draft basic assessment report: the proposed …...the linear length of the existing eskom 132 kv...

BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT

1

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT:

The Proposed Development of a 132 kV Powerline and Associated

Sub-station on the Remaining Extent of the Farm Kapstewel No.

436, Remaining Extent of Farm No. 437, Remaining Extent of Farm

No. 588, Remaining Extent of Farm No. 589, Remaining Extents of

Portions 8 & 14 of Farm No. 589 and Remaining Extent of Portions 3

& 5 of the Farm Groenwater No. 453. The proposed

decommissioning and diversion of an existing Eskom Powerline on

the Remaining Extent of the Farm Groenwater No. 453 and

Remaining Extents of Portions 4 & 5 of the Farm Groenwater No.

453 within the Tsantsabane Local Municipality, Kimberley

Registration Division, Northern Cape Province.

Prepared for: Metsimatala CSP Solar Energy (Pty) Ltd

Prepared by: Enviroworks

August 2016


2

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 5 SECTION A: ACTIVITY INFORMATION ............................................................................. 13 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................... 13 2. FEASIBLE AND REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES ....................................................... 19 3. PHYSICAL SIZE OF THE ACTIVITY ........................................................................... 22 4. SITE ACCESS ............................................................................................................. 23 5. LOCALITY MAP ........................................................................................................... 23 6. LAYOUT/ROUTE PLAN ............................................................................................... 24 7. SENSITIVITY MAP ...................................................................................................... 24 8. SITE PHOTOGRAPHS ................................................................................................ 24 9. FACILITY ILLUSTRATION ........................................................................................... 25 10. ACTIVITY MOTIVATION .......................................................................................... 25 11. APPLICABLE LEGISLATION, POLICIES AND/OR GUIDELINES ............................ 38 12. WASTE, EFFLUENT, EMISSION AND NOISE MANAGEMENT .............................. 44 13. WATER USE ............................................................................................................ 47 14. ENERGY EFFICIENCY ............................................................................................ 47 SECTION B: SITE/AREA/PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ....................................................... 48 15. GRADIENT OF THE SITE ........................................................................................ 50 16. LOCATION IN LANDSCAPE .................................................................................... 51 17. GROUNDWATER, SOIL AND GEOLOGICAL STABILITY OF THE SITE ................. 51 18. GROUNDCOVER ..................................................................................................... 52 19. SURFACE WATER .................................................................................................. 52 20. LAND USE CHARACTER OF SURROUNDING AREA ............................................ 53 21. CULTURAL/HISTORICAL FEATURES .................................................................... 54 22. SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTER .......................................................................... 57 23. BIODIVERSITY ........................................................................................................ 60 SECTION C: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.............................................................................. 66 24. ADVERTISEMENT AND NOTICE ............................................................................ 66 25. DETERMINATION OF APPROPRIATE MEASURES ............................................... 66 26. ISSUES RAISED BY INTERESTED AND AFFECTED PARTIES ............................. 68 27. COMMENTS AND RESPONSE REPORT ................................................................ 68 28. AUTHORITY PARTICIPATION ................................................................................ 68 29. CONSULTATION WITH OTHER STAKEHOLDERS ................................................ 69 SECTION D: IMPACT ASSESSMENT ................................................................................ 70 30. IMPACTS THAT MAY RESULT FROM THE PLANNING AND DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONAL, DECOMMISSIONING AND CLOSURE PHASES AS WELL AS PROPSOED MANAGEMENT OF IDENTIFIED IMPACTS AND PROPSOED MITIGATION MEASURES .................................................................................................. 70 31. CONSTRUCTION PHASE........................................................................................ 73 32. OPERATIONAL PHASE ........................................................................................... 91 33. E NVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT ........................................................... 106 SECTION E: RECOMMENDATION OF PRACTITIONER ................................................. 109 SECTION F: APPENDICES…………………………………………………………………….111


3

(For official use only)

File Reference Number:

Application Number:

Date Received:

Basic assessment report in terms of the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2014, promulgated in terms of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998), as amended.

Kindly note that: 1. This basic assessment report is a standard report that may be required by a competent authority

in terms of the EIA Regulations, 2014 and is meant to streamline applications. Please make sure that it is the report used by the particular competent authority for the activity that is being applied for.

2. This report format is current as of 08 December 2014. It is the responsibility of the applicant to ascertain whether subsequent versions of the form have been published or produced by the competent authority

3. The report must be typed within the spaces provided in the form. The size of the spaces provided is not necessarily indicative of the amount of information to be provided. The report is in the form of a table that can extend itself as each space is filled with typing.

4. Where applicable tick the boxes that are applicable in the report.

5. An incomplete report may be returned to the applicant for revision.

6. The use of “not applicable” in the report must be done with circumspection because if it is used in respect of material information that is required by the competent authority for assessing the application, it may result in the rejection of the application as provided for in the regulations.

7. This report must be handed in at offices of the relevant competent authority as determined by each authority.

8. No faxed or e-mailed reports will be accepted.

9. The signature of the EAP on the report must be an original signature.

10. The report must be compiled by an independent environmental assessment practitioner.

11. Unless protected by law, all information in the report will become public information on receipt by the competent authority. Any interested and affected party should be provided with the information contained in this report on request, during any stage of the application process.

12. A competent authority may require that for specified types of activities in defined situations only parts of this report need to be completed.

13. Should a specialist report or report on a specialised process be submitted at any stage for any part of this application, the terms of reference for such report must also be submitted.


4

14. Two (2) colour hard copies and one (1) electronic copy of the report must be submitted to the competent authority.

15. Shape files (.shp) for maps must be included in the electronic copy of the report submitted to the competent authority.


5

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Project description and location

Metsimatala CSP Solar Energy (Pty) Ltd intends to construct a 150 MW CSP (parabolic

trough) facility and associated substation on the Remaining Extent of the Farm Groenwater

No. 453 as well as Remaining Extent of Portions 4 & 5 of the Farm Groenwater No. 453. An

Environmental Authorisation application has been submitted for the above mentioned project

and a Scoping and EIA process is in progress.

This current proposed project for which Environmental Authorisation is now being applied for

this has two main objectives namely:

To construct a suitable 132 kV powerline and associated substation for the

transmission of the electricity generated from the proposed CSP facility to the

Managanore sub-station. The farm extents on which the powerline will be situated are

discussed under project location below.

To decommission and divert a section of the existing Eskom powerline, which currently

runs through the middle of the footprint of the proposed CSP facility, around its outer

boundary. The diversion of the existing powerline is compulsory in order to

accommodate and reroute the line around the footprint area of the proposed CSP

Plant. The farm extents on which the powerline will be diverted are discussed under

project location below.

