Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report i
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berth 203 to 205, Pier 2, Container Terminal, Port of
Durban
FINAL SCOPING REPORT
May 2012 [NEAS REF NO: DEA/EIA/0000988/2012
DEA REF NO: 14/12/16/3/3/2/275]
P.O. BOX 1673
SUNNINGHILL
2157
147 Bram Fischer Drive
FERNDALE
2194
Tel: 011 781 1730
Fax: 011 781 1731
Email: [email protected]
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report ii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PROJECT BACKGROUND AND MOTIVATION
The Port of Durban is the gateway port in the South African ports system which plays an
important role in facilitating the import and export needs for much of South Africa. The
existing Blockwork Quay wall structure along Pier 2 Berth 203 to 205 was designed in the
1970s, to support dockside cranes with a lifting capacity of 4 tonnes and a water depth of
-12.8m Chart Datum Port (CDP). This allowed for the safe berthing of vessels with a fully
laden draft (vertical distance between the waterline and the bottom of the hull) not greater
than -11.8m CDP. At present the existing quay wall structure is operated beyond its
original design parameters. Recent studies have concluded that the existing quay walls
do not meet the minimum Eurocode 7 Safety Standards and that there is a risk of
potential quay wall failure (PRDW, 2011).
In addition, vessel sizes have increased since the original terminal was constructed and
Berth 203 to 205 cannot therefore safely accommodate fully laden new generation
container vessels due to insufficient water depth at these berths. At present these vessels
enter and exit the Port partially laden and during the high tide window. This is an unsafe
operating condition and the risk exists that vessels could run aground. Transnet National
Ports Authority (TNPA) has proposed the deepening, lengthening and widening of Berth
203 to 205 in order to improve the safety of the berths as well as to improve the efficiency
of the Port.
The proposed upgrade would include the following activities:
1. The westward lengthening of Berth 205 by 170m;
2. The eastward lengthening of Berth 203 by 100m;
3. The seaward widening of Berths 203 to 205 by 50m;
4. The deepening of the berth channel, approach channel and vessel turning basin
from the current -12.8m CDP to -16.5m CDP;
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report iii
5. Three technical options will be considered namely, the Deck on Pile option, Sheet
Pile option and the Caisson option. For the Caisson option, a trench will need to be
excavated to -19m CDP;
6. The precasting of beams; storage of sheet piles or construction of caissons (for the
Deck on Pile, Sheet Pile and Caisson option respectively) would take place at
Bayhead Lot 10;
7. The offshore disposal of dredge material;
8. The offshore sand winning for infill material; and
9. The installation of new Ship to Shore (STS) cranes and associated infrastructure.
Nemai Consulting was appointed by TNPA to undertake the requisite Environmental
Authorisation Process for the Proposed Berth 203 to 205 upgrade. The proposed
development triggers activities listed in Government Notices No. R. 544, R. 545 and R.
546 dated 18 June 2010 in Government Gazette No. 33306. Hence a full Scoping/EIA
study as per the August 2010 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations
promulgated in terms of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107
of 1998) is necessary.
SCOPING AND EIA PROCESS
According to DEAT (2002), scoping is typically divided into three phases, namely:
Planning the scoping procedure;
A process of stakeholder engagement to identify the key issues; and
Reporting on the Terms of Reference (ToR) for the next Phase of the assessment.
The purpose of the Draft Scoping Report is as follows:
To describe the need and desirability for the proposed upgrade of Berths 203 to
205;
To describe how the proposed project will be executed;
To provide a description of the receiving environment that could be affected by the
proposed project;
To explain the Scoping and EIA processes;
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report iv
To describe the Public Participation Process that will occur as part of the Scoping
Phase;
To provide a description of the legislation that was considered; and
To present a Plan of Study for the pending EIA Phase of the project.
The Scoping Phase allows Interested and Affected Parties (I&APs) the opportunity to
comment on the overall environmental assessment approach and environmental issues.
These comments help to focus the efforts from technical specialists during the
subsequent Environmental Impact Assessment Phase.
The Draft Scoping report aimed to provide information on the background of the project,
the Scoping and EIA process, the project and activities, the receiving environment as well
as relevant legislation. Pertinent environmental issues and a Plan of Study for the EIA
phase was also provided. Registered I&APs were granted an opportunity to review and
comment on the Draft Scoping report in accordance with Regulation 56 (1) of
Government Notice No. R. 543 of 18 June 2010, Government Gazette No. 33306. The
public review period was between 09 March 2012 and 30 April 2012.
Comments received during the Public review process have been used to update the
Comments and Response Report, I&AP database. Moreover, some comments received
warranted the addition of new Specialist Studies. Due to the substantive nature of the
comments received, registered I&APs were granted a 2nd period of review of the final
Scoping Report between 25 May 2012 and 01 June 2012 in order to ensure that all
comments had been captured. The Final Scoping report will then be submitted to the
Department of Environmental Affairs for review on 4 June 2012.
The potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed project were identified
during the Scoping Phase through an appraisal of the following:
Proposed footprint of the project infrastructure and components, which included a
desktop evaluation with a Geographical Information System (GIS) and aerial
photography, as well as site investigations;
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report v
Activities associated with the project life-cycle (i.e. pre-construction, construction,
operation and decommissioning);
Nature and profile of the receiving environment and potential sensitive environmental
features and attributes;
Input received during the public participation process from I&APs; and
Legal and policy context.
PROJECT LOCATION
The project is located in eThekwini Municipality in the Port of Durban. The project
footprint includes the following:
The Current Pier 2 Berth 203 to 205;
170m west of Berth 205;
100m east of Berth 203;
50m seawards of the current quay wall for the widening of the Berths;
The dredge footprint including the berth channel, approach channel and turning
basin;
The excavation trench for the new quay wall (Caisson option only);
Bayhead Lot 10 for the construction of the caissons; precasting of elements for the
Deck On Pile option or storage of steel sheet piles for the Sheet Pile Option,
depending on which is the preferred option;
The offshore disposal site; and
The offshore sand winning site.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Port of Durban plays an important role in facilitating the import and export needs for
much of South Africa. The total cargo revenue at the Port of Durban is made up
predominately from containerised cargo. However, there is a growing concern by the
shipping industry that the Port of Durban cannot safely accommodate larger vessels with
a deeper draft.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report vi
The existing Blockwork Quay wall structure along Pier 2 Berth 203 to 205 was designed
in the 1970s and is presently operating beyond its original design limitations. Recent
studies have concluded that the existing quay walls do not meet the minimum Eurocode 7
Safety Standards and that there is a risk of potential quay wall failure (PRDW, 2011). The
key focus of the Port is to ensure safe, orderly and efficient port operations as indicated in
the National Ports Act, 2005 (Act No. 12 of 2005). In order to meet this obligation, the
proposed project is considered necessary.
In addition, vessel sizes have increased since the original terminal was constructed and
Berth 203 to 205 cannot therefore safely accommodate fully laden new generation
container vessels due to insufficient water depth at these berths. At present these vessels
enter and exit the Port partially laden and during the high tide window. This is an unsafe
operating condition and the risk exists that vessels could run aground. TNPA has
proposed the deepening, lengthening and widening of Berth 203 to 205 in order to
improve the safety of the berths as well as to improve the efficiency of the Port.
Details of the technology alternatives are detailed in Chapter 11 of the Draft Scoping
Report. As per Government Notice R. 543 (EIA Regulations, 2010), all alternatives will be
assessed equally.
It is important to note that no location alternatives will be assessed as the unsafe quay
walls are limited to Berths 203 to 205. Instead, three technological alternatives will be
assessed, namely:
1. Caisson Quay Wall;
2. Sheet Pile Quay Wall; and
3. Deck-On-Pile Quay Wall.
The proposed project involves:
The lengthening of Berth 203 by 100m eastwards;
The lengthening of Berth 205 by 170m westwards;
The widening of Berths 203 to 205 by 50m seawards;
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report vii
The deepening of the Berth channel, turning basin and approach channel to
-16.5m CDP;
The deepening of the new berth trench to-19m CDP (for the Caisson option only);
The construction of Caissons; or storage of Steel Sheet Piles or Precasting of
Concrete Piles for the Caisson, Sheet Pile and Deck on Pile options, respectively
at Bayhead Lot 10;
The offshore disposal of the dredge spoil material; and
The offshore sand winning for infill material.
PROFILE OF THE RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT
The Final Scoping Report provides a general description of the status quo of the
receiving environment in the project area. This serves to provide the context within which
the Scoping exercise was conducted. It also allows for an appreciation of sensitive
environmental features and possible receptors of the effects of the proposed project. The
study area includes the entire footprint of the project components and offshore sand
winning and offshore disposal areas.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
The Scoping Report provides a full account of the public participation process that was
followed for the Scoping phase for the proposed Berth 203 to 205 expansion.
The issues raised by I&APs during Scoping, to a large extent, determine and guide the
investigations during the EIA phase. The Comments and Response Report, which
summarises the salient issues raised by I&APs (during meetings and in correspondence
received) and the project team’s response to these matters, is contained in the Scoping
Report.
The issues raised by I&APs during Scoping, as contained in the Comments and
Response Report, were grouped into the following main categories:
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report viii
o 1999 RoD o Alignment with Transnet
Development Plans
o Water Use o Durban Bay draft Environmental
Management Plan
o Services o Alternatives
o Impacts on Central Sandbank o Environmental Process
o Impacts on Little Lagoon o Mitigation Measures and Offsets
o Impacts on the Durban Bay
Estuary
o Specialist Studies
o Impact on the Bayhead
Mangroves
o Socio-Economic Impacts
o Requests for Information o Traffic and Road Maintenance
o Offshore Borrow areas o Waste Management
o Concerns regarding modelling of
impacts
o General
o Dredging and Offshore dredge
disposal
o Climate Change
The figure to follow outlines the public participation process for the Scoping phase
(current) as well as the Environmental Impact Assessment phase (pending).
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report ix
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report x
SCOPING LEVEL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
In accordance with the purpose of the Scoping exercise as part of the overall
environmental assessment, the Scoping Report identifies potentially significant
environmental issues for further consideration and prioritisation during the EIA stage. This
allows for a more efficient and focused impact assessment in the ensuing EIA Phase,
where the analysis is largely limited to significant issues and reasonable alternatives. In
addition, a methodology to quantitatively assess the potential impacts is also provided,
which will be employed during the EIA Phase. The following features are discussed on a
qualitative level:
Land Use
Climate
Geology & Soils
Port Layout & Bathymetry
Recreational Users
Hydrodynamic Functioning
Water and Sediment Quality
Estuarine Hydrology
Estuarine Biota
Estuarine Sensitivity and
Functioning and Ecosystem
Services
Rivers
Sensitive Areas: the Little Lagoon
Sensitive Areas: Bayhead Natural
Heritage Site- Mangroves
Socio-Economic Environment
Air Quality
Noise
Maritime Archaeology and
Cultural Features
Infrastructure
Services: Storm Water
Services: Electricity
Services: Transportation network
Tourism
Offshore Dredge Disposal
Offshore Sand winning
Pertinent environmental issues, which will receive specific attention during the EIA phase,
are tabulated below. Please note that Specialist studies which have been underlined
have been added after comments from I&APs.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xi
Environmental Factor
Potential Issues / Impacts Proposed Assessment and/or
Management
Geology and Soil Sourcing of dredge material for infill purposes from Offshore Sand winning;
Physical impacts of dredging on offshore sand winning site;
Dredging of berth channel, approach channel and turning basin; and
Shoreline erosion due to offshore sand winning.
Geotechnical Study;
Sediment and Chemical Analysis of Dredge Material;
Shoreline Stability Study – Offshore Sand Winning; and
EMP;
Port Layout and Bathymetry
Change in Bathymetry through deepening; and
Possible increase in seiches.
Wave Energy Analysis
Wave Energy Analysis on Central Sandbank
Recreational User’s Impacts of increases in seiches on moored boats in the Marinas;
Impact of Dredging on Water Quality;
Impact on Expansion of Berth 205 onto the Central Sandbank;
Loss of vegetation of conservation significance; and
Impact on subsistence fishing opportunities.
Wave Energy Analysis;
Wave Energy Analysis on Central Sandbank;
Sediment Plume Analysis
Turbidity Study;
Sediment and Chemical Analysis of Dredge Material;
Estuarine/Marine Biodiversity Study;
Ecological Impact on Central Sandbank;
Local Economic Impact Study; and
EMP.
Hydrodynamic Functioning
Impacts of deepening on seiches, tides, waves etc.; and
Impacts of expansion on seiches, tides, waves etc.
Wave Energy Analysis;
Wave Energy Analysis on Central Sandbank; and
EMP.
Water and Sediment Quality
Impact of dredging on water quality in the Port; and
Impact of dredging on water quality at the Offshore disposal site.
Sediment Plume Analysis
Turbidity Study;
Sediment and Chemical Analysis of Dredge Material; and
EMP.
Estuarine Biota Impact of loss of tidal habitat on waterbirds;
Impacts of loss of tidal and sub tidal habitat on fish and crustaceans;
Impacts of loss of open water/ deepwater habitat on fish species;
Impact of dredging on microalgae;
Impacts related to increased turbidity of water;
Impact of dredging on benthic organisms; and
Impacts of dredging on water quality and related impacts on benthic organisms, fish, crustaceans and water birds
Sediment and Chemical Analysis of Dredge Material
Estuarine and Marine Biodiversity Assessment;
Ecological Impact on Central Sandbank;
Avifauna Impact Assessment; and
EMP.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xii
Environmental Factor
Potential Issues / Impacts Proposed Assessment and/or
Management
Estuarine Sensitivity and Functioning and Ecosystem goods and services
Decreased functioning of the Durban Bay Estuary; and
Loss of Ecosystem Goods and Services.
Estuarine and Marine Biodiversity Assessment;
Ecological Impact on Central Sandbank
Avifauna Impact Assessment;
Local Economic Study; and
EMP.
Sensitive Areas- Little Lagoon
Indirect impacts related to increased seiches, increased sedimentation, proximity to construction activities on the Little Lagoon.
Wave Energy Analysis;
Wave Energy Analysis on the Central Sandbank;
Estuarine and Marine Biodiversity Assessment;
Assessment of Indirect Impacts on the Little Lagoon; and
EMP.
Sensitive Areas- Central Sandbank
Impact on the habitat and functioning of the Central Sandbank.
Wave Energy Analysis on Central Sandbank;
Ecological Assessment of Impacts on the Central Sandbank.
Maritime Archaeological and Cultural Features
Impact on heritage resources Maritime Archaeology Heritage Impact Assessment; and
EMP.
Offshore Disposal Site
Smothering of benthic community at offshore disposal site;
Change in sediment type at offshore disposal site; and
Change in water quality at offshore disposal site.
Wave Energy Analysis;
Sediment and Chemical Analysis of Dredge Material;
Turbidity Study;
Bathymetric Survey;
Sediment Plume Analysis; and
EMP.
Offshore Sand Winning Site
Physical impacts of dredging on offshore sand winning site;
Impacts of dredging on water quality and related impacts on benthic organisms, fish, crustaceans and water birds; and
Potential for Shoreline erosion due to change in sea floor bathymetry and offshore sand winning site.
Wave Energy Analysis;
Turbidity Study;
Bathymetry Survey;
Estuarine and Marine Biodiversity Assessment;
Sediment Plume Modelling; and
Shoreline Stability Study.
Transportation Increase in construction related traffic; and
Increase in efficiency of Berths 203 to 205 leading to more traffic.
Current Traffic Management Plan between eThekwini Municipality and Transnet; and
EMP.
Tourism Impacts of increased sedimentation on beach users and uShaka Marine World; and
Impacts of shoreline erosion or accretion on beach users and uShaka Marine World.
Sediment Plume Modelling of offshore disposal;
Turbidity Study;
Wave Energy Analysis
Shoreline Stability Study; and
EMP.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xiii
PLAN OF STUDY FOR EIA
The Scoping Report is concluded with a Plan of Study, which explains the approach to be
adopted to conduct the EIA for the proposed Berth upgrade in accordance with the
following pertinent tasks and considerations:
Key environmental issues identified during the Scoping Phase to be investigated
further; and
Specialist studies to be undertaken, which include:
1. Estuarine/Marine Ecology Assessment;
2. Avifauna Impact Assessment;
3. Marine Archaeology Assessment;
4. Local Economic Impact Assessment;
5. Sediment and Chemical Analysis of Dredge Material;
6. Ecological Impact on Central Sandbank Study;
7. Assessment of Indirect and Direct Impacts on the Little Lagoon;
8. Sediment Plume Analysis (Internal and External)- Comparison of type of dredging;
9. Shoreline Stability – Offshore Sand Winning Site;
10. Sediment Plume Analysis – Ecological Impacts within the Port;
11. Wave Energy Analysis – Offshore borrow area and Offshore Disposal area;
12. Wave Energy Analysis – Ecological impacts on the Central Sandbank;
13. Geotechnical Study;
14. Turbidity Study – Impacts of Dredging and Sand Winning;
15. Bathymetric Survey; including: Central Sandbank; Offshore Disposal Site; Sand
winning site;
16. Technical Assessment of the three alternatives;
Public Participation process to be followed;
Contents of the EIA Report;
Consultation with DEA; and
EIA timeframes.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xiv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................... II
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................ XIV
TITLE AND APPROVAL PAGE .................................................................................. XXIX
AMENDMENTS PAGE ................................................................................................. XXX
LIST OF ACRONYMS ................................................................................................. XXXI
DEFINITIONS ........................................................................................................... XXXIV
1. PURPOSE OF THE FINAL SCOPING REPORT – 2ND REVIEW ........................... 1
2. DOCUMENT ROADMAP ........................................................................................ 3
3. PROJECT BACKGROUND AND MOTIVATION .................................................... 6
3.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 6
3.2 Existing Quay Wall Structure and Safety Concerns ......................................................... 7
3.3 Importance of Containerised Cargo in the Port of Durban ............................................. 8
3.4 Economic Importance of the Port of Durban .................................................................. 11
3.5 International Shipping Trends .......................................................................................... 17
3.6 Design Requirements for Super Post Panamax Vessels ................................................. 18
3.7 Quay Wall Safety and the Expansion of Berths 203 to 205 ............................................ 19
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xv
4. LEGISLATION AND GUIDELINES CONSIDERED .............................................. 20
4.1 The Constitution ................................................................................................................. 20
4.2 The National Environmental Management Act, 1998 .................................................... 20
4.3 The National Environmental Management: Integrated Coastal Management Act,
2008 ...................................................................................................................................... 26
4.4 The National Environmental Management Waste Act, 2008 ......................................... 30
4.5 The National Water Act, 1998 ........................................................................................... 31
4.6 The Marine Living Resources Act, 1989 .......................................................................... 32
4.7 The Seashore Act, 1935 ...................................................................................................... 33
4.8 The Sea Birds and Seals Act, 1973 .................................................................................... 33
4.9 The National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 ............................. 34
4.10 The National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act, 2003 ....................... 34
4.11 The Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act, 1983 ................................................. 34
4.12 The National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 .................................................................... 34
4.13 The Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2003 ................................... 36
4.14 The National Ports Act, 2005 ............................................................................................ 37
4.15 The National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, 2004 .............................. 38
4.16 The Occupational Health and Safety Act, 1993 ............................................................... 39
4.17 The National Health and Safety Act, 2004 ....................................................................... 39
4.18 The KZN Conservation Management Act ....................................................................... 39
4.19 Policy, Programmes and Plans .......................................................................................... 40
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xvi
4.19.1 Durban Bay Estuarine Management Plan – Situational Analysis Report ..................... 40
4.19.2 eThekwini Integrated Development Plan ...................................................................... 40
4.20 Guidelines ............................................................................................................................ 41
4.21 International Conventions ................................................................................................. 42
4.21.1 The London Convention of 1972 .................................................................................. 42
4.21.2 The London Protocol of 1996 ....................................................................................... 42
4.21.3 The Bonn Convention - Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of
Wild Animals (CMS) .................................................................................................... 42
4.22 Previous Records of Decision regarding the Port of Durban ......................................... 42
5. SCOPING AND EIA PROCESS ............................................................................ 46
5.1 Environmental Assessment Triggers ................................................................................ 46
5.2 Environmental Assessment Authorities ........................................................................... 46
5.3 Scoping Process .................................................................................................................. 47
5.3.1 Formal Process .............................................................................................................. 47
5.3.2 Landowner Notification ................................................................................................ 48
5.3.3 Application Form .......................................................................................................... 49
5.3.4 Screening of Alternatives .............................................................................................. 49
5.3.5 Impact Prediction .......................................................................................................... 50
6. ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS.................................................................... 52
7. NEED AND DESIRABILITY .................................................................................. 53
8. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PRACTITIONER .......................................... 57
9. PROJECT LOCATION .......................................................................................... 58
10. PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................................... 63
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xvii
10.1 Project Components ........................................................................................................... 64
10.1.1 Design Parameters of the Quay wall ............................................................................. 64
10.1.2 Design Parameters – Cope Level .................................................................................. 64
10.1.3 Design Parameters – Dredge Depth .............................................................................. 66
10.2 Project Life Cycle ............................................................................................................... 75
10.2.1 Pre-feasibility and Feasibility Phases ............................................................................ 75
10.2.2 Project Phasing .............................................................................................................. 75
10.2.3 Pre-construction Phase .................................................................................................. 78
10.2.4 Construction Phase ........................................................................................................ 79
10.2.5 Extension of Berth 205 .................................................................................................. 80
10.2.6 Extension of Berth 203 .................................................................................................. 80
10.2.7 Upgrade of Berths 203 to 205 ....................................................................................... 81
10.2.8 Operational Phase .......................................................................................................... 82
10.2.9 Decommissioning Phase ............................................................................................... 82
11. ALTERNATIVES ................................................................................................... 83
11.1 Screened Alternatives ........................................................................................................ 83
11.2 Quay Wall Alternatives ..................................................................................................... 86
11.2.1 Deck On Pile Quay Wall ............................................................................................... 86
11.2.2 Sheet Pile Quay Wall .................................................................................................... 89
11.2.3 Caisson Quay Wall ........................................................................................................ 91
11.2.4 Summary of Components .............................................................................................. 94
11.3 Offshore Sand Winning ..................................................................................................... 95
11.4 Offshore Dredge Disposal .................................................................................................. 96
11.5 No Go Option ...................................................................................................................... 97
12. PROFILE OF THE RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT ................................................. 99
12.1 Land Use ............................................................................................................................ 100
12.1.1 Status Quo ................................................................................................................... 100
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xviii
12.1.2 Potential Impacts / Implications .................................................................................. 102
12.1.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations .............................................. 102
12.2 Climate .............................................................................................................................. 103
12.2.1 Status Quo ................................................................................................................... 103
12.2.2 Potential Impacts / Implications .................................................................................. 103
12.2.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations .............................................. 104
12.3 Geology & Soils ................................................................................................................. 104
12.3.1 Status Quo ................................................................................................................... 104
12.3.2 Potential Impacts / Implications .................................................................................. 105
12.3.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations .............................................. 106
12.4 Port Layout and Bathymetry .......................................................................................... 107
12.4.1 Status Quo ................................................................................................................... 107
12.4.2 Potential Impacts / Implications .................................................................................. 109
12.4.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations .............................................. 110
12.5 Recreational Users ............................................................................................................ 110
12.5.1 Status Quo ................................................................................................................... 110
12.5.2 Potential Impacts / Implications .................................................................................. 111
12.5.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations .............................................. 112
12.6 Hydrodynamic Functioning ............................................................................................ 112
12.6.1 Status Quo ................................................................................................................... 112
12.6.2 Potential Impacts / Implications .................................................................................. 121
12.6.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations .............................................. 122
12.7 Water and Sediment Quality ........................................................................................... 122
12.7.1 Status Quo ................................................................................................................... 122
12.7.2 Potential Impacts / Implications .................................................................................. 130
12.7.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations .............................................. 130
12.8 Estuarine Hydrology ........................................................................................................ 131
12.8.1 Status Quo ................................................................................................................... 131
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xix
12.8.2 Potential Impacts / Implications .................................................................................. 131
12.8.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations .............................................. 131
12.9 Estuarine Biota ................................................................................................................. 132
12.9.1 Status Quo ................................................................................................................... 132
12.9.2 Potential Impacts / Implications .................................................................................. 138
12.9.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations .............................................. 139
12.10 Estuarine Sensitivity and Functioning and Ecosystem Good and Services ................ 140
12.10.1 Status Quo ................................................................................................................... 140
12.10.2 Potential Impacts / Implications .................................................................................. 143
12.10.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations .............................................. 143
12.11 Rivers ................................................................................................................................. 144
12.11.1 Status Quo ................................................................................................................... 144
12.11.2 Potential Impacts / Implications .................................................................................. 145
12.11.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations .............................................. 145
12.12 Sensitive Areas: The Little Lagoon ................................................................................. 145
12.12.1 Status Quo ................................................................................................................... 145
12.12.2 Potential Impacts / Implications .................................................................................. 146
12.12.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations .............................................. 146
12.13 Sensitive Areas: Bayhead Natural Heritage Site- Mangroves ..................................... 146
12.13.1 Status Quo ................................................................................................................... 146
12.13.2 Potential Impacts / Implications .................................................................................. 147
12.13.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations .............................................. 147
12.14 Socio-Economic Environment ......................................................................................... 147
12.14.1 Status Quo ................................................................................................................... 147
12.14.2 Potential Impacts / Implications .................................................................................. 150
12.14.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations .............................................. 151
12.15 Air quality ......................................................................................................................... 151
12.15.1 Status Quo ................................................................................................................... 151
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xx
12.15.2 Potential Impacts / Implications .................................................................................. 152
12.15.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations .............................................. 152
12.16 Noise ................................................................................................................................... 152
12.16.1 Status Quo ................................................................................................................... 152
12.16.2 Potential Impacts / Implications .................................................................................. 152
12.16.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations .............................................. 153
12.17 Maritime Archaeology and Culture features ................................................................. 153
12.17.1 Status Quo ................................................................................................................... 153
12.17.2 Potential Impacts / Implications .................................................................................. 155
12.17.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations .............................................. 155
12.18 Infrastructure ................................................................................................................... 155
12.18.1 Status Quo ................................................................................................................... 155
12.18.2 Potential Impacts / Implications .................................................................................. 157
12.18.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations .............................................. 157
12.19 Services: Storm Water ..................................................................................................... 157
12.19.1 Status Quo ................................................................................................................... 157
12.19.2 Potential Impacts / Implications .................................................................................. 157
12.19.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations .............................................. 157
12.20 Services: Electricity .......................................................................................................... 157
12.20.1 Status Quo ................................................................................................................... 158
12.20.2 Potential Impacts / Implications .................................................................................. 158
12.20.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations .............................................. 158
12.21 Transportation Network .................................................................................................. 158
12.21.1 Status Quo ................................................................................................................... 158
12.21.2 Potential Impacts / Implications .................................................................................. 158
12.21.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations .............................................. 159
12.22 Tourism ............................................................................................................................. 159
12.22.1 Status Quo ................................................................................................................... 159
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xxi
12.22.2 Potential Impacts / Implications .................................................................................. 159
12.22.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations .............................................. 159
12.23 Offshore Dredge Disposal ................................................................................................ 159
12.23.1 Status Quo ................................................................................................................... 159
12.23.2 Potential Impacts / Implications .................................................................................. 160
12.23.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations .............................................. 161
12.24 Offshore Sand Winning ................................................................................................... 161
12.24.1 Status Quo ................................................................................................................... 161
12.24.2 Potential Impacts / Implications .................................................................................. 161
12.24.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations .............................................. 162
13. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION .................................................................................. 163
13.1 Authorities Consultation.................................................................................................. 164
13.1.1 Pre-Application Consultation Discussions .................................................................. 164
13.1.2 Environmental Authorities Meeting ............................................................................ 164
13.2 Database of I&APs ........................................................................................................... 164
13.3 Landowner Notification ................................................................................................... 165
13.4 Focus Group Meetings ..................................................................................................... 165
13.5 One of One Meetings with Key Stakeholders ................................................................ 168
13.6 Project Announcement and Notification of Scoping Report Review .......................... 168
13.6.1 Background Information Document ........................................................................... 169
13.6.2 Onsite notices .............................................................................................................. 169
13.6.3 Newspaper Advertisements ......................................................................................... 170
13.6.4 Public Open Day ......................................................................................................... 170
13.6.5 Site Visits for I&APs .................................................................................................. 171
13.7 Review Process for Draft Scoping Report ...................................................................... 171
13.7.1 Accessing the Draft Scoping Report ........................................................................... 171
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xxii
13.7.2 Project Website ........................................................................................................... 172
13.7.3 Commenting on the Draft Scoping Report .................................................................. 173
13.7.4 2nd
Period of Public Review ........................................................................................ 173
13.8 Issues raised by I&APs .................................................................................................... 173
14. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES ............................................................................... 175
14.1 Approach ........................................................................................................................... 175
14.1.1 Predicting Significant Environmental Issues .............................................................. 175
14.1.2 Mitigation of Impacts .................................................................................................. 176
14.2 Environmental Screening Investigation ......................................................................... 177
14.3 Impacts identified by I&APs ........................................................................................... 181
14.4 Summary of Environmental Issues ................................................................................. 185
14.5 Cumulative Impacts ......................................................................................................... 191
15. METHODOLOGY TO ASSESS THE IDENTIFIED IMPACTS ............................ 194
16. PLAN OF STUDY FOR EIA ................................................................................ 196
16.1 Key Environmental Issues Identified During Scoping Phase ....................................... 196
16.2 Specialist Studies .............................................................................................................. 196
16.2.1 Terms of Reference – General .................................................................................... 198
16.3 Terms of Reference - Specific .......................................................................................... 200
16.3.1 Estuarine/Marine Biodiversity Assessment ................................................................ 200
16.3.1. Avifauna Impact Assessment ...................................................................................... 202
Summary of Key Issues & Triggers Identified During Scoping .................................... 202
Approach ..................................................................................................................................... 202
16.3.2 Marine Archaeology Impact Assessment .................................................................... 203
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xxiii
16.3.3 Sediment and Chemical Analysis of Dredge Material ................................................ 204
16.3.4 Ecological Impacts on the Central Sandbank .............................................................. 205
16.3.5 Local Economic Impact Assessment .......................................................................... 206
16.3.6 Assessment of the Indirect Impacts on the Little Lagoon ........................................... 206
16.4 Specialist studies under Technical Feasibility Study .................................................... 207
16.5 Public Participation – EIA Phase ................................................................................... 208
16.5.1 Updating of I&AP Database ....................................................................................... 208
16.5.2 Project Website ........................................................................................................... 208
16.5.3 Notification – Approval of Scoping Report ................................................................ 208
16.5.4 Public Open Day ......................................................................................................... 208
16.5.5 Comments and Response Report ................................................................................ 209
16.5.6 Review of Draft EIA Report ....................................................................................... 209
16.5.7 Notification of DEA Decision ..................................................................................... 209
16.6 EIA Report ........................................................................................................................ 210
16.7 Authority Consultation .................................................................................................... 211
16.8 Dumping at Sea Permit .................................................................................................... 211
16.9 EIA Timeframes ............................................................................................................... 212
17. CONCLUSION .................................................................................................... 213
18. REFERENCES .................................................................................................... 214
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xxiv
LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1: DIMENSIONS OF TEU (FROM - GERMANISCHER LLOYD, 2005) ....................................................................... 8
FIGURE 2: NUMBERS OF CONTAINERS HANDLED BY PORT BETWEEN 2003 AND 2009 (VAN COLLER ET AL., 2008). ...... 9
FIGURE 3: CONTAINERS HANDLED BETWEEN 1997 AND 2007 (FROM VAN COLLER ET AL., 2008). .............................. 10
FIGURE 4: ECONOMIC IMPACT CYCLE (URBAN-ECON DEVELOPMENT ECONOMISTS)................................................... 15
FIGURE 5: SHIPPING FLOWCHART AT PORT OF DURBAN ............................................................................................... 16
FIGURE 6: EVOLUTION OF CONTAINER VESSELS (FROM GERMANISCHER LLOYD, 2005) ............................................... 17
FIGURE 7: INTERNATIONAL MARITIME TRADE - SOURCE: UNCTAD, 2007 ..................................................................... 18
FIGURE 8: EXAMPLE OF 350M LONG VESSEL (FROM GERMANISCHER LLOYD, 2005) .................................................... 19
FIGURE 9: SCOPING AND EIA AUTHORISATION PROCESS .............................................................................................. 48
FIGURE 10: ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF LANDOWNER NOTIFICATION ............................................................................. 49
FIGURE 11: D’MOSS AREA .............................................................................................................................................. 55
FIGURE 12: CENTRAL REGION OF THE ETHEKWINI MUNICIPAL AREA (EMA) (FROM IDP, 2011) ................................... 58
FIGURE 13: 1: 250 000 TOPO-CADASTRAL LOCALITY MAP ............................................................................................. 60
FIGURE 14: 1:20 000 TOPO-CADASTRAL LOCALITY MAP ................................................................................................ 61
FIGURE 15: WARD MAP .................................................................................................................................................. 62
FIGURE 16: DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION OF THE COPE LEVEL (+4.25M CDP) (PRDW, 2011). ............................ 66
FIGURE 17: BERTH CHANNEL AND APPROACH CHANNEL TO BE DREDGED (PRDW, 2011). ........................................... 70
FIGURE 18: CONSTRUCTION STAGE 1 – BERTH 205 ...................................................................................................... 76
FIGURE 19: CONSTRUCTION STAGE 2: BERTH 204 ......................................................................................................... 77
FIGURE 20: CONSTRUCTION STAGE 3: BERTH 203 ......................................................................................................... 77
FIGURE 21: COMPLETED BERTHS AFTER CONSTRUCTION .............................................................................................. 78
FIGURE 22: SHEET PILES MADE UP OF 1200MM DIAMETER STEEL TUBULAR PILES (PRDW, 2011) ............................... 87
FIGURE 23: TRANSVERSE BEAMS MADE UP OF PRE-STRESSED CONCRETE U BEAMS FILLED WITH IN-SITU CONCRETE
SPANNING BETWEEN THE PILES AND THE EXISTING BLOCK WALL (PRDW, 2011) ..................................... 88
FIGURE 24: SHEET PILE WALL MADE UP OF HZ KING PILES WITH AZ INTERMEDIATE PILES WITH A STEEL GRADE OF
430 N/MM2
DRIVEN TO A DEPTH OF -33M CDP (PRDW, 2011) .................................................................. 90
FIGURE 25: SHEET PILE WALL WITH INVERTED T DEADMAN ANCHORS EACH ACCOMMODATING TWO TIE RODS
PASSING THROUGH DRILLED HOLES IN THE EXISTING QUAY WALL (PRDW, 2011) .................................... 91
FIGURE 26: PROPOSED CAISSON OPTION CAISSON FILLED WITH DREDGED FILL MATERIAL (PRDW, 2011) ................. 92
FIGURE 27: TYPICAL “FIGURE 8” TYPE CAISSONS ........................................................................................................... 93
FIGURE 28: ROW OF VERTICAL TUBULAR PILES WHICH WOULD BE USED TO SUPPORT THE REAR SHIP TO SHORE
CRANE BEAM (PRDW, 2011) ....................................................................................................................... 94
FIGURE 29: POSITION OF ALTERNATIVE SAND WINNING SITES (BATHYMETRY OBTAINED FROM COUNCIL OF
GEOSCIENCES, 2001). .................................................................................................................................. 96
FIGURE 30: CURRENT PERMITTED OFFSHORE DISPOSAL SITE ........................................................................................ 97
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xxv
FIGURE 31: AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE LAYOUT OF THE PORT OF DURBAN .............................................. 101
FIGURE 32: LAND USE WITHIN THE PORT (MER/ERM, 2011) ....................................................................................... 102
FIGURE 33: POSITION OF THE BOREHOLES FOR THE DETAILED GEOTECHNICAL STUDY (PRDW, 2011) ...................... 106
FIGURE 34: CURRENT LAYOUT OF THE PORT OF DURBAN (FROM TNPA, 2009) .......................................................... 107
FIGURE 35: DURBAN HARBOUR SANDBANK STUDY (EMS, 2010)................................................................................. 109
FIGURE 36: SURFACE FLOW DURING SPRING PEAK FLOOD (UPPER PANEL) AND EBB (LOWER PANEL) TIDES (SOURCE:
PRDW, 2007). ............................................................................................................................................ 114
FIGURE 37: ANNUAL WIND ROSES FOR VARIOUS LOCATIONS IN THE PROT OF DURBAN FOR THE PERIOD MAY 2010
TO OCTOBER 2011 .................................................................................................................................... 116
FIGURE 38 SCHEMATIC OF WATER QUALITY CONDITIONS IN THE PORT OF DURBAN (SOURCE: MER/ERM, 2011) .... 118
FIGURE 39: MEAN TIDAL CURRENTS IN THE PORT OF DURBAN DURING SPRING TIDES (SOURCE: PRDW, 2007) BEFORE
THE MOUTH WIDENING (UPPER PANEL) AND AFTER THE MOUTH WIDENING (LOWER PANEL) ............. 119
FIGURE 40: MAXIMUM TIDAL CURRENTS IN THE PORT OF DURBAN DURING SPRING TIDES (SOURCE: PRDW, 2007)
BEFORE THE MOUTH WIDENING (UPPER PANEL) AND AFTER THE MOUTH WIDENING (LOWER PANEL)120
FIGURE 41: AERIAL VIEW OF DURBAN BAY ILLUSTRATING THE POSITIONS WHERE WATER QUALITY WAS MONITORED
IN 2009, 2010 AND 2011 (CSIR, 2011) ...................................................................................................... 123
FIGURE 42: AVERAGE (±STANDARD DEVIATION) PH AND DISSOLVED OXYGEN CONCENTRATION MEASURED IN
SURFACE AND BOTTOM WATERS OF DURBAN BAY FOR 26 SURVEYS PERFORMED IN 2009 AND 2010.
STATIONS 1- 8 ARE SITUATED IN THE UPPER REACHES OF THE BAY, AND STATIONS 9 – 15 IN THE LOWER
REACHES. STATIONS 10 AND 11 ARE SITUATED WITHIN THE EXPANSION FOOTPRINT (CSIR, 2011) ....... 124
FIGURE 43: AVERAGE (±STANDARD DEVIATION) CONCENTRATIONS OF VARIOUS NUTRIENTS IN SURFACE WATERS OF
DURBAN BAY FOR 26 SURVEYS PERFORMED IN 2009 AND 2010. STATIONS 1- 8 ARE SITUATED IN THE
UPPER REACHES OF THE BAY, AND STATIONS 9 – 15 IN THE LOWER REACHES. STATIONS 10 AND 11 ARE
SITUATED WITHIN THE EXPANSION FOOTPRINT (CSIR, 2011) .................................................................. 125
FIGURE 44: ENRICHMENT FACTOR SPATIAL TRENDS FOR COPPER, MANGANESE AND MERCURY IN DURBAN BAY IN
AUGUST 2011. ALSO INCLUDED IS THE SPATIAL TREND FOR THE NUMBER OF METALS ENRICHED IN
SEDIMENT. AN ENRICHMENT FACTOR REPRESENTS BY HOW MANY TIMES A MEASURED METAL
CONCENTRATION EXCEEDS THE HIGHEST CONCENTRATION PREDICTED BY THE BASELINE MODEL FOR
THAT METAL IN GRANULOMETRICALLY EQUIVALENT SEDIMENT (CSIR, 2011) ........................................ 127
FIGURE 45: TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBON AND POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBON CONCENTRATIONS IN
SEDIMENT FROM DURBAN BAY IN AUGUST 2011. STATIONS 10 AND 11 ARE SITUATED WITHIN THE
EXPANSION FOOTPRINT ............................................................................................................................ 128
FIGURE 46: CONSERVATION STATUS OF THE PROPOSED BERTH 203 TO 205 EXPANSION AREA ................................ 134
FIGURE 47: PROTECTED STATUS OF THE PROPOSED BERTH 203 TO 205 EXPANSION AREA ....................................... 134
FIGURE 48: VEGETATION TYPES OF THE PROPOSED BERTHS 203 TO 205 EXPANSION SITE ........................................ 135
FIGURE 49: RIVERS IN THE REGIONAL STUDY AREA ..................................................................................................... 144
FIGURE 50: DURBAN HARBOUR SHOWING SHIPWRECK DATABASE ZONES (FROM CSIR, 2011). ................................ 154
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xxvi
FIGURE 51: INFRASTRUCTURE ON SITE ........................................................................................................................ 156
FIGURE 52: OUTLINE OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS .......................................................................................... 163
FIGURE 53: AREAS WHERE QUESTIONNAIRES WERE ADMINISTERED. ......................................................................... 166
FIGURE 54: MAIN CONCERNS REGARDING THE PROPOSED PROJECT. ......................................................................... 167
FIGURE 55: THE MAIN EXPECTED POSITIVE IMPACTS REGARDING THE PROPOSED PROJECT. .................................... 168
FIGURE 56: LOCATIONS OF ONSITE NOTICES ............................................................................................................... 170
FIGURE 57: COMPARATIVE RISK ASSESSMENT METHOD (ADAPTED FROM STANDARDS AUSTRALIA AND STANDARDS
NEW ZEALAND, 2004) (CSIR, 2011). .......................................................................................................... 177
FIGURE 58: CHANGES IN THE DURBAN BAY BETWEEN 1800S AND 1999..................................................................... 192
FIGURE 59: EIA TIMEFRAMES ....................................................................................................................................... 212
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xxvii
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1: SCOPING REPORT ROADMAP ............................................................................................................................ 3
TABLE 2: DEVELOPMENT OF CARGO CAPACITY IN THE DURBAN HARBOUR AS INTENDED FOR THE PERIOD TO 2050.
