PUBLIC OPEN DAY:12 April 2012

Deepening, Lengthening and Widening of Berth 203 to 205, Container Terminal,

Pier 2, Port of Durban

2

WELCOME & INTRODUCTIONWELCOME & INTRODUCTION

WELCOME!Thank you for taking the time to attend the Public Open Session.Your presence is appreciated ...Please take a seat and watch the

presentation.After the presentation you will have an opportunity to ask the

technical and environmental teams questions. Should you have any comments please complete a reply form. We value your

contribution to the EIA process.

3

VENUE LAYOUTVENUE LAYOUT

4

MEET THE PROJECT TEAMMEET THE PROJECT TEAM

Proponent

RepresentativeRepresentative ResponsibilityResponsibility OrganisationOrganisation

Ivan Moonsamy Senior Project ManagerTransnet National Ports Authority (TNPA)

Miriam Haffejee Environmental Manager

Paris Foolchand Project ManagerTransnet Capital Projects (TCP)

Joe McMahon Environmental Manager

Consultants

RepresentativeRepresentative ResponsibilityResponsibility OrganisationOrganisation

Vanessa BruetonEnvironmental Assessment Practitioner

Nemai ConsultingAnn Burke Conservation Specialist

Nicky Naidoo Project Manager

5

1. To provide an introduction, background and

overview to the project to you;

2. To discuss the environmental authorisation

processes; and

3. To provide an opportunity for you to submit and

raise your comments for consideration by the

project team.

WHY HAVE A PUBLIC OPEN DAY???WHY HAVE A PUBLIC OPEN DAY???

6

1. The current quay walls at Berth 203 to 205 are over 50 years old and is

beyond its original design limits. Hence, the quay walls are considered

unsafe and need to be upgraded.

2. At the same time the Port of Durban has experienced a steady growth in

container numbers and vessel sizes. Therefore, the design for the upgrade

to the existing quay walls needs to take into account the larger vessels

entering the Port.

3. As the berth channel is not deep enough, large vessels can only enter and

leave the Port at high tide which negatively impacts the efficiency of the

Port. Further, the Port of Durban is considered a ‘hub’ port and to maintain

this status, it needs to accommodate the larger vessels which will improve

its efficiency.

4. Hence, the upgrade of the unsafe quay walls presents an opportunity to

improve the safety and efficiency of the Port of Durban.

WHY IS THIS PROJECT NECESSARY???WHY IS THIS PROJECT NECESSARY???

DURBAN CONTAINERTERMINAL

PIER 1PIER 2

FOCUS OF THE PROPOSEDPROJECT IS PIER 2

COMPRISES OF 15 BERTHS

CAN ACCOMADATE 8 POST PANAMAX VESSELS

WHERE IS THE PROJECT LOCATED???WHERE IS THE PROJECT LOCATED???

203

204

205

EXISTING CRANEASSEMBLEY AREA

WATER DEPTH -12.8m CDP

EXISTING SANDBANK

TOTAL EXISTING BERTH LENGTH OF 914m

WHERE ARE BERTHS 203 to 205 LOCATED? WHERE ARE BERTHS 203 to 205 LOCATED?

9

WHAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH THE EXISTING QUAY WALLS??? WHAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH THE EXISTING QUAY WALLS???

1. It was built in the 1960s and does not meet the minimum Eurocode 7 Safety Standards;

2. The berth channel is not deep enough as a result scour holes have formed which has undermined the structural stability of the existing quay wall;

3. The berths are only 914m long and it needs to be 1190m to accommodate three Super Post Panamax vessels; and

4. The current quay wall cannot safely accommodate the larger Ship to Shore cranes.

10

WHAT EXACTLY IS THIS PROJECT ABOUT???WHAT EXACTLY IS THIS PROJECT ABOUT???

The project involves: 1. The westward lengthening of Berth 205 by 170m;2. The eastward lengthening of Berth 203 by 100m;3. The widening of Berths 203 to 205 by 50m; 4. The deepening of the Berth channel, approach

channel, and vessel turning basin from the current -12.8m CDP to -16.5m CDP;

5. Excavating the trench for the new quay wall structure from -12.8m CDP to -19m CDP (for caisson option only);

6. The offshore disposal of dredge material;7. The offshore sand winning for infill material; and8. The installation of new Ship to Shore (STS) cranes

and associated infrastructure.

