DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT Tulbagh Waste Disposal Facility: Proposed Section 20 Permit Amendment

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT

Tulbagh Waste Disposal Facility: Proposed Section 20 Permit Amendment

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR A WASTE MANAGEMENT LICENCE IN TERMS OF THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT: WASTE ACT, 2008 (ACT NO. 59 OF 2008)

PREPARED FOR: WITZENBERG MUNICIPALITY

REF NO: 14/3/2/B5/14/0176/16

DATE: MARCH 2019

PO Box 494 Cape Town 8000

Tel: 021 526 6024 Cell: 073 163 6409 E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.aurecongroup.com

i DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Page left blank intentionally

ii DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION A: ACTIVITY INFORMATION ...... 1 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...... 1 2. PHYSICAL SIZE OF THE ACTIVITY ...... 17 3. SITE ACCESS ...... 17 4. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY ON WHICH THE ACTIVITY IS TO BE UNDERTAKEN AND THE LOCATION OF THE ACTIVITY ON THE PROPERTY ...... 19 5. SITE PHOTOGRAPHS ...... 21 SECTION B: DESCRIPTION OF RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT ...... 22 1. GRADIENT OF THE SITE ...... 22 2. LOCATION IN LANDSCAPE ...... 22 3. GROUNDWATER, SOIL AND GEOLOGICAL STABILITY OF THE SITE ...... 22 4. SURFACE WATER ...... 23 5. BIODIVERSITY ...... 25 6. LAND USE OF THE SITE ...... 26 7. LAND USE CHARACTER OF SURROUNDING AREA ...... 26 8. SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS ...... 28 9. HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL ASPECTS...... 30 10. APPLICABLE LEGISLATION, POLICIES AND/OR GUIDELINES ...... 31 SECTION C: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ...... 35 SECTION D: NEED AND DESIRABILITY ...... 37 SECTION E: ALTERNATIVES ...... 44 SECTION F: IMPACT ASSESSMENT, MANAGEMENT, MITIGATION AND MONITORING MEASURES ...... 47 1. ASPECT DESCRIPTION ...... 47 2. DESCRIPTION AND ASSESSMENT OF THE SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACTS PRIOR TO AND AFTER MITIGATION ...... 50 3. SPECIALIST INPUTS/STUDIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 60 4. IMPACT SUMMARY ...... 63 5. OTHER MANAGEMENT, MITIGATION AND MONITORING MEASURES ...... 65 SECTION G: ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGIES AND CRITERIA, GAPS IN KNOWLEDGE, UNDERLAYING ASSUMPTIONS AND UNCERTAINTIES ...... 66 SECTION H: RECOMMENDATION OF THE EAP ...... 68 SECTION I: APPENDICES ...... 69 DECLARATIONS ...... 70

iii DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

TABLES

Table 1: Site Layout Alternatives ...... 1 Table 2: Borehole and PIT GPS Locations ...... 2 Table 3: Borehole sampling results ...... 3 Table 4: Groundwater monitoring results for Borehole 1 ...... 11 Table 5: Groundwater monitoring results for Borehole 2 ...... 12 Table 6: Groundwater monitoring results for Borehole 3 ...... 13 Table 7: Water monitoring results for the leachate collected at the stormwater detention pond ...... 14 Table 8: Witzenberg Population: Age, Size and Gender ...... 28 Table 9: Witzenberg Local Employment data ...... 29 Table 10: Witzenberg level of education per ward ...... 29

FIGURES

Figure 1: Borehole and Pit sampling locations ...... 2 Figure 2: Graph comparing the Chemical Oxygen Demand levels of each Borehole and Pit sample analysed...... 4 Figure 3: Graph comparing the Nitrates levels of each Borehole and Pit sample analysed. 4 Figure 4: Graph comparing Potassium levels of each Borehole and Pit sample analysed. .. 4 Figure 5: Graph comparing Chloride levels of each Borehole and Pit sample analysed...... 5 Figure 6: Graph comparing pH levels of each Borehole and Pit sample analysed...... 5 Figure 7: Graph comparing Conductivity of each Borehole and Pit sample analysed...... 5 Figure 8: Graph comparing Ammonia Nitrogen of each Borehole sample analysed...... 6 Figure 9: Graph comparing COD of each Borehole sample analysed...... 6 Figure 10: Graph comparing Nitrate and Nitrite of each Borehole sample analysed...... 7 Figure 11: Graph comparing Phenols of each Borehole sample analysed...... 7 Figure 12: Graph comparing DOC of each Borehole sample analysed...... 7 Figure 13: Graph comparing Ortho Phosphate of each Borehole sample analysed...... 8 Figure 14: Graph comparing Mercury of each Borehole sample analysed...... 8 Figure 15: Graph comparing Iron of each Borehole sample analysed...... 8 Figure 16: Graph comparing Lead of each Borehole sample analysed...... 9 Figure 17: Graph comparing Aluminium of each Borehole sample analysed...... 9 Figure 18: Graph comparing Total Chromium of each Borehole sample analysed...... 9 Figure 19: Graph comparing Hexavalent Chromium of each Borehole sample analysed. 10 Figure 20: Graph comparing Manganese of each Borehole sample analysed...... 10 Figure 21: Recycling bins situated at the Tulbagh WDF site...... 16

iv DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Figure 22: The Tulbagh WDF access road. An existing fence is indicated by the yellow line and the permitted area is indicated by the blue line...... 18 Figure 23: The Tulbagh Waste Dirposal Facility location and surrounding land use...... 19 Figure 24: The Tulbagh Waste Disposal Facility location and cadastral properties...... 20 Figure 25: Stormwater control measures for the Tulbagh WDF...... 24 Figure 26: The permitted Tulbagh WDF showing the identified land uses within a 500m radius from the centre of the area...... 27 Figure 27: Location of the Witzenberg Municipal area...... 28 Figure 28: Zone of Visual Influence (ZVI) ...... 61 Figure 29: Pan illustrating visual sensitivity of the area around the WDF...... 61

v DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A: EAP CV APPENDIX B: GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN APPENDIX C: APPLICATION FOR A WASTE MANAGEMENT LICENSE: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION APPENDIX D: LOCALITY MAP APPENDIX E: SITE PLANS AND TECHNICAL DRAWINGS APPENDIX F: SITE PHOTOGRAPHS APPENDIX G: PERMITS(S) / LICENSE(S) APPENDIX H: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION INFORMATION APPENDIX I: ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMME (EMPr) APPENDIX J: SPECIALIST STUDIES

IMPORTANT NOTE:

This report was originally compiled by Resource Management Solutions (RMS) as part of a waste license variation application during 2015 and 2016 for the Tulbagh WDF. Following an appeal process and court order, the DEA&DP issued a letter to the Witzenberg Municipality to request an amended BAR to be submitted, showcasing changes circumstances and additional information as requested in the letter (Ref No: 14/3/2/B5/14/0176/16 and dated 12 November 2018). Aurecon South Africa (Pty) Ltd was appointed during February 2019 to undertake the amendment process. To cater for time constraints the original BAR was used as a basis for this report and all work undertaken by RMS has been referenced herein.

The original RMS document was finalised in early 2016. This document is therefore compiled using additional information from the past 3 years, considering that many options assessed during 2015 might not be feasible anymore. This document therefore highlights all unchanged information as assessed by RMS, as well as all updated information as assessed by Aurecon. It should however be noted that all current alternatives were proposed by the Witzenberg Municipality and Aurecon as possible alternatives to be assessed for feasibility and has not been reviewed or acknowledged by RMS.

vi DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT (AUGUST 2010)

Basic Assessment Report in terms of the NEMA Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2010 AUGUST 2010

Kindly note that:

1. This Basic Assessment Report is the standard report required by DEA&DP in terms of the EIA Regulations, 2010 and must be completed for all Basic Assessment applications.

2. This report must be used in all instances for Basic Assessment applications for an environmental authorisation in terms of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998) (NEMA), as amended, and the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2010, and/or a waste management licence in terms of the National Environmental Management: Waste Act, 2008 (Act 59 of 2008) (NEM: WA), and/or an atmospheric emission licence in terms of the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, 2004 (Act No. 39 of 2004) (NEM: AQA).

3. This report is current as of 2 August 2010. It is the responsibility of the Applicant / EAP to ascertain whether subsequent versions of the report have been published or produced by the competent authority.

4. The required information must be typed within the spaces provided in the report. The sizes of the spaces provided are not necessarily indicative of the amount of information to be provided. It is in the form of a table that will expand as each space is filled with typing.

5. Incomplete reports will be rejected. A rejected report may be amended and resubmitted.

6. The use of “not applicable” in the report must be done with circumspection. Where it is used in respect of material information that is required by the Department for assessing the application, this may result in the rejection of the report as provided for in the regulations.

7. While the different sections of the report only provide space for provision of information related to one alternative, if more than one feasible and reasonable alternative is considered, the relevant section must be copied and completed for each alternative.

8. Unless protected by law all information contained in, and attached to this report, will become public information on receipt by the competent authority. If information is not submitted with this report due to such information being protected by law, the applicant and/or EAP must declare such non-disclosure and provide the reasons for the belief that the information is protected.

9. This report must be submitted to the Department at the postal address given below or by delivery thereof to the Registry Office of the Department. No faxed or e-mailed reports will be accepted. Please note that for waste management licence applications, this report must be submitted for the attention of the Department’s Waste Management Directorate (tel: 021-483-2756 and fax: 021-483-4425) at the same postal address as the Cape Town Office Region A.

10. Unless indicated otherwise, two electronic copies (CD/DVD) and three hard copies of this report must be submitted to the Department.

DEPARTMENTAL DETAILS

CAPE TOWN OFFICE REGION A CAPE TOWN OFFICE REGION B (Cape Winelands, City of Cape Town: (West Coast, Overberg, City of Cape Town: GEORGE OFFICE Tygerberg and Oostenberg Helderberg, South Peninsula, Cape Town (Eden and Central Karoo) Administrations) and Blaauwberg Administrations Department of Environmental Affairs Department of Environmental Affairs and Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning Development Planning and Development Planning Attention: Directorate: Integrated Attention: Directorate: Integrated Attention: Directorate: Integrated Environmental Management (Region Environmental Management (Region B) Environmental Management (Region A2) Private Bag X 9086 A1) Private Bag X 9086 Cape Town, Private Bag X 6509 Cape Town, 8000 George, 8000 6530 Registry Office Registry Office 1st Floor Utilitas Building Registry Office 1st Floor Utilitas Building 1 Dorp Street, 4th Floor, York Park Building 1 Dorp Street, Cape Town 93 York Street Cape Town George Queries should be directed to the Queries should be directed to the Directorate: Integrated Environmental Queries should be directed to the Directorate: Integrated Environmental Management (Region B) at: Directorate: Integrated Environmental Management (Region A2) at: Tel: (021) 483-4094 Fax: (021) 483-4372 Management (Region A1) at: Tel: (021) 483-4793 Fax: (021) 483-3633 Tel: (044) 805 8600 Fax: (044) 874-2423

View the Department’s website at http://www.capegateway.gov.za/eadp for the latest version of this document.

vii DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

DEPARTMENTAL REFERENCE NUMBER(S)

File reference number (EIA): File reference number (Waste): 14/3/2/B5/14/0176/16 File reference number (Other):

PROJECT TITLE

Tulbagh Waste Disposal Facility (WDF): Section 20 Permit Amendment

DETAILS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PRACTITIONER (EAP)

Environmental Assessment Aurecon South Africa (Pty) Ltd Practitioner (EAP):

Contact person: Jeanne-Louise Wiese

Postal address: PO Box 494

Postal Cape Town 8000 code:

Telephone: (021) 526 6024 Cell: 073 163 6409

E-mail: [email protected] Fax: -

EAP Qualifications BSc (Hons) Zoology and Geography

EAP Registrations/Associations SACNASP (Cert.Nat.Sci.)/ IAIA SA

DETAILS OF THE EAP’S EXPERTISE TO CARRY OUT BASIC ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES

Jeanne-Louise is a senior environmental scientist with Aurecon's Cape Town office. She specialises in environmental consulting for the mining and water related industries and has most recently been involved in civil, waste, roads and groundwater related projects.

She has also gained valuable experience as an environmental officer and later manager at Xstrata Alloys (now Glencore), where she was primarily responsible for the implementation of ISO 14001 and the compilation of environmental management systems (EMS). She is proficient in managing public participation processes (PPPs), stakeholder group facilitation, project management, environmental monitoring and reporting for various projects. This involves facilitating workshops for environmental protection strategies, process innovations, risk analysis and management. Jeanne-Louise also has experience in community-based projects relating to water provision and sanitation for long-term investment and sustainable development.

Jeanne-Louise obtained a Bachelor of Science (Honours) in Geography from the University of Pretoria, South Africa, in 2005, after completing her Bachelor of Science in Geography and Zoology at the North-West University (NWU) in 2004. She is a member of the International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA), South Africa and is registered as a Level A certified natural scientist with the South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions (SACNASP)

Please refer to Appendix A for the EAP’s CV.

viii DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE CONTENT OF THE BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT:

Project Background and Legislative Framework

The Tulbagh Waste Disposal Facility (WDF) was issued with a waste disposal permit in terms of Section 20 of the Environmental Conservation Act (ECA), Act 73 of 1989 (Ref no: 16/2/7/G100/D6/Z1/P305). The existing permit issued by Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF) on 31 July 1998 stipulates that the maximum height of the disposal site may not exceed the natural ground level. Witzenberg Municipality initiated a variation license application during 2015, after which a Waste Management License (WML) was issued on 15 July 2016 (Ref. No: 19/2/5/4/B5/14/WL0056/15) by the Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning (DEA&DP). The license was appealed and following a court order, the Witzenberg Municipality appointed Aurecon South Africa (Pty) Ltd to undertake a Basic Assessment amendment process as a result of a letter dated 12 November 2018 (Ref. No: 14/3/2/B5/14/0176/16) issued by the DEA&DP.

The Tulbagh WDF is located approximately 2 km from the centre of Tulbagh, on a portion of Erf 1 of Tulbagh, Portion 1 of the Farm Middelpos No. 116 and Portion 30 of the Farm Kruys Valley No. 187, Division of Tulbagh. The waste currently being disposed of at the Tulbagh site is generated from all towns in the Witzenberg area, except garden waste which is disposed of at Prince Alfred Hamlet Landfill Site. The WDF receives approximately 2221 tons of domestic, garden and building waste per month. The future medium and long- term management solutions for the waste generated within the Witzenberg area must still be resolved.

Due to the delay in obtaining authorization for alternative disposal areas and methods, such as the Worcester regional WDF and the Drakenstein Waste to Energy Plant, the use and optimization of alternative waste disposal sites within the Witzenberg area is essential. The proposed expansion triggers the following Waste Management Activity in terms of the NEM: WA:

Activity Describe the portion of the Provide the relevant Basic Assessment Activity(ies) as set out No(s): proposed project to which the in Category A of GN No. 921 applicable listed activity relates. 13 The expansion of a waste management activity listed in The expansion of the Tulbagh WDF Category A or B of this Schedule which does not trigger an additional waste management activity in terms of this Schedule

An access gate is present on site to control the flow of traffic and people entering the site. The waste disposal area (Cell 1 and Cell 2) is fenced off and the gate leading to this area is locked after hours. There are 2 buildings on site. The one building is to accommodate the offices of the employees on site and the other is to accommodate 24 hour security guards.

The existing bulk services include a gravel access road from Drostdy Avenue and power supply. The site employee building has water and is connected to the municipal sewerage reticulation system

The proposed project entails the expansion of the existing Tulbagh WDF and therefore does not include an alternative site.

ix DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Site Alternatives

Nine (9) site layout alternatives have been considered and are tabulated below. Alternative 3 and 4 will be constructed in phases. Use of the area that was previously trenched and dumped, North of the current WDF footprint, forms part of these alternatives as Cell 2. Development and engineering of WDF cells within the undeveloped area will not be financially viable without an approved height extension, due to the need to construct a Class B WDF liner (GNR 636 of 2013) prior to any waste being disposed of.

An airspace determination study undertaken by Aurecon (See attached Appendix J3) investigated feasible development alternatives on the existing site, whereby it was determined that the most feasible option from an operational, financial and environmental perspective would be Alternative 3, since this would cater for a buffer around the WDF, but also allow for approximately 5 years of waste disposal at the site, until such time as a regional or alternative method of waste disposal is investigated and implemented within the Municipality.

Alternative Description Alternative 1 Expand and raise the current height of the WDF on Cell 1 & 2 to 5 metres above natural ground level Alternative 2 Expand and raise the current height of the WDF on Cell 1 & 2 to 8 metres above natural ground level Alternative 3 Expand and raise the current height of the WDF on Cell 1 & 2 to 10 metres (Preferred) above natural ground level Alternative 4 Expand and raise the current height of the WDF on Cell 1, 2 & 3 to 175 metres above mean sea level Alternative 5 No height extension. Removal of current WDF material up to natural ground (No-go option) level OR levelling current WDF over Cell 1, 2 and 3 (permitted area) to no higher than natural ground level across the sites. Alternative 6 Expand and raise current WDF over Cell 1, 2 and 3 to 5 metres above natural ground level Alternative 7 Expand and raise current WDF over Cell 1, 2 and 3 to 8 metres above natural ground level Alternative 8 Considering the use of an incinerator on site and rehabilitate the existing WDF. Alternative 9 Using the site as a transfer station and rehabilitate the existing WDF.

