project planners and engineers, some being from outside of Upington, who will make use of accommodation and restaurants in Upington.

INDIRECT CUMULATIVE

Municipal Short-term Definite Moderately beneficial SOME BENEFITS No mitigation required. SOME BENEFITS


Increased traffic During the planning and design phase, inadequate planning for traffic within the SEZ could result in traffic congestion during the operation phase.

DIRECT, CUMULATIVE


During the planning and design appropriate planning should take place for the increased traffic to, from and within the SEZ.

The Traffic Impact Study (TIS) must be submitted to the Dawid Kruiper Local Municipality (DKLM) for their perusal with the complete development proposal, and that the DKLM in turn forward the TIS, with their comments, to the South African National Roads Agency Limited (SANRAL) for their perusal.

All final road design drawings will need to be submitted to the relevant road authority officials prior to construction.

Refer to the traffic impact assessment study for recommendations for internal road reticulation, parking and loading facilities, vehicular access onto existing main roads, pedestrian and bicycle access, access control, traffic calming measures, building lines, road reserves and street lighting.

LOW NEGATIVE

VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Visual intrusion During the planning and design phase, the proposed SEZ and design and sighting of the PV arrays could impact on the sense of place of an area and alteration of the landscape character.


Localised Permanent Probable Moderate to slight MODERATE NEGATIVE

All components of the SEZ must take place within the proposed footprint.

MODERATE NEGATIVE


Design of infrastructure for

Site Layout Alternative 1

(sewage infrastructure)


DIRECT, INDIRECT


Long-term Possible Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE







Same as above. DIRECT, INDIRECT


Long-term Possible Severe HIGH NEGATIVE Same as above

It is recommended that the WWTW not be












placed in this position.




Same as above. DIRECT, INDIRECT


Long-term Possible Severe MODERATE NEGATIVE








Impacts associated with the construction phase of the proposed SEZ. ISSUE DESCRIPTION OF IMPACT NATURE OF

IMPACT SPATIAL SCALE

(EXTENT) TEMPORAL SCALE

(DURATION) CERTAINTY SCALE

(LIKELIHOOD) SEVERITY / BENEFICIAL

SCALE SIGNIFICANCE

PRE-MITIGATION MITIGATION MEASURES SIGNIFICANCE POST-

MITIGATION

CONSTRUCTION PHASE

GENERAL IMPACTS

Legislation and policy

compliance


DIRECT CUMULATIVE

Localised Long-term Possible Severe HIGH NEGATIVE All relevant legislation and policy must be complied with during construction.

These should include (but are not restricted to): NEMA, NWA, NFA, Local and District Spatial Development Frameworks, Local Municipal bylaws.

LOW NEGATIVE

Stormwater During the construction phase, inadequate and ineffective provision of stormwater control measures could result in erosion of surrounding soils and sedimentation of nearby watercourses.

DIRECT CUMULATIVE

Study area Long-term Probable Severe HIGH NEGATIVE Appropriate stormwater management structures must be installed during the construction phase.

All stormwater management structures installed must be in line with DWS requirements.

LOW NEGATIVE

Sanitation facilities

During the construction phase inappropriate siting and servicing of sanitation facilities could result in contamination of surface and ground water.

DIRECT Localised Short-term Possible Severe HIGH NEGATIVE Sanitation facilities must NOT be located within 50m of any water resources or water drainage areas.

Sanitation facilities must only be located within the proposed SEZ footprint.

The facilities must be regularly serviced to reduce the risk of surface or groundwater pollution.

The facilities must be firmly secured to the ground.

LOW NEGATIVE


During the construction phase, inappropriate storage, use and disposal of hazardous substances and hazardous waste can lead to contamination of surrounding soil and nearby ground and surface water sources.

DIRECT Localised Medium-term Possible Severe HIGH NEGATIVE All hazardous substances must be placed in secondary impermeable containers 110% the volume of the contents within it. The containers must be on an impermeable concrete surface protected from the ingress of stormwater from surrounding areas.

All hazardous materials must be placed/stored at least 100m away from any watercourse or wetland.

Drip trays must be used for stationary plant and refuelling of construction vehicles.

Spill kits must be provided on site to use in the event of spill or leakage of hazardous substances.

All staff should know procedures to implement should a spillage of hazardous substances occur.

LOW NEGATIVE

Waste management

During construction, poor management of waste during storing, handling and disposal may result in contamination of the surrounding environment. Littering on site may attract vermin and make the construction area aesthetically unappealing.

DIRECT Localised Short-term Possible Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

Ensure there are sufficient containers for collecting waste.

No waste must be buried on site.

Waste must be collected on a regular basis and disposed of at a licensed landfill site.

Regular litter patrols must be implemented.

