DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT

APPENDIX E
Air Quality Impact Assessment Specialist Study

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-13289-4

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 January 2015

AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

ESIA for the Proposed Vopak-

Reatile Terminal Richards Bay
Bulk Liquid Storage and
Handling Facility

Submitted to:
Public Review

DEDTEA Reference Number: DC28/0001/2014 KZN/EIA/0001388/2014

Report Number: 13614921-11897-3

Distribution:
1 x Copy Vopak South Africa Developments (Pty)
Ltd
1 x Copy Golder Associates Africa (Pty) Ltd

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Executive Summary

Project overview
Golder Associates Africa (Pty) Ltd. (Golder) was appointed by Vopak South Africa Developments (VSAD) to
undertake an environmental authorisation and environmental management programme (EMP) for the
proposed Vopak-Reatile Terminal Richards Bay bulk storage facility, located at the Port of Richards Bay,
KwaZulu-Natal.

The proposed Vopak-Reatile Terminal will occupy a footprint of approximately 15.8 Ha and will consist of 45
storage tanks which will store Liquid Petroleum Gas (LPG), a mix of Clean Petroleum Products (CPP), and a
suite of chemicals. In addition to storage tanks, the proposed terminal infrastructure includes a liquid
shipping line; manifolds, stenching equipment, marine loading arm, road loading bays, rail loading bays,
weighbridges for road and rail loading, mass flow meters, fire suppression systems, buildings and supporting
utilities.

Project location
The proposed site is located in the South Dunes Precinct of the Port of Richards Bay, within the City of
uMhlathuze, KwaZulu-Natal.

Surrounding land uses and sensitive receptors

The site is located within the South Dunes Precinct (SDP)

Within 2 km of the proposed site:

Port of Richards Bay to the west

The small craft harbour to the north,

The harbour mouth to the north-east

The Indian Ocean to east; and

Richards Bay Game Reserve to the south.

Within 2 5 km of the proposed site:

The Grindrod dry bulk terminal to the north;

The suburb of Meerensee to the north-east;

Within 5 10 km of the proposed site:

Numerous industrial activities, specifically in the Alton area to the north-west; and

Numerous potential sensitive receptors, including nature reserves, residents, schools, hospitals and
clinics are also present, located within the following suburbs:

Gubethuka and Esikhawini to the south-west; and

Brackenham, Wildenweide, Veldenvlei, Birdswood, Arboretum (and Extension) to the north.

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Meteorological conditions
Richard Bay is located in the summer rainfall region of South Africa and therefore receives most of its rainfall
during the period of October to March, with peak rainfall occurring in the late summer months of January and
February.

Air temperatures in Richards Bay are warm, to hot, for most of the year and summers are humid. In summer
the average daily maximum temperature is 29 C with extremes exceeding 40 C, while in winter the average
maximum temperature is 23 C with extremes in the region of 34 C.

According to modelled meteorological data (MM5 data) for the period 2011 2013, the average wind speed
is 4.24 m/s. A clear dominant wind axis is evident, with winds predicted to originate from the north-north-east
(11% of the time) and north-east (10% of the time), followed by south-south-west (9%) and south-west (9%).
Winds are moderate, with 3.56% calms (<1m/s).

Diurnal variations in wind direction result from land and sea breezes, with the west-south-westerly land
breeze (off shore winds) dominant in the early hours (00:00 - 06:00) and the north-north-easterly sea breeze
dominant in the afternoons (12:00 18:00). Mornings (06:00 12:00) tend to be dominated by high speed
south-westerly winds (>10 m/s).

A seasonal variation is evident with north-easterly and east-north-easterly winds dominating in summer and
spring; and south-westerly and west-south-westerly winds dominating in autumn and winter. The highest
frequency of calms is noted in winter (4.08%). Southerly to south-south-westerly winds occur throughout the
year and are typically associated with the arrival of coastal low pressure systems (cold fronts and cut off-
lows). Coastal lows tend to be more frequent during the summer months.

Baseline air quality

Industrial activities, vehicle exhaust emissions (from the N2 highway and heavy trucks), and sugar cane
burning were identified as the main sources of emissions within the municipality (Thornhill and van Vuuren,
2009; SGS Environmental, 2011). The primary air pollutants are sulphur dioxide (SO2) and fine particulate
matter (PM10), while elevated fluoride concentrations have also been identified as a concern.

The Richards Bay Clean Air Association (RBCAA) owns and operates 11 monitoring stations in the greater
Richards Bay area, monitoring SO2, PM10 monitoring stations, Total Reduced Sulphide (TRS) and
meteorology. The closest air quality-monitoring station to the proposed terminal site is Harbour West which is
situated approximately 5.9 km north-west of the site.

The monitoring and data collection network is robust and well maintained. While not currently accredited, the
network satisfies South Africa National Accreditation System (SANAS) requirements, thus adding to the
confidence and reliability of the data and results. The results captured in the RBCAA 2013 Annual Report
revealed the following:

Current and future annual average PM10 NEM:AQA standards were not exceeded during 2013 (Golder
Associates, 2014). One exceedance of the current NEM:AQA daily standard (120 µg/m³) and seven
exceedances of the future NEM:AQA daily standard (75 µg/m³) were recorded in 2013. Annual average
PM10 concentrations show an over-all decreasing trend from 2007 - 2013; however 2013 annual
average concentrations are higher at the Brackenham and CBD monitoring stations than those
recorded in 2012.

Ten exceedances of the SO2 NEM:AQA daily average standard (48 ppb), 48 exceedances of the
NEM:AQA hourly average standard (134 ppb) and 66 exceedances of the NEM:AQA 10 minute
average standard (191 ppb) were recorded during 2013. Annual average SO2 concentrations showed a
marked increase in average annual SO2 concentrations from 2007 - 2013. However, the NEM:AQA
Annual average standard (19 ppb) was not exceeded during 2013.

25 exceedances of the World Health Organisation (WHO) 30-minute H2S guideline (5.0 ppb), 13
exceedances of the Ontario Ministry for the Environment (OME) TRS 10-minute health standard (9.3

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

ppb) 163 exceedances of the RBCAA 10-minute target (4.5 ppb) were recorded during 2013. A marked
decrease in annual average TRS concentrations is however evident from 2009 - 2013.

Impact assessment summary

Site clearing and construction
Site clearing and construction activities are important sources of fugitive dust emissions that may have
substantial temporary impact on the local air quality in the vicinity of the activity. The implementation of
mitigation measures will reduce the magnitude of this impact.

Emissions to the atmosphere from construction sites also include vehicle emissions, smoke and odour,
however the magnitude and duration of the impact on the ambient air quality is anticipated to be low

Operation
The significance of the operations impact on the ambient air quality was simulated and quantitatively
assessed. Based on this assessment, the Terminal will have a negative impact on the existing ambient air
quality, for the duration of the operation. The magnitude of the impact is however predicted to be low (< 10%
from current conditions) and limited to the Terminal site. The environmental consequence is therefore
anticipated to be low.

Decommissioning
Of particular significance are dust and particulate emissions associated with the following:

Generation of solid wastes and debris, their stockpiling, transfer, and loading onto trucks or into skips;

Transport of wastes off site; and

Movement of vehicles along unpaved roadways and paths, in and out of the site and within the site.
Particulate matter (soot) and gaseous emissions such as carbon monoxide, sulphur oxides, nitrogen oxides
and organic compounds including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) emissions are also likely to result from heavy vehicle/machinery exhausts emissions.

Air quality impacts are, however limited to the active phases of the proposed terminal. Provided the site is
rehabilitated and potential sources of wind erosion (such as stockpiles and open/exposed areas) are re-
vegetated, there will be no long term residual impact on the ambient air quality.

Cumulative impacts
Based on the information provided, the cumulative impact of the Terminal is likely to be negligible due to the
following factors:

The site is located at the harbour mouth and is therefore often subject to wind speeds > 5 m/s,
favouring dispersion (32% if the time);

The site is located > 2 km from the nearest residential area; and

The predicted emissions concentrations resulting from fugitive storage and handling losses is low (i.e.
less than 10%.

Recommendations
Based on the available data; site clearing, construction and operation of the proposed Vopak-Reatile
Terminal, will impact negatively on local ambient air quality. The overall significance of this impact is however
predicted to be low, as the facility is predicted to comply with local (South African) source emission and
ambient air quality standards and guidelines. Thus, there should be no detrimental impacts on sensitive
receptors in the vicinity of the facility.

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Since the type, volume and throughput of chemicals stored at the proposed Terminal will be dependent on
market conditions, the parameters assessed in this AQIA are likely to change. It is therefore recommended
that Vopak-Reatile re-assess the predicted emissions once the type, volume and throughput of chemicals, as
well as vehicle, rail and ship operational details are known.

Contributors
Candice Allan: Author and Dispersion Modeller

Lance Coetzee: Emissions Inventory

Adam Bennett: Review Manager

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

List of abbreviations and terms

µg Microgram

µg/m3 Micrograms per cubic metre

ACGIH American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists

AEL Atmospheric emission license

AQIA Air quality impact assessment

AQMP Air quality management plan

American Society for Testing and Materials standard method for collection and
ASTMD1739
analysis of windblown dust deposition.

BTEX Benzene, Ethylbenzene, Toluene & Xylene

CH4 Methane

CO Carbon monoxide

CO2 Carbon dioxide

CPP Clean Petroleum Products

DEA Department of Environmental Affairs

DJF December, January, February

E East

EAL Environmental Assessment Level

EIA Environmental impact assessment

EMP Environmental management plan

EMPR Environmental management programme report

ENE East-north-east

ESE East-south-east
Golder Golder Associates Africa (Pty) Ltd

H2 Hydrogen

HAPs Hazardous air pollutants

ITCZ Inter-Tropical Convergence Zone

IVS Island View Storage

JJA June, July, August

km Kilometre

km/h Kilometre per hour

LPG Liquid Petroleum Gas

MAM March, April, May

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

mg Milligrams
2
mg/m /day Milligrams per square metre per day

MM5 Modelled meteorological data

3
mn /h Normal cubic metres per hour

N North

NE North-east

NEM:AQA National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act (Act no. 39 of 2004)
NNE North-north-east

NNW North-north-west

NO2 Nitrogen dioxide

NOISH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

NOx Nitrogen oxides

NW North-west

PM10 Particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of less than 10 m

RBCT Richards Bay Coal Terminal

REL Recommended Exposure Limit

S South

SANS South African National Standards

SANS 1929 South African National Standard 1929

SAWS South African Weather Service

SDP South Dunes Precinct

SE South-east

SO2 Sulphur dioxide

SON September, October, November

SSE South-south-east

SSW South-south-west

SW South-west

TLV Threshold Limit Value

tonnes/h Tonnes per hour

UK United Kingdom

USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency

VSAD Vopak South Africa Developments

W West

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

WHO World health organisation

WNW West-north-west

WSW West-south-west

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Location ........................................................................................................................................................ 1

1.2 Project description ........................................................................................................................................ 2

1.2.1 Site Clearing and Preparation activities .................................................................................................. 2

1.2.2 Construction ............................................................................................................................................ 3

1.2.3 Proposed terminal layout ........................................................................................................................ 3

1.2.4 Operation ................................................................................................................................................ 5

1.2.5 Project Alternatives ................................................................................................................................. 6

2.0 TERMS OF REFERENCE.......................................................................................................................................... 7

2.1 Baseline assessment .................................................................................................................................... 7

2.2 Emissions Inventory...................................................................................................................................... 8

2.3 Dispersion modelling .................................................................................................................................... 8

2.4 Impact assessment ....................................................................................................................................... 8

2.5 Mitigation and monitoring............................................................................................................................ 10

3.0 APPLICABLE LEGISLATION, GIDELINES AND STANDARDS ............................................................................ 10

3.1 Emissions standards................................................................................................................................... 10

3.2 Ambient air quality standards ..................................................................................................................... 12

3.3 Dust fallout standards ................................................................................................................................. 13

3.4 Proposed environmental assessment levels ............................................................................................... 13

3.5 Local Municipal bylaws ............................................................................................................................... 14

4.0 BASELINE ASSESSMENT ..................................................................................................................................... 16

4.1 Environmental setting ................................................................................................................................. 16

4.1.1 Topography ........................................................................................................................................... 16

4.1.2 Land use and sensitive receptors ......................................................................................................... 16

4.1.3 Regional climate ................................................................................................................................... 19

4.1.4 Boundary layer conditions ..................................................................................................................... 20

4.1.5 Precipitation .......................................................................................................................................... 21

4.1.6 Temperature ......................................................................................................................................... 21

4.1.7 Wind speed and direction...................................................................................................................... 22

4.1.8 Meteorological overview - MM5 modelled meteorological data ............................................................. 22

4.1.9 MM5 data cross check and confidence ................................................................................................. 25

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 i

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

4.2 Baseline air quality...................................................................................................................................... 27

4.2.1 PM10 ...................................................................................................................................................... 28

4.2.2 SO2 ....................................................................................................................................................... 29

4.2.3 TRS ....................................................................................................................................................... 30

4.3 Key pollutants and associated health effects .............................................................................................. 31

5.0 EMISSIONS INVENTORY ....................................................................................................................................... 33

6.0 DISPERSION MODELLING..................................................................................................................................... 35

7.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT .......................................................................................................................................... 39

7.1 Construction Phase .................................................................................................................................... 39

7.2 Operational Phase ...................................................................................................................................... 40

7.3 Decommissioning Phase ............................................................................................................................ 40

7.4 Cumulative impacts .................................................................................................................................... 40

7.5 Assessment of Alternatives ........................................................................................................................ 46

