Q4

Fuel Depot Project

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT
Executive Summary

DATE AUGUST 2019

Compiled by: Applicant:

Setala Environmental Q4 Fuel Rustenburg (Pty) Ltd

P.O. Box 36593 14 Cobalt street
Menlopark, 0102 Zinniaville, Rustenburg, 0302
Contact person: Contact person:
Ria Pretorius Piet Theron
Tel +27(0)82 568 6344 Tel +27(0)82 698 0293
Fax +27(0)86 675 4026 Email piet@q4.co.za
Email ria@setalaenvironmental.co.za

Q4 Fuel Depot

Executive Summary


1 INTRODUCTION

Q4 Fuel Rustenburg (Pty) Ltd (the applicant) appointed Setala Environmental as the independent Environmental
Assessment Practitioner (EAP) to undertake the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the proposed
expansion of the Q4 Fuel Depot, in Rustenburg.

The proposed project is located in Rustenburg X 9 Industrial Area, on the outskirts of the Rustenburg CBD, and
falls within the Rustenburg Local Municipality.

An application for environmental authorisation is submitted in terms of the National Environmental Management
Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998) (NEMA), read with the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2014
(EIA Regulations), as amended.

2 APPROACH TO THE BASIC ASSESSMENT PROCESS

The approach followed by the consultants is based on the specifications for the Basic Assessment Report in
terms of the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2014, promulgated in terms of the National
Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998), as amended.
The Department of Economic Development, Environment, Conservation and Tourism, North West Provincial
Government (DEDECT), is the lead authority for this Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process and the
development needs to be authorised by this Department.).

To ensure that all requirements and processes in terms of the Acts are followed the following tasks need to be
conducted:
The following has to be submitted to the DEDECT:
ü Application form for Authorisation
ü Draft Basic Assessment Report
ü Environmental Management Programme (EMPr)
ü Final Basic Assessment Report
The environmental authority will review the Application and final Basic Assessment Report and the following
decisions may be made:
ü Grant authorisation of the activity
ü Refuse the activity
ü Request further information or investigations
ü Refer the application to a scoping process where substantial additional investigations or assessments are
required in order to make a decision.

3 PROJECT LOCALITY

The proposed project is located in Rustenburg X 9 Industrial Area, and falls within the Rustenburg Local
Municipality. (Project indicated in red on the Site Location map).

The entire Erf is approximately 2.1633 ha, but the actual target area for the proposed expansion of the Fuel
Depot is 0.087 ha. Cobalt Street forms the western boundary and access to the study site.

The GPS coordinates of the main landmarks within the project area are as follows:
• Study site location (approximate centre): 25°38'0.08"S; 27°13'57.85"E.

2
Q4 Fuel Depot

• Study Site entrance off Cobalt Street: 25°38'0.40"S; 27°13'55.07"E.

• Quarter Degree Square (QDS): 2527CA.
• Quaternary Drainage Area (QDA): A22H.

Figure 1: Site location

Figure 2: Study Site location (Google Earth)

3
Q4 Fuel Depot

Figure 3: Study site (Close Up)

4 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

The extension of the fuel depot will be on Erf 2265, of the existing Rustenburg Extension 9, situated in the
Rustenburg Local Municipality, North West Province. The project is on approximately 2.1633 hectares of land.
The Surveyor-general 21-digit site (erf/farm/portion) reference number is T0JQ00270000226500000.

5 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

This application is for the proposed expansion of a fuel depot and associated infrastructure, situated in the
Rustenburg X 9 Industrial Area. The applicant plans to expand on the existing facilities and the existing storage
tanks of 2 x 23m³, and proposes to construct 5 x 83m³ tanks; 1 x 23m³ tank and 1 x 14m³ tank.

The applicant purchased the business in 2017, with existing facilities and the storage tanks of 2 x 23m³. These
facilities were constructed in 1991. The site is leased to Q4 Rustenburg, the applicant. The development of the
facility will be done by the applicant.

The Q4 Fuel Rustenburg is currently establishing themselves as a “non-refining wholesaler”. The depot will
expand on its provision of fuel to customers in the areas surrounding Rustenburg. The combined capacity of the
fuel tanks will not exceed 500 cubic metres.