The anticipated duration of the construction phase of the proposed project will be

approximately 24 months.

Proposed new 132 kV powerline and Metsimatala Solar substation

The linear length of the proposed new 132 kV powerline to be constructed will be

approximately 26 km. The proposed powerline will consist of a linear series of pylons

(towers) which will be situated approximately 100 m - 200 m apart. The exact distance

between and locations of pylons will be dependent on site specific terrain and soil conditions.

This will only be determined during the final design stage. The tower type to be used will be

determined during the final design stages of the powerline (based on load and other

calculations). It is however envisaged that the bird friendly Single Steel Pole tower type (e.g.

ESKOM D-DT 7641, D-DT 7649) will be used in combination with the Steel Lattice towers at

bend points and where greater distances need to be spanned. The Single Steel Pole tower

type is between 18 m and 25 m in height and the Steel Lattice tower type is between 25m

and 29 m in height. The distribution substation will be approximately 173 m X 173.5 m in size

and will be situated on the CSP facility footprint.


6

Decommissioning and diversion of existing powerline

The linear length of the existing Eskom 132 kV powerline to be decommissioned is

approximately 3.4 km while the length of the proposed new 132 kV powerline (diverted

section) to be constructed around the outer boundary of the CSP facility is approximately 4.6

km. The diverted section will consist of a linear series of pylons (towers) which will be

situated approximately 100 m - 200 m apart. The exact distance between and locations of

pylons will be dependent on site specific terrain and soil conditions. This will only be

determined during the final design stage. The tower type to be used will be determined

during the final design stages of the powerline (based on load and other calculations). It is

however envisaged that the bird friendly Single Steel Pole tower type (e.g. ESKOM D-DT

7641, D-DT 7649) will be used in combination with the Steel Lattice towers at bend points

and where greater distances need to be spanned. The Single Steel Pole tower type is

between 18 m and 25 m in height and the Steel Lattice tower type is between 25 m and 29

m in height. A diagram of the tower type is attached as Appendix C.

Servitudes/corridors with a width of 32 m are proposed for each power line route alternative.

This will allow a degree of flexibility when determining the final route alignment for the

proposed 132 kV power line.

The proposed new 132 kV powerline and associated substation will be constructed on

Remaining Extent of the Farm Kapstewel No. 436, Remaining Extent of Farm No. 437,

Remaining Extent of Farm No. 588, Remaining Extent of Farm No. 589, Remaining Extents

of Portions 8 & 14 of Farm No. 589 and Remaining Extents of Portions 3 & 5 of the Farm

Groenwater No. 453.

The proposed section of the existing Eskom powerline to be decommissioned and diverted

as well as the new proposed section to be constructed around the outer boundary of the

CSP facility are situated on the Remaining Extent of Farm Groenwater No. 453 and

Remaining Extents of Portions 4 & 5 of the Farm Groenwater No. 453.

The farms are all situated approximately between 21 km and 27 km north-east of the town of

Postmasburg and between 17 km and 43 km north-east of the town of Lime Acres in the

Northern Cape Province. The farm falls inside the Tsantsabane Local Municipality which, in

turn, forms part of the greater ZF Mgcawu District Municipality.


7

Legislation

The proposed project triggers the following listed activities as per the National Environmental

Management Act (Act 107 of 1998) Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2014

(Government Notices R983, R984 and R985 in Government Gazette No. 38282 of 04

December 2014):

GNR 983

o 11, 12 & 19

GNR 985

o 4, 12 & 14

Report Structure

This report is set out as followed:

Section A: Activity Description provides an overview of the development proposal and

listed activities which are triggered in terms of listing notices GN R. 983 and R. 985; of

the EIA Regulations, 04 December 2014.

Section B: Description of Receiving Environment provides detail on the affected

landscape in its present state. A range of aspects relating to the biophysical (e.g.

geology, soil surface and sub-surface water and biodiversity), socio-economic and

historic and cultural character of the immediate route and surrounding area are

described herein, whilst applicable legislation, policy and guidelines considered are

recognised.

Section C: Public Participation describes the consultation component of this study

between the EAP and Interested or Affected Parties (I&APs) and organs of state.

Regulatory requirements of this process are discussed, with a summary of consultation

made with state departments and comments and response given. Comment periods

were afforded to parties, with an initial registration period provided to parties.

Section D: Impact Assessment, Management, Mitigation and Monitoring Measures,

describe how the proposed development may impact on the geographical and physical,

biodiversity, socio-economic and historical and cultural aspects of the receiving

environment. Resource uses of the proposed development phases, attributed to waste

and emissions, water use, power supply and energy efficiency are further discussed.

Section E: Recommendation of the EAP provides, based on such findings as various

site surveys, impact assessment, investigation of alternatives and the review of

strategic policy to consider the needs and desirability, the outgoing opinion of the EAP

is detailed. Any noteworthy recommendations emanating from the study are described

here.


8

Section F: Appendices lists all supportive documents enclosed with this report, after

which declarations of the Applicant, EAP and Specialist Parties are given.

Public Participation Process

A comprehensive Public Participation Process (PPP) will be undertaken with all stakeholders

and Interested and Affected Parties (I & AP’s), including the relevant Organs of State and

competent authority (Department of Environmental Affairs DEA) as identified.

The PPP will be conducted in accordance with the requirements of Regulation 41 of the EIA

Regulations, 2014 and the designated Public Participation Officer will ensure that the PPP is

facilitated in a manner which ensures reasonable opportunity for all stakeholders and

registered I & AP’s to comment and provide input on the proposed project.

Notifications have been placed in two local free, newspapers (Ghaap newspaper on 29

July 2016 and Kalahari Bulletin on 21 July 2016).

Site notices have been placed at the entrance to the proposed site location on 15

August 2016, Postmasburg Municipal Offices, public library as well as the entrance to

the Metsimatala local informal settlement.

Copies of the report have been placed at the Postmasburg Municipal Offices and the

public library on 15 August 2016.

A comprehensive list of stakeholders was identified during the PPP of the proposed

CSP facility. This list will be utilised for the purposes of the powerline PPP as well.

A notification email was sent to all stakeholders and I & AP’s on 12 August 2016.

Environmental Impact Statement

Proposed new 132 kV powerline

Ecology

The impacts of both the two alternative route corridors for the proposed powerline are fairly

similar. There are some sensitive systems which would be affected by the proposed

powerline routes. They include the rocky outcrops of the Kuruman Mountain Bushveld

(SVk10) and the episodic streams as well small wetlands/pans on the plains between the

rocky ridges.

No Red or Orange data species were found to occur along the powerline routes or

substation footprint although a protected species namely Olea europaea subsp. africana


9

occur on the rocky outcrops while Acacia erioloba, Acacia haematoxylon and Boscia

albitrunca occur on sandy plains.