7.5.1 Alternative layout and tanks design options .......................................................................................... 46

7.5.2 The No-Project alternative .................................................................................................................. 46

8.0 MITIGATION OBJECTIVES .................................................................................................................................... 46

9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................................................ 49

10.0 SUMMARY OF ASSUMTIONS AND LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................... 49

10.1 Assumptions ............................................................................................................................................... 49

10.1.1 Tanks .................................................................................................................................................... 49

10.1.2 Products ................................................................................................................................................ 49

10.1.3 Mitigation measures .............................................................................................................................. 50

10.2 Limitations .................................................................................................................................................. 50

11.0 REFERENCES......................................................................................................................................................... 51

TABLES
Table 1: Impact Classification for Impact Assessment ............................................................................................................... 8

Table 2: Categories describing Environmental Consequence .................................................................................................. 10

Table 3: Types of storage vessels for liquids ........................................................................................................................... 11

Table 4: Emissions limits for vapour recovery units ................................................................................................................. 11

Table 5: South African Ambient Air Quality Standards for Criteria Pollutants........................................................................... 12

Table 6: Acceptable dust fall rates ........................................................................................................................................... 13

Table 7: Proposed environmental assessment levels (EALs) for the Vopak-Reatile Terminal ................................................. 13

Table 8: Atmospheric stability classes ..................................................................................................................................... 20

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 ii

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Table 9: Identified emissions sources and common pollutants in the Richards Bay area ........................................................ 27

Table 10: Key pollutants and associate health effects ............................................................................................................. 31

Table 11: Products handled and stored ................................................................................................................................... 33

Table 12: Vopak-Reatile emissions rates ................................................................................................................................. 34

Table 13: Summary of results from the dispersion simulations ................................................................................................ 38

Table 14: Air quality impacts .................................................................................................................................................... 42

Table 15: Recommendations for construction .......................................................................................................................... 46

Table 16: Recommendations for operation .............................................................................................................................. 47

Table 17: Recommendations for decommissioning and closure phase ................................................................................... 48

Table 18: Vertical domed tank dimensions ............................................................................................................................... 49

Table 19: Vapour recovery/ destruction emissions limits.......................................................................................................... 50

FIGURES
Figure 1: Regional view of the proposed project location/lease sites. ........................................................................................ 1

Figure 2: Proposed project location/lease sites. ......................................................................................................................... 2

Figure 3: Vopak-Reatile Terminal Richards Bay plot plan. ......................................................................................................... 4

Figure 4: Process followed in the determination of the air quality impacts. ................................................................................ 7

Figure 5: City of uMhlathuze Spatial Development Framework (2007) buffer zone delineation (based on all air
pollution criteria for current operations). ................................................................................................................ 15

Figure 6: Regional topography of the greater Richards Bay area. ........................................................................................... 16

Figure 7: Photo of the IVS Storage Facility .............................................................................................................................. 17

Figure 8: Photo of the JBS Storage Facility.............................................................................................................................. 17

Figure 9: Land use and sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the proposed Terminal. .............................................................. 18

Figure 10: Seasonal circulation patterns affecting the regional climate. ................................................................................... 19

Figure 11: Long term precipitation trends in Richards Bay, based on the South African Weather Service long term
data record (1970 - 1990) (www.weathersa.co.za).................................................................................................. 21

Figure 12: Long term temperature trends in Richards Bay, based on the South African Weather Service long term
data record (1970 - 1990) (www.weathersa.co.za).................................................................................................. 22

Figure 13: MM5 wind rose and wind frequency distribution for the proposed terminal for the period 2011 to 2013. ................ 23

Figure 14: MM5 diurnal wind rose and wind frequency distribution for the proposed Terminal for the period 2011
to 2013. ................................................................................................................................................................... 24

Figure 15: Modelled seasonal wind rose and wind frequency distribution for the proposed terminal for the period
2011 to 2013. .......................................................................................................................................................... 25

Figure 16: Comparison between the RBCAA measured (2013) and MM5 (average 2011 2013) modelled wind
rose. ........................................................................................................................................................................ 26

Figure 17: Comparison between the RBCAA measured (2013) and MM5 (average 2011 2013) wind class
frequency distribution .............................................................................................................................................. 26

Figure 18: Location of the RBCAA monitoring stations in 2013 (RBCAA 2013 Annual Report, Golder Associates,
2014) ....................................................................................................................................................................... 28

Figure 19: Annual average PM10 concentrations. ................................................................................................................... 28

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 iii

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Figure 20: Seasonal trends in PM 10 (monthly average concentrations for 2013) ...................................................................... 29

Figure 21:Inter-annual average SO2 concentrations. ............................................................................................................... 29

Figure 22: Seasonal trends in SO2 (monthly average concentrations). .................................................................................... 30

Figure 23: TRS annual average information............................................................................................................................. 30

Figure 24: Seasonal trends in TRS (monthly average concentrations) .................................................................................... 31

Figure 25: Maximum hourly average dispersion simulations for the operation of the Vopak-Reatile Terminal......................... 36

Figure 26: Maximum annual average dispersion simulations for the operation of the Vopak-Reatile Terminal........................ 37

APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
Products Handled

APPENDIX B
Document limitations

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 iv

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

1.0 INTRODUCTION
Golder Associates Africa (Pty) Ltd (Golder) was appointed by Vopak South Africa Developments (VSAD) to
undertake an environmental authorisation and environmental management programme (EMP) for the
proposed Vopak-Reatile Terminal Richards Bay bulk storage facility, located at the Port of Richards Bay,
KwaZulu-Natal.

The proposed Vopak-Reatile Terminal will occupy a footprint of approximately 15.8 Ha and will consist of 45
storage tanks which will store Liquid Petroleum Gas (LPG), a mix of Clean Petroleum Products (CPP), and a
suite of chemicals. In addition to storage tanks, the proposed terminal infrastructure includes a liquid
shipping line; manifolds, stenching equipment, marine loading arm, road loading bays, rail loading bays,
weighbridges for road and rail loading, mass flow meters, fire suppression systems, buildings and supporting
utilities.

This report presents the findings of the Air Quality Impact Assessment (AQIA) undertaken in support of the
environmental authorisation and EMP in terms of the National Environmental Management Act: Air Quality
Act (Act no. 39 of 2004) (NEMA: AQA).

1.1 Location
The proposed site is located in the South Dunes Precinct of the Port of Richards Bay, within the City of
uMhlathuze, KwaZulu-Natal (Figure 1 and Figure 2).

Figure 1: Regional view of the proposed project location/lease sites.

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 1

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Figure 2: Proposed project location/lease sites.

1.2 Project description

Environmental Authorisation for the Construction, Operation and Decommissioning of the proposed Terminal
will be applied for under the EIA process.

1.2.1 Site Clearing and Preparation activities

Site clearing and preparation activities include:

Vegetation clearing;

Excavation;

Site levelling;

Stripping and stockpiling of soil;

Importing of soil for levelling purposes;

Compaction of soil;

Establishment and demarcation of construction camp;

Establishment of site offices;

Establishment of facilities for workers (e.g. ablution facilities etc.);

Establishment and demarcation of material storage facilities; and

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 2

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Erection of security fencing around the construction camp.

1.2.2 Construction
Construction activities will include building new tanks, construction of manifolds, liquid shipping lines, road
and rail loading bays, offices, and all supporting utilities. During the construction phase a temporary
warehouse will be built to store the construction equipment required. Since this is a new facility, enough
space will be allocated in the plot plan for additional pipe racks, extensions to structures, changes in
operation, automation and maintenance philosophies.

Raw materials required during construction include sand, crushed stone, concrete, steel plates, steel rods,
steel beams and steel pipes. Electricity will be sourced from the Eskom, and additional electricity will be
produced by diesel generators. Mechanical and electronic equipment required during the construction phase
will include cranes, trucks, earth-moving equipment, welding machines, diesel generators and compactors.

1.2.3 Proposed terminal layout

The proposed terminal layout is presented in Figure 3. Existing rail tracks utilised by the Richards Bay Coal
Terminal (RBCT) border the site to the north, south and east. All new rail tracks and siding access
constructed as part of the project will be located on the western side of the terminal, and will be spaced a
minimum of 15 m from any construction. The provision of rail infrastructure to the terminal site is the
responsibility of Transnet National Ports Authority (TNPA) and has been included in the scope of the Basic
Assessment (BA) process initiated by TNPA (DEA Reference Number: 14/12/16/3/3/1/582). Rail
infrastructure proposed by TNPA will be constructed according to the S410 Specification for railway
earthworks (2006) and the Geotechnical Service Handbook (1986). The design criterion is aimed at slow
moving trains with 20 ton axle loads (Geomeasure Group, 2013).

The provision of road access to the terminal lease site is also the responsibility of TNPA and has been
included in the scope of TNPA s BA process. Access currently exists to the boundary of the proposed
terminal site via Mundra Road. TNPA propose extending Mundra Road by 1 km in length and 7 m in width to
provide access to the site (Geomeasure Group, 2013). The site will have only one entrance for truck
movement, located in the north-western extent of the site, but for safety purposes a second gate will be
provided and will function as an emergency exit only. Parking space for trucks will be provided inside the
terminal facility.
Liquid shipping lines will be constructed from Berths 208 and 209 to the site. The construction of shipping
1
liquid lines requires a wayleave application to be completed and submitted to TNPA for approval.
All buildings including the main office building and canteen, cabins, firefighting station, laboratory, control
room and maintenance workshop will be located in the same vicinity in the northern extent of the terminal
site.

1
An application to the local authority requesting permission to install utility services of infrastructure. All parties and their contractors are required to obtain permission from the
council to install services or infrastructure on public land.

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 3

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 4
AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Figure 3: Vopak-Reatile Terminal Richards Bay plot plan.

Report No. 13614921-11897-3

January 2015

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

1.2.4 Operation
The following standard activities, operational services and functions are required and/or will take place at the
Vopak-Reatile Terminal Richards Bay:

Ship unloading of fuel (from ship to terminal tanks;

Ship loading of fuel (from terminal tanks to ship);

Railcar unloading of fuel (from railcar to terminal tanks);

Railcar loading of fuel (from terminal tanks to railcar);

Truck unloading of fuel (from truck to terminal tanks);

Truck loading of fuel (from terminal tanks to truck);

Internal tank-to-tank transfer;

Tank measurement on site;

Tank water draining activities/services;

Tank cleaning and emptying activities/services;

Separate line pigging, cleaning and purging;

Full firefighting facility;

Jetty and loading bay occupation;

Parking of vehicles at loading bay; and

Vapour recovery and treatment.

1.2.4.1 Storage capacity and products

The Vopak-Reatile Terminal Richards Bay is a greenfield site (i.e. the site has not been developed
previously), and will be developed in phases. All phases form part of the scope of the EIA. Once completed,
3
the total combined storage capacity will be approximately 300 000 m . The project will comprise the
following:

The initial phase with a total storage capacity of approximately 36 000 m³; and

Subsequent phases with a total storage capacity of up to 264 000 m³.

The proposed products to be stored at the terminal are:

Liquid Petroleum Gas (LPG);

Clean Petroleum Products (CPP); and

A suite of chemicals.

1.2.4.2 Proposed project infrastructure

The project infrastructure proposed for the terminal consists of the following:

Shipping liquid line;

Marine loading arm;

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 5

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Road loading bays;

Rail loading bays;

Weighbridges for road and rail loading;

Fire suppression systems;

Buildings; and

1.2.4.3 Supporting utilities

The 45 storage tanks will be designed to appropriate local and international standards according to the latest
versions of:

SANS 10089-1:2008: Storage and distribution of petroleum products in above-ground bulk

installations ;

Tank design manual (Vopak International Standard);

API 650: Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage ; and

EEMUA 190 Guide for the design, construction and use of mounded horizontal cylindrical steel vessels
for pressurised storage of LPG at ambient temperatures.

1.2.5 Project Alternatives

VSAD has considered alternative layout design, product groupings as well as tank design options to
international standards.

1.2.5.1 Alternative Land Options

It is critical that the terminal site be located in close proximity to a point of import/export, transportation
infrastructure, and within close enough proximity to primary users in the Gauteng and KwaZulu-Natal
regions. The terminal site is situated in the South Dunes Precinct within the Port of Richards Bay, as this was
the only suitable land available within the Port of Richards Bay and within proximity of the liquid fuel berths,
Berth 208 and 209.

In terms of the Environmental Management Framework (EMF) for the Richards Bay Port Expansion Area
and Industrial Development Zone (2011) the dune cordon area is primarily used for port related and various
liquid chemical and petroleum storage facilitates. The area has been earmarked to advance port-related
developments, and is under strict manangement control due to the hazardous nature of current and
proposed facilities (EMF, 2011). Furthermore, access to the area is restricted which presents opportunities
for the establishment of high secure facilities such as the Vopak-Reatile Terminal Richards Bay.

The implementation of the proposed Vopak-Reatile Terminal Richards Bay within the South Dunes Precinct
of the Port of Richards Bay is aligned with TNPA and Departmental planning and development frameworks,
as well as in terms of TNPA s proposed port expansion plans. As a result no alternative land options will be
considered as part of the EIA process.

1.2.5.2 Alternative Layout Design Options

The site layout plan provided by VSAD is preliminary in nature and will be optimized based on the site
specific conditions, and the outcomes of the EIA process, particularly the findings and recommendations of
the independent specialist studies.

1.2.5.3 Alternative Tank Design Options

Tanks planned for the proposed terminal, will be in accordance with relevant international best practice
guidelines and all other applicable legislation. The final tank designs will therefore be confirmed during the
final layout design process.