(FROM VAN COLLER ET AL., 2008) ...................................................................................................................... 9
TABLE 3:VESSEL ARRIVALS – DURBAN PORT (FIN. YR. 2005/06) (FROM VAN COLLER ET AL., 2008) ............................. 11
TABLE 4: LISTED ACTIVITIES TRIGGERED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT. .......................................................................... 21
TABLE 5: 1999 ROD AND THE IMPLICATIONS FOR THE CURRENT SCOPING REPORT ..................................................... 44
TABLE 6: NEED AND DESIRABILITY OF THE PROPOSED DEEPENING, LENGTHENING AND WIDENING OF BERTHS 203 TO
205 .............................................................................................................................................................. 53
TABLE 7: SCOPING AND EIA CORE TEAM MEMBERS ...................................................................................................... 57
TABLE 8: THE DESIGN VESSEL CHARACTERISTICS ........................................................................................................... 67
TABLE 9: CHANNEL DEPTH AND BERTH FACTORS .......................................................................................................... 69
TABLE 10: KEY ACTIVITIES FOR DIFFERING QUAY WALL TYPES ...................................................................................... 81
TABLE 11: SUMMARY OF QUAY WALL COMPONENTS ................................................................................................... 94
TABLE 12: ECONOMIC FACTORS AND IMPLICATIONS OF THE NO-GO ALTERNATIVE..................................................... 98
TABLE 13: MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM MONTHLY TEMPERATURES RECORDED AT DURBAN AIRPORT (MER/ERM,
2011) ......................................................................................................................................................... 103
TABLE 14: MONTHLY AVERAGE RAINFALL RECORDED AT DURBAN AIRPORT (MER/ERM, 2011) ................................ 103
TABLE 15: SUMMARY OF LOCAL GEOLOGY UNDERLYING THE PROJECT AREA ............................................................ 104
TABLE 16: HYDROLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF DURBAN BAY ESTUARY .......................................................................... 131
TABLE 17: ECOSYSTEM GOODS AND SERVICES PROVIDED BY DURBAN BAY (ADAPTED FROM MER/ERM, 2011). ..... 142
TABLE 18: A SUMMARY TABLE OF PM10 ESTIMATES FOR ETHEKWINI (WITI, 2005) ..................................................... 151
TABLE 19: WRECKS NEAR THE DURBAN HARBOUR (FROM CSIR, 2011) ....................................................................... 154
TABLE 20: LOCATIONS FOR REVIEW OF DRAFT SCOPING REPORT ............................................................................... 172
TABLE 21: RISK ASSESSMENT FOR THE DEEPENING, LENGTHENING AND WIDENING OF BERTH 203 TO 205 FROM THE
CSIR ENVIRONMENTAL SCREENING (2011) ................................................................................................. 178
TABLE 22: PERTINENT ISSUES (CONSTRUCTION PHASE) FOR PRIORITISATION DURING THE EIA PHASE ..................... 185
TABLE 23: PERTINENT ISSUES (OPERATIONAL PHASE) FOR PRIORITISATION DURING THE EIA PHASE ........................ 190
TABLE 24: LOCATIONS FOR REVIEW OF DRAFT EIA REPORT ........................................................................................ 209
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xxviii
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A Application form
Appendix B Curricula Vitae of EAPs
Appendix C Alternatives
Appendix D Maps
Appendix E Authority Meeting
Appendix F I&AP database
Appendix G Landowner Notification
Appendix H Focus Group Meeting
Appendix I Questionnaires
Appendix J WESSA Meeting
Appendix K Background Information Document
Appendix L Site Notices
Appendix M Newspaper Adverts
Appendix N Proof Of Delivery
Appendix O Comment Form
Appendix P Comments and Response Report
Appendix Q Public Open Day Presentation
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xxix
TITLE AND APPROVAL PAGE
Project name: Proposed Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berth 203 to 205,
Pier 2, Container Terminal, Port of Durban
Report Title: Proposed Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berth 203 to 205,
Pier 2, Container Terminal, Port of Durban - Draft Scoping Report
Authors: Vanessa Brueton, Donavan Henning, Ann Burke and Nicky Naidoo
Authority reference no.: NEAS REF NO: DEA/EIA/0000988/2012, DEA REF NO:
14/12/16/3/3/2/275
Status of report: Final Scoping Report for 2nd
Period of Public Review
Date of issue: 25 May 2012
Prepared by Nemai Consulting
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xxx
AMENDMENTS PAGE
Date Nature of Amendment Amendment No. Signature
09 March 2012 Draft for Public Review 1
25 May 2012 Final For 2nd Period of Public
Review 2
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xxxi
LIST OF ACRONYMS
CBD Central Business District
CDP Chart Datum Port
Chl-a Chlorophyll -a
cm Centimetre
CSD Cutter Suction Dredger
CSDP Central Spatial Development Plan
CSIR Council for Scientific and Industrial Research
CSR Central Spatial Region
D’MOSS Durban Metro Open Space System
DAEA&RD Department of Agriculture, Environmental Affairs and Rural Development
(provincial)
DEA Department of Environmental Affairs
DEDT Department of Economic Development and Tourism
DIN Dissolved Inorganic Nitrogen
DIP Dissolved Inorganic Phosphate
DO Dissolved Oxygen
DWA Department of Water Affairs
EA Environmental Authorisation
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xxxii
EESMP eThekwini Environmental Services Management Plan
EHI Estuary Health Index
EIA Environmental Impact Assessment
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EM eThekwini Municipality
EMP Environmental Management Plan
EstMP Estuarine Management Plan
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GGP Gross Geographic Product
GIS Geographic Information Systems
NEMA National Environmental Management Act (No. 107 of 1998)
NHRA National Heritage Resources Act (No. 25 of 1999)
RoD Record of Decision
TCP Transnet Capital Projects
TEMPI Transnet eThekwini Municipality Planning Initiative
TEU Twenty Foot Equivalent Unit
TNPA Transnet National Ports Authority
ToR Terms of Reference
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xxxiii
TSHD Trailing Suction Hopper Dredger
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xxxiv
DEFINITIONS
Acute effect Rapid adverse effect (e.g. death) caused for example by contaminants or physical
processes. The term can be used to define either the exposure or the response to
an exposure (effect).
Alternatives In relation to a proposed activity, alternatives refer to the different means of meeting
the general purpose and requirements of the activity, which may include alternatives
to:
The property or location where it is proposed to undertake the activity;
The type of activity to be undertaken;
The design or layout of the activity;
The technology to be used in the activity; and
The operational aspects of the activity.
Amphipod A kind of malacostracan crustacean.
Anthropogenic Produced or caused by humans.
Archaeology The scientific study of aspects of the human past, primarily through material
evidence.
Artifact An object used or produced by people in the past.
Ballast Water Use Use of water in specialised ballast tanks to aid in controlling a ship’s trim and draft.
Bathymetry The sea bed “topography” derived from measurements of depths of water.
Benthic Referring to organisms living in or on the sediments of aquatic, estuarine and
marine habitats.
Benthos The sum total of organisms living in, or on, the sediments of aquatic habitats.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xxxv
Biodiversity The variety of life forms, including the plants, animals and micro-organisms, the
genes they contain and the ecosystems and ecological processes of which they are
a part.
Biogeochemistry The study of the relationship between geochemistry of a region and the biology in
that region.
Biomass The living weight of a plant or animal population, usually expressed on a unit area
basis.
Biota The sum total of the living organisms of any designated area.
Bivalve A mollusc with a hinged double shell.
Chart Datum (CD) A reference point linked to the low water mark (ordinary spring tide) and used for
measuring sea water depth. In South Africa, a unique Chart Datum is identified for
each port. Chart Datum is defined by the Hydrographer as 0.913 metres below land
levelling datum.
Chart Datum Port
(CDP)
Chart Datum Port is defined by TNPA as 0.900 metres below land levelling datum.
Chronic effect Effect lingering or continuing for a long time; often for periods from several weeks to
years. Can be used to define either the exposure of an aquatic species or its
response to an exposure (effect).
Community An assemblage of organisms characterized by a distinctive combination of species
occupying a common environment.
Community
composition
All the types of taxa present in a community.
Community
structure
All the types of taxa present in a community and their relative abundances.
Contaminant Biological (e.g. bacterial and viral pathogens) and chemical introductions capable of
producing an adverse response (effect) in a biological system, seriously injuring
structure and/or function.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xxxvi
Cope Line The outer edge of the quay wall.
Crustacea A highly diverse class of organisms containing crabs, shrimps, lobsters, isopods,
amphipods etc.
Detritus Unconsolidated sediments composed of both inorganic and dead and decaying
organic material.
Dewatering To remove water from an object, in this case sediment.
Dragline An excavating machine with a digging bucket attached by cables to a long jib and
operated by being dragged back toward the machine by another cable.
Echinoderms Phylum of marine invertebrates that includes sea urchins, starfish, brittle stars, sea
cucumbers. All are characterized by tube feet and five-part radially symmetrical
bodies.
Endangered A taxon is regarded as endangered when it faces a high risk of extinction in the wild.
This is defined as a 20% probability of extinction within 20 years.
Environment The biophysical, social, economic, cultural, political and historical context within
which people live and within which development takes place.
Environmental
impact
A change resulting from the effect of an activity on the environment, whether
desirable or undesirable. Impacts may be the direct consequence of an
organisation’s activities or may be indirectly caused by them.
Environmental
impact
assessment (EIA)
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), as defined in the NEMA EIA Regulations
and in relation to an application to which scoping must be applied, means the
process of collecting, organising, analysing, interpreting and communicating
information that is relevant to the consideration of that application.
Environmental
issue
A concern felt by one or more parties about some existing, potential or perceived
environmental impact.
Epifaunal Organisms, which live at or on the sediment surface being either attached (sessile)
or capable of movement.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xxxvii
Habitat The place where a population (e.g. animal, plant, micro-organism) lives and its
surroundings, both living and non-living.
Infauna Animals of any size living within the sediment. They move freely through interstitial
spaces between sedimentary particles or they build burrows or tubes.
Interested and
affected party
(I&AP)
Individuals or groups concerned with or affected by an activity and its
consequences. These include the authorities, local communities, investors, work
force, consumers, environmental interest groups and the general public.
Isopod Any of various small terrestrial or aquatic crustaceans with seven pairs of legs
adapted for crawling.
Lithogenic Derived from rocks and/or soils
Macrofauna Animals which are greater than 1 mm.
Macrophyte A member of the macroscopic plant life of an area, especially of a body of water;
large aquatic plant.
Molluscs A phylum of organisms containing snails, mussels, oysters.
Mysids Small shrimp-like crustaceans.
PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyls.
PEL Probable effective levels.
Piscivorous Feeding on fishes.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xxxviii
Pollution The introduction of unwanted components into waters, air or soil, usually as result of
human activity; e.g. hot water in rivers, sewage in the sea, oil on land.
Polychaetes A class of mainly marine worms.
Population Population is defined as the total number of individuals of the species or taxon.
Recruitment The replenishment or addition of individuals of an animal or plant population
through reproduction, dispersion and migration.
Re-suspension A renewed suspension of particulates.
Scoping This refers to the process of determining the spatial and temporal boundaries (the
extent) for the EIA and key issues to be addressed in an environmental
assessment.
Sediment Unconsolidated mineral and/or organic particulate material.
Significant impact An impact that by its magnitude, duration, intensity or probability of occurrence may
have a notable effect on one or more aspects of the environment.
Sipunculids Small unsegmented marine worm that when disturbed retracts its anterior portion
into the body giving the appearance of a peanut.
Species A group of organisms that resemble each other to a greater degree than members
of other groups and that form a reproductively isolated group that will not produce
viable offspring if bred with members of another group.
Suspended
material
Total mass of material suspended in a given volume of water, measured in mg/l.
Taxon (Taxa): Any group of organisms considered to be sufficiently distinct from other such groups
to be treated as a separate unit (e.g. species, genera, families).
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report xxxix
TEL Threshold effective levels.
Terrigenous Derived naturally from rocks and/or soils.
TEU Twenty-foot Equivalent Unit, a unit referring to a standard twenty foot container size
and used to measure the volume of cargo, and used to measure the operations and
capacity of a container terminal.
Toxicity The inherent potential or capacity of a material to cause adverse effects in a living
organism.
Turbidity Turbidity is the attenuation of light in water caused by the sum of suspended
particles and any dissolved chemicals in the water which may alter the passage of
light through scattering (generally inorganic and organic particles) and/or absorption
(generally particulate or dissolved biological material).
Vulnerable A taxon is vulnerable when it is facing a medium risk of extinction in the wild in the
medium-term future, defined as a 10% probability of extinction within 100 years.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 1
1. PURPOSE OF THE FINAL SCOPING REPORT – 2ND REVIEW
The Scoping Report for the proposed Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berth
203 to 205 aims to determine the full ‘scope’ of the Environmental Impact Assessment
(EIA) Phase. It also aims to identify key environmental issues and identify potential
alternatives (DEAT, 2005a). Information used in this Draft Scoping report was obtained
from a number of sources (see references). The draft Scoping report was then made
available to the public for review and comment. Copies of the Draft Scoping Report were
placed at the Seafarers Club and the Central Library. In addition, an electronic copy was
made available on the project website (www.berth203to205expansioneia.co.za).
The purpose of the Draft Scoping Report was as follows:
To describe the need and desirability for the proposed upgrade of Berths 203 to
205;
To describe how the proposed project will be executed;
To provide a description of the receiving environment that could be affected by the
proposed project;
To explain the Scoping and EIA processes;
To describe the Public Participation Process that will occur as part of the Scoping
Phase;
To provide a description of the legislation that was considered; and
To present a Plan of Study for the pending EIA Phase of the project.
Comments received from registered I&APS (contained in the Comments and Response
Report in Appendix P) helped shape the final Scoping Report. Changes included the
introduction of new Specialist studies. Registered I&APs are granted a further week to
review the amended Final Scoping Report to ensure that all comments have been
included and addressed. The Final Scoping Report will be made available for review and
comment from 25 May 2012 to 01 June 2012 at the Seafarers Club and the Central
Library. In addition, it will be uploaded onto the project website
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 2
(www.berth203to205expansioneia.co.za) so that registered I&APs can download the
document.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 3
2. DOCUMENT ROADMAP
In order to ensure all requirements of Government Notice (GN) R. 543 of 18 June 2010
and to provide clarity to the readers of this document, a document roadmap is provided
below. The document roadmap provides information on GN R. 543 of 18 June 2010
Regulations requirements as well as a guide on the content of each chapter. Please note
that in some cases more information is provided than required in the EIA regulations in
which case there will be no correlating section to GN R. 543.
Table 1: Scoping Report Roadmap
Chapter Title CORRELATION WITH GN No. R. 543 (EIA REGULATIONS)
Included Section Description
1 Purpose of the Draft Scoping Report
2 Document Roadmap
3 Project Background and Motivation
R28(1)(i) A description of the need and desirability of the proposed activity.
4 Legislation and Guidelines Considered
R28(1)(f) An identification of all legislation and guidelines that have been considered in the preparation of the scoping report.
R28(2) A scoping report must take into account any guidelines applicable to the kind of activity which is the subject of the application.
5 Scoping and EIA Process
6 Assumptions & Limitations
7 Need & Desirability
R28(1)(i) A description of the need and desirability of the proposed activity.
8 Environmental Assessment Practitioner
R28(1)(a)
Details of - (i) the EAP who prepared the report; and (ii) the expertise of the EAP to carry out scoping
procedures.
9 Project Location R28(1)(d) A description of the property on which the activity is to be undertaken and the location of the activity on the property.
10 Project Description
R28(1)(b) A description of the proposed activity.
11 Alternatives R28(1)(c)
A description of any feasible and reasonable alternatives that have been identified.
R28(1)(j) A description of identified potential alternatives to the proposed activity, including advantages and
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 4
Chapter Title CORRELATION WITH GN No. R. 543 (EIA REGULATIONS)
Included Section Description
disadvantages that the proposed activity or alternatives may have on the environment and the community that may be affected by the activity.
12 Profile of the Receiving Environment
R28(1)(e) A description of the environment that may be affected by the activity and the manner in which the activity may be affected by the environment.
R28(1)(j)
A description of identified potential alternatives to the proposed activity, including advantages and disadvantages that the proposed activity or alternatives may have on the environment and the community that may be affected by the activity.
13 Public Participation
R28(1)(h)
Details of the public participation process conducted in terms of regulation 27(a), including - (i) the steps that were taken to notify potentially
interested and affected parties of the application;
(ii) proof that notice boards, advertisements and notices notifying potentially interested and affected parties of the application have been displayed, placed or given;
(iii) a list of all persons or organisations that were identified and registered in terms of regulation 55 as interested and affected parties in relation to the application; and
(iv) a summary of the issues raised by interested and affected parties, the date of receipt of and the response of the EAP to those issues.
R28(1)(k)
Copies of any representations, and comments received in connection with the application or the scoping report from interested and affected parties.
R28(1)(l)
Copies of the minutes of any meetings held by the EAP with interested and affected parties and other role players which record the views of the participants.
R28(1)(m) Any responses by the EAP to those representations and comments and views;
14 Environmental Issues
R28(1)(g) A description of environmental issues and potential impacts, including cumulative impacts, that have been identified.
15 Methodology to Assess the Identified Impacts
16 Plan of Study for EIA
R28(1)(n)
A plan of study for environmental impact assessment which sets out the proposed approach to the environmental impact assessment of the application, which must include - (i) a description of the tasks that will be
undertaken as part of the environmental impact assessment process, including any specialist reports or specialised processes,
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 5
Chapter Title CORRELATION WITH GN No. R. 543 (EIA REGULATIONS)
Included Section Description
and the manner in which such tasks will be undertaken;
(ii) an indication of the stages at which the competent authority will be consulted;
(iii) a description of the proposed method of assessing the environmental issues and alternatives, including the option of not proceeding with the activity; and
(iv) particulars of the public participation process that will be conducted during the environmental impact assessment process;
17 R28(1)(o) Any specific information required by the competent authority.
18 R28(1)(p) Any other matters required in terms of sections 24(4)(a) and (b) of the Act.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 6
3. PROJECT BACKGROUND AND MOTIVATION
3.1 Introduction
TNPA plans to upgrade Berths 203 to 205, Pier 2, Container Terminal, Port of Durban.
The existing Blockwork Quay wall structure along Pier 2 Berth 203 to 205 was designed
in the 1970s to support dockside cranes with the lifting capacity of 4 tonnes. The quay
walls are presently operating beyond their original design limitations. Recent studies have
concluded that the existing quay walls do not meet the minimum Eurocode 7 Safety
Standards and that there is a risk of potential quay wall failure (PRDW, 2011)
Vessel sizes have also increased since the original terminal was constructed and Berth
203 to 205 cannot therefore safely accommodate fully laden new generation container
vessels due to insufficient water depth at these berths. At present these vessels enter
and exit the Port partially laden and during the high tide window. This is an unsafe
operating condition and the risk exists that vessels could run aground. TNPA has
proposed the deepening, lengthening and widening of Berth 203 to 205 in order to
improve the safety of the berths as well as to improve the efficiency of the Port.
The proposed upgrade would include the following activities:
1. The westward lengthening of Berth 205 by 170m;
2. The eastward lengthening of Berth 203 by 100m;
3. The seaward widening of Berths 203 to 205 by 50m;
4. The deepening of the berth channel, approach channel, and vessel turning basin
from the current -12.7m CDP to -16.5m CDP;
5. Three technical options are to be considered namely, the Caisson option, Sheet
Pile option and Deck on Pile option. For the Caisson option, a trench will need to
be excavated to -19m CDP;
6. The construction of caissons, storage of sheet piles or precasting of elements of
the Deck on Pile (for the Caisson option, Sheet Pile Option and Deck on Pile
option, respectively) at Bayhead Lot 10;
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 7
7. The offshore disposal of dredge material;
8. The offshore sand winning for infill material; and
9. The installation of new Ship to Shore (STS) cranes and associated infrastructure.
Nemai Consulting was appointed by TNPA to undertake the requisite Environmental
Authorisation Process for the Proposed Berth 203 to 205, Pier 2 upgrade. The proposed
development triggers activities listed in Government Notices No. R. 544, R. 545 and R.
546. Hence, a full Scoping/EIA study as per the August 2010 Environmental Impact
Assessment (EIA) Regulations promulgated in terms of the National Environmental
Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998) is necessary.
In addition, a Dumping at Sea Permit as per the National Environmental Management:
Integrated Coastal Management Act, 2008 (Act 24 of 2008), is required to dispose of
dredged material at an offshore disposal site. A Mining permit for dredging of material
offshore for infill purposes will also be required as per the Mineral and Petroleum
Resources Development Act, 2002 (Act No. 22 of 2002). The impacts of offshore disposal
as well as offshore sand winning for infill material will also be included in the Scoping
Report.
3.2 Existing Quay Wall Structure and Safety Concerns
The existing blockwork quays of Berths 203 to 205 were designed in the 1970s and do
not meet the required Eurocode 7 minimum standards of safety (PRDW, 2011). The
recent Transnet (2009) study indicates that there is a potential risk for quay wall failure.
One of the main reasons for this is the insufficient water depth at the Berth 203 to 205.
Although large Post Panamax vessels enter
the Port partially laden and only at the high
tide, in some areas, scour protection at the
berths has been damaged by vessel
propeller blades. There is also the risk that
large vessels may run aground (even though
only partially laden). The safety of Berths
203 to 205, Pier 2 is an immediate concern
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 8
for TNPA and the main motivation for the upgrade of Berths 203 to 205.
3.3 Importance of Containerised Cargo in the Port of Durban
One of major technical changes in cargo logistics has been the introduction of containers
which has revolutionised cargo handling methods and costs (Van Coller et al., 2008).
Shipping companies have steadily increased the size of their ships and extended their
area of influence. With the introduction of much larger ships (Panamax, Post-Panamax
and Super Post-Panamax), it is natural that it is more cost efficient for these ships if they
can sail the longest possible distance between stops. This has fuelled the so-called “Hub
and Spoke” thinking where large ships sail between East and West, only calling at the
larger so-called Hub ports. From there smaller vessels carry out distribution to the smaller
ports along the coast (Van Coller et al., 2008).
The Port of Durban, situated in Durban Bay is South Africa’s busiest port in terms of large
cargo vessel calls (CSIR, 2008). In
addition, the Port of Durban handled
the greatest number of containers
between 2003 and 2009 of all South
African ports (Figure 2) (SAPO,
2010). Container size is often
described as Twenty foot Equivalent
Unit (TEU) and in terms of capacity,
it is expected that by 2050, the Port
of Durban will need to handle
approximately 8 065 000 TEU of
containers (Table 1).
Figure 1: Dimensions of TEU (From -
Germanischer Lloyd, 2005)
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 9
The growth in container traffic is currently approximately 10%. The Port of Durban,
already handles 67% of South Africa’s container cargo (Figure 2). In addition, container
volumes are up at over 2 million TEUs per annum which means that in terms of size,
Durban is a world-class port (Van Coller et al., 2008) (Figure 3).
Table 2: Development of cargo capacity in the Durban harbour as intended for the period to 2050.
(From Van Coller et al., 2008)
Projected capacity for different categories of cargo
Category 2005 2020 2035 2050
CONTAINERS
teu
berths
1 690 000
8
5 363 000
20
8 065 000
20
8 065 000
20
BREAKBULK
tons
berths
6 632 000
16
8 292 000
17
10 367 000
17
11 336 000
17
DRYBULK
tons
berths
11 474 000
8
15 442 000
8
20 784 000
8
27 972 000
8
LIQUID BULK
tons
berths
9 060 000
8
10 666 000
10
12 568 000
10
14 822 000
10
VEHICLES
units
berths
213 437
1
487 326
2
655 877
3
882 724
3
Figure 2: Numbers of Containers handled by Port between 2003 and 2009 (Van Coller et al., 2008).
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 10
For the Port of Durban to become a hub port for at least part of their cargo trade, there is
a need for major redesign of infrastructure, hence the 2010 project to widen the port
entrance and to dredge both the entrance and much of the internal port area to greater
depths (Van Coller et al., 2008).
Figure 3: Containers handled between 1997 and 2007 (from Van Coller et al., 2008).
In addition, of the seven South African Ports, Durban had the most vessel arrivals during
the 2005/06 financial year (April-March) (31, 7% of the total arrivals of 14,335 in South
Africa). Of the 4,551 vessels that entered the Port of Durban, approximately 90% were
ocean-going and 10% were coastal, fishing and miscellaneous (Table 3). In addition,
container vessels (26.6%) were the highest number by type of vessel and constituted the
most by gross tonnage (33.7%) in the 2005/2006 financial year.
0
200
400
600
800
1 000
1 200
1 400
1 600
1 800
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
'000
TE
Us
p.a
.
CONTAINER TEUS HANDLED
TEUs Landed Total TEUs Handled TEUs Shipped
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 11
Table 3: Vessel arrivals – Durban Port (Fin. Yr. 2005/06) (From Van Coller et al., 2008)
3.4 Economic Importance of the Port of Durban
The Port of Durban can be seen as the premier gateway port in South Africa and as the
South African economy grows, so does the need for a greater capacity to cater for
growing freight volumes at the Port. In the past 10 years, the growth in containerised
traffic through the Port of Durban has been three times the national GDP growth rate. It is
currently forecast that the existing transportation infrastructure will reach its limit by 2019
and unless significant expansion takes place, South African economic growth will be
constrained.
The total cargo revenue at the Port of Durban is made up predominately from
containerised cargo. Related to this, however, is the growing concern by the shipping
industry that the Port of Durban cannot safely accommodate this growth in containerised
cargo. Some new traffic can be handled merely by efficiency gains however it is
estimated that at the current rates of growth, container handling demands will exceed
handling capacity in the near future. The proposed upgrade aims at increasing efficiency
and safety at the Durban Container Terminal.
VESSEL TYPE TOTAL
No. % Gross Tonnage
(‘000)
%
Ocean Going:
General Cargo
Bulk
Liquid Bulk
Container*
Passenger
Car/Vehicle Carriers
Other
1088
762
603
1,214
64
239
132
23.9
16.7
13.2
26.6
1.4
5.3
2.9
13,455
16,767
17,607
31,817
1,009
9,602
2,024
14.2
17.7
18.6
33.7
1.1
10.2
2.1
Total Ocean Going 4,102 90.1 92,281 97.6
Coastwise
Fishing/Trawlers
Miscellaneous
196
176
77
4.3
3.9
1.7
1,869
95
298
2.0
0.1
0.3
Total Coastal/Fishing/Misc. 449 9.9 2,262 2.4
TOTAL Arrivals 4,551 100.0 94,543 100.0
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 12
President Jacob Zuma specifically made mention of Transnet expansion projects in his
2012 State of the Nation Address. This includes upgrade projects within the Port of
Durban. The national importance of the Port was judged by 80,764 million tonnes of
cargo (approximately 30% of the total cargo handled at the eight South African
Commercial Ports). In addition, the Port of Durban handled 2,713 million TEUs out of a
total of 4,393 million TEUs (61% of the total), thus emphasising the Port of Durban’s
importance as an international commercial gateway to South Africa and its adjoining
regions.
The expansion of the port including the upgrade of Berth 203 to 205 aims to reduce the
cost of doing business, improve productivity and will create employment and generate
wealth locally, regionally and nationally. The Port of Durban does face competition,
global shipping lines have indicated that there will only be one port of call (or ‘hub’) along
the KwaZulu-Natal coastline. As the turnaround time at the Port lengthens, shipping lines
may choose to relocate to other ports. The following ports are in competition with the Port
of Durban:
Port of St. Louis in Mauritius;
Port of Beira;
Port of Maputo;
Port of Richard’s Bay; and
Port of Coega.
Some of these ports have already begun upgrading their infrastructure.
The eThekwini Municipality Central Spatial Development Annual Review 2010/2011
recognises the strategic importance of upgrading and expanding the Port of Durban as it
is the economic, manufacturing and trading hub of the area. Moreover, the need for the
expansion within the port has been precipitated by prolonged congestion arising from a
capacity crisis in many aspects of port operations. With steady and accelerating
economic growth and the lowering of barriers to international trade, there have been
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 13
increased volumes of seaborne traffic and as a major generator of transport activity and
economic generation, the port is a strategic focus area in the eThekwini Municipality.
The Port of Durban is the responsibility of TNPA, which is in turn a division of Transnet
SOC Ltd. TNPA has two main business responsibilities, viz. (i) being the Port landlord,
and (ii) providing a range of maritime services such as tugs, pilots, dredging, berthing,
radar, lighthouses, dry-dock facilities, etc. as well as harbour master functions such as
port control, vessel traffic, port security, etc.
The land around the Port is owned by the TNPA and large sections of it are leased to
independent operators for cargo terminals, ship repairs and other activities. This is where
its role as port landlord comes into play. Dues earned from these leases (rentals, port and
cargo dues) form a large portion of the TNPA revenue. The main lessee is Transnet Port
Terminals (TPT) (also a Transnet division), which operates the major terminals. There are
also a number of private sector lessees who operate specialised terminals such as the
Sugar Terminal and Bulk Liquid Terminals or conduct specialised operations such as
Ship-building and Repair or Cargo Logistics processes of some kind.
Economic activity related to the Port of Durban can be divided into direct port-dependent
activity and indirect port-dependent activity. The former includes activities that owe their
existence directly to the port such as service vessels and cargoes. The latter includes
cargo owners that are based in Durban because of its locational advantage as well as
ancillary players who supply services and goods to the Port. Some directly dependent
services include the following:
All Port Services provided by the TNPA;
Marine Engineering;
Ship Chandlers ;
Marine Engineering Components & Spares;
Oil & Fuel Bunkering;
Marine Engines & Equipment Servicing, etc;
Marine Services;
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 14
Marine Servicing Materials;
Marine Consultants & Contractors;
Ship Repair;
Marine Cargo Surveyors & Cost Adjusters;
Boat & Engine Repair;
Marine Insurance Assessors;
Control Instruments & Systems;
Security & Surveillance Consultants ;
Meteorological Services;
Underwater Diving Services;
Fire Fighting Equipment & Supplies ;
Fire Protection Engineers; and
Specialist Services such as air conditioning, refrigeration, acoustics and
insulation, anti-corrosion treatment and cleaning.
The above list is not necessarily complete, but is sufficient to show that ship operations
require a wide range of support services (Van Coller et al., 2008). The multiplier effect in
terms of value added, jobs and local wealth creation from providing a full range of
services to over 4500 ship arrivals a year, is large.
The Port of Durban through these service linkages is also in a position to offer a very
wide range of services. There is for instance a large and excellent pool of ship building,
repair and servicing skills in Durban. Of particular interest is that some of these overlap
with other industries such as engineering, metal working and even the automotive sector.
Durban’s competitive advantage should be maintained at a high level through skills
development and support systems as it constitutes one of the port’s main strengths (Van
Coller et al., 2008).
Economic studies on the impacts of developing the efficiency of the Port of Durban have
shown a positive economic impact cycle (Figure 4) and from an economic view any
increased efficiency of the Port of Durban is likely to have positive knock on effects on
South Africa’s economy (Van Coller et al., 2008).
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 15
Figure 4: Economic Impact Cycle (Urban-Econ Development Economists)
TNPA has also prepared the Port of Durban Development Framework in which forecasts
indicate continued strong growth in container volumes through the Port (and in line with
world trends). The objectives of this framework are:
To provide additional container handling capacity to meet future demand; and
To consolidate general cargo handling facilities and the alignment of operations
with best practices.
The upgrade of Berths 203 to 205 is part of the first Phase of development of the Port.
The development framework details four proposed Phases of development aimed at
meeting the anticipated growth of container and general cargo.
A 2011 Order of Magnitude study by Urban-Econ Development Economists estimated the
impact of the proposed four Phases of development on new business sales, GGP, job
opportunities and income/wages. Although the upgrade of Berths 203 to 205 will only
contribute to Phase 1, the following figures indicate a significant positive impact with
approximately 29 000 jobs created for the entire Phase 1 and approximately 11 billion
rand spent in wages for the full Phase 1.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 16
Figure 5 provides a detailed flowchart of the different services required at the Port of
Durban.
Figure 5: Shipping Flowchart at Port of Durban
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 17
3.5 International Shipping Trends
With the global trend of containerisation, there has been a progressive trend of increasing
vessel size. In the 1970s, 1000 and 1500 TEU ships were replaced by 2000+ TEU ships
and by the early 1990s, most major shipping lines had ordered 4000+ TEU Panamax
vessels. The rate of increase in vessel size accelerated in the 1990s, when shipping lines
deployed vessels too large to transit the Panama Canal (Post-Panamax vessels). Vessel
sizes are still growing and ships up to 16 000 TEU are expected in the future. Figure 6
shows the typical evolution of container vessels up to 2005.
Figure 6: Evolution of Container Vessels (From Germanischer Lloyd, 2005)
Growth in containerised cargo has increased the overall maritime trade (Figure 7).
International shipping trends have an impact on the Port of Durban planning as the port
depth and berth characteristics restrict access of Super Post-Panamax vessels. Current
harbour restrictions for example, limit the organic bulk carriers because these vessels
require a certain depth of water in the entrance channel and at the quayside.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 18
Figure 7: International Maritime trade - Source: UNCTAD, 2007
3.6 Design Requirements for Super Post Panamax Vessels
As part of the feasibility studies for the Upgrade of Berths 203 to 205, Prestedge Retief
Dresner and Wijnberg (PRDW) used a 9200 TEU design vessel (the same design vessel
was used in the Durban Entrance Channel Widening and Deepening project).
The following vessel characteristics were used:
Vessel Type – 9200 TEU;
Displacement – 147,700 m3;
Laden Draught – 14.5m;
Overall Length – 350m; and
Beam – 45.6m
Figure 8 shows a vessel with similar design parameters to the design vessel used (length
= 353m; draught = 15m; breadth = 42.8m).
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 19
Figure 8: Example of 350m long vessel (From Germanischer Lloyd, 2005)
In order to safely accommodate Super Post Panamax vessels of this size at Berth 203 to
205, Port of Durban, it is necessary to deepen the berth channel, approach channel and
turning basin. In addition, Berth 203 to 205, would need to be lengthened to
simultaneously accommodate three Super Post Panamax vessels of about 353m in
length.
3.7 Quay Wall Safety and the Expansion of Berths 203 to 205
The main motivation for the upgrade of the quay wall at Berth 203 to 205, Pier 2 is the
current unsafe conditions at the berths. However, in order for the Port of Durban to
remain competitive as a ‘hub’ port for southern Africa there is also a need to
accommodate Super Post Panamax vessels which require deeper channels and longer
berths. The combination of these motivating factors has lead to decision to upgrade and
extend Berth 203 to 205 thus providing safe berthing conditions and meeting the present
demand of shipping companies for ports which can accommodate large container
vessels.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 20
4. LEGISLATION AND GUIDELINES CONSIDERED
4.1 The Constitution
The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, Act 108 of 1996, is the supreme law of
the land and provides amongst others the legal framwork for legislation regulating coastal
management in general. It also emphasises the need for co-operative governance. In
addition, the Environmental clause in Section 24 of the Constitution provides that:
The Constitution provides the overarching framework for sustainable development.
4.2 The National Environmental Management Act, 1998
The proposed Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205, requires
authorisation in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) (Act No.
107 of 1998), and the EIA will be undertaken in accordance with the EIA Regulations
(2010) that consist of the following:
“Everyone has the right –
a.) to an environment which 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 legislation and other
measures that:
I. Prevent pollution and ecological degradation;
II. Promotes conservation;
III. Secure ecologically sustainable development and the
use of natural resources while promoting justifiable
economic and social development”
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 21
EIA procedures - Government Notice No. R. 543;
Listing Notice 1 - Government Notice No. R. 544;
Listing Notice 2 - Government Notice No. R. 545; and
Listing Notice 3 - Government Notice No. R. 546.
The project triggers activities under Listing Notices 1, 2 and 3, and thus needs to be
subjected to a Scoping and EIA process. The listed activities are explained in the context
of the project in the table to follow. Note that some of the dimensions in the following
table differ from what was included in the Application Form (all values were originally
indicated as approximates), due to the dynamic nature of the planning and design
process.
In addition to the Listed Activities contained within the Listed Notices, NEMA articulates
principles such as “Polluter Pays” and “the Precautionary Principle”. It also provides for
ecosytems that require special attention:
Table 4: Listed Activities triggered by the proposed project.
Indicate the number and date of the
relevant notice:
Activity No (s) (in terms of the relevant notice)
:
Description
GNR. 544, 18 June 2010
9 The construction of approximately 2000m of storm water pipes
which exceed 0.36m in diameter.
13
Temporary storage of dangerous goods (e.g. fuel) during the
“Sensitive, valuable, highly dynamic or stressed ecosystems, such
as coastal shores, estuaries and wetlands...require specific
attention in management and planning procedures, especially
where they are subject to significant human resource usage and
development pressure”
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 22
Indicate the number and date of the
relevant notice:
Activity No (s) (in terms of the relevant notice)
:
Description
construction Phase at Berths 203 to 205
Temporary storage of dangerous goods (e.g. fuel) during the construction of the Caissons at Bayhead Lot 10*.
*Please note that this would only apply to the Caisson Quay Wall alternative and that all alternatives will be assessed equally.
14
The construction within coastal public property to: Lengthen berth 203 eastwards by 100m (involving the removal of
the Ro-Ro ramp) and lengthen berth 205, westwards by 170m(involving the demolition of the current South-East corner as well as excavation of a portion of the central sandbank).
Widening of berth 203 to 205 through the construction of a new Quay wall approximately 50m seawards.
Deepening of the berth basin, approach channel and turning basin through dredging to increase the current depth from -12.8m CDP (Chart Datum Point) to -16.5m CDP.
Excavation for the trench for the proposed quay wall structure to -20m CDP for the proposed new quay length from Berth 203 to 205.
In addition, three technological alternatives will be assessed equally. Caisson construction, sheet pile storage or precasting of some elements of the Deck on Pile alternative will take place at Bayhead Lot 10 for the Caisson option, Sheet Pile option or Deck on pile option, respectively. However it is important to note that the definition of Coastal Public Property currently excludes the Port as the relevant ICM section is on hold. This is being discussed at a Ministerial level. The Activity has been added put as a potential activity pending the outcome of the Ministerial decision.
16 (iv) (vi)
Construction and earth-moving activities within the Port of Durban to:
Lengthen berth 203 eastwards by 100m (involving the removal of the Ro-Ro ramp) and lengthen berth 205, westwards by 170m(involving the demolition of the current South-East corner as well as excavation of a portion of the central sandbank).
Widening of berth 203 to 205 through the construction of a new Quay wall approximately 50m seawards.
Deepening of the berth basin, approach channel and turning basin through dredging to increase the current depth from -12.8m CDP (Chart Datum Point) to -16.5m CDP.