LOW NEGATIVE



During construction, developing the SEZ will result in the permanent loss of land that is currently informally used as

DIRECT Localised Permanent Definitely Slightly severe LOW NEGATIVE There is other land available for informal grazing in the area

Agricultural potential is considered as low

LOW NEGATIVE










grazing. Development is within the urban edge and will not result in the loss of formal agricultural land

AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Impacts on air quality and dust

control

During construction of the proposed SEZ and solar plant facility, land clearing activities, grading of cleared land surfaces, windblown dust from exposed surfaces, materials handling and vehicle activity on unpaved roads may result in particulate emission generation. Tailpipe emissions from vehicles and construction equipment may result in gaseous emissions.

DIRECT Study area Short-term Probable Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

A stakeholder communications plan must be developed.

Record of all dust and air quality complaints must be kept.

A dust management plan must be developed.

All cleared or exposed surfaces must be dampened down to reduce dust generation.

Dampening of topsoil will reduce the potential for dust generation when tipped onto stockpiles.

LOW NEGATIVE



During construction the clearing of natural vegetation will lead to the permanent loss 440ha of natural scrubland.

DIRECT, INDIRECT,

CUMULATIVE

Study area Permanent Definite Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

Construction activities for each local development project must be limited to the approved designated footprint for that specific development i.e. construction materials, vehicular storage, construction camps etc.

LOW NEGATIVE


DIRECT, INDIRECT,

CUMULATIVE

Study area Permanent Probable Moderately severe HIGH NEGATIVE The impacted areas must be surveyed prior to topsoil removal in order to locate and capture any SCC within the area and relocate them.

All identified SCC must be relocated to similar habitats outside the construction and operational footprint.

Removal of both plants and animals must be undertaken by a professional and qualified specialist.

The contractor’s workers must not poach or trap wild animals.

The contractor’s workers must not harvest natural vegetation.

Any SCC overlooked by Search and Rescue must be reported to the ECO and relocated by a qualified specialist/trained representative

LOW NEGATIVE


DIRECT, INDIRECT,

CUMULATIVE

Study area Permanent Probable Moderately severe HIGH NEGATIVE LOW NEGATIVE


During construction the clearing of natural vegetation creates ‘open’ habitats that will favour the establishment of undesirable alien plant species in areas that are typically very difficult to eradicate and may pose a threat to neighbouring natural ecosystems.

DIRECT, INDIRECT

Localised Medium-term Probable Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

An Alien Management Plan must be developed and implemented during the construction phase to reduce the establishment and spread of undesirable alien plant species. The Alien Management Plan must be approved by the ECO prior to implementation.

Alien plants must be removed from the site through appropriate methods such as hand pulling, application of chemicals, cutting etc. on a regular basis.


LOW NEGATIVE


During construction poor rehabilitation of disturbed areas may lead to the permanent degradation of ecosystems as well as allow invading alien vegetation species to expand.

DIRECT, INDIRECT,

CUMULATIVE

Localised Short-term Probable Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

All impacted areas must be rehabilitated immediately after construction is completed in that local area.

Only topsoil from the immediate area must be used for rehabilitation. If none available

LOW NEGATIVE










alternative methods must be investigated and implemented like hydro-seeding, planting etc. The method must be approved by the ECO prior to commencement.

All impacted areas must be restored as per a Rehabilitation Management Plan.


Impact on ground and

surface water

During the construction phase, construction activities may lead to erosion of site and siltation of surface water features.

DIRECT Regional Short-term Probable Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

Construction should preferably take place during the dry season.

Excavations should be open for as short period as practically possible.

Unpaved areas should be vegetated as soon as possible.

LOW NEGATIVE

During construction phase, there may be oil, grease and diesel spillages from construction vehicles which may impact on ground and surface water.

DIRECT Study area Short-term Probable Moderately severe LOW NEGATIVE Construction vehicles and machines must be maintained properly to ensure that oil spillages are kept at a minimum.

Spill trays must be provided if refuelling of construction vehicles are done on site.

NEGLIGIBLE

During the construction phase there may be flooding of construction camps.

DIRECT Localised Short-term Probable Severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

Construction should take place during the dry season

NEGLIGIBLE

During the construction spillages from any sanitation facilities may pollute ground or surface water.

DIRECT Study area Short-term Probable Moderately severe LOW NEGATIVE The construction camp should be constructed on high ground.

Chemical sanitary facilities must be provided for construction workers. Construction workers should only be allowed to use temporary chemical toilets on the site. Chemical toilets shall not be within close proximity of the drainage system. Frequent maintenance should include the removal without spillages.

NEGLIGIBLE

During construction poor management and storage of chemicals and building materials may result in ground and surface water pollution.

DIRECT Study area Short-term Possible to probable

Moderately severe LOW NEGATIVE Adequate fuel containment facilities to be used during construction phase.

The use of all materials, fuels and chemicals which could potentially leach into underground water must be controlled.

All materials, fuels and chemicals must be stored in a specific and secured area to prevent pollution from spillages and leakages.

No uncontrolled discharges from the construction camp shall be permitted.

Chemical storage areas should be sufficiently contained, and the use of chemicals should be controlled.

NEGLIGIBLE

During construction spillages from fuel facilities may result in ground or surface water pollution.

