THYSPUNT NUCLEAR POWER STATION UPDATE

The much awaited 2nd Draft EIA has finally been released by Arcus Gibb, consultants to ESKOM on the NPS project. It is, as before, a lengthy document and requires time to study in detail. As before, Thyspunt has been identified as the preferred site. Following are comments based on studying the Executive summary of this report, as well as a cursory glance of the full version:

ESKOM and their consultants, Arcus Gibb, have to a large extent ignored comments made by a number of interested and affected parties, including the Thyspunt Alliance, and experts canvassed by the Alliance:

1)With respect to Geo-Hydrology, the new Draft EIA totally ignores input from Prof Fred Ellery, an expert in this field. (The report simply states that “there is no evidence of debris flows at the site or that conditions exist for debris flow”).

2)The report ignores a study and comments made by Dr Johan Binneman, a leading archaeologist. The report does not deal with the subject of archaeology of the site in spite of the matter being repeatedly raised in comments on the first Draft EIA. The site happens to be of major archaeological importance, covering time spans of millennia.

3)The site is of major importance in terms of the cultural heritage of the Khoisan people. The South African Heritage Resources Agency (SAHRA) has refused to approve the relevant Heritage Impact Scoping Report. Last year the minister of Arts and Culture stated that the NPS would not be built at Thyspunt for this very reason. The consultants to ESKOM deal with this matter by stating that an application has been made to SAHRA for a permit to perform test excavations.

4)The report states simply that the squid industry will only minimally be affected. This is in spite of the fact that various experts appointed by the South African Squid Management Association (SASMIA) have stated the contrary. Pumping 6,3 million cubic meters of sand into South Africa’s prime squid breeding ground will have a huge affect and will in all likelihood spell the end of the St Francis squid industry.

5)The report concedes that the surf break at Cape St Francis may be adversely affected by the above spoil pumped into the sea at the building site. If this is accepted, then it must also be accepted that the ocean floor will be covered by un-natural (ex-land based) sand…….which MUST affect the squid!

6)The report does not deal with the fact that the R330 (Humansdorp – Cape St Francis road) will be used as the main transport road to the site during the 8 odd years of construction. During peak traffic times a heavy vehicle will pass any given point every 90 seconds. There will also be times when extra heavy vehicles will stop all normal traffic on this road for many hours. We may add that ESKOM has already bought land to the West of Sea Vista to build the extension of the road through to the NPS site

7)The report incorrectly states that agriculture will be positively affected by the NPS project! (Cows produce more milk when near an NPS or transmission lines?)

8)Little, if any attention is paid to the fact that the project will employ some 8000 people during construction, and the effects of this influx. Also little attention is paid to what happens to the workforce after completion of the
project.

9)Arcus Gibb state that they have found a route for their heavy vehicles to by-pass Humansdorp during the construction phase. The “new” route uses Saffery Road, which runs through a residential area and is already used extensively by traffic avoiding the Humansdorp main road, en route to SFB and CSF.

10)Reading the main report, it is clear that the technology to be used has not been finalised. Certain conclusions drawn in the report are therefore premature.

11)The main report states that the predominant wind is “West-Northwest to Northwest”. This is INCORRECT and makes a huge difference to disaster management planning. The correct predominant wind direction is South West, which places Cape St Francis and St Francis Bay right in the path of any possible nuclear contamination in case of a disaster. (Arcus Gibb’s/Eskoms above claimed wind direction has the opposite effect. They have stuck to this incorrect wind direction in spite of the Thyspunt Alliance repeatedly pointing out the mistake.)

The above are some of the salient points…….the list could go on much longer. We plan to do our best to stop this project at this, the EIA stage. However, we need to face up to the fact that the only way in which ESKOM can be stopped may be in Court. For this we have started to put together a War Chest. We need to have at least R500.000 at our disposal for the 1st phase of a Court battle and to cover interim legal expenses. Thanks to some large donations out War Chest has R140.000 in it, so there is a long way to go. And we have to go all the way if need be!

PLEASE DONATE! We have established a bank account under the auspices of the St Francis Bay Residents’ Association. This will be administered and audited by the said Association. Account details are:

Bank: Standard Bank
Name: Residents’ Association Nuclear Fund
Branch Code 05001500
Acc Number 186554788

When making an electronic payment, please send your details to Cindy Evans, cindy@countryfeeling.co.za .
(Postal details P.O.Box 1300, Jeffrey’s Bay 6300).
In the event of the war chest not being used, we undertake to re-imburse our donors or, with their permission to donate the money to registered charities of our donors’ choice.

Thyspunt Alliance,
May 2011.

CONSUMER ACT HAS IMPORTANT IMPLICATIONS FOR PROPERTY SALES .

The Consumer Protection Act which came fully into effect on April 1 st 2011 has much to say about the marketing, sale and transfer of immoveable property.

WHO DOES IT AIM TO PROTECT : It is aimed at protecting the ‘small man’ “,the CPA is not intended to protect a company, close corporation, trust, partnership, association or other body corporate with an asset value or annual turnover exceeding a certain threshold. The threshold will be prescribed by the still outstanding Regulations. The Minister has, however, proposed a threshold of R3 million.