Impact Assessment

Visual Impact Assessment:

The visual assessment is directly informed by the previous assessment also undertaken by ARLA Consulting (Pty) Ltd. The visual sensitive receptors included commuters along Waveren road, Montoellier wine farm, and Rijks Ridge Wine farm. With regards to the visual impact on the visual intrusion and cultivated landscape Alternatives 1-3 has an empact prior to mitigation of MEDIUM and post mitigation of LOW. Alternatives 4, 6 and 7 has an impact prior to mitigation of HIGH and post mitigation it remains HIGH. From a visual perspective it is recommended that the height does not exceed 10m above natural ground level and that the waste body does not extend to Cell 3, which currently acts as a buffer. Alternative 3 would be the most feasible and visual least intrusive of the alternatives presented, however mitigation proposed should be implemented. Impact Ratings:

The visual impact will be permanent and will occur definitely. Its extent is limited and intensity moderate, therefore it is of medium significance and it will require management actions to avoid or mitigate the impacts.

EXTENT National Regional Local Site DURATION Permanent Long-term Medium-term Short-term PROBABILTY Definite Highly Probable Possible Improbable INTENSITY High Moderate Low

x DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Recommendations

The site is an existing WDF, It is well positioned in terms of topography and therefore visibility is limited to its immediate surroundings. From a visual perspective Alternative 3, where Cell 1 and Cell 2 is raised to 10 meters above natural ground level, is the only best practicable option if all mitigation measures are implemented.

It is recommended that Alternative three with the implementation of the mitigation measures, such as revegetation of the sidewalls of the WDF and screening by means of fast-growing indigenous trees, be considered as the preferred alternative.

The following tables provide a summary of the potential impacts that may be associated with the operation and decommissioning of the proposed expansion of the Tulbagh WDF waste body.

Summary of Operational Phase Impacts:

Potential Impact Significance before mitigation Significance after mitigation Traffic (earth moving) Medium (-) Low (-) Traffic (waste transportation Medium (-) Low (-) on public roads) Dust Medium (-) Low (-) Job creation Low (-) Medium (+) Noise Medium (-) Low (-) Litter High (-) Low (-) Odour Medium (-) Low (-) Vermin and Flies Medium (-) Low (-) Historical & Cultural Medium (-) Low (-) landscape Water resources Medium (-) Low (-) Visual – cultivated landscape Medium (-) Low (-) character (Alt. 1) Visual – cultivated landscape Medium (-) Low (-) character (Alt. 2) Visual – cultivated landscape Medium (-) Low (-) character (Alt. 3) Visual – cultivated landscape High (-) High (-) character (Alt. 4) Visual – cultivated landscape High (-) High (-) character (Alt. 6) Visual – cultivated landscape High (-) High (-) character (Alt. 7) Visual – Intrusion on scenic Medium (-) Low (-) route (Alt. 1) Visual – cultivated landscape Medium (-) Low (-) character (Alt. 2) Visual – Intrusion on scenic Medium (-) Low (-) route (Alt. 3) Visual – Intrusion on scenic High (-) High (-) route (Alt. 4) Visual – Intrusion on scenic High (-) High (-) route (Alt. 6) Visual – Intrusion on scenic High (-) High (-) route (Alt. 7)

xi DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Summary of Decommissioning Phase Impacts: Potential Impact Significance before mitigation Significance after mitigation Traffic Medium (-) Low (-) Dust Medium (-) Low (-) Job creation Low (-) Low (+) Historical & Cultural Medium (-) Low (-) Landscape Noise Low (-) Very Low (-) Illegal salvaging Medium (-) Very Low (-)

Conclusions and Recommendations

The Visual Impact Assessment has confirmed that Site layout Alternative 3 (Raise the current height of Cell 1 and 2 of the WDF area by 10 metres above natural ground level) is the best option with regards to the visual impact. Alternatives 4, 6 and 7 were found to have adverse effect on the neighbouring property from a visual perspective and are not recommended as site layout options. Site Layout Alternatives 4, 5, 6 and 7 were also found to not be financially viable options as the construction of a Class B WDF liner would need to be constructed prior to waste disposal. These options would also remove the buffer area (Cell 3) which can be used for stormwater control measures and visual screening such as planting of trees.

Site Layout alternative 3 should be considered for approval in terms of the Variation Application. The implementation and ongoing site management taking into account all aspects of the Environmental Management Programme is a prerequisite for the recommended Alternative 3 to be approved. Alternative waste disposal and diversion strategies should also be investigated by the Witzenberg Municipality to ensure that future expansions are not enforced due to lack of alternatives.

xii DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

SECTION A: ACTIVITY INFORMATION

1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

(a) Is the project a new development? YES NO

(b) Provide a detailed description of the development project and associated infrastructure.

The Tulbagh WDF is located approximately 2 km from the center of Tulbagh, on a portion of Erf 1 of Tulbagh, Portion 1 of the Farm Middelpos No. 116 and Portion 30 of the Farm Kruys Valley No. 187, Division of Tulbagh. The waste currently being disposed of at the Tulbagh site is generated predominantly within the Tulbagh area, with the exception of waste which is transported from Op Die Berg, Prince Alfred Hamlet, Nduli, Bella Vista and Wolseley due to capacity and other restrictions and opposition to disposal facilities in these areas. The WDF receives approximately 2221 tons of domestic, garden and building waste per month. The future medium and long-term management solutions for the waste generated within the Witzenberg area must still be resolved.

The site alternatives considered are tabulated below.

Table 1: Site Layout Alternatives Alternative Description Alternative 1 Expand and raise the current height of the WDF on Cell 1 & 2 to 5 metres above natural ground level Alternative 2 Expand and raise the current height of the WDF on Cell 1 & 2 to 8 metres above natural ground level Alternative 3 Expand and raise the current height of the WDF on Cell 1 & 2 to 10 metres (Preferred) above natural ground level Alternative 4 Expand and raise the current height of the WDF on Cell 1, 2 & 3 to 175 metres above mean sea level Alternative 5 No height extension. Removal of current WDF material up to natural ground (No-go option) level OR levelling current WDF over Cell 1, 2 and 3 (permitted area) to no higher than natural ground level across the sites. Alternative 6 Expand and raise current WDF over Cell 1, 2 and 3 to 5 metres above natural ground level Alternative 7 Expand and raise current WDF over Cell 1, 2 and 3 to 8 metres above natural ground level Alternative 8 Considering the use of an incinerator on site and rehabilitate the existing WDF. Alternative 9 Using the site as a transfer station and rehabilitate the existing WDF.

Geohydrology

Borehole sampling was conducted during 2015 on site to determine the current quality of the groundwater. Samples were taken from the three (3) boreholes located on site, as well as from two test pits (Figure 1). The GPS coordinates and depth of each borehole is provided in Table 2 below. The samples were sent to a certified laboratory for analysis. The results are displayed in Table 3 below.

i DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Historically Used Area

Current Operating Area

Permitted Area Used Area

Figure 1: Borehole and Pit sampling locations

Table 2: Borehole and PIT GPS Locations Borehole Name Latitude (S) Longitude (E) Depth (m) Strike (m) Yield (L/s) WL (m bgl)

BH1 (Down Stream) 33.273670 19.132060 25.51 17 <0.2 0.94

BH2 (Down Stream) 33.274446 19.130910 25.32 10 <0.2 5.57

BH3 (Upstream) 33.275860 19.132220 25.42 23 <0.2 16.59

PIT 1 (Winery Dam) 33.273250 19.133517 - - - -

PIT 2 (Lower Corner) 33.273250 19.133183 - - - -

BH3 is located upstream from the WDF area and is thus the Background Monitoring Borehole when comparing the results displayed in Table 2. Table 3 shows the results of the samples that were taken from BH1, BH2, BH3, PIT1 and PIT2, and analysed in a certified laboratory. Please refer to Appendix B for the Groundwater Managemnet investigations and borehole siting reports submitted by SRK Consulting during 2014 for the Tulbagh WDF site.

The parameters that are most important to note are the Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), Nitrate levels, Potassium levels, Chloride levels, the pH level and Conductivity of each sample that was analysed. Figure 2 to Figure 7 below display graphs comparing the results of the samples taken from BH1, BH2, BH3, PIT1 and PIT2 during 2015 for the above-mentioned parameters.

Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) levels were found to be highest in the sample obtained from PIT 1 (60.4 mg/l) and lowest in the BH1 (14.7 mg/l) sample (Refer to Figure 2).

Nitrates were found to be highest in the sample taken from BH1 and the BH2 sample, where both had a nitrate level of 0.13 mg/l. The lowest levels of nitrates were found in samples taken from the remaining borehole (BH3) and the two PITs (PIT1 and PIT2), with a 0.9 nitrate concentration level (Refer to Figure 3).

Potassium levels were highest in BH3 (3.4 mg/l) according to the analysed sample results and lowest in PIT1 (0.32 mg/l) (Refer to Figure 4).

Chloride levels were found to be highest in PIT1 (1568 mg/l) and lowest in PIT2 (197 mg/l), however BH3 (655 mg/l) showed the second highest Chloride level (Refer to Figure 5).

2 DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Table 3: Borehole sampling results Blue Drop Parameters BH1 BH2 BH3 PIT 1 PIT 2 SANS 241-1:2015 Standard

Total Alkalinity (mg/l as CaCO3) 286 180 22 100 344 N/A N/A Calcium (mg/l as Ca) 48.6 23.2 43 46.2 11.6 N/A N/A Total Chromium (μg/l as Cr) <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 50 Chronic Health 50 Hexavalent Chrome (mg/l as Cr6) <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 N/A N/A Chemical Oxygen Demand (mg/l) 14.7 29 27.7 60.4 31 N/A N/A Cyanide (μg/l as CN-) <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 200 Acute Health 200 Lead (μg/l as Pb) <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 10 Chronic Health 10 Nitrate & Nitrite Nitrogen (mg/l as 0.49 0.55 0.14 0.08 0.07 12 Acute Health 10 N) Combined Nitrate plus Nitrite 0.13 0.13 0.09 0.09 0.09 1.0 N/A (mg/l as N) Nitrate Nitrogen (mg/l as N) 0.41 0.47 <0.20 <0.20 <0.2 11 Acute Health 11 Nitrite Nitrogen (mg/l as N) <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 0.9 Acute Health 0.9 Phenols (mg/l) <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 Aesthetic 0.01 Potassium (mg/l as K) 2.3 2.8 3.4 <0.32 1.8 N/A N/A Total Dissolved Solids (mg/l) 894 2121 1631 4404 946 1200 Aesthetic 1200 Free Chlorine (mg/l) <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 5 Chronic Health 5 Boron (mg/l as B) <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 2.4 Chronic Health 2.4 C.H Magnesium (mg/l as Mg) 19.3 52.5 63.6 205 33.2 N/A N/A Cadmium (μg/l as Cd) <1 <1 2 2 2 3 Chronic Health 3 Chloride (mg/l as Cl) 251 583 655 1568 197 300 Aesthetic 300 Mercury (μg/l as Hg) <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 6 Chronic Health 6 pH (at 25 ºC) 6.45 6.78 7.71 7.34 8.2 5 - 9.7 Operational 5.00-9.70 Sodium (mg/l as Na) 164 401 274 820 214 200 Aesthetic 200 Conductivity (mS/m) (at 25 ºC) 147 265 255 540 174 170 Aesthetic 170 250 Aesthetic 500 250 A.500 Sulphate (mg/l as SO ) 33.8 105 89.5 294 97.6 4 Acute Health A.H-1 Fluoride (mg/l as F) 0.91 1.8 1.5 1 0.82 1.5 Chronic Health 1.5

pH levels were highest only in PIT2 (8.2) when compared to BH3 (7.71) (Refer to Figure 6).

Conductivity levels were found to be highest in PIT1 (540 m S/m) and only slightly higher in BH2 (265 m S/m) when compared to BH3 (255 m S/m). Lowest conductivity was found in BH1 with 147 m S/m) (Refer to Figure 7).

3 DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

70 60.4 60

50 BH1

40 31 BH2 29 27.7 30 BH3

PIT1 20 14.7 PIT2 10

0 Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) (mg/l)

Figure 2: Graph comparing the Chemical Oxygen Demand levels of each Borehole and Pit sample analysed.

0.16 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.12 0.09 0.09 0.09 BH1 0.1 BH2 0.08 BH3 0.06 PIT1 0.04 PIT2 0.02 0 Nitrates (mg/l as N)

Figure 3: Graph comparing the Nitrates levels of each Borehole and Pit sample analysed.

4 3.4 3.5 2.8 3 2.3 BH1 2.5 1.8 BH2 2 BH3 1.5 PIT1 1 PIT2 0.32 0.5 0

Potassium (mg/l as K)

Figure 4: Graph comparing Potassium levels of each Borehole and Pit sample analysed.

4 DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

1568 1600

1400

1200 BH1 1000 BH2 655 800 583 BH3 600 PIT1 400 251 197 PIT2 200

0 Chloride (mg/l as CL)

Figure 5: Graph comparing Chloride levels of each Borehole and Pit sample analysed.

8.2 9 7.71 7.34 8 6.78 6.45 7 6 BH1 BH2 5 4 BH3

3 PIT1 2 PIT2

1 0 pH (at 25C)

Figure 6: Graph comparing pH levels of each Borehole and Pit sample analysed.

540 600

500

400 BH1

265 255 BH2 300 BH3 174 200 147 PIT1

PIT2 100

Conductivity (mS/m) (at 25C)

Figure 7: Graph comparing Conductivity of each Borehole and Pit sample analysed.

To sum up the 2015 available data, the groundwater and test pit water quality results do not show any trend of groundwater pollution with Borehole 3 (Background Monitoring Borehole) having similar if not higher concentrations of certain parameters than boreholes 1 and 2 (Detection Monitoring boreholes). The seepage of industrial wash water from a wine cellar catchment dam located immediately to the east of the waste site does not appear to be having an effect on water quality with the exception of an elevated chloride concentration but is a “negative” in terms of seepage across the lower portion of the proposed waste disposal area.

5 DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

To expand on the above mentioned groundwater analysis undertaken by RMS during 2016, all monitoring data from June 2014 up to March 2019 was analysed by groundwater specialists at Aurecon and has been summarised in Table 4, Table 5 and Table 6 below. The leachate water sampling data is summarised in Table 7 below.

The parameters that are found to be most important for groundwater contamination detection are the Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), Ammonia, Nitrite and Nitrate levels, Phenols, Dissolved Organic Carbon, Ortho Phosphates, and all heavy metals of all samples. Figure 8 to Figure 20 below display graphs comparing the results of the samples taken from BH1, BH2 and BH3 during 2014 through to 2019 for the indicated parameters. The graphs also include measurements for March 2019 at the detention pond, to indicate water quality of the leachate collected in this pond. In these figures the red line indicates the SANS 241-1: 2015 standard, a blue line indicates the Blue Drop Standard and a yellow line indicate chronic/acute health limits (SANS 241 and Blue Drop Standards).

Figure 8: Graph comparing Ammonia Nitrogen of each Borehole sample analysed.

Figure 9: Graph comparing COD of each Borehole sample analysed.

6 DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Figure 10: Graph comparing Nitrate and Nitrite of each Borehole sample analysed.

Figure 11: Graph comparing Phenols of each Borehole sample analysed.

Figure 12: Graph comparing DOC of each Borehole sample analysed.

7 DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Figure 13: Graph comparing Ortho Phosphate of each Borehole sample analysed.

Figure 14: Graph comparing Mercury of each Borehole sample analysed.

Figure 15: Graph comparing Iron of each Borehole sample analysed.

8 DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Figure 16: Graph comparing Lead of each Borehole sample analysed.

Figure 17: Graph comparing Aluminium of each Borehole sample analysed.

Figure 18: Graph comparing Total Chromium of each Borehole sample analysed.

9 DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Figure 19: Graph comparing Hexavalent Chromium of each Borehole sample analysed.

Figure 20: Graph comparing Manganese of each Borehole sample analysed.

To sum up the 2014 to 2019 available groundwater and leachate monitoring data, the water quality results do not show any trend of groundwater pollution emanating from the WDF.