DIRECT Study area Short-term Probable Severe LOW NEGATIVE Adequate fuel containment facilities to be used during construction phase.

The use of all materials, fuels and chemicals which could potentially leach into underground water must be controlled.

All materials, fuels and chemicals must be stored in a specific and secured area to prevent pollution from spillages and leakages.

NEGLIGIBLE



During the construction phase, digging foundations and trenches into sensitive deposits that are not visible at the surface may involve displacement or destruction

DIRECT

Localised Permanent Probable to Definite

Severe to moderately severe

MODERATE NEGATIVE

The developer or qualified heritage specialist must implement a heritage conservation buffer of at least 100m around the two heritage receptors of medium-low

LOW NEGATIVE










of the two Middle Stone Age sites of medium-low significance and Middle Stone Age site of medium significance. During the construction phase, construction activities may involve displacement or destruction of Contemporary Period sites of low significance. Potential unidentified fossils or heritage features may be uncovered and damaged during construction.

significance and the one heritage receptor of medium significance. Where possible redesign infrastructure to avoid the heritage resources and conservation buffer.









Noise pollution During the construction phase, construction activities associated with sub-soil works (compaction soils, trenching etc), concrete pouring, development of internal roads (excavations and grading by noisy construction vehicles) and carnage required to move large equipment and components will result in noise pollution. During the construction phase, construction activities may need to take place outside of normal working hours which could cause a nuisance to surrounding communities.

DIRECT Study area Short-term Probable Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

Construction activities must be restricted to normal working hours as far as possible.

Receptors proposed for the SEZ (such as business, educational or hospitality facilities) should be implemented after major construction works have been completed. Surrounding buildings to these receptors should be in their finishing phase and not concrete phase where heavy equipment is required.

Good working relationship and communication channels between project representative and potentially sensitive receptor needs to be established to ensure prior notice to work taking place close to them.

LOW NEGATIVE










Refer to the Noise Impact Assessment for more details regarding the mitigation measures.


Influx of Job-seekers

During the construction phase, there may be an increase in conflicts within communities and between local people and outsiders resulting in tension over perceived preferential treatment.

DIRECT, INDIRECT,

CUMULATIVE

Study area Short-term Possible Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

A project steering committee (PSC) consisting of NCEDA, contractor, Community Liaison Officer (CLO), recruitment agency, community leaders, elders, and youth, ward councillors and the ZF Mgcawu DM and DKLM LED departments must be established in order to: o Conduct an audit of the affected

communities in terms of employment capacity.



o Set up a central labour desk where all workers register and only workers registered on the database should be considered for employment.


LOW NEGATIVE

During the construction phase, the influx of job-seekers may result in an increase in social pathologies. Many people fear that newcomers increase the crime level in the area, increase risky sexual behaviour (mainly prostitution) and substance abuse within the area.

DIRECT, INDIRECT,

CUMULATIVE


All construction workers must be clearly identifiable and wear easily recognisable uniforms. They need to carry identification cards issued by the contractor.

The SAPS must have access to construction sites.



The contractor must prevent loitering around the construction camp by providing transport to and from the camp sites.


LOW NEGATIVE

During the construction phase, the influx of job seekers may lead to an increase and spread of HIV/AIDS and other communicable diseases.

DIRECT, INDIRECT,

CUMULATIVE

Study area Long-term Probable Severe HIGH NEGATIVE A Health and Safety Officer must be appointed on site and must comply with the Occupational Health and Safety policies.

A HIV/AIDS, non-discrimination, awareness, prevention and health care support policy must be implemented.



The above program must extend to the

MODERATE NEGATIVE










communities located near the study area.



During the construction phase, influx of job seekers may lead to economic stimulation of and investment into business and enterprise due to an increase in demand for local services

DIRECT, INDIRECT,

CUMULATIVE

Study area Medium-term Probable Moderately severe MODERATE POSITIVE

NCEDA is limited in its capacity to enhance the benefits of this impact, as the development of the communities and town will occur in response to the needs and demands of construction workers. NCEDA can however play a role in facilitating the skills required to recognise the need and respond appropriately.

NCEDA must link the Local and District Municipal LED programmes and local business chambers with small to medium enterprises (including communities) in the area so that a state of “readiness” to optimise economic benefits is achieved. This may involve training in the following sectors: business, tourism, catering etc.

HIGH POSITIVE


During the construction phase, the upgrading of infrastructure may result in the improvement of health and general quality of life for the communities who will benefit from it.

DIRECT, INDIRECT,

CUMULATIVE

Study area Long-term Definite Beneficial MODERATE POSITIVE

No mitigation required. MODERATE POSITIVE

During the construction phase, there may be an increased demand on existing facilities and social services which could impact on health and general quality of life the people in the area.

DIRECT, INDIRECT,

CUMULATIVE

Study area Medium-term Probable Severe HIGH NEGATIVE Service providers associated with DKLM, clinics, schools and the SAPS must be made aware of the potential increase in demand for services, and the anticipated increased pressure to provide services for new households.