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 6

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

1.2.5.4 The No-Project Alternative

The no-project alternative would result in the current status quo regarding limited provision of strategic bulk
storage and handling facilities remaining unchanged. As a result consumers are likely to be faced with
shortages and possible interruptions in supply amidst increasing demand. As demand increases additional
pressure is placed on existing facilities and infrastructure such as loading facilities, storage tanks and
handling facilities; which can result in negative implications for the provision of such services. The Vopak-
Reatile Terminal Richards Bay will result in the provision of strategic bulk liquid storage capacity for LPG, a
suite of chemicals and CPP products within close proximity of major consumers, and will also present
additional opportunities for the import and export of product. Both imports and exports present economic
benefits in the form of taxation for imports, and revenue generation for exports.

2.0 TERMS OF REFERENCE

Golder was tasked with compiling an Air Quality Impact Assessment (AQIA) to assess the potential impact of
the proposed storage facility on the receiving environment and make recommendations for control and/or
mitigation. The methodology used in this assessment is illustrated in Figure 4 and further discussed in the
sections that follow.

Baseline assessment
Review of Identification of the
Literature Identification of Meteorological data
legislation, policies potential health
review sensitive receptors analysis
and standards effects
Emissions inventory
Identification of emission sources Calculation of emissions rates

Impact assessment
Dispersion modelling Impact assessment

Mitigation and monitoring

Recommendation of measures to control and/or
Recommendations for monitoring protocols
mitigate the impact of emissions

Figure 4: Process followed in the determination of the air quality impacts.

2.1 Baseline assessment

The baseline air quality assessment included:

A review of applicable legislation, policy and standards;

A description of the receiving environment including: topography, land use and sensitive receptors;

The characterisation of regional climate patterns and analysis of site-specific meteorological data;

The identification of local emission sources; and

The identification and discussion of the potential health effects associated with key atmospheric
emissions.

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 7

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

2.2 Emissions Inventory Box 1

An emissions inventory comprises the identification of sources of emission, and An emission factor
the quantification of each source s contribution to ambient air pollution is a representative
concentrations. The establishment of an emissions inventory therefore forms the value that attempts
basis for the assessment of the impacts of the proposed storage facility on the to relate the quantity
receiving environment. of a pollutant
released to the
Air pollution emissions may typically be obtained using actual sampling at the
atmosphere with an
point of emission, estimating it from mass and energy balances or emission
activity associated
factors which have been established at other, similar operations (see Box 1).
with the release of
Emissions from the proposed Vopak-Reatile Terminal were based on Australian that pollutant.
National Pollutant Inventory (NPI) emission factors for similar facilities. Emission factors
and emission
2.3 Dispersion modelling inventories are
fundamental tools
Dispersion modelling is used as a tool to predict the ambient atmospheric
for air quality
concentration of pollutants emitted to the atmosphere from a variety of processes.
management and
The AERMOD View modelling software was used to determine likely ambient air
planning. The
pollutant concentrations from the proposed storage facility. AERMOD View is an
emission factors are
air dispersion modelling package which incorporates the following United States
frequently the best
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) air dispersion models into one
or only method
integrated interface:
available for
AERMOD; estimating
emissions produced
ISCST3; and by varying sources.

ISC-PRIME.

These USEPA air dispersion models are used extensively internationally to assess pollution concentration
and deposition from a wide variety of sources.
2
The AERMET pre-processor was used to process MM5 modelled regional meteorological data for input into
ISC-AERMOD. Input to a dispersion model includes prepared meteorological data, source data, information
on the nature of the receptor grid and emissions input data.

2.4 Impact assessment

The significance of the identified impacts will be determined using the approach outlined in Table 1. This
incorporates two aspects for assessing the potential significance i.e. occurrence and severity, which are
further sub-divided as indicated. The impact ranking will be described for both pre and post implementation
of mitigation/management measures conditions.
Table 1: Impact Classification for Impact Assessment
Occurrence Severity

Environmental
Consequence

2
AERMET is a pre-processor that organizes and processes meteorological data and estimates the necessary boundary layer parameters for dispersion calculations in AERMOD

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 8

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Direction of an impact may be positive, neutral or negative with respect to the particular impact (e.g.,
a habitat gain for a key species would be classed as positive, whereas a habitat loss would be
considered negative).

Probability of occurrence is a description of the probability of the impact actually occurring as

improbable (less than 5% chance), low probability (5% to 40% chance), medium probability (40 %
to 60 % chance), highly probable (most likely, 60% to 90% chance) or definite (impact will definitely
occur).

Duration refers to the length of time over which an environmental impact may occur: i.e. transient (less
than 1 year), short-term (0 to 5 years [construction]), medium term (5 to 15 years [operational]), long-
term (greater than 15 years with impact ceasing after closure of the project) or permanent.

Magnitude is a measure of the degree of change in a measurement or analysis (e.g., the area of
pasture, or the concentration of a metal in water compared to the water quality guideline value for the
metal), and is classified as: negligible: no measurable effect (<1%) from current conditions; low: <10%
change from current conditions; moderate: 10 to 20% change from current conditions; and
high: >20% change from current conditions. The categorization of the impact magnitude may be based
on a set of criteria (e.g. health risk levels, ecological concepts and/or professional judgment) pertinent
to each of the discipline areas and key questions analysed. Each specialist study will attempt to quantify
the magnitude and outline the rationale used.

Scale/Geographic extent refers to the area that could be affected by the impact and is classified as
site; local: effect restricted to the LSA; regional: effect extends beyond the LSA into the RSA; and
beyond regional: effect extends beyond the RSA site.

Reversibility allows for the impact to be described as reversible or irreversible.

Frequency may be low: occurs once; medium: occurs intermittently; or high: occurs continuously.

Environmental Consequence: The overall residual consequence for each effect will be classified as
one of: negligible, low, moderate or high by evaluation of the rankings for magnitude, geographic
extent and duration Table 2.

Although not explicitly included in the criteria tables, there is uncertainty associated with the information and
methods used in an EIA because of its predictive nature. The certainty with which an impact analysis can be
completed depends on a number of factors including:

Understanding of natural/ecological and socio-economic processes at work now and in the future; and

Understanding of present and future properties of the affected resource.

The level of prediction confidence for an impact analysis will be discussed when there are questions about
the factors reviewed above. Where the level of prediction confidence makes a prediction of the impact
problematic, a subjective assessment is made based on the available information, the applicability of
information on surrogates and on professional opinion.

The level of prediction confidence is sufficiently low in some cases that an estimate of environmental
consequence cannot be made with a sufficient degree of confidence. Undetermined ratings are
accompanied by recommendations for research or monitoring to provide more data in the future.

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 9

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Table 2: Categories describing Environmental Consequence

Category Description
Of the highest order possible within the bounds of impacts that could occur. There is no
High
possible mitigation that could offset the impact, or mitigation is difficult.
Impact is real, but not substantial in relation to other impacts that might take effect within the
Moderate
bounds of those that could occur. Mitigation is both feasible and fairly easily possible.
Impact is of a low order and therefore likely to have little real effect. Mitigation is either easily
Low
achieved or little mitigation is required, or both.
No Impact Zero Impact.

2.5 Mitigation and monitoring

Recommendations for potential measures to control and/or mitigate the impact of emissions were provided
based on the findings of the impact assessment.

3.0 APPLICABLE LEGISLATION, GIDELINES AND STANDARDS

The National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act (Act No. 39 of 2004) (NEM:AQA) has shifted the
approach of air quality management from source based control to the control of the receiving environment.
The Act also devolved the responsibility of air quality management from the national sphere of government
to the local municipal sphere of government (district and local municipal authorities). District and Local
Municipalities are thus tasked with baseline characterisation, management and operation of ambient
monitoring networks, licensing of listed activities, and emissions reduction strategies. The main objectives of
the act are to protect the environment by providing reasonable legislative and other measures that:

Prevent pollution and ecological degradation;

Promote conservation; and

Secure ecologically sustainable development and use of natural resources while promoting justifiable
economic and social development.

3.1 Emissions standards

NEMA:AQA makes provision for the setting and formulation of national ambient air quality and emission
standards. On a provincial and local level, these standards can be set more stringently if the need arises.
The control and management of emissions in NEM:AQA relates to the listing of activities that are sources of
emission and the issuing of atmospheric emission licences (AELs). In terms of Section 21 of NEM:AQA, a
listed activity is an activity which results in atmospheric emissions which have or may have a significant
detrimental effect on the environment, including health, social conditions, economic conditions, ecological
conditions or cultural heritage .

The Vopak-Reatile Terminal Richards Bay is a new facility which will trigger a listed activity (NEM:AQA
Category 2. Subcategory 2.4: Storage and Handling of Petroleum Products). An AEL application process will
thus be run in parallel with the environmental authorisation.

According to Subcategory 2.4: Storage and Handling of Petroleum Products: the following transitional
arrangement shall apply for the storage and handling of raw materials, intermediate and final products with a
vapour pressure greater than 14 kPa at operating temperature:

i) Leak detection and repair (LDAR) program approved by licensing authority to be instituted, by 01
January 2014.

ii) The following special arrangements shall apply for control of total VOCs from storage of raw materials,
intermediate and final products with a vapour pressure of up to 14 kPa at operating temperature except

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 10

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

during loading and offloading. (Alternative control measures that can achieve the same of better results
may be used).
a) Storage vessels for liquids shall be of the following type (Table 3):

b) The roof legs, slotted pipes and/or dipping well on floating roof tanks (except for domed floating
rood tanks or internal floating roof tanks) shall have sleeves fitted to minimise emissions.

c) Relied valves on pressurised storage should undergo periodic checks for internal leaks. This can
be carries out using portable acoustic monitors or if venting to atmosphere with an accessible
open end, tested with a hydrocarbon analyser as part of an LDAR programme.

iii) The following special arrangements shall apply for control of total VOCs from the loading and unloading
(excluding ships) of raw materials, intermediate and final products with a vapour pressure of greater
than 14 kPa a handling temperature. (Alternative control measures that can achieve the same or better
results may be used).
3
a) All installations with a throughput of greater than 50 000 m per annum of products with a vapour
pressure greater than 14 kPA, must be fitted with vapour recovery/ destruction units. Emission
limits are set out in the Table 4.

b) For road tanker and rail car loading/ offloading facilities where the throughput is less than
50 000 m3 per annum, and where ambient air quality is, or is likely to be impacted, all liquid
products shall be loaded using bottom loading, or equivalent with the venting pipe connected to a
vapour pressure balancing system. Where vapour balancing and/or bottom loading is not possible,
a recovery system utilizing absorption, condensation or incineration of the remaining VOC s with a
collection efficiency of at least 95%, shall be fitted.
Table 3: Types of storage vessels for liquids
All permanent immobile liquid storage facilities at a single site
Application with a combined storage capacity of greater than 1 000 cubic
meters
True vapour pressure of contents at
Type of tank or vessel
product storage temperature
Type 1: Up to 14 kPa Fixed-roof tank vented to atmosphere, or as per Type 2 and 3
Type 2: Above 14 kPa and up to 91 kPa
3 Fixed roof tank with Pressure Vacuum Vents fitted as a
with a throughput of less than 50 000 m
minimum to prevent breathing losses, or as per Type 3.
per annum
1) External floating-roof tank with primary rim seal and
secondary rim seal for tank with a diameter of greater than
Type 3 : Above 14 kPa and up to 91 kPa
20 m. or
with a throughput greater than 50 000 m3
2) Fixed-roof tank with internal floating deck / roof fitted with
per annum
primary seal, or
3) Fixed-roof tank with vapour recovery system
Type 4: Above 91 kPa Pressure vessel

Table 4: Emissions limits for vapour recovery units

Description Vapour Recovery Units
3
Application All loading / offloading facilities with a throughput greater than 50 000 m
Substance or mixture of substances mg/Nm3 under normal
Plant
Chemical conditions of 273
Common name status
symbol Kelvin and 101.3 kPa
Total volatile organic compounds from vapour N/A New 150

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 11

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Description Vapour Recovery Units

recovery / destruction units using thermal treatment Existing 150
Total volatile organic compounds from vapour New 40 000
recovery/ destruction units using non-thermal N/A
treatment Existing 40 000

3.2 Ambient air quality standards

The South African ambient air quality standards for common pollutants prescribe the allowable ambient
concentrations of pollutants which are not to be exceeded during a specified time period in a defined area
(Table 5). If the standards are exceeded, the ambient air quality is defined as poor and potential adverse
health impacts are likely to occur.