As mentioned:
• Five above ground storage tanks, each having a storage capacity of 83m³ (equating to a total of 415m³)
• One above ground storage tank, having a storage capacity of 23m³ (equating to a total of 23m³),
• One above ground storage tank, having a storage capacity of 14m³ (equating to a total of 14m³) will be
installed.
The combined capacity of the proposed new fuel tanks on site will thus be 452m³.
The total combined storage capacity on site will thus not exceed 500m³ (cubic metres).

4
Q4 Fuel Depot

The full scope of works includes the construction/installation of:

Ø Expansion of the fuel depot and related uses
Ø Associated infrastructure including access road, civil services (water, sewer, stormwater reticulation and
electricity)

The following facilities could be available:

Ø Fuel bay - The pump islands are strategically placed on site to prevent traffic flow problems, and to ensure
maximum utilization of all servicing points
Ø Petrol and diesel categories under one roof
Ø Erection of a suspended forecourt roof above the dispensers to protect customers and dispensing facilities
from the elements
Ø Construction of a concreted forecourt
Ø Storage yard for flammable products (e.g. oils and greases)
Ø Parking facility for vehicles
Ø Staff ablution facilities
Ø Ancillary offices
Ø Storage area
Ø State of the art security and camera surveillance will be installed
Ø Communication services will be readily available in the event of emergencies

As mentioned, the site has existing facilities and storage tanks of 2 x 23m³. These facilities were constructed in
1991.

Figure 4: Existing Layout of facilities

5
Q4 Fuel Depot

The size of the proposed site is sufficient to be utilised for the proposed activities with ample of free space for the
envisaged activities, vehicular movement and entering and exiting of larger trucks. Access to the site is currently
proposed to be obtained from Cobalt street situated to the east of the site. This is an existing entrance.

The final design and layout of the facility will be based on the specifications of Q4 Fuel (Pty) Ltd. A detailed layout
for the facility, in compliance with their own internal specification, as well as relevant industry standards, will be
compiled by Q4 Fuel Rustenburg. The design will also be in compliance with the minimum development
requirements of the local authorities’ building regulations and according to the standard Q4 Fuel (Pty) Ltd
minimum requirements.

The preliminary layout of the filling station is indicated in Figure 5 below.

6 PHYSICAL SIZE OF THE ACTIVITY

The physical size of the preferred activity/ (footprint):
Table 1:
Alternative: Size of the activity:
Alternative 1 (Proposal) 0,087ha

6
Q4 Fuel Depot

The footprint of the activity will be as follows:

Table 2:
Schedule of areas
Item Bund Footprint/ Area
1 Bund No 1 18m x 6.5m = 117m2
2 Bund No 2 8.6m x 4.9m = 42m2
3 Bund No 3 8.6m x 5.3m = 46m2
4 Bund No 4 18m x 10.5m = 189m2
5 Bund No 5 18m x 10.5m = 189m2
TOTAL AREA = 583m2
6 Refuelling Bay No 1 9.3m x 5m = 47m2
7 Refuelling Bay No 2 30m x 8m = 240m2
TOTAL AREA = 287m2
TOTAL AREA 870m2

The size of the site (within which the above footprints will occur):
Table 3:
Alternative: Size of the site (within which the above footprints will occur):
Alternative 1 (Proposal) 2,1633 ha


7 SITE ACCESS

No new access to the site is planned. During construction all vehicle movement must be along existing roads.
The existing entrance is from Cobalt road.

8 LAND USES

The landcover (or landuse) of the study area is primarily that of developed industrial complexes, hard concrete
surfaces and typical factory facilities. The area earmarked for the project development is within this industrial
complex setup. There is no other land uses and landcovers on site, including agriculture fields and open
bushveld. The study site is totally transformed.

9 TOPOGRAPHY

The topography of the general region and study area is flat to slightly undulating plains, with no distinctive ridges,
valleys, ravines or rocky outcrops. The surrounding area and study site is industrial, urbanised, where the original
topography and natural environment has been altered during construction of roads, buildings, parking lots, etc.