11

WHAT ALTERNATIVES WERE CONSIDERED?WHAT ALTERNATIVES WERE CONSIDERED?

The EIA Regulations require that we consider different alternatives. For this

project no location alternatives were considered as the upgrade is

confined to the existing unsafe quay walls. Instead, technical

alternatives were identified. Initially, seven different technical quay wall

types were assessed and the following three were found to be most

feasible:

1. Deck on Pile Quay Wall;

2. Sheet Pile Quay Wall; and

3. Caisson Quay Wall.

12

TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF THE PROJECTTECHNICAL ASPECTS OF THE PROJECT

Now that you understand where the project is located, why it is necessary and what it will entail, please

welcome Mr. Ivan Moonsamy, Project Manager from TNPA who will take you through the technical aspects of

the project. Please raise all questions at the technical table and not during the presentation. All questions will be recorded and included in the final Scoping Report.

13

The original quaywall was designed to accommodate a 1000 TEU vessel with wharf cranes

DCT is presently operating vessels of 6000 TEU and greater

VESSEL SIZES AT DCTVESSEL SIZES AT DCT

14

170m Extension ofBerth 205

100m Extension of

Berth 203

EXTENSIONSEXTENSIONS

15

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

BAYHEAD LOT10BAYHEAD LOT10

16

PROJECT DESCRIPTION - ALTERNATIVESPROJECT DESCRIPTION - ALTERNATIVES

Deck On Pile Quay Wall

17

DECK ON PILEDECK ON PILE

18

PROJECT DESCRIPTION - ALTERNATIVESPROJECT DESCRIPTION - ALTERNATIVES

Sheet Pile Quay Wall

19

SHEET PILESHEET PILE

20

PROJECT DESCRIPTION - ALTERNATIVESPROJECT DESCRIPTION - ALTERNATIVES

Caisson Quay Wall

21

CAISSONCAISSON

203

205

204

DCT BERTH DEEPENING PROJECT – BERTHS 203 TO 205

PHASE 1 – JULY 2013 TO DECEMBER 2014 EXTEND BERTH 205 AND DREDGE APPROACH CHANNEL AND BASIN

PHASE 3 – AUG 2016 TO DECEMBER 2017 EXTEND BERTH 203

PHASE 2 – JAN 2015 TO JULY 2016

HOW WILL THE PROJECT BE PHASED???HOW WILL THE PROJECT BE PHASED???

23

Approach Channel and basin will be deepened from existing -12.8m CDP to -16.5m CDP by dredging.

Lot 10 Casting Yard and Storage Yard

Estimated 4.5 million m3 of material will be dumped offshore

DREDGINGDREDGING AND OFFSHORE DISPOSALAND OFFSHORE DISPOSAL

24

• Disposal of material at current offshore

disposal site

DREDGINGDREDGING AND OFFSHORE DISPOSALAND OFFSHORE DISPOSAL

25

• Disposal of material at current offshore

disposal site

DREDGINGDREDGING AND OFFSHORE DISPOSALAND OFFSHORE DISPOSAL

OFFSHORE BORROW AREASOFFSHORE BORROW AREAS

27

Thank you Ivan. By now you should have a better understanding of the

details of this project. The following slides are about the environmental process that will be followed. If you are

not interested in watching the remaining 12 slides, please proceed to the technical table.

28

ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION PROCESSESPROCESSES

29

1. Proposed Approach NEMA - EIA

2. Proposed Approach MPRDA –

Offshore Borrow Pits

3. Proposed Approach NEM: ICM –

Dumping at Sea Permit

ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION PROCESSESPROCESSES

To date the following as been undertaken:

The landowner (Transnet) was notified;

A focus group was convened;

A random survey was conducted;

Adjacent landowners within 100m were notified;

On site notices and adverts were placed; and

A project specific website domain was registered.