From an ecological perspective either route alternative 1 or 2 can be utilised due to their

relatively similar impacts. Although the preferred alternative powerline route crosses through

a small portion classified as a Critical Biodiversity Area as well as a small portion classified

as an Ecological Support Area (see Appendix A for Sensitivity map) it is recommended from

an ecological perspective that route alternative 1 (preferred) be approved due to it running a

shorter distance to the Manganore substation.

Avifauna

For the Grid Connection, the residual impacts of habitat destruction, collision and

electrocution were all found to have a medium significance rating after mitigation, with all

other impacts having a low rating. This indicates that either route alternative is acceptable

from an avifaunal perspective with neither being preferred.

Heritage

From an archaeological and cultural heritage perspective neither of the powerline

alternatives, poses a threat to any potentially significant sites. It is therefore recommended

that development of the approved powerline proceed without the developer having to comply

with additional heritage compliance requirements pertaining to lithic Stone Age deposits,

such as Phase 2 mitigation, prior to construction impact.

There are also no major palaeontological grounds to halt the development of the preferred

Alternative Route 1 or 2, but it is advised that sites marked for erection of pylons or

construction of associated infrastructure, which will require excavation into fresh bedrock

sediments of the Campbellrand and Asbestos Hills Subgroup, is mapped and recorded prior

to the construction phase of the development.

No major impacts were identified for either of the powerline alternatives and substation

footprint and by implementing the recommended mitigation measures, the impacts will be

adequately reduced to acceptable levels.


10


Ecology

The impacts of both the two alternative route corridors for the diversion of the existing

powerline are similar and low. It is thereof recommended that the preferred alternative 1 be

approved.

Avifauna

For the line diversion, similar ratings were obtained as for the new powerline, and both route

alternatives are therefore acceptable, with alternative two being slightly preferred only as it

runs along the main tar road. Alternative 1 is however also acceptable.

Heritage

Although route alternative 1 passes in the proximity of identified significant cemetery site

MVIA 3, the site will not be impacted by the proposed powerline diversion. In fact, the

mitigations measures imposed will assist in the improvement of the integrity of the identified

site. Route alternative 2 for the diversion of the existing power line may potentially traverse

Griquatown Formation iron stones (Vad) considered to be of moderate palaeontological

sensitivity.

No major impacts were identified for either of the powerline diversion alternatives and by

implementing the recommended mitigation measures, the impacts will be adequately

reduced to acceptable levels.

Conclusion After careful consideration of the findings and outcomes during the Basic Assessment

process, Enviroworks is of the opinion that based on all information that was captured in this

report; the proposed development will not lead to unacceptable impacts or fatal flaws and

should be considered plausible in the framework of NEMA. It is indicated that the majority of

the anticipated impacts are rated as low to medium while the impacts rated as medium-high

to high (avifaunal) can be adequately addressed through the various mitigation measures

and reduced to an acceptable level.

Enviroworks also recommend that the preferred route layout alternative 1 for the new

proposed powerline and the substation be considered and approved as well as the preferred

route layout alternative 1 for the decommissioning and diversion of the existing powerline

due to its lesser impacts.


11

ABBREVIATIONS

BA Basic Assessment

CARA Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act (Act 43 of 1983)

CEL Cost Estimate Letter

CIA Cumulative Impact Assessment

CO₂ Carbon Dioxide

CO₂e Carbon Dioxide Equivalent

CPA Communal Property Association

CRR Comments and Responses Report

CSP Concentrated Solar Power

DAFF Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries

DEA Department of Environmental Affairs

DENC Department of Environment and Nature Conservation

DM District Municipality

DMR Department of Mineral Resources

DoE Department of Energy

DSR Draft Scoping Report

DWS Department of Water and Sanitation

EA Environmental Authorisation

EAP Environmental Assessment Practitioner

ECO Environmental Control Officer

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

EIR Environmental Impact Report

EMPr Environmental Management Programme

FSR Final Scoping Report

Ha Hectares

HTF Heat Transfer Fluid

I & APs Interested and Affected Parties

IDP Integrated Development Plan

IPP Independent Power Producer

kV Kilovolt

LED Local Economic Development

LM Local Municipality

LSA Late Stone Age

MAP Mean Annual Precipitation

MASL Metres Above Sea Level


12

MLL Minimum living level

MSA Middle Stone Age

MVA Megavolt ampere

MW Megawatt

NCPSDF Northern Cape Provincial Spatial Development Framework

NDP National Development Plan

NEMA National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of 1998)

NEMBA National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (Act 10 of 2004)

NEMWA National Environmental Management: Waste Act (Act 59 of 2008)

NERSA National Energy Regulator of South Africa

NFA National Forests Act (Act 84 of 1998)

NHRA National Heritage Resources Act (Act 25 of 1999)

NIP National Infrastructure Plan

NWA National Water Act (Act 36 of 1998)

PFS Pre-feasibility Study

PPP Public Participation Process

PUC Point of Utility Connection

PoSEIA Plan of Study for Environmental Impact Assessment

REIPPP Renewable Energy Independent Power Producers Procurement Programme

SAHRA South African Heritage Resources Agency

SDF Spatial Development Framework

SIA Social Impact Assessment

SIP Strategic Integrated Project

ToR Terms of Reference

UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

VIA Visual Impact Assessment

WRYCM Water Resource Yield Computer Model

WULA Water Use Licence Application


13

SECTION A: ACTIVITY INFORMATION

Has a specialist been consulted to assist with the completion of this section? NO

If YES, please complete the form entitled “Details of specialist and declaration of interest” for the specialist appointed and attach in Appendix I. 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

a) Describe the project associated with the listed activities applied for Project description: Metsimatala CSP Solar Energy (Pty) Ltd intends to construct a 150

MW CSP (parabolic trough) facility and associated substation on the Remaining Extent of

the Farm Groenwater No. 453 as well as Remaining Extent of Portions 4 & 5 of the Farm

Groenwater No. 453. An Environmental Authorisation application has been submitted for

the above mentioned project and a Scoping and EIA process is in progress.

This current proposed project for which Environmental Authorisation is now being applied

for this has two main objectives namely:

To construct a suitable 132 kV powerline and associated substation for the

transmission of the electricity generated from the proposed CSP facility to the

Manganore sub-station. The farm extents on which the powerline will be situated

are discussed under project location below.

To decommission and divert a section of the existing Eskom powerline, which

currently runs through the middle of the footprint of the proposed CSP facility,

around its outer boundary. The diversion of the existing powerline is compulsory in

order to accommodate and reroute the line around the footprint area of the

proposed CSP Plant. The farm extents on which the powerline will be diverted are

discussed under project location below.