If authorised to operate, the proposed storage facility emission contributions to the ambient air quality levels
must not exceed or cause exceedances of the ambient air quality standards.
Table 5: South African Ambient Air Quality Standards for Criteria Pollutants
Limit Limit
Frequency of
Pollutant Averaging Period Value Value Compliance Date
3 Exceedance
(µg/m ) (ppb)

(a) 1 hour 200 106 88 Immediate

NO2
1 year 40 21 0 Immediate
Immediate
24 hour 120 - 4
31 December 2014
(b) 24 hour 75 - 4 1 February 2015
PM10
Immediate
1 year 50 - 0
31 December 2014
1 year 40 - 0 1 February 2015
(c)
O3 8 hours (running) 120 61 11 Immediate
Lead (Pb)
(d) 1 year 0.5 - 0 Immediate

1 hour 30 000 26 000 88 Immediate

CO (e)
8 hour (1 hourly average) 10 000 8 700 11 Immediate
Immediate
Benzene 1 year 10 3.2 0
(f) 31 December 2014
(C6H6)
1 year 5 1.6 0 1 February 2015
10 minute 500 191 526 Immediate
1 hour 350 134 88 Immediate
(g)
SO2 24 hours 125 48 4 Immediate

1 year 50 19 0 Immediate

Immediate
24 hours 65 4
31 December 2015
1 January 2016
24 hours 40 4
PM2.5
(h)
31 December 2029
24 hours 25 4 1 January 2030
Immediate
1 year 25 0
31 December 2015

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 12

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Limit Limit
Frequency of
Pollutant Averaging Period Value Value Compliance Date
3 Exceedance
(µg/m ) (ppb)
1 January 2016
1 year 20 0
31 December 2029
1 year 15 0 1 January 2030
Notes:
a. The reference method for the analysis of NO2 shall be ISO 7996
b. The reference method for the determination of the particulate matter fraction of suspended particulate matter shall be EN 12341
c. The reference method for the analysis of ozone shall be the UV photometric method as described in ISO 13964
d. The reference method for the analysis of lead shall be ISO 9855
e. The reference method for analysis of CO shall be ISO 4224
f. The reference methods for benzene sampling and analysis shall be either EPA compendium method TO-14 A or method TO-17
g. The reference method for the analysis of SO2 shall be ISO 6767
h. The reference method for the analysis of PM2.5 shall be EN14907

3.3 Dust fallout standards

On 1 November, 2013, the National Dust Control Regulations were promulgated under the National
Environmental Management: Air Quality Act (NEM:AQA), 2004 and published in the Government Gazette
No. 36974. The dust fall standard defines acceptable dust fall rates in terms of the presence of residential
areas (Table 6).
Table 6: Acceptable dust fall rates
2
Dust fall rate (mg/m /day
Restriction areas Permitted frequency of exceedance
over a 30 day average)
Residential areas Dust fall < 600 Two per annum (not in sequential months)
Non-residential areas 600 < Dust fall < 1200 Two per annum (not in sequential months)

3.4 Proposed environmental assessment levels

According to the International Finance Corporation (IFC) Environmental, Health, and Safety (EHS)
Guidelines (2007) on air emissions and ambient air quality, projects with significant sources of air emissions,
and potential for significant impacts to ambient air quality, should prevent or minimize impacts by ensuring
that emissions do not result in pollutant concentrations that reach or exceed relevant ambient quality
guidelines and standards by applying national legislated standards, or in their absence, the current World
Health Organization (WHO) Air Quality Guidelines.
In the absence of local standards and guidelines, applicable WHO and other international air quality
guidelines were used to assess the predicted emissions from the proposed Vopak-Reatile Terminal. Where
ambient air quality guidelines could not be found, occupational limits were used.

Internationally, it is generally accepted that, in the absence of any ambient reference standards available, it
th th
is acceptable to make use of either 1/50 (for non-carcinogens) or 1/100 (for carcinogens) of the relevant
Occupational Exposure Limits. In the absence of reliable toxicological data, this methodology has been used
to set numerous ambient standards including those published by the UK Environment Agency/ European
Commission.
Table 7: Proposed environmental assessment levels (EALs) for the Vopak-Reatile Terminal
Short term (1 hour) Long term (annual)
Product 3 3 Reference
EAL (µg/m ) EAL (µg/m )
a
Acetone 362 000 18 100 UK Environment Agency (2011)
a
Acrylic acid 6 000 300 UK Environment Agency (2011)

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 13

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Short term (1 hour) Long term (annual)

Product Reference
EAL (µg/m3) EAL (µg/m3)
3 b
Butanol 3 000 - 150 mg/m NIOSH REL
3 b
Butyl Acrylate 1 100 - 55 mg/m NIOSH REL
a
Diethanolamine 324 7.8 UK Environment Agency (2011)
3 b
Ethanol 38 000 - 1900 mg/m NIOSH REL
3 b
Ethyl Acetate 28 000 - 1400 mg/m NIOSH REL
Ethyl Acrylate 6 200 210 UK Environment Agency (2011) a
3 b
Methyl ethyl ketone 11 800 - 590 mg/m NIOSH REL
3 b
Methyl isobutyl ketone 4 100 - 205 mg/m NIOSH REL
3 b
Propanol 10 000 - 500 mg/m NIOSH REL
3 b
Propylene glycol 500 - 25 mg/m NIOSH REL
c
Styrene 800 800 WHO (2000)
3 d
Triethanolamine 100 - 5 mg/m ACGIH TLV
Ethylbenzene 55 200 4 410 UK Environment Agency (2011) a
a
Toluene 8 000 1 910 UK Environment Agency (2011)
Xylenes 66 200 4 410 UK Environment Agency (2011) a
e
Total VOC 10 000 - European Parliament (2000)
Notes:
a) UK Environment Agency (2011) H1 Environmental Risk Assessment Framework. Annex F - Air Emissions. Bristol, United
Kingdom. GEHO0410BSIL-E-E v2.2
b) National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Recommended Exposure Limit (REL)
c) World Health Organisation (WHO), Air quality guidelines 2000, EAL derived from values for 24 hour reference period
d) American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) Threshold Limit Value (TLV)
e) European Parliament (2000) Directive 2000/76/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 December 2000 on
the Incineration of Waste. Official Journal of the European Communities. L332/91

3.5 Local Municipal bylaws

As a result of historical ambient air quality problems and the profusion of heavy industries within Richards
Bay, the City of uMhlathuze adopted local air quality guidelines that include emission targets and the
implementation of air quality buffer zones.

Buffer zones were delineated based on potential health impacts and environmental or nuisance impacts, and
were determined by air dispersion modelling and health risk screening assessments. Based on the City of
uMhlathuze Spatial Development Framework (2007), the buffer zone delineation (based on all air pollution
criteria for current operations), the proposed terminal site falls within the Management Zone (Single Health
Limit Exceedance) (Figure 5). The Management Zone has been identified as it could result in possible health
implications. The recommendation was therefore made that the ambient monitoring network be expanded to
ensure representative monitoring within this zone.

The proposed site is also within very close proximity to the Alert Zone (The lowest level at which adverse
effects for a specific pollutant have been observed [LOAEL] and Alert Threshold). The main pollutants of
concern in the Alert Zone are PM10 around the harbour and SO2 at the Richards bay central business district
(CBD) and surroundings. The recommendation was made that further industrial development resulting in
PM10 and SO2 pollutants within this zone should be carefully considered since effects may be noticed by
sensitive individuals, and actions to reduce these effects may be needed.

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 14

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

Figure 5: City of uMhlathuze Spatial Development Framework (2007) buffer zone delineation (based on all air pollution criteria for current operations).

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 15
 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

4.0 BASELINE ASSESSMENT

4.1 Environmental setting
4.1.1 Topography
Richards Bay is located within a large coastal plain varying in altitude from sea level at the coast to 200 m
approximately 20 km inland (Empangeni). The coastline is characterized by a steep sandstone ridge and a
strip of one to four dune ridges (up to +/- 1 km wide) running parallel to the coast and reaching a height of
approximately 100 m. The only break in coastal dune ridge is the harbour and sanctuary entrances.

Figure 6: Regional topography of the greater Richards Bay area.

4.1.2 Land use and sensitive receptors

4.1.2.1 Land use and sensitive receptors within 2km of the site
The site is located within the South Dunes Precinct (SDP) which is bordered by the Port of Richards Bay to
the west, the small craft harbour to the north, the harbour mouth to the north-east, the Indian Ocean to east,
and Richards Bay Game Reserve to the south. The SDP is used primarily for liquid chemical and petroleum
storage facilities (DAERD, 2011). Tenants include the Richards Bay Coal Terminal (RBCT), Island View
Storage (IVS) (Figure 7), Joint Bunker Services (JBS) (Figure 8), and Transnet Rail Engineering (TRE).

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 16

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Figure 7: Photo of the IVS Storage Facility Figure 8: Photo of the JBS Storage Facility

RBCT is the world s largest coal export terminal, with capacity to export 66.5 million tons of coal to the
international market per year. RBCT exports coal derived from the Mpumalanga coalfields and can handle
3,000 84-ton coal wagons per day and fill an average of 700 ships per year (CSIR, 2002).

IVS is a bulk liquid storage and handling facility which handles a wide range of liquefied gases and
hazardous liquids; including propylene, butane, butadiene, ammonia, hexane, octane and acetone (CSIR,
2002).

JBS is a joint bunker service provider and provides storage of fuels for Caltex Oil (SA) (Pty) Ltd, Engen
Petroleum Limited, BP Southern Africa (Pty) (Ltd), Shell Oil South Africa (Pty) Ltd and Total Oil South Africa
(Pty) Ltd (CSIR, 2002).

4.1.2.2 Land use and sensitive receptors within 2 5 km of the site

The Grindrod dry bulk terminal is located approximately 4 km north of the site. The terminal handles coal,
heavy minerals (phosphate rock and metal ores), sulphur (and other phosphates), and other dry bulk
commodities.

The suburb of Meerensee is located 2 5 km north-east of the site. Home to the boat club, shopping malls,
churches, schools, guesthouses, hotels and residences; the suburb comprises many potential sensitive
receptors.

4.1.2.3 Land use and sensitive receptors within 5 10 km of the site

Numerous industrial activities exist within 5 10 km of the proposed site, specifically in the Alton area, north-
west of the proposed site (Figure 9), with major industries including (but not limited to):

BHP Billiton Bayside (now non-operational) and Hillside smelters;

Foskor fertiliser plant;

Mondi Richards Bay pulp and paper mill;

Tata Steel;

Richards Bay Coal Terminal; and

Richards Bay Minerals Mine and Smelter Complex.

Numerous potential sensitive receptors, including nature reserves, residents, schools, hospitals and clinics
are also present within this band and are located within the following suburbs:

Gubethuka and Esikhawini to the south-west; and

Brackenham, Wildenweide, Veldenvlei, Birdswood, Arboretum (and Extension) to the north.

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 17

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

Figure 9: Land use and sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the proposed Terminal.

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 18
 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

4.1.3 Regional climate

Richards Bay is situated in the subtropical high-pressure belt. The mean circulation of the atmosphere over
the subcontinent is anticyclonic throughout the year (except for near the surface) (Preston-Whyte and Tyson,
1997). The synoptic patterns affecting the typical weather experienced in the region owe their origins to the
subtropical, tropical and temperate features of the general atmospheric circulation over Southern Africa
(Figure 10).

Figure 10: Seasonal circulation patterns affecting the regional climate.

The subtropical control is brought via the semi-permanent presence of the South Indian Anticyclone (HP
cell), Continental High (HP cell) and the South Atlantic Anticyclone (LP cell) in the high pressure belt located
approximately 30°S of the equator (Preston-Whyte and Tyson, 1997). The tropical controls are brought via
tropical easterly flows (LP cells) (from the equator to the southern mid-latitudes) and the occurrence of the
easterly wave and lows (Preston-Whyte and Tyson, 1997). The temperature control is brought about by
perturbations in the westerly wave, leading the development of westerly waves and lows (LP cells) (i.e. cold
front from the polar region, moving into the mid-latitudes) (Preston-Whyte and Tyson, 1997).

Seasonal variations in the positioning and intensity of the HP cells determine the extent to which the westerly
waves and lows impact the atmosphere over the region. In winter, the high pressure belt intensifies and
moves northward while the westerly waves in the form of a succession of cyclones or ridging anticyclones
moves eastwards around the South African coast or across the country. The positioning and intensity of
these systems are thus able to significantly impact the region. In summer, the anticyclonic HP belt weakens
and shifts southwards and the influence of the westerly wave and lows weakens.

Anticyclones (HP cells) are associated with convergence in the upper levels of the troposphere, strong
subsidence throughout the troposphere, and divergence in near the surface of the earth. Air parcel
subsidence, inversions, fine conditions and little to no rainfall occur as a result of such airflow circulation
patterns (i.e. relatively stable atmospheric conditions). These conditions are not favourable for air pollutant
dispersion, especially in regards to those emissions emitted close to the ground.

Westerly waves and lows (LP cells) are characterised by surface convergence and upper-level divergence
that produce sustained uplift, cloud formation and the potential for precipitation. Cold fronts, which are
associated with the westerly waves, occur predominantly during winter. The passage of a cold front is
characterised by pronounced variations in wind direction and speed, temperature, humidity, pressure and
distinctive cloud bands (i.e. unstable atmospheric conditions). These unstable atmospheric conditions bring
about atmospheric turbulence which creates favourable conditions for air pollutant dispersion.

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 19

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The tropical easterlies and the occurrence of easterly waves and lows affect Southern Africa mainly during
the summer months. These systems are largely responsible for the summer rainfall pattern and the north
easterly wind component that occurs over the region (Schulze, 1986; Preston-Whyte and Tyson, 1988).

In summary, the convective activity associated with the easterly and westerly waves disturbs and hinders the
persistent inversion which sits over Southern Africa. This allows for the upward movement of air pollutants
through the atmosphere leading to improved dispersion and dilution of accumulated atmospheric pollution.

4.1.4 Boundary layer conditions

The atmospheric boundary layer constitutes the first few hundred metres of the atmosphere and is directly
affected by the earth s surface. The earth s surface affects the boundary layer through the retardation of air
flow created by frictional drag, created by the topography, or as result of the heat and moisture exchanges
that take place at the surface.

During the day, the atmospheric boundary layer is characterised by thermal heating of the earth s surface,
converging heated air parcels and the generation of thermal turbulence, leading to the extension of the
mixing layer to the lowest elevated inversion. These conditions are normally associated with elevated wind
speeds, hence a greater dilution potential for the atmospheric pollutants.

During the night, radiative flux divergence is dominant due to the loss of heat from the earth s surface. This
usually results in the establishment of ground based temperature inversions and the erosion of the mixing
layer. As a result, night times are characterised by weak vertical mixing and the predominance of a stable
layer. These conditions are normally associated with low wind speeds, hence less dilution potential.