10 DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Table 4: Groundwater monitoring results for Borehole 1 Date 09-Jun-14 25-Sep-14 05-May-15 16-Sep-15 05-Apr-16 12-Jun-17 04-Oct-18 01-Mar-19 SANS 241-1:2015 Blue Drop Standard

Analyses Results Results Results Results Results Results Results Results pH (at 25 ºC) 6.81 6.88 6.35 6.45 6.88 7.17 6.82 0.00 ≥5 - ≤9.7 Operational ≥5.00 - ≤9.70 Total Alkalinity (mg/I as CaCO3) 257.00 169.00 267.00 287.00 378.00 350.00 0.00 Conductivity (mS/m) (at 25 ºC) 172.00 135.00 131.00 147.00 178.00 220.00 194.00 0.00 ≤170 Aesthetic ≤170 Total Hardness (mg/I as CaCO3) 292.00 180.00 193.00 335.00 0.00 Chemical Oxygen Demand (mg/l) 14.70 18.00 N/A Calcium (mg/I as Ca) 67.20 45.10 47.50 48.60 83.40 85.10 0.00 Calcium Hardness (mg/I as CaCO3) 168.00 119.00 213.00 0.00 Magnesium (mg/I as Mg) 30.20 16.50 18.00 19.30 40.30 29.70 0.00 Magnesium Hardness (mg/I as CaCO3) 124.00 67.70 73.80 122.00 0.00 Cadmium (µg/l as Cd) 113.00 <1 <1 ≤3 Chronic Health ≤3 Sodium (mg/I as Na) 201.00 150.00 186.00 164.00 339.00 251.00 0.00 ≤200 Aesthetic ≤200 Potassium (mg/I as K) 3.50 2.90 3.60 2.30 12.30 5.40 0.00 Chloride (mg/I as Cl) 300.00 197.00 204.00 251.00 417.00 342.00 0.00 ≤300 Aesthetic ≤300 Sulphate (mg/I as SO4) 57.80 26.20 25.70 33.80 65.30 65.00 0.00 ≤250 Aesthetic ≤500 Acute Health ≤250 A.≤500 A.H-1 Ammonia Nitrogen (mg/I as N) 0.26 0.17 <0.10 <0.10 s1.5 Aesthetic 1.5 Fluoride (mg/l as F) 0.91 0.75 ≤1.5 Chronic Health ≤1.5 Cyanide (µg/l as CN-) <50 <20 ≤200 Acute Health ≤200 Nitrate & Nitrite Nitrogen (mg/I as N) 0.08 <0.20 <0.20 0.49 <0.20 <0.20 ≤12 Acute Health ≤10 Combined Nitrate plus Nitrite (mg/l as N) 0.13 0.22 ≤1.0 Nitrate Nitrogen (mg/l as N) 0.41 <0.20 ≤11 Acute Health ≤11 Nitrite Nitrogen (mg/l as N) <0.08 <0.20 ≤0.9 Acute Health ≤0.9 Phenols (mg/l) <0.01 <0.01 ≤0.01 Aesthetic ≤0.01 Dissolved Organic Carbon (mg/I as C) 1.00 3.80 11.20 6.00 5 Ortho Phosphate (mg/I as P) <0.20 <0.02 0.05 <0.10 N/A Turbidity (NTU) 675.00 ≤5 Aesthetic ≤1 Operational ≤5.0 A. ≤1.0 O. Colour (mg/l as Pt) 7.00 ≤15 Aesthetic ≤15 Total Dissolved Solids (mg/l) 894.00 1147.00 1453.00 ≤1200 Aesthetic ≤1200 Boron (mg/l as B) <0.10 <0.10 ≤2.4 Chronic Health ≤2.4 C.H Mercury (µg/l as Hg) <6 <5 ≤6 Chronic Health ≤6 Iron (µg/l as Fe) 3793.00 ≤300 Aesthetic ≤2000 Chronic ≤300 A.≤2000 C.H Health Lead (µg/l as Pb) <7 <7 ≤10 Chronic Health <10

Aluminium (µg/l as Al) 874.00 ≤300 Operational ≤300 Total Chromium (µg/l as Cr) <7 <7 ≤50 Chronic Health ≤50 Hexavalent Chrome (mg/l as Cr6) <0.01 <0.01 Manganese (µg/l as Mn) 1970.00 ≤100 Aesthetic ≤400 Chronic Health ≤100 A.≤1000 C.H Free Chlorine (mg/l) <0.05 - <0.05 ≤5 Chronic Health ≤5.0. Total Chlorine (mg/l) - ≤0.2 Opt. E.coli (count per 100 ml) 12.00 1.00 <1 <1 <1 1.00 0.00 Not Detected <1 A.H.-1 Total Coliform Bacteria (count per 100 ml) >2419 93.00 1011.00 57.00 >2419 >2419 0.00 ≤10 Operational <10 Opt. Heterotrophic Plate Count (count per ml) >5000 770.00 >5000 4980.00 >5000 >1000 0.00 ≤1000 Operational <1000 Opt.

11 DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Table 5: Groundwater monitoring results for Borehole 2 Date 09-Jun-14 25-Sep-14 05-May-15 16-Sep-15 05-Apr-16 12-Jun-17 04-Oct-18 01-Mar-19 Analyses Results Results Results Results Results Results Results Results SANS 241-1:2015 Blue Drop Standard pH (at 25 ºC) 6.18 7.44 6.64 6.78 6.95 7.46 Borehole 6.73 ≥5 - ≤9.7 Operational ≥5.00 - ≤9.70 Total Alkalinity (mg/I as CaCO3) 57.20 115.00 233.00 180.00 220.00 damaged 107.00 Conductivity (mS/m) (at 25 ºC) 363.00 293.00 315.00 265.00 278.00 260.00 due to 139.00 ≤170 Aesthetic ≤170 Total Hardness (mg/I as CaCO3) 333.00 253.00 318.00 construction 132.00 Chemical Oxygen Demand (mg/l) 29.00 18.40 30.50 Calcium (mg/I as Ca) 23.80 18.20 18.80 23.20 45.30 12.00 Calcium Hardness (mg/I as CaCO3) 59.50 45.50 47.00 30.00 Magnesium (mg/I as Mg) 66.70 50.60 66.20 52.60 67.60 24.90 Magnesium Hardness (mg/I as CaCO3) 273.00 207.00 271.00 102.00 Cadmium (µg/l as Cd) <1 <1 <1 ≤3 Chronic Health ≤3 Sodium (mg/I as Na) 494.00 368.00 525.00 401.00 352.00 263.00 ≤200 Aesthetic ≤200 Potassium (mg/I as K) 4.60 3.60 4.40 2.80 6.70 1.80 Chloride (mg/I as Cl) 795.00 617.00 860.00 583.00 662.00 373.00 ≤300 Aesthetic ≤300 Sulphate (mg/I as SO4) 179.00 116.00 85.20 105.00 92.70 57.00 ≤250 Aesthetic ≤500 Acute Health ≤250 A.≤500 A.H-1 Ammonia Nitrogen (mg/I as N) 0.80 0.13 <0.10 <0.1 s1.5 Aesthetic Fluoride (mg/l as F) 1.80 2.20 1.30 ≤1.5 Chronic Health ≤1.5 Cyanide (µg/l as CN-) <50 <20 <20 ≤200 Acute Health ≤200 Nitrate & Nitrite Nitrogen (mg/I as N) <0.05 <0.20 <0.20 0.55 0.46 <0.2 ≤12 Acute Health ≤10 Combined Nitrate plus Nitrite (mg/l as N) 0.13 0.25 0.22 ≤1.0 Nitrate Nitrogen (mg/l as N) 0.47 0.26 <0.2 ≤11 Acute Health ≤11 Nitrite Nitrogen (mg/l as N) <0.08 <0.20 <0.2 ≤0.9 Acute Health ≤0.9 Phenols (mg/l) <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 ≤0.01 Aesthetic ≤0.01 Dissolved Organic Carbon (mg/I as C) 1.20 5.00 26.40 6.00 5 (estimate from TOC limit) 50% Ortho Phosphate (mg/I as P) <0.20 <0.02 0.03 <0.1 1 (special limit) Turbidity (NTU) 32.80 ≤5 Aesthetic ≤1 Operational ≤5.0 A. ≤1.0 O. Colour (mg/l as Pt) 7.00 ≤15 Aesthetic ≤15 Total Dissolved Solids (mg/l) 2121.00 1611.00 1605.00 1006.00 ≤1200 Aesthetic ≤1200 Boron (mg/l as B) <0.10 <0.10 <0.1 ≤2.4 Chronic Health ≤2.4 C.H Mercury (µg/l as Hg) <6 <5 <5 ≤6 Chronic Health ≤6 Iron (µg/l as Fe) 569.00 1840.00 ≤300 Aesthetic ≤2000 Chronic ≤300 A.≤2000 C.H Health Lead (µg/l as Pb) <7 <7 75.00 ≤10 Chronic Health <10

Aluminium (µg/l as Al) 137.00 1043.00 ≤300 Operational ≤300 Total Chromium (µg/l as Cr) <7 <7 <7 ≤50 Chronic Health ≤50 Hexavalent Chrome (mg/l as Cr6) <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 Manganese (µg/l as Mn) 137.00 207.00 ≤100 Aesthetic ≤400 Chronic Health ≤100 A.≤1000 C.H Free Chlorine (mg/l) <0.05 - <0.05 ≤5 Chronic Health ≤5.0. Total Chlorine (mg/l) - ≤0.2 Opt. E.coli (count per 100 ml) <1 1.00 <1 <1 <1 55.00 Not Detected <1 A.H.-1 Total Coliform Bacteria (count per 100 67.00 >2419 691.00 74.00 1.00 461.00 ≤10 Operational <10 Opt. ml) Heterotrophic Plate Count (count per ml) 3124.00 3784.00 1166.00 >5000 3840.00 >1000 ≤1000 Operational <1000 Opt.

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Table 6: Groundwater monitoring results for Borehole 3

Date 09-Jun-14 25-Sep-14 05-May-15 16-Sep-15 05-Apr-16 12-Jun-17 04-Oct-18 01-Mar-19

Analyses Results Results Results Results Results Results Results Results SANS 241-1:2015 Blue Drop Standard pH (at 25 ºC) 7.57 7.69 7.23 7.71 7.61 7.63 6.47 7.01 ≥5 - ≤9.7 Operational ≥5.00 - ≤9.70 Total Alkalinity (mg/I as CaCO3) 174.00 159.00 244.00 222.00 110.00 65.30 349.00 Conductivity (mS/m) (at 25 ºC) 255.00 266.00 218.00 255.00 228.00 210.00 42.50 198.00 ≤170 Aesthetic ≤170 Total Hardness (mg/I as CaCO3) 315.00 304.00 331.00 26.70 345.00 Chemical Oxygen Demand (mg/l) 27.70 29.20 47.60 Calcium (mg/I as Ca) 33.10 35.60 35.30 43.00 17.20 3.30 81.40 Calcium Hardness (mg/I as CaCO3) 82.80 89.00 88.30 8.30 204.00 Magnesium (mg/I as Mg) 56.70 52.50 59.10 63.60 45.40 4.50 34.40 Magnesium Hardness (mg/I as CaCO3) 232.00 215.00 242.00 18.50 141.00 Cadmium (µg/l as Cd) 2.00 <1 <1 ≤3 Chronic Health ≤3 Sodium (mg/I as Na) 332.00 320.00 446.00 274.00 310.00 69.00 332.00 ≤200 Aesthetic ≤200 Potassium (mg/I as K) 3.20 4.00 4.80 3.40 2.50 1.00 6.60 Chloride (mg/I as Cl) 713.00 644.00 749.00 655.00 514.00 59.50 417.00 ≤300 Aesthetic ≤300 Sulphate (mg/I as SO4) 102.00 87.40 88.10 89.50 70.20 37.30 50.80 ≤250 Aesthetic ≤500 Acute Health ≤250 A.≤500 A.H-1 Ammonia Nitrogen (mg/I as N) 4.90 0.12 <0.10 <0.1 <0.1 s1.5 Aesthetic Fluoride (mg/l as F) 1.60 2.00 0.71 ≤1.5 Chronic Health ≤1.5 Cyanide (µg/l as CN-) <50 <20 <20 ≤200 Acute Health ≤200 Nitrate & Nitrite Nitrogen (mg/I as N) 0.06 <0.20 0.25 0.14 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 ≤12 Acute Health ≤10 Combined Nitrate plus Nitrite (mg/l as N) 0.09 0.22 0.22 ≤1.0 Nitrate Nitrogen (mg/l as N) <0.20 <0.2 <0.2 ≤11 Acute Health ≤11 Nitrite Nitrogen (mg/l as N) <0.08 <0.01 <0.2 ≤0.9 Acute Health ≤0.9 Phenols (mg/l) <0.01 <0.01 ≤0.01 Aesthetic ≤0.01 Dissolved Organic Carbon (mg/I as C) 1.40 4.20 25.70 6.90 22.10 5 (estimate from TOC limit) 50% Ortho Phosphate (mg/I as P) <0.20 <0.02 0.04 <0.1 <0.10 1 (special limit) Turbidity (NTU) 12.40 ≤5 Aesthetic ≤1 Operational ≤5.0 A. ≤1.0 O. Colour (mg/l as Pt) 6.00 ≤15 Aesthetic ≤15 Total Dissolved Solids (mg/l) 1631.00 1639.00 1320.00 1412.00 ≤1200 Aesthetic ≤1200 Boron (mg/l as B) <0.10 <0.1 <0.1 ≤2.4 Chronic Health ≤2.4 C.H Mercury (µg/l as Hg) <6 <5 <5 ≤6 Chronic Health ≤6 Iron (µg/l as Fe) 176.00 1773.00 ≤300 Aesthetic ≤2000 Chronic ≤300 A.≤2000 C.H Health Lead (µg/l as Pb) <7 <7 100.00 ≤10 Chronic Health <10

Aluminium (µg/l as Al) 88.00 1053.00 ≤300 Operational ≤300 Total Chromium (µg/l as Cr) <7 <7 <7 ≤50 Chronic Health ≤50 Hexavalent Chrome (mg/l as Cr6) <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 Manganese (µg/l as Mn) 33.00 1669.00 ≤100 Aesthetic ≤400 Chronic Health ≤100 A.≤1000 C.H Free Chlorine (mg/l) <0.05 - <0.05 ≤5 Chronic Health ≤5.0. Total Chlorine (mg/l) - ≤0.2 Opt. E.coli (count per 100 ml) 2.00 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 53.00 Not Detected <1 A.H.-1 Total Coliform Bacteria (count per 100 ml) 1986.00 >2419 1011.00 83.00 <1 190.00 291.00 ≤10 Operational <10 Opt.

Heterotrophic Plate Count (count per ml) 2992.00 4070.00 200.00 >5000 210.00 >1000 >1000 ≤1000 Operational <1000 Opt.

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Table 7: Water monitoring results for the leachate collected at the stormwater detention pond

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

GN No. R. 544 Describe the relevant Basic Assessment Describe the portion of the development as per the Activity No(s): Activity(ies) in writing as per Listing Notice 1 project description that relates to the applicable (GN No. R. 544) listed activity.

Not applicable

GN No. R. 546 Describe the relevant Basic Assessment Describe the portion of the development as per the Activity No(s): Activity(ies) in writing as per Listing Notice 3 project description that relates to the applicable (GN No. R. 546) listed activity.

Not applicable

If the application is also for activities as per Listing Notice 2 and permission was granted to subject the application to Basic Assessment, also indicate the applicable Listing Notice 2 activities:

GN No. R. 545 If permission was granted in terms of Regulation 20, Describe the portion of the development as per the Activity No(s): describe the relevant Scoping and EIA Activity(ies) project description that relates to the applicable in writing as per Listing Notice 2 (GN No. R. 545) listed activity.

Not applicable

Waste management activities in terms of the NEM: WA (Government Gazette No. 32368):

GN No. 921 - Category A Describe the relevant Category A waste management activity in writing. Activity No(s):

The expansion of a waste management activity listed in Category A or B of this Schedule which 13 does not trigger and additional waste management activity in terms of this Schedule.

Please note: If any waste management activities are applicable, the Listed Waste Management Activities Additional Information Annexure must be completed and attached to this Basic Assessment Report as Appendix C.

If the application is also for waste management activities as per Category B and permission was granted to subject the application to Basic Assessment, also indicate the applicable Category B activities:

GN No. 718 – Category B Describe the relevant Category B waste management activity in writing. Activity No(s): Not applicable

Atmospheric emission activities in terms of the NEM: AQA (Government Gazette No. 33064):

GN No. 248 Describe the relevant atmospheric emission activity in writing. Activity No(s):

Not applicable

15 DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

(d) Please provide details of all components of the proposed project and attach diagrams (e.g. architectural drawings or perspectives, engineering drawings, process flow charts etc.).

Buildings YES NO

Provide brief description:

An access gate is present on site to control the flow of vehicles entering and exiting the site. The waste disposal area is fenced off and the gate leading to the site is locked after hours. There are two buildings on the site. The one building is to accommodate the employees on the site and the other is to accommodate the 24 hour security guards.

Infrastructure (e.g. roads, power and water supply/ storage) YES NO

Provide brief description:

The existing infrastructure on site includes an access road and power supply. The site employee’s building has water and is connected to the municipal sewerage reticulation system.

Processing activities (e.g. manufacturing, storage, distribution) YES NO

Provide brief description: The Municipality is currently employing 8 disabled persons to undertake sorting of recyclable waste into the relevant recycling bins on site. The recycling is stored on site temporarily until it is removed and taken to the recycling depot at Worcester on a weekly basis.