The average height above sea level (asl) of the study area is approximately 1 147m, with a maximum and
minimum elevation of approximately 1 149m and 1 146m, respectively. The average gradient (slope) across the
study area is very low and averages between 0% and 1,5%. The general downward slope across the study site is
from west to east, with basically no slope from north to south.

10 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

Most of the area is underlain by the mafic intrusive rocks of the Rustenburg Layered Suite of the Bushveld
Igneous Complex. Rocks include gabbro, norite, pyroxenite and anorthosite. The shales and quartzites of the
Pretoria Group (Transvaal Supergroup) also contribute to the geology of the area. Soils present are mainly vertic
melanic clays with some dystrophic or mesotrophic plinthic catenas and some freely drained, deep soils.

7
Q4 Fuel Depot

11 LEGAL REQUIREMENTS

1 National Environmental Management Act

In terms of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998) (NEMA) as amended and
the EIA Regulations 2014, an application for environmental authorisation for certain listed activities must be
submitted to the relevant competent authority, the The Department of Economic Development, Environment,
Conservation and Tourism, North West Provincial Government (DEDECT).

A Basic Assessment (BA) process for this proposed project is being undertaken by Setala Environmental. The
listed activities for the proposed project are the following:
Table 4: Legislation
Description of compliance with the relevant legislation, policy or guideline:
Legislation, policy of guideline Description of compliance
Notice 1 of the EIA Regulations 2014, as amended
Listed Activity Activity/ Project Description
Listing Notice 1 Activity 14 – Not Relevant This activity will not be triggered as this
The development and related operation of facilities or project entails an expansion to an
infrastructure, for the storage, or for the storage and handling, of existing facility.
a dangerous good, where such storage occurs in
containers with a combined capacity of 80 cubic metres or more
but not exceeding 500 cubic metres.
Listing Notice 1 Activity 27 - Not Relevant The construction of the proposed
The clearance of an area of 1 hectare or more, but less than 20 development will not entail the
hectares of indigenous vegetation, except where such clearance clearance of more that 1 hectares of
of indigenous vegetation is required for – indigenous vegetation. The impacted
(i) the undertaking of a linear activity; or study area is 2,1633 ha, but the site is
(ii) maintenance purposes undertaken in accordance with a within an industrial area and yard and
maintenance management plan. the entire environment is totally
transformed with no indigenous
vegetation.
Listing Notice 1 Activity 51 The applicant plans to expand on the
The expansion and related operation of facilities for the storage, existing facilities, and proposes to
or storage and handling, of a dangerous good, where the construct 5 x 83m³ tanks; 1 x 23m³ tank
capacity of such storage facility will be expanded by more than and 1 x 14m³ tank. The combined
80 cubic metres. capacity of the proposed new fuel tanks
on site will thus be 452m³.
Listing Notice 1 Activity 67 There is existing storage tanks of 2 x
Phased activities for all activities— 23m³ on site. This has a combined
(i) listed in this Notice, which commenced on or after the effective capacity of 46 m³.
date of this Notice or similarly listed in any of the previous NEMA The applicant plans to expand on the
notices, which commenced on or after the effective date of such existing facilities, and proposes to
previous NEMA Notices; construct 5 x 83m³ tanks; 1 x 23m³ tank
(ii) listed as activities 5, 7, 8(ii), 11, 13, 16, 27(i) or 27(ii) in Listing and 1 x 14m³ tank. The combined
Notice 2 of 2014 or similarly listed in any of the previous NEMA capacity of the proposed new fuel tanks
notices, which commenced on or after the effective date of such on site will thus be 452m³.
previous NEMA Notices; The total combined storage capacity on
where any phase of the activity was below a threshold but where site will thus be 498m³ and not exceed
a combination of the phases, including expansions or extensions, 500m³.
will exceed a specified threshold.

8
Q4 Fuel Depot

2 North West Biodiversity Sector Plan (2015)

According to the North West Biodiversity Plan (2015), the study site is not within or near any critical biodiversity
areas (CBAs) or ecological support areas (ESAs) (www.bgis.sanbi.org; READ, 2015).