The mixed layer ranges in depth from a few metres during night-time s to the base of the lowest elevated
inversion during unstable, daytime conditions. Atmospheric stability is frequently categorised into one of six
stability classes. These are briefly described in Table 8.

The atmospheric boundary layer is normally unstable during the day as a result of the turbulence due to the
sun's heating effect on the earth's surface. The thickness of this mixing layer depends predominantly on the
extent of solar radiation, growing gradually from sunrise to reach a maximum at about 5-6 hours after
sunrise. This situation is more pronounced during the winter months due to strong night-time inversions and
a slower developing mixing layer. During the night a stable layer, with limited vertical mixing, exists. During
windy and/or cloudy conditions, the atmosphere is normally neutral.
Table 8: Atmospheric stability classes
Designation Stability Class Atmospheric Condition
A Very unstable Calm wind, clear skies, hot daytime conditions
B Moderately unstable Clear skies, daytime conditions
C Unstable Moderate wind, slightly overcast daytime conditions
D Neutral High winds or cloudy days and nights
E Stable Moderate wind, slightly overcast night-time conditions
F Very stable Low winds, clear skies, cold night-time conditions

For elevated releases, the highest ground level concentrations would occur during unstable, daytime
conditions. The wind speed resulting in the highest ground level concentration depends on the plume
buoyancy. If the plume is considerably buoyant (high exit gas velocity and temperature) together with a low
wind, the plume will reach the ground relatively far downwind. With stronger wind speeds, on the other hand,
the plume may reach the ground closer, but due to the increased ventilation, it would be more diluted. A wind
speed between these extremes would therefore be responsible for the highest ground level concentrations.
In contrast, the highest concentrations for ground level, or near-ground level releases would occur during
weak wind speeds and stable (night-time) atmospheric conditions.

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 20

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

4.1.5 Precipitation
The proposed terminal is located in the summer rainfall region of South Africa and thus receives most of its
rainfall during the period of October to March, with peak rainfall occurring in the late summer months of
January and February. Rainfall is not uncommon in winter when it is associated with the passage of low
pressure frontal weather systems from the south-west (I.e. cold fronts).

Long term (1970 1990) precipitation trends for Richards Bay are presented in Figure 11.

Figure 11: Long term precipitation trends in Richards Bay, based on the South African Weather Service long term data
record (1970 - 1990) (www.weathersa.co.za).

4.1.6 Temperature
Ambient air temperature is a key factor affecting both plume buoyancy and the development of mixing and
inversion layers. The greater the difference in temperature between the plume and the ambient air, the
higher the plume is able to rise.
Air temperatures in Richards Bay are warm, to hot, for most of the year and summers are humid. In summer
the average daily maximum temperature is 29 C with extremes exceeding 40 C, while in winter the average
maximum temperature is 23 C with extremes in the region of 34 C. Extreme temperatures frequently occur
due to berg wind conditions. Annual average relative humidity levels are 82% (08:00) and 67% (14:00),
respectively. Long term (1970 1990) temperature trends for Richards Bay are presented in Figure 12.

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 21

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Figure 12: Long term temperature trends in Richards Bay, based on the South African Weather Service long term data
record (1970 - 1990) (www.weathersa.co.za).

4.1.7 Wind speed and direction

Wind roses summarize the occurrence of winds at a specified location via representing their strength,
direction and frequency. Calm conditions are defined as wind speeds of less than 1 m/s which are
represented as a percentage of the total winds in the centre circle. Each directional branch on a wind rose
represents wind originating from that specific cardinal direction (16 cardinal directions). Each cardinal branch
is divided into segments of different colours which represent different wind speed classes.

4.1.8 Meteorological overview - MM5 modelled meteorological data

Data for Richards bay for the period January 2011 to December 2013 was acquired from the Pennsylvania
State University / National Centre for Atmospheric Research PSU/NCAR meso-scale model (known as MM5)
for the dispersion modelling purposes. The meteorological overview for the site was based on the analysis of
this MM5 modelled meteorological data. The analysis of the data is assumed and expected to be
representative of the actual experienced meteorological conditions on site. A cross check was also
undertaken against actual recorded meteorological data to determine if the modelled data has a high or low
degree of confidence (Section 4.1.9).

4.1.8.1 Wind rose for the modelled period

The annual wind rose for the proposed terminal is presented in Figure 13. The average wind speed for the
period was 4.24 m/s. Clear dominant wind axes are evident, with winds predicted to originate from the north-
north-east (11% of the time) and north-east (10% of the time), followed by south-south-west (9%) and south-
west (9%). Winds are moderate, with 3.56% calms (<1m/s).

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 22

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Figure 13: MM5 wind rose and wind frequency distribution for the proposed terminal for the period 2011 to 2013.

4.1.8.2 Diurnal wind roses

A diurnal variation is apparent in Figure 14, with the west-south-westerly land breeze (off shore winds)
dominant in the early hours (00:00 - 06:00) and the north-north-easterly sea breeze dominant in the
afternoons (12:00 18:00). Mornings (06:00 12:00) tend to be dominated by high speed south-westerly
winds (>10 m/s).

4.1.8.3 Seasonal wind roses

A seasonal variation can be seen in Figure 15, with north-easterly and east-north-easterly winds dominating
in summer and spring; and south-westerly and west-south-westerly winds dominating in autumn and winter.
The highest frequency of calms is noted in winter (4.08%).

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 23

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

00:00 to 05:59 06:00 to 11:59

N 16% of the time SW 13% of the time
WSW 15% of the time SSW & WSW 11% of the time
Calms: 2.65% Calms: 6.18%

12:00 to 17:59 18:00 to 23:59

ENE 17% of the time NE 18.5% of the time
NE 15.5% of the time NNE 17% of the time
Calms: 2.83% Calms: 2.52%
Figure 14: MM5 diurnal wind rose and wind frequency distribution for the proposed Terminal for the period 2011 to 2013.

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 24

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Summer (DJF) Autumn (MAM)

NE 13% of the time SW 11% of the time
ENE 11.5% of the time N & WSW 10% of the time
Calms: 3.63% Calms: 4.18%

Winter (JJA) Spring (SON)

SW 15% of the time NNE 15.5% of the time
WSW 14.75% of the time NE 14% of the time
Calms: 4.08% Calms: 2.35%
Figure 15: Modelled seasonal wind rose and wind frequency distribution for the proposed terminal for the period 2011 to
2013.

4.1.9 MM5 data cross check and confidence

The annual average wind rose for Richards Bay can be seen in Figure 16. The wind roses were taken from
the Richards Bay Clean Air Association (RBCAA) 2013 Annual Report and represent the average wind
speed and direction recorded at the Association s Arboretum meteorological station (28° 45' 24.295" S; 32°
3' 52.206" E). The Arboretum Station data capture statistic for 2013 was recorded as 97.5%, exceeding the
90% South Africa National Accreditation System (SANAS) requirement for data use.

The measured data shows that south-south-westerly (9%) and south-westerly (8.8%) winds dominate,
followed by north-north-easterly (8.5%) and north-easterly (8%) winds. This clear dominant wind axis is
mirrored in the MM5 wind rose, which indicates winds predicted to originate from the north-north-east (11%
of the time) and north-east (10% of the time), followed by south-south-west (9%) and south-west (9%).

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 25

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

A difference in the wind class (wind speed) frequency is evident in comparing the wind roses. According to
the measured data, the average wind speed recorded during 2013 was 3.54 m/s with 15.7% of winds
recorded between 2 3 m/s. The MM5 data on the other had has a slightly higher average wind speed of
4.24 m/s with 26.6% of winds modelled between 3 4 m/s. The higher average modelled wind speed is
however countered by the higher frequency of calms (3.56%), compared to the measured data (1.56%
calms).

In comparing the results of the local recorded data and MM5 data, it is clear that while there are some
variations, the outputs are generally consistent. These variations may be attributable to the comparatively
sheltered location of the Arboretum station in Richards Bay, versus the exposed Vopak-Reatile site at the
harbour mouth. A relatively high level of confidence is thus instilled in the MM5 modelled data.

Average RBCAA data measured at Arboretum for 2013 MM5 Data average for the period 2011 - 2013

Figure 16: Comparison between the RBCAA measured (2013) and MM5 (average 2011 2013) modelled wind rose.

Average RBCAA data recorded at Arboretum for 2013 MM5 Data average for the period 2011 - 2013

Figure 17: Comparison between the RBCAA measured (2013) and MM5 (average 2011 2013) wind class frequency
distribution

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 26

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

4.2 Baseline air quality

Industrial activities, vehicle exhaust emissions (from the N2 highway and heavy trucks), and sugar cane
burning were identified as the main sources of emissions within the municipality (Thornhill and van Vuuren,
2009; SGS Environmental, 2011). The primary air pollutants are sulphur dioxide (SO2) and fine particulate
matter (PM10), while fluoride has also been identified as a potential threat. The main emissions sources and
associated pollutants are summarised in Table 9.
Table 9: Identified emissions sources and common pollutants in the Richards Bay area
Pollutants

Total Reduced Sulphide

Hydrogen sulphide /
Hydrogen fluoride
Carbon monoxide

Particulate matter

Sulphur trioxide
Nitrogen oxides

Sulphur dioxide

Volatile organic
Source
Carbon dioxide

compounds
Ammonia
BHP Billiton Hillside smelter X X X X X X X
Exxaro Hillendale Mine and Central
X X ? X X X
Processing Centre (CPC)
Foskor fertiliser plant X X X X X X X
Island View Storage X X X
Mondi Felixton and Richards Bay pulp
X X X X X X X
mills
Richards Bay Coal Terminal (RBCT) X
Richards Bay Minerals Mine and
X X ? X X X
Smelter Complex
Tata Steel X X X X X X
Tongaat Hulett Sugar Mill X X X X
Vehicle exhaust emissions X X X X X
Biomass burning (peat fires and sugar
X X X X X
cane burning)
Domestic fuel burning X X X X X

The Richards Bay Clean Air Association (RBCAA) monitored sulphur dioxide (SO2) at six, particulates (PM10)
at six, Total Reduced Sulphur (TRS) at two and meteorology at nine locations in Richards Bay during 2013
(Figure 18).The monitoring and data collection network is robust and well maintained, with a system in place
in alignment with South Africa National Accreditation System (SANAS) requirements, thus adding to the
confidence and reliability of the data and results. The following sections present the results RBCAA s
monitoring as presented in its 2013 Annual Report (Golder Associates, 2014).

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 27

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Figure 18: Location of the RBCAA monitoring stations in 2013 (RBCAA 2013 Annual Report, Golder Associates, 2014) 3

4.2.1 PM10
Annual average concentrations dating back to 2007 are illustrated in Figure 19. An over-all decreasing trend
is noticeable over the seven year period; however 2013 annual average concentrations are higher at the
Brackenham and CBD monitoring stations than those recorded in 2012.

Figure 19: Annual average PM10 concentrations.

3
The St Lucia PM10 background monitoring station was decommissioned on 25 June 2014. A new station monitoring PM10, SO2, TRS and meteorology was installed in eSikhaleni
in August 2014.

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 28

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The seasonal trends in PM10 concentrations for 2013 are provided in Figure 20. Peaks are evident during the
dry winter months, dropping in the wet summer periods.

Figure 20: Seasonal trends in PM10 (monthly average concentrations for 2013)

Current and future annual average NEM:AQA standards were not exceeded during 2013. One (1)
exceedance of the current NEM:AQA daily standard (120 µg/m³) and seven (7) exceedances of the future
NEM:AQA daily standard (75 µg/m³) were recorded in 2013.

4.2.2 SO2
Annual average SO2 concentrations are illustrated in Figure 21. A marked increase in average annual SO2
concentrations is evident at Scorpio over the seven year period. Harbour West displays a similar trend
although to a lesser extent. The NEM:AQA Annual average standard (19 ppb) was not exceeded during
2013.

Figure 21:Inter-annual average SO2 concentrations.

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 29

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The seasonal trends in SO2 concentrations for 2013 are provided in Figure 22. Peaks are evident in the
winter months when temperature inversions are common. Concentrations decrease in the summer months.

Figure 22: Seasonal trends in SO2 (monthly average concentrations).

Ten (10) exceedances of the NEM:AQA daily average standard (48 ppb), forty eight (48) exceedances of the
NEM:AQA hourly average standard (134 ppb) and sixty six (66) exceedances of the NEM:AQA 10 minute
average standard (191 ppb) were recorded during 2013. All exceedances were recorded at the Scorpio
Station, with the exception of one (1) which was recorded at Harbour West.

During 2013 the permissible number of exceedances for the daily standard (4) measured at Scorpio were
exceeded, the station therefore does not comply with this standard.

4.2.3 TRS
Annual average TRS concentrations are illustrated in Figure 23. A marked decrease in annual average TRS
concentrations is evident post 2009. Concentrations increased marginally 2012 and dropped subsequently in
2013. This is likely due to the success of Mondi s odour abatement programme.

Figure 23: TRS annual average information.

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 30

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The seasonal trends for TRS concentrations in 2013 are provided in Figure 24. An over-all decreasing trend
is noted in 2013, with the exception of marginally elevated levels recorded in April, May and June.
Concentrations returned to baseline levels after the analyser was calibrated in June 2013.

Figure 24: Seasonal trends in TRS (monthly average concentrations)

There were twenty five (25) recorded exceedances of the WHO 30-minute H2S guideline (5.0 ppb) during
2013.