Figure 21: Recycling bins situated at the Tulbagh WDF site.

The Witzenberg Municipality has proposed to construct a Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) at the Tulbagh WDF in the near future in order to decrease the amount of waste being disposed of to the WDF. The MRF will not exceed 1000m2 and will thus not trigger any listed activities in terms of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 108 of 1998), as amended, or the National Environmental Management Waste Act, 2008 (Act No. 59 of 2008).

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Storage facilities for raw materials and products (e.g. volume and substances to be stored)

Provide brief description YES NO

The recyclable materials that are stored on site do not exceed 100m3. The recycled materials that are temporarily stored include plastic, glass, tin cans and paper. This particular activity falls within the Norms and Standards for Waste Storage.

Storage and treatment facilities for solid waste and effluent generated by the project YES NO

Provide brief description

The Tulbagh WDF receives approximately 2221 tonnes of domestic, garden and building waste per month.

Other activities (e.g. water abstraction activities, crop planting activities) YES NO

Provide brief description

Not applicable. 2. PHYSICAL SIZE OF THE ACTIVITY

Size of the property:

(a) Indicate the size of the property (cadastral unit) on which the activity is to be undertaken. 127 681m2

Size of the facility:

(b) Indicate the size of the facility (development area) on which the activity is Current used footprint + historically used to be undertaken. footprint (Cell 1 + Cell 2) = 47 428m2

Size of the activity:

Cell 1 = 31 885 m2 Cell 2 = 15 543 m2 (c) Indicate the physical size (footprint) of the activity together with its associated 2 infrastructure: Cell .3 = 80 253 m Permitted Area = Approximately 127 681m2 Cell 1 = 31 885 m2 Cell 2 = 15 543 m2 (d) Indicate the physical size (footprint) of the activity: Cell .3 = 80 253 m2 Permitted Area = Approximately 127 681m2 Cell 1 = 31 885 m2 Cell 2 = 15 543 m2 (e) Indicate the physical size (footprint) of the associated infrastructure: Cell .3 = 80 253 m2 Permitted Area = Approximately 127 681m2 and, for linear activities: Not applicable Length of the activity: (f) Indicate the length of the activity: m

3. SITE ACCESS

(a) Is there an existing access road? YES NO

(b) If no, what is the distance over which a new access road will be built? m

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

The Tulbagh WDF can be accessed via Drostdy Avenue.

Figure 22: The Tulbagh WDF access road. An existing fence is indicated by the yellow line and the permitted area is indicated by the blue line. Please Note: indicate the position of the proposed access road on the site plan.

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

4. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY ON WHICH THE ACTIVITY IS TO BE UNDERTAKEN AND THE LOCATION OF THE ACTIVITY ON THE PROPERTY (a) Provide a description of the property on which the activity is to be undertaken and the location of the activity on the property.

The permitted footprint of the WDF is 128 678m2 and the total of the current fenced footprint and historically used footprint is 36 350m2. The Tulbagh Industrial area is situated to the East of the property. A wine distillery is located within this industrial area. Private land is situated to the West and North of the property. Municipal owned land is situated beyond the North East and Southern borders of the property. See Figure 23 below.

Private owned Land

Tulbagh Industrial Area Historically (Wine Distillery) Used Area Private owned Land Current Operating Area

Municipal owned land Permitted Area Used Area

Figure 23: The Tulbagh Waste Dirposal Facility location and surrounding land use.

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Figure 24: The Tulbagh Waste Disposal Facility location and cadastral properties.

(b) Please provide a location map (see below) as Appendix D to this report which shows the location of the property and the location of the activity on the property; as well as a site map (see below) as Appendix E to this report; and if applicable all alternative properties and locations.

The scale of the locality map must be at least 1:50 000. For linear activities of more than 25 kilometres, a smaller scale e.g. 1:250 000 can be used. The scale must be indicated on the map. The map must indicate the following: • an accurate indication of the project site position as well as the positions of the alternative sites, if any; • road names or numbers of all the major roads as well as the roads that provide access to the site(s) Locality map: • a north arrow; See Appendix D • a legend; • the prevailing wind direction (during November to April and during May to October); and • GPS co-ordinates (Indicate the position of the activity using the latitude and longitude of the centre point of the site for each alternative site. The co-ordinates should be in degrees and decimal minutes. The minutes should have at least three decimals to ensure adequate accuracy. The projection that must be used in all cases is the WGS84 spheroid in a national or local projection).

Detailed site plan(s) must be prepared for each alternative site or alternative activity. The site plan must contain or conform to the following: • The detailed site plan must be at a scale preferably at a scale of 1:500 or at an appropriate scale. The scale must be indicated on the plan. • The property boundaries and numbers of all the properties within 50m of the site must be indicated on the site plan. • The current land use (not zoning) as well as the land use zoning of each of the adjoining properties Site Plan: must be indicated on the site plan. See Appendix E • The position of each element of the application as well as any other structures on the site must be indicated on the site plan. • Services, including electricity supply cables (indicate above or underground), water supply pipelines, boreholes, sewage pipelines, storm water infrastructure and access roads that will form part of the development must be indicated on the site plan. • Servitudes indicating the purpose of the servitude must be indicated on the site plan. • Sensitive environmental elements within 100m of the site must be included on the site plan, including (but not limited to): 20

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

o Rivers. o Flood lines (i.e. 1:10, 1:50, year and 32 meter set back line from the banks of a river/stream). o Ridges. o Cultural and historical features. o Areas with indigenous vegetation (even if it is degraded or infested with alien species). • Whenever the slope of the site exceeds 1:10, then a contour map of the site must be submitted.

Not applicable

Indicate the position of the activity using the latitude and longitude of the centre point of the site. The co-ordinates must be in degrees, minutes and seconds. The minutes Latitude (S): Longitude (E): should be given to at least three decimals to ensure adequate accuracy. The projection that must be used in all cases is the WGS84 spheroid in a national or local projection.

Tulbagh WDF 33o 16’ 32.27” 19o 7’ 59.58”

SG21 Digit codes

C 0 7 5 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 7 5 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 6 0 0 0 0 1 C 0 7 5 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 8 7 0 0 0 3 0

(d) or: Not applicable

For linear activities: Latitude (S): Longitude (E): • Starting point of the activity o ‘ “ o ‘ “ • Middle point of the activity o ‘ “ o ‘ “ • End point of the activity o ‘ “ o ‘ “

Please Note: For linear activities that are longer than 500m, please provide and addendum with co-ordinates taken every 100 meters along the route.

5. SITE PHOTOGRAPHS

Colour photographs of the site and its surroundings (taken of the site and from the site) with a description of each photograph. The vantage points from which the photographs were taken must be indicated on the site plan, or locality plan as applicable. If available, please also provide a recent aerial photograph. Photographs must be attached as Appendix F to this report. It should be supplemented with additional photographs of relevant features on the site. Date of photographs must be included. Please note that the above requirements must be duplicated for all alternative sites. Please refer to Appendix F – Site Photographs

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

SECTION B: DESCRIPTION OF RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT

Site/Area Description

For linear activities (pipelines, etc.) as well as activities that cover very large sites, it may be necessary to complete copies of this section for each part of the site that has a significantly different environment. In such cases please complete copies of Section B and indicate the area which is covered by each copy No. on the Site Plan.

1. GRADIENT OF THE SITE

Indicate the general gradient of the sites (highlight the appropriate box).

Flat Flatter than 1:10 1:10 – 1:4 Steeper than 1:4

2. LOCATION IN LANDSCAPE

(a) Indicate the landform(s) that best describes the site (highlight the appropriate box(es).

Undulating Side slope of Closed Open Ridgeline Plateau Plain plain/low Dune Sea-front hill/mountain valley valley hills

(b) Please provide a description of the location in the landscape.

The Tulbagh WDF is located approximately 2 kilometres from the centre of Tulbagh, on the Remainder of Erf 1 of Tulbagh, Portion 1 of the Farm Middelpos No. 116 and Portion 30 of the Farm Kruys Valley No. 187, Division of Tulbagh. The permitted footprint of the WDF is 128 678m2 and the total of the current fenced footprint and historically used footprint is 36 350m2. The Tulbagh Industrial area is situated to the East of the property. A wine distillery is located within this industrial area. Private land is situated to the West and North of the property. Municipal owned land is situated beyond the North Eastern and Southern borders of the property.

Refer to Appendix D for the locality maps.

3. GROUNDWATER, SOIL AND GEOLOGICAL STABILITY OF THE SITE

(a) Is the site(s) located on or near any of the following (highlight the appropriate boxes)?

Shallow water table (less than 1.5m deep) YES NO UNSURE Seasonally wet soils (often close to water bodies) YES NO UNSURE Unstable rocky slopes or steep slopes with loose soil YES NO UNSURE Dispersive soils (soils that dissolve in water) YES NO UNSURE Soils with high clay content YES NO UNSURE Any other unstable soil or geological feature YES NO UNSURE An area sensitive to erosion YES NO UNSURE An area adjacent to or above an aquifer. YES NO UNSURE An area within 100m of the source of surface water YES NO UNSURE

(b) If any of the answers to the above are “YES” or “unsure”, specialist input may be requested by the Department. (Information in respect of the above will often be available at the planning sections of local authorities. Where it exists, the 1:50 000 scale Regional Geotechnical Maps prepared by Geological Survey may also be used).

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Other Granite Shale Sandstone Quartzite Dolomite Dolorite (describe) Please provide a description.

Quartizitic Sandstone and Shale

4. SURFACE WATER

(a) Indicate the surface water present on and or adjacent to the site and alternative sites (highlight the appropriate boxes)?

Perennial River YES NO UNSURE

Non-Perennial River YES NO UNSURE

Permanent Wetland YES NO UNSURE

Seasonal Wetland YES NO UNSURE

Artificial Wetland YES NO UNSURE

Estuarine / Lagoonal wetland YES NO UNSURE

(b) Please provide a description.

The nearest mapped natural wetland is located approximately 300 metres to the North of the current WDF footprint. There are no natural watercourses directly adjacent or on the permitted WDF site. An artificial drainage system is situated on the North and East perimeter of the site.

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

A stormwater management plan (SWMP) has been drafted for the Tulbagh WDF which indicate the proposed stormwater collection, diversion and detention measures to be implemented for the preferred option (Alternative 3). The SWMP is attached hereto as Appendix J2. Figure 25 below presents the proposed stormwater control measures to be considered and includes diversion berms on the southern and eastern sides of the WDF, a detention pond in the north west corner of the site on Cell 3 and stormwater collection channels around the WDF to divert all stormwater from site to the detention pond. The stormwater channels and detention pond should be designed in accordance with pollution prevention best practices with suitable liners, as can be described by the design engineers.

Figure 25: Stormwater control measures for the Tulbagh WDF.

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

5. BIODIVERSITY

Please note: The Department may request specialist input/studies depending on the nature of the biodiversity occurring on the site and potential impact(s) of the proposed activity/ies. To assist with the identification of the biodiversity occurring on site and the ecosystem status consult http://bgis.sanbi.org or [email protected]. Information is also available on compact disc (cd) from the Biodiversity-GIS Unit, Ph (021) 799 8698. This information may be updated from time to time and it is the applicant/ EAP’s responsibility to ensure that the latest version is used. A map of the relevant biodiversity information (including an indication of the habitat conditions as per (b) below) and must be provided as an overlay map to the property/site plan as Appendix E to this report.

(a) Highlight the applicable biodiversity planning categories of all areas on site and indicate the reason(s) provided in the biodiversity plan for the selection of the specific area as part of the specific category).

If CBA or ESA, indicate the reason(s) for its selection in biodiversity Systematic Biodiversity Planning Category plan According to the Biodiversity Spatial Plan (2017) for the Witzenberg municipality, the permitted site contains the following sensitive landscapes:

CBA 1 – A small section is mapped as an aquatic CBA in the north western corner of the permitted site (Cell 3). The reasons for the Critical Other No Natural Ecological mapping is mainly for downstream watercourse protection. Biodiversity Natural Area Support ESA 1 – the entire extent of Portion 1 of Farm Middelpos 116 as well Area Area Remaining Area (ESA) as Portion 30 of farm Kruys Valley 187 is mapped as an ESA 1, (CBA) (ONA) (NNR) aimed at watercourse protection and supporting the functioning of nearby CBA’s. ESA 2 - A very small piece (bordered by CBA 1) in the north western corner of the permitted site (Cell 3) is mapped as ESA 2. The reason for this is its role in supporting the CBA functioning in terms of watercourse protection and water recharge. Highlight and describe the habitat condition on site.

Percentage of Description and additional Comments and Observations habitat condition Habitat Condition (including additional insight into condition, e.g. poor land management class (adding up practises, presence of quarries, grazing/harvesting regimes etc). to 100%)

Natural %

Near Natural (includes areas with low to % moderate level of alien invasive plants) Degraded The northern and western section of the permitted site (Cell 3) is party (includes areas heavily 50 % disturbed and very little indigenous vegetation remains on the site. invaded by alien plants)

Transformed Cell 1 and 2 has been mostly transformed due to waste disposal (includes cultivation, dams, 50 % activities and almost no vegetation remains. urban, plantation, roads, etc)

(c) Complete the table to indicate: (i) the type of vegetation, including its ecosystem status, present on the site; and (ii) whether an aquatic ecosystem is present on site.

Terrestrial Ecosystems Aquatic Ecosystems

Critical Wetland (including rivers, depressions, channelled Ecosystem threat status as per the Endangered and unchanneled Estuary Coastline National Environmental wetlands, flats, seeps Vulnerable Management: Biodiversity Act (Act pans, and artificial No. 10 of 2004) wetlands) Least Threatened YES NO UNSURE YES NO YES NO

There are no water bodies present on site.

(d) Please provide a description of the vegetation type and/or aquatic ecosystem present on site, including any important biodiversity features/information identified on site (e.g. threatened species and special habitats) 25

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

The dominant vegetation type in the Witzenberg area is Breede Shale Renosterveld which has been classified as Vulnerable according to the National List of Threatened Ecosystems, however no endemic vegetation has been observed on the permitted site. Cell 1 and 2 has been largely transformed due to waste disposal activities, whereas Cell 3 has been partially disturbed for stormwater control measures and the rest seems to be recovering from past agricultural use.

6. LAND USE OF THE SITE

Please note: The Department may request specialist input/studies depending on the nature of the land use character of the area and potential impact(s) of the proposed activity/ies.

Low density Medium density High density Untransformed area Informal residential residential residential residential Commercial & Retail Light industrial Medium industrial Heavy industrial warehousing Office/consulting Military or police Casino/entertainment Tourism & Power station room base/station/compound complex Hospitality facility Underground Quarry, sand or Open cast mine Spoil heap or slimes dam Dam or reservoir mine borrow pit Hospital/medical center School Tertiary education facility Church Old age home Train station or Major road (4 lanes or Sewage treatment plant Railway line Airport shunting yard more) Harbour Sport facilities Golf course Polo fields Filling station River, stream or Nature WDF or waste treatment site Plantation Agriculture wetland conservation area Mountain, koppie or ridge Museum Historical building Graveyard Archeological site Other land uses (describe):

(a) Please provide a description.

The Tulbagh WDF is a fully operational WDF and was licensed by the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF) on 31 July 1998 as a G:S:B+ waste disposal site. The current footprint of the WDF covers Cell 1, with historic and recent waste disposal on Cell 2. Cell 3 within the permitted footprint is mostly undeveloped with a small section used for stormwater control measures and a gravel service road is located along the fence boundary.

7. LAND USE CHARACTER OF SURROUNDING AREA

(a) Highlight the current land uses and/or prominent features that occur within +/- 500m radius of the site and neighbouring properties if these are located beyond 500m of the site.

Please note: The Department may request specialist input/studies depending on the nature of the land use character of the area and potential impact(s) of the proposed activity/ies.

Harbour Sport facilities Golf course Polo fields Filling station

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

River, stream or Nature WDF or waste treatment site Plantation Agriculture wetland conservation area Mountain, koppie or ridge Museum Historical building Graveyard Archeological site

Other land uses (describe):

(b) Please provide a description, including the distance and direction to the nearest residential area and industrial area. Light Industrial Area: The Tulbagh Industrial area is situated approximately 260m to the East of the property. A wine distillery is located within this industrial area. Low Density Residential Area: Private land is situated approximately 370m to the West of the property. Residential housing is situated on this property. Dam: There are farm dams located approximately 490 metres to the north of the centre of the permitted area and approximately 500 metres to the west of the centre of the permitted area.

Low Density Residential Area

Light Industrial Area

Figure 26: The permitted Tulbagh WDF showing the identified land uses within a 500m radius from the centre of the area.

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

8. SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS

Describe the existing social and economic characteristics of the community in order to provide baseline information.

Tulbagh is located in the Western Cape and forms part of the Witzenberg Municipality, which include the towns of Ceres, Prince Alfred’s Hamlet, Tulbagh, Wolseley and Op- die- berg. Witzenberg Local Municipality covers an area of 2 851 km2 and is situated approximately 150 km North- East of Cape Town.