12 FEASIBLE AND REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES

The proposal and alternatives that are considered in this application are described in the section below.
Alternatives did include a consideration of all possible means by which the purpose and need of the proposed
activity could be accomplished. The determination of whether the site or activity (including different processes
etc.) or both is appropriate are informed by the specific circumstances of the activity and its environment.

The no-go option is included in the assessment phase as the baseline against which the impacts of the other
alternatives are assessed.

1 DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES

Table 5: Alternatives
No. Alternative type, either Description
alternative: site on property,
properties, activity, design,
technology, energy, operational or
other
1 Layout Alternatives Due to the small size of the site and access from the link road, layout
Layout Proposed (Alternative 1) alternatives are limited.
The preliminary layout (Layout Alternative 1) is the only feasible layout
Alternative considered in this DBAR.
The final design and layout of the facility will be based on the
specifications of the fuel supplier, Q4 Fuel SA. A detailed layout for the
facility, in compliance with their own internal specification, as well as
relevant industry standards will be compiled. This may result in slight
changes to the proposed preliminary layout.
The sensitivity assessment takes a number of issues into consideration.
These include the terrestrial and the aquatic ecology of the site and
immediate surrounding area; the presence of heritage resources etc.
According to the analyses of the floristic, faunal and overall ecological
sensitivities there are no high sensitivity areas or habitats. In other words,
there are no ‘No-Go’ areas within the study area. The ecological
sensitivity of the site is calculated to be ‘Low’. The whole of the site is
therefore usable from a sensitivity point of view.
2 Site Alternatives It is not feasible to consider other sites in terms of location alternatives as
Alternative Property the property has existing operational fuel facilities. The applicant has a
lease agreement with the owner of the property. Alternative locations are
therefore currently not available and would involve the lease or purchase
of other land / other sites. The proposed expansion is compatible with the
surrounding land uses and should blend in well with the predominant
industrial character of the surrounding developments.
3 Alternative Activity: Current and The site is in an area (Rustenburg X9) that has been approved for
future development trends in the industrial purposes. Several commercial and industrial developments exist
area within this area thus setting the precedent and need for industrial
Industrial development development.
Proposal/ preferred The proposed development can be deemed desirable and in line with
future development trends for the area:
Ø The character of the area has changed over time as a result of

9
Q4 Fuel Depot

continuous development, supporting logistics and industrial uses.

Ø The area appears to be vibrant and dynamic due to the establishment
of a range of commercial and industrial land uses. The impact of the
proposed expansion will consequently not affect the character of the
area, and it is further felt that the site is ideally suited for the
proposed use.
Ø It will support the existing commercial and industrial development in
the area.
Ø Noises caused by the development will be in accordance with the
uses within the area.
Based on the above, the proposed expansion on the industrial
development is regarded as the preferred land use alternative.
4 Technology alternatives No technology alternatives are being considered for this project as no
alternatives which are feasible or reasonable are available. The storage of
fuel for dispensing is governed by SANS 10089-1 and the installation of
the storage tanks and associated fuel handling infrastructure will need to
conform to these standards. This requirement limits the opportunity to
implement alternate technology.
5 Other alternatives (e.g. scheduling, Alternative 1
demand, input, scale and design Proposal with sustainable design principles.
alternatives) Sustainable design principles in terms of services will be implemented
where feasibly possible. i.e. Solar panels.
Alternative 2
Proposal with conventional design principles.
Only conventional design principles in terms of services will be
implemented

2 NO-GO ALTERNATIVE

It is suggested that to maintain the status quo is not the best option for the micro and macro environment. The do-
nothing (“no go”) option would entail not developing the site and maintaining the site as is. From certain
perspectives this is not a viable option as the site is situated within an industrial area. By not developing the site,
the site will be anomalous in the context of the surrounding land-uses, and some of the direct and indirect socio-
economic benefits (i.e. job creation, etc.) will not materialise.
From an environmental perspective, most of the site is assessed to be of LOW sensitivity. No Highly Sensitive or
‘No-Go’ habitats or environments occur on the study site. The study site is totally transformed with no sensitive
habitats present. There are no priority faunal or floral species present on the site; no watercourses present and
no wetlands within a 500m radius of the site; The site is not within any priority areas; critical biodiversity areas; or
ecological support areas.
The No-Go development alternative could therefore not be considered the responsible way to manage the site.