This will require the establishment of direct contact between LM, DM, the Department of Health, SAPS, Department of Education, etc. The channels of communication must be established as permanent points of contact throughout the construction phase of the project.

Regular monitoring of schools and clinics must be undertaken in order to determine whether there are sufficient resources. When resources are insufficient, NCEDA must communicate, through established channels, with the relevant departments for assistance.

MODERATE NEGATIVE

During construction, noise and dust generated by construction activities may impact on health and general quality of life of the people in the area.

DIRECT, INDIRECT,

CUMULATIVE


Surrounding communities must have access to a grievance reporting mechanism, e.g. through a project steering committee.

LOW NEGATIVE

During the construction phase, construction of the proposed SEZ may result in disruption in daily living and movement patterns of surrounding communities and road users.

DIRECT, INDIRECT,

CUMULATIVE

Study area Short-term Definite Severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

Disruptions and road closures must be announced throughout the municipal area, and especially in the communities surrounding the construction area.

LOW NEGATIVE











During the construction phase, the SEZ will bring about much needed employment opportunities.

DIRECT, INDIRECT,

CUMULATIVE

Study area

Short-term

Probable

Very severe

HIGH NEGATIVE


Culture and tradition must be considered when planning the division of labour for construction.

Employment must be managed by a recruitment agency/labour desk that uses a selection system that ensures recruitment of semi and unskilled workers from all local impacted communities in accordance with recent government policies related to local procurement. This must ensure a fair and equitable recruitment process.

Where appropriate, employees involved in the construction phase should be incorporated into the permanent maintenance staff for the operational phase; and

Particular attention must be paid to employment opportunities for women and disabled persons.

HIGH POSITIVE


Regional Short-term Possible Very severe HIGH NEGATIVE NCEDA must ensure that the principle of utilising local business resources (suppliers and SMMEs), in accordance with recent government policies related to local procurement, forms part of the procurement specifications.

HIGH POSITIVE

During the construction phase, the construction of the SEZ may result in skills development and capacity building of employed workers.

Study area Medium-term Possible Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

NCEDA must implement a skills development programme which will also include training in business, project management, monitoring and evaluation.

HIGH POSITIVE


Material Stockpiling

During the construction phase, stockpiling of construction materials within 50 m of a watercourse could result in erosion and mobilisation of the materials into the nearby watercourse, resulting in sedimentation and a decrease in water quality and aquatic habitat.

DIRECT, INDIRECT,

CUMULATIVE

Study area, downstream of watercourses

Medium-term Possible Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

During the construction phase no construction material must be stored within 50 m of a watercourse.

Stockpiles should not be placed within 50 m of watercourses.

Stockpiles within 100 m of watercourses must be monitored for erosion and mobilisation of materials towards watercourses. If this is noted by an ECO, suitable cut-off drains or berms must be placed between the stockpile area and the nearest watercourse.

LOW NEGATIVE

Water Quality During the construction phase, accidental contamination of wet concrete (highly alkaline) in the rivers/wetland could result in flash kills of macro-invertebrates and fish species in the vicinity (see appendix A).

DIRECT, CUMULATIVE


During the construction phase no concrete mixing must take place within 50 m of any river bank or the wetland.

A serviced fire extinguisher (to neutralise pH levels if a spill occurs) must be available on site in the event that wet concrete is accidentally spilled into a river.

Refer to Appendix A of the Surface Water and Wetland Assessment for mitigation measures associated with concrete works.

LOW NEGATIVE

During the construction phase, accidental chemical spills or other spills (sewage,

DIRECT, CUMULATIVE

Study area, downstream of

Short-term Possible Severe HIGH NEGATIVE During the construction phase no machinery must be parked overnight within 50 m of the

LOW NEGATIVE










etc.) in the vicinity of the rivers/wetland will result in water pollution, adversely affecting the aquatic ecosystem.

watercourses rivers/wetland.

All stationary machinery must be equipped with a drip tray to retain any oil leaks.

Chemicals used for construction must be stored safely on bunded surfaces in the construction site camp.

Emergency plans must be in place in case of spillages.

No ablution facilities should be located within 50 m of any river or the wetland.

Chemical toilets must be regularly maintained/ serviced to prevent ground or surface water pollution.


During the construction phase the inappropriate routing of stormwater will lead to stream sedimentation, adversely affecting the aquatic environment.

DIRECT Study area, downstream of watercourses

Long-term Probable Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

During the construction phase stormwater must be managed effectively to minimize the ingress of sediment-laden stormwater into the rivers/ wetlands.

LOW NEGATIVE

Wetland vegetation

During the construction phase, the removal of sensitive wetland vegetation may adversely affect the aquatic environment.

DIRECT Study area Long-term Probable Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

During the construction phase sensitive wetland vegetation must not be impacted /removed.

Removal of alien invasive vegetation should be prioritised.

Vehicles and machinery should not encroach into areas outside/surrounding the planned project footprint

LOW NEGATIVE

TOURISM IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Sense of place During the construction phase, the SEZ and Solar PV Facility could detract from the tourists’ experience and sense of place due to the changes in the landscape.