Figure 27: Location of the Witzenberg Municipal area.

Socio- Economic Information for the Witzenberg Municipal Area:

As per Table 8 below the greatest percentage of the Witzenberg Municipal Area population size consists of persons between the ages of 35-59 year olds, which make up 30.3% of the total population size. The smallest percentage of the population is made up of 60-64 year olds, with only 2.6%.

Table 8: Witzenberg Population: Age, Size and Gender Male Female Total Age Category: Total % Total % % 0-4 4811 5.3 4471 4.9 9282 10.2 5-14 8473 9.3 8183 8.9 16656 18.2 15-24 6987 7.6 7273 8 14260 15.6 25-34 8110 8.9 8640 9.5 16750 18.4 35-59 13835 15.2 13751 15.1 27586 30.3 60-64 1154 1.3 1251 1.4 2405 2.6 65 and Older 1948 2.1 2335 2.5 4283 4.7 TOTAL 45318 49.7 45904 50.3 91222 100

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Table 5 below shows that Ward 2 of the Witzenberg Municipal Area has the highest number of employed persons, while Ward 1 has the lowest. Ward 1 has the highest number of unemployed persons, while Ward 10 has the lowest. Table 6 shows the level of education per racial group within the Witzenberg Municipality.

Table 9: Witzenberg Local Employment data Municipal Not economically Employed Unemployed Ward active Ward 1 1431 1737 1576 Ward 2 4 633 266 2104 Ward 3 3034 664 2163 Ward 4 1613 374 1401 Ward 5 2943 240 1255 Ward 6 2880 890 2786 Ward 7 2343 511 2014 Ward 8 3108 89 602 Ward 9 4386 113 674 Ward 10 2713 59 586 Ward 11 3777 679 1992

Table 10: Witzenberg level of education per ward Level of Education per racial group: No Grade 7- Grade 12/ Matric + Certificate/ Grade 0-6 Schooling 11 Matric Degree Black 1697 3856 9132 1718 269 White 44 86 1619 2512 2426 Coloured 2373 8473 23184 6279 1506 Asain 5 34 34 36 - Total 4119 12449 33969 10545 4201

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

9. HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL ASPECTS

(a) Please be advised that if section 38 of the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (Act No. 25 of 1999), is applicable to your proposed development, then you are requested to furnish this Department with written comment from Heritage Western Cape as part of your public participation process. Section 38 of the Act states as follows: “38. (1) Subject to the provisions of subsections (7), (8) and (9), any person who intends to undertake a development categorised as- (a) the construction of a road, wall, power line, 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 50m in length; I 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; or (iii) involving three or more erven or divisions thereof which have been consolidated within the past five years; or (iv) the costs of which will exceed a sum set in terms of regulations by SAHRA or a provincial heritage resources authority; (d) the re-zoning of a site exceeding 10 000 m2 in extent; or (e) any other category of development provided for in regulations by SAHRA or a provincial heritage resources authority, must at the very earliest stages of initiating such a development, notify the responsible heritage resources authority and furnish it with details regarding the location, nature and extent of the proposed development.”

(b) The impact on any national estate referred to in section 3(2), excluding the national estate contemplated in section 3(2)(i)(vi) and (vii), of the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (Act No. 25 of 1999), must also be investigated, assessed and evaluated. Section 3(2) states as follows: “3(2) Without limiting the generality of subsection (1), the national estate may include— (a) places, buildings, structures and equipment of cultural significance; (b) places to which oral traditions are attached or which are associated with living heritage; I historical settlements and townscapes; (d) landscapes and natural features of cultural significance; (e) geological sites of scientific or cultural importance; (f) archaeological and palaeontological sites; (g) graves and burial grounds, including— (i) ancestral graves; (ii) royal graves and graves of traditional leaders; (iii) graves of victims of conflict; (iv) graves of individuals designated by the Minister by notice in the Gazette; (v) historical graves and cemeteries; and (vi) other human remains which are not covered in terms of the Human Tissue Act, 1983 (Act No. 65 of 1983); (h) sites of significance relating to the history of slavery in South Africa; (i) movable objects, including— (i) objects recovered from the soil or waters of South Africa, including archaeological and palaeontological objects and material, meteorites and rare geological specimens; (ii) objects to which oral traditions are attached or which are associated with living heritage; (iii) ethnographic art and objects; (iv) military objects; (v) objects of decorative or fine art; (vi) objects of scientific or technological interest; and (vii) books, records, documents, photographic positives and negatives, graphic, film or video material or sound recordings, excluding those that are public records as defined in section 1(xiv) of the National Archives of South Africa Act, 1996 (Act No. 43 of 1996).”

YES NO Is section 38 of the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999, applicable to the development? UNCERTAIN

If YES, explain:

Will the development impact on any national estate referred to in section 3(2) of the National YES NO Heritage Resources Act, 1999? UNCERTAIN

If YES, explain:

Will any building or structure older than 60 years be affected in any way? YES NO UNCERTAIN If YES, explain:

Please Note: If uncertain, the Department may request that specialist input be provided. 30

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

10. APPLICABLE LEGISLATION, POLICIES AND/OR GUIDELINES

(a) Please list all legislation, policies and/or guidelines that have been considered in the preparation of this Basic Assessment Report.

TYPE DATE ADMINISTERING Permit/ license/ LEGISLATION (if already AUTHORITY authorisation/comment / relevant obtained): consideration

The Constitution of South Africa Act, National Government Relevant consideration N/A 1998 (Act No. 108 of 1996)

National Environmental DEA (National) Management Act, 1998 (Act No. Authorisation N/A DEA&DP (Provincial) 107 of 1998) Variation of existing The National Environmental DEA ( National) Section 20 ECA Management Waste Act. Act No. Waste Licence DEA&DP (Provincial) permit – subject to 58 of 2009 this application

National Heritage Resources Act, Relevant consideration / HWC (Provincial) N/A 1999 (Act No. 25 of 1999) Authorisation

Department of Water Existing Lawful Use / Water Use Permit from DWAF National Water Act (Act 36 of 1998) and Sanitation (DWS) License / General Authorisation (1998)

POLICY/ GUIDELINES ADMINISTERING AUTHORITY

DEA ( National) National Waste Management Strategy (2011) DEA&DP (Provincial)

Western Cape Provincial Spatial Development Framework (2014) Provincial Government of the Western Cape

Witzenberg SDF (2012) Witzenberg Municipality

Witzenberg IDP (2017-2022; Adopted 30 May 2017) Witzenberg Municipality

Witzenberg Municipality Integrated Waste Management Plan (July 2013) Witzenberg Municipality

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

(b) Please describe how the legislation, policies and/or guidelines were taken into account in the preparation of this Basic Assessment Report.

DESCRIBE HOW THE LEGISLATION / POLICY / GUIDELINE WERE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT LEGISLATION / POLICY / GUIDELINE (e.g. describe the extent to which it was adhered to, or deviated from, etc).

The Constitution of South Africa Act, The environmental rights as stipulated in the Constitution were considered and 1998 (Act No. 108 of 1996) promoted as part of the application:

“Everyone has the right to – (a) an environment that is not harmful to their health or well-being; and (b) have the environment protected, for the benefit of present and future generations, through reasonable legislative and other measures that: (i) prevent pollution and ecological degradation; (ii) promote conservation; and (iii) secure ecologically sustainable development and use of natural resources while promoting justifiable economic and social development.”

The Constitution also states in Schedule 5B that waste management is a local government function which much be conducted in a way which will protect human and environmental health.

This Basic Assessment Report examines the potential environmental impacts of the proposed activity and includes detailed measures in which to minimize or prevent potential environmental impacts. The proposed extension of the operational life of the WDF aims to improve waste management services in the Witzenberg Municipal area and minimize potential negative impacts as a result of unsustainable poor waste management conditions and limited waste management solutions over the short term.

National Environmental The principles set out in NEMA set out in Chapter 2 of NEMA have been considered Management Act, 1998 (Act No. during the Basic Assessment process: Those of relevance to the proposed activity are 107 of 1998), as amended. highlighted in the table below: RELEVANCE TO BASIC ASSESSMENT RELEVANT PRINCIPLE PROCESS/DEVELOPMENT That the disturbance of ecosystems and loss of biological diversity are avoided, or where they cannot be altogether avoided, are minimised and remedied

The pollution and degradation of the This Basic Assessment Report provides environment are avoided, or where they measures to avoid, reduce, minimise cannot be altogether avoided, are environmental impacts and disturbance minimised and remedied. to the surrounding environment.

That negative impacts on the environment and on people's environmental rights be anticipated and prevented, and where they cannot be altogether prevented, are minimised and remedied.

The Basic Assessment report provides a That a risk-averse and cautious approach number of uncertainties and assumptions is applied, which takes into account the which will be considered by the applicant limits of current knowledge about the in order to ensure that a cautious consequences of decisions and actions. approach is adopted.

The participation of all interested and affected parties in environmental governance must be promoted, and all people must have the opportunity to The Basic Assessment Report provides an develop the understanding, skills and account of the public participation capacity necessary for achieving process undertaken to date. The public equitable and effective participation and participation process is fair, transparent as participation by vulnerable and well as inclusive. disadvantaged persons must be ensured.

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

National Environmental RELEVANCE TO BASIC ASSESSMENT RELEVANT PRINCIPLE Management Act, 1998 (Act No. PROCESS/DEVELOPMENT 107 of 1998), as amended Decisions must take into account the interest, needs and values of all interested and affected parties, and this includes The Basic Assessment Report provides an recognising all forms of knowledge, account of the public participation including traditional and ordinary process undertaken to date. The public knowledge. participation process is fair, transparent as Decisions must be taken in an open and well as inclusive. transparent manner, and access to information must be provided in accordance with law. The Basic Assessment Report (Section 10) There must be intergovernmental co- provides an indication of the policies, and ordination and harmonisation of policies, laws (at all levels of government) which legislation and actions relating to the were considered during the preparation of environment. the Basic Assessment report/process. The environment is held in public trust for The Basic Assessment Report highlights the people. The beneficial use of that the proposed activity will serve to environmental resources must serve the improve waste management conditions in public interest and the environment must the Witzenberg Municipal area by be protected as the people's common continuing to accept waste and avoiding heritage. Illegal dumping. The costs of remedying pollution, environmental degradation and The Basic Assessment Report indicates consequent adverse health effects and of that the proposed activity supports an preventing, controlling or minimising further integrated waste management approach pollution, environmental damage or aimed at reducing waste entering the adverse health effects must be paid for by WDF, which also ensures that pollution is those responsible for harming the minimised. environment. The National Environmental The proposed activity is listed in terms of Category A NEM: Waste Act. The legal and Management Waste Act. Act No. procedural provisions of the NEM: Waste Act was complied with. This relates to the 58 of 2009 obtaining of a waste licence for the listed activities, and the process to be followed in order to obtain the said licence. The proposed activity also takes into account the following: • Section 16 which refers to the general duty in respect of waste management; • Part 3: Recycling, re-use and recovery of waste DEA&DP NEMA EIA Regulations These guidelines provide information and guidance for applicants, authorities and I&APs Guideline & Information on requirements for the consideration of alternatives, public participation requirements Document Series (March 2013) and procedures to assess the need and desirability of a proposed activity. These guidelines were taken into account during the Basic Assessment process and preparation of this report. National Waste Management One of the objectives in the National Waste Management Strategy that fall within the Strategy 2011 goal of waste minimization is to encourage reduction in the waste stream within an economic environment that favours recycled materials. The NWMS was developed with the waste management hierarchy as a foundation for an integrated waste management approach. As such the proposed extension of the operational life of the facility will reduce waste by promoting the recycling and recovery of materials (on-site) and continue to aid in waste management in the Witzenberg Municipal area. It will also

continue to aid in service delivery which benefits the Witzenberg community. Witzenberg Municipality This report states that the municipality is committed to a system of waste management Integrated Waste Management that will see the least possible amount of waste going to modern engineered WDFs. This Plan (July 2013) will be achieved through the use of education, law enforcement and material recovery, and treatment plants. New and emerging technologies, where applicable and affordable, will also play a part in overall waste management. The Waste Management Strategic Objectives for Witzenberg Municipality on which this Waste Management Plan is based, commits the municipality to: a) Create an atmosphere in which the environment and natural resources of the region are conserved and protected. b) Develop a communication/information/education strategy to help ensure acceptance of ‘ownership’ of the strategic objectives among members of the public and industry throughout the municipality and to promote co-operative community action. c) Provide a framework to address the municipality’s growing problem of waste management in accordance with best prevailing norms, financial capacity and best environmental practice. d) Provide solutions for the three main objectives: • The avoidance of waste generation. • The reduction of waste volumes. • The safe disposal of waste. 33

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

DESCRIBE HOW THE LEGISLATION / POLICY / GUIDELINE WERE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT LEGISLATION / POLICY / GUIDELINE (e.g. describe the extent to which it was adhered to, or deviated from, etc).

Witzenberg IDP (2017-2022; IDP Strategic Objectives Adopted 30 May 2017) General To ensure that Waste Management in the Witzenberg Municipal Area complies with South African and International environmental standards so that it is beneficial to industrial and agricultural growth and the public’s right to a clean and healthy environment. Waste Avoidance To promote the minimisation of the generation of waste. Waste Reduction To promote the reduction of all waste so that nothing of value nor anything that can decompose, gets disposed. Creating waste management initiatives through appointment of disabled persons to sort and recycle waste at the WDF. Waste Disposal To store, dispose or treat all waste that cannot be avoided nor reduced at licensed facilities with regular operational and environmental monitoring and in accordance with regulatory requirements. Support in implementing a new Waste Management Strategy which aim to focus on the construction of a waste recovery facility to replace waste skips.

Western Cape Provincial Spatial The Western Cape Infrastructure Framework proposes a number of key transitions in the Development Framework (2014) waste and settlement sectors, including Innovation in the waste sector to increated recycling and reuse, including the adoption of waste-to-energy in the long term.

A focus is placed on waste minimization and recycling to limit waste being disposed of at WDF’s. Provincial Spatial Policy R4 speaks to the use of illegal WDF’s to be addressed and alternative regional WDF’s to be created next to railway lines to encourage effective waste transport & distribution to these facilities. Witzenberg SDF (October 2012) According to the 2010-Town Study the Witzenberg Municipality has a low development potential with medium social needs. It has a low performance in the economic, infrastructure and institutional indexes, while the physical environment index’s performance was of medium standard. This current situation could pose to be problematic since most of the settlements located in the Municipality have medium to high social needs. It is unlikely that a municipality with low development potential will be able to address the social needs of it settlement without some form of intervention from provincial government or partnerships with the public sector. Current challenges facing the Witzenberg Municipality are likely to remain, if not increase in severity. Even with the best of intentions, the local authority will not be able to address the issues of poverty, unemployment, etc. given its own staff and resource limitations. Effective public-private partnerships based on a pragmatic and flexible approach to development thus becomes critical.

Please note: Copies of any permit(s) or licences received from any other organ of state must be attached this report as Appendix G.

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

SECTION C: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

The public participation process must fulfil the requirements outlined in NEMA, the EIA Regulations, and if applicable the NEM: WA and/or the NEM: AQA. This Department’s Guideline on Public Participation (August 2010) and Guideline on Exemption Applications (August 2010), both of which are available on the Department’s website (http://www.capegateway.gov.za/eadp), must also be taken into account. The person conducting the public participation process must fulfil the requirements outlined in Chapter 6 of the 2014 NEMA EIA Regulations and must take into account any applicable guidelines published in terms of Section 24J of NEMA, the Department’s Circular EADP 0028/2014 on the “One Environmental Management System” and the EIA Regulations (dated 9 December 2014) as well as any other guidance provided by the Department. Note that the public participation requirements are applicable to all proposed sites.

Please highlight the appropriate box below to indicate the public participation process that has been or will be undertaken to give notice of the application to all potential interested and affected parties, including exemptions that have been/will be applied for:

1. In terms of regulation 41 of the EIA Regulations, 2014 - (a) fixing a notice board at a place conspicuous to and accessible by the public at the boundary, on the fence or along the corridor of - (i) the site where the activity to which the application relates is or is to be undertaken; YES EXEMPTION and (ii) any alternative site YES EXEMPTION

(b) giving written notice, in any manner provided for in section 47D of the NEMA, to – (i) the occupiers of the site and, if the applicant is not the owner or person in control of the site on which the activity is to be undertaken, the owner or person in control of the YES EXEMPTION N/A site where the activity is or is to be undertaken or to any alternative site where the activity is to be undertaken; (ii) owners, persons in control of, and occupiers of land adjacent to the site where the activity is or is to be undertaken or to any alternative site where the activity is to be YES EXEMPTION undertaken; (iii) the municipal councillor of the ward in which the site or alternative site is situated and YES EXEMPTION any organisation of ratepayers that represent the community in the area; (iv) the municipality (Local and District Municipality) which has jurisdiction in the area; YES EXEMPTION

(v) any organ of state having jurisdiction in respect of any aspect of the activity; and YES EXEMPTION

(vi) any other party as required by the Department; YES EXEMPTION N/A

(i) one local newspaper; or YES EXEMPTION (ii) any official Gazette that is published specifically for the purpose of providing public YES EXEMPTION N/A notice of applications or other submissions made in terms of these Regulations; (d) placing an advertisement in at least one provincial newspaper or national newspaper, if the activity has or may have an impact that extends beyond the YES EXEMPTION N/A boundaries of the metropolitan or district municipality in which it is or will be undertaken (e) using reasonable alternative methods, as agreed to by the Department, in those instances where a person is desirous of but unable to participate in the process due to— (i) illiteracy; YES EXEMPTION N/A (ii) disability; or (iii) any other disadvantage. If you have indicated that “EXEMPTION” applies to any of the above, then a separate Application for Exemption must be submitted. 2. The Waste Act requires that a notice must be placed in at least two newspapers.