The anticipated duration of the construction phase of the proposed project will be

approximately 24 months.

Proposed new 132 kV powerline and Metsimatala Solar substation

The linear length of the proposed new 132 kV powerline to be constructed will be

approximately 27 km. The proposed powerline will consist of a linear series of pylons

(towers) which will be situated approximately 100 m - 200 m apart. The exact distance

between and locations of pylons will be dependent on site specific terrain and soil

conditions. This will only be determined during the final design stage. The tower type to be

used will be determined during the final design stages of the powerline (based on load and


14

other calculations). It is however envisaged that the bird friendly Single Steel Pole tower

type (e.g. ESKOM D-DT 7641, D-DT 7649) will be used in combination with the Steel

Lattice towers at bend points and where greater distances need to be spanned. The Single

Steel Pole tower type is between 18 m and 25 m in height and the Steel Lattice tower type

is between 25 m and 29 m in height.

The distribution substation will be approximately 173 m X 173.5 m in size and will be

situated on the CSP facility footprint. It will include transformer bays which will contain

transformer oils. Bunded racking will be constructed to ensure that any oil spills will be

adequately attenuated and prevented from release into the environment. For health and

safety purposes, the substation shall be securely fenced to prevent unauthorized access.

Where the substation is beside the line, the connection to the line will be connected via

drop down conductors. Where the line is remote from the substation the connection will be

by MV 66/132 kV overhead line, using either pole or pylon construction depending on the

voltage.

The Substation will include the following;

- 2 bay switching station, and

- Control Plant with protection, metering, telecontrol and SCADA (Supervisory Control and

Data Acquisition), DC and Telecomms.


The linear length of the existing Eskom 132 kV powerline to be decommissioned is

approximately 3.4 km while the length of the proposed new 132 kV powerline (diverted

section) to be constructed around the outer boundary of the CSP facility is approximately

4.6 km. The diverted section will consist of a linear series of pylons (towers) which will be

situated approximately 100 m - 200 m apart. The exact distance between and locations of

pylons will be dependent on site specific terrain and soil conditions. This will only be

determined during the final design stage. The tower type to be used will be determined

during the final design stages of the powerline (based on load and other calculations). It is

however envisaged that the bird friendly Single Steel Pole tower type (e.g. ESKOM D-DT

7641, D-DT 7649) will be used in combination with the Steel Lattice towers at bend points

and where greater distances need to be spanned. The Single Steel Pole tower type is

between 18 m and 25 m in height and the Steel Lattice tower type is between 25 m and 29


15

m in height. A diagram of the tower type is attached as Appendix C.

Servitudes/corridors with a width of 32 m are proposed for each power line route

alternative. This will allow a degree of flexibility when determining the final route alignment

for the proposed 132 kV power line.

Project location: The proposed new 132 kV powerline and associated substation will be

constructed on Remaining Extent of the Farm Kapstewel No. 436, Remaining Extent of

Farm No. 437, Remaining Extent of Farm No. 588, Remaining Extent of Farm No. 589,

Remaining Extents of Portions 8 & 14 of Farm No. 589 and Remaining Extent of Portions 3

& 5 of the Farm Groenwater No. 453.

The proposed section of the existing Eskom powerline to be decommissioned and diverted

as well as the new proposed section to be constructed around the outer boundary of the

CSP facility are situated on the Remaining Extent of Farm Groenwater No. 453 and

Remaining Extents of Portions 4 & 5 of the Farm Groenwater No. 453.

The farms are all situated approximately between 21 km and 27 km north-east of the town

of Postmasburg and between 17 km and 43 km north-east of the town of Lime Acres in the

Northern Cape Province. The farm falls inside the Tsantsabane Local Municipality which,

in turn, forms part of the greater ZF Mgcawu District Municipality.

b) Provide a detailed description of the listed activities associated with the project as

applied for

Listed activity as described in GN R.983, 984, 985

Description of project activity Government Notice R983 – Listing Notice 1 of 2014

11

The development of facilities or infrastructure for the

transmission and distribution of

electricity-

outside urban areas or industrial complexes with a

capacity of more than 33 but less than 275 kilovolts.

A 132 kV powerline and

associated Metsimatala Solar

substation will be constructed

on the Remaining Extent of

the Farm Kapstewel No. 436,

Remaining Extent of Farm

No. 437, Remaining Extent of

Farm No. 588, Remaining


16

Extent of Farm No. 589

Remaining Extents of

Portions 8 & 14 of Farm No.

589 and Remaining Extent of

Portions 3 & 5 of the Farm

Groenwater No. 453. The

linear length of the proposed

new 132 kV powerline to be

constructed will be

approximately 27 km. The

distribution substation will be

approximately 173 m X 173.5

m in size and will be situated

on the CSP facility footprint.

A section of the existing

Eskom 132 kV powerline

running through the


Groenwater No. 453 and

Portion 5 of the Farm

Groenwater No. 453 will be

decommissioned and

diverted around the outer

boundary of the proposed

CSP plant to be constructed.

The linear length of the

existing Eskom 132 kV

powerline to be

decommissioned is

approximately 3.4 km while

the length of the proposed

new 132 kV powerline

(diverted section) to be

constructed around the outer

boundary of the CSP facility

is approximately 4.6 km. The

diverted section of the

powerline will traverse the


Groenwater No. 453 and

Portions 4 & 5 of the Farm

Groenwater No. 453.


17

12 The development of:

xii) infrastructure or structures with a physical

footprint of 100 square meters or more;

where such development occurs-

a) Within a watercourse

c) if no development setback exists, within 32

meters of a watercourse, measured from the

edge of a watercourse.

The proposed powerline is

located in close proximity to

and will cross various

seasonal watercourses.

Pylons and other

infrastructure, exceeding 100

m², may need to be placed

within 32 metres of a

watercourse. The

servitude/corridor of the

proposed powerline will be

32 m wide and the area sizes

at watercourse crossings will

therefore exceed 100 m².

The decommissioning and

diversion of the existing

Eskom 132 kV powerline will

not be located in close

proximity to and will not cross

any seasonal watercourses.

19 The infilling or depositing of any material of more

than 5 cubic metres into, or the dredging, excavation,

removal or moving of soil, sand, shells, shell grit,

pebbles or rock of more than 5 cubic metres from –

(i) a watercourse;

Construction activities for the

new proposed 132 kV

powerline may take place in

close proximity to a

wetland/watercourse.

Construction activities for the

decommissioning and



not take place in close

proximity to any

wetland/watercourse.

Government Notice R985 – Listing Notice 3 of 2014

Description of project activity

4 The development of a road wider than 4 metres with

a reserve less than 13,5 metres.