DIRECT Short-term Municipal Probable Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

The footprint of the SEZ and Solar PV Facility must be clearly demarcated and construction activities must be restricted to this area.

LOW NEGATIVE


The proposed SEZ and Solar PV Facility will attract construction workers and engineers, some being from outside of Upington, who will make use of accommodation and restaurants in Upington during the Construction Phase.

INDIRECT Short-term Municipal Definite Moderately beneficial SOME BENEFITS No mitigation required. SOME BENEFITS

Dust Generation The construction of the SEZ and Solar PV Facility will generate dust which could detract from tourism attractions and facilities.

DRIECT Short-term Study area Unlikely Slight LOW NEGATIVE No mitigation. The high tourism area in Upington is situated more than 1.5km from the study area and should not be impacted by dust generation during the Construction Phase.

LOW NEGATIVE

Noise pollution The construction of the SEZ and Solar PV Facility could produce noise that could become a nuisance to tourist attractions and facilities in proximity to the site.

DIRECT Short-term Study area Unlikely Slight LOW NEGATIVE No mitigation. The high tourism area in Upington is situated more than 1.5km from the study area and should not be impacted by noise pollution during the Construction Phase.

LOW NEGATIVE

Traffic delays The increase in the use of roads by heavy vehicles could lead to delays in the travel of tourists near the site; including National Route N10 between the Upington International Airport and Upington.

DIRECT Short-term Study area Possible Moderately severe LOW NEGATIVE No mitigation required. LOW NEGATIVE


Traffic volume During the construction phase there will be an increase in traffic along existing

DIRECT Study area Medium-term Probable Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

During the construction phase local residents should be made aware of the presence of

LOW NEGATIVE










roads that border the proposed SEZ as well as within the general area of Upington. This may result in an increase in traffic congestion within the site area

construction vehicles by making use of high-visibility signage.

Whenever possible construction vehicles should be limited to low-volume periods.

Road condition should be recorded prior to construction vehicles making use of the roads and any damage caused by construction vehicles should be repaired immediately.

VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Visual intrusion During the construction phase construction activity and the presence and use of large machinery on site and along access roads will result in a visual disturbance of the landscape. Storage of materials and general waste on site is generally aesthetical unappealing.

DIRECT CUMULATIVE

Localised Short-term Probable Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

All construction activity should take place during daylight working hours (i.e. 7 – 5pm).

All construction activity and equipment must be limited to the demarcated areas.

Good housekeeping measures must be implemented throughout the construction phase.

LOW NEGATIVE



Impacts associated with the operational phase of the proposed SEZ. ISSUE DESCRIPTION OF IMPACT NATURE OF





SCALE SIGNIFICANCE


MITIGATION

OPERATION PHASE

GENERAL IMPACTS

Legislation and policy

compliance


DIRECT CUMULATIVE

Localised Long-term Possible Severe HIGH NEGATIVE The proponent must ensure that the operation of the SEZ is in line with relevant legislations and policies.

These should include (but are not restricted to): NEMA, NWA, NFA, Local and District Spatial Development Frameworks, Local Municipal bylaws.

LOW NEGATIVE


DIRECT CUMULATIVE

Study area Long-term Possible Severe HIGH NEGATIVE All stormwater management measures and infrastructure must be properly maintained and monitored.

If stormwater measures that have been put in place prove to be inadequate then new or additional stormwater infrastructure and measures must be put in place.

LOW NEGATIVE

Sanitation facilities

During the operation phase in adequate sanitation facilities or infrastructure failure as well as lack of maintenance of systems may result in sewage spills or leaks which could contaminate the surrounding soil, surface and ground water.

DIRECT Localised Medium-term Possible Severe HIGH NEGATIVE All sanitation infrastructure must be maintained and regularly inspected and monitored to ensure that there are no leakages.

Any leaks, spillages and failure of infrastructure must be fixed immediately and any contaminated areas remediated immediately.

LOW NEGATIVE


During the operation phase, inappropriate storage, use and disposal of hazardous substances and hazardous waste can lead to contamination of surrounding soil and nearby ground and surface water sources.

DIRECT Localised Long-term Possible Severe HIGH NEGATIVE All hazardous substances must be placed in secondary impermeable containers 110% the volume of the contents within it. The containers must be on an impermeable concrete surface protected from the ingress of stormwater from surrounding areas.

No hazardous substances must be placed outside of the proposed SEZ footprint.

All businesses storing, handling or disposal of hazardous waste must have spill kits kept on site.

All staff should know procedures to implement should a spillage of hazardous substances occur.

LOW NEGATIVE

Waste management

During the operation phase, poor management of waste during storing, handling and disposal may result in contamination of the surrounding environment. Littering on site may attract vermin and make the construction area aesthetically unappealing.

DIRECT Localised Medium-term Possible Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

During the operational phase a waste management plan must be implemented to ensure the appropriate storage, handling and disposal of waste generated at the proposed SEZ.

Central waste collection points should be located throughout the SEZ.