4.3 Key pollutants and associated health effects

Table 10 summarises the health effects associated with the main pollutants affecting the regional air quality,
as well as those associated with the proposed Vopak-Reatile Terminal
Table 10: Key pollutants and associate health effects
Pollutant Health effects

Severe hypoxia
Headaches, nausea & vomiting
Carbon
Muscular weakness
Monoxide
Shortness of breath
Long term exposure can lead to Neurological deficits and damage
Irritation to the eyes, nose, or throat
Difficulty in breathing for some asthmatics
Hydrogen Loss of consciousness
Sulphide Headaches, poor attention span, poor memory, and poor motor function
In extreme cases, death
Does not accumulate in the body, therefore there are no long term effects.
Effects on pulmonary function, especially in asthmatics
Nitrogen dioxide Increase in airway allergic inflammatory reactions
Increase in mortality
Particulate Airway allergic inflammatory reactions & a wide range of respiratory problems
matter Increase in medication usage related to asthma, nasal congestion and sinuses problems
(TSP, PM10 and Adverse effects on the cardiovascular system
PM2.5) Increase in mortality
Reduction in lung function
Sulphur dioxide Respiratory symptoms (wheeze and cough)
Increase in mortality

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 31

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Pollutant Health effects

Adverse effects on the cardiovascular system and central nervous system

Volatile organic
Increase in mortality
compounds
(BTEX) Long term exposure can lead to Neurological and cardiovascular system damage and
Increased prevalence of carcinomas in the community
Slight irritation to nose and pharynx at high concentration (about 1000 ppm). Concentration
higher than 2000 ppm may induce sleep, nausea, vomiting, feeling of intoxication and
Acetone dizziness. Concentration higher than 10000 ppm may induce unconsciousness and death.
Daily exposure of 3 hours at 1000 ppm concentration for 7 to 15 years will result in nose
and pharynx irritation, disorientation and weakness.
Hazardous in case of inhalation (lung corrosive). Causes nose and eye irritation, lung
haemorrhage. Tests involving acute exposure of rats, mice, and rabbits have
Acrylic acid
demonstrated acrylic acid to have moderate acute toxicity by inhalation or ingestion, and
high acute toxicity by dermal exposure.
Exposure to butyl acrylate mists or vapours at levels above the recommended exposure
Butyl Acrylate limits may cause irritation to the respiratory tract. High exposure could result in pulmonary
edema. Inhalation of mists or aerosols could result in irritation, drowsiness and headache.
Harmful if inhaled. Irritating to the nose and throat and respiratory system. Over exposure
Diethanolamine may cause coughing, difficulty in breathing and chest pains. Low inhalation hazard due to
low vapour pressure unless material is heated or a mist or spray is generated.
Vapours may be irritating to the eyes, nose and throat. Inhalation may cause headache,
Ethanol nausea, vomiting, dizziness, drowsiness, irritation of the respiratory tract, and loss of
consciousness.
Vapour may be irritating, experienced as nasal discomfort and discharge, with headache,
Ethyl Acetate
nausea, dizziness, unconsciousness, liver and kidney damage, and pulmonary edema.
Vapours may be irritating to the eyes, nose and throat. Inhalation may cause headache,
Ethyl Acrylate nausea, vomiting, dizziness, drowsiness, irritation of the respiratory tract, and loss of
consciousness.
Butanol Headaches and irritation of the eyes, nose and throat
Propanol High vapour concentrations may cause irritation of eyes and respiratory tract.
Methyl ethyl
Nasal and respiratory irritation, dizziness, weakness and fatigue
ketone
Headaches, dizziness, nausea, decreased blood pressure, changes in heart rate and
Methyl isobutyl
cyanosis may result from over-exposure to vapour or skin exposure. Prolonged inhalation
ketone
may be harmful.
Propylene A single prolonged (hours) inhalation exposure is not likely to cause adverse effects. Mists
glycol are not likely to be hazardous.
Vapours may cause mucous membrane irritation and upper respiratory tract discomfort.
High concentrations may result in headache, nausea, insensibility and other central
Styrene
nervous system effects. Repeated exposure to high concentrations may cause liver and
kidney damage.
Vapours may cause coughing and difficulty breathing. Repeated exposure to high
Triethanolamine
concentrations may cause liver and kidney damage.

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 32

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

5.0 EMISSIONS INVENTORY

Emissions from the proposed Vopak Reatile Terminal were based on Australian National Pollutant Inventory
(NPI) emission factors for similar facilities. An emission factor is a tool that is used to estimate emissions to
the environment, and this relates the quantity of substances emitted from a source to some common activity
associated with those emissions, in this case emissions from the handling and storage of various liquids.

Emissions from the handling and storage of various liquids can be categorised as working and standing
losses:

Working losses are the combined loss from filling and emptying a tank. As the liquid level increases, the
pressure inside the tank increases and vapours are expelled from the tank. A loss during emptying
occurs when air drawn into the tank becomes saturated with organic vapour and expands, thus
exceeding the capacity of the vapour space.

Standing losses occur through the expulsion of vapour from a tank due to the vapour expansion and
contraction as a result of changes in temperature and barometric pressure. This loss occurs without any
change in the liquid level in the tank.

A list of possible products handled and stored at Vopak Reatile as well as throughputs are provided in the
table below (Table 11) (NPI, 2012).
Table 11: Products handled and stored
Product CAS Throughput (T/Annum)
Acetone 00067-64-1 7 000
Bitumen 08052-42-4 80 000
Bright stock 64742-54-7 1 600
Butyl Acrylate 00141-32-2 59 000
Caustic soda 01310-73-2 216 000
Di-ethanolamine 00111-42-2 414
Diesel 68334-30-5 120 000
Ethanol 00064-17-5 12 000
Ethyl Acetate 00141-78-6 5 000
Ethyl Acrylate 00140-88-5 21 000
Ethylol 95 09003-99-0 10 000
Ethylol 99 00064-17-5 10 000
Fuel Oil 360 68476-33-5 320 000
Acrylic acid 00079-10-7 2 400
Iso-Butanol 00078-83-1 5 800
Iso-Propylol 00067-63-0 25 000
LPG (propane / butane) 68476-85-7 100 000
Lube SN150 72623-86-0 3 200
Lube SN500 72623-86-0 4 800
Methyl ethyl ketone 00078-93-3 3 000
Methyl isobutyl ketone 00108-10-1 48 000
N-Butanol 00071-36-3 89 000
N-paraffin (kerosene) 64771-72-8 7 200
Petrol (ULP) 08006-61-9 120 000
Propylene glycol 00057-55-6 3 576

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 33

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Product CAS Throughput (T/Annum)

Sabutol 00071-23-8 2 300
Styrene 00100-42-5 600 00
Sulphuric Acid 07664-93-9 240 000
TDI 66071-12-3 3 422
Triethanolamine 00102-71-6 2 892
Triethanolamine 00102-71-6 1 421
Voralux 106 09082-00-2 3 850
Voralux HL 109 09082-00-2 2 892
Voranol 4701 25322-69-4 856
Voranol CP 6001 25322-69-4 856

Emissions associated with the handling and storage of the products at the proposed Vopak-Reatile Terminal
are presented in Table 12.

Table 12: Vopak-Reatile emissions rates

Emission Emission
Product
(T/Annum) (g/s)
Acetone 7.00 0.22
Acrylic acid 0.08 0.00
Butanol 2.82 0.09
Butyl Acrylate 1.87 0.06
Di-ethanolamine 0.01 0.00
Ethanol 1.02 0.03
Ethyl Acetate 0.16 0.01
Ethyl Acrylate 0.67 0.02
Methyl ethyl ketone 0.10 0.00
Methyl isobutyl ketone 1.52 0.05
Propanol 0.79 0.03
Propylene glycol 0.11 0.00
Styrene 1.90 0.06
Triethanolamine 0.14 0.00
Benzene 0.33 0.01
Ethylbenzene 0.06 0.00
Toluene 0.35 0.01
Xylenes 0.27 0.01
Total VOC 55.88 1.77

In calculating the emissions, the following assumptions were made:

Liquids are stored in standard vertical fixed roof (domed) tanks;

Liquefied gasses are stored in pressurized horizontal mounded bullets;

The storage tanks are:

In good condition;

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 34

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Well maintained; and

Best practice is followed in filling and extracting;

A default maximum emission rate was used for products without emission factors;

The vapour recovery unit for petrol is assumed to have a control efficiency of 95%;

Emissions of LPG are accounted as part of Total VOC emissions; and

Although small quantities of sulphur oxides are emitted from storage tank vents and tank car and tank
truck vents during loading operations, from sulphuric acid concentrators, and through leaks in process
equipment these emissions are not significant.

The emission inventory has the following limitations:

Availability of information on emissions from handling and storage of certain products such as:

LPG; and

Sulphuric acid.

6.0 DISPERSION MODELLING

Dispersion modelling for the operation of the proposed Vopak-Reatile Terminal is presented as follows:

Maximum hourly average concentrations for all pollutants(Figure 25); and

Maximum annual average concentrations for all pollutants (Figure 26).

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 35

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Figure 25: Maximum hourly average dispersion simulations for the operation of the Vopak-Reatile Terminal.

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 36

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Figure 26: Maximum annual average dispersion simulations for the operation of the Vopak-Reatile Terminal.

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 37

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The results of the simulations were compared with relevant standards and are summarised in Table 13
Table 13: Summary of results from the dispersion simulations
Short term (1 hour average) Long term (annual average)

Product EAL* Maximum EAL* Maximum

3 % of EAL 3 % of EAL
(µg/m ) concentration (µg/m ) concentration

Acetone 362 000 83.6 0.02% 18 100 0.95 0.01%

Acrylic acid 6 000 0.9 0.02% 300 0.01 0.00%
Butanol 3 000 33.7 1.12% 0.38
Butyl Acrylate 1 100 22.4 2.03% 0.25
Diethanolamine 324 0.2 0.05% 7.8 0.00 0.02%
Ethanol 38 000 12.1 0.03% 0.14
Ethyl Acetate 28 000 1.9 0.01% 0.02
Ethyl Acrylate 6 200 8.0 0.13% 210 0.09 0.04%
Methyl ethyl ketone 11 800 1.1 0.01% 0.01
Methyl isobutyl
4 100 18.2 0.44% 0.21
ketone
Propanol 10 000 9.5 0.09% 0.11
Propylene glycol 500 1.4 0.27% 0.02
Styrene 800 22.7 2.84% 800 0.26 0.03%
Triethanolamine 100 1.6 1.64% 0.02
Benzene - 4.0 - 5 0.04 0.90%
Ethylbenzene 55 200 0.7 0.00% 4 410 0.01 0.00%
Toluene 8 000 4.2 0.05% 1 910 0.05 0.00%
Xylenes 66 200 3.2 0.00% 4 410 0.04 0.00%
Total VOC 10 000 667.6 6.68% 7.57
* See Section 3.0

The results of the dispersion simulations indicated that:

Maximum offsite long term (annual) and short term (hourly) concentrations for all pollutants did not
exceed 10% of their respective guideline or standard;

Maximum offsite long term (annual) and short term (hourly) concentrations for all pollutants occurred
within 250 m of the proposed facility fence line; and that

Concentrations of pollutants decreased by 50% within 500 m, and 75% within 1 km of the proposed
facility fence line.

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 38

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

7.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT

7.1 Construction Phase
Site clearing and construction activities are significant sources of fugitive dust emissions that may have a
substantial, but temporary impact on the local air quality in the vicinity of the proposed Terminal. The
following possible sources of fugitive dust and particulate emissions were identified as activities which could
potentially generate significant quantities of particulate matter and TSP (dust) during site clearing and
construction activities:

Site Clearing and Preparation activities:

Debris removal;

Removal of obstacles such as boulders, trees, etc.;

Truck loading, transport and unloading of debris;

Earthworks;

Vehicular traffic (exhaust emissions and entrainment of dust on unpaved roads);

Bulldozing, excavating and scraping;

Loading and unloading excavated material;

Dumping of fill material, road base, or other materials; and

Compacting and grading.

Construction activities:

Particulate matter (soot) and gaseous emissions such as carbon monoxide, sulphur oxides,
nitrogen oxides and organic compounds including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emissions, including:

Vehicle exhaust emissions associated with the operation of heavy machinery and related
equipment for earthmoving and construction purposes (excavators, bulldozers, cranes, etc.) and
the engines associated with such machines;

Exhaust emissions associated with the diesel generators required for additional electricity
generation;

Dust and finer, fugitive particulate matter emissions associated with the following:

Erection of structures using steel, concrete, brick, glass, timber, and other materials;

Mechanical activities including grinding, hammering and drilling;

Metal joining and finishing including welding, brazing, soldering and other techniques;

Generation of solid wastes and debris, their stockpiling, transfer, and loading onto trucks or into
skips;

Transport of building materials and supplies onto the site, and transport of wastes off site; and

Movement of vehicles along unpaved roadways and paths, in and out of the site and within the
site, together with any establishment and maintenance of the roadways (e.g. grading).

Odour generation through the release of VOCs, associated with extensive applications of paints,
sealants, caulking compounds, adhesives and waterproofing agents over large surface areas.

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 39

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Emissions to the atmosphere from construction sites also include smoke and odour.

The quantities of dust will vary according to the intensity of activity, the type of operation and the
meteorological conditions. Large particles settle out near the source causing a local nuisance problem. Fine
particles can be dispersed over much greater distances. Fugitive dust may have significant adverse impacts
such as reduced visibility, soiling of buildings and materials, reduced growth and production in vegetation
and may affect sensitive industries and aesthetics.

These impacts will however have a short duration and will be limited to the proposed Terminal site. IVS
employees, located adjacent the proposed site, are not likely to suffer health effects however the dust may
become a nuisance during periods of increased activity or wind speeds. It is for these reasons; the
environmental consequence of the impact is anticipated to be moderate.