(a) In Free State, Limpopo, Mpumalanga and

Northern Cape provinces:

(ii) Outside urban areas, in:

(ee) Critical Biodiversity areas as identified in

systematic biodiversity plans adopted by the

competent authority or in bioregional plans

Existing roads and farm

tracks will mainly be used. If

additional site roads are

required they will be

constructed with a width of

more than 4 m. A small

portion of the proposed

development route/corridor

traverses an area classified


18

as CBA.




not cross through any CBA’s.

12 The clearance of an area of 300 square metres or

more of indigenous vegetation except where such

clearance of indigenous vegetation is required for

maintenance purposes undertaken in accordance

with the maintenance management plan.

(d) In Northern Cape:

(ii). Within critical biodiversity areas identified in

bioregional plans;

The proposed 132 kV

powerline servitude/corridor

will be 32 m wide and will

cross through a CBA 1 area

where the total surface size

of the crossing sections will

be more than 300 m².





14 The development of –

(xii) infrastructure or structures

with a physical footprint of

10 square metres or more;

Where such development occurs –

(a) within a watercourse;

(a) In Northern Cape

(ii) Outside urban areas, in:

(ff) Critical biodiversity areas or ecosystem service

areas as identified in systematic biodiversity plans

adopted by the competent authority or in

bioregional plans;

The proposed 132 kV

powerline servitude/corridor

will be 32 m wide and will

cross through a CBA 1 area

where the total surface size

of the crossing sections will

be more than 10 m².






19

2. FEASIBLE AND REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES

“alternatives”, in relation to a proposed activity, means different means of meeting the general purpose and requirements of the activity, which may include alternatives to— (a) the property on which or location where it is proposed to undertake the activity; (b) the type of activity to be undertaken; (c) the design or layout of the activity; (d) the technology to be used in the activity; (e) the operational aspects of the activity; and (f) the option of not implementing the activity. Describe alternatives that are considered in this application as required by Appendix 1 (3)(h), Regulation 2014. Alternatives should include a consideration of all possible means by which the purpose and need of the proposed activity (NOT PROJECT) could be accomplished in the specific instance taking account of the interest of the applicant in the activity. The no-go alternative must in all cases be included in the assessment phase as the baseline against which the impacts of the other alternatives are assessed. The determination of whether site or activity (including different processes, etc.) or both is appropriate needs to be informed by the specific circumstances of the activity and its environment. After receipt of this report the, competent authority may also request the applicant to assess additional alternatives that could possibly accomplish the purpose and need of the proposed activity if it is clear that realistic alternatives have not been considered to a reasonable extent. The identification of alternatives should be in line with the Integrated Environmental Assessment Guideline Series 11, published by the DEA in 2004. Should the alternatives include different locations and lay-outs, the co-ordinates of the different alternatives must be provided. The co-ordinates should be in degrees, minutes and seconds. The projection that must be used in all cases is the WGS84 spheroid in a national or local projection. Powerline alternatives

Two (2) route servitude/corridor alternatives were considered for the proposed new 132 kV

powerline. These are as follows:

Alternative 1 (Preferred): approximately 27.0 km – (running straight from the

proposed Metsimatala substation to the Manganore Substation)

Alternative 2: approximately 31.5 km – (the majority will run along an existing

Eskom 132 kV powerline to the Manganore Substation)

A new Metsimatala Solar substation will be developed in the middle of the proposed CSP

facility footprint from where the powerline will be connected. The distribution substation will

be approximately 173 m X 173.5 m in size and will be situated on the CSP facility footprint.


20

Existing Eskom 132 kV powerline decommissioning and diversion alternatives

Two (2) route servitude/corridor alternatives were considered for the decommissioning and

diversion of the existing Eskom powerline. These are as follows:

Alternative 1 (Preferred): approximately 4.6 km – (around the eastern and northern

outer boundary of the proposed CSP facility)

Alternative 2: approximately 5.4 km – (around the southern and western outer

boundary of the proposed CSP facility)

The decommissioning and diversion of the existing powerline is compulsory in order to

accommodate and reroute the line around the footprint area of the proposed CSP facility.

The Locality map that indicates the route corridor of the proposed powerline (Alternatives 1

& 2) as well as the route corridor of the existing Eskom powerline decommissioning and

diversion (Alternatives 1 & 2) is provided in Appendix A.

A technical diagram/technical layout plan of the proposed pylon type to be used is provided

in Appendix C.

a) Site alternatives

In the case of linear activities:

Proposed new 132 kV powerline:

Latitude (S): Longitude (E): Alternative 1 (preferred)

Starting point of the activity 28°16’59.62’’S 23°17’49.62’’E

Middle/Additional point of the activity 28°12’39.85’’S 23°12’55.17’’E

End point of the activity 28°07’56.06’’S 23°06’12.85’’E

Alternative 2




Decommissioning and diversion of existing 132 kV powerline:

Alternative 1 (preferred)




Alternative 2



21



For route alternatives that are longer than 500m, please provide an addendum with co-ordinates taken every 250 meters along the route for each alternative alignment.

These final coordinates will be provided in the Final BA Report.

The positions and coordinates for the placement of the pylons will only be determined during the final

design phase.

In the case of an area being under application, please provide the co-ordinates of the corners of the site as indicated on the lay-out map provided in Appendix A of this form. n/a b) Lay-out alternatives

Alternative 1 (preferred alternative)

Description Lat (DDMMSS) Long (DDMMSS)

n/a

Alternative 2

Description Lat (DDMMSS) Long (DDMMSS)

n/a

c) Technology alternatives


n/a

Alternative 2

n/a

d) Other alternatives (e.g. scheduling, demand, input, scale and design alternatives)


n/a

Alternative 2

n/a

e) No-go alternative The no-go alternative addresses the scenario of the status-quo remaining the same, with no development on the proposed site. The no-go alternative would entail that the current land use does not change.

Advantages

The negative environmental impacts associated with the proposed project and its

alternatives will be avoided if the proposed project is not implemented. No significantly high

rating impacts were however identified by any specialists.


22

Disadvantages

If the proposed project does not go ahead, the proposed CSP facility will not have an

adequate way of distributing its generated electricity into the local grid. The new 132 kV

powerline construction and existing 132 kV powerline decommissioning and diversion is

crucial for the successful operation of the proposed CSP facility. The local communities will

forego the significant economic benefits which the project will have on the area such as

immediate additional employment opportunities and revenue streams during the

construction phase and most importantly, sustainable capacity building (skills, experience

and resources development) for the future. The development of alternative renewable

energy sources and distribution of generated electricity is crucial within the context of South

Africa’s current energy crisis as well as the commitment towards greenhouse gas emission

reductions. The current electricity shortage within the Metsimatala area will continue if the

no-go alternative is considered.

