BCB 725: IEM Practical: Basic Assessment Reports to Environmental Authorisation

Below are extracts from DEA&DP’s Website with links to virtually every relevant document needed to help you with your assessment of the UWC EIA process.

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations promulgated under the Environment Conservation Act (ECA) 1989, will be replaced by the new EIA Regulations which have been passed in terms of Chapter 5 of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998, as amended (NEMA). The repeal of the ECA EIA Regulations and its replacement with NEMA EIA Regulations will thus be effective from 1 July 2006. NEMA states that before certain development activities can be undertaken, an environmental impact assessment must be followed. The environmental departments of the various provincial governments are responsible for evaluating applications that have been submitted in terms of the EIA regulations. Based on the findings of the EIA process, a decision in the Western Cape will be made by the Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning on whether the development is authorised or refused.

The National Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism is responsible for evaluating projects of national importance (for instance projects that cross provincial or national boundaries).

The written decision previously called a Record of Decision (RoD) is now called an Environmental Authorisation. This is a legal document setting out the conditions of the authorisation and the actions required to protect human health and the environment. Any affected party may appeal against the decision contained in an environmental authorisation. Appeals must be lodged with the Minister who considers appeals in terms of the relevant provisions of NEMA and the environmental regulations.

A notable difference between the current EIA Regulations in terms of NEMA and previous EIA Regulations in terms of ECA is the stipulation of time frames which must be adhered to.

Queries can be lodged at a call centre available on: Tel: 021 483 4098 during office hours (09h00 - 15h00) Email eiainfo[at]pgwc.gov.za

Transitional Arrangements Guideline

A transitional arrangements guideline has been drafted to effect theseamless transition from the previous EIA ECA Regulations to the new NEMA EIA Regulations. Applicants are requested to familiarise themselves with these transitional arrangements. Applicants must also consult guidelines with regard to Public Participation and the consideration of Alternatives before submitting an EIA application with the Department. Applicants may also request exemption from certain provisions in the Regulations by completing the application for exemption in the Notice of Intent and Application Forms Development proposals/projects cannot be implemented until an environmental authorisation is received from the Department. The Department is not obliged to authorise any development proposal/project for which an application is submitted. The reporting of illegal activities in the province can be done on a transgression form which must be submitted to the Directorate: Strategic Environmental Management. For the reporting of Environmental Crimes and Incidents contact the 24 hour Hotline on 0800 205 005.

The NEMA EIA Regulations makes provision for two types of environmental investigations in the EIA process, being the Basic Assesment phase and the Scoping/EIA phase.

Basic Assessment

Basic Assessment must be applied to activities listed in Listing Notice 1 No. R386. For more information on the process for the Basic Assessment please see the process flow diagram. In order to process the Basic Assessment application an applicant should submit a notice of intent to submit an application at least fourteen (14) days prior to submitting the completed application formand Basic Assessment report. The application form must be completed by the applicant/environmental assessment practitioner. The application must be informed by Guidelines that have been developed by the Department. Your completed application form and Basic Assessment report must be submitted to the appropriate Directorate for consideration by the Department where after an environmental authorisation may/may not be issued.

Scoping/EIA

Scoping/EIA must be applied to activities listed in Listing Notice 2 No. R387. The Scoping/EIA process is further outlined in the process flowdiagram. An application form must be completed by the applicant/environmental assessment practitioner. The application must be informed by Guidelines that have been developed by the Department. Your completed application form must be submitted to the appropriate Directorate for consideration by the Department whereafter an environmental authorisation may/may not be issued.

Appeals

In terms of ECA EIA

You can appeal against a Record of Decision issued in terms of the previous ECA EIA Regulations by completing and submitting the ECA appeal questionnaire. The Department will assess these appeals in terms of the Environmental Conservation Act and its relevant regulations.

In terms of new NEMA EIA Appeals against an environmental authorisation issued in terms of the NEMA EIA Regulationswill be dealt with differently. The new process requires that the applicant/appellant fill in the notice of intention to appeal form which must be submitted to the Ministry within ten (10) days of being notified of the decision taken by the Department. The actual appeal must be submitted on the NEMA appeal questionnaire. This section should be read in conjunction with the appeal guideline.

Departmental Guidelines

The Department has developed a set of guidelines that applicants must take into account while compiling their application and undertaking the Basic Assessment or Scoping/EIA. All previous process guidelines that have been developed by the Department will not be valid from 1 July 2006.

 Provincial Urban Edge Guidelines  Guidelines for Resort Developments in the Western Cape  Guidelines for Golf Courses, Golf Estates, Polo Fields and Polo Estates in the Western Cape  Western Cape Provincial Spatial Development Framework  A Guide for Reporting and Estimating Emissions for the Integrated Pollutant and Waste Information System  Draft Guidelines for Comment: Regulation 76 of Government Notice 385 of 21 April 2006 (the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations): Authorisation Requirements for Aquaculture in the Western Cape

The Department has developed policy guidelines around specialist involvement in EIA processes. The guidelines aim to improve the quality of specialist input and facilitate informed decision-making. They clarify the roles and responsibilities of all role players with regard to specialist input in the EIA process. This will help practitioners draft appropriate terms of reference for specialist input and assist role players to evaluate the appropriateness of specialist input in individual cases.