Re-use and recycling of waste should be promoted.

LOW NEGATIVE

AIR IMPACTS

Impacts on air quality and dust

control

During the operation phase, industries within the SEZ may cause air pollution with the amount, type and severity depending on the type of industry (high risk, heavy, medium or light).


Generic buffer zones for the type of industry must be implemented which are 300m for heavy industry, 150m for medium industry and 50m for light industry.

Recommended separation distance between

LOW NEGATIVE










The increase of workers and people driving vehicles to and from and within the SEZ may increase vehicle emissions within the general area.

industrial and sensitive land uses has been provided in the Air Impact Assessment and should be implemented once the type of industry becomes known.

The proposed residential area east of the proposed SEZ may need to be revised due to its close proximity to the heavy industrial area planned to the north of the proposed SEZ.

Appropriate emergency preparedness and prevention plans as well as liaison with local fire and emergency services must be put in place.

A number of good environmental practices for industrial estates are stipulated in the Air Quality Impact Assessment.

It is recommended that once specific industries have been identified for the SEZ, further consideration of the likely nature and extent of their environmental impacts be established from a simple dispersion modelling exercise which may show that the indicative buffer distance is still acceptable.

The specific industries, which may cause adverse impacts to air quality, may be required to submit an EIA report with an EMP including mitigation measures on air pollution

Refer to the detailed mitigation measures described in the Air Quality Impact Assessment.



During the operation phase the lack of an effective alien vegetation management plan may lead to the large scale alien plant invasion.

DIRECT, INDIRECT,

CUMULATIVE

Localised Long-term Probable Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

An Alien Management Plan must be developed and implemented during the operational phase to reduce the establishment and spread of undesirable alien plant species. The Alien Management Plan must be approved by the ECO prior to implementation.


LOW NEGATIVE


Impact on ground and

surface water

During the operation phase, spillages and leakages from process water containers and tanks may occur and contaminate surrounding ground or surface water.

DIRECT Localised Long-term Probable Severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

The use of all detergents, oil, fuels and chemicals which could potentially leach into underground water must be controlled.

The dirty water system should be discharged into a licensed holding facility and not into any streams, rivers, or open fields. This facility will be designed accordingly and during the construction phase.

Chemical storage areas should be sufficiently contained, and the use of chemicals should be controlled.

Storm water should be redirected around the

LOW NEGATIVE










site. Storm water can be detrimental due the gradient op the topography. High Elevation in the West and low Elevation in the east towards the proposed PV solar plant.

Rainwater falling on the site should be contained and included in a dirty water system.

During the operation phase, there may be spillages from underground holding facilities which may contaminate ground or surface water.

DIRECT Localised Long-term Probable Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

Underground storage facilities and tanks should be properly installed and maintained to prevent possible leakage into ground. Monitoring electronic gauges should be employed below and above ground to detect any leakages and seepage.

The transfer of fluids to and from the underground facilities should be accounted for and metered, for the early detection of leakages.

LOW NEGATIVE



During the operation phase, digging foundations and trenches into sensitive deposits that are not visible at the surface may involve displacement or destruction of Middle Stone Age sites of medium-low to medium significance. During the operational phase, displacement or destruction of Contemporary Period sites of low significance may occur. During the operation phase, potential unidentified fossils or heritage features may be uncovered and damaged.

DIRECT

Localised Permanent Probable to Definite

Severe to moderately severe

MODERATE NEGATIVE

The developer or qualified heritage specialist must implement a heritage conservation buffer of at least 100m around the two heritage receptors of medium-low significance and the one heritage receptor of medium significance. Where possible redesign infrastructure to avoid the heritage resources and conservation buffer.







LOW NEGATIVE












Noise pollution During the operation phase, the different types of industries will produce different sound pressure levels. The light industrial zones may cause only levels of noise. the medium industry will likely cause moderate to high noise generating capacities associate with heavy vehicles such as ADT, conveyor belts units, drive train units and pressing/moulding units. The heavy industry require noisy equipment with associated high noise levels. During the operation phase there may be an increase in noise levels in the general area as a result of increase traffic volume and speeds and types of vehicles required for each industry (such as trucks).

DIRECT, INDIRECT,

CUMULATIVE

Study area Long-term Probable Moderately severe LOW NEGATIVE Pre-planning phase mitigation options must be adhered to

An acoustical measurement and audit programme is recommended to be conducted during the first year of operations. The measurement report will enable the developer to ensure mitigation options selected will be successful.

Construction activities must be restricted to normal working hours as far as possible.

Receptors proposed for the SEZ (such as business, educational or hospitality facilities) should be implemented after major construction works have been completed. Surrounding buildings to these receptors should be in their finishing phase and not concrete phase where heavy equipment is required.

Good working relationship and communication channels between project representative and potentially sensitive receptor needs to be established to ensure prior notice to work taking place close to them.

Refer to the Noise Impact Assessment for more details regarding the mitigation measures.

