Centre for Environmental Rights - Advancing Environmental Rights in South Africa

Pretoria Portland Cement Company Limited's disclosure of environmental non-compliances in annual reports

PPC’s annual reports mention the findings made in the National Environmental Compliance and Enforcement Reports to a limited extent. The level of disclosure is low considering the number of violations which the National Environmental Compliance and Enforcement Reports record at PPC operations and PPC’s recurring failure to adhere to commitments made to the Department of Environmental Affairs.

2008 company reports

PPC’s 2008 Annual Report stated that a number of its plants had been audited by the environmental management inspectors, presumably a reference to the inspections reported in the National Environmental Compliance and Enforcement Report.¹ It was also reported that, “(t)he Green Scorpions’ report for PPC Riebeeck has been received and contained no major legal findings. Issues of concern in the report included the management of dust impacts and waste management at the PPC Riebeeck landfill.”²

PPC’s 2008 Annual Report also stated that during the 2008 reporting period the Jupiter operation had been issued with a directive in terms of section 31A³ of the Environment Conservation Act and that PPC had responded to the provincial environment department’s requirements for section 24G applications to be submitted for the Slurry and Dwaalboom operations, alongside the payment of R 120,000.00 in fines for both operations.⁴

This report also noted that there had been fires at the De Hoek and Dwaalboom facilities.⁵

2009 company reports

A “business objective” within the 2009 Annual Report was to “meet all legislated emission level requirements and further reduce emissions”.⁶ The CEO’s report also stated that during the reporting year six plants had impromptu visits from the environmental management inspectors and that “no non-conformance notices or clean-up directives were issued as a result of these visits”.⁷ Considering the significant number of non-compliance findings set out in the National Environmental Compliance and Enforcement Reports, this statement is misleading.

There was also a statement in another section of the report that “external legal audits have identified a few areas of non-compliance, however management plans have been drawn up to address these areas of concern”.⁸ In terms of “Environmental compliance and incidents” it was stated in the Sustainability Report that there were no fines issued to PPC but an emergency incident report had been lodged with the Department of Water and Environmental Affairs during 2009.⁹ It was explained that it had been discovered at the Slurry operation that about 3509 litres of diesel was unaccounted for in August and that the underground transporting pipes were leaking. It was also stated that “environmental non-conformances on site were managed through the ISO 14001:2004 /ASPASA EMS system”.

2010 company reports

In the 2010 Annual Report it was stated that the Port Elizabeth plant had received correspondence from the environmental management inspectors requesting management plans to address fugitive emissions and raw material onsite.¹⁰ It was also stated that no fines or directives had been received for the South African operations.¹¹

2011 company reports

In the 2011 report it was again stated that no fines or directives had been received for South African operations.¹² The 2011 report fails to disclose that follow-up inspections by the environmental management inspectors had found that most of the non-compliances which PPC had undertaken to address had not been rectified, and that the Department of Environmental Affairs was at that time in the process of developing enforcement strategies.

2012 company reports

PPC’s 2012 report stated that “PPC Riebeeck faced challenges in meeting permitted sulphur dioxide limits due to its plant technology and composition of the ore body. PPC completed extensive investigations and has approached the authorities to request an interim relaxation of limits pending the upgrade of this facility.”¹³

It was also stated that, “Slurry kiln 7 dust emissions remain a challenge, we are discussing options with the authorities”.¹⁴ It was also stated that PPC Lime Acres had recently been audited by the environmental management inspectorate and it had been “recommended that PPC Lime Acres apply for a variation of its waste licence to ensure that all conditions are appropriate for the operation”.¹⁵ A variation application was reported to have been submitted.

2013 company reports

The 2013 report also stated that a section 30 incident¹⁶ had been reported at PPC Riebeeck and that “Slurry kiln 7 dust emissions remain a challenge”¹⁷(as had also been reported in the previous year’s report). The section 30 incident related to a historical diesel tank spillage at PPC Riebeeck and it was stated that the Department of Environmental Affairs had issued a directive to address this and PPC was implementing recommendations from the directive.

It was also stated that the operations at Jupiter and Hercules had been inspected by the Gauteng Environmental Inspectorate to verify compliance against environmental permit conditions and the duty of care but that no reports had been received for those inspections.¹⁸

PPC’s 2013 environmental review stated that PPC had “almost 70%” of water use licences issued by the Department of Water Affairs.¹⁹ PPC was therefore presumably operating without 30% of required water use licences.

2014 company reports

PPC’s 2014 Integrated Report listed the following “lowlights” from the year:

Given concerns on the performance of four emission points, we applied to postpone compliance timeframes for Dwaalboom kiln 1, PE kiln 4, De Hoek finishing mill 6 and Slurry kiln 7.

Delays in issuing water-use licences and various regulatory amendments remain a challenge. PPC continues to engage with government officials to ensure successful outcomes.

…

We have been unable to achieve our goals in implementing energy management systems aligned to ISO 50001, due to resource constraints.²⁰

It was also reported that no environmental compliance directives had been received in South Africa over the year.²¹ In an update on the company’s lack of water use licences, it was stated that, “PPC has not received all integrated water-use licences”.²²