Have you /will an advertisement be placed in at least two newspapers? YES NO

If “NO”, then an application for exemption from the requirement must be applied for.

Note: It is no longer possible to obtain permission to deviate from the requirements to give notice to potential interested and affected parties. Unless exemption has been granted from a particular requirement, the requirement must be met. If an application for exemption is refused, the requirement in question must be met.

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

2. Provide a list of all the state departments that were consulted:

• Department of Environmental Affairs & Development Planning: Waste Management • Department of Environmental Affairs & Development Planning: Chemical and Pollution Management • Department of Water and Sanitation • Department of Health (Environmental Health) • Breede Gouritz Catchment Management Agency • Cape Winelands District Municipality • Witzenberg Local Municipality • Department of Agriculture

3. Please provide an overall summary of the Public Participation Process that was followed. (The detailed outcomes of this process must be included in a comments and response report to be attached to the final Basic Assessment Report (see note below) as Appendix H). As part of the DBAR comment period, all identified authorities, stakeholders, neighbouring land owners and land occupants and municipalities will be notified of the DBAR availability via hand, courier or normal mail and newspaper advertisements.

An advertisement will be placed in two newspapers, namely; • Witzenberg Herald (English); and • Die Burger (Afrikaans).

The adverts call for the registration of all Interested & Affected Parties and will inform the public of the project and the availability of the Draft Basic Assessment Report (BAR) on Aurecon’s website and at the local Tulbagh Library.

The Draft Basic Assessment Report will be made available via the following ways; • Copies of the DBAR will be sent to all the relevant authorities (See Section 2 above); • The Draft BAR will be made available on the Aurecon website (https://www.aurecongroup.com/public-participation ); and • In hardcopy at the Tulbagh Public Library.

An A3 poster will be displayed at the entrance of the Tulbagh WDF, at the start of Drostdy Avenue, on the fence boardering the permitted area (facing adjacent properties).

The DBAR 30 day commenting period will be from 1 April 2019 – 6 May 2019.

Refer to Appendix H - Public Participation Report.

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

SECTION D: NEED AND DESIRABILITY

Please Note: Before completing this section, first consult this Department’s Guideline on Need and Desirability (August 2010) available on the Department’s website (http://www.capegateway.gov.za/eadp).

1. Is the activity permitted in terms of the property’s existing land use rights? YES NO Please explain

The property on which the Tulbagh WDF is located is zoned as Utility Use. The primary use is authority use, which includes use for a solid waste disposal site. The site was licensed by the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF) on 31 July 1998 as a G:S:B+ waste disposal site.

2. Will the activity be in line with the following? (a) Provincial Spatial Development Framework (PSDF) YES NO Please explain The PSDF (2009) set out a number of Objectives, where Objective 9 has relevance to the management of waste.

Objective 9: Minimise consumption of scarce environmental resources – waste recycling

All municipalities should follow an integrated hierarchical approach to waste management in respect of avoidance, reduction, reuse, recycling, composting, treatment and final disposal. Local Municipalities are encouraged to reduce the amount of waste that is disposed at WDF in order to limit the transport costs.

The PSDF (2014) sets out a number of Key Challenges, one of the challenges ‘Resource Consumption and Disposal’ high-lights the need for the recovery and recycling of waste.

The Tulbagh WDF provides an essential service as it forms an integral part of the Integrated approach to waste management. The onsite recycling area ensures that reusable materials are recovered. The WDF aids in effective waste management that is not harmful to the environment and continues to aid in service delivery in the Witzenberg municipal area.

(b) Urban edge / Edge of Built environment for the area YES NO Please explain

The permitted site (Cell 1, 2 and 3) fall within the urban edge of Tulbagh but outside of the built-up area.

(c) Integrated Development Plan and Spatial Development Framework of the Local Municipality (e.g. would the approval of this application compromise the YES NO Please explain integrity of the existing approved and credible municipal IDP and SDF?). Witzenberg Spatial Development Framework 2012: The SDF has a Witzenberg Municipality Integrated Waste Management Plan (December 2010), prepared by Jan Palm Consulting Engineers, which states that the municipality is committed to a system of waste management that will see the least possible amount of waste going to modern engineered WDFs. The Waste Management Strategic Objectives for Witzenberg Municipality on which this Waste Management plan is based, commits the Municipality to: (a) Create an atmosphere in which the environment and natural resources of the region are conserved and protected. (b) Develop a communication/ Information/ education strategy to help ensure acceptance of ‘acceptance’ of ‘ownership’ of the strategic objectives among members of the public and industry throughout the municipality and to promote co-operative community action. (c) Provide a framework to address the municipalities growing problem of waste management in accordance with the best prevailing norms, financial capacity and best environmental practice. (d) Provide solutions for the three main objectives: • The avoidance of waste generation • The reduction of waste volumes • The safe disposal of waste

The expansion of the of the Tulbagh WDF will provide part of the solution of the main objectives set out in the SDF under the Integrated Waste Management Plan.

(d) Approved Structure Plan of the Municipality YES NO Please explain

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

(e) An Environmental Management Framework (EMF) adopted by the Department (e.g. Would the approval of this application compromise the integrity of the existing YES NO Please explain environmental management priorities for the area and if so, can it be justified in terms of sustainability considerations?)

There is only a draft EMF for the Cape Winelands District Municipality, dated 2011. The property on which the Tulbagh Waste Disposal facility is located is indicated as authority, however the WDF was operational prior to 1 July 1985 and the official zoning is therefore municipal use.

(f) Any other Plans (e.g. Guide Plan) YES NO Please explain

Not applicable

3. 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 YES NO Please explain proposed development in line with the projects and programmes identified as priorities within the credible IDP)?

The site was licensed by the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF) on 31 July 1998 as a G:S:B+ waste disposal site. The site currently provides an essential short term waste management service for the Witzenberg municipal area.

4. 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 YES NO Please explain here at this point in time?

The permitted footprint for the Tulbagh WDF (Cell 1, 2 and 3) measures 128 678m2 (12.87 Ha), but the current fenced WDF footprint (Cell 1 and 2) measures 29 624m2 (2.96 Ha). The permitted footprint will not expand, only the waste management activity will expand within the permitted footprint area.

5. 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 YES NO Please explain level (e.g. development is a national priority, but within a specific local context it could be inappropriate.) The site currently provides an essential short term waste management service for the Witzenberg municipal area. The waste currently being disposed of at the Tulbagh site is generated predominantly within the Tulbagh area, with the exception of waste which is transported from Op Die Berg, Prince Alfred Hamlet, Nduli, Bella Vista and Wolseley due to capacity and other restrictions and opposition to disposal facilities in these areas. Bins are provided for recyclable waste and disabled personnel are appointed to undertake the sorting of the recycling. 6. Are the necessary services with adequate capacity currently available (at the time of application), or must additional capacity be created to cater for the YES NO Please explain development? The Tulbagh WDF is an existing site and is in itself a service provider for waste disposal in the area and surrounding towns. Other services such as roads, sewage and water are sufficient to cater for the proposed project. 7. Is this development provided for in the infrastructure planning of the municipality, and if not what will the implication be on the infrastructure YES NO Please explain planning of the municipality (priority and placement of services and opportunity costs)?

The Witzenberg SDF comments as follows on the status of all waste disposal sites with the Witzenberg municipality:

“Establish waste transfer and recycling stations in all urban areas at neighbourhood level. Place waste skips at all informal settlements and promote their use through community participation projects. Establish waste transfer and removal systems in rural areas to encourage rural settlements and resorts to use municipal infrastructure in order to reduce waste disposal in rural environments. Impose conditions on all new development to enforce sustainable and efficient waste management.”

8. Is this project part of a national programme to address an issue of national YES NO Please explain 38

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

concern or importance?

The extension of the operational life of the Tulbagh WDF promotes the principles of the National Waste Management Strategy (2011), which supports national and provincial Integrated waste management plans.

9. 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 YES NO Please explain on this site within its broader context.)

The property on which the Tulbagh WDF is located is zoned as Utility Use. The primary use is authority use, which includes use of a solid waste disposal site. The site was licensed by the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF) on 31 July 1998 as a G:S:B+ waste disposal site.

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

10. 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 YES NO Please explain environment)? There are no sensitive natural or cultural areas located within close proximity of the site. The site is however located on a road leading west out of the town of Tulbagh with many historical monuments, which makes the area very important from a tourism perspective. The neighboring farms are also mostly dominated by wine grape farming with cellars and guesthouses, which also contribute to the tourism potential of the surrounding area. These would only be impacted if the WDF is not managed in accordance with legislation and permit / license conditions. If managed and rehabilitated properly, the site is not foreseen to have adverse effects on the surrounding natural and cultural areas. 11. How will the development impact on people’s health and wellbeing (e.g. in YES NO Please explain terms of noise, odours, visual character and sense of place, etc)? An Environmental Management Programme has been developed in order to mitigate such impacts associated with the expansion of the operational activity of the Tulbagh WDF. It is important that the facility is managed in accordance with the EMPr (Appendix I) to control odour, due to the fact that a homestead is located to the West of the site. 12. Will the proposed activity or the land use associated with the activity applied YES NO Please explain for, result in unacceptable opportunity costs?

The property on which the Tulbagh WDF is located is zoned as Utility Use. The primary use is authority use, which includes use of a solid waste disposal site.

13. What will the cumulative impacts (positive and negative) of the proposed YES NO Please explain land use associated with the activity applied for, be?

The overall positive cumulative impacts of the proposed activity will be the continued efficient waste management within the Witzenberg Municipal area.

Negative cumulative impacts may be noise, odour, windblown litter, visual impacts as well as the social impacts. The facility should be managed in accordance with the EMPr which has been developed to mitigate such impacts (Appendix I).

14. Is the development the best practicable environmental option for this YES NO Please explain land/site?

15. What will the benefits be to society in general and to the local communities? Please explain

The WDF aids in effective waste management, eliminating illegal dumping and continued service delivery within the Witzenberg area.

16. Any other need and desirability considerations related to the proposed activity? Please explain

• Improved regional waste management • Reduced pollution • Improvement of current condition of the site

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

(17) Please describe how the general objectives of Integrated Environmental Management as set out in section 23 of NEMA have been taken into account:

Relevant IEM Objectives: Relevant Consideration:

The general objective of integrated environmental 2 management is to -

Promote the integration of the principles of environmental The Basic Assessment process has taken into account management set out in Section 2 into the manufacturing (a) social, environmental and economic aspects of the of all decisions which may have a significant effect on the proposed activity. environment;

Identify, predict and evaluate the actual and potential impact on the environment, socio-economic conditions and cultural heritage, the risks and consequences and (b) alternatives and options for mitigation of activities, with a view to minimising negative impacts, maximizing benefits, A Visual Impact Assessment was undertaken as part of and promoting compliance with the principles of the Assessment Process. Refer to Section F of this report. environmental management set out in Section 2;

Ensure that the effects of activities on the environment (c) receive adequate consideration before actions are taken in connection with them;

A comprehensive public participation process is to be Ensure adequate and appropriate opportunity for public undertaken as part of the Basic Assessment. Please (d) participation in decisions that may affect the See Section C for details on the Public Participation environment; Process to be undertaken. Ensure the consideration of environmental attributes in A Visual Impact Assessment was undertaken as part of (e) management and decision-manufacturing which may the Assessment Process. Refer to Section F of this report. have a significant effect on the environment; and

Identify and employ the modes of environmental A summary of the relevant Principles and how they management best suited to ensuring that a particular (f) have been taken into account are contained in the activity is pursued in accordance with the principles of table below (18). environmental management set out in section 2.

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

(18) Please describe how the principles of environmental management as set out in section 2 of NEMA have been taken into account:

NEMA Principle Relevance to BA Process/ Project

Sustainable development requires the consideration of all 4(a) relevant factors including the following:

That the disturbance of ecosystems and loss of biological (i) diversity are avoided, or, where they cannot be altogether This Basic Assessment Report identifies potential avoided, are minimised and remedied; impacts and provides mitigation measures to avoid/ reduce/minimise environmental impacts and that pollution and degradation of the environment are disturbance to the surrounding environment. (ii) avoided, or, where they cannot be altogether avoided, are minimised and remedied;

that the disturbance of landscapes and sites that This Assessment Report identified potential impacts constitute the nation’s cultural heritage is avoided, or and provides measures to avoid, reduce and minimise (iii) where it cannot be altogether avoided, is minimised and environmental impacts and disturbance to the remedied; surrounding environment.

The Basic Assessment Report includes uncertainties that a risk-averse and cautious approach is applied, which and assumptions which will be considered by the (vii) takes into account the limits of current knowledge about applicant in order to ensure that a cautious approach the consequences of decisions and actions; and is adopted.

that negative impacts on the environment and on This Basic Assessment Report identifies potential people’s environmental rights be anticipated and impacts and provides measures to avoid/ reduce/ (viii) prevented, and where they cannot be altogether minimise environmental impacts and disturbance to prevented, are minimised and remedied. the surrounding environment.

Environmental justice must be pursued so that adverse The public participation process will be fair, environmental impacts shall not be distributed in such a (c) transparent and inclusive allowing all potential I&AP’s manner as to unfairly discriminate against any person, to raise concerns related to the proposed project. particularly vulnerable and disadvantaged persons.

An Environmental Management Programme has been compiled. This is a “living” document and should be Responsibility for the environmental health and safety updated throughout the lifetime of the facility so as to (e) consequences of a policy, programme, project, product, ensure that the Applicant takes responsibility for the process, service or activity exists throughout its life cycle. consequences of the development and any unforeseen impacts that result from the development.

The participation of all interested and affected parties in environmental governance must be promoted, and all The Basic Assessment Process provides for the people must have the opportunity to develop the participation of potential I&AP’s. The Public (f) understanding, skills and capacity necessary for achieving Participation Report (Appendix H) provides an equitable and effective participation, and participation account of the detailed public participation process by vulnerable and disadvantaged persons must be undertaken to date to ensure that the public are ensured. provided with an opportunity to play an active role in the decision-manufacturing process. The public Decisions must take into account the interests, needs and participation process should be fair, transparent and values of all interested and affected parties, and this (g) inclusive. includes recognizing all forms of knowledge, including traditional and ordinary knowledge.

The sharing of knowledge can be done to some extent Community wellbeing and empowerment must be through the Public Participation Process. If necessary, a promoted through environmental education, the raising of (h) public open day will be held during the course of the environmental awareness, the sharing of knowledge and PPP to inform all Interested & Affected Parties of the experience and other appropriate means. proposed activity.

The social, economic and environmental impacts of activities, including disadvantages and benefits, must be (i) considered, assessed and evaluated, and decisions must Refer to Section F of this Basic Assessment Report. be appropriate in the light of such consideration and assessment.

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

NEMA Principle Relevance to BA Process/ Project

The applicant will be made aware of this Principle. The EMPr outlines the need for on-site training of staff so that they perform their work with all the necessary skills and training. (j) The right of workers to refuse work that is harmful to human health or the environment and to be informed of dangers All the necessary safety signage must be displayed must be respected and protected. and explained to workers by the applicant/ contractor during the construction and operational phases of the development.

The Basic Assessment Process provides for the participation of potential I&AP’s. The Public Decisions must be taken in an open and transparent Participation Report (Appendix H) provides an (k) manner, and access to information must be provided in account of the detailed public participation process accordance with the law. undertaken to date to ensure that the public are provided with an opportunity to play an active role in the decision-manufacturing process.

Section B (Point 10) of this Basic Assessment Report There must be intergovernmental co-ordination and provides an indication of the policies, and laws (at all (l) harmonisation of policies, legislation and actions relating levels of government) which were considered during to the environment. the preparation of the Assessment report/process.

Actual or potential conflicts of interest between organs of The DBAR was made available to all Interested & (m) state should be resolved through conflict resolution Affected Parties on the RMS website and hardcopies procedures. were delivered to all applicable organs of state.

The costs of remedying pollution, environmental degradation and consequent adverse health effects and (p) of preventing, controlling or minimizing further pollution, The applicant will be made aware of this Principle. environmental damage or adverse health effects must be paid for by those responsible for harming the environment.

The vital role of women and youth in environmental The public participation process will be fair, (q) management and development must be recognised and transparent and inclusive allowing all potential I&AP’s their full participation therein must be promoted. to raise concerns related to the proposed project.

