Environmental impact assessment rectification process for Shell fuel storage tanks in Gauteng, South Africa
This report is on the Environmental Impact Assessment Rectification Process conducted by Environmental Resource Management (ERM) on behalf of Shell Marketing (Pty.) Ltd. for Shell's fuel storage installations within the province of Gauteng, South Africa. This is a feedback report on a selection of sites in Gauteng assessed by four University of Cape Town students who assisted ERM in the project. South African legislation (Environmental Conservation Act 73 of 1989) requires Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) to be carried out before the installation of fuel storage tanks. A number of Shell's fuel storage tanks within South Africa were installed without conducting EIAs in violation of this legislation. The Gauteng Government gave Shell and other such companies a six month amnesty period to conduct EIAs retrospectively for fuel tank installations, terming this activity an EIA Rectification Process. Shell thus was expected to conduct Rectification EIAs within the province. Shell commissioned ERM, an independent consultancy, to conduct the EIA Rectification Process. The EIA Rectification process was conducted under the specification of the Gauteng Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Environment (GDACE). ERM divided the applicable tank locations amongst five teams, with a total of 176 sites in Gauteng. Two teams consisted of four University of Cape Town (UCT) Master of Philosophy students in Environmental Management, who assessed 39 sites, on which this report is mostly based. A list of the 39 sites is provided in appendix H, with examples of actual compiled reports shown in appendices G-J. The site inspections conducted by the UCT Masters students were in strict accordance with the environmental assessment requirements stipulated by GDACE for the EIA Rectification Process. The major findings, based on site environmental assessments of tank installations, are that: * the location of the majority of tanks are not accurately listed in Shell's database; * 44% of tank installations are in a dilapidated condition; * 28% of sites show evidence of product leakage; * 92% of sites do not have any pollution prevention measures; and * 87% of sites were assessed to be in the 'moderate vulnerability' category in terms of groundwater pollution analysis. Based on the findings of the study, a number of recommendations have been made to Shell, these include: *
Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations
Department of Environmental and Geographical Science