Excavation for the trench for the proposed quay wall structure to -20m CDP for the proposed new quay length from Berth 203 to 205.
In an Estuary. In addition, three technological alternatives will be assessed equally. Caisson construction, sheet pile storage or precasting of some elements of the Deck on Pile alternative will take place at Bayhead Lot 10 for the Caisson option,
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 23
Indicate the number and date of the
relevant notice:
Activity No (s) (in terms of the relevant notice)
:
Description
Sheet Pile option or Deck on pile option, respectively.
18
Infilling of more than 5 cubic metres of material (mixture of suitable dredged material and imported sand):
Between the current Quay wall and the new Quay wall within the Port of Durban to extend Berth 203 to 205 approximately 50m seawards and the cells of the proposed quay wall structure.
In an estuary.
Deepening of the berth basin, approach channel and turning basin through dredging to increase the current depth from -12.8m CDP (Chart Datum Point) to -16.5m CDP.
Excavation for the trench for the proposed quay wall structure to -20m CDP for the proposed new quay length from Berth 203 to 205.
Depositing of dredge material at an offshore disposal site (which will require a Dumping at Sea permit).
20
The construction of the new quay wall of Berths 203 to 205 will require infilling of approximately 1 million cubic metres.
This infill material will be obtained from an offshore borrow pit. The application for which will be scoped in this EIA but for which authorisation will be sought from the Department of Minerals and Energy.
26 Possible occurrence of sensitive biodiversity features in the
adjacent Durban Bay Estuary and Central Sandbank.
27 (v)
The decommissioning of the Straddle Crane parking lot (adjacent to Berth 205) which has been used for the storage of dangerous goods (diesel and hydraulic fluid) within decommissioned Straddle cranes.
Please note that this activity was not included in the original activity however a new application form will be submitted with the Draft Scoping report and the impacts of this activity will be assessed as part of the Scoping and EIA process.
28
The expansion of Berths 203 to 205 will include the dredging of approximately 4.22 million cubic metres of dredge material which will be disposed at an offshore disposal site.
A Dumping permit will be necessary for such offsite disposal under the National Environmental Management: Integrated Coastal Management Act, 2008 (Act No. 24 of 2008).
43
Expansion of Berth 203 to 205 through construction in coastal public property to:
Lengthen berth 203 eastwards by 100m (involving the removal of the Ro-Ro ramp) and lengthen berth 205, westwards by 170m (involving the demolition of the current South-East corner as well as excavation of a portion of the central sandbank).
Widening of berth 203 to 205 through the construction of a new Quay wall approximately 50m seawards
Deepening of the berth basin, approach channel and turning basin through dredging to increase the current depth from -12.8m CDP (Chart Datum Point) to -16.5m CDP.
Excavation for the trench for the proposed quay wall structure to -20m CDP for the proposed new quay length from Berth 203 to 205.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 24
Indicate the number and date of the
relevant notice:
Activity No (s) (in terms of the relevant notice)
:
Description
These activities are aimed at improving the efficiency of Berths 203 to 205. In addition, three technological alternatives will be assessed equally. Caisson construction, sheet pile storage or precasting of some elements of the Deck on Pile alternative will take place at Bayhead Lot 10 for the Caisson option, Sheet Pile option or Deck on pile option, respectively. However it is important to note that the definition of Coastal Public Property currently excludes the Port as the relevant ICM section is on hold. This is being discussed at a Ministerial level. The Activity has been added put as a potential activity pending the outcome of the Ministerial decision.
45 (iv) (vi) (vii)
Expansion of Berth 203 to 205 through construction and earth-moving activities within the Port of Durban to:
Lengthen berth 203 eastwards by 100m (involving the removal of the Ro-Ro ramp) and lengthen berth 205, westwards by 170m (involving the demolition of the current South-East corner as well as excavation of a portion of the central sandbank).
Widening of berth 203 to 205 through the construction of a new Quay wall approximately 50m seawards.
Deepening of the berth basin, approach channel and turning basin through dredging to increase the current depth from -12.8m CDP (Chart Datum Point) to -16.5m CDP.
Excavation for the trench for the proposed quay wall structure to -20m CDP for the proposed new quay length from Berth 203 to 205.
These activities are aimed at improving the efficiency of Berths 203 to 205. In addition, three technological alternatives will be assessed equally. Caisson construction, sheet pile storage or precasting of some elements of the Deck on Pile alternative will take place at Bayhead Lot 10 for the Caisson option, Sheet Pile option or Deck on pile option, respectively.
GN R. 545, 18 June 2010
5
The construction of the new quay wall for of Berths 203 to 205 will include the dredging of approximately 4.22 million cubic metres of dredge material which will be disposed at an offshore disposal site.
A Dumping permit will be necessary for such offsite disposal under the National Environmental Management: Integrated Coastal Management Act, 2008 (Act No. 24 of 2008).
24 (i)
Construction and earth-moving activities within the Port of Durban to:
Lengthen berth 203 eastwards by 100m (involving the removal of the Ro-Ro ramp) and lengthen berth 205, westwards by 170m (involving the demolition of the current South-East corner as well as excavation of a portion of the central sandbank).
Widening of berth 203 to 205 through the construction of a new Quay wall approximately 50m seawards.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 25
Indicate the number and date of the
relevant notice:
Activity No (s) (in terms of the relevant notice)
:
Description
Deepening of the berth basin, approach channel and turning basin through dredging to increase the current depth from -12.8m CDP (Chart Datum Point) to -16.5m CDP.
Excavation for the trench for the proposed quay wall structure to -20m CDP for the proposed new quay length from Berth 203 to 205.
These activities are aimed at improving the efficiency of Berths 203 to 205. In addition, three technological alternatives will be assessed equally. Caisson construction, sheet pile storage or precasting of some elements of the Deck on Pile alternative will take place at Bayhead Lot 10 for the Caisson option, Sheet Pile option or Deck on pile option, respectively.
GN R. 546, 18 June 2010
10 (a) (i)
Temporary storage of dangerous goods (e.g. fuel) during the
construction Phase in an estuary.
Temporary storage of dangerous goods (e.g. fuel) during the construction of Caissons for the Caisson option or precasting of elements for the Deck on Pile Option at Bayhead Lot 10.
16 (a) (i)
Construction and earth-moving activities within the Port of Durban to:
Lengthen berth 203 eastwards by 100m (involving the removal of the Ro-Ro ramp) and lengthen berth 205, westwards by 170m (involving the demolition of the current South-East corner as well as excavation of a portion of the central sandbank).
Widening of berth 203 to 205 through the construction of a new Quay wall approximately 50m seawards.
Deepening of the berth basin, approach channel and turning basin through dredging to increase the current depth from -12.8m CDP (Chart Datum Point) to -16.5m CDP.
Excavation for the trench for the proposed quay wall structure to -20m CDP for the proposed new quay length from Berth 203 to 205.
These activities are aimed at improving the efficiency of Berths 203 to 205.
Berths 203 to 205 are adjacent to the Durban Bay Estuary. In addition, three technological alternatives will be assessed equally. Caisson construction, sheet pile storage or precasting of some elements of the Deck on Pile alternative will take place at Bayhead Lot 10 for the Caisson option, Sheet Pile option or Deck on pile option, respectively.
24 (a) (i)
Expansion of Berth 203 to 205 through construction and earth-moving activities within the Port of Durban to:
Lengthen berth 203 eastwards by 100m (involving the removal of the Ro-Ro ramp) and lengthen berth 205, westwards by 170m (involving the demolition of the current South-East corner as well as
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 26
Indicate the number and date of the
relevant notice:
Activity No (s) (in terms of the relevant notice)
:
Description
excavation of a portion of the central sandbank).
Widening of berth 203 to 205 through the construction of a new Quay wall approximately 50m seawards.
Deepening of the berth basin, approach channel and turning basin through dredging to increase the current depth from -12.8m CDP (Chart Datum Point) to -16.5m CDP.
Excavation for the trench for the proposed quay wall structure to -20m CDP for the proposed new quay length from Berth 203 to 205.
These activities are aimed at improving the efficiency of Berths 203 to 205.
Berths 203 to 205 are adjacent to the Durban Bay Estuary. In addition, three technological alternatives will be assessed equally. Caisson construction, sheet pile storage or precasting of some elements of the Deck on Pile alternative will take place at Bayhead Lot 10 for the Caisson option, Sheet Pile option or Deck on pile option, respectively.
4.3 The National Environmental Management: Integrated Coastal Management
Act, 2008
The National Environmental Management: Intergrated Coastal Management Act, 2008
(Act No 24 of 2008) aims to promote the coastal environment as well as to ensure that
development and use of natural resources within the coastal zone is socially and
economically justiable and ecologically sustainable.
Certain provisions are directly related to management of estuaries. In addition, the
definition of ‘estuary’ differs to that in the National Water Act, 1998.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 27
Another important definition is that of Coastal Public Property (Section 7 of the Act):
It also stipulates that the State, in its capacity as the public trustee of all coastal public
property must ensure that all ensure that coastal public property is managed, protected,
The definition of an “estuary” meaning a body of water (as per the
NEM ICM):
a.) that is part of a watercourse that is permanently or periodically open to
the sea;
b.) in which a rise and fall of the water level as a result of the tides is
measurable at spring tides when the watercourse is open to the sea; or;
c.) in respect of which the salinity is measurably higher as a result of the sea
Coastal Public Property:
(a) coastal waters;
(b) land submerged by coastal waters, including—
(i) land flooded by coastal waters which subsequently becomes part of the bed of coastal waters; and
(ii) the substrata beneath such land;
(c) any island, whether natural or artificial, within coastal waters, but excluding—
(i) any part of an island that was lawfully alienated before this Act commenced; or
(ii) any part of an artificially created island (other than the seashore of that island) that is proclaimed by the Minister
to be excluded from coastal public property;
(d) the seashore, but excluding—
(i) any portion of the seashore below the high-water mark which was lawfully alienated before the Sea-Shore Act,")
935 (Act No. 21 of 1935) took effect or which was lawfully alienated in terms of that Act and which has not
subsequently been re-incorporated into the seashore; and
(ii) any portion of a coastal cliff that was lawfully alienated before this Act took effect and is not owned by the State;
(e) the seashore of a privately owned island within coastal waters; 20
(f) any admiralty reserve owned by the State;
(g) any state-owned land declared under section 8 to be coastal public property; or
(h) any natural resources on or in—
(i) any coastal public property of a category mentioned in paragraph (a) to (8)1 25
(ii) the exclusive economic zone, or in or on the continental shelf as contemplated in sections 7 and 8 of the
Maritime Zones Act. 1994 (Act No. 15 of 1994), respectively: or
(iii) any harbour, work or other installation on or in any coastal public property of a category mentioned in
paragraphs (a) to (h) that is owned by an organ of state.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 28
conserved and enhanced in the interests of the whole community and also should take
whatever reasonable legislative measures it considers necessary to conserve and protect
coastal public property for the benefit of present and future generations.
However it is important to note that the definition of Coastal Public Property currently
excludes the Port, as the relevant NEM: ICM section is on hold. This is being discussed
at a Ministerial level. While activities related to Coastal Public Property have been
included, this is pending the outcome of the Ministerial decision.
Section 70 of the NEM:ICM deals with the prohibition of incineration or dumping at sea
while Section 71 deals with Dumping Permits. When deciding on an application for a
Dumping permit, the Minister must take into account the following:
a.) The Waste Assessment Guidelines set out in Schedule 2;
b.) Any coastal management programme applicable in the area;
c.) The likely environmental impact of the proposed activity;
d.) National legislation dealing with waste;
e.) The interests of the whole community;
f.) Transboundary impacts and International obligations and standards; and
g.) Any other factors that may be prescribed.
Dumping at sea is only permitted for certain substances and this is governed by Section
71 (3). A Dumping at Sea permit can be obtained for dredged material if certain
conditions are satisfied.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 29
Schedule 2 (Section 71) sets out the Guidelimes for the Assessment of Wastes or other
material that may be considered Dumping at Sea (“The Waste Assessment Guidelines”).
The Waste Assessment Guidelines sets out that a Waste Prevention Audit should be
conducted in order to assess alternatives to Dumping at Sea. This assessment should
include an evaluation of the following;
a.) the types, amounts and relative hazard of waste generated;
b.) details of the production process and sources of wastes within that process;
and
c.) the feasibility of the following waste reduction or prevention techniques:
i) product reformulation;
ii) clean production technologies;
iiii.) process modification;
iv) input substitution; and
v) on-site, closed loop recycling.
Specfically, for dredged material and sewerage sludge, the goal of waste management
should be to identify and control the sources of contamination. In addition, all applications
to dump wastes at sea must demonstrate that appropriate consideration has been given
to the following hierarchy of waste management options which includes:
a.) re-use;
Section 71 (3):
The Minister may not grant any dumping permit that authorises the
dumping of any waste or other material, other than:
a.) dredged material;
b.) sewerage sludge;
c.) fish waste, or material resulting from industrial fishing processing operations;
d.) vessels and platforms or other man-made structures at sea;
e.) inert, inorganic, geological material;
f.) organic material of natural origin; or
g,) bulky items primarily comprised of iron, steel, concrete and similarly non
harmful materials where the concern is physical impact and limited to
circumstances where such waste is generated at locations such as small islands
with isolated communities having no practicable access to disposal options other
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 30
b.) off site recycling;
c.) destruction of hazardous constituents;
d.) treatment to reduce or remove the hazardous constituents; and
e.) disposal on land, into air, and in water.
Characterisation of waste to dumped must also be taken into account and includes:
a.) origin, total amount, form, average composition;
b.) properties: physical, chemical, biochemical and biological;
c.) toxicity;
d.) persistence: phsyical, chemical and biological; and
e.) accumulation and biotransformation in biological materials or sediments.
The main implications of the National Environmental Management Integrated Coastal
Management Act, 2008 (Act 24 of 2008) on the proposed project is its function in the
government of offshore disposal of dredge material as well as the management of
Estuaries.
4.4 The National Environmental Management Waste Act, 2008
The National Environmental Management Waste Act (56 of 2008) regulates waste
management in order to protect the health and environment of South African citizens.
This is achieved through pollution prevention, institutional arrangements and planning
matters, national norms and standards and the licensing and control of waste
management activities.
This act contains activities listed in Categories A and B that would require licensing from
the provincial or national authorities. In order to obtain licences for these application a
Basic Assessment or EIA process, respectively, should be followed according to the
requirements stated in NEMA.
No authorisation will be required in terms of the National Environmental Management:
Waste Act (NEM: WA) (Act No. 59 of 2008), as the project will not include any listed
waste management activities.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 31
The following should be noted with regards to waste management during the construction
Phase:
The decommissioning of the Straddle Crane storage yard which has been used to
store dangerous goods does not require a Waste License Application as:
o Dangerous goods previously stored at the Straddle Crane Storage yard will be
removed by a third party contractor to the requisite licensed waste disposal
facility;
Temporary waste storage facilities will remain below the thresholds contained in the
listed activities under Schedule 1 of NEM:WA; and
The EMP will make suitable provisions for waste management, including the storage,
handling and disposal of waste.
4.5 The National Water Act, 1998
The National Water Act (36 of 1998) regulates the surface and subsurface water of South
Africa. Water is considered a scarce commodity and should therefore be adequately
protected. Amongst other, the act deals with the protection of water sources, water uses,
water management strategies and catchment management, dam safety and general
powers and functions.
The purpose of the act is to ensure that South Africa’s water resources are protected,
used, developed, conserved, managed and controlled. The National Water Act includes
the definition of a Water Resource as well as an Estuary.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 32
A Water Use License Application in terms of the National Water Act, 1998 is not
necessary as there are no activities requiring this.
WESSA/Coastwatch has asked that the need for an Integrated Water Use License be re-
assessed. Clarification has been sought from the Provincial Department of Water Affairs
and any information pertaining to this will be included during the EIA phase.
4.6 The Marine Living Resources Act, 1989
The Marine Living Resources Act, 1989 (Act No. 18 of 1989) (MLRA) aims to provide for
the conservation of the marine ecosystem, the long term sustainable utilisation of marine
living resources, the orderly access to exploitation, utilisation and protection of certain
marine living resources and to provide for the exercise of control over marine living
resources in a fair and equitable manner to the benefit of all citizens of South Africa.
The National Water Act definition for a Water Resource
includes:
1.) A Watercourse;
2.) Surface Water;
3.) An Estuary; and
4.) An Aquifer
The National Water Act definition for an estuary is:
A partially or fully enclosed body of water –
a.) which is open to the sea permanently or periodically; and
b.) within which the sea water can be diluted to an extent that
is measurable with fresh water drained from the land.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 33
These aims are directly dependent on the healthy functioning of estuaries and thus the
impacts of developments on estuaries as well as Marine living resources needs to be
acertained.
The MLRA applies to all persons on, or in South African waters.
The main implication of this act, is the sustainable utilisation of marine resources.
Estauries provide numerous ecosystem goods and services which are necessary to
marine resources and thus impacts on the Durban Bay Estuary may impact marine
resources.
4.7 The Seashore Act, 1935
The Seashore Act, 1935 (Act 21 of 1935) regulated the use and pollution as well as the
removal of material from the sea and shore. This act was repealed in its entirety by the
National Environmental Management: Integrated Coastal Management Act, 2008. The
Seashore Act, is still discussed in the Durban Bay Estuary Management Plan –
Situational Analysis and as such is worth mentioning.
4.8 The Sea Birds and Seals Act, 1973
The Sea birds and Seals Act, 1973 (Act No. 46 of 1973) provides protection for various
seabirds along the South African coast including estuaries.
The main implication of this act is the protection of seabirds. The Central Sandbank
provides a tidal habitat to many migratory wading birds.
South African Waters includes the seashore, internal waters, territorial
waters, the exclusive economic zone and such waters as tidal lagoons and
tidal rivers in which the rise and fall of the water level takes place as a
result of the tides.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 34
4.9 The National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004
The National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (10 of 2004) was promulgated
for the management and conservation of South Africa’s biodiversity through the
protection of species and ecosystems and the sustainable use of indigenous biological
resources.
The main implication of this act is the protection of biodiversity. The Central Sandbank is
a diverse habitat and thus the impacts of the proposed project need to be ascertained.
4.10 The National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act, 2003
The aim of the National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act, 2003 (Act No
57 of 2003) is to provide for the protection and conservation of ecologically viable areas
representative of South Africa’s biological diversity and natural seascapes. The purpose
of a Protected Environment is amongst others to protect a specific ecosystem outside a
special nature reserve world heritage site or nature reserve and also to ensure the use of
the natural resources in the area is sustainable.
4.11 The Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act, 1983
The Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act, 1983 (Act No 43 of 1983) requires the
maintenance of riparian vegetation and provides a list of invasive alien vegetation that
must be controlled or eradicated.
4.12 The National Heritage Resources Act, 1999
The National Heritage Resources Act (25 of 1999) was promulgated for the protection of
National Heritage Resources and the empowerment of civil society to conserve their
heritage resources.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 35
In terms of Section 38 of this act, certain listed activities require authorisation from
provincial agencies:
(a) the construction of a road, wall, powerline, pipeline, canal or other similar form of
linear development or barrier exceeding 300m in length;
(b) the construction of a bridge or similar structure exceeding 50 m in length;
(c) any development or other activity which will change the character of a site—
(i) exceeding 5 000 m2 in extent; or
(ii) involving three or more existing erven or subdivisions thereof;
(d) the re-zoning of a site exceeding 10 000 m2 in extent.
The National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 protects both buildings and shipwrecks that
are older than 60 years old. A permit may be required from SAHRA should the need arise
to disturb or damage any historic shipwrecks however at this point no permits are
necessary. Further, during the Channel Widening and Deepening Project, studies were
done to determine the location of shipwrecks. These will be checked against the areas of
development for this project.
Other relevant legislation which incorporates submerged archaeological sites is described
in the following acts:
Merchant Shipping Act, 1951 (Act No, 57 of 1951);
Customs and Excise Act, 1964 (Act No 91 of 1964); and
Legal Succession to the South African Transport Services Act, 1989 (Act No 9 of
1989).
The above legislation mainly deals with the sites of shipwrecks and with shipwrecks and
their contents without any reference to any cultural or historical value. Only the NHRA
specifically acknowledges the value of shipwrecks in terms of cultural or historical
context.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 36
4.13 The Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2003
The Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) (Act No. 28 of 2002)
sets out the requirements with which applicants for prospecting rights, mining rights and
mining permits must comply in Sections 16, 22 and 27 of the MPRDA.
Important definitions of the MPDA include:
‘ ‘
‘ ‘
Specifically, Section 35 (1) states that “The protection of any wreck in the
territorial waters and the maritime cultural zone shall be the responsibility of the
South African Heritage Resource Agency (SAHRA)”.
‘Land’ which includes the surface of the land and the sea, where appropriate,
Mine’ when used as a verb, means any operation or activity for the purposes of
winning an mineral on, in, or under the earth, water, or any residue deposit,
whether by underground or open working or otherwise and includes any operation
or activity incidental thereto.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 37
In order to infill behind the new quay wall, a mining permit will be required to dredge the
required material from an offshore sand winning area.
4.14 The National Ports Act, 2005
The National Ports Act, 2005 (Act No. 12 of 2005) is the primary piece of legislation
regulating the port sector in South Africa. It specifically deals with the modernisation and
efficient operation of South African ports. Transnet National Ports Authority (TNPA) must
regulate and control development, in accordance with approved port development
frameworks, integrate biophysical, social and economic issues in all forms of decision
making and ensure sustainable and transparent planning processes, in consultation with
stakeholders.
Mineral’ means any substance, whether in solid, liquid or gaseous form, occurring
naturally in or on the earth or in or under water and which was formed by subjected
to a geological process and includes sand, stone, rock, gravel, clay, soil and any
minerals occurring in residue stockpiles or residue deposits but excludes –
a.) water, other than water taken from land or sea for the extraction of any mineral
b.) petroleum; or
c.) peat
The objective of the Ports:
“To promote the development of effective and productive South African
ports Industry that is capable of contributing to the economic growth and
development of South Africa”
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 38
Section 69 of the NPA deals with the protection of the environment and requires that
TNPA achieves a balance between the protection of the environment and the
establishment, development and maintenance of ports as well as ensuring the
sustainable and transparent port planning processes are undertaken when formulating
any port development framework. Amongst others the NPA requires that TNPA regulate
and control pollution within the port limits.
Section 80 of the NPA deals with Port regulations, while Section 83 deals with Port
Access and recognises that a port must be freely accessible to any person who conducts
lawful business in it. However as per the requirements of the International Ship and Port
Facility Security (ISPS) code and the Occupational Health and Safety Act, a balance
between public access and safety is required.
As per Section 80 (2) of the NPA, TNPA has developed Port Rules (Government Gazette
No 31986 on 6 March 2009) for the control and management of ports and the approaches
thereto and for the maintenance of safety, security and good order in the ports. The Port
Rules deal with the following:
Vessel movements;
Health and Safety;
Prevention of Pollution;
Protection of the Environment; and
Compliance with the Port Waste Management Plan.
4.15 The National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, 2004
The National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act 39 of 2004 provides for the
setting of national norms and standards for regulating air quality monitoring, management
and control and describes specific air quality measures so as to protect the environment
and human health or well-being by:
preventing pollution and ecological degradation; and
promoting sustainable development through reasonable resource use.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 39
It also includes the establishment of national ambient dust fall out levels that may be
relevant to the construction.
4.16 The Occupational Health and Safety Act, 1993
The Occupational Health and Safety Act, 1993 (Act No.85 of 1993) provides for the
health and safety of people at work as well as the health and safety of persons using
plant and machinery.
4.17 The National Health and Safety Act, 2004
The National Health Act, 2004 (Act No. 61 of 2004) provides measures for the promotion
of health of citizens of South Africa and is administered by the Department of Health. The
Act has impact on the port in that pollution of marine resources can have impacts of
human health.
The Act also provide for Municipal Health Services which include:
Water quality monitoring;
Waste management;
Health surveillance of premises;
Environmental pollution control; and
Chemical safety
4.18 The KZN Conservation Management Act
The Act provides for the establishment of the KZN Conservation and prescribes its
powers, duties and functions which include:
Direct Nature conservation management
Direct Protected areas management;
This is currently carried out by Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 40
4.19 Policy, Programmes and Plans
4.19.1 Durban Bay Estuarine Management Plan – Situational Analysis Report
As per the National Environmental Management: Integrated Coastal Management Act,
Transnet National Ports Authority, Department of Agriculture, Environmental Affairs and
Rural Development and eThekwini Municipality have requested the development of the
Durban Bay Estuarine Management Plan. As part of this, a Situational assessment of the
Durban Bay was undertaken by Environmental Resources Management (ERM) and
Marine and Estuarine Research (MER) (MER/ERM, 2011). Information contained in this
report has been used in this Scoping report.
Please note that the draft Environmental Management Plan for the Durban Bay Estuary
was only made available for public review after the Scoping Report had been compiled
(from 12 March 2012). However, the implications of this document will be discussed
during the EIA phase.
4.19.2 eThekwini Integrated Development Plan
The Municipal Systems Act, 2000 (Act No. 32 of 2000) requires that local government
structures prepare Integrated Development Plans (IDPs) to serve as tools for facilitation
and management of development. The IDP (2011) highlights the Port of Durban as an
economic investment area that requires major investment. The development of the Port
as an economic, manufacturing and trading hub and its promotion as a gateway port to
the east is prioritised. However, the IDP also highlights the importance of balancing the
physical, social and economic benefits of the coastal area.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 41
4.20 Guidelines
The following guidelines were used in the preparation of this report.
Integrated Environmental Management Information Series, in particular Series 2 –
Scoping (DEAT, 2002);
Guideline on Alternatives: NEMA Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations
(prepared by the Western Cape Department of Environmental Affairs and
Development Planning, 2006);
Guideline 3: General Guide to the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations,
2005. Integrated Environmental Management Guideline Series (DEAT, 2005a);
Guideline 4: Public Participation, in support of the EIA Regulations. Integrated
Environmental Management Guideline Series (DEAT, 2005);
Guideline on Need and Desirability, NEMA Environmental Impact Assessment
Regulations Guideline and Information Document Series. Department of
Environmental Affairs and Development Planning (DEADP, 2009);
Assessment of alternatives and impacts (Guideline 5) in support of the EIA
Regulations, Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Pretoria (DEAT,
2006); and
Celiers, L., Breetzke, T., Moore, L., and Malan, D. 2009. A User-friendly Guide to
South Africa’s Integrated Coastal Management Act. DEA and SSO Engineers and
Environmental Consultants, Cape Town, South Africa.
Although, not a Guideline, the Review and Update of South Africa’s National Action List
for the Screening of Dredged Sediment proposed for Marine Disposal (DEA, 2011) also
provided much guidance in regards to Screening of Dredged Material.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 42
4.21 International Conventions
4.21.1 The London Convention of 1972
The deliberate disposal of waste and other matter at sea is internationally regulated
through the London Convention (Convention of the Prevention of Marine Pollution by
Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter). As a party to the London Convention, the South
African government has agreed to adhere to the pollution prevention principles
encapsulated in the convention.
4.21.2 The London Protocol of 1996
The London Protocol entered into force on 24 March 2006 and acts to modernise the
London Convention. It will replace the London Convention when all members of the
Convention are also parties to the London Protocol. However, for parties which are
already parties to the London Protocol, the protocol supersedes the London Convention.
4.21.3 The Bonn Convention - Convention on the Conservation of Migratory
Species of Wild Animals (CMS)
This convention was organised in response to the need for nations to cooperate in the
conservation of animals that migrate across their borders. These include terrestrial
mammals, reptiles, marine species and birds. Special attention is paid to endangered
species. South Africa is a major partner in this convention as it is the terminus for many of
the migratory species, including the Palaeoarctic (birds) and the Antarctic species
(whales and birds).
4.22 Previous Records of Decision regarding the Port of Durban
In 1999, Common Ground Consulting undertook an Integrated Environmental
Management Process which evolved into an Environmental Impact Assessment on behalf
of Portnet (now TNPA) regarding the following activities:
1. Phase 1, which would have involved the westward expansion of Pier 2 to create
berths 206/207 and the dredging of the channel through the central banks;
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 43
2. Phase 2, which would have entailed the relocation of the SA Container Depot
(SACD) and the creation of a buffer zone relating to Phase 1;
3. Phase 3, which entailed the creation of Deepwater Berths ‘D’ to ‘G’ at the Point
and the relocation of breakbulk business from Pier 1 to the new terminal;
4. Phase 4(a), which entailed the conversion of Pier 1 to container handling; and
5. Phase 4(b), which would have entailed the eastward expansion of Pier 1.
The main implications for the Current Scoping Assessment come from clarification
provided from the Department. Firstly, although similar, Phase 1 of the 1999 EIA would
create two new berths and permanently separate the central sandbank. It would also
result in the permanent loss of the Little Lagoon. The current proposed project, cuts into a
small portion of the central sandbank but does not cut through and separate it. In
addition, it does not directly impact the Little Lagoon (Indirect impacts will be assessed as
part of the Scoping and EIA process).
“Successful outcome of the habitat rehabilitation, creation and monitoring programme
referred to Paragraph 5, means that the Department would assess the success based on
future evidence to be provided in a possible application.”
The proposed project through the Scoping and EIA process will assess the impacts of the
proposed development and this will be assessed by the Department as a new application.
Another important point of clarity, is that in regards to Phase 3, the authorisation was
granted on condition that there is to no further loss of water area in the future as a result
of infilling.” Further clarification from the Authorities indicated that no further infilling to the
‘magnitude of Phase 3 would be allowed. The proposed infilling is less than the Phase 3
infilling and thus below the order of magnitude provided by the Department.
The Record of Decision for the above Phased activities was as follows:
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 44
Table 5: 1999 RoD and the implications for the Current Scoping report
Phase RoD Implications for the current Scoping Report
Phase 1, which would have involved the westward expansion of Pier 2 to create berths 206/207 and the dredging of the channel through the central banks
Not granted 1. Stakeholders consulted throughout the IEM process recommended that Phase 1 should be deferred;
2. Phase 1 is proposed within the most ecologically sensitive parts of the Bay; 3. The findings of the EIR indicate that the ecological impacts of Phase 1 are irreversible and
significantly high 4. The ecological impacts of the Phase will result in:
a. Permanent loss of habitat for juvenile fish and migrant wading birds. South Africa is a signatory to the Bonn Convention and therefore should put measures in place to honour her commitment to the convention
b. Dredging of the channel would separate the remaining sandbanks from the mangroves leading to the destruction of the Natural Heritage Site which lies within the Little Lagoon
5. Future approval of Phase 1 would dependent of the outcome of a habitat, rehabilitation, creation and monitoring programme led by Portnet.
In 1999, the latter was clarified with the Authorities: “Successful outcome of the habitat rehabilitation, creation and monitoring programme referred to Paragraph 5, means that the Department would assess the success based on future evidence to be provided in a possible application.”
Phase 2, which would have entailed the relocation of the SA Container Depot (SACD) and the creation of a buffer zone relating to Phase 1;
Not granted The findings of the EIA was that Phase 2 is closely associated with Phase 1 and therefore should be deferred.
Phase 3, which entailed the creation of Deepwater Berths ‘D’ to ‘G’ at the Point and the relocation of breakbulk business from Pier 1 to the new terminal;
Authorised “Authorisation is granted on condition that there is to no further loss of water area in the future as a result of infilling.” This point was clarified with the Authorities in 1999. The Clarification states that the “no further loss of water area” means that there should be no further infill of the sea to the order of magnitude of Phase 3.
Phase 4(a), which entailed the conversion of Pier 1 to container handling
Authorised None
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 45
Phase 4(b), which would have entailed the eastward expansion of Pier 1.
Refused 1. Phase 4 (b) will proceed only if Phase 1 or a new long term option proves not viable; 2. The activity will result in further filling of the bay and loss of deep water habitat
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 46
There have been several comments from I&APs regarding the 1999 RoD. These have
been noted. In addition, the Clarification obtained from the Department of Environmental
Affairs (DEA) then the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) has
been made available on the project website (www.berth203to205expansioneia.co.za).
The 1999 RoD has been read together with the Clarification obtain from the Department.
5. SCOPING AND EIA PROCESS
5.1 Environmental Assessment Triggers
The proposed Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berth 203 to 205 entails certain
activities that require authorisation in terms of NEMA. Refer to Section 4 for further
discussion on the legal framework.
The process for seeking authorisation is undertaken in accordance with the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations (GN No. R. 543, R. 544, R. 545 and
R. 546 of 18 June 2011), promulgated in terms of Chapter 5 of NEMA. From the date of
effect of these amended EIA Regulations, which was 02 August 2010, they replaced the
previous EIA Regulations that had been promulgated on 21 April 2006.
Based on the types of activities involved, which include activities listed in GN No. R. 544,
R. 545 and R. 546 of 18 June 2011 (see Table 4), the requisite environmental
assessment for the project is a Scoping and EIA process.
5.2 Environmental Assessment Authorities
In terms of NEMA, the lead decision-making authority for the environmental assessment
is the National Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA), as the project proponent
TNPA is a Parastatal company. However, due to the geographic location of the project
the KZN Department of Agriculture, Environmental Affairs and Rural Development
(DAEARD) is regarded as a key commenting authority during the execution of the EIA,
and all documentation will thus be copied to this Department.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 47
In addition, the Coastal and Biodiversity Management Component of the Department of
Agriculture, Environmental Affairs and Rural Development will also receive a copy of all
documentation as requested.
5.3 Scoping Process
5.3.1 Formal Process
According to DEAT (2002), Scoping is typically divided into three phases, namely:
Planning the scoping procedure;
A process of stakeholder engagement to identify the key issues, and
Reporting on the terms of reference for the next Phase of the assessment.
A key output of the Scoping process is the prioritisation of environmental issues and
impacts and the selection of suitable and feasible alternatives to be investigated further.
An outline of the Scoping and EIA process for the proposed Deepening, Lengthening and
Widening of Berths 203 to 205, is provided in below.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 48
Figure 9: Scoping and EIA Authorisation Process
5.3.2 Landowner Notification
TNPA is the Landowner and the Project proponent. However, as per the EIA regulations,
TNPA were notified of the proposed project during the application phase.
Acknowledgment of Notification is provided below.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 49
Figure 10: Acknowledgement of Landowner Notification
5.3.3 Application Form
An Application Form for Scoping and EIA, in terms of Regulation 26 of Government
Notice No. R. 543 of 18 June 2010, was submitted to DEA on 10 February 2012 (refer to
copy of Application Form and DEA’s acknowledgement contained in Appendix A). DEA
assigned the following reference number to the project: NEAS Reference:
DEA/EIA/0000988/2012; DEA Reference: 14/12/16/3/3/2/275. A copy of the Application
Form was submitted to KZN DAEARD.
5.3.4 Screening of Alternatives
Various options to meeting the project’s objectives were considered during the previous
feasibility study (PRDW, 2011).
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 50
The Scoping exercise considers feasible design alternatives of the quay wall. The main
reason for this is that the current quay wall does not meet current safety standards and
needs to be replaced. Thus no location alternatives can be considered. The “no go”
option is also evaluated.
The EIA Phase will include a detailed comparative analysis of the project’s feasible
alternatives that emanate from the Scoping exercise, which will include environmental,
social, economic and technical evaluations (with specialist input). This will ultimately
result in the selection of a Best Practicable Environmental Option (BPEO).
See Section 11 for further discussions on alternatives.
5.3.5 Impact Prediction
The potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed project were identified
during the Scoping Phase through an appraisal of the following:
Proposed footprint of the project infrastructure and components, which included a
desktop evaluation with a Geographical Information System (GIS) and aerial
photography, as well as site investigations;
Activities associated with the project life-cycle (i.e. pre-construction, construction,
operation and decommissioning);
Nature and profile of the receiving environment and potential sensitive environmental
features and attributes;
Input received during public participation from I&APs; and
Legal and policy context.
The Scoping exercise aims to identify and qualitatively predict significant environmental
issues for further consideration and prioritisation during the EIA stage (see Section 15).
Note that “significance” relate to whether the effect (i.e. change to the environmental
feature / attribute) is of sufficient importance that it ought to be considered and have an
influence on decision-making.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 51
During the EIA stage a detailed quantitative impact assessment will be informed by
contributions from the project team, specialist studies, the public, and through the
application of the impact assessment methodology contained in Section 15. Suitable
mitigation measures will be identified to manage (i.e. prevent, reduce, rehabilitate and/or
compensate) the environmental impacts, and will be included in an Environmental
Management Programme (EMPr).
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 52
6. ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS
The following assumptions and limitations were made in the Scoping exercise:
In accordance with the purpose of Scoping, the report does not include detailed
specialist investigations on the receiving environment, which will only form part of the
EIA Phase. The environment in the project area was primarily assessed in the
Scoping Phase through site visits, desktop screening, incorporating existing
information from previous studies, and input received from I&APs.
As the design of the project components is still in feasibility stage, and due to the
dynamic nature of the planning environment, the dimensions and layout of the
infrastructure may change as the technical study advances.
The details of the offshore sand winning areas are based on previous geophysical and
sediment sampling and will only be confirmed following the conclusion of the
geotechnical study, which will be available during the EIA Phase.
The details of the Sediment and Chemical analysis of Dredge Material will only be
available in the EIA Phase. The desktop analysis of the impacts of disposal of dredge
material included in this Scoping report was taken from previous modelling studies
regarding offshore disposal.
Since 2000, there have been numerous Specialist studies regarding the Central
Sandbank and the Little Lagoon. These reports have been used to provide a desktop
analysis of the impacts of the proposed projects. Specialist Studies for the proposed
project will only be available in the EIA Phase.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 53
7. NEED AND DESIRABILITY
In terms of Regulation 28(1)(i) of GN No. R. 543 (18 June 2010), this section discusses
the need and desirability of the project. The format contained in the Guideline on Need
and Desirability (DEA&DP, 2009) has been used in Table 6.
Table 6: Need and Desirability of the Proposed Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203
to 205
No. Question Response
NEED (‘timing’)
1. Is the land use (associated with the activity being applied for) considered within the timeframe intended by the existing approved Spatial Development Framework (SDF) agreed to by the relevant environmental authority? (i.e. is the proposed development in line with the projects and programmes identified as priorities within the IDP).
The eThekwini Integrated Development Plan (IDP) and the Central Spatial Development Framework (CSDF) prioritises the development of the Port as an economic, manufacturing and trading hub and promoting it as a gateway especially to the East;
However, it must be noted that eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality has raised an objection to the proposed development based on the 1999 RoD. The Clarification of the 1999 RoD has been made available in Appendix R as part of the final Scoping Report. (Please see Comments and Response Report in Appendix P).
2. Should development, or if applicable, expansion of the town/area concerned in terms of this land use (associated with the activity being applied for) occur here at this point in time?
Yes The proposed project aims to increase container efficiency at the Port of Durban. Data from the Transnet eThekwini Municipality Port Initiative (TEMPI) suggests that the upgrade is necessary in order to meet current and future demand. TEMPI which is a joint planning initiative between Transnet and the eThekwini Municipality. Initiated at the beginning of 2006, TEMPI aimed to develop a framework to inform independent decision making, based on a shared vision and understanding of future development requirements of the port and the city. The TEMPI exercise occurred in the context of rapidly escalating demand for port capacity and related activities, nationally and particularly in Durban:
Current projections are that container volumes will be 2,5 times higher in 2020 than in 2006.
The Durban port handled 1,7m TEU in 2005, and Transnet projects that it will need to be able to handle some 5,36m TEU by 2020, and 8m TEU by 2050,
Transnet projections are based on moderate national economic growth estimates (3/4% pa), which are already being exceeded.
In addition, Van Coller et al., (2007) undertook a Value Chain Analysis of the Durban Maritime Industry. Data showed that the
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 54
No. Question Response
current efficiency of the container terminals is low and new cranes are required in order to increase efficiency. In addition, Transnet (2009) safety analysis of the quay wall indicated it was below the minimum Eurocode 7 Safety requirements and thus needs to be upgraded. Lastly, major shipping companies have indicated to TNPA that they are planning to start using larger Super Post Panamax vessels which currently cannot be accommodated by Berths 203 to 205. The lengthening of the berths would allow for simultaneous berthing of three 350m Super Post Panamax Vessels..