The implementation of mitigation measures will reduce the magnitude of this impact, thus reducing the
significance of the impact to low.

Similarly, the magnitude and duration of the degeneration of the ambient air quality due to an increase in
gases (CO, NOx, SOx, and VOCs) and particulate matter (soot) associated with vehicle exhaust emissions is
anticipated to be low.

The magnitude, duration and environmental consequence of impacts associated with the erection of
structures, mechanical activities (drilling, grinding etc.), metal joining and finishing and applications of paints,
sealants, adhesives etc. is anticipated to be low.

7.2 Operational Phase

The significance of the proposed Terminal s operational impacts on the ambient air quality was simulated
and quantitatively assessed. Based on this assessment, the proposed Terminal will have a negative impact
on the existing ambient air quality, for the duration of its operations. The magnitude of the impact is however
predicted to be low (< 10% from current conditions) and limited to the proposed Terminal site. The impact is
therefore likely to have a low environmental consequence.

7.3 Decommissioning Phase

Similarly to land clearing and site preparation, decommissioning activities are likely to constitute significant,
yet short lived sources of fugitive dust emissions that may have substantial, but temporary impact on the
local air quality in the vicinity of the proposed Terminal. Of particular significance would be dust and
particulate emissions associated with the following:

Generation of solid wastes and debris, their stockpiling, transfer, and loading onto trucks or into skips;

Transport of wastes off site; and

Movement of vehicles along unpaved roadways and paths, in and out of the proposed Terminal site and
within the site itself.

Particulate matter (soot) and gaseous emissions such as carbon monoxide, sulphur oxides, nitrogen oxides
and organic compounds including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) emissions are also likely to result from heavy vehicle/machinery exhausts emissions.

Air quality impacts are, however limited to the active phases of the proposed Terminal. Provided the
proposed Terminal site is rehabilitated and potential sources of wind erosion (such as stockpiles and
open/exposed areas) are re-vegetated, there will be no long term residual impact on the ambient air quality.
The impact is therefore likely to have a low environmental consequence.

7.4 Cumulative impacts

Based on the information provided, the cumulative impact of the Terminal is likely to be negligible due to the
following factors:

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 40

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The site is located at the harbour mouth and is therefore often subject to wind speeds greater than 5
m/s, favouring dispersion (32% if the time);

The site is located in excess of 2 km from the nearest residential area; and

The predicted emissions concentrations resulting from fugitive storage and handling losses is low (i.e.
less than 10%).

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 41

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Table 14: Air quality impacts

Environmental
Occurrence Severity
Consequence
Impacts
Geographic Before After
Direction Probability Duration Magnitude Reversibility Frequency
Extent Mitigation Mitigation
Demolition
and debris
Fugitive
removal
dust and
(including Negative Definite Transient Medium Site Reversible Medium Moderate Low
PM
transportation,
emissions
loading and
unloading)
Fugitive
dust and
Earthworks Negative Definite Short term Medium Site Reversible Medium Moderate Low
PM
emissions
Fugitive
vehicle
exhaust

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

emissions Negative Definite Short term Low Site Reversible Medium Low Low

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

(CO, SO ,
NO , PM
and VOCs)
Vehicular
traffic Fugitive
dust and
PM
emissions
Negative Definite Short term Medium Site Reversible Medium Moderate Low
from
travelling
on unpaved
roads
Vehicle and Exhaust
Negative Definite Short term Low Site Reversible Medium Low Low
generator emissions

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 42
 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Environmental
Occurrence Severity
Consequence
Impacts
Geographic Before After
Direction Probability Duration Magnitude Reversibility Frequency
Extent Mitigation Mitigation
exhaust (CO, SO ,
emissions NO , PM
and VOCs)
Fugitive
Erection of dust and
structures Negative Definite Transient Low Site Reversible Medium Low Low
PM
emissions
Mechanical Fugitive
activities dust and
(drilling, Negative Definite Transient Low Site Reversible Low Low Low
PM
grinding etc.) emissions
Stockpiling,
transfer, and Fugitive
loading of dust and
Negative Definite Short term Medium Site Reversible Medium Moderate Low

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

waste and PM

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

building emissions
material

Metal joining Fugitive

and finishing PM Negative Medium Transient Low Site Reversible Low Low Low
emissions
Movement of Fugitive
vehicles along dust and
roadways (i.e. PM
dust emissions Negative Definite Short term Medium Site Reversible Medium Moderate Low
entrainment from
on unpaved travelling
roads on unpaved

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 43
 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Environmental
Occurrence Severity
Consequence
Impacts
Geographic Before After
Direction Probability Duration Magnitude Reversibility Frequency
Extent Mitigation Mitigation
roads
Extensive
applications of
paints, Odour and
Negative Medium Transient Low Site Reversible Low Low Low
sealants, VOCs
adhesives etc.

Storage
losses from Volatile gas Medium
Negative Definite Low Site Reversible Medium Low Low
tanks emissions term

Working
losses during Volatile gas Medium
product Negative Definite Low Site Reversible Medium Low Low
emissions term
handling

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

Fugitive

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

Demolition of dust and
Negative Definite Transient High Local Reversible Low Moderate Low
structures PM
emissions
Stockpiling, Fugitive
transfer, and dust and
Negative Definite Short term Medium Site Reversible Medium Moderate Low
loading of PM
waste emissions
Movement of Fugitive
vehicles along dust and
Negative Definite Short term Medium Site Reversible Medium Moderate Low
unpaved PM
roadways emissions
Re-vegetation Reduction Positive High Long term Low Site Reversible High No Impact No Impact

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 44
 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Environmental
Occurrence Severity
Consequence
Impacts
Geographic Before After
Direction Probability Duration Magnitude Reversibility Frequency
Extent Mitigation Mitigation
post closure in fugitive
dust and
PM
emissions

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 45
 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

7.5 Assessment of Alternatives

7.5.1 Alternative layout and tanks design options
The site layout plan is preliminary in nature and will be optimized based on the site specific conditions, and
the outcomes of the EIA process, particularly the findings and recommendations of the independent
specialist studies.

Tanks planned for the proposed terminal, will be in accordance with relevant international best practice
guidelines and all other applicable legislation. The final tank designs will therefore be confirmed during the
final layout design process.

Whilst care has been taken to assess the potential air pollution impact from the proposed terminal, changes
to the current existing designs (specifically tank dimensions), may result in different conclusions. It is
therefore recommended that the proposed terminal emissions are re-modelling if and when changes occur.

7.5.2 The No-Project alternative

The no-project alternative will not alter the ambient air quality from its current state.

8.0 MITIGATION OBJECTIVES

Mitigation objectives in line with the impacts identified are outlined in the following tables:

Table 15: Recommendations for construction;

Table 16: Recommendations for operation; and

Table 17: Recommendations for decommissioning and closure phase.

Recommend attainable mitigation or management actions are also provided which could be included in
action plans for implementation by site staff. Quantifiable standards for measuring the effectiveness of
mitigation are provided where possible.

Table 15: Recommendations for construction

Construction Phase Responsibility
To comply with the requirements of NEM:AQA; and
Objectives
To reduce discomfort or nuisance effects on receptors.

Fugitive dust and PM emissions associated with:

Demolition and debris removal (including transportation, loading

and unloading);

Earthworks;
Impacts:
Stockpiling, transfer, and loading of waste and building material; Site Manager

Vehicular traffic on unpaved roads; and

Material stockpiles.

Training the workforce in awareness of air emissions should be

carried out at all levels (workers, foremen, managers) and should be
Mitigation included in site induction courses. Training should focus on
measure(s): promoting understanding as to why mitigation measures are in
place;

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 46

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Construction Phase Responsibility

Reduce unnecessary traffic volumes by developing plans to optimise
vehicle usage and movement;

Employ wet suppression on construction access roads using water

and a suitable dust palliative to achieve the 95% control efficiency
(water alone will only achieve a 75% control efficiency);

Institute rigorous speed control and traffic calming measures to

reduce vehicle entrainment of dust. A recommended maximum
speed of 20 km/h to be set on all unpaved roads and 35 km/h on
paved roads;

Use temporary windbreaks in open exposed areas and stockpiles

prone to wind erosion to reduce wind speed through sheltering; and

Employ good housekeeping both inside and outside the construction

site, including: cleaning up rubbish and debris, sweeping, hosing
down stockpiles or roadways, repairing tears in hessian or shade
cloth used for dust attenuation.

Vehicle use and movement optimisation plan;

Evidence of wet suppression on access roads and stockpiles;

Performance Evidence of speed control (e.g. speed bumps or speed limit

criteria signage);

Housekeeping schedule; and

Use of temporary windbreaks.

Any complaints as to the management of on-site air quality will be

Monitoring/ directed to the site management. Complaints and any actions arising
Measurement from a complaint will be recorded in a complaints register to be
maintained by site management.

Table 16: Recommendations for operation

Operational Phase
To comply with the requirements of NEM:AQA;
Put measures in place to align the operations with the provisions of
Objectives Responsibility
South African guidelines on air quality; and
To reduce discomfort or nuisance effects on receptors.

Impacts: Fugitive volatile gas emissions from storage tanks and handling
Environmental
3
All installations with a throughput of greater than 50 000 m per control officer
annum of products with a vapour pressure greater than 14 kPa, will (ECO) or
Mitigation be fitted with vapour recovery/ destruction units. This is considered Safety Health
measure(s): to be a conservative approach as vapour recovery system control Environmental
efficiencies typically range from 90 97%. and Quality
(SHEQ)
Performance Manager
Compliance with the Atmospheric Emissions Licence (AEL)
criteria

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 47

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Operational Phase

Monitoring should be in compliance with the Atmospheric Emissions

Licence (AEL)
Monitoring/ Any complaints as to the management of on-site air quality will be
Measurement directed to the site management. Complaints and any actions arising
from a complaint will be recorded in a complaints register to be
maintained by site management.

Table 17: Recommendations for decommissioning and closure phase

Decommissioning and closure phase
To comply with the requirements of NEM:AQA;
Put measures in place to align the operations with the provisions of
Objectives Responsibility
South African guidelines on air quality; and
To reduce discomfort or nuisance effects on receptors.
Fugitive dust and PM emissions associated with:
Stockpiling, transfer, and loading of waste and rubble;
Impacts:
Vehicular traffic on unpaved roads; and
Material stockpiles.
Training the workforce in awareness of air emissions can be carried
out at all levels (workers, foremen, managers) and can be included
in site induction courses. Training should focus on promoting
understanding as to why mitigation measures are in place;

Reduction in unnecessary traffic volumes by developing plans to

optimise vehicle usage and movement;

Wet suppression on construction access roads with water and a

suitable dust palliative to achieve the 95% control efficiency (water
alone will only achieve a 75 % control efficiency); Environmental
control officer
Mitigation Rigorous speed control and the institution of traffic calming (ECO) or
measure(s): measures to reduce vehicle entrainment of dust. A recommended Safety Health
maximum speed of 20 km/h to be set on all unpaved roads and 35 Environmental
km/h on paved roads; and Quality
(SHEQ)
Use temporary windbreaks in open exposed areas and stockpiles Manager
prone to wind erosion to reduce wind speed through sheltering;

Re-vegetation to minimise wind erosion impacts in the context of

establishing self-sustaining ecosystems;

Traffic and movement over stabilised areas should be restricted and

controlled, and damage to stabilised areas should be repaired and
maintained to the satisfaction of the Environmental Manager.

Vehicle use and movement optimisation plan

Evidence of wet suppression on access roads and stockpiles
Performance
criteria Evidence of speed control (e.g. speed bumps or speed limit
signage)
Housekeeping schedule

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 48

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Decommissioning and closure phase

Use of temporary windbreaks
Rehabilitation and closure plan
Any complaints as to the management of on-site air quality will be
Monitoring/ directed to the site management. Complaints and any actions arising
Measurement from a complaint will be recorded in a complaints register to be
maintained by site management.

9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the available data; site clearing, construction and operation of the proposed Vopak-Reatile
Terminal, will impact negatively on local ambient air quality. The overall significance of this impact is however
predicted to be low, as the facility is predicted to comply with local (South African) source emission and
ambient air quality standards and guidelines. Thus, there should be no detrimental impacts on sensitive
receptors in the vicinity of the facility.

Since the type, volume and throughput of chemicals stored at the proposed Terminal will be dependent on
market conditions, the parameters assessed in this AQIA are likely to change. It is therefore recommended
that Vopak-Reatile re-assess the predicted emissions once the type, volume and throughput of chemicals, as
well as vehicle, rail and ship operational details are known.

10.0 SUMMARY OF ASSUMTIONS AND LIMITATIONS

10.1 Assumptions
10.1.1 Tanks
The facility has 41 standard vertical fixed (domed) roof tanks (Table 18).
3
The facility has also 3 standard 7 200 m mounded bullets for LPG, with an internal diameter of 10m.
3
The total storage capacity of the site is 251 600 m .

The site will be simulated as a volume source.

The tanks are white and in good condition.

The maximum liquid height is 90% of shell height and the average liquid level is 75% of shell height.
Table 18: Vertical domed tank dimensions
Tank Size Number of Diameter Height Diameter Height
(m³) tanks (m) (m) (ft) (ft)
1 000 19 11.2 12.2 36 40
1 500 4 13.4 11.5 44 37
5 000 9 24.4 12.2 80 40
10 000 2 36.6 9.8 120 32
20 000 7 45.7 12.2 150 40

10.1.2 Products
The products handled at the facility are shown in APPENDIX A;

Products aren t mixed and have dedicated tanks;

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 49

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The CAS numbers indicated relate to the products handled;

Certain products have no storage facility and/or throughput (yellow and orange highlight). The
throughput indicated is in metric tons per year (mt/yr); and

The total throughput of the site is 1 592 479 mt/yr.