13 SPECIALIST INPUT

Specialist input was obtained to investigate the impact of the various alternatives that could accomplish the
purpose of the project. The specialist input is summarised as follows:

1 Biodiversity Asessment

The following information has been extracted from the Biodiversity Assessment (Ecological Assessment and
Wetland Assessment) conducted by Flori Scientific Services cc.

10
Q4 Fuel Depot

Vegetation
The study site is situated within the original extent of Marikana Thornveld, which is a threatened veld type.
However, study site is within an industrial area and yard and the entire environment is totally transformed.

Priority species
There are no priority fauna or flora species in the study area.

Protected trees in the study area

There are no protected trees on site.

Watercourses in the study area

There are no watercourses in the study area. There are also no wetlands within a 500m radius of the site.

Drainage areas
A summary of the drainage region in which the study site is situated is summarised below in Table below.
Table 6: Summary of drainage region
Level Category
Primary Drainage Area (PDA) A
Quaternary Drainage Area (QDA) A22H
Water Management Area (WMA) – Previous / Old Crocodile (West) & Marico (WMA 3)
Water Management Area (WMA) – New Limpopo (WMA 1)
Catchment Management Agency (CMA) Limpopo (CMA 1)
Sub-Water Management Area Elands
Priority Quaternary Catchment No

Fatal flaws
There are no fatal flaws. There are no ‘No-Go’ zones.

Priority areas
The study area is not situated within any national priority areas (such as wetlands or protected areas), and is also
not within any Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBAs) or Ecological Support Areas (ESAs).

Sensitivity map
Below is the sensitivity map of the study site (Figure 6).

11
Q4 Fuel Depot

Figure 6: Sensitivity map

Conclusions & Recommendations

The conclusions and recommendations of the study are as follows:
• The study site is totally transformed with no sensitive habitats present.
• There are no priority faunal or floral species present on the site.
• There are no watercourses present and no wetlands within a 500m radius of the site.
• The site is not within any priority areas; critical biodiversity areas; or ecological support areas.
• There are no ‘no-go’ zones present and there are no recommended buffer zones.
• A few basic mitigating measures are recommended which include: monitoring erosion and dust during
construction; removing all unused materials and waste during and after construction; monitoring and
mechanically eradicating any weeds arising after construction and probably due to construction
activities.
• There are no fatal flaws and the project may proceed, in terms of the ecological component.

2 Heritage

A Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) is the process to be followed in order to determine whether any heritage
resources are located within the area to be developed as well as the possible impact of the proposed
development thereon. Setala Environmental submitted a request for exemption from conducting a Heritage
Impact Assessment.

The following is applicable:

• The entire site is disturbed.
• The buildings on the property is younger than 60 years or temporary structures.
• None of these have any heritage significance.
• It is not necessary to apply for a permit in terms of the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (Act 25 of
1999).

12
Q4 Fuel Depot

Due to the mentioned factors, the chances therefore of finding any heritage related features are indeed extremely
slim. It is therefore believed that an additional Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) is not needed for this project.

Recommendation:
That the development be exempted from doing an HIA.

Mitigation
Should construction work begin for this project:
The developer should note that due to the nature of archaeological material, such sites, objects or features, as
well as graves and burials may be uncovered during construction activities on site. In such a case work should
cease immediately and an archaeologist should be contacted as a matter of urgency to assess such occurrences.

14 IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The impacts that may result from the planning and design, construction, operational, decommissioning and
closure phases as well as proposed management of identified impacts and proposed mitigation measures have
been addressed in the Basic Assessment Report.

15 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMME (EMPr)

An Environmental Management Programme was prepared to detail a plan of action to ensure that
recommendations for preventing the negative environmental impacts (and where possible improving the
environment) are implemented during the life-cycle of the project.

16 CONCLUSION

The findings conclude that there are no environmental fatal flaws that could prevent the proposed Q4 Fuel Depot
development if the recommended mitigation and management measures contained in the BAR and EMPr are
implemented.

**********************************************************************************

13