3. Does the community/area need the activity and the associated land use concerned (is it a societal priority)? This refers to the strategic as well as local level (e.g. development is a national priority, but within a specific local context it could be inappropriate)
TEMPI which is a joint planning initiative between Transnet and the eThekwini Municipality initiated in 2006 undertook to understand the Economic footprint of the Port of Durban. Around 32 000 people are employed directly in the port. In addition, approximately 7000 people are employed indirectly. According to the IDP (2011) employment numbers in the eThekwini Municipality amounted to 53.4% of the provincial total with the majority of employment opportunities in (1) wholesale and retail trade, (2) community services and (3) manufacturing; Ongoing improvements at the Port of Durban have cushioned the blow of the global economic slowdown (IDP, 2011).
However, it must be noted that eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality has raised an objection to the proposed development based on the 1999 RoD. The Clarification of the 1999 RoD has been made available in Appendix R as part of the final Scoping Report. (Please see Comments and Response Report in Appendix P).
4. Are the necessary services with appropriate capacity currently available (at the time of application), or must additional capacity be created to cater for the development?
Services to be considered during the EIA Phase however due to the fact that the proposed project is an upgrade of an existing site, it is thought that service provision will be available.
5. Is this development provided for in the infrastructure planning of the municipality, and if not what will the implication be on the infrastructure planning of the municipality (priority and placement of services)?
Transnet and eThekwini initiated a joint planning initiative in 2006 called TEMPI which aimed to develop a framework to inform independent decision making, based on a shared vision and understanding of future development requirements of the port and the city. The proposed upgrade of Berths 203 to 205 is in line with this framework.
However, it must be noted that eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality has raised an objection to the proposed development based on the 1999 RoD. The Clarification of the 1999 RoD has been made available in Appendix R as part of the final Scoping Report. (Please see Comments and Response Report in Appendix P).
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 55
No. Question Response
6. Is this project part of a national programme to address an issue of national concern or importance?
Yes The National Development Plan for 2030 makes mention of new plans developed by Transnet to address the capacity issues with the Port of Durban.
DESIRABILITY (‘placing’)
7. Is the development the best practicable environmental option (BPEO) for this land/site?
The BPEO will only be determined following a comparative analysis of the feasible alternatives during the EIA Phase.
8. Would the approval of this application compromise the integrity of the existing approved municipal IDP and SDF as agreed to by the relevant authorities?
No It is not anticipated that the proposed project will contradict or be in conflict with the municipal IDPs and SDFs as in both documents, the strategic importance of development of the Port of Durban is made.
However, it must be noted that eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality has raised an objection to the proposed development based on the 1999 RoD. The Clarification of the 1999 RoD has been made available in Appendix R as part of the final Scoping Report. (Please see Comments and Response Report in Appendix P).
9. Would the approval of this application compromise the integrity of the existing environmental management priorities for the area (e.g. as defined in EMFs), and if so, can it be justified in terms of sustainability considerations?
The impacts of the proposed activity will be assessed in the EIA Phase however, the Port of Durban occurs within Durban Bay Estuary which is a D’MOSS area. Wherever possible no development is permitted within D’MOSS. This system has been designed to ensure a sustained supply of ecosystem goods and services that are needed to ensure a high quality of life for all of Durban’s residents.
Figure 11: D’MOSS area
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 56
No. Question Response
10. Do location factors favour this land use (associated with the activity applied for) at this place? (this relates to the contextualisation of the proposed land use on this site within its broader context).
The proposed project does not change the current land use of Berths 203 to 205 (which are currently used for Berthing of Ships and container handling). The proposed project, however extends the footprint of Berths 203 (eastwards) and Berth 205 (westwards) into D’MOSS areas which provide important ecosystem services.
11. How will the activity or the land use associated with the activity applied for, impact on sensitive natural and cultural areas (built and rural/natural environment)?
The impact of the proposed activity on sensitive features such as the Little Lagoon and Central Sandbank as well as on Durban Bay Estuary as a whole will be assessed in detail in the EIA Phase. For a desktop assessment, see compilation of significant environmental issues associated with the proposed Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205 contained in Section 14.
12. How will the development impact on people’s health and wellbeing (e.g. i.t.o. noise, odours, visual character and sense of place, etc)?
The proposed activity takes place within an existing port. For a desktop assessment, see compilation of significant environmental issues associated with the proposed Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205 contained in Section 14.
13 Will the proposed activity or the land use associated with the activity applied for, result in unacceptable opportunity costs?
For a desktop assessment, see compilation of significant environmental issues associated with the proposed Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205 contained in Section 14.
14 Will the proposed land use result in unacceptable cumulative impacts?
Cumulative impacts, as considered in Section 14.4 will be evaluated in the EIA Phase
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 57
8. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PRACTITIONER
Nemai Consulting was appointed by Transnet National Ports Authority (TNPA) as the
independent Environmental Assessment Practitioner (EAP) to undertake the
environmental assessment for the proposed Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of
Berths 203 to 205, Port of Durban. In accordance with Regulation 28(1)(a) of Government
Notice No. R. 543 of 18 June 2010, this section provides an overview of Nemai
Consulting and the company’s experience with EIAs, as well as the details and
experience of the EAPs that form part of the Scoping and EIA team.
Nemai Consulting is an independent, specialist environmental, social development and
Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) consultancy, which was founded in December
1999. The company is directed by a team of experienced and capable environmental
engineers, scientists, ecologists, sociologists, economists and analysts. The company
has offices in Randburg (Gauteng), Durban (KZN) and Rustenburg (North West
Province).
The core members of Nemai Consulting that are involved with the Scoping and EIA
process for the proposed Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205,
Port of Durban are captured in Table 7 below, and their respective Curricula Vitae are
contained in to Appendix B.
Table 7: Scoping and EIA Core Team Members
Name Qualifications Duties
Ms D. Naidoo BSc Eng (Chem) Project Manager
Environmental Engineering
Ms. V. Brueton
BSc. (Hons) – Ecology, Environment and Conservation
MSc. – Ecology, Environment and Conservation (Awaiting Examination)
EIA Process
Scoping & EIA Reports
Ms A. Burke BSc – Forestry Management
MSc - Natural Resource Management
Public Participation Coordinator
Conservation Specialist
Mr D. Henning
BSc (Hons) Aquatic Health
M.Sc River Ecology
Water Quality and Aquatic Health Specialist
Mr C. Chidley BSc Eng (Civil);
BA (Economics, Philosophy)
Environmental Engineering
EMP
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 58
MBA
Ms. R. Le Roux
MSc (Env Management) EIA process
9. PROJECT LOCATION
The project area occurs in the central region of the eThekwini Municipal Area (EMA) and
falls within Durban (Figure 12. The central region is essentially the Urban Core of the
EMA and is home to approximately 1.3 million people accounting for 34% of eThekwini’s
total population of 3.5 million people (Stats SA). Please see Appendix D for the locality
maps of the area.
Figure 12: Central Region of the eThekwini Municipal Area (EMA) (From IDP, 2011)
The boundaries of the Central Spatial Region (CSR) extend from the Umgeni River, in the
North, along the coast through to the Umlaas Canal in the South and extend to the
escarpment in the west extending over an area of 677 km2 (67772.33 ha). Three Area
Based Management (ABM) areas fall within the CSR namely; Inner eThekwini
Regeneration and Urban Management Programme (iTrump), Cato Manor Development
Association (CMDA) and part of the South Durban Basin (SDB) (IDP,2011).
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 59
The project site occurs in Ward 66 (Figure 15) and the property description for the sites is
Portion of Kings Flats No. 16344 (Pier 2) (N0FU00000001634400000) and Portion 10 of
Erf 10013, Durban (N0FU00850001001300000). See Figure 13 and 14 for the Site
Locality Maps.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 60
Figure 13: 1: 250 000 Topo-Cadastral Locality Map
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 61
Figure 14: 1:20 000 Topo-Cadastral Locality Map
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 62
Figure 15: Ward Map
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 63
10. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Note: The sizing and location of the project-related infrastructure takes place within a
dynamic planning environment, with various role-players, affected landowners, authorities
and other stakeholders. Subsequent project modifications that emanate from discussions
with the I&APs, findings from specialist studies and technical considerations will be
conveyed during the public participation of the EIA Phase and will be incorporated into
the Draft EIA report, which will be lodged in the public domain.
The proposed upgrade would include the following activities:
1. The westward lengthening of Berth 205 by 170m;
2. The eastward lengthening of Berth 203 by 100m;
3. The seaward widening of Berths 203 to 205 by 50m;
4. The deepening of the Berth channel, approach channel, and vessel turning basin
from the current -12.7m CDP to -16.5m CDP;
5. Three technical options are to be considered namely, the Caisson option, Sheet
Pile Option and Deck on Pile option, however for the Caisson option, a trench will
need to be excavated to -19m CDP;
6. The construction of caissons or storage of sheet piles or precasting of elements of
the Deck on Pile (for the Caisson option, Sheet Pile Option and Deck on Pile
option, respectively) at Bayhead Lot 10;
7. The offshore disposal of dredge material;
8. The offshore sand winning for infill material; and
9. The installation of new Ship to Shore (STS) cranes and associated infrastructure
Three technological alternatives for the Upgrade of Berths 203 to 205 are being
considered. These include:
1. Deck On Pile Quay Wall;
2. Sheet Pile Quay Wall; and
3. Caisson Quay Wall.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 64
Refer to the layout of three technology alternatives contained in Appendix C for the
discussions to follow. A more detailed description of the project activities is provided in
the sections to follow.
10.1 Project Components
10.1.1 Design Parameters of the Quay wall
In order to increase efficiency of Berths 203 to 205, the design alternatives have taken
into account the following functional requirements:
The Quay wall needs to be 1190m long in order to simultaneously accommodate
three 9200 TEU capacity Super Post Panamax container vessels;
The Berths to have a water depth of -16.5m CDP with a cope level of +4.25m
CDP;
The Quay wall must be able to accommodate 80 tonne lift capacity Ship to Shore
Cranes with a rail gauge of 30.48m;
The new structures will be designed for a design life of 50 years;
The Quay wall must be flexible in accommodation of alternative loading
requirements;
The Quay wall option must be robust; and
The provision of additional stack area would be beneficial.
During the initial concept development phase, seven quay walls concepts were assessed
using a Multi Criteria Assessment approach. Options that provided a structural, safe,
reliable, financially viable and maintenance friendly structure were selected.
10.1.2 Design Parameters – Cope Level
The Cope Level which is the top edge of a quay wall also needed to determined and is
dependent on the water level in the harbour. Thus the following site conditions were
taken into account:
Astronomical tides;
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 65
Barometric pressure;
Wind and wave set up;
Resonance (seiche);
Long term effects (Global Climate Change); and
Short Period waves
Tide records between 1972 and 2001 were analysed and compared with astronomical
predictions to determine a residual value. This residual value provides information on the
impact of barometric pressure and set up effects. This value was found to be 69cm for a
1:100 year return period (PRDW, 2011)
Resonance is not believed to be significant because of the length of the waterway and
the convoluted shape of the bay.
The impact of global climate change and sea level rise will have an impact on the existing
quay structure in the future. Mid point projections, upper end projections and extreme
upper limit projections were considered for the period to 2050, 2061 and 2100
respectively. Upper end projects are recommended for large coastal structures (PRDW,
2011) and thus the following increase estimate was considered reasonable:
Increase in Sea Level to 2061 - +0.58m
Storm Surge increase to 2061 – +12%
Design Wave Height increase to 2061 – +10%
Short period waves due to wind or because of ship’s wake effects were superimposed
onto to the still water level. A wave height of 60cm (crest to trough) was considered
reasonable.
Thus the maximum water level in the port was calculated as follows.
Highest Astronomical Tide (HAT) = + 2.297m CDP
1:100 year residual = + 0.690m
Long Term Sea Level Rise (2061) = + 0.580m
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 66
Wave (60cm/2) = + 0.300m
+ 3.857m CDP
Minimum water level was calculated using the Lowest Astronomical Tide (LAT) which is
-0.013m CDP and Wave of -0.300m. From these calculations, a Cope Level of +4.25m
CDP has been used in the design. The figure below shows the proposed cope level.
Figure 16: Diagrammatic representation of the Cope Level (+4.25m CDP) (PRDW, 2011).
10.1.3 Design Parameters – Dredge Depth
In addition, the Berth Channel, approach channel and turning basin need to be dredged
to allow for the depth requirements of 9200 TEU Post Panamax Vessels. Dredge depths
were based on PIANC (1997a) and PIANC (1985) guidelines and the nominal depth was
determined using a 9200 TEU design vessel in fully laden conditions. In addition, to the
depth required for the design vessel, maintenance depth zone factors were also
determined.
The following design requirements were taken into account:
Design Vessel;
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 67
Channel and Berth depths;
Channel Geometry;
Channel Width;
Berth Length;
Cope Level;
Scour Protection;
Design loading conditions; and
Alternative Quay requirements
Table 8: The Design Vessel Characteristics
Characteristic Description Maximum
Design Vessel
Minimum
Design Vessel
Vessel Type
A TEU is a Twenty foot Equivalent Unit used
to describe 1 x 20ft Container and provides a
description of the size of the Container
Vessel.
9200 TEU 2000 TEU
Displacement The amount of water displaced fully laden.
As weight is added to a ship, it submerges. 147,700 m
3 30,694m
3
Dead Weight
Tonnage
Maximum DWT is the amount of weight a
ship can carry without riding dangerously low
in the water
111,000 dwt 20,000 dwt
Length Overall
The overall length of the Container Vessel
350m 201m
Length between
Perpendiculars
The length of a vessel along the waterline
from the main bow perpendicular member to
the main stern perpendicular member. This
gives a reasonable idea of the ship's carrying
capacity, as it excluded the small, often
334m 190m
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 68
Characteristic Description Maximum
Design Vessel
Minimum
Design Vessel
unusable volume contained in her
overhanging ends.
Beam
The beam (B) is its width at the widest point.
45.6m 28.6m
Laden Draft
The draft of a ship's hull is the vertical
distance between the waterline and the
bottom of the hull (keel), with the thickness of
the hull included. Draft determines the
minimum depth of water a ship or boat can
safely navigate.
14.5m 10.4m
Moulded Depth
The moulded depth (D) is the vertical
distance measured from the top of the keel to
the underside of the upper deck at side.
27.2m 16.1m
Bow Radius The radius of the forward part of the hull of a
ship. 150m -
Block Coefficient
Block Coefficient (Cb) is the volume (V)
divided by the Length Between
Perpendiculars (Lpp,) x Beam at Waterline
(BWL) x Draft (T). If you draw a box around
the submerged part of the ship, it is the ratio
of the box volume occupied by the ship. It
gives a sense of how much of the block
defined by the beam (B) & draft (T) is filled by
0.67 -
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 69
Characteristic Description Maximum
Design Vessel
Minimum
Design Vessel
the hull. Full forms such as oil tankers will
have a high Cb where fine shapes such as
sailboats will have a low Cb.
A deterministic method was used to determine channel and berth depths which included
factors such as tidal changes during transit, loaded draft of the vessel, net underkeel
clearance, allowances for squat and allowances for heel/trim. The channel and berth
depth factors are summarised below:
Table 9: Channel Depth and Berth Factors
Allowance Parameter Channel Depth Berth Depth
Tidal Changes during Transit 0.0m 0.0m
Loaded draft of the vessel 14.5, 14.5,
Net underkeel clearance 0.6m 0.6m
Allowances for Squat 0.4m 0.0m
Allowance for Heel/Trim 0.3m 0.4m
Nominal Depth 15.8m 15.5m
Allowance for Sounding Error 0.2m 0.2m
Allowance for Siltation 0.2m 0.5m
Maintenance Dredging
Accuracy
0.3m 0.3m
Depth Requirement (m CDP) 16.5 m CDP 16.5 m CDP
In addition, PIANC (1997a) recommends a minimum depth/draft ratio of between 1 and
1.15. This added to depth requirement means that the Total Depth requirement is
between -16. 0 m CDP and -16.7 m CDP and a depth of -16.5 m CDP was decided for
both the berth and the channel. Note: This figure excludes additional overburden
protection to the top of the berth scour protection.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 70
In terms of Channel Geometry, figure 17 shows the approximate area of the Berth
Channel, approach channel and turning basin to be dredged.
Figure 17: Berth Channel and approach channel to be dredged (PRDW, 2011).
Specific requirements include:
Although the entrance channel has been dredged to -17m CDP (in the Port
Entrance Widening project), the south East corner of the point berths does not
have the appropriate safety margin for the berthing operations. Thus the entrance
channel is to be widened and deepened to -17m CDP;
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 71
Figure 17a: Proposed widening and deepening of Point berths
The deepening of the remaining navigable channels to a depth of -16.5m CDP;
Figure 17b: Proposed deepening of the approach channel and berth channel to -16.5m
The deepening of the turning basin which is 600m in diameter, between Pier 1 and
the T-Jetty (Note PIANC requires a turning basin of 630m, however due to the
limiting factors of the sandbank and existing infrastructure, a turning basin of 600m
should be adequate); and
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 72
Figure 17c: Proposed deepening of the turning basin
A reduction in the channel width from 425m to 280m.
Figure 17d: Proposed reduction in channel width through the widening of berths 203 to 205 by 50m
The figures below show the proposed typical cross sections at deepened berths 203 to
205.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 73
Figure 17e: Geological Profile of approach channel and turning basin
Figure 17f: Geological profile of Berth channel
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 74
Figure 17g: Geological Profile between turning basin and berth channel
Figures 17e to 17g show the geological profile of the turning basin, approach channel and
berth channel which would be deepened as part of the proposed project. Approximately 4
million m3 of material will be dredged. The majority of this will be made up of sand
(3,640,357 m3), while a small portion will be made up of clay (582,640m3) (PRDW, 2011).
The design of the channel side slopes which face towards the sandbanks are based on
the existing slopes in these areas and are regarded to be at ‘limiting equilibrium’. The
design approach which has been taken aims to minimise the volume of dredging and the
impact on the sandbanks (PRDW, 2011).
In areas where the sandbanks will not be exposed to significant waves, a 1:3 slope will be
dredged. However in areas where the sandbanks will be affected by the propellers of the
berthing/ unberthing ships, the slopes will be protected using sheet piles.
On the basis of the current geotechnical information available, the dredging will be done
using a combination of a >10 000m3 Trailing Suction Hopper Dredger (TSHD) and a
Medium Size Cutter Suction Dredger (CSD) with associated tug, spilt hopper barges and
a workboat (PRDW, 2011).
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 75
All material will be dredged by the TSDH except the Berth 205 extension as the nature of
the dredging for the extension is very different to the rest of the proposed dredging. The
soil has to be cut from high levels: this will be done using the CSD which will undermine
the dredge slope and feed the cutter suction head of the dredger.
To adequately consider the impacts associated with the deepening, lengthening and
widening of Berth 203 to 205, the major activities during each Phase of the project life-
cycle is provided. The activities associated with the three alternative quay wall types may
have different activities associated and thus the project life cycles of each option is
tabulated below where necessary.
10.2 Project Life Cycle
10.2.1 Pre-feasibility and Feasibility Phases
a) Wave modelling;
b) Assessment of base conditions (including geology, construction material
investigation etc.);
c) Technical, economic and environmental screening of the three quay wall options;
d) Geotechnical investigations to confirm borrow areas and quarries;
e) Geotechnical investigations to confirm geology of the areas to be dredged; and
f) Sediment and Chemical analysis of Dredge material to be disposed.
10.2.2 Project Phasing
The proposed project will occur between 49 and 53 months (approximately 4 years)
(PRDW, 2011). However, due to the importance of the container terminal to the Port of
Durban, the project will need to be Phased to allow for two operational berths at all times
(Figure 18, 19, 20). This will occur in the following way:
Berth 205 will be decommissioned at the site camp set up;
This stage will take approximately 19 months;
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 76
During this time dredging of the entire dredge footprint will take place to ensure
that when the proposed deepened Berth 205 is operational, it will be able to safely
accommodate Super Post Panamax Ships; and
If possible, dredge material from the dredging will be used to infill behind the new
quay wall (for the Sheet pile and Caisson Options only).
Figure 18: Construction Stage 1 – Berth 205
Once Berth 205 is operational, Berth 204 will be decommissioned;
The area will be dredged and the new quay wall be fitted; and
The area behind the new quay wall will be infilled using fill material sourced from
an offshore sand winning site. This is due to the fact that by this stage, all dredging
will have taken place.
Comments raised by I&APs include the need to consider the alternative of storing the
dredge material for use for infilling of Berths 203 and 204. This will be considered as part
of the EIA phase.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 77
Figure 19: Construction Stage 2: Berth 204
Once Berth 204 becomes operational, Berth 203 will be decommissioned;
The area will be dredged and the new quay wall be fitted; and
The area behind the new quay wall will be infilled using fill material sourced from a
offshore sand winning site. This is due to the fact that by this stage, all dredging
will have taken place.
Figure 20: Construction Stage 3: Berth 203
The following diagram provides an overview of the planned berths after construction
(Figure 21).
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 78
Figure 21: Completed Berths after construction
10.2.3 Pre-construction Phase
a) Detailed engineering design;
b) Detailed geotechnical investigations;
c) Obtain Environmental Authorisation;
d) Obtain Permit for Offshore dredge disposal;
e) Obtain Permit for Offshore sand winning;
f) Procurement process for Contractors;
g) Transnet National Ports Authority (TNPA) will produce a detailed cargo migration
plan for container cargo during the proposed upgrade;
h) Demobilise Berth 205 for the first Phase of construction;
i) The displaced containers will be accommodated within the cargo migration plan.
j) Procurement of HZM 1180 D-24 and AZ 26 Sections for Sheet Pile extensions of
existing Berths;
k) Procurement of other necessary materials;
l) For caisson alternative: Set up site camp at Bayhead lot 10
m) For Sheet Pile Alternatives: Store sheet piles at Bayhead Lot 10; and
n) For Deck on Pile Alternative: Use Bayhead Lot 10 as casting yard.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 79
10.2.4 Construction Phase
The construction of the new quay wall is likely to take:
53 months for Double span Deck on Pile Quay wall;
52 months for Sheet Pile Quay wall; and
49 months for a Caisson Quay Wall.
General activities as part of the construction Phase include:
a) Appoint Environmental Control Officer;
b) Site establishment;
c) Relocation of infrastructure;
d) Establish construction camps;
e) Establish Bulk fuel storage;
f) Storage and handling of material;
g) Site and basin clearing;
h) Excavation and dredging of the site;
i) Establishment of and operations at the Lot 10 site for construction of Caissons
(Caisson Option) or Beams (Deck On Pile Option) or storage of Sheet Piles
(Sheet Pile Option);
j) Concrete Works;
k) Sheet Piling;
l) Mechanical, Electrical, Stormwater and Crane Rail;
m) Stockpiling (sand, crushed stone, aggregate, etc.);
n) Waste and wastewater management;
o) Reinstatement and rehabilitation of construction domain; and
p) Commissioning of Berths.
The following is a specific description of the activities related to the following phases.
Please refer to Section 10.2.2 for more information on project phasing.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 80
10.2.5 Extension of Berth 205
The extension of Berth 205 will use Sheet pile technology and will involve the following
activities:
a) Demolish and remove existing back of quay paving and South West corner return
wall;
b) Set up land based piling rig and guide frame and pile positions;
c) Position and drive HZ king piles and double AZ intermediate piles in staged
pattern;
d) Excavate for deadman anchor and tie rod installation;
e) Install deadman anchors;
f) Install, backfill and tension tie rods;
g) Construct cope beam and rear crane beam;
h) Dredge the Berth pocket to -18.3 m CDP;
i) Place scour protection;
j) Install services and pave back of quay area; and
k) Install quay furniture.
10.2.6 Extension of Berth 203
The return wall from 202 to 203 will use Sheet pile technology and will involve the
following activities:
a) Demolish and remove the existing quay wall so that the founding rock can be
removed in order to install the new sheet pile quay wall;
b) Set up marine piling rig and guide frame at pile positions;
c) Position and drive HZ king piles and double AZ intermediate piles in staged
pattern;
d) Partial backfill behind new wall;
e) Install deadman anchors;
f) Install, backfill and tension tie rods;
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 81
g) Complete backfill behind new wall;
h) Construct cope beam and rear crane beam;
i) Dredge the Berth pocket to -18.3 m CDP;
j) Place scour protection;
k) Install services and pave back of quay area; and
l) Install quay furniture.
Please note that initially it was thought that Sheet Pile extensions would be required for
both the Berth 203 and Berth 205 extensions. However, as new information regarding the
geology of site comes to light, all three alternatives will be considered for the extensions.
10.2.7 Upgrade of Berths 203 to 205
The project activities for the upgrade of the current berths differ depending on
technological alternative. The table below provides a summary of key activities related to
each quay wall alternative.
Table 10: Key Activities for differing Quay wall types
Deck On Pile Sheet Pile Caisson
Set up Casting yard at Lot 10. Set up marine piling rig and guide
frame at pile positions.
Construct Caissons at Bayhead
Lot 10 casting yard.
Remove existing scour
protection.
Position and drive HZ king piles
and double AZ intermediate piles
in staged pattern.
Dredge caisson trench to -19.6m
CD and place foundation bed
underwater.
Dredge to -18.5 m CDP at
28.5m seaward of existing
cope line.
Demolish existing back of quay
paving and core drill the tie rod
holes in existing capping unit.
Once complete, tow the caissons
into position and sink the caisson.
Drive central piles from marine
based piling rig.
Excavate for deadman anchor
and tie rod installation.
Fill the caissons with dredged
sand material and seal the joints
between the caissons.
Place revetment rock between
and around piles. Install deadman anchors.
Place scour protection and drive
piles for landside crane rail.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 82
Construct superstructure on
piles, working over water.
Install, backfill and tension the tie
rods. Backfill behind the caisson wall.
Install services and pave back
of quay area. Backfill behind the new wall.
Construct cope beam and rear
crane beam.
Place scour protection. Construct the cope beam and
rear crane beam.
Install services and pave back of
quay area.
Install Quay furniture.
Dredge berth pocket to -18.3m
CDP.
Install quay furniture. Place scour protection and pave
back of quay area.
Install quay furniture.
10.2.8 Operational Phase
a) Maintenance of infrastructure;
b) Operation of Berth 203 to 205 Container terminal;
c) Maintenance dredging to required depths; and
d) On-going consultation with directly affected parties.
10.2.9 Decommissioning Phase
The new quay wall has been designed to have a lifespan of approximately 50 years
with suitable maintenance. Depending on the Port of Durban requirements, Berths
203 to 205 would be maintained, or upgraded if necessary. Decommissioning is thus
not considered applicable to the project. However, should decommissioning be
required the activity will need to comply with the appropriate environmental legislation
and best practices at that time.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 83
11. ALTERNATIVES
Alternatives are the different ways in which the project can be executed to ultimately
achieve its objectives. Examples could include carrying out a different type of action,
choosing an alternative location or adopting a different technology or design for the
project.
The sub-sections to follow discuss the project alternatives considered during the Scoping
process. The EIA process will provide a detailed comparative analysis of alternatives
from environmental (including specialist input) and technical perspectives.
By conducting the comparative analysis, the Best Practicable Environmental Option
(BPEO) can be selected with technical and environmental justification. Münster (2005)
defines BPEO as the alternative that “provides the most benefit or causes the least
damage to the environment as a whole, at a cost acceptable to society, in the long term
as well as in the short term”.
11.1 Screened Alternatives
Prestedge Retief Dresner Wijnberg Consulting Port and Coastal Engineers (PRDW)
conducted a Pre-Feasibility analysis of seven quay wall alternatives (2011). These
alternatives included:
1. Deck On Pile (Double Span) Quay Wall;
2. Deck On Pile (Narrow) Quay Wall;
3. Deck with Toe Pile Quay Wall;
4. Sheet Pile Combi Quay Wall;
5. Caisson Full Slope Quay Wall;
6. Caisson Toe Pile Quay Wall; and
7. Counterfort Quay Wall.
A Multi Criteria Analysis based on the following factors was undertaken:
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 84
1. Serviceability
1.1 Accommodation of range of vessel sizes
1.2 Impact on terminal stacking area
2. Value and Cost
2.1 Capital Cost
2.2 Maintenance and Operation Cost
2.3 Least Occupational Cost
3. Constructability
3.1 Speed of construction
3.2 Interface with Dredging
3.3 Risk of delays due to ground conditions
4. Existing Structure
4.1 Stability of existing structure (permanent)
4.2 Stability of existing structure (temporary)
4.3 Impact of existing structure failure
5. Maintainability
5.1. Ease of Maintenance
5.2. Localisation and reparability of damage
5.3. Services
6. Upgradeability
6.1 Ability to design for future deepening
6.2 Ability to increase loading –post construction
From the Pre-feasibility, the following alternatives were determined to be feasible, and
underwent further feasibility studies (PRDW, 2012). The Scoping exercise considers
feasible alternatives in terms of the following quay wall alternatives.
1. Deck On Pile (Double Span) Quay Wall;
2. Sheet Pile Combi Quay Wall; and
3. Caisson Quay Wall.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 85
The EIA Phase will include a detailed comparative analysis of the project’s feasible
alternatives that emanate from the Scoping exercise, which will include environmental,
social, economic and technical evaluations (with specialist input) together with input from
I&APs. This will ultimately result in the selection of a Best Practicable Environmental
Option (BPEO).
An important consideration is that currently, the safety of the current quay wall has been
shown to be below standard and thus the main motivation for the upgrade is to prevent
berth collapse. The alternatives investigated (quay walls) have been largely considered to
address this issue.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 86
11.2 Quay Wall Alternatives
11.2.1 Deck On Pile Quay Wall
This option uses a combination of deck on pile structure and sheet pile quay wall sections
in order to make up the required 1190m of new quay wall length
A Deck on Pile structure consists of cast insitu suspended concrete “deck” structure
which is supported by precast beams and cast insitu concrete piles. The Deck On Pile
structure depends on the re-use of the existing quay wall as an integral structural
component. Due to the structural instability of the existing wall, additional passive
pressure would need to be applied to the waterside of the existing wall in the form of a
protective scour slope. The formation of the passive protection slope during construction
and its inaccessibility to maintenance crews after construction poses a significant risk to
failure of this type of construction.
The open nature of this structure also exposes a greater surface area of concrete to
splash zone corrosion. The inaccessible nature of the soffit (underneath) of the structure
makes repairs dangerous and expensive. The suspended deck does not require infilling.
Due to their configuration, deck on pile quay walls can be expected to be associated with
increased safety and environmental risks in the form of structure failure, slippage and
instability.
The Deck on Pile Quay Wall option consists of the following:
A new double span deck wall with a cope line of approximately 28.38m seaward of
the current cope line;
The rear Ship to Shore crane rail will run along the existing block quay wall;
A new deck on pile quay wall will run along the 914m of existing quay wall;
The lengthening of Berth 203 by 100m eastwards and Berth 205, westwards by
170m will use sheet pile quay walls;
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 87
The double span deck will be supported on two rows of vertical piles spaced at
approximately 6.7m centres, longitudinally;
There will be three spans per bollard/fender location; and
The piles will be made up of 1200mm diameter steel tubular piles which attain the
required bearing capacity through a combination of skin friction and end bearing
within the soil strata.
Figure 22: Sheet Piles made up of 1200mm diameter steel tubular piles (PRDW, 2011)
The transverse beams will be 1.5m deep pre-stressed concrete U beams filled with
in-situ concrete spanning between the piles and the existing block wall; and
The drilling of large diameter piles close to the existing wall poses a significant risk
of collapse on the existing quay wall structure.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 88
Figure 23: Transverse beams made up of pre-stressed concrete U beams filled with in-situ concrete
spanning between the piles and the existing block wall (PRDW, 2011)
The beams running in a longitudinal direction will be made of pre-cast concrete
1.2m deep;
The deck will be made up of pre-stressed concrete planks spanning between the
transverse beams and finished with an in-situ topping;
All the pile caps will be made of pre-cast concrete elements which are placed
directly onto the top of the pile, providing an allowance of 100mm in any direction
for installation tolerance before being bonded to the overlying superstructure with
in-situ concrete;
Post-tensioned ground anchors extending from the top of the existing block wall
will resist the lateral loads applied to the structure; and
The span between the existing block wall and the middle row of piles is articulated
at each end to prevent induced bending caused by the differential settlement or
deflection of the two different structure types.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 89
11.2.2 Sheet Pile Quay Wall
This option makes use of a continuous 1190m tied back sheet pile wall.
Sheet pile quay walls are essentially anchored retaining walls. They consist of a number
of steel sheets/piles which are driven deep into the ground. Sheet Pile quay walls require
an anchor to support the weight of the wall. This anchor will be situated behind the
existing quay wall front. The implementation of a sheet pile quay wall would require the
establishment of a new stone bed/scour protection at the new dredged depth in front of
the quay wall.
The area behind the Sheet Pile quay wall would then be backfilled, while the surface of
the quay would need to be covered with concrete paving. Sheet Pile quay walls also have
a limited life expectancy due to the materials used in constructing the quay wall. Steel
materials are more subjective to corrosion and are restricted to specified load weights so
as to avoid bending. Regular maintenance of the quay wall will be required to extend the
life expectancy of this quay wall alternative.
The Sheet Pile Quay Wall option consists of:
Continuous tied back sheet pile wall with a cope line 31.58m seaward from the
existing cope line;
The rear Ship to Shore (STS) crane rail will run along the top of the existing block
quay wall. When the STS runs over the eastward and westward extensions, it will
be supported by reinforced concrete spread footings; and
The continuous embedded wall will consist of HZ king piles with AZ intermediate
piles with a steel grade of 430 N/mm2.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 90
Figure 24: Sheet Pile wall made up of HZ king piles with AZ intermediate piles with a steel grade of
430 N/mm2 driven to a depth of -33m CDP (PRDW, 2011)
The wall is then tied back by tie rods (95mm diameter, steel grade 460 N/mm2)
spaced at 2.258m centres anchored by inverted T deadman anchors which are
positioned 12m back from the existing cope line.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 91
Figure 25: Sheet Pile wall with inverted T deadman anchors each accommodating two tie rods
passing through drilled holes in the existing quay wall (PRDW, 2011)
Each anchor will accommodate two tie rods;
The tie rods will pass through core drilled holes in the existing quay wall;
Resistance to is provided by the high section modulus of the solution as well the
as the design penetration depth which varies along the wall length between -24m
CDP and -34m CDP; and
The composition of backfill material for the proposed wall will be a composite of
the hydraulic fill from the offshore borrow site.
11.2.3 Caisson Quay Wall
The Caisson option consists of combination of caisson and sheet pile quay wall with a
new cope line that is 48.5m seawards from the existing quay wall.
Caisson quay walls comprise of a number of large individual concrete structures
(caissons) which are floated into position and then submerged adjacent to one another to
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 92
form a quay front. Due to the fact that caisson quay walls make use of gravitational forces
they are able to support excessive loads.
The implementation of a caisson quay wall would require the establishment of a new
stone bed/scour protection. The area behind the caisson quay wall would then require
backfilling in order to extend the relevant quay wall to the desired width. The surface of
the quay would then be covered with concrete paving to create a solid, accessible area
for the loading and offloading of container cargo by gantry cranes and rail. Due to their
nature, caisson quay walls require little maintenance and are associated with an
extended life cycle compared to other quay wall options.
The proposed Caisson Quay Wall option consists of:
The proposed new caisson wall will consist of a “figure 8” type caisson that is
15.9m wide x 26m long x 0.8m thick, founded on a 1m thick prepared stone bed.
The external walls of the caisson will be 0.55m thick.
Figure 26: Proposed Caisson option caisson filled with dredged fill material (PRDW, 2011)
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 93
Figure 27: Typical “figure 8” type Caissons
The extensions from Berth 203 eastwards and Berth 205 westward would be done
using sheet piles should Caissons not be able to be placed at these tie in points;
and
The rear Ship to Shore crane beam will be supported by a row of vertical tubular
piles placed at 6m centres.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 94
Figure 28: Row of vertical tubular piles which would be used to support the rear Ship to Shore crane
beam (PRDW, 2011)
The backfill material will be a combination of suitable dredge material and imported
sand; and
The distance between the existing wall and the proposed caisson wall allows for a
1:3 dredge slope down to the base of the proposed new caisson wall which
minimises the risk of undermining the existing quay wall during the construction
Phase.
11.2.4 Summary of Components
The salient parameters for the three quay wall options are summarised in the table to follow.
Table 11: Summary of Quay Wall Components
Deck On Pile Sheet Pile Caisson
Length of wall 1190m 1190m 1190m
Seaward Expansion of Cope Line
28.38m 31.58m 48.5m
New Scour Bed Protection
Yes Yes Yes
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 95
Deck On Pile Sheet Pile Caisson
Life Expectancy Limited Limited Extended
Backfilling required Only at Extension areas Yes Yes
Maintenance Regular maintenance of the quay wall will be required to extend the life expectancy.
Regular maintenance of the quay wall will be required to extend the life expectancy.
Requires little maintenance
Reliant on Current Wall
Yes No No
Safety Increased safety risks in the form of structure failure, slippage and instability.
Steel materials are more subjective to corrosion and are restricted to specified load weights so as to avoid bending. Without maintenance, safety may become an issue.
They make use of gravitational forces so are able to support excessive loads. Also require little maintenance.
Type of Extension (eastward from 203 and westward of 205)*
Sheet Pile Sheet Pile Sheet Pile
* Please note that based on new geotechnical information available, all quay wall
alternatives will be considered during the EIA phase.
11.3 Offshore Sand Winning
In order to maintain a functioning port during the upgrade process, the dredging of the
turning basin, approach channel and berth channel will occur in the first Phase of the
upgrade. Berth 205 will then be decommissioned and upgraded while Berths 203 and 204
are still functioning. Suitable dredge material will be used where possible for the infill of
Berth 205, however, unused dredge spoil will be disposed before it can be used for
infilling of Berths 203 and 204. Thus, offshore sand winning will be necessary to provide
the necessary dredge infill material for Berths 203 and 204.
Two proposed sand winning areas have been investigated by a prior geophysical and
sediment sampling studies in 2001 (Council for Geoscience, 2001). The impacts of the
proposed offshore sand winning will be assessed in the EIA Phase.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 96
Figure 29: Position of alternative sand winning sites (Bathymetry obtained from Council of
Geosciences, 2001).
11.4 Offshore Dredge Disposal
Approximately 4 million cubic metres of dredge material will need to be disposed at an
offshore disposal site. The Port of Durban currently has an offshore disposal permit for
maintenance dredging and the site has been used for previous capital projects. An
application for a Dumping at sea permit can only be made once a positive Environmental
Authorisation has been received. However, the impacts of both dredging and dredge
disposal need to be determined during the EIA Phase. Figure 30 below shows the current
permitted site.
If a Dumping at Sea permit is received, a grid would be superimposed over the location of
the current disposal site. Dredge material would be moved to the site in a TSHD and
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 97
each disposal event would occur over a separate cell of the disposal site in order to
ensure an equal distribution.
In addition, in order to obtain a Dumping at Sea Permit, as per the National
Environmental Management: Integrated Coastal Management Act, the sediment type,
quality, size and chemical composition of the dredge material needs to be determined.
This is to ensure that the quantity of metals, hydrocarbons etc. are not above dangerous
levels. A Sediment and Chemical Analysis of Dredge Material will take place as a
specialist study in the EIA Phase. However, from studies of water quality (CSIR, 2011), it
appears that the area around Berth 203 to 205 is not highly contaminated (see Section
12).
Figure 30: Current permitted offshore disposal site
11.5 No Go Option
As standard practice and to satisfy regulatory requirements, the option of not proceeding
with the project is included in the evaluation of the alternatives.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 98
The Transnet eThekwini Municipality Port Initiative (TEMPI) undertook an economic
assessment of the Port of Durban in 2007. The following is a summary of the major
findings and the implications of no go alternative which are economic in nature.
The impacts of the no-go alternative will also be assessed in regards to the receiving
environment.