The no-go option would not be preferable as the existing and proposed residential areas

require adequate electricity provision, which can be supplied by this proposed

development. The proposed development of the 132 kV powerline has been assessed in

this report against the no-go option. The no-go alternative is not considered a preferred

alternative.

Paragraphs 3 – 13 below should be completed for each alternative. 3. PHYSICAL SIZE OF THE ACTIVITY

a) Indicate the physical size of the preferred activity/technology as well as alternative

activities/technologies (footprints): Alternative: Size of the activity:

Alternative 1 (preferred alternative) n/a m2

Alternative 2 n/a m2

Alternative A3 (if any) n/a m2

or, for linear activities: Proposed new 132 kV powerline Alternative: Length of the activity:

Alternative 1 (preferred alternative) 27 000 m

Alternative 2 31 500 m

Alternative 3 n/a


23

Decommissioning and diversion of existing 132 kV powerline Alternative: Length of the activity:

Alternative 1 (preferred alternative) 4600 m

Alternative 2 5400 m

Alternative 3 n/a

b) Indicate the size of the alternative sites or servitudes (within which the above footprints

will occur): Proposed new 132 kV powerline Alternative: Size of the site/servitude:

Alternative 1 (preferred alternative) Width 32 m; Size 86.4 ha

Alternative 2 Width 32 m; Size 100.8 ha

Alternative 3 n/a

Decommissioning and diversion of existing 132 kV powerline Alternative:

Size of the site/servitude:

Alternative 1 (preferred alternative) Width 32 m; Size 14.72 ha

Alternative 2 Width 32 m; Size 17.28 ha

Alternative 3 n/a

4. SITE ACCESS

Does ready access to the site exist? YES

If NO, what is the distance over which a new access road will be built n/a

Describe the type of access road planned: Existing roads and farm tracks will mainly be used.

Include the position of the access road on the site plan and required map, as well as an indication of the road in relation to the site. 5. LOCALITY MAP

An A3 locality map must be attached to the back of this document, as Appendix A. The scale of the locality map must be relevant to the size of the development (at least 1:50 000. For linear activities of more than 25 kilometres, a smaller scale e.g. 1:250 000 can be used. The scale must be indicated on the map.). The map must indicate the following:

an accurate indication of the project site position as well as the positions of the alternative sites, if any;

indication of all the alternatives identified;

closest town(s;)

road access from all major roads in the area;

road names or numbers of all major roads as well as the roads that provide access to the site(s);

all roads within a 1km radius of the site or alternative sites; and


24

a north arrow;

a legend; and

locality GPS co-ordinates (Indicate the position of the activity using the latitude and longitude of the centre point of the site for each alternative site. The co-ordinates should be in degrees and decimal minutes. The minutes should have at least three decimals to ensure adequate accuracy. The projection that must be used in all cases is the WGS84 spheroid in a national or local projection).

See Appendix A for the A3 Locality map 6. LAYOUT/ROUTE PLAN

A detailed site or route plan(s) must be prepared for each alternative site or alternative activity. It must be attached as Appendix A to this document. The site or route plans must indicate the following:

the property boundaries and numbers of all the properties within 50 metres of the site;

the current land use as well as the land use zoning of the site;

the current land use as well as the land use zoning each of the properties adjoining the site or sites;

the exact position of each listed activity applied for (including alternatives);

servitude(s) indicating the purpose of the servitude;

a legend; and

a north arrow.

See Appendix A for the A3 Locality/Layout/Route map 7. SENSITIVITY MAP

The layout/route plan as indicated above must be overlain with a sensitivity map that indicates all the sensitive areas associated with the site, including, but not limited to:

watercourses;

the 1:100 year flood line (where available or where it is required by DWS);

ridges;

cultural and historical features;

areas with indigenous vegetation (even if it is degraded or infested with alien species); and

critical biodiversity areas. The sensitivity map must also cover areas within 100m of the site and must be attached in Appendix A.

See Appendix A for the A3 Sensitivity and vegetation maps 8. SITE PHOTOGRAPHS

Colour photographs from the centre of the site must be taken in at least the eight major compass directions with a description of each photograph. Photographs must be attached under Appendix B to this report. It must be supplemented with additional photographs of relevant features on the site, if applicable.

See Appendix B for Photo report


25

9. FACILITY ILLUSTRATION

A detailed illustration of the activity must be provided at a scale of at least 1:200 as Appendix C for activities that include structures. The illustrations must be to scale and must represent a realistic image of the planned activity. The illustration must give a representative view of the activity.

See Appendix C for technical drawings of the proposed pylon type to be used 10. ACTIVITY MOTIVATION

Motivate and explain the need and desirability of the activity (including demand for the activity):

1. Is the activity permitted in terms of the property’s existing land use rights?

YES Please explain

The surrounding area is characterised by mostly vacant natural veld, which is used for livestock grazing. The farms are classified as stock farms either with or without dwellings. There is already an existing 132 kV powerline present on the relevant farms.

The diversion of the existing Eskom 132 kV powerline will also merely be a relocation of an existing line which is already present on the property.

A change in land use will not be required as the 132 kV powerline servitude will be considered as special use within the existing land use rights.

2. Will the activity be in line with the following?

(a) Provincial Spatial Development Framework (PSDF) YES Please explain

The proposed project falls within the Northern Cape Province. The Free State Growth and

Development Pillars, which is contained in the Northern Cape Provincial Spatial

Development Framework (NCPSDF), has set its own set of drivers with long-term

programmes which discusses the improved quality of life and states that basic

infrastructure should be expanded or maintained or order to achieve the desired quality of

life improvement.

The proposed project will contribute to this in the following ways:

By providing new basic electricity infrastructure at a local level;

By providing Bulk Services; and

By improving technical capacity of local municipalities for sustainable local

infrastructure.

Therefore, the proposed project will be in line with the NCPSDF in terms of the improvement of quality of life.


26

(b) Urban edge / Edge of Built environment for the area YES Please explain

Neither the proposed development of the new 132 kV powerline or the diversion of the

existing Eskom 132 kV powerline will compromise the urban edge as they are linear

activities which have no restrictions in terms of the urban edge.

(c) Integrated Development Plan (IDP) and Spatial Development Framework (SDF) of the Local Municipality (e.g. would the approval of this application compromise the integrity of the existing approved and credible municipal IDP and SDF?).

YES Please explain

The proposed development is situated within the Tsantsabane Local Municipality. An overview of challenges, development priorities and opportunities of the above mentioned municipality indicates that service delivery is one of the key focus areas in the Integrated Development Plan (IDP).

KPA 1 of Tsantsabane Municipality: Service Delivery.