WHAT KIND OF PROPERTY TRANSACTIONS FALL UNDER THE CPA : On a property level, it aims to regulate the way in which property is done by those for whom it is a normal course of business i.e speculators, developers, investors. Normal once-off private transactions between a seller and buyer of property for private purposes will not be subject to the CPA.

IF AN AGENT IS INVOLVED IN THE MARKETING AND SELLING OF A PROPERTY, IS THE CPA APPLICABLE?
If an estate agent is involved in marketing the property and negotiating the sale between the seller and purchaser, this marketing service provided by the agent is covered by the provisions of the CPA. The following areas are regulated by the CPA:
1. The mandate agreement between the seller or the purchaser (whoever instructed the agent) and the estate agent is governed by the CPA and must be in fair and reasonable terms.
2. The marketing service which the agent supplies to the purchaser must also comply with the CPA. The consumer is entitled to responsible marketing; honest dealings; equality and privacy; full disclosure of information.
3. The sale agreement that takes place between buyer and seller, even though this agreement is often facilitated by an estate agent, essentially remains a private, once-off transaction and therefore it seems to fall outside the scope of the CPA. Our courts will eventually have to draw the line and, either narrowly or broadly, interpret the provisions for these once-off transactions.

WHAT ABOUT THE VOETSTOOTS CLAUSE
Contrary to much speculation, the ‘voetstoots’ clause remains applicable for the once –off transaction between a seller and buyer, when selling is not the normal course of business. Despite this, responsibility rest heavily on the agent to ensure that full disclosure of any defects in the property are made to the buyer.

COOLING OFF CLAUSE“A consumer may rescind a transaction resulting from any direct marketing without reason or penalty, by notice to the supplier in writing …, within five business days after the later of the date on which the transaction or agreement was concluded.” While this certainly relates to a mandate that a seller or buyer has signed with an estate agent, there is much speculation as to whether this can be applied to the sale and transfer of a property. Should this be so, the consequences boggle the mind.

LOWERING THE INTEREST RATE

On Thursday 25th March 2010, Gill Marcus of the Reserve Bank took the bold step of lowering the interest rate by 50 basis points.This went contrary to the expectations of most economists who had predicted that due to the very slow revival in the economy and the possible inflationary effects expected to result from pertol and electricity prices later this month, the rates would remain the same. At 10.5%, the interest rate is now at the lowest level in 3 decades, something which is welcomed by FEDUSA and COSATU who have expressed a wish that this may go a very small way to heal an economy which shed close to 900 000,00 jobs last year.

This lowered interst rate combined with the boost brought on by the World Cup in June 2010 is hoped to accelerate the inflow of funds to the country as well as boost expendidture within the borders of South Africa."

SELLING A SHARE OF A CO-OWNED PROPERTY

In the event of a person who is a co-owner of a property, wanting to be released from the co-ownership and to be bought out by the other co-owner, the process is treated much like a normal transfer process. The most important initial step would be for the partners to obtain an idea of the realistic and current market value of this property. This would then form the basis of the purchase price to be agreed upon. It is most important that valuations are obtained from estate agents familiar with the area. Ideally these valuations should be based on a Comparative Market Analysis method which will take into account recent comparable sales in the area. SARS will require a bona fide valuation when the transaction comes up for registration.

Transfer duty, as with any normal sale will be applicable and will be calculated on the value of the whole property. The amount payable by the individuals involved in the transaction, will be calculated according to the percentage being bought/sold. If the agreed purchase price is less than the deemed ‘fair market value’, SARS retains the right to calculate transfer duty on the higher amount. It is also important to note that the difference between the market value and the purchase price, may attract ‘donation tax.’ The selling party must also be aware that CGT is payable on the portion sold.
A customary Offer to Purchase document or Sale Agreement will be used to begin this process. Existing bonds held over the property will either have to be settled in full or cancelled simultaneously with the transfer registration. The buying party may then re-register for a bond. Usual conveyance, bond and other costs involved in the transfer process are applicable.

TRANSFER YOUR PROPERTY FROM A TRUST/COMPANY OR C.C INTO YOUR PERSONAL NAME – TAX FREE

Prior to 2001, many natural persons used companies or trusts to purchase their domestic residence as this offered them the ability to avoid transfer duty without onerous tax consequences. However with the introduction of CGT [Capital Gains Tax] in 2001 and the residential property company anti-avoidance rules in 2002, these benefits were removed. A window period was granted to allow tax payers a limited opportunity to transfer a residence out of a pre-existing company or trust without adverse tax consequences.

In February 2009 a new window period offering tax relief commenced and will extend until December 2011. During this period, the distribution of a primary residence by a company or a trust, will be exempt from transfer duty and secondary tax on companies. The properties transferred must be used for residential purposes and must be primary residences. The primary residence must be the sole asset of the company or trust. The natural person taking transfer of the property must have initially donated the property to the trust, funded the purchase or been involved in paying the bond installments.
The advantages to an individual of making such a transfer during this window period is that at the time of sale of that property down the line, the amount of CGT to be paid will be less due to the fact that natural persons enjoy a far higher monetary exemption on profit made in the sale of a property and enjoy an annual exclusion amount on taxable income.