Sensitive, vulnerable, highly dynamic or stressed ecosystems, such as coastal shores, estuaries, wetlands, and similar systems require specific attention in All sensitive and vulnerable ecosystems have been (r) management and planning procedures, especially where taken into consideration. they are subject to significant human resource usage and development pressure.

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

SECTION E: ALTERNATIVES

Please Note: Before completing this section, first consult this Department’s Guideline on Alternatives (August 2010) available on the Department’s website (http://www.capegateway.gov.za/eadp).

“Alternatives”, in relation to a proposed activity, means different means of meeting the general purposes and requirements of the activity, which may include alternatives to – (a) the property on which, or location where, it is proposed to undertake the activity; (b) the type of activity to be undertaken; (c) the design or layout of the activity; (d) the technology to be used in the activity; (e) the operational aspects of the activity; and (f) the option of not implementing the activity.

The NEMA prescribes that the procedures for the investigation, assessment and communication of the potential consequences or impacts of activities on the environment must, inter alia, with respect to every application for environmental authorisation – • ensure that the general objectives of integrated environmental management laid down in NEMA and the National Environmental Management Principles set out in NEMA are taken into account; and • include an investigation of the potential consequences or impacts of the alternatives to the activity on the environment and assessment of the significance of those potential consequences or impacts, including the option of not implementing the activity.

The general objective of integrated environmental management is, inter alia, to “identify, predict and evaluate the actual and potential impact on the environment, socio-economic conditions and cultural heritage, the risks and consequences and alternatives and options for mitigation of activities, with a view to minimising negative impacts, maximising benefits, and promoting compliance with the principles of environmental management” set out in NEMA.

1. In the sections below, please provide a description of any indentified and considered alternatives and alternatives that were found to be feasible and reasonable.

Please note: Detailed written proof the investigation of alternatives must be provided and motivation if no reasonable or feasible alternatives exist.

(a) Property and location/site alternatives to avoid negative impacts, mitigate unavoidable negative impacts and maximise positive impacts, or detailed motivation if no reasonable or feasible alternatives exist:

There is no alternative property for the proposed activity as the Tulbagh WDF is a fully operational WDF site located on property of the Witzenberg Municipality (Remainder of Erf 1 of Tulbagh, Portion 1 of the Farm Middelpos No. 116 and Portion 30 of the Farm Kruys Valley No. 187, Division of Tulbagh). It would not be feasible to move the facility to an alternative location.

Other alternatives include type of waste management, handling and disposal (including incinerator and transfer station at the permitted site), alternative combinations of using Cell 1, 2 and 3 for disposal at different heights and footprints.

(b) Activity alternatives to avoid negative impacts, mitigate unavoidable negative impacts and maximise positive impacts, or detailed motivation if no reasonable or feasible alternatives exist:

Not applicable.

(c) Design or layout alternatives to avoid negative impacts, mitigate unavoidable negative impacts and maximise positive impacts, or detailed motivation if no reasonable or feasible alternatives exist:

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

(d) Technology alternatives (e.g. to reduce resource demand and resource use efficiency) to avoid negative impacts, mitigate unavoidable negative impacts and maximise positive impacts, or detailed motivation if no reasonable or feasible alternatives exist:

Not Applicable

(e) Operational alternatives to avoid negative impacts, mitigate unavoidable negative impacts and maximise positive impacts, or detailed motivation if no reasonable or feasible alternatives exist:

Alternative 8 Considering the use of an incinerator on site and rehabilitate the existing WDF. Alternative 9 Using the site as a transfer station and rehabilitate the existing WDF.

(f) the option of not implementing the activity (the No-Go Option):

Alternative 5: (the No- Go alternative):

The closure of the Tulbagh WDF would require the transportation of all waste to the Worcester WDF, due to the Wolseley WDF currently not being operational.

A permanent waste transfer station will need to be constructed which potentially may require the completion of a Basic Assessment process. The establishment of a temporary waste transfer station is deemed to be an impractical and not a financially viable solution and could also be considered an illegal activity.

The lack of temporary or permanent transfer station would imply that collection vehicles will have to travel from their collection rounds within Witzenberg Municipality to the Worcester WDF, which in turn requires additional trips, extended collection times and high transport costs. The Worcester WDF airspace also needs to be taken into consideration. The Worcester WDF remaining lifespan was estimated by JPCE in 2015, in their audit report for the Worcester WDF site, to be until 2018. This lifespan will be shortened if it is to receive additional waste from the Witzenberg Municipal area prior to the final approval of the Cape Winelands District Municipal regional WDF site alongside the current Worcester municipal waste disposal site.

(g) Other alternatives to avoid negative impacts, mitigate unavoidable negative impacts and maximise positive impacts, or detailed motivation if no reasonable or feasible alternatives exist:

Not applicable.

(h) Please provide a summary of the alternatives investigated and the outcomes of such investigation:

Please find attached Tulbagh Airspace – Modeling and Time Capacity Report (Appendix J3)

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Please note: If no feasible and reasonable alternatives exist, the description and proof of the investigation of alternatives, together with motivation of why no feasible or reasonable alternatives exist, must be provided.

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

SECTION F: IMPACT ASSESSMENT, MANAGEMENT, MITIGATION AND MONITORING MEASURES

Please note: The information in this section must be duplicated for all the feasible and reasonable alternatives (where relevant).

1. ASPECT DESCRIPTION

PLEASE DESCRIBE THE MANNER IN WHICH THE DEVELOPMENT WILL IMPACT ON THE FOLLOWING ASPECTS:

GEOGRAPHICAL AND PHYSICAL ASPECTS

(a) Geographical and physical aspects:

The development will take place within the property boundaries/permitted footprint (128 678m2) of the existing Tulbagh WDF. The development footprint will not expand, only the waste management activity will expand within the permitted footprint area.

BIOLOGICAL ASPECTS

(b) Biological aspects:

Will the development have an impact on critical biodiversity areas (CBAs) or ecological support areas (CSAs)? YES NO If yes, please describe: Will the development have on terrestrial vegetation, or aquatic ecosystems (wetlands, estuaries or the YES NO coastline)? If yes, please describe: Will the development have an impact on any populations of threatened plant or animal species, and/or on YES NO any habitat that may contain a unique signature of plant or animal species? If yes, please describe: Please describe the manner in which any other biological aspects will be impacted:

SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS

What is the expected capital value of the activity on completion? unknown What is the expected yearly income or contribution to the economy that will be generated by or as a N/A result of the activity? Will the activity contribute to service infrastructure? YES NO How many new employment opportunities will be created in the construction phase of the activity? unknown What is the expected value of the employment opportunities during the construction phase? unknown What percentage of this will accrue to previously disadvantaged individuals? unknown How will this be ensured and monitored (please explain):

This will be monitored in terms of the Council’s equity targets.

How many permanent new employment opportunities will be created during the operational phase of the activity? What is the expected current value of the employment opportunities during the first 10 years? What percentage of this will accrue to previously disadvantaged individuals? How will this be ensured and monitored (please explain):

This will be monitored in terms of the Council’s equity targets and as per tender specifications.

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Any other information related to the manner in which the socio-economic aspects will be impacted: No additional Information.

(d) Cultural and historic aspects:

There are no cultural or historical aspects associated with the site and proposed activity.

WASTE AND EMISSIONS

(a) Waste (including effluent) management

Will the activity produce waste (including rubble) during the construction phase? YES NO If yes, indicate the types of waste (actual type of waste, e.g. oil, and whether hazardous or not) and estimated quantity per type?

Not applicable.

Will the activity produce waste during its operational phase? YES NO If yes, indicate the types of waste (actual type of waste, e.g. oil, and whether hazardous or not) and m3 estimated quantity per type?

Not applicable.

Where and how will the waste be treated / disposed of (describe)?

If yes, indicate the types of waste (actual type of waste, e.g. oil, and whether hazardous or not) and estimated quantity per type per phase of the development?

Not applicable.

Has the municipality or relevant authority confirmed that sufficient capacity exist for treating / disposing of the waste to be generated by this activity(ies)? If yes, provide written confirmation from Municipality or YES NO relevant authority

The Tulbagh WDF is an existing fully functional WDF.

Will the activity produce waste that will be treated and/or disposed of at another facility other than into a YES NO municipal waste stream?

If yes, has this facility confirmed that sufficient capacity exist for treating / disposing of the waste to be generated by this activity(ies)? Provide written confirmation from the facility and provide the following YES NO particulars of the facility:

Does the facility have an operating license? (If yes, please attach a copy of the license.) YES NO

Facility name: Contact person: Postal address: Postal code: Telephone: Cell: E-mail: Fax:

Describe the measures that will be taken to reduce, reuse or recycle waste: Recyclable materials (plastic, glass, tin cans and paper) can be deposited into the recycling bins situated at the Tulbagh WDF. No processing activities will take place on site. The recyclables are removed to Worcester on a weekly basis.

(b) Emissions into the atmosphere

Will the activity produce emissions that will be disposed of into the atmosphere? YES NO If yes, does it require approval in terms of relevant legislation? YES NO

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Describe the emissions in terms of type and concentration and how it will be treated/mitigated:

Not applicable.

WATER USE

Please indicate the source(s) of water for the activity by ticking the appropriate box(es)

River, Stream, Municipal Water board Groundwater Other The activity will not use water Dam or Lake

If water is to be extracted from a groundwater source, river, stream, dam, lake or any other natural feature, please indicate the volume that will be extracted per month: Not applicable m3

Please provide proof of assurance of water supply (eg. Letter of confirmation from municipality / water user associations, yield of borehole) Does the activity require a water use permit / license from DWAF? YES NO If yes, please submit the necessary application to Department of Water Affairs and attach proof thereof to this application. Describe the measures that will be taken to reduce water demand, and measures to reuse or recycle water:

Not applicable.

POWER SUPPLY

Please indicate the source of power supply eg. Municipality / Eskom / Renewable energy source

Eskom

If power supply is not available, where will power be sourced from?

Not applicable.

ENERGY EFFICIENCY

Describe the design measures, if any, that have been taken to ensure that the activity is energy efficient:

Not applicable.

Describe how alternative energy sources have been taken into account or been built into the design of the activity, if any:

Not applicable.

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

2. DESCRIPTION AND ASSESSMENT OF THE SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACTS PRIOR TO AND AFTER MITIGATION

Please note: While sections are provided for impacts on certain aspects of the environment and certain impacts, the sections should also be copied and completed for all other impacts.

(a) Impacts that may result from the planning, design and construction phase (briefly describe and compare the potential impacts (as appropriate), significance rating of impacts, proposed mitigation and significance rating of impacts after mitigation that are likely to occur as a result of the planning, design and construction phase.

Since the site is an existing WDF, there will be no construction activities, but all activities will be related to operation of the WDF, including height and footprint increase.

(b) Impacts that may result from the operational phase (briefly describe and compare the potential impacts (as appropriate), significance rating of impacts, proposed mitigation and significance rating of impacts after mitigation that are likely to occur as a result of the operational phase.

Potential impacts on the geographical and physical Traffic – due to operational activities such as earth moving aspects: Nature of impact: Negative Extent and duration of impact: Local – short term Probability of occurrence: Highly Probable Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Low Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable Negligible loss of resources: Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Medium (-) Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation Medium (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: High Proposed mitigation: Adequate scheduling of earth moving vehicles on public roads Cumulative impact post mitigation: Low (-) Significance rating of impact after mitigation Low (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

Potential impacts on the geographical and physical Traffic- Trucks transporting waste to the facility. aspects: Nature of impact: Negative Extent and duration of impact: Regional – long term Probability of occurrence: Highly Probable Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Medium Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable Negligible loss of resources: Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Medium (-) Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation Medium (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: High • The waste site is only active during weekday working hours (08h00 – 17h00) Proposed mitigation: • Route transport to avoid main streets in residential areas • Make use of rail transport from other towns as far as possible. • Limit the number of vehicle movement on public roads Cumulative impact post mitigation: Low (-) Significance rating of impact after mitigation Low (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Potential impact: Dust from operational activities

Nature of impact: Negative Extent and duration of impact: Local and short term. Probability of occurrence: Possible Degree to which the impact can be reversed: High Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable Negligible loss of resources: Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Medium (-) Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation Medium (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: High Employ dust suppression methods. i.e. water tankers and Proposed mitigation: mulching with chipped greens. Cumulative impact post mitigation: Low (-) Significance rating of impact after mitigation Low (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

Potential impacts on the socio-economic aspects: Job creation during operation Nature of impact: Positive Extent and duration of impact: Local and short term Probability of occurrence: Highly Probable Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Low – medium Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable Negligible loss of resources: Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Low (-) Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation Low (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: Medium Rent earth moving vehicles locally and employ labour from local Proposed mitigation: communities where possible. Cumulative impact post mitigation: Medium (+) Significance rating of impact after mitigation Medium (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

Noise impacts: Noise from operating machinery

Nature of impact: Negative Extent and duration of impact: Local and long term Probability of occurrence: Highly Probable Degree to which the impact can be reversed: High Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable Negligible loss of resources: Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Medium (-) Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation Medium (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: High • Maintain a buffer zone (Cell 3); • Planting of fast growing large trees to act as noise barriers; • Use of standard equipment compliant with SABS noise Proposed mitigation: specifications; and • all work to be conducted during normal working hours (08h00 – 17h00). Cumulative impact post mitigation: Low (-) Significance rating of impact after mitigation Low (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Impact on biological aspects: Wind-blown litter which may pollute the surrounding environment

Nature of impact: Negative – aesthetic impact due to wind scatter. Extent and duration of impact: Local and long term Probability of occurrence: Possible Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Medium Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable Negligible loss of resources: Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: High (-) Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation High (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: High • Appropriate cover of waste transport vehicles • Permanent catch fences and netting to trap wind-blown litter • Prompt cover and compaction of waste likely to be windborne Proposed mitigation: • Adequate cover material on compacted waste • Regular clean-up actions by personnel / youth programmes in surrounding areas where litter is visible • Planting of fast growing large trees to act as wind barriers Cumulative impact post mitigation: Low (-) Significance rating of impact after mitigation Low (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

Odour nuisance: Odour Nuisance

Nature of impact: Negative Extent and duration of impact: Local – long term Probability of occurrence: Possible Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Medium Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable Negligible loss of resources: Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Medium (-) Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation Medium (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: High • Adequate compaction; • Daily covering of waste with soil; Proposed mitigation: • Planting of fast growing large trees to act as odour screens; • Speedy disposal and burial of malodorous waste; and • Effective leachate management on site. Cumulative impact post mitigation: Low (-) Significance rating of impact after mitigation Low (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

Pest Control: Vermin and Flies

Nature of impact: Negative Extent and duration of impact: Local – long term Probability of occurrence: Possible Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Low Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable Negligible loss of resources: Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Medium (-) Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation Medium (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: Medium • Adequate compaction; Proposed mitigation: • Daily covering of waste with soil; and • Active pest control measures on the WDF. Cumulative impact post mitigation: Low (-) Significance rating of impact after mitigation Low (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) 52

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Potential impacts on the cultural-historical aspects: Historical and cultural landscape impacts

Nature of impact: Negative Extent and duration of impact: Local – long term Probability of occurrence: Possible Degree to which the impact can be reversed: High Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable Negligible loss of resources: Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Medium (-) Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation Medium (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: High • Adequate compaction & covering of waste on a regular basis; Proposed mitigation: • Planting of fast growing large trees to act as visual screens; • Concurrent rehabilitation and vegetation cover on sideslopes of WDF; Cumulative impact post mitigation: Low (-) Significance rating of impact after mitigation Low (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

Potential impacts on water resources: Groundwater and surface water impacts

Nature of impact: Negative Extent and duration of impact: Local – long term Probability of occurrence: Possible Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Medium Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable Negligible loss of resources: Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Medium (-) Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation Medium (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: High • Adequate stormwater diversion around WDF; • Lining of stormwater channels and detention ponds where practicably possible; • Proper design of stormwater detention pond to cater for 1:50 Proposed mitigation: year flood event and maintain freeboard of 0.5m; • Regular water sampling and monitoring should be undertaken within the borehole network around the WDF as well as in the detention pond (leachate control) to identify any potential sources of pollution of water resources. Cumulative impact post mitigation: Low (-) Significance rating of impact after mitigation Low (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

Potential visual impact: Visual intrusion on Cultivated Landscape Character (Alternative 1)

Nature of impact: Negative Extent and duration of impact: Local – Medium Term Probability of occurrence: Probable Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Low Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable Unknown loss of resources: Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Medium (-) Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation Medium (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: High • Planting of trees on all sides of the WDF similar to windbreaks Proposed mitigation: in adjacent farms Cumulative impact post mitigation: Low (-) Significance rating of impact after mitigation Low (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) 53

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Potential visual impact: Visual intrusion on Cultivated Landscape Character (Alternative 2)

Potential visual impact: Visual intrusion on Cultivated Landscape Character (Alternative 3)

Nature of impact: Negative Extent and duration of impact: Local – Medium-Long Term Probability of occurrence: Probable Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Low Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable Unknown loss of resources: Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Medium (-) Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation High (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: High • Planting of trees (500l) on all sides of the WDF similar to Proposed mitigation: windbreaks in adjacent farms Cumulative impact post mitigation: Low (-) Significance rating of impact after mitigation Medium (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