Physical Infrastructure and Energy Efficiency – to ensure efficient infrastructure and energy supply that will contribute to the improvement of quality of life for all citizens of Tsantsabane.

The proposed development will contribute to the IDP and SDF by providing electricity to households, business and service providers, etc., within the municipal area and therefore adhering to the bulk service supply of the municipality. The proposed project will also serve as a solution to forthcoming potential overloading and as a result thereof, electricity losses and interruptions.

(d) Approved Structure Plan of the Municipality YES Please explain

The IDP of the Tsantsabane Municipality is the only structure plan available. The proposed development is for service infrastructure and therefore will not have any undesired effect on the Municipalities’ Structure Plans. It will in fact contribute positively to the local requirements.

(e) An Environmental Management Framework (EMF) adopted by the Department (e.g. Would the approval of this application compromise the integrity of the existing environmental management priorities for the area and if so, can it be justified in terms of sustainability considerations?)

NO Please explain

The district municipality EMF was taken into consideration when developing the local Tsantsabane IDP. KPA 2 discusses safety and the environment which needs to be managed responsibly and sustainably.

The proposed development would not compromise the integrity of the environmental management priorities for the area. No environmental fatal flaws were identified by the specialists and it was determined that the impacts can be mitigated to an acceptable level. In addition, the development would result in socio-economic considerable benefits for the local community.


27

(f) Any other Plans (e.g. Guide Plan) YES Please explain

The proposed development is aligned with Eskom’s Integrated Strategic Electricity Planning (ISEP) process, which is destined to provide energy and demand forecasting for up to 20 years into the future. As part of this process, data is gathered on supply- and demand-side costs and performances. Then the mix of these options and the timing of their use are optimised to meet the load forecast with suitable reliability, taking into account risks and assessment criteria.

The proposed development is also in line with the National Integrated Resource Plan (NIRP) which aims at providing a long-term, cost-effective resource plan for meeting electricity demand, which is consistent with reliable electricity supply and environmental, social and economic policies.

3. Is the land use (associated with the activity being applied for) considered within the timeframe intended by the existing approved SDF agreed to by the relevant environmental authority (i.e. is the proposed development in line with the projects and programmes identified as priorities within the credible IDP)?

YES Please explain

The proposed development is situated within the Tsantsabane Municipality. The municipality has set some goals within the IDP to address service delivery issues like the electricity backlog and other service.

KPA 1 pertains to service delivery in terms of physical infrastructure and energy efficiency while KPA 2 discusses the need for local economic development. These are two major and high priority objectives of the local municipality in order to improve the current status and condition of the local municipality.

The proposed project will directly benefit both these high priority KPA’s in the short as well as the long term future through job creation and economic stimulation together with necessary sufficient local electricity provision.

4. Does the community/area need the activity and the associated land use concerned (is it a societal priority)? (This refers to the strategic as well as local level (e.g. development is a national priority, but within a specific local context it could be inappropriate.)

YES Please explain

In line with national electricity generation and job creation priorities, the construction of the proposed CSP facility and associated 132 kV powerline will provide significant benefit to the local community.

Benefits will firstly come in the form of employment and skills development opportunities primarily during the construction but also subsequent operational phases which will assist in the alleviation of unemployment in the area. Secondly, the more stable and constant supply of adequate electricity to the local areas will assist in the improvement of livelihoods and quality of living of the local communities. The project will therefore provide a financial as well as social benefit to the area.


28

5. Are the necessary services with adequate capacity currently available (at the time of application), or must additional capacity be created to cater for the development? (Confirmation by the relevant Municipality in this regard must be attached to the final Basic Assessment Report as Appendix I.)

YES Please explain

This proposed development itself forms part of enabling the provision of a “necessary

service” in terms of sufficient local electricity supply. The construction of the 132 kV

powerline and diversion of the existing line will therefore beneficially add to the energy

capacity of the local area.

The Municipality has confirmed that they will be able to accommodate the water supply

required for the construction and operation of the CSP facility and powerline.

See Appendix I for confirmation letter from the Municipality.

6. Is this development provided for in the infrastructure planning of the municipality, and if not what will the implication be on the infrastructure planning of the municipality (priority and placement of services and opportunity costs)? (Comment by the relevant Municipality in this regard must be attached to the final Basic Assessment Report as Appendix I.)

YES Please explain

The improvement and maintenance of electricity distribution infrastructure is a high priority

KPA for the local municipality and the proposed 132 kV powerline development will

significantly contribute in a positive way to the infrastructure planning and improvement

within the local municipality.

7. Is this project part of a national programme to address an issue of national concern or importance?

YES Please explain

One objective regarding electricity distribution within the National Development Plan (NDP)

is that the proportion of people with access to the electricity grid should rise to at least 90

% by 2030, with non-grid options available for the rest. Resolving maintenance and the

refurbishment of backlogs is one of the actions set out in the NDP to solve this issue. This

proposed project will therefore assist in positively contributing to the improvement of the

national electricity supply situation.


29

8. Do location factors favour this land use (associated with the activity applied for) at this place? (This relates to the contextualisation of the proposed land use on this site within its broader context.)

YES Please explain

The proposed location for the CSP facility has a very high solar radiation and the

topography of the area is virtually flat with little contours or gradient. For this reason, the

location is perfectly suited for the proposed CSP facility. The associated powerline needs

to connect the CSP facility to the nearest Managanore substation in order to feed into the

local power grid. The most appropriate route for the powerline would be to run as straight

and short distance as far as possible in order to minimise the environmental impact on the

area. The location and route chosen for the powerline is therefore favourable in achieving

the desired objective of electricity distribution into the local grid while minimising the

environmental impact as far as possible. The local agricultural land-use of mostly grazing

will not be adversely affected once the pylons have been constructed as the actual

footprint of natural areas transformed by the project will not be of significant size.

9. Is the development the best practicable environmental option for this land/site?

YES Please explain

The current environmental land-use capability is already low. Once the pylons have been

constructed the area will again be available for agricultural utilisation mainly in the form of

livestock grazing as is current practice. The project will not adversely affect the current

land-use capability and environmental potential. The development of the powerline is

essential in the success of the proposed CSP facility.

10. Will the benefits of the proposed land use/development outweigh the negative impacts of it?

YES Please explain

The benefits of the proposed project will significantly outweigh the potential negative

impacts thereof. The proposed project will contribute to improving the socio-economic

conditions of the area. Local job creation, skills development, improved livelihood and

quality of life as well as adequate local electricity supply are significant local benefits while

the need for additional clean energy generation and supply will significantly benefit on a

national level. The negative impacts on the existing environment will be minimal due to the

fact that the proposed powerline will be constructed along an existing power line.