Table 12: Economic factors and implications of the No-go Alternative
Key Economic Factors (TEMPI, 2007) Implications of the No-Go Alternative
Durban’s port infrastructure and traffic levels
are colossal by African and Southern
Hemisphere standards
The implications of the ‘no go’ option are as
follows:
The Port of Durban will not maintain
a competitive level of services
Large vessels make use of
competitor ports
Loss of income in terms of wages
and salaries
Negative economic impact on the
local economy
Negative economic impact on the
national economy
Negative impact on related
industries
It vies for leading container port in the Southern
Hemisphere
It has the largest and most diversified set of port
ancillary establishments of any port in the
Southern hemisphere
It’s a hub port for the rest of Southern Africa
Around 32 000 people are employed directly by
the port
Approximately R3bn is spent on wages and
salaries annually
NEPAD agenda forsees Durban as the logistics
hub for adjacent economies
In order for the port to maintain its standing, it
needs to expand and handle more cargo and
larger ships
International evidence shows ports have to keep
up with changing technology to remain
competitive
Without deepening, the port will be relegated to
a shrinking residual of smaller and relatively
more expensive vessels
There is a significant linkage between local
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 99
Key Economic Factors (TEMPI, 2007) Implications of the No-Go Alternative
economy and the port
Products handled in the port are also linked to
other industries and thus the growth of the local
economy is dependent on the growth of the port
12. PROFILE OF THE RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT
This section provides a general description of the status quo of the receiving environment
in the project area. This serves to provide the context within which the Scoping exercise
was conducted. It also allows for an appreciation of sensitive environmental features and
possible receptors of the effects of the proposed project.
The study area includes the entire footprint of the project components, offshore borrow
areas and offshore disposal areas. Where necessary, the regional context of the
environmental features is also explained, with an ensuing focus on the local surrounding
environment. More in-depth discussions on the receiving environment will be provided in
the EIA Report, where the findings of the requisite specialist studies will be incorporated
into the document.
A brief overview is also provided of the manner in which the environmental features may
be affected (positively or negatively) by the proposed Berth 203 to 205 upgrade project
life-cycle. Key environmental issues are discussed further in Section 15. These
preliminary effects are only discussed concisely on a qualitative level, as part of the
Scoping Phase. The EIA Report will provide a comprehensive evaluation of the potential
impacts, and will quantify the effects to the environment based on the methodology
presented in Section 16.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 100
12.1 Land Use
12.1.1 Status Quo
The area under consideration for the proposed developments, i.e. the Port of Durban,
is situated along the Indian Ocean coastline on the east coast of South Africa within
the province of KwaZulu-Natal. Historically, the port has formed a focal point for the
City of Durban, and is of national and international importance owing to its role in
facilitating the import and export needs for much of South Africa.
In terms of biophysical setting, the area is characterized by a number of sandbanks
clearly visible at low tide, together with isolated relics of mangrove areas. The
uMhlatuzana, uMbilo and aManzimnyama Rivers of KwaZulu-Natal, comprise the
three major rivers flowing into the Port of Durban at their corresponding canals. Each
of these rivers hosts a variety of land uses and form the core of urbanization and
industrialization. In addition, there are several storm water drains with sources located
in the Durban CBD that discharge into the port at various locations (MER/ERM, 2011;
CSIR, 2011).
The Port of Durban spans a total area of approximately 1 854 Ha in extent. The water
surface is approximately 892 Ha at high tide and approximately 679 Ha at low tide,
while the land based component of the Port covers approximately 962 Ha (Transnet,
2011). The total extent of the Port area including the harbour and back of port area is
managed by Transnet National Ports Authority (TNPA) (CSIR, 2011). The land use of
Berths 203 to 205 and Bayhead Lot 10 is industrial (Figure 31 and 32).
Land uses within the Port of Durban include the following (MER/ERM, 2011):
Port activities at various operational terminals (including the Container
Terminal);
Large scale shipping activities as well as smaller boating activities;
Other industrial activities undertaken by tenants or leaseholders located in
Maydon Wharf, Bayhead, Kings Rest and Cutler. These include petro-chemical
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 101
storage and liquid bulk, cold storage, container staking, shipping repair, ship
building, manufacturing industries and other storage;
Recreational uses such as marinas and club houses in the Victoria
Embankment and Silt Canal;
Commercial uses along the Victoria Embankment including the Bat Centre and
Wilson’s Wharf;
Natural heritage areas such as the Mangroves; and
Smaller subsistence use by fisherman.
The main land users are Transnet National Ports Authority and the industrial and
commercial leaseholders that make use of the Port.
Figure 31: Aerial photograph showing the layout of the Port of Durban
Beyond the boundaries of the Port, the area is surrounded by a mixture of industrial,
business and residential districts (Figure 32) (CSIR, 2011).
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 102
Figure 32: Land use within the Port (MER/ERM, 2011)
12.1.2 Potential Impacts / Implications
In terms of the Port activities and associated industrial land use, the proposed project
plans to extend and upgrade an existing Berth area which should have positive impacts
overall. The proposed project however will change the land use of a portion of the Central
Sandbank. Due to the ecological sensitivity of the sandbank, this may have impacts on
recreational and subsistence land users however these will be assessed together with
impacts on the ecological impacts.
12.1.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations
No direct specialist studies associated with land use to be conducted. Indirect studies
associated with the proposed project include the Marine/Estuarine Biodiversity Study.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 103
12.2 Climate
12.2.1 Status Quo
The Port of Durban is subjected to a warm maritime climate with average minimum
temperatures of 16°C during the winter months of May to July and an average of 27°C
during the hotter summer months of January to March (MER/ERM, 2011) (Table 13).
Table 13: Minimum and Maximum Monthly temperatures recorded at Durban Airport (MER/ERM,
2011)
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Avg
Durban-
Max (°C)
27 27 27 24 23 23
22 22 22 23 25 26 24
Durban-
Min (°C)
22 22 22 19 16 16 16 17 17 18 20 21 19
The area is generally wet, receiving an average rainfall of 1054 mm/year. Most of the
rainfall is received in summer (MER/ERM, 2011) (Table 14).
Table 14: Monthly average rainfall recorded at Durban Airport (MER/ERM, 2011)
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Avg
Durban-
Rainfall
(mm)
119 127 132 84 56 33 36 48 74 109 117 119 87
12.2.2 Potential Impacts / Implications
On a large scale, the upgrade of Berths 203 to 205 contributes to Port development
aimed at increasing the efficiency of the Port. This could contribute to greenhouse gas
emissions, due to the presence of larger vessels at the Port. However, the proposed
project will not change the current land use of the Port and the project is not expected to
change the micro-climate of the area.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 104
12.2.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations
No specialist studies are currently envisioned.
12.3 Geology & Soils
12.3.1 Status Quo
Rock types beneath the Durban Bay are described as faulted Karoo sediments of the
Dwyka (tillite) and Ecca (Shales) Groups (MER/ERM, 2011). These are overlain by a
shallow crust of Cretaceous sediments which thicken eastward beneath the Bluff (King,
1960). As result of the depositional environment, the Harbour beds are extremely variable
both in depth and lateral distribution. These sediments are mainly sands with layers of
clays which vary in thickness from less than 1m to 15m thick (PRDW, 2011).
Table 15 below provides a summary of the local geology underlying the project area and
was determined using information from numerous borehole logs, sonic and acoustic logs
(PRDW, 2011).
Table 15: Summary of local geology underlying the project area
Geological Divisions
Units Description Depth
Late Pleistocene and Holocene cover sands
Late Pleistocene Aeolian Sediments
Medium dense to dense, light reddish brown to light grey fine grained sand with a coarser basal unit, gravelly sand
Holocene lagoonal sediments
Medium dense to dense, olive to light grey/brown, fine to medium grained sand with occasionally heavy minerals
Late Pleistocene Calcarenite
Medium to hard rock, light to dark brown, fine to medium grained, weakly laminated
-7.5 to -11.4m CDP
Late Pleistocene Channel Sands
Unit 2 – Upper Portion (clay rich unit)
Very soft to stiff, light grey to dark brown mottled, occasionally orange, fissured silty to fine to medium grained sandy clay
-12 to - -41.7m CDP
Unit 2- Lower portions, sandy unit
Loose to dense, light to dark grey, yellowish brown olive or light reddish brown, fine to coarse grained sand, subordinate layers of firm grey clay.
Late Pleistocene channel fill sediments
Unit 1 – Upper clay Rich Unit
Stiff to very stiff, light grey to dark brown occasionally black fissured to microshattered, silty to sandy, occasionally gravelly clay
-16 m to -44m CDP
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 105
Unit 1- Basal Sand Unit
Loose to very dense, olive to dark grey reddish brown occasionally light grey to white, fine to medium grained sand, occasionally medium to very coarse with minor conglomerate
Late Pleistocene Logaoonal sediments
Highly variable sediment assemblage, light olive grey to reddish light brown, dark brown and orange brown loose to dense fine to medium sand, occasional lenses of fine to coarse grained to gravelly sand with occasional shell fragments
-14m to -34m CDP
Late Pleistocene Aeolianite
Isolated eroded remnants, pale yellowish brown slight weathered thinly bedded medium to coarse grained, medium to coarse grained medium hard rock, calcarenite
-17m to - 28m CDP
Pleistocene Basal Sand Unit
Light reddish orange to brown mottled light grey to medium dense to very dense fine to medium grained sand with small amounts of clayey/silty sand
-23m to - 29m CDP
Pleistocene Basal Clay Unit
Dark brown and dark grey to black, stiff to very stiff dense to very dense organic fine sandy to silty clay with minor amounts of clayey fine sandy silt
-27m to - 33m CDP
Pleistocene Basal Silt Unit
Dark yellowish orange to dark grey mottled with dark orange medium dense to very stiff, weathered fine sandy to gravelly silts or clayey silty fine sands
-28m to -36m CDP
Cretaceous Sediments
Olive to light grey thickly bedded consolidated siltstone wuth thin interbedded hard concretionary calcarenite horizons
-18m to - 52m CDP
12.3.2 Potential Impacts / Implications
The main implications of the site geology relates to dredging. The approach channel,
berth channel, turning basin and berths will be dredged to between -16.5m CDP and -
19m CDP. Suitable dredge material will be used for the infill of Berth 205 (which will be
the first Phase of the project), while the rest of the material is likely to be disposed at an
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 106
offshore disposal site. The type and quantity of sediments to be dredged will affect the
impacts of dredge disposal on the offshore disposal site.
12.3.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations
A detailed Geotechnical study will take place as part of the Feasibility assessment (see
the figure below for information on the proposed position of the boreholes for the
Geotechnical study).
Figure 33: Position of the Boreholes for the Detailed Geotechnical Study (PRDW, 2011)
In addition, as required by the National Environmental Management: Integrated Coastal
Management Act, sediment and chemical analysis of dredge material will be undertaken.
Information from these studies will be provided during the EIA Phase.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 107
12.4 Port Layout and Bathymetry
12.4.1 Status Quo
The Port of Durban comprises a number of interlinked channels and turning basins
servicing port infrastructure (jetties, wharfs, berths and piers), and which is also used by a
variety of small craft (yachts, ski boasts, supply vessels, tug boats, naval vessels) (Figure
34).
Figure 34: Current layout of the Port of Durban (From TNPA, 2009)
Recently, the entrance channel was widened and deepened to about -17m CD.
Navigation channels in much of the remainder of the port (west of Pier 1 and T jetty) are
maintained at a depth of about -13m CD. In addition to the deepwater navigation
channels, shallower waters exist in numerous areas of the Bay and are either remnants
or modifications of the original habitat.
The CSIR conducted an elevation and bathymetric study after the Port Entrance widening
and deepening project (2010). Results suggest that erosion at certain boundary edges of
the central sandbank has occurred where deepwater dredging has encroached near or
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 108
into the slope of the sandbanks resulting in localised progradation and slumping (CSIR,
2010). In addition, there was some loss of sediment from the surface of the sandbanks.
The following figure provides a summary of the Durban Harbour Sandbank Survey (EMS,
2010). The main results show that there has been a slight increase in the sedimentation
of the little lagoon (Figure 35 a and d), and loss of sediment along the southern portion of
the central sandbank (Figure 35 a and c). In addition, the topography has of the Central
Sandbank has changed slightly since 2007 (Figure 35b).
a b
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 109
c d
Figure 35: Durban Harbour Sandbank Study (EMS, 2010)
12.4.2 Potential Impacts / Implications
The port bathymetry will be changed by deepening of the approach channel, turning
basin and berth channel. The channels are currently maintained at approximately -13m
CDP and this will be deepened to between -16.5m CDP and -19m CDP. This may impact
waves, tides, seiches etc. which would have a further cumulative impact on the port
bathymetry.
Furthermore, the addition of new, longer quay wall, 50m seawards may also influence
wave seiches. A seiche is a ‘standing wave’ which occurs on an enclosed or partially
enclosed body of water. The widening of the entrance channel has resulted in an
approximate doubling in the magnitude of the one hour and 10 minute oscillations in the
Bay. These changes are greatest in the upper reaches. There is a strong likelihood that
changes in the port layout, particularly the straightening of quay walls, will exacerbate
such seiches (CSIR, 2010). Such changes could serve to destabilise or move sediments
on the sandbank areas, particularly should dredging activities predispose the sandbanks
to such a destabilisation. While it is highly likely that the seiches will be changed or
amplified, the consequences for the sandbanks are much less certain. The westward
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 110
expansion of Berth 205 into the central sandbank may further impact the stability of the
sandbanks.
12.4.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations
A wave energy analysis will be undertaken to understand the impact of the proposed
study on wave energy. This information will be used to determine whether further impacts
on the port bathymetry can be expected. This information will be provided during EIA
Phase.
12.5 Recreational Users
12.5.1 Status Quo
The Port of Durban is owned and managed by Transnet National Ports Authority (TNPA)
and the main land use (as mentioned previously) is port operations and the use of the
Port by large and small shipping vessels.
In addition, the Port is used by the following:
Recreational uses such as marinas and club houses in the Victoria
Embankment and Silt Canal;
Commercial uses along the Victoria Embankment including the Bat Centre and
Wilson’s Wharf;
Natural heritage areas such as the Mangroves; and
Smaller subsistence use by fisherman.
In addition, uShaka Marine World as well as beach users may be effected by dredging
and offshore sand winning which could potentially impact water quality, water turbidity
and bathymetry as well as related wave energy.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 111
12.5.2 Potential Impacts / Implications
The exacerbation of one hour and 10 minute seiches could result in changes in water
level variability of up to 20 cm greater than presently observed. This could have impacts
on the moored yachts and thus impact recreational users of the Port. The changes in port
layout, resulting in more rectilinear structures, could exacerbate long wave energy effects
in the Bay which would also have a negative impact on moored yachts. The proposed
project is unlikely to have long wave energy effects (CSIR, 2010).
Contaminants released from sediment during dredging are available for uptake by
organisms. This is known as bioaccumulation. This poses a risk to organisms at higher
trophic levels since predators are exposed to contaminants in their prey (CSIR, 2010).
According to the CSIR Environmental Screening Study (2010), dredging may release
contaminants into the water. However, the probability of such bioaccumulation, is
unlikely. Metal and hydrocarbon contamination of sediment across the dredging footprint
for all Phases is of a low to very low magnitude (CSIR, unpublished data). The release of
contaminants from sediment during dredging is thus expected to be low. By implication,
the availability of contaminants for uptake is also low. Bioaccumulation of contaminants
would mainly affect subsistence fisherman who are fishing in the bay. Although no fishing
is authorised in the Port of Durban, subsistence fishing does occur.
Disposal of dredged material at the offshore disposal site will result in a change of
bathymetry of the seabed at the offshore disposal site. This can lead to changes in wave
direction (through refraction) and in turn to changes in long shore transport of sediment
and consequently shoreline erosion and/or accretion (CSIR, 2011). However, proposed
offshore disposal ground is situated in water of a considerable depth and it is improbable
that alterations to its bathymetry through spoil disposal will lead to changes wave
direction. Further support for this contention comes from the fact that no changes to wave
direction appear to have resulted due to the disposal of spoil generated through dredging
for the Entrance Widening Programme (CSIR, 2011)
In addition, dredging for infill material at an offshore sand winning/borrow pit would impact
the bathymetry of the borrow area and may lead to changes in wave direction and
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 112
consequently shoreline erosion. The impacts although unlikely, would impact recreational
users of the beaches closest to the sand winning site.
Other implications will be discussed in more detail in sections below. However, the
proposed project may impact the Little lagoon, Central Sandbank and Mangroves which
would have an impact on the ecological integrity of the port and thus negatively impact
any recreational use related to the ecological integrity of the port.
12.5.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations
No direct assessment of the impacts on recreational users is envisaged, however, the
implications mentioned above are directly linked to a number of other issues including the
level of contamination of dredge material, wave energy in the Port and ecological
impacts. The following studies will be undertaken and discussed (as related to
recreational users) in the EIA Phase:
Wave energy analysis;
Sediment and Chemical analysis of dredge material;
Marine/Estuarine Biodiversity Assessment;
Local Economic Impact Assessment;
Ecological Assessment of the Impacts on the Central Sandbank;
Assessment of the Indirect Impacts on the Little Lagoon;
Shoreline Stability – Offfshore Sand winning site;
Sediment Plume Modelling – Offshore Sand winning Site; and
High Level Central Sandbank Study.
12.6 Hydrodynamic Functioning
12.6.1 Status Quo
The circulation in the Port of Durban is largely tidally driven, with localised effects due to
wind-forcing of the surface waters and inflows of fresh water in the upper reaches of the
Port. Shorter term fluctuations known as resonant seiches with periods of approximately
1 hour and 10min are observed in the port (PRDW, 2009; CSIR, 2010).
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 113
Moreover, water level variation in the Port is made up mainly of a semi-diurnal tide with a
period of approximately 12.4 hours and a range of 0.4 m at neap tide, increasing to 2.3 m
at maximum spring tide. These tidal water level variations drive near-surface tidal flows of
up to 0.3 to 0.4 m/s mid-channel in the entrance channel, with surface flows exceeding
0.55 m/s in shallow waters on either side of the channel (PRDW, 2009) (Figure 36).
Tidal flows in the entrance channel during neap tides are significantly less (approximately
0.1 m/s near-bottom and 0.15 m/s near the surface (PRDW, 2009; CSIR, 2010). Strong
tidal flows are observed over shallows adjacent to Victoria Embankment and over the
Central Sandbank between Pier 2 and the Maydon Wharf Channel (see Figure 36).
Measurements made by the CSIR in the entrance channel in early summer 2001 (CSIR,
unpublished data; CSIR, 2010) and in 2005 (PRDW, 2009) indicate that near-bottom
flows are not much less than those near the surface.
The resonant seiches of approximately 1 hour period (first resonant mode of the Bay)
have a water level range of approximately 0.1 to 0.2 m and result in short-term
fluctuations in currents of approximately 0.1 to 0.15 m/s, while seiches with an
approximate 10 minute period are somewhat smaller in amplitude, ranging approximately
between 0.05 and 0.1 m (CSIR, 2010).
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 114
Figure 36: Surface flow during spring peak flood (upper panel) and ebb (lower panel) tides (source:
PRDW, 2007).
Wind-driven influences on circulation in the Bay include large-scale wind-driven flows
over the adjacent shelf that affect conditions and the nature of flows in the entrance
channel and the temperature of waters entering into the Bay. More immediate wind
influences result in small modifications to surface flows and wind waves in the port.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 115
These influences vary around the Bay, due to the local variations in the wind field (Figure
37) (CSIR, 2011).
Winds inside the Bay are significantly less than those measured at the Port Control tower
and on the eastern breakwater. Within the Bay, the Salisbury Island area is sheltered
from SW to SSW winds that predominate in winter. To a lesser extent the same
observation can be made for the container terminal. However, winds measured on the
northern part of the Bay between the yacht basin and the T-jetty do not show similar
sheltering effects with respect to SW to SSW winds. All sites seemingly are fully exposed
to the NNE and NE winds that predominate in spring and summer, the strongest NNE/NE
winds being observed at Salisbury Island (Figure 37) (CSIR, 2011).
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 116
Figure 37: Annual wind roses for various locations in the Prot of Durban for the period May 2010 to
October 2011
Durmarine Building
Container Terminal Pier
SA Navy Base
Eastern
Breakwater Port Control 2
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 117
In addition, the water column within the Bay is not strongly stratified. Profile
measurements show that vertical temperature gradients generally do not exceed one or
two degrees Celsius. Thermistor chain measurements in the entrance channel prior to
widening of the entrance channel show a mean difference between the surface and
bottom sensors of 0.4°C, with a maximum difference of 2.5°C (PRDW, 2009).
Measurements within the Bay confirm that although episodic stratification events may
occur, temperature stratification is limited (CSIR, 2011).
Freshwater inflows result in salinity-driven stratification events in the upper part of the
Port. This stratification is generally limited to the upper part of the water column, often
resulting in lower salinity water being confined to the upper tens of centimetres of the
water column (CSIR, 2011). The magnitude and depth depends on the magnitude of
these freshwater inflows, which peak in summer.
The nature of flushing in the Bay (tidal near the entrance channel and flushing by
freshwater inflows in the upper reaches) results in a strong gradient in flushing potential.
At the entrance channel there is strong flushing due to tidal flows (Figure 38). With the
widening of the entrance channel this flushing has increased. However, in the upper
reaches, where the influence of tidal flushing is limited, flushing rates and residence times
have remained largely the same as those that existed prior to the entrance channel
widening.
Freshwater inflows are generally confined to surface layers of the water column and thus
surface water may be relatively well-flushed in these upper reaches of the port. However
the deeper waters remain largely insulated from these flushing effects unless there are
very large freshwater inflows. A schematic of prevailing water conditions (Figure 38)
provides a good proxy for the flushing potential and residence times in the Bay. These
observations are supported by the model results reported in PRDW (2007) (CSIR, 2011).
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 118
Figure 38 Schematic of water quality conditions in the Port of Durban (source: MER/ERM, 2011)
Model simulations of maximum current speeds in the Port of Durban prior to the entrance
channel widening show that the mean current speeds in the entrance channel will have
changed significantly with its widening (CSIR, 2010). Model predictions suggest that
mean current speeds in the entrance channel over a tidal cycle will have reduced from
0.25 m/s to 0.12 m/s and the maximum current speed from 0.55 m/s to 0.30 m/s (Figure
39).
However, conversely, the maximum current speed over the Central Sandbank during
spring tides is predicted to have increased from 0.40 m/s to 0.55 m/s with the widening of
the entrance channel (Figure 40). The mean current speed during spring tides is
predicted to remain largely unchanged. The maximum current speeds are also predicted
to have increased on the southern end of the tidal mud flats in the vicinity of the Yacht
Basin. These increases have been attributed to the widened entrance channel allowing
more long period energy (near the resonant oscillation period of approximately 1 hour) to
enter the Bay (PRDW, 2007).
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 119
Figure 39: Mean tidal currents in the Port of Durban during Spring tides (source: PRDW, 2007)
before the mouth widening (upper panel) and after the mouth widening (lower panel)
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 120
Figure 40: Maximum tidal currents in the Port of Durban during Spring tides (source: PRDW, 2007)
before the mouth widening (upper panel) and after the mouth widening (lower panel)
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 121
12.6.2 Potential Impacts / Implications
The proposed deepening, widening and lengthening of Berth 203 to 205 may have the
following implications:
1. The exacerbation of one hour and 10 minute seiches could result in changes in
water column mixing dynamics and consequently positively affect water quality in
the Port (however this is unlikely) and if changes occur they would likely be
insignificant (CSIR, 2010).
2. The exacerbation of one hour and 10 minute seiches could serve to destabilise or
move sediments on the sandbank areas, particularly should dredging activities
predispose the sandbanks to such a destabilisation.
3. The exacerbation of one hour and 10 minute seiches could result in changes in
water level variability of up to 20 cm greater than presently observed.
4. The loss of surface water area associated with the expansion of Berth 203 to 205
including the extension of Berth 205 by 170 m into the Central Sandbank, the
seaward expansion of Berths 203 to 205 by 50m and the eastward expansion of
Berth 203 by 100m results in approximately 52 535 m2 water loss. The percentage
loss of water surface based on an assumed estuarine area of 13.5 km2 (reported in
MER/ERM, 2011) is approximately 0.4% (CSIR, 2010). Only small changes in
currents would be expected due to the reduction in tidal prism due to the infilling
proposed for the container berth expansion. These changes are also not expected
to affect and change flushing in the upper reaches of the Bay (CSIR, 2010). The
tidal prism or the quantity of water flowing into and out of the port with each tide is
roughly proportional to the water surface area.
5. Long-term changes to water and sediment quality that could arise due to changes
in hydrodynamics will clearly have implications for the ecological functioning of the
Bay.
6. Wave patterns in the Bay could be altered by the change in layout, resulting in
possible infrastructure damage, due to the fact that Berth 203 to 205 exists
already, the probability of such wave patterns is unlikely.
7. Mooring problems due to long-wave energy could also be a possible impact,
however long wave energy is not thought to be a concern for the upgrade of
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 122
Berths 203 to 205 as the proposed project will only be upgrading existing
structures and not adding or creating new rectilinear structures which could
exacerbate long wave energy effects in the Port.
8. Possible localised scour and habitat change due to locally accelerated flows are
possible, however unlikely, as the expansion of Berths 203 to 205 is not creating
new rectilinear areas through infill, only extending the current quay wall.
12.6.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations
In order to understand the impacts of the proposed berth extension, a Wave energy study
will be undertaken. Information from this study will be used to better understand the
impacts of the proposed project on hydrodynamic functioning.
12.7 Water and Sediment Quality
12.7.1 Status Quo
Surveys of water quality performed at 15 stations across the Port of Durban (Figure 41) in
the summer and winter of 2011 on behalf of TNPA (unpublished) and research on long-
term (23 surveys over 18 months) trends in water quality performed by the Coastal
Systems Research group of the CSIR at the same 15 stations in 2009 and 2010
(unpublished) has provided a good understanding of spatial and temporal trends in water
quality in Durban Bay (CSIR, 2011).
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 123
Figure 41: Aerial view of Durban Bay illustrating the positions where water quality was monitored in
2009, 2010 and 2011 (CSIR, 2011)
Water quality in the upper reaches of the Bay, taken as extending between the extreme
upper reach of the Silt Canal through to the exit of the Esplanade Channel, to the left of
the central sandbank (stations 1 to 8 in Figure 41) is poor and far more impaired
compared to the remaining lower area of the Port to (stations 9 to 15) (CSIR, 2011).
There is lower pH and dissolved oxygen concentrations in the upper reaches of the bay
as well as higher nutrient concentrations when compared to lower reaches of the Bay
(Figures 42 and 43). Station 10 (between Berth 203 and 205 and the Central Sandbank)
is most relevant to this discussion. Both pH and dissolved oxygen concentrations are
relatively high (Figure 42) and dissolved nutrients are relatively low (Figure 43).
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 124
Figure 42: Average (±standard deviation) pH and dissolved oxygen concentration measured in
surface and bottom waters of Durban Bay for 26 surveys performed in 2009 and 2010. Stations 1- 8
are situated in the upper reaches of the Bay, and stations 9 – 15 in the lower reaches. Stations 10
and 11 are situated within the expansion footprint (CSIR, 2011)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
pH
7.5
7.7
7.9
8.1
8.3
Station
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Dis
solv
ed o
xyge
n (
mg.
l-1)
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Surface
Bottom
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 125
Figure 43: Average (±standard deviation) concentrations of various nutrients in surface waters of
Durban Bay for 26 surveys performed in 2009 and 2010. Stations 1- 8 are situated in the upper
reaches of the Bay, and stations 9 – 15 in the lower reaches. Stations 10 and 11 are situated within
the expansion footprint (CSIR, 2011)
Station
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
PO
4 (µM)
0
2
4
6
8
10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
NH
4 (µM)
0
5
10
15
20
25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
NO
2 (µM)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
NO
x (µM)
0
15
30
45
60
75
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 126
To a certain extent, the berth channel is protected from the main anthropogenic sources
of contaminants to the Port which include the aManzimnyama, uMhlatuzana and uMbilo
Rivers (which are identified as the major anthropogenic sources of contaminants to the
Bay) and vessel repair and construction facilities (CSIR, 2011). In general, port activities
in the lower reaches of the Bay are of a ‘cleaner’ nature, including the import and export
of containers and vehicles (CSIR, 2011).
The situation is compounded by the channel-like morphology of the upper reaches of the
Bay, which serves to reduce the turnover time of water. Because of the low turnover time
and hence reduced mixing and dilution, contaminants are retained in the upper reaches
of the Bay. Many of these contaminants settle from the water column. However, other
contaminants, such as nutrients, are retained in the water column for longer in these
reaches of the Bay. This can lead to the development of microalgal blooms (CSIR, 2011).
In 2007, a microalgal bloom is widely considered the main cause of a particularly large
fish kill that occurred (CSIR, 2011). However, the magnitude and frequency of blooms in
the lower reaches is typically far lower compared to the upper reaches (CSIR, 2011).
Research performed by the Coastal Systems research group of the CSIR in 2011
(unpublished) has provided an excellent understanding of the spatial extent of organic
matter enrichment and metal contamination of sediment in Durban Bay, while surveys of
sediment quality performed in summer and winter since 2007 on behalf of Transnet
National Ports Authority (unpublished) has provided insight into broad spatial trends for
hydrocarbon contamination of sediment (CSIR, 2011).
Metal and hydrocarbon contamination of sediment from the upper reaches of the Bay is
far more pronounced than in the lower reaches (Figures 44). The most pronounced metal
and hydrocarbon contamination is in the Silt canal and the Congella Basin, with relatively
minor contamination in the lower reaches.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 127
Figure 44: Enrichment Factor spatial trends for copper, manganese and mercury in Durban Bay in
August 2011. Also included is the spatial trend for the number of metals enriched in sediment. An
Enrichment Factor represents by how many times a measured metal concentration exceeds the
highest concentration predicted by the baseline model for that metal in granulometrically equivalent
sediment (CSIR, 2011)
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 128
Figure 45: Total petroleum hydrocarbon and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon concentrations in
sediment from Durban Bay in August 2011. Stations 10 and 11 are situated within the expansion
footprint
Sediment quality near Berth 203 to 205, is in general, good. There is very low level
mercury enrichment of sediment in the basin between Pier 1 and Pier 2. Hydrocarbon
contamination of sediment in and near the expansion footprint is either the lowest or near
the lowest for any area investigated in the Bay (Figure 45).
However, dredging may have an impact on water quality as contaminants in sediment
can exist in two forms: i) Adsorbed or otherwise bound to particulates, and ii) Dissolved in
sediment porewater (water between grains of sediment). Dredging leads to the release of
contaminants from sediment into the water column, where they can remain in their
original form (i.e. particulate‐associated or dissolved) or they can be transformed from
one form to the other. Many metals, for example, are immobilised in sediment through
their binding to sulphide and are unable to exert toxicity unless the sediment is ingested.
Sulphides, produced by sulphate reducing bacteria in sediment under anoxic conditions,
are unstable in the presence of oxygen. When exposed to well-aerated water the
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 129
sulphide is transformed to sulphate and the metal is released in its ionic, or dissolved,
form (CSIR, 2011). In this form contaminants are able to cross biological membranes and
exert toxic effects.
The fate of contaminants released from sediment is determined by conditions in the
overlying water, in particular its pH, salinity, dissolved oxygen concentration, and
suspended solids concentration (Eggleton and Thomas, 2004; Simpson et al., 2004;
Atkinson et al., 2007). Most contaminants in their dissolved form rapidly adsorb onto
suspended sediment and in this manner are scavenged from the water column (van den
Berg et al., 2001; Santana-Casiano et al., 2004). As a result, dissolved concentrations of
contaminants are usually only temporarily elevated in the immediate vicinity of dredging
operations (e.g. van den Berg et al., 2001; Versar, 2001; CSIR, 2011).
Dredging also releases nutrients present in sediment porewater into the water column. If
the released nutrient concentrations are high and various other conditions are met,
microalgal productivity can be stimulated to a degree that a microalgal bloom forms
(CSIR, 2011). This can lead to many adverse effects including low dissolved oxygen
concentrations. In addition, when microalgal blooms eventually collapse, it results in the
influx of a large amount of organic matter to sediment (CSIR, 2011).
There are numerous compounds and substances in sediment that exert an oxygen
demand, including organic material, reduced iron and sulphides. Exposure of these
compounds and substances to well-aerated water through dredging leads to an increase
in the demand for oxygen in the overlying water column (Stumm and Morgan, 1996; LFR,
2004; CSIR, 2011). The reduction of dissolved oxygen during dredging is minimal (1 - 2
mg.l-1) and transient in surface waters, but can be more severe in bottom waters
(reduction of up to 6 mg.l-1 for 4 - 8 minutes, US Navy 1990) if the load of oxygen
demanding substances in sediment is high. Since oxygen is a fundamental requirement
for the survival of most aquatic organisms, decreases in dissolved oxygen can affect
ecological processes. The severity of this impact from an ecological perspective is more
likely in situations where dissolved oxygen concentrations are already reduced (LFR,
2004; CSIR, 2011).
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 130
12.7.2 Potential Impacts / Implications
Some of the potential implications of the expansion of Berths 203 to 205 include:
1. Reduced tidal flushing related to a reduced tidal prism (infilling decreases the tidal
prism or the amount of water moving in and out the Port) may result in decreased
water quality. However, the reduction in tidal prism is very small and the
associated water quality should not be significantly impacted.
2. Dredging may release contaminants in sediments into the water column to the
extent that water quality is reduced and toxic effects may manifest. However, this
would be localised to the immediate vicinity of the dredging operation. It is
dependent on the amounts of contamination in the dredging area which is low.
3. Dredging may release nutrients into the sediment porewater and result in
microalgal blooms which can reduce or completely remove dissolved oxygen.
However, this is unlikely as the total organic content of the dredging footprint is low
(CSIR, 2011).
4. Dredging can aerate water and mix substances and compounds in the sediment
which exert an oxygen demand. This can lead to a reduction of dissolved oxygen
during dredging. This impact is unlikely as the water column is already well
aerated and the total organic compounds of the expansion footprint is low (CSIR,
2011).
5. As mentioned, dredging can release contaminants that are available for uptake by
organisms and this can, in certain instances, result in bioaccumulation of
contaminants in organisms. This is however, unlikely as the contamination across
the dredging footprint is low.
12.7.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations
A Sediment and Chemical analysis of materials to be dredged will be undertaken. This
together with the numerous water quality studies conducted by the CSIR in the past, will
be used to better understand the probability and extent of the impact of the Berth 203 to
205 expansion.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 131
12.8 Estuarine Hydrology
12.8.1 Status Quo
Mallory (2010) conducted an estuarine health and hydrology assessment. In addition, the
Durban Estuarine Management Plan Situational Analysis (MER/ERM, 2011) has provided
a detailed assessment of the state of the Durban Bay Estuary (Port of Durban) (Table
16).
Table 16: Hydrological assessment of Durban Bay Estuary
Hydrological characteristic
Quaternary catchment location U60F
Quaternary catchment area 272 km2
Natural MAR if U60F 43.25 million m3/annum
Estuary Catchment area 229 km2
Proportion of quaternary catchment flowing into
estuary
0.84
Natural MAR of Estuary 33.33 million m3/annum
Mean annual precipitation 969mm/annum
Mean annual evaporation 1200mm/annum
The results of the hydrological analysis of Durban Bay show that the hydrology of the
estuary has been altered by increased run off due to urbanisation and effluent return
flows. The present day run off is estimated to approximately 74% greater than natural
with only 36% of the flow made up of natural components.
12.8.2 Potential Impacts / Implications
The proposed expansion project should have only a small and localised impact on the
estuarine hydrology through increased run off from the larger expanded berths.
12.8.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations
No specialist studies specifically related to estuarine hydrology is envisaged however, the
impacts of storm water and increased run off will be assessed in the EIA Phase.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 132
In addition, the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) will provide mitigation measures
to decrease run off during the construction Phase of the project.
12.9 Estuarine Biota
12.9.1 Status Quo
Estuaries, especially in KwaZulu-Natal, are the most threatened of all coastal habitats.
Biota dependent on estuaries rely on connectivity amongst these systems, the habitats
within them, and their connectivity to freshwaters. The ever decreasing environmental
quality of estuaries, brought about by a multitude of anthropogenic activities, constrains
populations of estuarine dependent biota and the benefits we derive from them (CSIR,
2011).
The most obvious plants in the Bay are the mangroves followed by the smaller macro-
algae commonly known as seaweeds. However, a major contribution to the entire system
is made by micro-algae, microscopic, single celled plants, which live in the water or on
the bottom, particularly in shallower areas where there is more light penetration. Their
presence is not readily evident unless they occur in abundance in the water column,
where their presence may discolour the water and these are referred to as blooms
(MER/ERM, 2011).
Of the different micro-algal types, diatoms are often present in the greatest abundance.
The micro-algae occupy a significant position at the base of the food chain and are found
in the water column and on the sandbanks of Durban Bay as both phytoplankton
(suspended drifting plankton) and microphytobenthos (bottom dwelling microalgae). The
evaluation of the role of micro-algae is often centred on diatoms which are ubiquitous and
prolific in Durban Bay. It should also be noted that the Central Sandbank with an area of
approximately 77 ha constitutes nearly 60 % of the total sandbank area and is the area
with the greatest diversity and abundance of microphytobenthos (MER/ERM, 2011).
The greater species diversity on the central sandbanks is indicative that environmental
conditions are more favourable on these banks in contrast to the dominance of a few
species that are tolerant of the harsher and more polluted conditions in the silt canal area
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 133
(MER/ERM, 2011). The Central Sandbanks are the single largest expanse of habitat
suitable for diverse diatom growth in the harbour area. The central sandbanks are
essentially large grained sediments with a low capacity for retention of heavy metals and
other pollutants. Wide expanses of shallow pools offer a favourable micro-habitat for algal
production during low tide. The central sandbanks are also shallow at high tide and there
are only short lived turbid i.e. light reducing conditions after a major inflow of river water
into the Bay during summer (MER/ERM, 2011).
In the past, at least four types of estuarine vegetation community would have existed in
the original Bay configuration (submerged macrophytes such as seagrasses, emergent
macrophytes such as reeds and sedges, mangroves and brackish/freshwater swamp with
Barringtonia racemosa and Hibiscus tiliaceus), only one type of estuarine vegetation
community still exists in Durban Bay i.e. the mangroves.
In the late 1950s, Durban Bay still supported about 250 Ha of mangroves, despite a
history of destruction going back to the latter years of the 19th Century when there was
recorded resistance from the public to mangrove clearing in 1890. The species involved
are the predominant white Avicennia marina, black Brugueira gymnorrhiza and the much
less common red Rhizophora mucronata. The southern and western margins of the Bay,
which supported the bulk of the mangrove area, disappeared under infilling and
development, except for the Bayhead remnant, in the 50s and 60s. The Bayhead site of
Mangroves achieved Natural Heritage Status however only a small area remnant
remains.
In the past, the main vegetation type of Berth 203 to 205 would have been KwaZulu-Natal
Coastal Belt. The 2006 Conservation Status of this vegetation type is endangered and it
poorly protected (Figure 46 to 48).
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 134
Figure 46: Conservation Status of the proposed Berth 203 to 205 expansion area
Figure 47: Protected status of the proposed Berth 203 to 205 expansion area
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 135
Figure 48: Vegetation types of the proposed Berths 203 to 205 expansion site
From an invertebrate organism point of view the Durban Bay provides an exceptional
habitat on the KZN coastline - the distinctive habitat is provided by the fact that the Bay is
sheltered from the strong wave action that characterises the KZN coast. In addition, it is
tidal with extensive shallow areas and has a strong marine influence. This combination
has allowed the development of the mangroves, which in turn provide a major
invertebrate habitat, while the intertidal banks provide an additional habitat for those
species such as the soldier crab Dotilla fenestrata and the several species of fiddler crabs
belonging to the genus Uca which are dependent on consistent tidal exposure of their
habitats (MER/ERM, 2011).
Estuarine dependant fishes (and crustaceans) make use of Durban Bay. The spotted
grunter (Pomadasys commersonnii) is one of the most important of these from a fisheries
resource point of view. Within the Bay this species is a favoured target for recreational
anglers. Subsistence anglers also target the species, along with other estuarine
dependant fishes. Several of these species are heavily exploited in coastal fisheries
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 136
outside of Durban Bay, and the Bay plays presently unquantified role in sustaining these
fisheries (CSIR, 2011)
The sandprawn, Callianassa kraussi is an important component of the Bay’s invertebrate
fauna. It is thought to be the reason that spotted grunter appears to favour Durban Bay,
as these prawns comprise an important component of their diet. The role of Callianassa
as a bioturbator influencing sandbank structure and biological communities in Durban
Bay has been highlighted in recent scientific literature (Pillay et al., 2007a, b and 2008;
CSIR, 2011).