30

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS TO DATEPUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS TO DATE

PROOF OF LANDOWNER NOTIFICATIONPROOF OF LANDOWNER NOTIFICATION

32

OUTCOME OF RANDOM SURVEYOUTCOME OF RANDOM SURVEY

33

PROOF OF SITE AND ADVERT NOTIFICATIONPROOF OF SITE AND ADVERT NOTIFICATION

34

LOCATION OF DRAFT SCOPING REPORTLOCATION OF DRAFT SCOPING REPORT

The draft Scoping Report was made available at the following venues for

review. I&APs on the Durban Bay Estuarine Management Plan

Database were notified and encouraged to review the scoping report.

Seafarers Club

Central Library

In addition, the draft Scoping Report was made available on the project

website : www.berth203to205expansioneia.co.za

The draft Scoping Report is available for public review from 9 March 2012

to 30 April 2012 (50 days)

The following authorities were invited to a

meeting held on 29 February 2012 to discuss

the project:

35

AUTHORITIES MEETINGAUTHORITIES MEETING

• DEADEA • SAHRA- Maritime ArchaeologySAHRA- Maritime Archaeology• KZN DAEARDKZN DAEARD • eThekwini Metropolitan eThekwini Metropolitan

Municipality Municipality • Ezemvelo KZN WildlifeEzemvelo KZN Wildlife • KZN Department of TransportKZN Department of Transport• KZN DMRKZN DMR • DAFFDAFF• DWA Regional OfficeDWA Regional Office

A Mining permit for the offshore borrow pit will

be made to DMR in terms of the MPRDA.

A Dumping At Sea Permit for the offshore

disposal site for the dredge material will be

made to the DEA in terms of the NEM:ICM.

36

OTHER LICENSING PROCESSESOTHER LICENSING PROCESSES

37

SPECIALIST STUDIES TO BE UNDERTAKENSPECIALIST STUDIES TO BE UNDERTAKEN

1. Estuarine/Marine Biodiversity Assessment;

2. Marine Archaeology Assessment;

3. Local Economic Impact Assessment;

4. Sediment and Chemical Analysis of Dredge Material;

5. Ecological Assessment of Impacts on the Central Sandbank;

6. Assessment of Indirect Impacts on the Little Lagoon;

7. Sediment Plume Analysis for Offshore Sand Winning;

8. Shoreline Stability for Offshore Sand Winning;

9. Wave Energy Analysis as part of Technical Studies; and

10.Geotechnical Study as part of Technical Studies.

38

WHAT IMPACT DOES THIS PROJECT HAVE ON THE 1999 RoD???WHAT IMPACT DOES THIS PROJECT HAVE ON THE 1999 RoD???

Phase 1, which would have

involved the westward

expansion of Pier 2 to create

berths 206/207 and the

dredging of the channel

through the central banks

Not granted 1. Stakeholders consulted throughout the IEM process recommended that phase 1 should be deferred;

2. Phase 1 is proposed within the most ecologically sensitive parts of the Bay;

3. The findings of the EIR indicate that the ecological impacts of phase 1 are irreversible and significantly high

4. The ecological impacts of the phase will result in:

a. Permanent loss of habitat for juvenile fish and migrant wading birds. South Africa is a signatory to

the Bonn Convention and therefore should put measures in place to honour her commitment to the

convention

b. Dredging of the channel would separate the remaining sandbanks from the mangroves leading to

the destruction of the Natural Heritage Site which lies within the Little Lagoon

5. Future approval of Phase 1 would dependent of the outcome of a habitat, rehabilitation, creation and

monitoring programme led by Portnet.

In 1999, the latter was clarified with the Authorities:

“Successful outcome of the habitat rehabilitation, creation and monitoring programme

referred to Paragraph 5, means that the Department would assess the success

based on future evidence to be provided in a possible application.”

Phase 3, which entailed the

creation of Deepwater Berths

‘D’ to ‘G’ at the Point and the

relocation of breakbulk

business from Pier 1 to the

new terminal;

Authorised “Authorisation is granted on condition that there is to no further loss of water area in the future as a result

of infilling.”

This point was clarified with the Authorities in 1999. The Clarification states that the

“no further loss of water area” means that there should be no further infill of the sea to

the order of magnitude of phase 3.

39

This brings us to the end of the presentation. We trust that you have sufficient information on the project.

Please raise all questions at the technical station. We encourage you to complete a reply form before you leave if you have any comments. Should you prefer,

please free comment anonymously.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.