Potential visual impact: Visual intrusion on Cultivated Landscape Character (Alternative 4)

Nature of impact: Negative Extent and duration of impact: Local – Long Term Probability of occurrence: Probable Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Low Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable Unknown loss of resources: Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: High (-) Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation Very High (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: Low • Planting of trees (500l) on all sides of the WDF similar to Proposed mitigation: windbreaks in adjacent farms Cumulative impact post mitigation: High (-) Significance rating of impact after mitigation High (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Potential visual impact: Visual intrusion on Cultivated Landscape Character (Alternative 6)

Nature of impact: Negative Extent and duration of impact: Local – Long Term Probability of occurrence: Probable Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Low Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable Unknown loss of resources: Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: High (-) Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation High (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: Low • Planting of trees (500l) on all sides of the WDF similar to Proposed mitigation: windbreaks in adjacent farms Cumulative impact post mitigation: High (-) Significance rating of impact after mitigation Medium (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

Potential visual impact: Visual intrusion on Cultivated Landscape Character (Alternative 7)

Potential visual impact: Visual intrusion on Scenic Route (Alternative 1)

Nature of impact: Negative Extent and duration of impact: Local – Medium Term Probability of occurrence: Probable Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Low Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable Unknown loss of resources: Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Medium (-) Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation Medium (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: High • Planting of trees on southern side of WDF as well as Proposed mitigation: appropriate fencing and rehabilitation Cumulative impact post mitigation: Low (-) Significance rating of impact after mitigation Low (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Potential visual impact: Visual intrusion on Scenic Route (Alternative 2)

Nature of impact: Negative Extent and duration of impact: Local – Medium Term Probability of occurrence: Probable Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Low Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable Unknown loss of resources: Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Medium (-) Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation Medium (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: High • Planting of trees on southern side of WDF as well as Proposed mitigation: appropriate fencing and rehabilitation Cumulative impact post mitigation: Low (-) Significance rating of impact after mitigation Low (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

Potential visual impact: Visual intrusion on Scenic Route (Alternative 3)

Nature of impact: Negative Extent and duration of impact: Local – Medium-Long Term Probability of occurrence: Probable Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Low Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable Unknown loss of resources: Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Medium (-) Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation High (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: High • Planting of trees on southern side of WDF as well as Proposed mitigation: appropriate fencing and rehabilitation Cumulative impact post mitigation: Low (-) Significance rating of impact after mitigation Medium (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

Potential visual impact: Visual intrusion on Scenic Route (Alternative 4)

Nature of impact: Negative Extent and duration of impact: Local – Long Term Probability of occurrence: Probable Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Low Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable Unknown loss of resources: Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: High (-) Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation Very High (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: Low • Planting of trees on southern side of WDF as well as Proposed mitigation: appropriate fencing and rehabilitation Cumulative impact post mitigation: High (-) Significance rating of impact after mitigation High (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Potential visual impact: Visual intrusion on Scenic Route (Alternative 6)

Nature of impact: Negative Extent and duration of impact: Local – Long Term Probability of occurrence: Probable Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Low Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable Unknown loss of resources: Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: High (-) Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation High (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: Low • Planting of trees on southern side of WDF as well as Proposed mitigation: appropriate fencing and rehabilitation Cumulative impact post mitigation: High (-) Significance rating of impact after mitigation Medium (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

Potential visual impact: Visual intrusion on Scenic Route (Alternative 7)

Nature of impact: Negative Extent and duration of impact: Local – Long Term Probability of occurrence: Probable Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Low Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable Unknown loss of resources: Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: High (-) Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation Very High (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: Low • Planting of trees on southern side of WDF as well as Proposed mitigation: appropriate fencing and rehabilitation Cumulative impact post mitigation: High (-) Significance rating of impact after mitigation High (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

(c) Impacts that may result from the decommissioning and closure phase (briefly describe and compare the potential impacts (as appropriate), significance rating of impacts, proposed mitigation and significance rating of impacts after mitigation that are likely to occur as a result of the decommissioning and closure phase.

Potential impacts on the geographical and physical Traffic – due to decommissioning activities aspects: Nature of impact: Negative Extent and duration of impact: Local – short term Probability of occurrence: Highly Probable Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Low Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable Negligible loss of resources: Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Medium (-) Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation Medium (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: High Adequate scheduling of vehicles involved with rehabilitation and Proposed mitigation: driving on public roads Cumulative impact post mitigation: Low (-) Significance rating of impact after mitigation Low (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Potential impact: Dust from decommissioning / rehabilitation activities

Nature of impact: Negative Extent and duration of impact: Local and short term. Probability of occurrence: Possible Degree to which the impact can be reversed: High Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable Negligible loss of resources: Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Medium (-) Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation Medium (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: High • Employ dust suppression methods. i.e. water tankers; • Plant fast growing trees to act as dust screen around site; and Proposed mitigation: • Ensure concurrent revegetation takes place during operational phase to aid with dust suppression. Cumulative impact post mitigation: Low (-) Significance rating of impact after mitigation Low (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

Potential impacts on the socio-economic aspects: Job creation during the decommissioning.

Nature of impact: Positive Extent and duration of impact: Local and short term Probability of occurrence: Highly Probable Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Low – medium Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable Negligible loss of resources: Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Low (-) Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation Low (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: Low • Employ labour from local communities where possible; • Use local tree, plant and seed suppliers for rehabilitation where possible; Proposed mitigation: • Develop waste reduction, recycling and reuse initiatives where current employees of the WDF can be re-employed • Investigate alternatives such as waste to energy plant or waste transfer station to retain current employees. Cumulative impact post mitigation: Low (+) Significance rating of impact after mitigation Low (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

Potential impacts on the cultural-historical aspects: Historical and cultural landscape impacts

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Potential noise impacts: Noise from activities during decommissioning

Nature of impact: Negative Extent and duration of impact: Local – short term Probability of occurrence: Improbable Degree to which the impact can be reversed: High Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable The activity will not cause an irreplaceable loss of resources loss of resources: Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Low (-) Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation Low (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: High Proposed mitigation: Decommissioning to be limited to standard working hours Cumulative impact post mitigation: Very Low (-) Significance rating of impact after mitigation Low (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

(d) Any other impacts:

Potential impact: Illegal salvaging

Nature of impact: Positive Extent and duration of impact: Local and long-term Probability of occurrence: Probable Degree to which the impact can be reversed: High Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable Negligible loss of resources: Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Medium (-) Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation Medium (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: High • Closure of the waste disposal site. • Access to the site to be controlled. Proposed mitigation: • Compaction will ensure recovery is not easily done • Covering and revegetation of site throughout lifecycle of WDF Cumulative impact post mitigation: Very Low (-) Significance rating of impact after mitigation Low (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

3. SPECIALIST INPUTS/STUDIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Please note: Specialist inputs/studies must be attached to this report as Appendix J. Also take into account the Department’s Guidelines on the Involvement of Specialists in EIA Processes available on the Department’s website (http://www.capegateway.gov.za/eadp).

Specialist inputs/studies and recommendations:

Visual Impact Assessment (Appendix J1)

A summary of the Visual Impact Assessment completed by Antoinette Raimond Landscape Architectural (ARLA) Consulting, as part of the proposed height increase in the maximum allowed waste body height of the Tulbagh WDF disposal area, with specific reference to the methodology followed, the findings, impact ratings and recommendations is presented below.

Evaluation Method:

In order to update the Visual Impact Assessment undertaken during 2015, a Level 4 Visual Assessment was compiled as per the criteria, definitions and terminology as set out in the reference document Guideline for involving Visual & Aesthetic Specialists in EIA processes: Edition 11.

The method followed by the specialist was as follows; a) A revision of information received from all consultants working on the project, b) A field survey was undertaken on 5 February 2019. This allowed for the opportunity to: • Re-assess the scenic resources within the vicinity of the site, including its contexts and visual sensitivity, • Review the actual or practical extent of potential visibility of the proposed development, by assessing the screening effect of landscape features; • Conduct a photographic survey of the landscape surrounding the development; • Re-assess sensitive landscape and visual receptors. c) To review the relevant legislation that informs this study, d) Prepare and assess photomontages of the proposed alternatives for the WDF, e) Re-assess the proposed project against the visual impact criteria (visibility, visual exposure, sensitivity of site and receptors, visual absorption capacity and visual intrusion). f) Re-assess impacts based on a synthesis of criteria (nature of impact, extent, duration, intensity, probability and significance). g) Make mitigation recommendations. h) Prepare and review 3D Modelling and simulations with and without mitigation.

The Visual Impact Assessment of the site:

The visual sensitive receptors included commuters along Waveren road, Montoellier wine farm, and Rijks Ridge Wine farm. Figure 28 below provides a map showing the zone of visual influence for the worst-case scenario (from a visual perspective) for all alternatives, which would be alternative 7 (8m above natural ground level across Cell 1, 2 and 3).

1 Oberholzer, B. 2005: Guideline for involving Visual & Aesthetic Specialists in EIA processes: Edition 1. CSIR Report No ENV-S-C 2005 053 F. Republic of South Africa, Provincial Government of the Western Cape, Department of Environmental Affairs & Development Planning, Cape Town. 60

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Figure 28: Zone of Visual Influence (ZVI)

Visually sensitive areas within the ZVI are the adjacent farmsteads and the historical farmstead Montpellier. Visually sensitive receptors include Waveren street and parts of Van der Stel street. See Figure 29 below summarises the visual sensitivity of the area.

Figure 29: Pan illustrating visual sensitivity of the area around the WDF. 61

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

The visual specialist identified 12 viewpoints from which the visual impact was determined using 3D modelling and photos. Each of the viewpoints presented 3D presentations for each site alternative and can be found in the specialist report attached hereto as Appendix J1.

Impact rating:

EXTENT National Regional Local Site DURATION Permanent Long-term Medium-term Short-term PROBABILTY Definite Highly Probable Possible Improbable INTENSITY High Moderate Low

Recommendations:

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

4. IMPACT SUMMARY

Please provide a summary of all the above impacts.

Summary of Operational Phase Impacts:

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

Summary of Decommissioning Phase Impacts:

Potential Impact Significance before mitigation Significance after mitigation Traffic Medium (-) Low (-) Dust Medium (-) Low (-) Job creation Low (-) Low (+) Historical & Cultural Medium (-) Low (-) Landscape Noise Low (-) Very Low (-) Illegal salvaging Medium (-) Very Low (-)

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

5. OTHER MANAGEMENT, MITIGATION AND MONITORING MEASURES

(a) Over and above the mitigation measures described in Section 6 above, please indicate any additional management, mitigation and monitoring measures.

In order to prevent negative impacts associated with the proposed activity; all mitigation measures as proposed in the EMPr must be implemented.

Refer to Appendix I for the EMPr.

(b) Describe the ability of the applicant to implement the management, mitigation and monitoring measures.

The applicant will adhere to an approved Environmental Management Programme which will be included in the Final Basic Assessment Report.

Refer to Appendix I for the EMPr, which includes a Rehabilitation Plan.

Please note: A draft ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMME must be attached this report as Appendix I.

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

SECTION G: ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGIES AND CRITERIA, GAPS IN KNOWLEDGE, UNDERLAYING ASSUMPTIONS AND UNCERTAINTIES

(a) Please describe adequacy of the assessment methods used.

In order to determine the significance of the impacts of the activities at the site, this study was subjective and qualitative. The information used was acquired from the site visit, photographs of the site, the expertise of the project team and specialists, public participation and information obtained from the applicant and associates.

(b) Please describe the assessment criteria used.

The potential impacts were assessed and rated based on the methodology and rating criteria outlined in this section.

The significance of an impact is defined as a combination of the consequence of the impact occurring and the probability that the impact will occur. The criteria used to determine impact consequence are presented below.

Refers to potentially adverse impacts of high, harmful or destructive intensity and / or High Significance has long term (i.e. 5 to 10 years) or permanent duration on the immediate or surrounding environment.

Refers to potentially adverse impacts of moderate intensity and / or has medium term Medium duration (i.e. 2 to 5 years) that could have an effect on the immediate or surrounding Significance environment.

Potentially adverse impacts of a low intensity and / or has short term duration (i.e. less Low Significance than 2 years) that could have an effect over the immediate or surrounding environment.

The following is also listed:

Nature Would the impact have a positive or negative effect The area over which the impact will be experienced (i.e. none, local, regional or Extent national). The time frame for which the impact will be experienced (i.e. none, short-, medium- or Duration long-term). The likelihood of the impact occurring (i.e. improbable, probable, highly probable or Probability definite). Reversibility Degree to which impact can be reversed (Low, Medium or High) Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable loss of resources (Definite, Loss of Resources Unknown or Negligible) Significance (i.e. insignificant, very low, low, medium, high or very high)

The air emissions from the WDF site may increase after the proposed development has taken place. The impact on human health and air quality are expected to remain minimal but have however not be quantified.

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

(d) Please describe the underlying assumptions.

This Basic Assessment Report is based on the assumptions that:

• Aurecon was supplied with correct and up-to-date information from the applicant and specialists. • The applicant will comply with the mitigation measures to limit the impacts and the need for continual monitoring. • The conditions stipulated in the authorisation can only be effective if the authorities themselves continually monitor and enforce compliance.

(e) Please describe the uncertainties.

This Basic Assessment Process provides an indication of likely/potential environmental impacts based on subjective criteria, the public consultation process, and maps of the site and nature of the receiving environment. It is important that the Local Municipality (applicant), ensure continual monitoring as a means to ensure environmental protection. It is also essential that the EMPr and the Operation, Management & Rehabilitation Plan (Prepared by JPCE) (Attached as Appendix J4) be updated in order to reflect actual impacts and the changing institutional and legal environment as appropriate.

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

SECTION H: RECOMMENDATION OF THE EAP

In my view (EAP), the information contained in this application form and the documentation attached YES NO hereto is sufficient to make a decision in respect of the activity applied for.

If “NO”, list the aspects that should be further assessed through additional specialist input/assessment or whether this application must be subjected to a Scoping & EIR process before a decision can be made:

Not applicable.

If “YES”, please indicate below whether in your opinion the activity should or should not be authorised:

Activity should be authorised: YES NO

Please provide reasons for your opinion • It is the opinion of the EAP that the low level negative impacts associated with the Alternative 3 (preferred alternative) where the site height is authorised to a maximum of 10 metres above natural ground level can be sufficiently mitigated so as to prevent any long-term negative impacts of the surrounding environment and visual receptors; • The proposed activity will generate local income in the form of jobs primarily with regards to the required onsite civil engineering works (temporary), waste sorting and recycling and initiatives for disabled personnel; • The proposed activity will continue to ensure effective waste management and disposal in the Witzenberg municipal area and will also continue to aid in service delivery which benefits the Witzenberg community. • Should the proposed expansion be authorised, it would allow the Witzenberg Municipality legal means of waste disposal until such time as an alternative is implemented within the regional context due to limited alternatives available within the District Municipality. • An EMPr has been developed and should be implemented in order to reduce the potential negative impacts of the proposed activity. If you are of the opinion that the activity should be authorised, then please provide any conditions, including mitigation measures that should in your view be considered for inclusion in an authorisation. • Visual screening is very important to limit the impact on surrounding visual receptors. Screening should include, but not be limited to, large fast-growing trees planted at least on the northern and western boundaries of the WDF. • Regular compaction and covering of waste must be implemented to reduce wind-blown litter. • The side-walls of the WDF should be covered with topsoil and revegetated during the operational phase where appropriate and where disturbance will be minimal. • The recommendations in this report and the attached EMPr should be included in the license conditions, if authorised, to ensure proper site management, prevention of pollution, mitigation of visual impacts and sustainable development and closure of the site. • There must be compliance with all Occupational Health and Safety legislation and regulations as well. Duration and Validity: Environmental authorisations are usually granted for a period of three years from the date of issue. Should a longer period be required, the applicant/EAP is requested to provide a detailed motivation on what the period of validity should be. Since the site is existing, there is no need for EA validity for commencement of activities. It is however recommended that the Waste Management License be issued for the life of the proposed WDF expansion (which is anticipated to be approximately 5 years), after which it is recommended that the site is closed and rehabilitated, if another legal waste disposal facility is available to the Witzenberg Municipality.

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: TULBAGH WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY MARCH 2019

SECTION I: APPENDICES

The following appendices must be attached to this report:

Tick the box Appendix if Appendix is attached Appendix A: EAP CV √

Appendix B: Groundwater Management Plan √

Appendix C: Application for a Waste Management License: Additional Information √

Appendix D: Locality Map √

Appendix E: Site plans and Technical Drawings √

Appendix F: Site photographs √

Appendix G: Permit (s) / License (s) √

Public participation information: including a copy of the register of interested and Affected Parties, the Comments and Responses Report, proof of site Appendix H: notices, advertisements and any other public participation information as √ required in Section C above. Appendix I : Environmental Management Programme √

Appendix J : Specialist studies √

J1: Visual Impact Assessment √

J2: Stormwater Management Plan √

J3: Airspace Determination Report √

J4: Operation, Management & Rehabilitation Plan √