NEGLIGIBLE


Influx of Job-seekers

During the operation phase, there may be an increase in conflicts within communities and between local people and outsiders resulting in tension over perceived preferential treatment.

DIRECT, INDIRECT,

CUMULATIVE

Study area Long-term Possible Slightly severe LOW NEGATIVE A project steering committee (PSC) consisting of NCEDA, contractor, Community Liaison Officer (CLO), recruitment agency, community leaders, elders, and youth, ward councillors and the ZF Mgcawu DM and DKLM LED departments must be established in order to: o Conduct an audit of the affected

communities in terms of employment capacity.



o Set up a central labour desk where all workers register and only workers registered on the database should be considered for employment.


LOW NEGATIVE

During the operation phase, the influx of DIRECT, Study area Long-term Possible Moderately severe MODERATE The SAPS must have access to the proposed LOW NEGATIVE










job-seekers may result in an increase in social pathologies. Many people fear that newcomers increase the crime level in the area, increase risky sexual behaviour (mainly prostitution) and substance abuse within the area.

INDIRECT, CUMULATIVE

NEGATIVE SEZ.




During the operation phase, the influx of job seekers may lead to an increase and spread of HIV/AIDS and other communicable diseases.

DIRECT, INDIRECT,

CUMULATIVE

Study area Long-term Possible Slightly severe LOW NEGATIVE A HIV/AIDS, non-discrimination, awareness, prevention and health care support policy must be implemented.



The above program must extend to the communities located near the study area.



LOW NEGATIVE


During the operation phase, the upgrading of infrastructure may result in the improvement of health and general quality of life for the communities who will benefit from it.

DIRECT, INDIRECT,

CUMULATIVE

Study area Long-term Definite Beneficial MODERATE POSITIVE

No mitigation required. MODERATE POSITIVE

During the operation phase, there may be an increased demand on existing facilities and social services which could impact on health and general quality of life the people in the area.

DIRECT, INDIRECT,

CUMULATIVE

Study area Short-term Possible Slightly severe LOW NEGATIVE Service providers associated with DKLM, clinics, schools and the SAPS must be made aware of the potential increase in demand for services, and the anticipated increased pressure to provide services for new households.

This will require the establishment of direct contact between LM, DM, the Department of Health, SAPS, Department of Education, etc. The channels of communication must be established as permanent points of contact throughout the operation phase of the project.

Regular monitoring of schools and clinics must be undertaken in order to determine whether there are sufficient resources. When resources are insufficient, NCEDA must communicate, through established channels, with the relevant departments for assistance.

LOW NEGATIVE

During operation, noise and dust generated by construction activities may impact on health and general quality of life of the people in the area.

DIRECT, INDIRECT,

CUMULATIVE

Study area Long-term Possible Slightly severe LOW NEGATIVE Surrounding communities must have access to a grievance reporting mechanism.

LOW NEGATIVE

During the operation phase, construction DIRECT, Study area Long-term Possible Slightly severe LOW NEGATIVE Disruptions and road closures must be LOW NEGATIVE










of the proposed SEZ may result in disruption in daily living and movement patterns of surrounding communities and road users.


announced throughout the municipal area, and especially in the communities surrounding the propose SEZ.


During the operation phase, the SEZ will bring about much needed employment opportunities.

DIRECT, INDIRECT,

CUMULATIVE

Study area

Long-term

Possible

Slightly beneficial

LOW NEGATIVE


Employment must be managed by a recruitment agency/labour desk that uses a selection system that ensures recruitment of semi and unskilled workers from all local impacted communities in accordance with recent government policies related to local procurement. This must ensure a fair and equitable recruitment process.

Where appropriate, employees involved in the construction phase should be incorporated into the permanent maintenance staff for the operational phase; and

Particular attention must be paid to employment opportunities for women and disabled persons.

LOW POSITIVE

During the operation phase, the buying power of people living in the area will increase due to increased individual and household income. This will increase the demand for goods and services, which presents an opportunity for local businesses to diversify and expand.

DIRECT, INDIRECT,

CUMULATIVE

Regional Long-term Possible Slightly beneficial LOW POSITIVE NCEDA must ensure that the principle of utilising local business resources (suppliers and SMMEs), in accordance with recent government policies related to local procurement, forms part of the procurement specifications.

MODERATE POSITIVE

During the operation phase, the construction of the SEZ may result in skills development and capacity building of employed workers.

DIRECT, INDIRECT,

CUMULATIVE

Regional Long-term Possible Slightly beneficial MODERATE NEGATIVE

NCEDA must implement a skills development programme which will also include training in business, project management, monitoring and evaluation.

MODERATE POSITIVE

During the operation phase, the proposed SEZ may provide real significant economic opportunity in terms of spin-off project and investment opportunities. This includes the consideration of industrial sectors such as renewable energy related manufacturing, assembly and support services in support of South Africa’s renewable energy strategy.


Regional Long-term Possible Beneficial MODERATE POSITIVE

NCEDA is limited in terms of their input regarding the spin-off business opportunities as these depend on investor interest and market demand; however they play a key role in permitting sectors within the SEZ. NCEDA should therefore, in their consideration of industrial sectors, consider the benefit to local communities and ensure that equitable benefits are realised and readily facilitate sectors that will benefit the communities and region at large.