10.1.3 Mitigation measures

3
All installations with a throughput of greater than 50 000 m per annum of products with a vapour
pressure greater than 14 kPa, will be fitted with vapour recovery/ destruction units. This is considered to
be a conservative approach as vapour recovery system control efficiencies typically range from 90
97%;

Vapour recovery/ destruction units will not exceed the emission limits set out in the Table 19;
3
For road tanker and rail car loading/ offloading facilities (where the throughput is less than 50 000 m
per annum and where ambient air quality is, or is likely to be impacted) all liquid products will be loaded
using bottom loading, or equivalent with the venting pipe connected to a vapour pressure balancing
system; and

Where vapour balancing and/or bottom loading is not possible, a recovery system using absorption,
condensation or incineration of the remaining VOC s with a collection efficiency of at least 95%, will be
fitted.
Table 19: Vapour recovery/ destruction emissions limits
mg/Nm3 under normal
Technology conditions of 273 Kelvin and
101.3 kPa
Total volatile organic compounds from vapour recovery / destruction
150
units using thermal treatment
Total volatile organic compounds from vapour recovery/ destruction
40 000
units using non-thermal treatment

10.2 Limitations
Emissions from road vehicles, trains and ships during loading/ unloading were not considered in this
assessment;

Dispersion models are limited in their inability to account for highly complex rapidly varying spatial and
temporal meteorological systems such as calms; coastal fumigation, sea/land breeze recirculation, and
mountain and valley winds, especially where complex terrain is involved. The USEPA considers the
range of uncertainty to be -50% to 200% for models applied to gently rolling terrain. The accuracy
improves with fairly strong wind speeds and during neutral atmospheric conditions. Dispersion
modelling results can be compared with monitored values in order to improve the accuracy of, or
calibrate models.

Whilst care has been taken to assess the potential air pollution impact from the proposed Vopak Reatile
Terminal, changes to the current existing designs, throughputs, etc. after this assessment may result in
different conclusions;

No site specific monitoring data was available, therefore reliance is placed on regional monitoring data;
and

No emission data from the surrounding industries was available for inclusion in the simulations.

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 50

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

11.0 REFERENCES
American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) Threshold Limit Value (TLV)
https://www.osha.gov/dts/chemicalsampling/data/

Chestnut, L.G et al., 1991: Pulmonary Function and Ambient Particulate Matter: Epidemiological Evidence
from NHANES I, Archives of Environmental Health, 46, 135 144.

Cowherd C, Muleski GE and Kinsey JS, 1988: Control of Open Fugitive Dust Sources, EPA-450/3-88-008,
US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina

Department of Water and Environmental Affairs (DWEA), 2011: Proposed Draft National Dust Control
th
Regulations for public comment, Government Gazette no 34307), 27 May 2011.

Environment Australia, 1999: National Pollutant Inventory (NPI) Emission estimation Techniques Manual for
fugitive emissions, December 1999.

EPA 1993 AP 42, Fifth Edition Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, Volume 1: Stationary Point and
Area Sources, Chapter 8: Inorganic Chemical Industry, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington D.C.,
United States

EPA, 1996: Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors (AP-42), 5th Edition US Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

European Parliament (2000) Directive 2000/76/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4
December 2000 on the Incineration of Waste. Official Journal of the European Communities. L332/91

Fenger, J., 2002: Urban air quality, In J. Austin, P. Brimblecombe and W. Sturges (eds), Air pollution science
for the 21st century, Elsevier, Oxford.

General Notice No. 964, Gazette No. 35894 Notice on The Intention to Amend the National Listed Activities
23 November 2012

Google Earth: images

Harrison, R.M. and R.E. van Grieken, 1998: Atmospheric Aerosols. John Wiley: Great Britain.

International Finance Corporation (IFC) (2007) Environmental, Health, and Safety (EHS) Guidelines

Manahan, S.E., 1991: Environmental Chemistry, Lewis Publishers Inc, United States of America.

Ministry for the Environment, (NZ) 2001. Good Practice for assessing and managing the environmental
effects of dust emissions. Wellington, New Zealand, <http://www.mfe.govt.nz>

National Environmental Management Act: Air Quality Act, Act 39 of 2004.

National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act (39/2004): List of activities which result in atmospheric
emissions which may have a significant detrimental effect on the environment, including health, social
conditions, economic conditions, ecological conditions or cultural heritage, GN 35894, 23 November 2012

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Recommended Exposure Limit (REL)
https://www.osha.gov/dts/chemicalsampling/data/

NPI 2012 National Pollutant Inventory Mission Estimation Technique Manual for Fuel and Organic Liquid
Storage, Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra, Australia
Pope, C. A III and Dockery, D.W., 1992: Acute Health Effects of PM10 Pollution on Symptomatic and Non-
Symptomatic Children, American Review of Respiratory Disease, 145, 1123 1128.

Pope, C.A III and Kanner, R.E., 1993: Acute Effects of PM10 Pollution on Pulmonary Function of Smokers
with Mild to Moderate Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, American Review of Respiratory Disease,
147, 36 40.

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 51

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Preston-Whyte, R.A., and Tyson, P.D., 1997: The Atmosphere and Weather of Southern Africa. Oxford
University Press, Cape Town.
Preston-Whyte, R.A., and Tyson, P.D., 1998: The Weather and Climate of Southern Africa, 2nd Edition.

Quilliam, J.H., 1974: Sources and methods of control of dust. In: The ventilation of South African gold mines.
Yeoville, Republic of South Africa: The Mine Ventilation Society of South Africa.

Samaras, Z., and Sorensen, S.C., 1999: Mobile sources, In J. Fenger, O. Hertel and F. Palmgren (eds),
urban air pollution European aspects, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Denmark

SANAS R07-01

SGS Environmental. 2011. Air Quality Impact Assessment for the Proposed Fairbreeze Mine. Prepared for
Exxaro. AQ211.
Shafirovich, E and A Varma. 2009. UCG: a brief review of current status. Ind Eng Chem Res Vol 48: 7865-
7875;

The South African ambient air quality standards for common pollutants were published in the Government
Gazette, No. 32816 on 24 December 2009

UK Environment Agency (2011) H1 Environmental RiskAssessment Framework. Annex F - Air Emissions.

Bristol, United Kingdom. GEHO0410BSIL-E-E v2.2
USEPA., (1995): Compilation of air pollutant emission factors, AP-42, CH 13.2.3: Heavy Construction
Operation, U.S Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C.
nd
World Health Organization, WHO Air Quality Guidelines for Europe, 2 edition. WHO Regional Office for
Europe, 2000, Copenhagen, Denmark. WHO Regional Publications, European Series, No 91).
World Health Organization. 2005, WHO Air Quality Guidelines Global Update. WHO Regional Office for
Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark.

GOLDER ASSOCIATES AFRICA (PTY) LTD.

Candice Allan Adam Bennett

Air Quality Specialist Review Manager

CAA/AB/ck

Reg. No. 2002/007104/07

Directors: SA Eckstein, RGM Heath, SC Naidoo, GYW Ngoma

Golder, Golder Associates and the GA globe design are trademarks of Golder Associates Corporation.

\\dur2-s-fs3\gaadata\projects\13614921_vopak_eia-reatile_fuel_storage_rb\6_deliverables\deiar jan 2015\appendices\appendix_e_13614921-11897-3_vsad_rb_aqia_rev0.docx

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3 52

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX A
Products Handled

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Table A: Products

Number of Volume Tank Size Throughput

Product CAS Tank Type
Tanks (m³) (m³) (mt/yr)
2-Ethylhexyl acrylate 00103-11-7 - 0 0 1 500 0
Acetone 00067-64-1 Vertical 1 1 500 1 500 7 000
Benzene 68476-50-6 - 0 0 1 500 0
Bitumen 08052-42-4 Vertical 2 10 000 5 000 80 000
Bright stock 64742-54-7 Vertical 1 1 000 1 000 1 600
Butyl Acrylate 00141-32-2 Vertical 2 10 000 5 000 59 000
Caustic soda 01310-73-2 Vertical 2 40 000 20 000 216 000
DEA 00111-42-2 Vertical 1 1 000 1 000 414
Diesel 68334-30-5 Vertical 1 10 000 10 000 120 000
Diethylene glycol 00111-46-6 - 0 0 1 500 0
Ethanol 00064-17-5 Vertical 1 1 500 1 500 12 000
Ethyl Acatate 00141-78-6 Vertical 1 1 000 1 000 5 000
Ethyl Acrylate 00140-88-5 Vertical 1 1 500 1 500 21 000
Ethylol 95 09003-99-0 Vertical 1 1 000 1 000 10 000
Ethylol 99 00064-17-5 Vertical 1 1 000 1 000 10 000
Fuel Oil 360 68476-33-5 Vertical 2 40 000 20 000 320 000
GAA(Glycol Acrylic Acid) 00079-10-7 Vertical 1 1 000 1 000 2 400
Iso-Butanol 00078-83-1 Vertical 1 1 000 1 000 5 800
Isopropylol 00067-63-0 - 0 0 0 25 000
LPG 68476-85-7 Horizontal 3 21 600 7 200 100 000
Lube SN150 72623-86-0 Vertical 1 1 000 1 000 3 200
Lube SN500 72623-86-0 Vertical 1 1 500 1 500 4 800
MEK 00078-93-3 Vertical 1 1 000 1 000 3 000
MIBK 00108-10-1 Vertical 2 10 000 5 000 48 000
N-Butanol 00071-36-3 Vertical 2 10 000 5 000 89 000
N-paraffin 64771-72-8 Vertical 1 1 000 1 000 7 200
Petrol 08006-61-9 Vertical 1 10 000 10 000 120 000
PGI 00057-55-6 Vertical 1 1 000 1 000 3 576
Sabutol 00071-23-8 Vertical 1 1 000 1 000 2 300
Styrene 00100-42-5 Vertical 1 5 000 5 000 60 000
Styrene Monomer 00100-42-5 - 0 0 0 0
Sulphuric Acid 07664-93-9 Vertical 3 60 000 20 000 240 000
TDI 66071-12-3 Vertical 1 1 000 1 000 3 422
TEA 00102-71-6 Vertical 1 1 000 1 000 2 892
TEA (Commercial) 00102-71-6 Vertical 1 1 000 1 000 1 421
Voralux 106 09082-00-2 Vertical 1 1 000 1 000 3 850
Voralux HL 109 09082-00-2 Vertical 1 1 000 1 000 2 892
Voranol 4701 25322-69-4 Vertical 1 1 000 1 000 856
Voranol CP 6001 25322-69-4 Vertical 1 1 000 1 000 856

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX B
Document limitations

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

DOCUMENT LIMITATIONS
This Document has been provided by Golder Associates Africa Pty Ltd ( Golder ) subject to the following
limitations:

i) This Document has been prepared for the particular purpose outlined in Golder s proposal and no
responsibility is accepted for the use of this Document, in whole or in part, in other contexts or for any
other purpose.

ii) The scope and the period of Golder s Services are as described in Golder s proposal, and are subject to
restrictions and limitations. Golder did not perform a complete assessment of all possible conditions or
circumstances that may exist at the site referenced in the Document. If a service is not expressly
indicated, do not assume it has been provided. If a matter is not addressed, do not assume that any
determination has been made by Golder in regards to it.

iii) Conditions may exist which were undetectable given the limited nature of the enquiry Golder was
retained to undertake with respect to the site. Variations in conditions may occur between investigatory
locations, and there may be special conditions pertaining to the site which have not been revealed by
the investigation and which have not therefore been taken into account in the Document. Accordingly,
additional studies and actions may be required.

iv) In addition, it is recognised that the passage of time affects the information and assessment provided in
this Document. Golder s opinions are based upon information that existed at the time of the production
of the Document. It is understood that the Services provided allowed Golder to form no more than an
opinion of the actual conditions of the site at the time the site was visited and cannot be used to assess
the effect of any subsequent changes in the quality of the site, or its surroundings, or any laws or
regulations.
v) Any assessments made in this Document are based on the conditions indicated from published sources
and the investigation described. No warranty is included, either express or implied, that the actual
conditions will conform exactly to the assessments contained in this Document.

vi) Where data supplied by the client or other external sources, including previous site investigation data,
have been used, it has been assumed that the information is correct unless otherwise stated. No
responsibility is accepted by Golder for incomplete or inaccurate data supplied by others.

vii) The Client acknowledges that Golder may have retained sub-consultants affiliated with Golder to
provide Services for the benefit of Golder. Golder will be fully responsible to the Client for the Services
and work done by all of its sub-consultants and subcontractors. The Client agrees that it will only assert
claims against and seek to recover losses, damages or other liabilities from Golder and not Golder s
affiliated companies. To the maximum extent allowed by law, the Client acknowledges and agrees it will
not have any legal recourse, and waives any expense, loss, claim, demand, or cause of action, against
Golder s affiliated companies, and their employees, officers and directors.

viii) This Document is provided for sole use by the Client and is confidential to it and its professional
advisers. No responsibility whatsoever for the contents of this Document will be accepted to any person
other than the Client. Any use which a third party makes of this Document, or any reliance on or
decisions to be made based on it, is the responsibility of such third parties. Golder accepts no
responsibility for damages, if any, suffered by any third party as a result of decisions made or actions
based on this Document.

GOLDER ASSOCIATES AFRICA (PTY) LTD

January 2015
Report No. 13614921-11897-3

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com