Deepening Lengthening and Widening of Berth 203 to

Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berth 203 to 205, Container Terminal, Pier 2, Port of Durban PUBLIC OPEN DAY: 12 April 2012

WELCOME & INTRODUCTION WELCOME! Thank you for taking the time to attend the Public Open Session. Your presence is appreciated. . . Please take a seat and watch the presentation. After the presentation you will have an opportunity to ask the technical and environmental teams questions. Should you have any comments please complete a reply form. We value your contribution to the EIA process. 2

VENUE LAYOUT 3

MEET THE PROJECT TEAM Proponent Representative Responsibility Ivan Moonsamy Senior Project Manager Miriam Haffejee Environmental Manager Paris Foolchand Project Manager Organisation Transnet National Ports Authority (TNPA) Transnet Capital Projects (TCP) Joe Mc. Mahon Environmental Manager Consultants Representative Vanessa Brueton Responsibility Environmental Assessment Practitioner Ann Burke Conservation Specialist Nicky Naidoo Project Manager Organisation Nemai Consulting 4

WHY HAVE A PUBLIC OPEN DAY? ? ? 1. To provide an introduction, background and overview to the project to you; 2. To discuss the environmental authorisation processes; and 3. To provide an opportunity for you to submit and raise your comments for consideration by the project team. 5

WHY IS THIS PROJECT NECESSARY? ? ? 1. The current quay walls at Berth 203 to 205 are over 50 years old and is beyond its original design limits. Hence, the quay walls are considered unsafe and need to be upgraded. 2. At the same time the Port of Durban has experienced a steady growth in container numbers and vessel sizes. Therefore, the design for the upgrade to the existing quay walls needs to take into account the larger vessels entering the Port. 3. As the berth channel is not deep enough, large vessels can only enter and leave the Port at high tide which negatively impacts the efficiency of the Port. Further, the Port of Durban is considered a ‘hub’ port and to maintain this status, it needs to accommodate the larger vessels which will improve its efficiency. 4. Hence, the upgrade of the unsafe quay walls presents an opportunity to improve the safety and efficiency of the Port of Durban. 6

WHERE IS THE PROJECT LOCATED? ? ? FOCUS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS PIER 2 PI ER 2 ER PI 1 DURBAN CONTAINER TERMINAL COMPRISES OF 15 BERTHS CAN ACCOMADATE 8 POST PANAMAX VESSELS

WHERE ARE BERTHS 203 to 205 LOCATED? 203 204 205 WATER DEPTH -12. 8 m CDP TOTAL EXISTING BERTH LENGTH OF 914 m EXISTING SANDBANK EXISTING CRANE ASSEMBLEY AREA

WHAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH THE EXISTING QUAY WALLS? ? ? 1. It was built in the 1960 s and does not meet the minimum Eurocode 7 Safety Standards; 2. The berth channel is not deep enough as a result scour holes have formed which has undermined the structural stability of the existing quay wall; 3. The berths are only 914 m long and it needs to be 1190 m to accommodate three Super Post Panamax vessels; and 4. The current quay wall cannot safely accommodate the larger Ship to Shore cranes. 9

WHAT EXACTLY IS THIS PROJECT ABOUT? ? ? The project involves: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. The westward lengthening of Berth 205 by 170 m; The eastward lengthening of Berth 203 by 100 m; The widening of Berths 203 to 205 by 50 m; The deepening of the Berth channel, approach channel, and vessel turning basin from the current 12. 8 m CDP to -16. 5 m CDP; Excavating the trench for the new quay wall structure from -12. 8 m CDP to -19 m CDP (for caisson option only); The offshore disposal of dredge material; The offshore sand winning for infill material; and The installation of new Ship to Shore (STS) cranes and associated infrastructure. 10

WHAT ALTERNATIVES WERE CONSIDERED? The EIA Regulations require that we consider different alternatives. For this project no location alternatives were considered as the upgrade is confined to the existing unsafe quay walls. Instead, technical alternatives were identified. Initially, seven different technical quay wall types were assessed and the following three were found to be most feasible: 1. Deck on Pile Quay Wall; 2. Sheet Pile Quay Wall; and 3. Caisson Quay Wall. 11

TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF THE PROJECT Now that you understand where the project is located, why it is necessary and what it will entail, please welcome Mr. Ivan Moonsamy, Project Manager from TNPA who will take you through the technical aspects of the project. Please raise all questions at the technical table and not during the presentation. All questions will be recorded and included in the final Scoping Report. 12

VESSEL SIZES AT DCT The original quaywall was designed to accommodate a 1000 TEU vessel with wharf cranes DCT is presently operating vessels of 6000 TEU and greater 1

EXTENSIONS 170 m Extension of Berth 205 ion of s n e t x E 100 m Berth 203 14

BAYHEAD LOT 10 Lot 10 Casting Yard and Storage Area to be used during the proposed project 15