Guidance for specialist reports

 Guideline for Determining the Scope of Specialist Involvement in EIA Processes (File type: pdf; size: 609 KB)  Guideline for the Review of Specialist Input into the EIA Process (File type: pdf; size: 467 KB)  Guideline for Involving Biodiversity Specialists in EIA Processes (File type: pdf; size: 904 KB)  Guideline for Involving Heritage Specialists in EIA Processes (File type: pdf; size: 687 KB)  Guideline for Involving Visual and Aesthetic Specialists in EIA Processes (File type: pdf; size: 552 KB)  Guideline for Involving Economists in EIA Processes (File type: pdf; size: 842 KB)  Guideline for Involving Hydrogeologists in EIA Processes (File type: pdf; size: 816 KB)  Guideline for Environmental Management Plans (File type: pdf; size: 667 KB)  Guideline for Involving Social Assessment Specialists in EIA Processes (File type: pdf; size: 538 KB)

BCB 725: IEM Practical: more background (2006)

As you should already know your practical is based on an assessment of the EIA undertaken for the development of UWC’s new Life Science Development. I as an academic at UWC only got to know about this development during August 2006. The university has claimed that it did not need to undertake an EIA - do you think this is correct? Here in this posting are some important information, links and a presentation to help you to decide (please add your views as a comment on this posting once you have gone through all the material in this and the previous posting)

Here are some important considerations and additional information including links to government and my own UWC documents plus a narrated presentation.

The site is defined as a wetland based on the NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ACT (ACT NO 107, 1998) legislation. The water table is within 1.5 m from the surface and some of the vegetation is wetland in nature. The link to the appropriate legislation can be found here, and the NEMA amendments can be found here.

Timeline

August 2006

The first mention of the site for the new Life Science Development to the academic community. Planning was at an advanced stage, since a competition had been conducted and the local dhk Architects had been appointed to prepare initial plans. Four “senior” UWC management staff had gone on a global tour (UK and Australia) to see what a “good science building looks like” see my postscript. The Dog’s Leg site had obviously been identified and the initial “artist” impressions” been prepared for dhk Architects to get appointed. The images below can be clicked to get a “bigger” view. The original concept illustration of UWC’s proposed Life Science Development - showing the prominent “Green Roof”. The final plans have rather less green roof and the aspect reversed so this is what it will look like from Modderdam Road. The development is still more than 200 m in length with six floors and provides about 42 000 sq m in floor space.

The original concept illustration of UWC’s proposed Life Science Development - this is the impressive entrance to the proposed building which is to be the most modern facility in Africa. The new Life Science Development was inspired by elements of an organic design. A central expression of this is the “forest of columns” that support a huge pergola. It was to originally to have supported a green roof. The vegetated roof will go up to about two and a half storeys and its profile continued to the almost 30m height of the building. This aspect of the buildings architecture will face Modderdam Road rather than into the university as originally planned.

This is an artist impression of the original plan which was to have an avenue in front of the new Life Science Building. Since the building has been inverted this road will now go on the other side of the building and form a connection between the old Senate building and the main UWC campus. The final artist’s impression of the new Life Science Building at UWC along Modderdam Road. The plans of the building have been inverted so this will be the view that faces the rest of the University.

The above images were kindly provided by dhk which are copyrighted and should not be used without their permission architects[at]dhk.co.za.

Representatives of BCB and Environmental Education Resources Unit (EERU) which have been managing UWC campus were only informed of the new site in early August. While we knew the new Life Science Building was “on the cards” the details were not known, except that it was meant to have a greenroof. What information I had at that time was put onto the Conservation Biology Blog an the article can be found here.

The proposed development was shown to myself and Prof. Lincoln Raitt on 2nd August 2006 by Vice Rector Prof Stan Ridge, the Dean of Science Jan van Bever Donker and Mr Larry Pokpas (Academic Planning).

The Biodiversity and Conservation Biology Department responded officially via Prof Lincoln Raitt on the 3rd August 2006. A copy of that correspondence can be found here. I responded privately with both the Vice Rector Prof Stan Ridge, the Dean of Science Jan van Bever Donker who did both get back with their overall responses. A request for clarification of details was sent to Mr Larry Pokpas which was not answered.

On the 23 August 2006 I sent through to the Vice Rector and Dean of Science information on NEMA legislation (links to all relevent documents) and the report that can be found here.

September 2006

A faculty-wide meeting was held which was attended by the BCB department (including myself) but this really did not deal with the environmental issues. However, I did report on what development there was on the Conservation Blog found here. During mid-September I developed a Power Point on the issues of Cape Lowland vegetation and the siting of the new Life Science Development which was forwarded to the UWC senior management. That presentation should be viewed an can be viewed by clicking the image below.

Background to the UWC Life Science Building

During a rather damp September morning Tessa Oliver (Biota Liason Officer) took some photos of the Dog’s Leg and this developed into a full multi-media production which can be viewed at the posting found here

October 2006

The University authorities commissioned an independent Botanical Report prepared by Dave McDonald which can be found here. Please examine this report in detail and add as additional comments to this page the major limitations of this study and if you agree/disagree with its overall recommendations.

The Botanical Report was undertaken in late October 2006 and was to serve as a background document in preparation for undertaking an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).

November 2006

The University appointed Enviro-Africa to undertake the Basic Assessment Report (BAR) for approval by provincial authorities (DEA&DP). The university was not prepared to consider any alternative sites to the proposed one.

December 2006 Just before Christmas the Rector Brian O’Connor emailed to the entire UWC community the announcement of the EIA process and call for registering as Interested and Affected Parties (I&APs). The registration included either support or rejection of the proposed development.

Postscript - Now that the plans have been virtually finalised - the organization of the floor space is near identical to the University of Transkei’s Science building erected in the early 1970’s with wet and dry sides and organized from dry to wet with lecturer’s offices, write up areas, general labs and specialist labs. This space only worked because there were offices aligned to each research lab and the staff occupied these and the labs themselves rather than the “official” offices. All the internal open-plan spaces were eventually converted into little glass house offices with a store right in the very centre. Pity they did not visit this building.