The mudprawn, Upogebia africana, also occurs in the Bay. Mudprawns are not limited to
shallow sand banks and occur in deeper (and muddier) basins and channels (Weerts,
per.obs), and are also likely to be an important food source for spotted grunter and other
fishes (CSIR, 2011; MER/ERM, 2011).
Various species of water bird make use of Durban Bay and have a high dependence on
the habitats it offers, particularly as roosting and feeding areas. Several of these species
are migratory. It is widely regarded that suitable alternative habitats either do not exist or
are generally fully utilised, so losses and/or reductions of these habitats in Durban Bay
may result in population losses (CSIR, 2011). The role of Durban Bay for water birds has
also been highlighted and investigated (Allan, 2009; CSIR, 2011). The estuarine nature of
Durban Bay and is therefore relatively well studied and accepted (CSIR, 2011).
The Central Sandbank supports 40% of all waterbirds in the Bay, mainly the Palaeartic
waders as well as the roosting gulls and terns (MER/ERM, 2011). In addition, species
such as the large bodied greenshank (Tringa totanus), grey plover (Pluvialis squatarola)
and whimbrel (Numenius phaeopus) are also common. Bayhead was the second most
selected site with species such as Charadrius hiaticula, Kittlitz’ plover, Charadruis
pecuarius, common sandpiper Actitis hypoleucos and terek sandpiper, Xerus cinereus as
well as the little stint, Calidris minuta (MER/ERM, 2011; McInnes et al., 2006). The
importance of the Central Sandbank is related to feeding opportunities as well as human
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 137
limited access. As South Africa is a signatory to the Bonn Convention, there is a
commitment to limit threats from human disturbance (MER/ERM, 2011).
The biological role of Durban Bay as an estuary has been documented in the scientific
literature (Cyrus and Forbes, 1996; Forbes et al., 1996; CSIR, 2011). This was based on
the findings of field surveys conducted in the early 1990’s, indicating recruitment of post-
larval prawns into these systems, a dominance of typically estuarine associated fauna,
and a large proportion of sampled fish fauna comprising juveniles of marine spawned
estuarine species. Factors underpinning the estuarine role of these bays in KwaZulu-
Natal and influencing biological spatial and temporal distributions within them, such as
larval and juvenile fish recruitment, faunal-habitat associations and bioturbation effects,
have subsequently been the focus of post-graduate studies (Harris and Cyrus, 1997 and
1999; Weerts and Cyrus, 2002; Weerts et al., 2003; Pillay et al., 2007a, b and 2008;
CSIR, 2011; MER/ERM, 2011).
Less well studied or appreciated is the role of these bays as refugia and habitat for
marine biota. The lower reaches of Durban Bay, especially at hard structure habitats
created by concrete piers and quay walls, are subject to water that is strongly marine in
nature and shows little variation in salinity. Flora and fauna that use these habitats are
much more typical of marine reef biota than estuarine biota. They include sessile and/or
encrusting biota, such as algae, sponges, tunicates, barnacles and mussels, as well as
more mobile invertebrates and fishes (CSIR, 2011).
The above species all have estuarine dependencies. Estuaries typically provide
ecosystem goods and services and thus habitat integrity, diversity and connectivity are
the critical features of these systems which underpin their resilience and their ability to
provide these ecosystem goods and services (CSIR, 2011).
Estuaries are highly valued components of natural coastal systems. Biologically, they are
highly productive and usually diverse. Their role as a nursery to important marine
spawned fish and crustacean species is perhaps their most well recognised value.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 138
However, they play important roles in many basic coastal processes, including
hydrodynamics, sediment movement, and geochemical, water chemistry and biological
processes (CSIR, 2010; MER/ERM, 2011).
12.9.2 Potential Impacts / Implications
The proposed expansion may have potential implications on estuarine biota including:
1. Dredging will result in the physical destruction and removal of sediment habitat
and associated infauna. This loss of habitat and associated infauna is temporary
and newly exposed sediment is re-colonised however the rate of re-colonisation is
dependent on numerous factors and can affect productivity of the area.
2. Dredging can result in the removal of prey species such as the mudprawn
Upogebia africana for bottom feeding fish and will likely impact fish populations
until prey populations have recovered.
3. Expansion of Berth 205 into the Central Sandbank will result in the loss of some
intertidal habitat, which is considered the most threatened in the Port of
Durban/Durban Bay. This has implications on the estuarine species dependent on
this habitat.
4. Dredging of the Berth channel may negatively impact the Central Sandbank,
should dredging encroach close enough to the sandbank. The dredging may result
in slumping of the sandbank and thus result in a loss of habitat for estuarine biota.
5. Expansion of Berths 203 to 205 seawards by 50m will result in a loss of deep
subtidal and open water habitats which may impact ecological productivity and
assimilative capacity of the Bay.
6. Dredging will disturb sediment and the excessive settlement of suspended
sediment can result in smothering of bottom dwelling organisms and changes to
the community composition.
7. Dredging activities are likely to increase suspended solids in the water column
which can adversely affect filter feeding organisms which often have very delicate
respiratory apparatus. High concentrations of inedible suspended sediment can
also directly interfere with food intake by clogging filter-feeding structures,
potentially affecting growth and condition of these animals. In addition, dilution of
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 139
organic material by sediment particles can lead to a decrease in the net food
intake per unit of time and clearing excess sediment is energetically expensive.
8. Dredging of the expansion footprint with increase suspended solids concentrations
and turbidity on the water column. This can impact primary productivity as the
reduction of light can inhibit photosynthesis of microalgae.
9. Microalgae that live in and on sediment, the so-called microphytobenthos, are
important components of the intertidal community (Gibbs et al., 2001; CSIR, 2011).
Microphytobenthos contribute significantly to primary production in shallow waters,
and in intertidal habitats they dominate primary productivity. Since
microphytobenthos are dependent on light for photosynthesis, a decrease in light
penetration of the water column over intertidal sandbanks due to increased
suspended solids concentrations and turbidity due to with dredging may reduce
their productivity.
10. Dredging of the expansion footprint may increase suspended solid concentrations
and turbidity on pelagic organisms including swimming prawn and fish. Feeding
rates of fish which are visual predators decrease due to a decrease in visibility.
Fine sediment may also clog the respiratory epithelia while larger sediment
particles may clog the gills. Fish species have been found with an increased level
of deformities such as eroded fins, ‘coughing and lesions when there are
increased suspended solid concentrations in the water column.
11. Dredging increases the suspended solid concentration in the water column, bird
species that hunt using visual cues may be adversely affected.
12. Feeding habitat for wading birds will be lost on a portion of Central Sandbank; in
addition, if there is any collapsing of the Central Sandbank further loss of habitat
may result.
13. Noise during construction may disturb bird species.
12.9.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations
An Estuarine/Marine Biodiversity Assessment will be undertaken in order to understand
the potential implications of the proposed expansion of Berths 203 to 205. In addition, an
Ecological Assessment of the Central Sandbank and an Assessment of the indirect
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 140
Impacts on the Little Lagoon will also be undertaken to understand the impacts on the
Central Sandbank and the Little Lagoon.
Due to comments from WESSA/Coastwatch, an Avifauna Impact Assessment will be
undertaken during the EIA phase. Further, a Turbidity Study as well as a Sediment Plume
Analysis will also be undertaken and will provide insight on the effects of dredging.
12.10 Estuarine Sensitivity and Functioning and Ecosystem Good and Services
12.10.1 Status Quo
By definition, an estuary constitutes a partly enclosed coastal body of water with one or
more rivers or streams flowing into it, and with a free connection to the open sea. These
systems form a transition zone between river and ocean environments and are subject to
both marine influences (e.g. tides, waves, and the influx of saline water) and riverine
influences (e.g. flows of fresh water and sediment). The high productivity in estuaries
stems from the inflow of both seawater and freshwater, which provide high levels of
nutrients in both the water column and sediment.
Durban Bay Estuarine Management Situational Analysis (MER/ERM, 2011) showed that
the Durban Bay Estuary is highly degraded largely due to the following issues:
Change in mouth configuration and state;
Significant loss of habitat;
Loss of rich productive habitat types such as the Zostera seagrass beds;
Significant declines in water quality;
Loss of invertebrate species associated with a loss of habitat;
Changes in species composition and abundance of fish;
Loss of bird species and overall numbers due to habitat loss; and
Increased nutrient loading in the system.
Although highly modified from its original form and state, Durban Bay remains an
estuarine embayment. Biological habitat in its broadest sense has a structural component
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 141
and an environmental component (CSIR, 2011; MER/ERM, 2011). Habitat structure in the
Bay is governed by sheltered tidal waters in deepwater basins and over shallow
sandbanks and mudflats. Environmental properties are derived from the inflows of
freshwater (predominantly via surface flow), which creates variability in water quality
parameters such as salinity, turbidity and pH. These water quality characteristics,
particularly over shallow water sand and mud substrates, and together with a remnant
stand of mangroves at Bayhead, are the most important estuarine habitats in the Bay
(CSIR, 2011).
The major causes for the ecological deterioration that occurred between 1950 and 1980
were listed by Begg (1978) as:
Loss of “marginal” vegetation (this included primarily mangroves and Zostera
eelgrass);
“Disruption” of suitable substrates as feeding grounds (referring to dredging
impacts on sand and mud substrates, and loss of these shallow water habitats).
Industrial pollution; and
Increased tidal exchange.
The impacts of loss of structural habitat (sand and mudflats, mangroves and Zostera)
were, in all likelihood, the predominant vector of ecosystem degradation between
1950 and 1980. Major port developments occurred during this period. Pollution
undoubtedly played some role, with domestic and industrial effluent disposed from an
outlet on North Pier at the port entrance until 1969. Potential impacts of this practise
were mitigated by restricting disposal to outflowing tides and major pollution events
were likely the result of spillages rather than persistent contaminant loading. An early
(1972) fish kill in the Bay was reportedly the result of discharge of acidic effluent
(Heydorn, 1972; cited in Begg, 1978; CSIR, 2011).
Together with urban development, catchment and stormwater contamination became
increasingly problematic, to the point that Begg (1978, p. 247) described the Bay as
functioning as a “giant stormwater sump for the city of Durban”. Monitoring
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 142
programmes conducted in the last decade all indicate degraded water and sediment
quality in the vicinity of river and stormwater inflows (Pillay, 2004; James et al.,
2008a,b; Deyzel et al., 2009; CSIR, 2011).
Past port and city development has therefore already affected the significant majority
of the original area of Durban Bay, through physical alteration and destruction of
habitat. Past developments have constrained more recent port development, to the
point that future port growth now relies on expansion of quays and wharfs at the
expense of open waters and the little natural intertidal and subtidal habitat that
remains (CSIR, 2011).
The urban population and city development, on the other hand, have continued to
increase, with increases in pollutant loads to the port via river and stormwater inflows.
This increasing pollution loading into a decreasing water area with reduced
assimilative capacity through loss of natural habitat has reduced the ecological
resilience of the Bay. Pollution impacts, such as fish kills experienced in 2007 (Weerts
and Pillay, 2008), are the result (CSIR, 2011).
Ecosystem services provided by Durban Bay have been the subject of consideration
in recent years, largely in response to the need to assist and guide decision-making
pertaining to various port development options. Table 17 represents a summary of the
most recent thinking on ecosystem services provided, as presented in the Draft
Situation Assessment of the Estuarine Management Plan being developed for Durban
Bay (MER/ERM, 2011). This thinking stems largely from the ecosystem goods and
services assessment conducted as part of the Transnet - eThekwini Municipality
Planning Initiative (Mander et al., 2006).
Table 17: Ecosystem goods and services provided by Durban Bay (adapted from MER/ERM, 2011).
Ecosystem goods and services or mitigation supplied by Durban Bay
Key habitats essential for delivery of goods and
services
Atmospheric management Sandbanks, water column
Climate management - cooling built up urban areas Water body, sandbanks
Climate change - species diversity and links to different All habitats
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 143
industries supported by these species as well as international obligations
Waste dilution - waste entering the port from port activities and urban/industrial runoff is diluted by water volume and tidal exchange
Water column, sandbanks (current topography promotes rapid exchange)
Waste assimilation and disease risk management – waste and bacteriological contamination entering the port from port activities and urban/industrial runoff is absorbed and degraded
Sandbanks, water column, mangroves
Flood mitigation - receiving facility / shock absorber reducing flood damage
Water body
Mitigation of environmental impacts on adjacent smaller estuaries caused by droughts/floods, artificial mouth breachings and pollution events
Intertidal sandbanks, water column
Nursery for estuarine dependent crustaceans and fish - without estuarine systems these organisms cannot complete their life cycle
All habitats, especially intertidal sandbanks, mangroves and Little Lagoon
Essential habitat for aquatic birds - a local, regional and internationally important habitat for resident and migratory birds
Sandbanks, water surface, mangroves
Genetic, species and landscape conservation - conservation of national assets
All habitats, especially intertidal sandbanks
Landscape character - creates a sense of place for local residents and users of the Bay area
Water surface, sandbanks
Food production and supply All habitats
Sport and outdoor recreational activities - swimming, canoeing, fishing, flyfishing, sailing
Waterbody, sandbanks
Leisure activities - picnic and bird watching Sandbanks, mangroves
Education activities Mangroves, Little Lagoon, sandbanks
Research and knowledge creation All habitats
12.10.2 Potential Impacts / Implications
Further expansion in the Port of Durban/Durban Bay may result in loss of estuarine
habitat and decrease the habitat functioning of the Durban Bay Estuary. This could result
in a loss of ecosystem goods and services.
12.10.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations
The Estuarine/Marine Biodiversity Assessment will also provide detailed information
regarding impacts on Estuarine habitat which will be discussed in the EIA Phase. In
addition, the high level Central Sandbank study and the Ecological Assessment of the
impacts of the Central Sandbank will determine how the proposed project will impact the
Central Sandbank. An assessment of the indirect impacts on the Little Lagoon will also be
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 144
undertaken. This information will be linked to the Ecosystem Goods and Services that the
Central Sandbank, Little Lagoon and Durban Estuary as a whole, provides and discussed
in the EIA Phase.
12.11 Rivers
12.11.1 Status Quo
Figure 49: Rivers in the Regional Study Area
The uMbilo, uMhlatuzana and aManzimnyama are three rivers supplying freshwater to
the estuary (Figure 49). The catchment of all three rivers falls within the eThekwini
Municipal Bounday. The uMbilo River has a catchment of 67km2 and a length of 35km,
whilst the uMhlatuzana River has a catchment of 113km2 and a length of 50km. The
aManzimnyama River is the smallest and has a 15km2 catchment and is approximately
5.5km long (MER/ERM, 2011). All three rivers are canalised in their lower reaches and
highly transformed through most of the catchment.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 145
12.11.2 Potential Impacts / Implications
The expansion of Berths 203 to 205 will not impact any rivers feeding into the Estuary.
12.11.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations
No specialist studies are required.
12.12 Sensitive Areas: The Little Lagoon
12.12.1 Status Quo
The Little Lagoon area of Durban Bay has been demonstrated to have exceptional
biodiversity richness (MER, 2003). A Record of Decision regarding the expansion of Pier
2 (by adding 2 new berths, Berth 206 and 207), was handed down in 1999 and the
decision was deferred mainly due to the ecological sensitivity of the Little Lagoon, which
would have been lost. Transnet National Ports Authority (then Portnet) undertook a study
to understand the ecological sensitivity of the Little Lagoon.
Monitoring of typical major, physico-chemical determinants of estuarine environments
such as salinity, temperature, dissolved oxygen, turbidity and sediment type took place in
2001 and 2002. Salinities generally approximated seawater levels, turbidity was relatively
low and temperatures were within the range to be expected in a sub-tropical estuary. In
addition, Chlorophyll-a levels in the water column were low.
Thirty-four benthic invertebrate species were recorded, of which, the sandprawn
Callianassa kraussi and the inter-tidal soldier crab, Dotilla fenestrata made up the bulk of
the biomass (MER, 2003). The hypobenthos were dominated by a mysid shrimp,
Mesopodopsis africanus but densities were low. In addition, the zooplankton community
was dominated by an alien copepod. A total of 32 fish species were recorded, most of
these were juveniles that were either partially or completely dependent on the estuarine
nursery grounds. Most of these fish were feeding on Benthic Invertebrates.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 146
12.12.2 Potential Impacts / Implications
The Post harbour widening survey (CSIR, 2010; EMS, 2010) showed that the port
widening project had increased sediment deposition in the Little Lagoon to a small
degree. The potential implications of the proposed expansion of Berths 203 to 205 are a
change in Bay hydrology leading to increased sedimentation of the Little Lagoon. Another
potential implication is that, as mentioned above, dredging may release contaminants into
the water column and that this impact may extend to the Little lagoon. This is highly
unlikely due to current hydrology of the Bay.
In addition, during Construction, activities such as excavation, infilling, decommissioning
of the berth 205 may result in an increase in pollution flowing into the water around the
little lagoon.
12.12.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations
An ecological Assessment of the impacts on the Central Sandbank and an indirect
assessment of the impacts on the Little Lagoon will be used to better understand the
current state of the area together with the Marine/Estuary Impact Assessment.
12.13 Sensitive Areas: Bayhead Natural Heritage Site- Mangroves
12.13.1 Status Quo
In the late 1950s, Durban Bay still supported about 250 Ha of mangroves, despite a
history of destruction going back to the latter years of the previous century when there
was recorded resistance from the public to mangrove clearing in 1890. The mangroves
provide a habitat for a variety of march crabs, mainly of the genus, Sesarma, the large
Scylla serrata, the large mangrove whelk, Pyranzus palustris and the climbing whelk,
Cerithidea decollate. However evidence suggests that both whelk species have declined
(MER/ERM, 2011). In addition, the mangrove fringes and adjoining areas still support
various species of fiddler crabs of the genus, Uca.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 147
Light isotope tracer studies undertaken by Newman et al., (2008) on the usage of energy
captured by the mangroves indicated that the large sesarnud marsh crab, Neosarmatium
meinerti, was the only species which derived significant proportions of its energy from
mangrove material (MER/ERM, 2011).
12.13.2 Potential Impacts / Implications
The Bayhead Natural Heritage site should not be affected by the proposed expansion
project as firstly, the expansion footprint does not interfere with the mangroves. However,
there may be indirect impacts related to the release of contaminants into the water
column; increased turbidity and change in hydrology. However, the likelihood of these
impacts is very low due to the low level of contaminants in the expansion footprint
(especially in comparison to the poor water quality experienced by the Bayhead area) as
well as the current hydrology of the Port, where the upper reaches of the Bay (near the
mangroves) are not flushed by the tides.
12.13.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations
The Estuarine/Marine Biodiversity Assessment will also take into account impacts on the
mangroves.
12.14 Socio-Economic Environment
12.14.1 Status Quo
The Port of Durban can be seen as the premier gateway port in South Africa and as the
South African economy grows, so does the need for a greater capacity to cater for
growing freight volumes at the Port. In the past 10 years, the growth in containerised
traffic through the Port of Durban has been three times the national GDP growth rate. It is
currently forecast that the existing transportation infrastructure will reach its limit by 2019
and unless significant expansion takes place, South African economic growth will be
constrained.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 148
President Jacob Zuma specifically made mention of upgrade projects within the Port of
Durban in 2012 State of the Nation Address. The national importance of the Port was
judged by 80, 764 million tonnes of cargo (30% of the total cargo handled at the eight
South African Commercial Ports). In addition, the Port of Durban handled 2,713 million
TEUs out of a total of 4,393 million TEUs (61% of the total), thus emphasising the Port of
Durban’s importance as an international commercial gateway to South Africa and its
adjoining regions.
The expansion of the port including the upgrade of Berths 203 to 205 aims to reduce the
cost of doing business, improve productivity and will create employment and generate
wealth locally, regionally and nationally. However, the Port of Durban does face
competition. Global shipping lines have indicated that there will only be one port of call (or
‘hub’) along the KwaZulu-Natal coastline. As the turnaround time at the Port lengthens,
shipping lines may choose to relocate to other ports.
From the cargo aspect, the highest growth has been in container numbers, motor
vehicles, bulk liquid chemicals and bulk petroleum products. The growth rates in these
products have been spectacular over the past decade, with a sharp escalation since
2002. In addition, container volumes are up at over 2 million TEUs per annum which
means Durban is in a world-size class, and growing at between 8 and 10 percent per
annum.
In addition, of the seven South African Ports, Durban had the most vessel arrivals during
the 2005/06 financial year (April-March). Altogether 4,551 vessels entered Durban
harbour (31,7% of the of the total arrivals of 14,335 in South Africa). Of these
approximately 90% were ocean-going and 10% were coastal, fishing and miscellaneous.
Container vessels (26.6%) were the highest number by type of vessel and constituted the
most by gross tonnage (33.7%) in the 2005/2006 financial year.
The total cargo revenue at the Port of Durban is made up predominately from
containerised cargo. In the 2009/2010 financial year, containerised cargo revenue was
2,032,913,600 (approximately, 77% of the total cargo revenue). Related to this, however,
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 149
is the growing concern by the shipping industry that the Port of Durban can accommodate
this growth in containerised cargo. Some new traffic can be handled merely by efficiency
gains however it is estimated that at the current rates of growth, container handling
demands will exceed handling capacity in the near future. The proposed upgrade aims at
increasing efficiency and safety and the Durban Container Terminal.
TNPA has also prepared the Port of Durban Development Framework in which forecasts
indicate continued strong growth in container volumes through the Port (and in line with
world trends). The objectives of this framework are:
To provide additional container handling capacity to meet future demand; and
To consolidate general cargo handling facilities and the alignment of operations
with best practices.
The upgrade of Berths 203 to 205 is set out as part of the first Phase of development of
the Port. The development framework details four proposed Phases of development
aimed at meeting the anticipated growth of container and general cargo. A 2011 Order of
Magnitude study by Urban-Econ Development Economists estimated a positive impact of
the proposed four Phases of development on new business sales, GGP, job opportunities
and income/wages.
The Port of Durban together with its associated catchments forms the core of
urbanisation and industrialisation. As such, a large portion of the 3 583 300 people living
in Durban (Statistics SA, 2007), together with associated activities supported by the port,
all may ultimately impact on the functioning of the Bay (MER/ERM, 2011). In fact a large
portion of Durban’s population lives within the catchments in which the Bay is located
(approximately 13% of Durban’s total population i.e. 465 829 people), with an additional
10% of the total population (i.e. 360 791 people) occurring within 6 kilometres of the Bay
(MER/ERM, 2011).
MER/ERM (2011) identifies a range of land use and social users within and on the border
of the primary boundary (i.e. the Bay), including:
Predominant industrial activities surrounding the port include:
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 150
Port activities in various operational terminals; and
Industrial activities undertaken by tenants including petro-chemical storage, cold
storage, manufacturing industries and liquid bulk.
A small portion of the bay is used for non-industrial purposes including:
Recreational users such as marinas and club houses;
Commercial users such as the Bat Centre and Wilson’s Wharf complex; and
Natural heritage areas such as the mangrove area near King’s Rest.
MER/ERM (2011) further identifies a range of social users and activities within the
secondary land use boundary (i.e. the immediate vicinity of the Bay and beyond)
including:
Large scale back of port industry;
CBD and associated commercial retail and state institutions;
Tourism and recreational facilities;
Open space classified areas on the Bluff, Durban Botanical Gardens and Albert
Park;
Formal and less formal settlements in the areas of Clairwood, Bluff and Glenwood;
Undeveloped land near the Bayhead rail yards;
Rail facilities and shunting yards in the Bayhead area; and
Recreational areas including Sun Coast Casino and Durban Central Beachfront.
12.14.2 Potential Impacts / Implications
The potential impact of the proposed expansion project is positive. The proposed
expansion includes the deepening of the berth channel, approach channel and turning
basin to allow for the use of Super Post Panamax Ships. The widened berths will also
allow for larger and more efficient Ship to Shore cranes which should increase efficiency
at the Port of Durban. These positive impacts should allow for the Port of Durban’s
continued success as a ‘hub’ port which has positive implications for both the national
economy as well as the local economy.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 151
12.14.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations
A number of studies have been undertaken regarding the Port of Durban by Transnet
eThekwini Municipality Ports Initiative (TEMPI) as well as the Durban Bay Estuarine
Management Plan- Situational Analysis. In addition, a Local Economic Impact
Assessment will be undertaken. The impacts of the proposed expansion will be discussed
in greater detail in the EIA Phase.
12.15 Air quality
12.15.1 Status Quo
The Ethekwini Municipality established a modern air quality monitoring network in the
South Durban Basin in December 2003 (Witi, 2005). The basin is located on the eastern
seaboard of South Africa and has a mix of heavy industrial activity and residential
settlements in close proximity. Air quality monitoring takes place at the following stations
and aims to measure two main sources of air pollution: industrial and traffic pollution.
1. Ganges Monitoring Station – Merebank
2. King Edward Monitoring Station – Congella
3. City Hall Monitoring Station – City Centre
4. Settlers Monitoring Station – Merebank
5. Wentwork Monitoring Station – Wentworth
6. Ferndale Monitoring Station – North of Durban
The pollutants measured include sulphur dioxide, total reduced sulphur, oxides of
nitrogen, particulate matter (PM10), ozone and carbon monoxide and the network
incorporates the latest technology in continuous air quality monitoring (Witi, 2005).
Table 18: A summary table of PM10 estimates for Ethekwini (Witi, 2005)
Station Annual Average
(μg/m3)
24-Hour MAX.
(μg/m3)
24-Hour
Exceedances
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 152
Wentworth 39.1 143.1 27
Ganges 46.4 179.3 36
City Hall 38.1 159.7 21
King Edward 37.6 162.2 21
Ferndale 39.7 145.9 18
Settlers school 40.0 NA NA
12.15.2 Potential Impacts / Implications
Dust will be generated during the construction period from various sources. In addition,
the expanded Berth 203 to 205 will increase the efficiency of the Port of Durban, so more
containers should be handled in a period of time which is likely to increase traffic and the
emissions from traffic. However, no specific Air Quality Assessment is necessary for this
study.
12.15.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations
No specialist studies are currently envisaged. However the EMP will make special
recommendations regarding dust control.
12.16 Noise
12.16.1 Status Quo
The Port of Durban is the industrial hub of the city and noise levels are relatively high due
to the Port activities taking place.
12.16.2 Potential Impacts / Implications
During construction, localised increases in noise will be caused by construction activities.
Leaseholders and tenants in the Port of Durban may find the additional noise a nuisance
during the construction period. In addition, berths at the Point will be used during the
upgrade process which may increase the noise impacts on flats and offices in the area.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 153
12.16.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations
Noise that emanates from construction activities will be addressed through targeted best
practices for noise management in the EMP. The EIA will further pay special attention to
the management of noise from the berths at Point to ensure that regulated standards are
abided by.
12.17 Maritime Archaeology and Culture features
12.17.1 Status Quo
Underwater Heritage:
According to the Shipwreck database compiled from Levine (1986) and Turner (1988)
(CSIR, 2011), 139 ships have been wrecked in or near Durban Harbour since 1685. Of
these, 38 were salvaged or removed, either at the time of the event or years later, as in
the case of the Karin. Of the 101 remaining wrecks, 12 were scuttled in the deep water
either off the Bluff or about 5km away from Durban; 28 were wrecked in or near the
entrance to the harbour and the remaining 61 were wrecked on the Durban Beach areas
or the Outer Anchorage. Figure 49 below depicts 4 Shipwreck Zones which occur within
an around the Durban Harbour.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 154
Figure 50: Durban Harbour showing Shipwreck Database Zones (From CSIR, 2011).
The below wrecks were either reported as wrecking in the harbour or their whereabouts
are not recorded in the standard databases.
Table 19: Wrecks near the Durban Harbour (from CSIR, 2011)
Name Status Origin Date Comment
Burnham Aground –
Wrecked
Britain 29 May 1840 Harbour? The vessels cable
parted at the port, during a north-
west gale and went aground. Part
of cargo was saved and no lives
were lost.
Elizabeth Anne Wrecked October
1863
Fleur de
Maurice
Aground Britain April 1894
Kayle
M. Smith Abandoned – Norway 23 March Durban as a hulk. After the
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 155
Peterson Towed –
Converted to
hulk
1903 vessel was disabled in a gale, the
crew were rescued by the fishing
steamer, Hansa and brought to
Durban. The barque was
abandoned near Port Shepstone
and towed to Durban by the tug
Ingane. She was converted into a
hulk.
Northwester /
North-Wester
Wrecked? 31 May
1939/1839
No lives lost.
Stone Age Sites:
There is a low possibility that artefacts may be recovered during the dredging process
(CSIR, 2011).
12.17.2 Potential Impacts / Implications
The project could impact on heritage resources as follows:
Destruction or damage of heritage resources through construction activities; and
Inundation of heritage resources.
12.17.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations
A Maritime Archaeology Study will be undertaken to better understand the impact of the
proposed expansion of maritime archaeology.
12.18 Infrastructure
12.18.1 Status Quo
Existing infrastructure on Berths 203 to 205 include a Ro-Ro Ramp, Electrical Substation,
Storm water drain system, site offices and lights (see pictures below). The current cranes
will be replaced with Ship to Shore.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 156
Figure 51: Infrastructure on site
In addition, there is a straddle crane storage area which will be decommissioned. This
area has been contaminated by hazardous material such as diesel and hydraulic fluid
however it occurs on layers on concrete. A third party contractor will be hired to remove
the contaminated concrete and to dispose of it at a licensed disposal facility.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 157
12.18.2 Potential Impacts / Implications
Existing infrastructure on Berth 203 to 205 will be decommissioned and removed before
construction of the new quay wall begins. All other services will be abandoned although it
may be possible to salvage and recycle some infrastructure such as sole plates. New
services infrastructure will be necessary. In addition, the new Ship to Shore cranes could
be potentially impacted during construction activities.
12.18.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations
Mitigation measures to be identified during the EIA Phase to safeguard existing
infrastructure. In addition, the EMP will provide specific measures to ensure the Straddle
Crane storage area is dealt with correctly.
12.19 Services: Storm Water
12.19.1 Status Quo
The new storm water system will be integrated with the current existing storm water
system during the expansion process.
12.19.2 Potential Impacts / Implications
There should be no implications for storm water.
12.19.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations
Feasibility assessments for the proposed expansion (PRDW, 2011) have taken into
account the construction of a new storm water pipe. No additional studies are necessary.
12.20 Services: Electricity
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 158
12.20.1 Status Quo
Electrical services to the site already exist, however the relatively new Substation will be
decommissioned and removed and a new substation will be constructed once the new
quay walls have been built.
12.20.2 Potential Impacts / Implications
There should be no implications for Electrical Services.
12.20.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations
As the site already has access to electricity services, no additional studies are required.
12.21 Transportation Network
12.21.1 Status Quo
Currently, the transportation network around the Port of Durban is congested. The
Transnet eThekwini Municipality Port Initiative (TEMPI) undertook a traffic assessment. In
addition, Transnet and eThekwini Municipality have a Traffic Management Plan which
both parties have agreed to. The increase of traffic for the upgrade of Berths 203 to 205
is thought to be minimal and will not increase traffic numbers above the agreed upon
limits set out in the Traffic Management Plan with eThekwini Municipality.
12.21.2 Potential Impacts / Implications
The increase in traffic for the deepening, lengthening, and widening of Berth 203 to 205 is
thought to be minimal as the project is mainly focused on the safety of the current Berths.
Increased efficiency at Berth 203 to 205 however may increase traffic loads in the area.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 159
12.21.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations
A desktop analysis of the TEMPI traffic study will be undertaken and more details
provided in the EIA Phase. However it’s important to note that the traffic will not increase
above agreed upon levels with the eThekwini Municipality.
12.22 Tourism
12.22.1 Status Quo
The main tourist areas in and around the Port of Durban include the Marinas, the
beaches and uShaka Marine World.
12.22.2 Potential Impacts / Implications
The proposed project does not plan to change the land use of the Port and impacts on
tourism are related to indirect effects such as increased water turbidity due to sand
winning.
12.22.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations
A Sediment Plume Analysis from the Sand winning site will be conducted to ensure that it
does not impact on uShaka Marine World or recreational users within the Port. The
Marine/Estuarine Biodiversity Assessment will also determine the impacts of the
proposed project on fauna. This will be used to assess the indirect impacts. In addition, a
Turbidity study and a shoreline impact study will be undertaken.
12.23 Offshore Dredge Disposal
12.23.1 Status Quo
Approximately 4 million cubic metres of dredge material will need to be disposed at an
offshore disposal site. The Port of Durban currently has an offshore disposal permit for
maintenance dredging and the site has been used for previous capital projects. An
application for a Dumping at sea permit can only be made once a positive Environmental
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 160
Authorisation has been received. However, the impacts of both dredging and dredge
disposal need to be determined during the EIA Phase.
The current site is dispersive and has been used for both maintenance dredge disposal
as well as dredge disposal for capital projects. The sediment at the site is thus already
mixed. In addition, Water and Sediment Quality studies suggest that the contamination
around Berth 203 to 205 is relatively low. Thus the impact on the offshore disposal site is
likely to be less significant.
In addition, if a Dumping at Sea permit was
received, a grid would be superimposed
over the location of the current disposal
site. Dredge material would be moved to
the site in a TSHD and each disposal
would occur over a separate cell of the
disposal site in order to ensure an equal
distribution.
12.23.2 Potential Impacts / Implications
1. Changes to the bathymetry of the seabed associated with spoil disposal can lead
to changes in wave direction (through refraction) and in turn to changes in
longshore transport of sediment and consequently shoreline erosion and/or
accretion. However, dredge disposal for the Channel Widening and Deepening
project took place at the current dredge disposal site and no impacts on the
shoreline were noted;
2. Offshore disposal of dredge material will result in smothering of bottom dwelling
organisms at the Offshore disposal site. If the sediment type is different to that
found at the disposal site, a change in community composition may also be
expected;
3. During disposal of dredge material, contaminants may be released into the water
column. This can have negative impacts on biota; and
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 161
4. Disposal of dredge material at the offshore disposal site will increase turbidity and
amount of suspended solids which will impact biota at the offshore disposal site.
12.23.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations
In order to obtain a Dumping at Sea Permit, as per the National Environmental
Management: Integrated Coastal Management Act, 2008, the sediment type, quality, size
and chemical composition of the dredge material needs to be determined. This is to
ensure that the quantity of metals, hydrocarbons etc. are not above dangerous levels. A
Sediment and Chemical Analysis of Dredge Material will take place as a specialist study
in the EIA Phase. In addition, a Turbidity study will be undertaken as well as Bathymetric
survey of the offshore disposal site. The Wave Energy analysis will also include the
changes in bathymetry at the offshore disposal site. n
12.24 Offshore Sand Winning
12.24.1 Status Quo
Two potential sites which were investigated during 2001 (Centre for Geosciences, 2011)
will be investigated to assess the sediment type etc.
12.24.2 Potential Impacts / Implications
1. Offshore sand winning for infill material will result in the physical destruction and
removal of sediment habitat and associated infauna at the offshore borrow area;
2. Changes to the bathymetry of the seabed associated with sand winning can lead
to changes in wave direction (through refraction) and in turn to changes in
longshore transport of sediment and consequently shoreline erosion and/or
accretion;
3. Increased turbidity due to dredging at the sand winning site may impact beach
users;
4. Increased turbidity due to dredging at the sand winning site may impact visual
predators; and
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 162
5. Dredging at the sand winning site may release contaminants or nutrients into the
water column however this is unlikely as the sites, although impacted have not
been used for dredge disposal.
12.24.3 Specialist Study Triggered / Additional Investigations
A sediment plume modelling analysis as well as Turbidity Study will take place to ensure
that increased turbidity does not impact recreational users, fishermen etc. In addition, a
Shoreline Stability Assessment will be undertaken to ensure that sand winning does not
undermine the beaches in the area. The Wave Energy Study will also include the sand
winning area.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 163
13. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
The purpose of public participation process for the proposed Deepening, Lengthening
and Widening of Berth 203 to 205 includes:
1. Providing I&APs with an opportunity to obtain information about the project;
2. Allowing I&APs to express their views, issues and concerns with regard to the project;
3. Granting I&APs an opportunity to recommend measures to avoid or reduce adverse
impacts and enhance positive impacts associated with the project; and
4. Enabling Transnet and the project team to incorporate the needs, concerns and
recommendations of I&APs into the project, where feasible.
The public participation process that was followed for the proposed project is governed by
NEMA and Government Notice No. R. 543. Figure 52 outlines the public participation
process for the Scoping (current) and EIA Phases (pending).
Figure 52: Outline of Public Participation Process
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 164
13.1 Authorities Consultation
Note that authorities are regarded as government departments with jurisdiction pertaining
to the activities associated with the proposed Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of
Berths 203 to 205 or the receiving environment.
13.1.1 Pre-Application Consultation Discussions
Informal Pre-Application Consultation Discussions took place telephonically with the
Department of Environmental Affairs: Directorate – Oceans and Coasts. The purpose of
this discussion was to determine the needs of the Department in regards to offshore
disposal of dredge material.
13.1.2 Environmental Authorities Meeting
An Environmental Authorities Meeting was held on 29 February 2012 at the Queen
Elizabeth Boardroom, Queens Warehouse, Durban (Transnet Offices). The meeting was
attended by representatives from the following authorities:
Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA): Oceans and Coasts Directorate;
KwaZulu-Natal Department of Agriculture, Environmental Affairs and Rural
Development (KZN DAEARD);
South African Heritage Resources Agency - Maritime Archaeology Unit (SAHRA);
eThekwini Municipality; and
KwaZulu-Natal Department of Economic Development and Tourism (KZN DEDT).
The minutes of the Environmental Authorities Meeting are contained in Appendix E.
13.2 Database of I&APs
A database of I&APs, which includes authorities, different spheres of government
(national, provincial and local), parastatals, stakeholders, landowners, interest groups
and members of the general public, was prepared for the project and is contained in
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 165
Appendix F. The project made use of the Durban Bay Estuarine Management Plan
Database of I&APs due to the fact that proposed project takes place within the Durban
Bay Estuary.
13.3 Landowner Notification
The landowner for the proposed Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berth 203 to
205 is Transnet. The Port Manager of the Port of Durban, Ricky Bhikraj was officially
notified. (The Acknowledgement of Receipt of the Landowner Notification is contained in
Appendix G). The letter and Acknowledgement of Receipt accompanied the submission
of the Application form to the DEA on 10 February 2012.
13.4 Focus Group Meetings
A focus group meeting was held on the 22 February 2012 at the Seafarers Club, 1
Seafarers Road, Bayhead. The purpose of this meeting was to determine the concerns
regarding the proposed project. The Minutes of the Focus Group Meeting is Contained in
Appendix H).
Concerns centred around the socio-economic impacts on the local community and
seafarers. One of the main concerns was that larger ships require a smaller crew and that
the expansion project would result in fewer jobs for the seafaring community. There were
also concerns that this would then have a knock on effect on the community as a whole.
However, the attendees felt that if the project would have positive socio-economic
impacts then it would be a welcomed even if there were negative environmental impacts.
Another concern was related to the logistics planning of the project and how this would
impact tenants and businesses in the Port.
There was some concern regarding the Central Sandbank, impact on the birds and on
the mangroves. In addition, it is important to note that the general public must feel
comfortable to report issues related to TNPA business. This may be difficult as TNPA is
the landowner in most cases and a major force in the local economy.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 166
From the conclusions presented above, the following recommendations have been made
and are included in the Draft Scoping Report:
1. A Local Economic Impact Assessment to determine the positive and negative
impacts (if any) of the proposed project on the community (including businesses,
tenants and seafarers) has been included in the Plan of Study for the EIA;
2. The importance of a Traffic Management Plan has been highlighted and Traffic
Management will be specifically dealt with in the EIA;
3. In order to provide a comfortable commenting environment, I&APs will be able to
comment anonymously at the Public Open Day through anonymous Reply forms;
and
4. A detailed logistics plan related to management of the berths (i.e. container
migration plan) must be provided during the EIA phase so that I&APs know how
the logistics management of the proposed project will impact them.
