AMATHOLE DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY UPGRADING OF HOGSBACK SANITATION INFRASTRUCTURE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 15 November 2016

Presentation Sequence Purpose of meeting Project team Project Background Project Motivation Design Parameters Design Options EIA process Key Issues Conclusion Way forward

Purpose of Meeting Upgrading of Hogsback Sanitation Infrastructure Public Meeting as part of the EIA process to inform the community with regards to the project and obtain comments/ concerns with regards to the project

PROJECT TEAM EAP: Indwe Environmental Consulting Engineers: Royal HaskoningDHV Proponent: Amathole District Municipality

PROJECT BACKGROUND ADM appointed RHDHV to investigate options to upgrade sanitation infrastructure in Hamburg, Kei Mouth and Hogsback Tourism Areas Currently erven within Hogsback have septic tank and soakaway systems Several septic tanks were observed to be overflowing. Due to the loamy ground conditions and shade caused by thick tree cover the soak-away drains are not effective. The saturated soil around the soak-away drains prevents the overflow water from being absorbed. Overflowing tanks are causing unhygienic living conditions and pollution of the groundwater and surrounding environment.

PROJECT BACKGROUND RHDHV prepared Preliminary Design Report for Sanitation Infrastructure Upgrade in Hogsback in September 2015 Indwe Environmental Consulting appointed to undertake applications for environmental authorisation: Basic Assessment (National Environmental Management Act, 108 of 1998, EIA Regulations 2014) General Authorisation for stream crossings (National Water Act, 36 of 1998, Section 21 (c) and (i)) General Authorisation for discharge of treated effluent (National Water Act, 36 of 1998, Section 21 (e) Protected tree disturbance for construction (National Forest Act, 84 of 1984)

PROJECT MOTIVATION The primary objective of the project is to provide a basic, hygienic sanitation system to the area that is safe to the environment and the community that will be using it Currently high cost of operation (tankers have to discharge at Alice - 70km round trip) On-going pollution of the environment due to overflowing septic tanks Potential negative effect on the tourism industry and downstream water users

ADM IDP 2016/17

DESIGN PARAMETERS Erf connections will be at the lowest point of the site. Pipelines will be located 1m from the cadastral boundary either on the inside of the property or outside the property within the road reserve. The position of existing services was not taken into consideration for the preliminary design. The location of all existing services needs to be confirmed with various service providers

Pump stations located at the lowest areas of the site to pump to the WWTW Pump stations designed to incorporate a 4 hour emergency storage capacity in case of power or mechanical failures The plant will include all unit processes and components required to accomplish: screening primary treatment and nitrification solids removal (secondary settling) disinfection (chlorination) tanks

DESIGN OPTIONS OPTION 1 – WATER BORNE SANITATION & WWTW ADM OPTION 2 – SMALL-BORE SANITATION & ON-SITE TREATMENT MODULE

WATER BORNE SANITATION & PACKAGE TREATMENT PLANT The sewer reticulation network and WWTW will require on-going maintenance Operational cost expected to be much lower than tanker service Requires a water connection to each property Sewage will be treated and discharged into a nearby stream

WWTW Site 1

WWTW Site 2

EIA PROCESS Environmental Assessment processes: National Environmental Management Act – (EIA) Environmental Application to be submitted to DEDEAT Public Participation Process Basic Assessment Report and Environmental Management Plan Submitted to DEDEAT – Amathole Region, East London National Water Act

BA PROCESS or + Consultation BAR & EMPR Pre-application (Optional) WUL Application Consultation BAR & EMPR + NOI Site inspection & permission to proceed 90 days Public Participation including CA (30 days) Incorporate PP comments Submit BAR & EMPr EA Decision prerequisite for MPRDA Decision or Notification of addition 50 days PP DWA meeting: DWA recommendations BAR and EMPr review Public participation including CA (30 days) Incorporate PP comments 50 days WULA submitted 107 days WULAC recommendation 197 DAYS (Non- substantive) 247 Days (Substantive) Submit BAR & EMPr 157 days Decision BAR and EMPr review WUL Decision 107 days Decision In event of substantive BA process all time-frames extended by 50 days ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION APPEAL FINALISED 90 days EA APPEAL DECISION 90 days

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Undertaken in accordance with Regulation 41 of 2014 EIA Regulations A newspaper advert was placed on 19th September 2016 Background information documents were delivered to residents and all I&APs on 28th September 2016 Signboards were placed at the entrances of Hogsback

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Posters were placed in public areas in Hogsback Comments have been received and recorded from I&APs Tourism Info Centre Local Grocery Store

KEY ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Ecological Impacts Disturbance of indigenous vegetation and biodiversity impacts Disturbance to riparian vegetation during trench digging for stream crossings Disturbance to residents gardens during linear pipeline installation Rehabilitation of trenches, cleared areas, access roads and subsequent erosion control Social Impacts Increased noise, construction traffic Employment opportunities (job creation and community upliftment) Improved health and hygiene standards if system is operated correctly

GENERAL ISSUES RAISED BY I&APs Regular experiences of electricity failures for extended periods Social instability of the area arising from the non delivery of services Current informal housing and future high density housing plans in Hogsback need to be considered and included in the project Need for a comprehensive Development Plan for Hogsback Properties dependent on water from ADM have experienced a lack of water in the past Municipality should focus its resources and consider direct assistance to the three hotels and small business zone Concern for the on-going maintenance of the proposed infrastructure

CONCLUSION Development in line with latest environmental policy Draft Basic Assessment Report – 30 day public comment Detailed Environmental Management Programme prepared for construction and operation phases Environmental Authorisation – legal document in which EMP and other approval conditions are mandatory and are audited

Way Forward Please sign attendance register All reports are on Indwe Website – www.indwecon.co.za Please send written comments by 30 November 2016 to: Indwe Environmental Consulting 12 Preston Avenue Vincent East London Tel: 043 726 6860 Fax: 086 513 9734 Email: info@Indwecon.co.za