1. Amendment of definitions Certain definitions are amended to clarify their meanings and usage. These include technical improvements to definitions such as "estuary", "high water-mark", and "land unit". It is proposed that the scope of "coastal waters" be expanded by including the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and the continental shelf. New definitions are proposed for insertion as a consequence of proposed amendments to the Act, e.g. the definitions for "access fee", "reclamation" "harbour" and "port". 2. Section 2: Insertion of coastal protection zone in the objects clause It emerged from the public comments that the coastal protection zone was erroneously omitted from the objects of the Amendment Bill. 3. Section 6: Insertion of new subsection 4 to clarify ownership of organs of state This clause clarifies the ownership and status of assets owned by organs of state, like Transnet, within coastal public property and that they can continue to enjoy the use and control of the sea space within ports and harbours. 4. Amendment of section 7: Coastal public property The Act creates the notion of "coastal public property" (CPP), which comprises the territorial waters of South Africa up to the high-water mark and includes admiralty reserves. In other words, the beaches, sea and sea-bed which occur below the high-water mark form part of coastal public property. Section 11 of the Act (which is not yet in operation) vests ownership of these natural assets in the citizens to be held in trust by the State. Section 65 (also not yet in operation) prohibits occupation of CPP without a lease from the Minister of the Department of Environmental Affairs (the Minister). Coastal Public Property cannot be sold or leased. The Act did not clearly specify whether the infrastructure below the high water-mark also formed part of coastal public property and as a result, organs of state, such as Transnet, felt uncertain about the status of their assets within ports. Transnet, for example, leases out spaces on jetties which extend into the sea in order to fund port operations. They are concerned that the Act may be interpreted as divesting Transnet of its ownership and right to lease these jetties. In addition, they are concerned that the 20-year limitation on leases in section 65 limits their ability to secure finances through long-term leases. Clause 4 seeks to clarify that coastal public property does not include assets or infrastructure above or below the high water-mark. Hence the Act would not negatively impact on their leases as they would not be subject to the ownership and lease restrictions in sections 11 and 65.