In addition, a small survey was undertaken, whereby a questionnaire was administered to
determine main concerns regarding the proposed project.
Figure 53: Areas where questionnaires were administered.
Respondents were surveyed in five different areas surrounding the Port of Durban
(Figure 52). The results (Appendix I) show that in general, the project is well known in
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 167
the community. Of the 19 people interviewed, seven people were most concerned about
traffic related issues (Figure 53). Four people had social concerns (mostly related to job
creation and employment) while three had environmental concerns. In addition, nearly all
expected positive impacts related to the project related to economic issues such as
employment (Figure 54).
Recommendations drawn from the survey process include the following:
The inclusion of a Local Economic Impact Assessment to determine the positive
and negative impacts of the proposed project on the local community; and
The inclusion of a Traffic Management Plan in the EIA report.
Figure 54: Main Concerns regarding the proposed project.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
What are your mainconcerns?
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 168
Figure 55: The main expected positive impacts regarding the proposed project.
13.5 One of One Meetings with Key Stakeholders
In order to further facilitate public participation for the proposed project, one on one key
stakeholder meetings were held with Wildlife and Environmental Society of South Africa
(WESSA). During one of two site visits held during the public review period, discussions
with the South Durban Community Environmental Alliance (SDCEA) took place.
A meeting with Ushaka Marine World will be organised during the EIA phase.
The minutes for the meeting are contained in Appendix J.
13.6 Project Announcement and Notification of Scoping Report Review
The project announcement and notification of review of the Draft Scoping Report was
undertaken as a combined exercise through the various media and mechanisms
employed to inform the I&APs.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
What positivethings could thisproject bring?
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 169
13.6.1 Background Information Document
Background Information Documents (BIDs) and Reply Forms (refer to Appendix K) were
prepared and forwarded to the I&APs contained in the database. In addition, although the
project occurs within the Port of Durban, all properties, landowners, tenants etc. within
100m of the Port of Durban were notified through the distribution of BIDs.
The BID provided the following information:
Project background and description;
EIA process; and
Details of the review process for the Draft Scoping Report and the public meeting.
The BID included a Reply Form, which granted the opportunity to register as an I&AP and
to raise queries or concerns regarding the project.
13.6.2 Onsite notices
Onsite notices, which also served as notification of the project and provided the details of
the review of the Draft Scoping Report and the public meeting, will be placed at strategic
points, which include the following points:
Bayhead;
Point;
Maydon Wharf;
Victoria Embankment;
The Bluff;
Umbilo; and
Congela
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 170
Figure 56: Locations of onsite notices
Proof of these notices is contained in Appendix L.
13.6.3 Newspaper Advertisements
In addition, an advertisement was placed in the Mercury and the Isolezwe on 9 March
2012. Copies of the advert are contained in Appendix M.
13.6.4 Public Open Day
The following public open day has been scheduled:
Date: 12 April 2012
Time: 10h00 – 17h00
Venue: Seafarers Club
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 171
The purpose of the meeting was to introduce the project and to share information, to
present the EIA process and an overview of the Draft Scoping Report, and to provide a
platform for project-related discussions. The minutes of the public open day together with
the informative presentation used are included in Appendix Q.
13.6.5 Site Visits for I&APs
Three site visits were organised during the public review period for I&APs that requested
an opportunity to the view the site. The details of these site visits are contained below:
Date Time Attendance
24 April 2012
(Low Tide)
09h00 Patrick Bond – UKZN Centre for Civil Society
Robert Kirby - Private
Santosh Banchoo- Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife
J. Surgu - Private
24 April 2012
(High Tide)
13h00 Desmond D’Sa – South Durban Community Environmental
Alliance (SDCEA) and four representatives of KZN
Subsistence Fisherman Forum and the SDCEA
26 April 2012
(Low Tide)
12h00 Representatives of the KZN Subsistence Fisherman Forum
13.7 Review Process for Draft Scoping Report
13.7.1 Accessing the Draft Scoping Report
In accordance with Regulation 56 of G.N. No. R. 543 of 18 June 2010, registered I&APs
were granted an opportunity to review and comment on the Draft Scoping Report by
placing copies of the document at the locations provided in Table 20. A 50-day review
period (from 09 March 2012 – 30 April 2012) has been provided.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 172
Table 20: Locations for review of Draft Scoping Report
No. Location Address Tel. No.
1. The Seafarers Club 1 Seafarers Road, Bayhead, Durban 031 466 1326
2. Central Reference Library - Durban
10th Floor, Liberty Towers, 214 Dr Pixley KaSeme Street, Durban
031 322 4414
Copies of the document were also provided to the following key regulatory and
commentary authorities:
DEA (Environment Impact Evaluation);
DEA (Oceans and Coasts);
KZN DAEARD – Environmental Services
KZN DAEARD – Coastal and Biodiversity Management
Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife;
DWA KZN Regional Office;
DMR KZN Office;
SAHRA – Maritime Archaeology;
KZN Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF);
KZN Department of Transport; and
eThekwini Municipality.
A copy of the draft Scoping Report was also provided to WESSA/Coastwatch and the
South Durban Community Environmental Alliance. Proof of delivery to the
aforementioned authorities in also contained in Appendix N.
13.7.2 Project Website
Due to the public interest in this proposed project, a copy of the Draft Scoping report was
made available on the following website (www.berth203toberth205expansioneia.co.za ).
The website will be updated throughout the Scoping and EIA process to allow for a
comprehensive public participation process. Furthermore, during the public review
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 173
period, numerous documents were requested by I&APs. All requested information which
has been provided to date is provided in Appendix R.
13.7.3 Commenting on the Draft Scoping Report
A comment form was provided in Appendix O of the Draft Scoping report. A copy of this
comment form which was also available at the Public Open Day and in the Background
Information Documents (BIDs).
Comments received from I&APs from the review of the Draft Scoping Report between the
09 March 2012 and 30 April 2012 are contained in the Comments and Response Report
in Appendix P. A number of comments were received between the 31 April 2012 and the
05 May 2012 but were still included in the Comments and Response Report however any
comments received after the 05 May 2012 will be included in the EIA phase.
13.7.4 2nd Period of Public Review
Due to the substantive nature of the comments, the Final Scoping report with the
Comments and Response Report were made available for a second period of public
review between 25 May 2012 and 01 June 2012. Copies of the report will be available at
the Seafarers Club and the Central Library (Table 20 above). In addition, the amended
Scoping report will be available on the project website
(www.berth203to205expansioneia.co.za) for download and review.
13.8 Issues raised by I&APs
The finalised Comments and Response Report, which summarises the salient issues
raised by I&APs and the project team’s response to these matters is included in Appendix
P. The issues listed in the final Comments and Response Report were identified from
minutes of meetings, questionnaires, completed Reply Forms and other correspondence
received.
As mentioned, the Scoping Phase serves to identify and prioritise issues for further
assessment during the EIA Phase. Accordingly, the comments received from I&APs
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 174
during public participation as part of Scoping will be afforded due consideration and
further investigation during the pending EIA stage. The comments received can be
divided into the following categories.
o 1999 RoD o Alignment with Transnet
Development Plans
o Water Use o Durban Bay draft Environmental
Management Plan
o Services o Alternatives
o Impacts on Central Sandbank o Environmental Process
o Impacts on Little Lagoon o Mitigation Measures and Offsets
o Impacts on the Durban Bay
Estuary
o Specialist Studies
o Impact on the Bayhead
Mangroves
o Socio-Economic Impacts
o Requests for Information o Traffic and Road Maintenance
o Offshore Borrow areas o Waste Management
o Concerns regarding modelling of
impacts
o General
o Dredging and Offshore dredge
disposal
o Climate Change
Main concerns centred around the impacts on the Central Sandbank and Durban Bay
estuary as a whole. Specific concerns included the impact on wading bird species;
fisheries and the socio-economic impact on subsistence fisherman who rely on the
Central Sandbank nursery.
Furthermore, there were concerns regarding the validity of the proposed expansion due
to the Record of Decision (RoD) handed down by the Department of Environmental
Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) in 1999. There were also concerns that increased efficiency
would result in heavier traffic in the area.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 175
A number of I&APs felt that the expansion was necessary to maintain the ‘hub’ status of
the Port of Durban.
14. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
In accordance with the purpose of the Scoping exercise as part of the overall
environmental assessment, this section aims to identify potentially significant
environmental issues for further consideration and prioritisation during the EIA stage. This
allows for a more efficient and focused impact assessment in the ensuing EIA Phase,
where the analysis is largely limited to significant issues and reasonable alternatives.
14.1 Approach
14.1.1 Predicting Significant Environmental Issues
The potential environmental issues associated with the proposed Deepening,
Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205, were identified during the Scoping
Phase through an appraisal of the following:
The risks identified during the Environmental Screening Investigation, undertaken by
CSIR (2011) (see Section 14.2 and Section 12);
Project-related components and infrastructure (see Section 10.1);
Activities associated with the project life-cycle (i.e. pre-construction, construction,
operation and decommissioning) (see Section 10.3);
Proposed alternatives (see Section 11);
Nature and profile of the receiving environment and potential sensitive environmental
features and attributes (see Section 12), which included a desktop evaluation (via
literature review, GIS, topographical maps and aerial photography) and site
investigations;
Input received during public participation from I&APs (see Section 14.3); and
Legal and policy context (see Section 4).
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 176
The two main categories of environmental impacts of the proposed project are those
which are inherent to construction (including dredging, offshore disposal, offshore sand
winning, upgrading of the new quay wall and extension of the berths) and those which are
related to the operation new upgraded and extended Berths 203 to 205. Apart from
explaining the receiving environment, Section 12 discusses possible impacts during
primarily the construction and operational Phases of the project. The significant
environmental issues were distilled from the aforementioned section and are summarised
in Section 14.4. Cumulative impacts are briefly explained in Section 14.5.
14.1.2 Mitigation of Impacts
During the EIA stage a detailed assessment will be conducted to evaluate all potential
impacts (paying particular attention to the significant issues listed in the Scoping Report),
with input from the project team and requisite specialist studies and through the
application of the impact assessment methodology contained in Section 15.
Suitable mitigation measures will be identified to manage the environmental impacts
according to the following hierarchy:
1. Initial efforts should strive to prevent the occurrence of the impact;
2. It this is not possible, mitigation should include measures that reduce or minimise the
significance of the impact to an acceptable level;
3. Remediation and rehabilitation should take place if measures cannot suitably
prevent or reduce the impacts, or to address the residual impacts; and
4. As a last measure, compensation should be employed as a form of mitigating the
impacts associated with a project.
The mitigation measures will be incorporated into the Environmental Management
Programme (EMP), which will form part of the EIA Report. This deliverable, together with
the Environmental Authorisation, can act as a standalone document that can be used to
inter alia monitor against compliance of the project with its pre-determined objectives,
targets and management actions.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 177
14.2 Environmental Screening Investigation
The CSIR was appointed by Transnet in 2011 to undertake an Environmental Screening
for three Phases of potential upgrades at the Port of Durban. The first of these Phases
involves the deepening, lengthening and widening of Berths 203 to 205. The study
identified potential environmental (biophysical, socio-economic and enviro-legal) issues.
Information contained in the Environmental Screening report by the CSIR (2011) has
been used together with other information to determine the environmental impacts of the
proposed projects.
The screening assessment was undertaken using a risk matrix system (Figure 56), where
the possible risks associated with each environmental issue were rated according to risk
level, likelihood and significance.
Figure 57: Comparative risk assessment method (adapted from Standards Australia and Standards
New Zealand, 2004) (CSIR, 2011).
Table 21 presents a summary of the risk assessment conducted by CSIR (2011). Main
issues include impacts of dredging and expansion into the Central Sandbank.
*P
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 178
Table 21: Risk Assessment for the Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berth 203 to 205 from the CSIR Environmental Screening (2011)
Source of Risk
Risk Identified Extent Duration Probability Status Degree of
Confidence
Significance
Without Mitigation
With Mitigation
Impacts associated with dredging and quay expansion in Durban Bay
Reduced tidal flushing associated with a reduction in the tidal prism Local Permanent Definite -ve High Low Low
Potential destabilisation of sand bank areas due to the potential exacerbation of one hour and/or 10 minute oscillations by changes in port layout
Local Permanent Probable -ve Low Medium Low
Potential effects on Yacht Basin due to the potential exacerbation of one hour and/or 10 minute oscillations by changes in port layout
Local Permanent Probable -ve Low Low Low
Changes in mixing dynamics and flushing in the port associated with the potential exacerbation of one hour and/or 10 minute oscillations by changes in port layout
Local Permanent Unlikely +ve High Low Low
Wave patterns in the Bay could be altered by the change in layout, particularly the Phase 2 development, resulting in infrastructure damage
Local Permanent Unlikely -ve Medium Low Low
Mooring problems due to long-wave energy Local Permanent Unlikely -ve Medium Medium Low
Possible localised scour and habitat change due to locally accelerated flows
Local Permanent Probable -ve Medium Low Low
Ecological effects due to the release of contaminants in sediment into the water column to the extent that toxic effects manifest
Local During
Construction Unlikely -ve High Low Low
Ecological effects due to the release of nutrients in sediment porewater to the extent that microalgae are stimulated to bloom status
Local During
Construction Unlikely -ve High Medium Medium
Ecological effects due to the reduction in dissolved oxygen concentrations Local During
Construction Probable -ve High Low Low
Ecological and human health risks due to the bioaccumulation and biomagnification of contaminants released from sediment
Local During and
Post Construction
Unlikely -ve High Low Low
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 179
Source of Risk
Risk Identified Extent Duration Probability Status Degree of
Confidence
Significance
Without Mitigation
With Mitigation
Ecological effects due to the temporary loss of sediment habitat and associated infauna in dredging footprint
Local During and
Post Construction
Definite -ve High Medium Medium
Ecological effects due to the permanent loss of intertidal and shallow subtidal habitats – Phase
Local and Regional
Permanent Definite -ve High High High
Ecological effects due to the permanent loss of intertidal and shallow subtidal habitats due to sandbank slumping and movement
Local and Regional
Permanent Definite -ve High High High
Ecological effects due to the permanent loss of deep subtidal and open water habitats
Local Permanent Definite -ve High Medium Low
Ecological effects due to the smothering of subtidal bottom-dwelling organisms due to the settlement of suspended sediment outside the dredging footprint
Local During
Construction Definite -ve High Low Low
Ecological effects of increased suspended solids concentrations on filter feeding organisms
Local During
Construction Definite -ve High Low Low
Ecological effects of increased suspended solids concentrations and turbidity on water column primary productivity
Local During
Construction Definite -ve Medium Low Low
Ecological effects of increased suspended solids concentrations and turbidity on microphytobenthos
Local During
Construction Probable -ve Medium High High
Ecological effects of increased suspended solids concentrations and turbidity on pelagic organisms
Local During
Construction Definite Neutral High Medium Medium
Ecological effects of increased suspended solids concentrations and turbidity on piscivorous birds
Local / Regional /
Inter- national
During Construction
Probable -ve Medium Medium Low
Aesthetic effects of increased suspended solids concentrations and turbidity
Local During
Construction Definite -ve High Low Low
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 180
Source of Risk
Risk Identified Extent Duration Probability Status Degree of
Confidence
Significance
Without Mitigation
With Mitigation
Impacts associated with disposal of dredged material in offshore waters
Ecological effects due to the release of contaminants, nutrients and organic matter during spoil disposal
Local During
Construction Unlikely -ve High Low Low
Ecological effects due to increased suspended solids concentrations and turbidity during spoil disposal
Local During
Construction Unlikely -ve High Low Low
Ecological effects due to the disturbance of bottom-dwelling organisms at the spoil disposal ground – exposure to contaminants in spoil
Local During
Construction Unlikely -ve High Low Low
Ecological effects due to the disturbance of bottom-dwelling organisms at the spoil disposal ground – physical effects
Local During and
Post Construction
Definite -ve High Low Low
Shoreline effects due to the alteration of wave patterns Local During and
Post Construction
Unlikely -ve Low Low Low
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 181
14.3 Impacts identified by I&APs
The issues raised by I&APs during Scoping, as contained in the Comments and
Response Report (Appendix P), have been grouped into the following main categories
(also reflected in summarized list in Section 13.8):
1999 RoD -
o Implications of the 1999 RoD;
o Loss of amount of Surface water prevented by 1999 RoD; and
o Habitat recreation has not been undertaken by TNPA (as required by 1999 RoD).
Water Use -
o The need for an Integrated Water Use License Application (IWULA) must be re-
assessed; and
o A storm water management plan for construction and operation is required in the
EIA phase.
Services -
o The presence of any electrical services must be determined; and
o The relocation of any electrical services must be at the expense of the applicant.
Impacts on Central Sandbank -
o Impacts of berthing larger ships on the Central Sandbanks;
o Details of the exact physical and ecological footprint of the expansion into the
Central Sandbank is required;
o Impacts on fish spawning on Central Sandbanks and related impacts on fisheries;
o Negative impacts should be mitigated with offsets;
o Impacts on slope stability and possibility of collapse;
o Impact of additional wave action from larger ships on the Central Sandbank;
o Impact of removal and loss of habitat;
o Impact of changes in tidal prism and erosional impacts on the Central Sandbanks;
and
o Impacts on wading birds.
Impacts on Little Lagoon -
o Impacts on the Little Lagoon should be mitigated.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 182
Impacts on Durban Bay Estuary-
o Alignment with Durban Bay Estuarine Management Plan
o Impacts on Durban Bay’s ability to provide goods and services;
o Importance of Durban Bay for wading birds;
o Impact of knock on and cumulative effects not limited to the project footprint;
o Increased pollution to Durban Bay;
o Impacts on Durban Bay may have regional consequences.
o Further development may result in ecological collapse of Durban Bay and
compromise the long term functioning of the system.
o Direct loss of intertidal sandbank;
o Further loss of the intertidal sandbank as a result of erosion due to larger vessels
moving through the area;
o Infilling and subsequent loss of water areas;
o Loss of subtidal areas as a consequence of dredging.
o Impacts on the largest population of the Sandprawn Callianassa kraussi which
occurs within Durban Bay.
o Impacts on benthic invertebrates within Durban Bay.
o Impact of infilling on the carrying capacity of the Durban Bay ecosystem.
o Increase in depth and redistribution of sediment due to dredging;
Impacts on the Bayhead Natural Heritage Site- Mangroves –
o Indirect impacts on Mangroves.
Requests for information
o Requests for various documents
Offshore Borrow Areas -
o Impacts to biodiversity at offshore borrow areas;
o Impacts of offshore sand winning on shoreline;
Concern Regarding Modelling of Impacts -
o Modelled results must be treated with caution.
Dredging and Offshore Dredge Disposal -
o Impacts of contaminated spoil material on dredge disposal site;
o Impacts of dredging on marine life;
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 183
o Use of dredge material for infilling to be considered as an alternative to offshore
sand winning;
o Impacts of suspended solids in the water;
o Impacts of dredging on visual predators which rely on clear water; and
o Possible re-suspension of trace metals and contaminants during dredging.
Alignment with Transnet Development Plans-
o The alignment of the proposed development must be discussed in light of the
broader context of Transnet plans;
o Alignment of the proposed development with the proposed dig out port.
o Placing power line underground;
o Building of new sub-station;
o Alignment of route alongside existing transmission lines and roads;
o Suggestions of possible deviations;
o Upgrading existing power lines.
Draft Durban Bay Estuarine Management Plan -
o Alignment of the proposed expansion with the Durban Bay Estuarine Management
Plan;
o Proposed development contradicts Durban Bay Estuarine Management Plan;
Alternatives -
o No site alternatives have been assessed;
o Implications of Sheet Pile Option in terms of corrosion, maintenance and load
weights to be included in EIA report.
o Alternative of storing dredge material for use in the infill of Berth 203 to 205 to be
considered;
o Site alternatives within the Port should be assessed;
o Alternative of rehabilitating the quay wall without expansion should be considered.
Environmental process -
o Dumping at Sea Process;
o Need for Activity 13, 27 and 56 of GN. R 544 of 18 June 2010 and Activity 10 of
GN.R. 546 of 18 June 2010 to be re-assessed;
o Independence of Environmental Assessment Practitioner;
o Notice of Scoping phase;
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 184
o Public Participation Process;
o Site Visit for I&APs; and
o Decision making authority
Mitigation Measures and Offsets -
o Offsets for impacts on Little Lagoon;
o Mitigation measures for impacts on beaches to be considered; and
o Compensation is not possible in estuarine environment.
Specialist Studies -
o Marine/Estuarine Biodiversity Impact Assessment to include offshore disposal site
and offshore sand winning site;
o Specialist Study Terms of Reference;
o Resource Economic Impact Study;
o Avifauna Impact Assessment;
o Results of Specialist studies to be holistically considered; and
o Traffic Impact Assessment and Traffic Management plan.
Socio-economic Impacts -
o Impacts on economy
o Impacts on trade;
o Impacts on employment;
o Impacts of influx of workers into Durban;
o Need for larger ships to meet global requirements; and
o Impacts on subsistence fishing.
Traffic and Road Maintainance –
o Impacts of increased traffic;
Waste Management –
o Need for a Waste Management License; and
o Spill contingency plan.
General –
o Land Use and zoning;
o Health and Safety during construction;
o Noise;
o Background Information Document (BID);
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 185
Climate Change -
o Impacts of increased CO2 emissions from larger ships;
o Impacts of increased CO2 emissions from transportation of containers; and
o Impact on COP17 legacy.
14.4 Summary of Environmental Issues
Pertinent environmental issues, which will receive specific attention during the EIA
Phase, are listed in the tables to follow.
Table 22: Pertinent Issues (Construction Phase) for prioritisation during the EIA Phase
Environmental Factor
Potential Issues / Impacts Proposed Resolution
Geology and Soil Sourcing of dredge material for infill purposes from Offshore Sand winning;
Physical impacts of dredging on offshore sand winning site;
Dredging of berth channel, approach channel and turning basin; and
Shoreline erosion due to offshore sand winning.
Geotechnical Study;
Sediment and Chemical Analysis of Dredge Material;
Shoreline Stability Study – Offshore Sand Winning; and
EMP
Port Layout and Bathymetry
Change in Bathymetry through deepening; and
Possible increase in seiches.
Wave Energy Analysis
Wave Energy Analysis on Central Sandbank
Recreational Users Impacts of increases in seiches on moored boats in the Marinas;
Impact of Dredging on Water Quality;
Impact on Expansion of Berth 205 onto the Central Sandbank;
Loss of vegetation of conservation significance; and
Impact on subsistence fishing opportunities.
Wave Energy Analysis;
Wave Energy Analysis on Central Sandbank;
Sediment Plume Analysis
Turbidity Study;
Sediment and Chemical Analysis of Dredge Material;
Estuarine/Marine Biodiversity Study;
Ecological Impact on Central Sandbank;
Local Economic Impact Study; and
EMP.
Water and Sediment Quality
Impact of dredging on water quality in the Port; and
Impact of dredging on water quality at the Offshore disposal site.
Sediment Plume Analysis
Turbidity Study;
Sediment and Chemical Analysis of Dredge Material; and
EMP.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 186
Environmental Factor
Potential Issues / Impacts Proposed Resolution
Estuarine Biota Impact of loss of tidal habitat on waterbirds;
Impacts of loss of tidal and sub tidal habitat on fish and crustaceans;
Impacts of loss of open water/ deepwater habitat on fish species;
Impact of dredging on microalgae;
Impacts related to increased turbidity of water;
Impact of dredging on benthic organisms; and
Impacts of dredging on water quality and related impacts on benthic organisms, fish, crustaceans and water birds
Sediment and Chemical Analysis of Dredge Material
Estuarine and Marine Biodiversity Assessment;
Ecological Impact on Central Sandbank;
Avifauna Impact Assessment; and
EMP.
Estuarine Sensitivity and Functioning and Ecosystem goods and services
Decreased functioning of the Durban Bay Estuary; and
Loss of Ecosystem Goods and Services.
Estuarine and Marine Biodiversity Assessment;
Ecological Impact on Central Sandbank
Avifauna Impact Assessment;
Local Economic Study; and
EMP.
Sensitive Areas- Little Lagoon
Indirect impacts related to increased seiches, increased sedimentation, proximity to construction activities on the Little Lagoon.
Wave Energy Analysis on Central Sandbank;
Ecological Assessment of Impacts on the Central Sandbank; and
Indirect and direct impacts on the Little Lagoon.
Sensitive Areas- Central Sandbank
Impact on the habitat and functioning of the Central Sandbank.
Wave Energy Analysis on Central Sandbank;
Avifauna Impact Assessment;
Ecological Assessment of Impacts on the Central Sandbank.
Maritime Archaeological and Cultural Features
Impact on heritage resources Maritime Archaeology Heritage Impact Assessment; and
EMP.
Offshore Disposal Site
Smothering of benthic community at offshore disposal site;
Change in sediment type at offshore disposal site; and
Change in water quality at offshore disposal site.
Wave Energy Analysis;
Sediment and Chemical Analysis of Dredge Material;
Turbidity Study;
Bathymetric Survey;
Sediment Plume Analysis; and
EMP.
Offshore Sand winning site
Physical impacts of dredging on offshore sand winning site;
Impacts of dredging on water quality and related impacts on benthic organisms, fish, crustaceans and water birds; and
Potential for Shoreline erosion due to change in sea floor bathymetry and offshore sand winning site.
Wave Energy Analysis;
Turbidity Study;
Bathymetry Survey;
Estuarine and Marine Biodiversity Assessment;
Sediment Plume Modelling; and
Shoreline Stability Study.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 187
Environmental Factor
Potential Issues / Impacts Proposed Resolution
Transportation Increase in construction related traffic; and
Current Traffic Management Plan between eThekwini Municipality and Transnet; and
EMP.
Tourism Impacts of increased sedimentation on beach users and uShaka Marine World; and
Impacts of shoreline erosion or accretion on beach users and uShaka Marine World.
Sediment Plume Modelling of offshore disposal site and offshore sand winning site;
Turbidity Study;
Wave Energy Analysis
Shoreline Stability Study; and
EMP.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 188
Environmental Factor
Potential Issues / Impacts Proposed Assessment and/or
Management
Geology and Soil Sourcing of dredge material for infill purposes from Offshore Sand winning;
Physical impacts of dredging on offshore sand winning site;
Dredging of berth channel, approach channel and turning basin; and
Shoreline erosion due to offshore sand winning.
Geotechnical Study;
Sediment and Chemical Analysis of Dredge Material;
Shoreline Stability Study – Offshore Sand Winning; and
EMP;
Port Layout and Bathymetry
Change in Bathymetry through deepening; and
Possible increase in seiches.
Wave Energy Analysis
Wave Energy Analysis on Central Sandbank
Recreational User’s Impacts of increases in seiches on moored boats in the Marinas;
Impact of Dredging on Water Quality;
Impact on Expansion of Berth 205 onto the Central Sandbank;
Loss of vegetation of conservation significance; and
Impact on subsistence fishing opportunities.
Wave Energy Analysis;
Wave Energy Analysis on Central Sandbank;
Sediment Plume Analysis
Turbidity Study;
Sediment and Chemical Analysis of Dredge Material;
Estuarine/Marine Biodiversity Study;
Ecological Impact on Central Sandbank;
Local Economic Impact Study; and
EMP.
Hydrodynamic Functioning
Impacts of deepening on seiches, tides, waves etc.; and
Impacts of expansion on seiches, tides, waves etc.
Wave Energy Analysis;
Wave Energy Analysis on Central Sandbank; and
EMP.
Water and Sediment Quality
Impact of dredging on water quality in the Port; and
Impact of dredging on water quality at the Offshore disposal site.
Sediment Plume Analysis
Turbidity Study;
Sediment and Chemical Analysis of Dredge Material; and
EMP.
Estuarine Biota Impact of loss of tidal habitat on waterbirds;
Impacts of loss of tidal and sub tidal habitat on fish and crustaceans;
Impacts of loss of open water/ deepwater habitat on fish species;
Impact of dredging on microalgae;
Impacts related to increased turbidity of water;
Impact of dredging on benthic organisms; and
Impacts of dredging on water quality and related impacts on benthic organisms, fish, crustaceans and water birds
Sediment and Chemical Analysis of Dredge Material
Estuarine and Marine Biodiversity Assessment;
Ecological Impact on Central Sandbank;
Avifauna Impact Assessment; and
EMP.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 189
Environmental Factor
Potential Issues / Impacts Proposed Assessment and/or
Management
Estuarine Sensitivity and Functioning and Ecosystem goods and services
Decreased functioning of the Durban Bay Estuary; and
Loss of Ecosystem Goods and Services.
Estuarine and Marine Biodiversity Assessment;
Ecological Impact on Central Sandbank
Avifauna Impact Assessment;
Local Economic Study; and
EMP.
Sensitive Areas- Little Lagoon
Indirect impacts related to increased seiches, increased sedimentation, proximity to construction activities on the Little Lagoon.
Wave Energy Analysis;
Wave Energy Analysis on the Central Sandbank;
Estuarine and Marine Biodiversity Assessment;
Assessment of Indirect Impacts on the Little Lagoon; and
EMP.
Sensitive Areas- Central Sandbank
Impact on the habitat and functioning of the Central Sandbank.
Wave Energy Analysis on Central Sandbank;
Ecological Assessment of Impacts on the Central Sandbank.
Maritime Archaeological and Cultural Features
Impact on heritage resources Maritime Archaeology Heritage Impact Assessment; and
EMP.
Offshore Disposal Site
Smothering of benthic community at offshore disposal site;
Change in sediment type at offshore disposal site; and
Change in water quality at offshore disposal site.
Wave Energy Analysis;
Sediment and Chemical Analysis of Dredge Material;
Turbidity Study;
Bathymetric Survey;
Sediment Plume Analysis; and
EMP.
Offshore Sand Winning Site
Physical impacts of dredging on offshore sand winning site;
Impacts of dredging on water quality and related impacts on benthic organisms, fish, crustaceans and water birds; and
Potential for Shoreline erosion due to change in sea floor bathymetry and offshore sand winning site.
Wave Energy Analysis;
Turbidity Study;
Bathymetry Survey;
Estuarine and Marine Biodiversity Assessment;
Sediment Plume Modelling; and
Shoreline Stability Study.
Transportation Increase in construction related traffic; and
Increase in efficiency of Berths 203 to 205 leading to more traffic.
Current Traffic Management Plan between eThekwini Municipality and Transnet; and
EMP.
Tourism Impacts of increased sedimentation on beach users and uShaka Marine World; and
Impacts of shoreline erosion or accretion on beach users and uShaka Marine World.
Sediment Plume Modelling of offshore disposal site and offshore sand winning site;
Turbidity Study;
Wave Energy Analysis
Shoreline Stability Study; and
EMP.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 190
Table 23: Pertinent Issues (Operational Phase) for prioritisation during the EIA Phase
Environmental Factor
Potential Issues / Impacts Proposed Resolution
Geology and Soil Shoreline erosion due to offshore sand winning.
Geotechnical Study;
Shoreline Stability Study; and
EMP.
Recreational Users Impacts on increases seiches on moored boats in the Marinas;
Impact on Expansion of Berth 205 into the Central Sandbank on subsistence fishing opportunities; and
Loss of vegetation of conservation significance.
Wave Energy Analysis;
Estuarine/Marine Biodiversity Study;
Local Economic Impact Assessment; and
EMP.
Hydrodynamic Functioning
Impacts of deepening on seiches, tides, waves etc.; and
Impacts of expansion on seiches, tides, waves etc.
Wave Energy Analysis;
Wave Energy Analysis on Central Sandbank; and
EMP.
Estuarine Biota Impact of loss of tidal and subtidal habitat on waterbirds;
Impacts of loss of tidal and subtidal habitat on fish and crustaceans; and
Impacts of loss of deepwater habitat on fish species.
Estuarine and Marine Biodiversity Assessment;
High Level Central Sandbank Study;
Ecological Assessment of Impacts on the Central Sandbank;
Assessment of Indirect Impacts on the Little Lagoon; and
EMP.
Estuarine Sensitivity and Functioning and Ecosystem goods and services
Decreased functioning of the Durban Bay Estuary; and
Loss of Ecosystem Goods and Services.
Estuarine and Marine Biodiversity Assessment;
High Level Central Sandbank Study;
Ecological Assessment of Impacts on the Central Sandbank;
Assessment of Indirect Impacts on the Little Lagoon; and
EMP.
Offshore disposal site
Change in sediment type at offshore disposal site; and
Increase in contaminated spoil at disposal site.
Sediment and Chemical Analysis of Dredge Material;
Estuarine and Marine Biodiversity Assessment; and
EMP.
Offshore Sand Winning
Physical Destruction of habitat and loss of infauna;
Increased sedimentation and impacts of visual predators;
Increased turbidity; and
Shoreline erosion or accretion.
Shoreline Stability Study;
Sediment Plume Modelling; and
Estuarine/Marine Biodiversity Assessment.
Transportation Increase in efficiency of Berths 203 to 205 leading to more traffic.
Current Traffic Management Plan between eThekwini Municipality and Transnet; and
EMP.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 191
Environmental Factor
Potential Issues / Impacts Proposed Resolution
Tourism Impacts of increased sedimentation on beach users and uShaka Marine World
EMP;
Sediment Plume Modelling; and
Shoreline Stability Study.
Although impacts in the decommissioning phase are not included, it will nonetheless
receive appropriate attention in the impact assessment during the EIA Phase.
14.5 Cumulative Impacts
Box 3: What is a “Cumulative Impact”?
According to GN No. R. 543 (18 June 2010), a “cumulative impact”, in relation to an activity, means the impact of an activity that in itself may not be significant, but may become significant when added to the existing and potential impacts eventuating from similar or diverse activities or undertakings in the area.
Cumulative impacts can be identified by combining the potential environmental
implications of the proposed deepening, lengthening and widening of Berths 203 to 205
with the impacts of projects and activities that have occurred in the past, are currently
occurring, or are proposed in the future within the project area.
The loss of the tidal, subtidal and open water habitat within the Durban Bay Estuary is
one of the main cumulative impacts (Figure 57).
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 192
Figure 58: Changes in the Durban Bay between 1800s and 1999
In the past, most of the area was made up of Mangroves, tidal flats and open water
however there has been a significant decrease in the amount of natural remaining habitat
and a related increase in infilled land (Figure 57). The current project does not
significantly decrease the water area or central sandbanks. However, as part of a host of
port planning packages, the cumulative impact of encroaching on the Central Sandbank
may be great. The loss of open water due to future infilling may also be great.
The cumulative impacts of any further encroachment on the Central Sandbank and loss
of open water would need to be determined as part of any future environmental
authorisation processes. In addition, as part of the current Environmental Authorisation
process, a High Level Central Sandbank study will determine the impacts of the proposed
project on the ecologically sensitive Central Sandbank.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 193
The construction period will be associated with traffic-related impacts to the local road
network. Transnet and eThekwini Municipality have a Traffic Management Plan in place
and the proposed project does not increase the traffic beyond agreed levels.
The offshore disposal site may also have cumulative impacts as it has been used for
maintenance and capital dredging in the past and most likely will be used for
maintenance dredging in the future. The increase of sediment may impact the site
bathymetry. It may also increase the level of contaminants in the area. The impact of
future dredge disposal would need to be determined.
A positive cumulative impact is that of the socio-economic environment at a local,
regional and national scale. The Port of Durban handles a high proportion of container
imports and exports, with more efficient and safe quays, it is most likely that the Port of
Durban will remain a economic hub. This has positive implications in terms of job creation
and wages.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 194
15. METHODOLOGY TO ASSESS THE IDENTIFIED IMPACTS
The EIA quantitative impact assessment will further focus on the direct and indirect
impacts, as well as impacts associated with standard and non-standard operating
procedures.
All impacts will be analysed with regard to their nature, extent, magnitude, duration,
probability and significance. The following definitions apply:
Nature (/Status)
The project could have a positive, negative or neutral impact on the environment.
Extent
Local - extend to the site and its immediate surroundings.
Regional - impact on the region but within the province.
National - impact on an interprovincial scale.
International - impact outside of South Africa.
Magnitude
Degree to which impact may cause irreplaceable loss of resources.
Low - natural and social functions and processes are not affected or minimally affected.
Medium - affected environment is notably altered; natural and social functions and processes
continue albeit in a modified way.
High - natural or social functions or processes could be substantially affected or altered to the
extent that they could temporarily or permanently cease.
Duration
Short term - 0-5 years.
Medium term - 5-11 years.
Long term - impact ceases after the operational life cycle of the activity either because of
natural processes or by human intervention.
Permanent - mitigation either by natural process or by human intervention will not occur in
such a way or in such a time span that the impact can be considered transient.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 195
Probability
Almost certain - the event is expected to occur in most circumstances.
Likely - the event will probably occur in most circumstances.
Moderate - the event should occur at some time.
Unlikely - the event could occur at some time.
Rare/Remote - the event may occur only in exceptional circumstances.
Significance
Provides an overall impression of an impact’s importance, and the degree to which it can be
mitigated. The range for significance ratings is as follows-
0 – Impact will not affect the environment. No mitigation necessary.
1 – No impact after mitigation.
2 – Residual impact after mitigation.
3 – Impact cannot be mitigated.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 196
16. PLAN OF STUDY FOR EIA
This Plan of Study, which explains the approach to be adopted to conduct the EIA for the
proposed deepening, lengthening and widening of Berths 203 to 205, was prepared in
accordance with Regulation 28(1)(n) of GN No. R. 543 (18 June 2010).
16.1 Key Environmental Issues Identified During Scoping Phase
The Scoping exercise aims to identify and qualitatively predict significant environmental
issues for further consideration and prioritisation during the EIA stage. The issues raised
by I&APs during Scoping Phase will also guide the identification of significant issues.
During the EIA stage a detailed quantitative impact assessment will be conducted via
contributions from the project team and requisite specialist studies, and through the
application of the impact assessment methodology contained in Section 15. Suitable
mitigation measures will be identified to manage (i.e. prevent, reduce, rehabilitate and/or
compensate) the environmental impacts, and will be included in an EMP.
Pertinent environmental issues identified during Scoping, which will receive specific
attention during the EIA Phase are listed in Table 22 (construction Phase) and Table 23
(operation Phase).
16.2 Specialist Studies
According to Münster (2005), a ‘trigger’ is “a particular characteristic of either the
receiving environment or the proposed project which indicates that there is likely to be an
issue and/or potentially significant impact associated with that proposed development that
may require specialist input”. The requisite specialist studies ‘triggered’ by the findings of
the Scoping process, aimed at addressing the key issues and compliance with legal
obligations, include:
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 197
1. Estuarine/Marine Ecology Assessment;
2. Avifauna Impact Assessment;
3. Marine Archaeology Assessment;
4. Local Economic Impact Assessment;
5. Sediment and Chemical Analysis of Dredge Material;
6. Ecological Impact on Central Sandbank Study;
7. Assessment of Indirect and Direct Impacts on the Little Lagoon;
8. Sediment Plume Analysis (Internal and External)- Comparison of type of dredging;
9. Shoreline Stability – Offshore Sand Winning Site;
10. Sediment Plume Analysis – Ecological Impacts within the Port;
11. Wave Energy Analysis – Offshore borrow area and Offshore Disposal area;
12. Wave Energy Analysis – Ecological impacts on the Central Sandbank;
13. Geotechnical Study;
14. Turbidity Study – Impacts of Dredging and Sand Winning;
15. Bathymetric Survey; including: Central Sandbank; Offshore Disposal Site; Sand
winning site;
16. Technical Assessment of the three alternatives;
The Terms of Reference (ToR), both general and specific, for the abovementioned
specialist studies follow in the sub-sections below. Amongst others, the Guideline for
determining the scope of specialist involvement in EIA processes (Münster, 2005) was
used in compiling the general Terms of Reference for the specialist studies. The following
guidelines were also employed to prepare the specific ToR for the respective specialists
(where appropriate):
Guideline for involving biodiversity specialists in EIA processes (Brownlie, 2005);
Guideline for involving heritage specialists in EIA processes (Winter & Baumann,
2005); and
In addition to the above guidelines, the relevant specialists need to satisfy specific
requirements stipulated by the following key environmental authorities:
DEA and KZN DAEARD;
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 198
Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife;
DMR; and
SAHRA – Maritime Archaeology
For the inclusion of the findings of the specialist studies into the EIA report, the following
guideline will be used: Guideline for the review of specialist input in EIA processes
(Keatimilwe & Ashton, 2005). Key considerations will include:
Ensuring that the specialists have adequately addressed I&APs’ issues and specific
requirements prescribed by environmental authorities;
Ensuring that the specialists’ input is relevant, appropriate and unambiguous; and
Verifying that information regarding the receiving ecological, social and economic
environment has been accurately reflected and considered.