HIGH POSITIVE


Stormwater runoff

During the operation phase stormwater infrastructure might not be adequate or effective and may result in soil erosion and sedimentation of watercourses.

DIRECT, CUMULATIVE

Localised, downstream

Long-term Possible Severe HIGH NEGATIVE During the operation phase, stormwater management measures such as attenuation structures, channels, etc. must be properly maintained and monitored.

If the stormwater management measures put in place is deemed insufficient, a qualified engineer must be approached to assist with additional storm water attenuation mechanisms and remediation.

LOW NEGATIVE

Maintenance of sewage

During the operational phase if the sewage infrastructure (WWTW, pump

INDIRECT CUMULATIVE


During the operation phase sewage infrastructure must be maintained and

LOW NEGATIVE










infrastructure stations, pipelines) is not regularly maintained and checked for leaks or leaks are not repaired timeously this could lead to sewage polluting the aquatic environment.

pipelines checked for leaks.

If leaks are identified or reported by the public, immediate actions must be taken to repair these leaks.

Water quality

During the operational phase the re-use of treated waste water (in the SEZ and for irrigation) that is of a poor quality could result in ground and surface water pollution.

DIRECT, INDIRECT

Study area, Long-term Possible Severe HIGH NEGATIVE During the operation phase the quality of treated waste water must be continuously monitored.

The use of treated waste water for irrigation must conform to guidelines provided in the Department of Health’s publication – Guide: Permissible Utilisation and Disposal of Treated Sewage Effluent.

LOW NEGATIVE


DIRECT, INDIRECT


Long-term Possible Severe HIGH NEGATIVE During the operation phase sewage infrastructure must be regularly monitored for leaks. If any leaks or spills occur immediate actions must be taken to fix the leaks and remedy the spill.

It is recommended that the position of the WWTW in the sewage alternative 2 be reviewed and the WWTW be moved further away from the drainage system and wetland.

LOW NEGATIVE


Sense of place During the operation phase, the SEZ and Solar PV Facility could detract from the tourists’ experience and sense of place due to the changes in the landscape.

DIRECT Long-term Municipal Probable Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

The Solar PV Facility must be maintained as to prevent the growth of alien vegetation and to ensure that litter does not accumulate near the facility. Indigenous vegetation should be used to revegetate the site where possible.

LOW NEGATIVE

During the operation phase, the SEZ and Solar PV Facility could attract tourists and improve their experience and sense of place.

DIRECT Long-term Municipal Probable Moderately beneficial SOME BENEFITS Educational tours of the Solar PV Facility should be considered to attract tourists and educate scholars and other interested individuals.

BENEFICIAL


During the operation phase, the SEZ and Solar PV Facility will attract individuals, from outside of Upington, who will make use of accommodation and restaurants in Upington.

INDIRECT Medium-term Municipal Definite Beneficial BENEFICIAL No mitigation required. BENEFICIAL


Traffic volume During the operation phase there will be an increase in traffic along existing roads that border the proposed SEZ as well as within the general area of Upington. This may result in an increase in traffic congestion, collisions and a reduction in operation capacity.


During the operation phase regular road maintenance must take place.

Appropriate pedestrian accommodation measures must be in place.

LOW NEGATIVE



No-go impacts associated with the proposed SEZ. ISSUE DESCRIPTION OF IMPACT NATURE OF





SCALE SIGNIFICANCE


MITIGATION

NO-GO ALTERNATIVE



The no-go option entails no development which will result in no loss of informal agricultural land.

DIRECT Study area Long-term Definite Slightly beneficial FEW BENEFITS No mitigation FEW BENEFITS

SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Loss of employment opportunities

The no-go option entails no development and would not create any employment opportunities.

DIRECT Municipal Short-term Definite Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

No mitigation. MODERATE NEGATIVE

Loss of potential economic

opportunities and growth

The no-go option entails no development and would not result in any economic or growth opportunities.

DIRECT Municipal Long-term Definite Moderately severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

No mitigation. MODERATE NEGATIVE

Socio-economic benefits

If the project does not proceed then this will hinder economic development in the area, and a loss in job opportunities which deprives the local people of improved quality of life

INDIRECT Study Area Long-term Definite Severe HIGH NEGATIVE No mitigation HIGH NEGATIVE


Loss of an opportunity to

create a tourism attraction

The no-go option entails no development and would result in the loss of an opportunity to potentially create a tourism attraction.

DIRECT, INDIRECT

Municipal Medium-term Possible Slight LOW NEGATIVE LOW NEGATIVE



14.3 Appendix C: Specialist Volumes





14.4 Appendix D: Environmental Management Programme

Documents

REVISIONS TRACKING TABLE - CESNET Special Economic Zone SEZ...Figure 3.18: A solar array and group station showing the typical layout of the structures (Suntech Power Holdings Co.,