1
PRESS RELEASE BY RESCUE VLEESBAAI ACTION GROUP (REVAG)
PETROSA’S SCOPING REPORT FOR LNG FACILITY REJECTED
The Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) last week rejected PetroSA’s scoping report and plan of study for the environmental impact assessment (EIA) for the proposed liquefied natural gas (LNG) offloading facility in the Mossel Bay area.
This decision is a major victory for REVAG (Rescue Vleesbaai Action Group)and other interested parties who have been lobbying against the proposal since its announcement in October 2008. “This decision by the DEA confirms REVAG’s viewpointthat the proposed facility would be a major threat for the environment and the safety of the people living in the area,” said Mareo Bekker, REVAG’s chairman. “We will have to wait and see whether PetroSA takes the decision on appeal or review”, says Bekker.
Aurecon, PetroSA’s environmental consultants, submitted the final scoping report to the DEA in February this year. On 1 March Aurecon advised that PetroSA terminated negotiations with GDF Suez and decided not to proceed with the proposed LNG facility at that stage as it would not be commercially viable. PetroSA wanted to put the EIA process on hold after the DEA had approved the scoping report.
REVAG immediately addressed a letter to the DEA expressing its concerns with the process proposed by PetroSA. REVAG stated that it would be inappropriate for the DEA to approve the scoping report under such circumstances and requested that the Aurecon/PetroSA application should be rejected by the DEA without further consideration.
REVAG sought legal opinion and submitted its arguments against the proposed process to the DEA. These arguments inter alia dealt with the DEA’s constitutional mandate, as well as the timeframe involved. PetroSA presented the project on the basis that it had to commence by late 2010 / early 2011 - otherwise the existing gas refinery would close, resulting in significant adverse socio-economic impact. The urgent timeframe materially impacted the direction and progress of the entire EIA process. In particular, it played a central role in determining the feasibility of alternatives suggested by interested and affected parties, including REVAG, and in determining the terms of reference for certain further studies to be undertaken during the EIA process.
The urgency of the proposed project and the apparently dire consequences that would ensue if the proposed project was not approved in time for it to commence by late 2010 / early 2011 was used by Aurecon/PetroSA as justification for rejecting certain alternatives in the EIA process.REVAG contended that all alternatives which were disregarded on the basis of timing related considerations would have to be re-introduced and reconsidered in a new scoping phase for the proposed project. On 9 September the Chief Director: Environmental Impact Management of the DEA informed REVAG that the DEA has rejected the scoping report.
Date of release: 14 September 2010
Released by: Mareo Bekker, Chairman
RESCUE VLEESBAAI ACTION GROUP
Tel 011 880 2113
Cell 082 900 3804