16.2.1 Terms of Reference – General
The following general ToR apply to all the EIA specialist studies to be undertaken for the
proposed Deepening, lengthening and widening of Berth 203 to 205:
1. Address all triggers for the specialist studies contained in the subsequent specific
ToR.
2. Address issues raised by I&APs, as contained in the Comments and Response
Report, and conduct an assessment of all potentially significant impacts. Additional
issues that have not been identified during Scoping should also be highlighted to the
EAP for further investigations.
3. Ensure that the requirements of the environmental authorities that have specific
jurisdiction over the various disciplines and environmental features are satisfied.
4. Approach to include desktop study and site visits, as deemed necessary, to
understand the affected environment and to adequately investigate and evaluate
salient issues. Indigenous knowledge (i.e. targeted consultation) should also be
regarded as a potential information resource.
5. Assess the impacts (direct, indirect and cumulative) in terms of their significance
(using suitable evaluation criteria) and suggest suitable mitigation measures. In
accordance with the mitigation hierarchy, negative impacts should be avoided,
minimised, rehabilitated (or reinstated) or compensated for (i.e. offsets), whereas
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 199
positive impacts should be enhanced. A risk-averse and cautious approach should be
adopted under conditions of uncertainty.
6. Consider time boundaries, including short to long-term implications of impacts for
project life-cycle (i.e. pre-construction, construction, operation and decommissioning).
7. Consider spatial boundaries, including:
a. Broad context of the proposed project (i.e. beyond the boundaries of the specific
site);
b. Off-site impacts; and
c. Local, regional, national or global context.
8. The provision of a statement of impact significance for each issue, which specifies
whether or not a pre-determined threshold of significance (i.e. changes in effects to
the environment which would change a significance rating) has been exceeded, and
whether or not the impact presents a potential fatal flaw or not. This statement of
significance should be provided for anticipated project impacts both before and after
application of impact management actions.
9. Recommend a monitoring programme to implement mitigation measures and
measure performance. List indicators to be used during monitoring.
10. Appraisal of alternatives (including the No-Go option) by identifying the Best
Practicable Environmental Option (BPEO) with suitable justification.
11. Advise on the need for additional specialists to investigate specific components and
the scope and extent of the information required from such studies.
12. Engage with other specialists whose studies may have bearing on your specific
investigation.
13. Present findings and participate at public meetings, where EIA Report is to be
presented to I&APs.
14. Information provided to the EAP needs to be signed off.
15. Review and sign off on EIA Report prior to submission to DEA to ensure that
specialist information has been interpreted and integrated correctly into the report.
16. The appointed specialists must take into account the policy framework and legislation
relevant to their particular studies.
17. All specialist reports must adhere to regulation 32 (“specialist reports and reports on specialist processes”) of GN No. R. 543 (18 June 2010).
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 200
16.3 Terms of Reference - Specific
16.3.1 Estuarine/Marine Biodiversity Assessment
Summary of Key Issues & Triggers Identified During Scoping
Offshore Sand Winning will result in the physical removal of the benthic community.
Dredging within the Port of Durban will result in the physical removal of the benthic
community.
Increased turbidity may impact visual predators in the area of dredging inside the
Port of Durban and at the Offshore Sand winning Site.
Extension into the Central Sandbank may result in a loss of habitat and impact
wading bird species.
Dredging near the Central Sandbank may result in central sandbank collapsing and
a loss of habitat for Wading bird species, fish species and crustaceans.
Extension into the Central Sandbank may result in central sandbank collapsing and
a loss of habitat for Wading bird species, fish species and crustaceans.
Impacts of disposal of dredge material on offshore disposal site.
Approach
Undertake baseline survey (reconnaissance) and describe affected environment
within the project footprint from a biodiversity perspective.
Undertake desktop study (literature review, topographical maps and aerial
photographs) and baseline survey and describe the Durban Bay Estuary, the
offshore sand winning site.
Take into consideration the provincial conservation goals and targets and identify
existing and future planned conservation areas.
Assess the current ecological status and the conservation priority within the project
footprint and adjacent area (as deemed necessary) including the dredge footprint,
expansion footprint and offshore sand winning area. Provide a concise description
of the importance of the affected area to biodiversity in terms of pattern and
process, ecosystem goods and services, as appropriate.
Undertake sensitivity study to identify protected and conservation-worthy species.
Prepare a biodiversity sensitivity map with the use of GIS, based on the findings of
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 201
the study.
Identify potential fatal flaws associated with the project and its alternatives from a
biodiversity perspective.
Provide suitable mitigation measures to safeguard the estuary and offshore sand
winning area and during project life-cycle.
Provide suitable mitigation measures to safeguard the little lagoon during the
project life cycle.
Provide suitable mitigation measures to safeguard the central sandbank during
project life-cycle.
Determine ecological status of the receiving estuarine and marine environment,
including the identification of endangered or protected species.
Nominated Specialist
Organisation: Anchor Environmental Consultants
Name: Barry Clark
Qualifications: PhD- Marine Biology
No. of years experience: 15
Affiliation (if applicable): Professional Natural Scientist: South African Council
for Natural Scientific Professions
Professional Member of South African Institute of
Ecologists and Environmental Scientists
South African representative to the SURVAS Network
(Synthesis and Upscaling of Sea-level Rise
Vulnerability Assessment Studies)
Member of International Association of Impact
Assessors (IAIA)
Member of Subsistence Fisheries Advisory Group
Member of the South African Network for Coastal and
Oceanic Research (SANCOR) Economics Task Team
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 202
16.3.1. Avifauna Impact Assessment
Summary of Key Issues & Triggers Identified During Scoping
Increased turbidity may impact visual predators in the area of dredging inside
the Port of Durban including bird species.
Extension into the Central Sandbank may result in a loss of habitat and impact
wading bird species.
Dredging near the Central Sandbank may result in central sandbank
collapsing and a loss of habitat for Wading bird species.
Extension into the Central Sandbank may result in central sandbank collapsing
and a loss of habitat for Wading bird species.
Approach
Undertake baseline survey (reconnaissance) and describe affected environment
within the project footprint from a biodiversity perspective.
Undertake desktop study (literature review, topographical maps and aerial
photographs) and baseline survey and describe the Central Sandbank within the
Durban Bay Estuary.
Take into consideration the provincial conservation goals and targets and identify
existing and future planned conservation areas.
Undertake sensitivity study to identify protected and conservation-worthy species.
Prepare a biodiversity sensitivity map with the use of GIS, based on the findings of
the study.
Undertake an Avifauna impact assessment which highlights are impacts as well as
possible mitigation measures
Identify potential fatal flaws associated with the project and its alternatives from a
avifauna perspective.
Provide suitable mitigation measures to safeguard avifauna within the central
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 203
sandbank during project life-cycle.
Nominated Specialist
Organisation: Anchor Environmental Consultants
Name: Jane Turpie
Qualifications: PhD- Ornithology
No. of years experience: 14
16.3.2 Marine Archaeology Impact Assessment
Summary of Key Issues & Triggers Identified During Scoping
Potential occurrence of heritage resources such as shipwrecks within the dredging
at the Port of Durban
Potential occurrence of heritage resources such as shipwrecks within the dredging
at the Offshore Sand winning site and Offshore disposal site.
Approach
Undertake a Phase 1 Heritage Impact Assessment in accordance with the South
African Heritage Resources Act (No. 25 of 1999).
The identification and mapping of all heritage resources in the area affected, as
defined in Section 2 of the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999, including
archaeological and palaeontological sites on or close (within 100 m) of the
proposed development including the dredging footprint, expansion footprint, and
offshore sand winning site.
An assessment of the significance of such resources in terms of the heritage
assessment criteria as set out in the regulations.
An assessment of the impact of development on such heritage resources.
Prepare a heritage sensitivity map (GIS-based), based on the findings of the study.
Identify heritage resources to be monitored.
Comply with specific requirements and guidelines of SAHRA – Maritime
Archaeology Unit.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 204
Nominated Specialist
Name: Vanessa Maitland
Qualifications: B.A. (Hons) – Archaeology
No. of years experience: 8 years
Affiliation (if applicable): Association for South African Professional Archaeologists
16.3.3 Sediment and Chemical Analysis of Dredge Material
Summary of Key Issues & Triggers Identified During Scoping
Potential for contamination and environmental impacts such a microalgal blooms
during dredging due to the release of organic matter and/or contaminants into the
water column
Impacts of contaminated dredge material on the offshore disposal site
Approach
Sampling to -17m CDP to determine vertical content of dredge footprint
Sampling at approximately 15 points to determine horizontal content of dredge
footprint
Determining the grain size composition
Determine the concentrations of trace metals including Aluminium, Iron, Arsenic,
Cadmium, Cobalt, Chromium, Copper, Manganese, Mercury, Nickel, Lead,
Vanadium and Zinc
Reporting to include all relevant information for the Dumping at Sea permitting process.
Nominated Specialist
Organisation: CSIR
Name: Brent Newman
Qualifications: PhD
No. of years experience: 11 years
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 205
16.3.4 Ecological Impacts on the Central Sandbank
Summary of Key Issues & Triggers Identified During Scoping
Extension into the Central Sandbank may result in a loss of habitat and impact on
wading bird species.
Dredging near the Central Sandbank may result in central sandbank collapsing and
a loss of habitat for Wading bird species, fish species and crustaceans.
Approach
Determine the ecological status quo of the different tidal zones of the Central
Sandbank together with the percentage of fauna and flora that occurs within the
affected footprint.
Compare this to the percentage of fauna and flora on the entire Central Sandbank
to determine the significance of the loss of the portion of the sandbank through the
extension of Berth 205. In addition, determine whether this loss would be significant
and if would undermine the functioning of the Central Sandbank as a whole.
Determine if deepening of the approach channel, berth channel and turning basin
to 16.5m will result in a shorting of the water circulation cycle within the Port of
Durban. If there is an impact, what are the implications on hydrodynamic
functioning?
Conduct a desk top study for the widening of little lagoon and re-introducing sea
grass species. Determine the viability of the reintroduction as well as the benefits to
the ecosystem. Also determine why the proposed species is the most viable option.
Nominated Specialist
Organisation: CSIR
Name: Steven Weerts
Qualifications: To be determined
No. of years experience:
Affiliation (if applicable):
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 206
16.3.5 Local Economic Impact Assessment
Summary of Key Issues & Triggers Identified During Scoping
An outcome of the survey and focus group was to understand the economic
implications for businesses and residences in the vicinity of the Port.
Approach
Currently various economic studies have been undertaken for the Port of Durban
including van coller et al., 2008 and Urban-Econ, 2011. The emphasis of these
studies are at a regional and national scale. As part of this assessment, these
studies will be downscaled to a local level with the intention of understanding the
economic implications on the local community.
Nominated Specialist
Organisation: Urban-Econ
Name:
To be determined Qualifications:
No. of years experience:
Affiliation (if applicable):
16.3.6 Assessment of the Indirect Impacts on the Little Lagoon
Summary of Key Issues & Triggers Identified During Scoping
The Little Lagoon is considered a highly sensitive feature in the vicinity of Berths
203 to 205.
The 1999 Record of Decision recognised the Little Lagoon as an area of
conservation importance.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 207
Approach
Desktop assessment of the ecological status quo of the Little Lagoon.
Determine any impacts (direct or indirect) on the Little Lagoon.
Recommend, offset and/or mitigation measures to limit any impacts on the Little
Lagoon.
Nominated Specialist
Organisation: CSIR
Name:
Steven Weerts Qualifications:
No. of years experience:
Affiliation (if applicable):
16.4 Specialist studies under Technical Feasibility Study
The following specialist studies will form part of the Technical Studies, and the findings
will be incorporated into the EIA Report:
Sediment Plume Analysis (Internal and External)- Comparison of type of dredging;
Shoreline Stability – Offshore Sand Winning Site;
Sediment Plume Analysis – Ecological Impacts within the Port;
Wave Energy Analysis – Offshore borrow area and Offshore Disposal area;
Wave Energy Analysis – Ecological impacts on the Central Sandbank;
Geotechnical Study;
Turbidity Study – Impacts of Dredging and Sand Winning;
Bathymetric Survey; including: Central Sandbank; Offshore Disposal Site; Sand
winning site;
Technical Assessment of the three alternatives;
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 208
16.5 Public Participation – EIA Phase
16.5.1 Updating of I&AP Database
The I&APs database will be updated as and when necessary during the execution of the
EIA.
16.5.2 Project Website
Due to the interest in the project, a project website has been created. All documents and
notifications will also be available on the project website for download. The website will
be updated periodically with new information. I&APs are encouraged to visit the website
at (www.berth203to205expansioneia.co.za).
16.5.3 Notification – Approval of Scoping Report
Advertisements will be placed in the following newspapers as notification that the Scoping
Report has been approved by DEA:
Isolezwe; and
The Mercury.
In addition, all I&APs will be notified of the approval of the Scoping Report and
commencement of the EIA Phase via fax, email or registered mail. The notification will
also be available on the project website (www.berth203to205expansioneia.co.za).
16.5.4 Public Open Day
A public meeting will be held in Durban. All parties on the I&AP database will be invited
(via email, fax or post) to attend and advertisements will be placed in the newspapers
(same as listed in Section 16.5.2) as notification of the Public Open Day.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 209
16.5.5 Comments and Response Report
A Comments and Response Report will be compiled and included in the EIA Report,
which will record the date that issues were raised, a summary of each issue, and the
response of the team to address the issue.
In addition, any unattended comments from the Scoping Phase or where the status of the
responses has changed, will also be addressed in the Comments and Response Report
for the EIA Phase.
16.5.6 Review of Draft EIA Report
A 40-day period will be provided to I&APs to review the Draft EIA Report, and copies of
the document will be lodged for public review at the following venues:
Table 24: Locations for review of Draft EIA Report
Copy Location Address Tel. No.
1. The Seafarers Club 1 Seafarers Road, Bayhead, Durban 031 466 1326
2. The Central Reference Library - Durban
10th floor, Liberty Towers, 214 Dr. Pixley
KaSeme Street, Durban 031 322 4414
All parties on the I&APs database will be notified via email, fax or post of the opportunity
to review the Draft EIA Report at the abovementioned locations, the review period and
the process for submitting comments on the report. The public will also be notified of the
aforementioned via advertisements in the newspapers (Isolezwe and the Mercury). In
addition, an electronic copy of the Draft EIA report will be available for download from
www.berth203to205expansioneia.co.za.
All comments received from I&APs and the responses thereto will be included in the final
EIA Report for submission to DEA.
16.5.7 Notification of DEA Decision
All I&APs will be notified via email, fax or post within 10 days after having received written
notice from DEA on the final decision. Advertisements will also be placed in local and
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 210
regional newspapers regarding the Department’s decision. These notifications will include
the appeal procedure to the decision.
16.6 EIA Report
The EIA Report will be compiled to satisfy the minimum requirements stipulated in
regulation 31 of GN No. R. 543 (18 June 2010). The following critical components of the
EIA Report are highlighted:
A detailed description of the proposed development;
A detailed description of the proposed development site;
A description of the environment that may be affected by the activity and the manner
in which physical, biological, social, economic and cultural aspects of the environment
may be affected by the proposed development;
The methodology of the stakeholder engagement process will be described;
The Comments and Response Report and Stakeholder Database will be provided as
an appendix to the EIA Report;
A description of the need and desirability of the proposed development and the
identified potential alternatives to the proposed activity;
A summary of the methodology used in determining the significance of potential
impacts;
A description and comparative assessment of the project alternatives;
A summary of the findings of the specialist studies;
A detailed assessment of all identified potential impacts;
A list of the assumptions, uncertainties and gaps in knowledge;
An opinion by the consultant as to whether the development is suitable for approval
within the proposed site;
An Environmental Management Programme (EMP) that complies with regulation 33 of
GN No. R. 543;
Copies of all specialist reports appended to the EIA report; and
Any further information that will assist in decision making by the authorities.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 211
16.7 Authority Consultation
The EIA will only commence once DEA has accepted the Scoping Report and the Plan of
Study for the EIA. If relevant, the necessary revisions will be made to the aforementioned
documents if requested by this Department.
An authorities meeting will be scheduled during the EIA public participation process to
present salient findings. In addition, copies of the Draft EIA Report will be provided to the
following key regulatory and commentary authorities:
DEA (Environmental Impact Evaluation);
DEA (Oceans and Coasts);
KZN DAEARD;
Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife;
DWA KZN Regional Office;
DMR KZN Office;
SAHRA – Maritime Archaeology
KZN DAFF;
KZN Department of Transport; and
eThekwini Municipality.
The final EIA Report will be submitted to DEA. Any requested amendments will be
discussed with the Department to ensure that their queries are adequately and timeously
attended to.
16.8 Dumping at Sea Permit
Once a decision has been obtained by the DEA, the Dumping at Sea Permit application
will be made to DEA: Oceans and Coasts Directorate. The Final EIA report as well as the
Environmental Authorisation will be provided as appendices to the application.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 212
16.9 EIA Timeframes
The table below presents the proposed timeframes for the EIA process. Note that these
dates are subject to change.
Figure 59: EIA Timeframes
EIA Milestone Proposed Timeframe
I&AP Review of Draft Scoping Report 9 March 2012-30 April
2012
Submission of final Scoping Report to DEA 04 June 2012
Review of Scoping Report by DEA 25 May 2012 – 01 June
2012
Notification - I&AP Review of Draft EIA Report 24 July 2012
Public Review of Draft EIA Report 26 July 2012 – 6 September 2012
Submit final EIA Report to DEA 27 September 2012
DEA Review & Decision 28 September 2012- 12
February 2013
Notify I&APs of Decision 13 February 2013- 15
February 2013
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 213
17. CONCLUSION
Taking cognisance of the findings of the Scoping process, the EIA will need to conduct
detailed investigations for the significant environmental issues identified as well as for the
proposed alternative quay wall options.
It is the opinion of the EIA team that Scoping was executed in an objective manner and
that the process and report conform to the requirements of regulations 27 and 28 of GN
No. R. 543 (18 June 2010), respectively.
It is also believed that the Plan of Study for EIA is comprehensive and will be adequate to
address the significant issues identified during Scoping, to select the BPEO, and to
ultimately allow for informed decision-making.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 214
18. REFERENCES
Allan, D. (2001). The waterbirds of Durban Bay, South Africa - a worst-case scenario of African coastal wetland destruction. Symposium S04: Wetlands and Waterfowl. Ostrich 72:S15: 71-87.
Amafa Heritage KwaZulu-Natal (2011). Available: http://heritagekzn.co.za. Last
accessed 13 November 2011. Angel, A. and B.M. Clark (Undated). “Port of Durban Ballast Water Flora and Faunal
Survey. Final Report. Prepared for Transnet, National Ports Authority.” Anchor Environmental Consultants, Unpublished.
Arcus Gibb (2004). “Environmental Impact Assessment for the Widening and
Deepening of the Port of Durban Entrance Channel Final Scoping Report.” AS/NZS (Standards Australia and Standards New Zealand) (2004). “Risk
Management Guidelines: Companion to AS/NZS 4360:2004.” HB 436, NSW, ISBN 0 7337 5960 2.
AS/NZS (Standards Australia and Standards New Zealand) (2004). “Risk
Management, AS/NZS 4360:2004”. NSW, ISBN 0 7337 5904 1. Atkinson, C.A., D.F. Jolley and S.L. Simpson (2007). “Effect of overlying water pH,
dissolved oxygen, salinity and sediment disturbances on metal release and sequestration from metal contaminated marine sediments.” Chemosphere 69: 1428-1437.
Beckley, L.E., P.V. Radebe and B.Q. Mann (2001). “Inventory of Fishes Recorded
from Durban Harbour (1950 – 2000).” Unpublished Report, South African Association for Marine Biological Research (202): 1-9.
Beckley, L.F., and B.Q. Mann (2001). “Monitoring of Fishes in Durban Harbour June –
December 2001 Annual Report.” Begg, G.W. (1978). “The Estuaries of Natal.” Natal Town and Regional Planning
Report 41: 1-657. Begg, G.W. (1984). “The Estuaries of Natal (Part II).” Natal Town and Regional
Planning Report 55: 1 631. Berg, L. (1982). “The effect of exposure to short-term pulses of suspended sediment
on the behaviour of juvenile salmonids.” In: Hartman, G.F. (Ed) “Proceedings of the Carnation Creek workshop: a ten-year review.” Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Pacific Biological Station, Nanaimo, Canada.
Bolam, S.G. (2011). “Burial survival of benthic macrofauna following deposition of
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 215
simulated dredged material.” Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 181: 13-27.
Bolam, S.G. and H.L. Rees (2003). “Minimizing impacts of maintenance dredged
material disposal in the coastal environment: a habitat approach.” Environmental Management 32: 171-188.
Bolam, S.G. and P. Whomersley (2005). “Development of macrofaunal communities
on dredged material used for mudflat enhancement: a comparison of three beneficial use schemes after one year.” Marine Pollution Bulletin 50: 40-47.
Bolam, S.G., H.L. Rees, P. Somerfield, R. Smith, K.R. Clarke, R.M. Warwick, M.
Atkins and E. Garnacho (2006). “Ecological consequences of dredged material disposal in the marine environment: A holistic assessment of activities around the England and Wales coastline.” Marine Pollution Bulletin 52: 415-426.
Celiers, L., Breetzke, T., Moore, L., and Malan, D. 2009. A User-friendly Guide to
South Africa’s Integrated Coastal Management Act. DEA and SSO Engineers and Environmental Consultants, Cape Town, South Africa
Claassen, M. (1999). “Ecological Risk Assessment as a Framework for Environmental
Impact Assessments.” Water Science and Technology Vol. 39, No. 10-11, pp. 151 – 154. Elsevier Science Limited, Great Britain.
Claassen, M., W.F. Strydom, K. Murray and S. Jooste (2001). “Ecological Risk
Assessment Guidelines.” Pretoria, South Africa. CSIR (2010). Elevation and Bathymetric survey of the Port of Durban sandbanks post
entrance widening, with a desktop assessment of potential ecological implications. CSIR Report.
CSIR (2011). Environmental Sensitivity Study- Proposed development of Pier 1,
Phase 2 Container Terminal in the Port of Durban. CSIR Report. Cyrus, D.P. and A.T. Forbes (1996). “Preliminary results on the role of KwaZulu-Natal
harbours as nursery grounds for juveniles of selected marine organisms which utilise estuaries.” South African Journal of Wildlife Research 26: 26-33.
Day, J.H. and J.F.C. Morgans (1956). “The ecology of South African estuaries. Part 7.
The biology of Durban Bay.” Annals of the Natal Museum 13: 259-312 Delgado, M.V., A. De Jonge, and H. Peletier (1991). “Experiments on the
resuspension of natural microphytobenthos populations.” Marine Biology 108: 321-328.
Demetriades, N.T., and A.T. Forbes (2008). “Report on Fish Kill and Dissolved
Oxygen Levels in Durban Bay During December 2007/January 2008.”
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 216
DEAT, 2001. South African Estuaries: Catchment Land-Cover. National Summary Report. Prepared by CSIR for the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT), Pretoria.
DEAT, 2002. Scoping, Integrated Environmental Management, Information Series 2,
Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT), Pretoria. DEAT. 2005a. Guideline 3: General Guide to the Environmental Impact Assessment
Regulations, 2005. Integrated Environmental Management Guideline Series. Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT), Pretoria.
DEAT. 2005b. Guideline 4: Public Participation, in terms of the EIA Regulations.
Integrated Environmental Management Guideline Series. Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT), Pretoria.
DEA&DP. 2006. Guideline on Alternatives, NEMA EIA Regulations Guideline and
Information Document Series. Western Cape Department of Environmental Affairs & Development Planning (DEA&DP), Cape Town.
DEA&DP. 2009. Guideline on Need and Desirability, NEMA EIA Regulations
Guideline and Information Document Series. Western Cape Department of Environmental Affairs & Development Planning (DEA&DP), Cape Town.
Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) (2002). “Integrated
Environmental Management Information Series: Ecological Risk Assessment.” DEAT, Pretoria.
Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) (2006). “Integrated
Environmental Management Information Series 23: Risk Management.” DEAT, Pretoria.
Department of Public Works, Roads and Transport (DPWRT) (2011). “Port of Durban.”
Available: http://www.safiri.co.za/mpfdb/maritime-port-of-durban.html. Last accessed 14 November 2011.
Deyzel, S., N. James and A. Paterson (2008a). “Confidential report on long-term
ecological monitoring in the Port of Durban - January and February 2008.” SAEON Unpublished Report.
Deyzel, S., N. James and A. Paterson (2008b). “Confidential report on long-term
ecological monitoring in the Port of Durban - July 2008.” SAEON Unpublished Report.
Deyzel, S., N. James and A. Paterson (2009). “Confidential Report on Long-Term
Ecological Monitoring in the Port of Durban – July 2008 and January 2009.” Prepared for Transnet National Ports Authority by the South African Environmental Observation Network, Unpublished.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 217
Eggleton, J. and K.V. Thomas (2004). “A review of factors affecting the release and bioavailability of contaminants during sediment disturbance events.” Environment International 30: 973-980.
EMS (2010). Durban Harbour Sandbank Survey. Unpublished Report. Essink, K. (1999). “Ecological effects of dumping of dredged sediments: options for
management.” Journal of Coastal Conservation 5: 69-80. Forbes, A.T. and N.T. Demetriades (2003). “Ecology of the Little Lagoon area of
Durban Bay.” Report prepared for National Ports Authority Durban by Marine and Estuarine Research. 74 pp.
Forbes, A.T. and N.T. Demetriades (2006a). “Transnet-eThekwini Municipality
Planning Initiative. Specialist Report - Environment. Report for Transnet-eThekwini Municipality Planning Initiative.”
Forbes, A.T. and N.T. Demetriades (2006b). “Assessment of the potential for
restoration of habitats in Durban Bay.” In Forbes, A.T. and N.T. Demetriades (2006). “Specialist Ecological Reports July - November 2006.” Report for Transnet-eThekwini Municipality Planning Initiative.
Forbes, A.T., N.T. Demetriades and D.P. Cyrus (1996).” Biological significance of
harbours as coastal habitats in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.” Aquatic Conservation: Marine and freshwater ecosystems 6: 331-341.
Germanischer Lloyd, 2005. “Trends in the Development of Container Ships.”
Presentation at NTU Athens. Gibbs, M., S. Thrush, J. Sukias, K. Berkenbusch, D. Thompson and S. Bury (2001).
“Evaluation of terrestrial sediment spatial patterns throughout the Whitford embayment and its benthic food web using stable isotope techniques.” Prepared for Auckland Regional Council. NIWA Client Report ARC01270.
Grant, J. and G. Gust (1987). “Prediction of coastal sediment stability from
photopigment content of mats of purple sulphur bacteria.” Nature 330: 244-246. Guarini, J.M., G.F. Blanchard, P. Gros, D. Gouleau and C. Bacher (2000). “Dynamic
model of the short-term variability of microphytobenthic biomass on temperate intertidal mudflats.” Marine Ecology Progress Series 195: 291-303.
Harris, S.A. and D.P. Cyrus (1997). “Composition, abundance and seasonality of
larval fish in Richards Bay harbour, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.” Southern African Journal of Aquatic Sciences 23: 56-78.
Harris, S.A. and D.P. Cyrus (1999). “Composition, abundance and seasonality of fish
larvae in the mouth of Durban Harbour, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.” South African Journal of Marine Science 21: 19-39.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 218
Hecht, T. and C.D. van der Lingen (1992). “Turbidity-induced changes in feeding
strategies of fish in estuaries.” South African Journal of Zoology 27: 95-107. Heydorn, A.E.F. (1972). “South African estuaries, their function and the threat to their
existence.” Findiver 32: 18-19. Hollanda, R., N. Zingmarka and D.J. Dean (1974). “Quantitative evidence concerning
the stabilization of sediments by marine benthic diatoms.” Marine Biology 27: 191-196.
IDP. 2011. Integrated Development Plan: eThekwini Municipality 2011/2012. Jassby, A.D., A.J. Cloers and T.M. Powell (1993). “Organic carbon sources and sinks
in San Francisco Bay: Variability induced by river flow.” Marine Ecology 95: 39-54.
Jones, R.A. and G.F. Lee (1978). “Evaluation of the Elutriate Test as a Method of
Predicting Contaminant Release during Open Water Disposal of Dredged Sediment and Environmental Impact of Open Water Dredged Material Disposal, Vol. I: Discussion.” Technical Report D-78- 45, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
Kromkamp, J., J. Peene, P. van Rijswijk, A. Sandee and N. Goosen (1995).
“Nutrients, light and primary production by phytoplankton and microphytobenthos in eutrophic, turbid Westerschelde estuary (The Netherlands).” Hydrobiologia 311: 9-19.
KZN Durban (2011). “Transport.” Available:
http://www.kzndurban.co.za/Durban/transport.php. Last accessed 13 November2011.
Lee, G.F., R.A. Jones, F.Y. Saleh, G.M. Mariani, D.H. Homer, J.S. Butler and P.
Bandyopadhyay (1978). “Evaluation of the Elutriate Test as a Method of Predicting Contaminant Release during Open Water Disposal of Dredged Sediment and Environmental Impact of Open Water Dredged Materials Disposal, Vol. II: Data Report.” Technical Report D-78-45, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS (1978).
Levine, M. Unpublished Manuscript. Held by Vanessa Maitland. LFR (2004.)” Framework for assessment of potential effects of dredging on sensitive
fish species in San Francisco Bay.” USACE, San Francisco, CA. MacIntyre, H.L. and J.J. Cullen (1995). “Fine-scale vertical resolution of chlorophyll
and photosynthetlc parameters in shallow-water benthos.” Marine Ecology Progress Series 122: 227-237.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 219
Mander M., N.T. Demetriades, A.T. Forbes and D. Allan (2006). “An Assessment of the Ecosystem Benefits Supplied by Durban Bay and the Implications of Port Development Options.” Report for Transnet-eThekwini Municipality Planning Initiative.
Mann, B. (2002). “Long Term Monitoring of Fish and Sand Prawns in the Durban
Harbour Quarterly Feedback Report (April 2002).” Unpublished report of the Oceanographic Research Institute.
Mann, B. and N. James (2002). “Long Term Monitoring of Fish and Sand Prawns in
the Durban Harbour Quarterly Feedback Report (June 2002).” Unpublished report of the Oceanographic Research Institute.
Mann, B. and N. James (2002). “Long Term Monitoring of Fish and Sand Prawns in
the Durban Harbour Quarterly Feedback Report (September 2002).” Unpublished report of the Oceanographic Research Institute.
Mann, B. and N. James (2003). “Long Term Monitoring of Fish and Sand Prawns in
the Durban Harbour Quarterly Feedback Report (December 2002).” Unpublished report of the Oceanographic Research Institute.
Maurer, D., R.T. Keck, J.C. Tinsman and W.A. Leathem (1982). “Vertical migration
and mortality of benthos in dredged material: Part III: Polychaeta.” Marine Environmental Research 6: 49-68.
Maurer, D., R.T. Keck, J.C. Tinsman, W.A. Leathem, C. Wethe, C. Lord and T.M.
Church (1986). “Vertical migration of benthos in simulated dredged material overburdens: a synthesis.” Internationale Revue gesamten Hydrobiologie 71: 49-63.
Mclusky, D.S. (1989). “The estuarine ecosystem.” Chapman and Hall, NY. MER/ERM (2011). “Development of the Bay of Natal Estuarine Management Plan:
Situation Assessment.” Report prepared for eThekwini Municipality, Transnet National Port Authority and the Department of Agriculture, Environmental Affairs and Rural Development.
Miller, D.C., C.L. Muir and O.A. Dauser (2002). “Detrimental effects of sedimentation
on marine benthos: What can be learned from natural processes and rates?” Ecological Engineering 19: 211-232.
Newell, R.C., L.I. Seiderer and D.R. Hitchcock (1998). “The impact of dredging works
in coastal waters: a review of the sensitivity to disturbance and subsequent recovery of biological resources on the sea bed.” Oceanography and Marine Biology Annual Review 36: 127-178.
Newman, B., S. Weerts, S. Porter and F. Mackay (2008). “Specialist Studies for
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 220
Transnet Capital Expansion Program Durban Bay.” CSIR Report for Transnet Projects. Unpublished. 230 pp. incl. 17 Appendices.
Nowicki, L. and S.W. Nixon (1983). “Benthic community metabolism in a coastal
lagoon ecosystem.” Marine Ecology Progress Series 22: 21-30. Paterson, D., D.R. Crautok and R. Little (1990). “Subaerial exposure and changes in
sediment stability of intertidal estuarine sediments.” Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science 30: 341-356.
Pearson, T. (1995). “African Keyport: Story of the Port of Durban.” Durban. Accucut
Books cc. Pennekamp, J.G.S. and M.P. Quaak (1990). “Impact on the Environment of Turbidity
Caused by Dredging.” Terra et Aqua 42: 10-20. Pillay, D., G.M. Branch and A.T. Forbes (2007a).” The influence of bioturbation by the
sandprawn Callianassa kraussi on feeding and survival of the bivalve Eumarcia paupercula and the gastropod Nassarius kraussianus.” Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 344: 1–9.
Pillay, D., G.M. Branch and A.T. Forbes (2007b). “Experimental evidence for the
effects of the thalassinidean sandprawn Callianassa kraussi on macrobenthic communities.” Marine Biology 152: 611–618.
Pillay, D., G.M. Branch and A.T. Forbes (2008). “Habitat change in an estuarine
embayment: Anthropogenic influences and a regime shift in biotic interactions.” Marine Ecology Progress Series 370: 19-31.
Pillay, S. (2004). “Port of Durban. Review of previous monitoring data. Environmental
chemistry.” Prepared for National Ports Authority of South Africa. CSIR Report. Plante-Cuny, M., C. Barranguet, D. Bonn and C. Grenz (1993). “Does chlorophyllide a
reduce reliability of chlorophyll a measurements in marine coastal sediments?” Aquatic Science 55: 19-30.
Prestedge Retief Dresner Wijnberg (PRDW) (2007). “Hydrodynamic Modelling Study.”
PRDW Report No. 479/1/103 Rev 01. Prestedge Retief Dresner Wijnberg (PRDW) (2009). “Impact of Entrance Widening
and Deepening on Tidal Levels inside the Harbour.” PRDW Report No. 385/G/006.
Prestedge Retief Dresner Wijnberg (PRDW) (2011). Pre-Feasibility Study Report for
the Proposed Berth Deepening of Berths 203 to 205 at DCT. PRDW Report No. 1079/0/003/REV01.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 221
Roberts, R.D., M.R. Gregory and B.A. Fosters (1998). “Developing an efficient macrofauna monitoring index from an impact study – a dredged spoil example.” Marine Pollution Bulletin 36: 231-235.
Santana-Casiano, J.M., M. Gonzalez-Davila and F.J. Millero (2004). “The oxidation of
Fe(II) in NaCl-HCO-3 and seawater solutions in the presence of phthalate and salicylate ions: a kinetic model.” Marine Chemistry 85: 27-40.
Schleiger, S.L. (2000). “Use of an index of biotic integrity to detect effects of land use
on stream fish communities in wet-central Georgia.” Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 129: 1118-1183.
Scullion, J. and R.W. Edwards (1980). “The effects of coal industry pollutants on the
macro-invertebrate fauna of a small river in the South Wales Coalfield.” Freshwater Biology 10: 141-162.
Shand, N. (2007). “Transnet Capital Projects, Durban Bayhead Container Terminal,
Port and Marine Engineering, Hydrological and Water Quality Analysis, First Draft.”
Sherk, J.A., J.M. O’Connor and D.A. Neumann (1975). “Effects of suspended and
deposited sediments on estuarine environments.” Estuarine Research 2. Academic Press, New York.
Simpson, S.L., B.M. Angel and D.F. Jolley (2004). “Metal equilibration in laboratory-
contaminated (spiked) sediments used for the development of whole-sediment toxicity tests.” Chemosphere 54: 597-609.
Staats, N., L.I. Stal, B. De Winder and L.R. Mur (2000). “Oxygenic photosynthesis as
driving process in exopolysaccharide production of benthic diatoms.” Marine Ecology Progress Series 193: 261-269.
Stumm, W. and J.J. Morgan (1996). “Aquatic Chemistry. In: Chemical Equilibria and
Rates in Natural Waters.” John Wiley, New York. TEMPI (2007). Transnet-eThekwini Joint Port Planning Project – Economic
Workstream. Transnet National Ports Authority (2011). “Durban Overview.” Available:
http://www.transnetnationalportsauthority.net/NPA_ports_durban_overview.html. Last accessed 14 November 2011.
Turner, M. (1988). “Shipwrecks & Salvage in Southern Africa: 1505 to the Present.”
Cape Town. C.Struik. Urban-Econ Development Economist (2011). Measuring Anticipated Economic Impact
of Dig-Out Port. Presentation.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 222
UNCTAD (2007). Globalisation of Port Logistics: opportunities and challenges for developing countries. Presentation.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (1998). “Guidelines for Ecological Risk
Assessment.” EPA/630/R-95/002F, Federal Register 63(93):26846-26924. US-EPA, Washington DC.
US Navy (1990). “Final environmental impact statement for proposed new dredging.
U.S. Navy Military Construction. US Navy, Western Division Naval Facility Engineering Command Projects P-202 (Naval Air Station Alameda) and P-082 (Naval Supply Center Oakland).”
van Ballegooyen, R., A. Pulfrich, N. Steffani, P. Morant, G. Diedericks and A. Theron
(2011). “Comparative Marine Environmental Risk Assessment of two proposed locations for the Vision Industrial Park, Namibia.” CSIR Report No: CSIR/NRE/CO/ER/2011/0049/B, pp. 150.
Van Coller,J., Maasdorp, G., and Mavundla, K. 2011. Durban Maritime Industry: A
Value Chain Analysis. Unpublished Report.
Van den Berg, G.A., G.G.A. Meijers, L.M. Van der Heijdt and J.J.G. Zwolsman (2001).
“Dredging-related mobilisation of trace metals: A case study in the Netherlands.” Water Research 35: 1979-1986.
Varela, M. and E. Penas (1985). “Primary production of benthic microalgae in an
intertidal sand flat of the Ria de Arosa, NW Spain.” Marine Ecology Progress Series 24: 111-119.
Versar (2001). “Near-field water quality modelling of dredging operations in the
Delaware River.” Prepared for US Army Core of Engineers, Philadelphia, PA. Ware, S., S.G. Bolam and H.L. Rees (2010). “Impact and recovery associated with the
deposition of capital dredging at UK disposal sites: Lessons for future licensing and monitoring.” Marine Pollution Bulletin 60: 79-90.
Weerts, S.P. and Pillay (2008). “Fish kills in Durban Bay, December 2007.” CSIR
Report No. CSIR/NRE/ECO/ER/ 2008/0015/C. Weerts, S.P. and D.P. Cyrus (2002). “Occurrence of young and small-sized fishes in
different habitats within a subtropical South African estuary and adjacent harbour.” Marine and Freshwater Research 53: 447-456.
Weerts, S.P., G. Cilliers and D.P. Cyrus (2003). “Estuarine macrocrustacea of
Richards Bay harbour, South Africa, with particular reference to the penaeid prawns.” African Zoology 38(2): 286-296.
Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berths 203 to 205
Final Scoping Report 223
Whitfield, A.K. (2004). “External Review of Little Lagoon Studies, Port of Durban.”
South African Institute for Aquatic Biodiversity. Widdows, J., P. Fieth and C.M. Worral (1979). “Relationship between seston,
available food and feeding activity in the common mussel Mytilus edulis.” Marine Biology 50: 195-207.
Wilber, D.H. and D.G. Clarke (2001). “Biological effects of suspended sediments: a
review of suspended sediment impacts on fish and shellfish with relation to dredging activities in estuaries.” North American Journal of Fisheries Management 21: 855-875.