PROJECT DESCRIPTION - ALTERNATIVES Deck On Pile Quay Wall 16

DECK ON PILE 17

PROJECT DESCRIPTION - ALTERNATIVES Sheet Pile Quay Wall 18

SHEET PILE 19

PROJECT DESCRIPTION - ALTERNATIVES Caisson Quay Wall 20

CAISSON 21

DCT BERTH DEEPENING PROJECT – BERTHS 203 TO 205 HOW WILL THE PROJECT BE PHASED? ? ? PHASE 1 – JULY 2013 TO DECEMBER 2014 EXTEND BERTH 205 AND DREDGE APPROACH CHANNEL AND BASIN PHASE 2 – JAN 2015 TO JULY 2016 PHASE 3 – AUG 2016 TO DECEMBER 2017 EXTEND BERTH 203 204 205

DREDGING AND OFFSHORE DISPOSAL Approach Channel and basin will be deepened from existing -12. 8 m CDP to -16. 5 m CDP by dredging. Estimated 4. 5 million m 3 of material will be dumped offshore Lot 10 Casting Yard and Storage Yard 23

DREDGING AND OFFSHORE DISPOSAL • Disposal of material at current offshore disposal site 24

DREDGING AND OFFSHORE DISPOSAL • Disposal of material at current offshore disposal site 25

OFFSHORE BORROW AREAS

Thank you Ivan. By now you should have a better understanding of the details of this project. The following slides are about the environmental process that will be followed. If you are not interested in watching the remaining 12 slides, please proceed to the technical table. 27

ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION PROCESSES 28

ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION PROCESSES 1. Proposed Approach NEMA - EIA 2. Proposed Approach MPRDA – Offshore Borrow Pits 3. Proposed Approach NEM: ICM – Dumping at Sea Permit 29

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS TO DATE v To date the following as been undertaken: Ø The landowner (Transnet) was notified; Ø A focus group was convened; Ø A random survey was conducted; Ø Adjacent landowners within 100 m were notified; Ø On site notices and adverts were placed; and Ø A project specific website domain was registered. 30

PROOF OF LANDOWNER NOTIFICATION

OUTCOME OF RANDOM SURVEY 32

PROOF OF SITE AND ADVERT NOTIFICATION 33

LOCATION OF DRAFT SCOPING REPORT The draft Scoping Report was made available at the following venues for review. I&APs on the Durban Bay Estuarine Management Plan Database were notified and encouraged to review the scoping report. v Seafarers Club v Central Library In addition, the draft Scoping Report was made available on the project website : www. berth 203 to 205 expansioneia. co. za The draft Scoping Report is available for public review from 9 March 2012 to 30 April 2012 (50 days) 34

AUTHORITIES MEETING v The following authorities were invited to a meeting held on 29 February 2012 to discuss the project: • DEA • KZN DAEARD • Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife • KZN DMR • DWA Regional Office • SAHRA- Maritime Archaeology • e. Thekwini Metropolitan Municipality • KZN Department of Transport • DAFF 35

OTHER LICENSING PROCESSES v A Mining permit for the offshore borrow pit will be made to DMR in terms of the MPRDA. v A Dumping At Sea Permit for the offshore disposal site for the dredge material will be made to the DEA in terms of the NEM: ICM. 36

SPECIALIST STUDIES TO BE UNDERTAKEN 1. Estuarine/Marine Biodiversity Assessment; 2. Marine Archaeology Assessment; 3. Local Economic Impact Assessment; 4. Sediment and Chemical Analysis of Dredge Material; 5. Ecological Assessment of Impacts on the Central Sandbank; 6. Assessment of Indirect Impacts on the Little Lagoon; 7. Sediment Plume Analysis for Offshore Sand Winning; 8. Shoreline Stability for Offshore Sand Winning; 9. Wave Energy Analysis as part of Technical Studies; and 10. Geotechnical Study as part of Technical Studies. 37

WHAT IMPACT DOES THIS PROJECT HAVE ON THE 1999 Ro. D? ? ? 1. Stakeholders consulted throughout the IEM process recommended that phase 1 should be deferred; westward 2. Phase 1 is proposed within the most ecologically sensitive parts of the Bay; expansion of Pier 2 to create 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: Phase 1, which would have involved berths the 206/207 dredging of the and Not granted the a. channel 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 through the central banks convention b. Dredging of the channel would separate the remaining sandbanks from the mangroves leading to the destruction of the Natural Heritage Site which lies within the Little Lagoon 5. Future approval of Phase 1 would dependent of the outcome of a habitat, rehabilitation, creation and monitoring programme led by Portnet. In 1999, the latter was clarified with the Authorities: “Successful outcome of the habitat rehabilitation, creation and monitoring programme referred to Paragraph 5, means that the Department would assess the success based on future evidence to be provided in a possible application. ” Phase 3, which entailed the Authorised “Authorisation is granted on condition that there is to no further loss of water area in the future as a result creation of Deepwater Berths of infilling. ” ‘D’ to ‘G’ at the Point and the This point was clarified with the Authorities in 1999. The Clarification states that the “no relocation further loss of water area” means that there should be no further infill of the sea to the of breakbulk business from Pier 1 to the new terminal; order of magnitude of phase 3. 38

This brings us to the end of the presentation. We trust that you have sufficient information on the project. Please raise all questions at the technical station. We encourage you to complete a reply form before you leave if you have any comments. Should you prefer, please free comment anonymously. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. 39