Therefore, the environment has already been exposed to similar activities and the

aesthetic feel of the environment will not be greatly affected from a visual perspective. The

Ecological Impact Assessment as well as an Avifaunal Impact Assessment conducted by

specialists yielded negative impacts on the ecology and the birdlife of relatively low

significance and impacts identified can also be suitably mitigated to acceptable levels.


30

11. Will the proposed land use/development set a precedent for similar activities in the area (local municipality)?

NO Please explain

There are other solar power facilities in the area which also have powerlines which connect

them to the power grid in order to distribute their electricity generated. The proposed

powerline development will form part of a distribution network required for electricity

transmission in the area. Distribution networks are usually upgraded and changed over

time in order to optimise efficiency and adjust to the changes in requirements and

demands. It is therefore possible that the network may be altered in the future. The new

powerline will also run along the already existing line indicating that the area has been

approved for similar activities.

12. Will any person’s rights be negatively affected by the proposed activity/ies?

NO Please explain

The proposed project activities will not have a negative effect on any person’s rights; it will

in fact improve the socio-economic conditions of the area and subsequently improve

livelihood and quality of life for the local community.

13. Will the proposed activity/ies compromise the “urban edge” as defined by the local municipality?

NO Please explain

The proposed project will be constructed outside the urban edge of Metsimatala as

indicated by the SDF of the municipality. Infrastructure for the provision of services would

therefore not alter or impact the urban edge.


31

14. Will the proposed activity/ies contribute to any of the 17 Strategic Integrated Projects (SIPS)?

YES Please explain

The National Government recently adopted an Infrastructure Plan that is intended to

transform the economic landscape of South Africa, create a significant number of new

jobs, strengthen the delivery of basic services to the people of South Africa and support

the integration of African economies.

The Infrastructure Plan of South Africa sets out the challenges and enablers, which South

Africa needs to respond to, in the building and developing of relevant infrastructure.

Based on the work of the Presidential Infrastructure Coordination Commission (PICC),

seventeen Strategic Integrated Projects (SIPs) have been developed and approved to

support economic development and address service delivery in the poorest provinces.

Each SIP is comprised of a large number of specific infrastructure components and

programmes.

The proposed development of the powerline will contribute to SIP 6 and 10.

SIP 6 regarding integrated municipal infrastructure projects, include projects that:

Develop national capacity to assist the 23 least resourced districts (19 million

people) to address all the maintenance backlogs and upgrades required in water,

electricity and sanitation bulk infrastructure; and

SIP 10, regarding electricity transmission and distribution for all, includes projects that:

Expand the transmission and distribution network to address historical imbalances,

provide access to electricity for all and support economic development; and

Align the 10-year transmission plan, the services backlog, the national broadband

roll-out and the freight rail line development to leverage off regulatory approvals,

supply chain and project development capacity.1

The aim of the project is to expand the transmission and distribution network to address

the current electricity imbalance and provide access to electricity for the existing

Metsimatala residential area.

15. What will the benefits be to society in general and to the local communities?

Please explain

The proposed development will provide an additional supply of electricity to the local area

in which it is proposed. The construction and subsequent operation of the proposed

development will also provide a significant financial boost to the area in terms of job

creation and skills development. The current imbalance in the electricity supply within the

surrounding areas will be restored and it will add to a higher quality of life to residents. The

capacity for the potential development of new residential areas will also be created once

the proposed electrical services development is completed. This will enhance the

economic development process within the area. The generation and distribution of clean

renewable energy will provide a benefit to society in general.


32

16. Any other need and desirability considerations related to the proposed activity?

Please explain

As discussed earlier, the project is firstly needed in order for the proposed CSP facility to

be able to connect into the local power grid and adequately distribute electricity generated.

Without the construction of the proposed powerline, the functionality of the CSP facility will

be severely compromised.

The project will contribute to national clean renewable energy generation targets and

initiatives. It will provide a socio-economic boost to the area through job creation and skills

development and improve the livelihood and quality of life of local the community through

adequate electricity generation and provision.

17. How does the project fit into the National Development Plan for 2030? Please explain

The key point in Chapter 4 of The National Development Plan (NDP) of 2030, is that South Africa needs to maintain and expand its electricity, water, transport and telecommunication infrastructure in order to support economic growth and social development goals. The plan further envisages that, by 2030, South Africa will have an energy sector that promotes inter alia, economic growth and development through adequate investment in energy infrastructure.

The proposed project will fit into the NDP of 2030 through the construction and improvement of electricity infrastructure that will promote electricity supply to the proposed development area in the future. This will also be beneficial to the residents within the area as this will contribute to their livelihood and quality of life. The project will also form part of clean renewable energy generation and targets to be reached.

18. Please describe how the general objectives of Integrated Environmental Management as set out in section 23 of NEMA have been taken into account.

The required Basic Assessment (BA) in terms of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998) (NEMA) was undertaken for the proposed powerline, in order to investigate and assess any potential environmental impacts associated with the development prior to implementation. Alternatives were identified and the potential mitigation measures of impacts to acceptable levels were also assessed during the Basic Assessment. As part of the BA process, specialist studies were conducted to evaluate the actual and potential impacts that the proposed development could have on the biophysical environment, within the study area. In line with the general objectives of Integrated Environmental Management, the risks and consequences of the various corridor alternatives were assessed and mitigation measures were recommended by each specialist in order to minimise the negative impacts to acceptable levels and maximise the benefits of the proposed project.

In addition, a comprehensive Public Participation Process (PPP) will be undertaken as part of the Basic Assessment, which will involve informing of and consultation with various interested and affected parties, key stakeholders and organs of state, including national, provincial, district and local authorities, relevant government departments, parastatals and NGO’s. This PPP will ensure they are afforded sufficient time and information in order to make informed comments on the proposed project. These processes will ensure that all provisions of the Act are considered and as such that the principle of Integrated Environmental Management is adhered to.


33

19. Please describe how the principles of environmental management as set out in section 2 of NEMA have been taken into account.


34

Through the undertaking of a Basic Assessment process by a competent Environmental Assessment Practitioner, informed by guidelines, the consideration of impacts and alternatives (advantages and disadvantages coupled thereto) has been made. Moreover, the conducting of a public participation process and specialist investigations form part of this basic assessment process, whilst mitigation measures and the needs and desirability of the proposed project were interrogated. This ensured that all provisions of the Act were considered and as such integrated environmental management were accounted for as follows:

(2) Environmental Management must place people and their needs at the forefront of its concern, and serve their physical, psychological, developmental, cultural heritage and social interests equitably.

The goal of this Basic Assessment is to identify and adequately mitigate potential socio-economic impacts in order to meet the terms of Section 24 of the Constitution. The project will have considerable socio-economic benefits such as job creation, skills development and transfer as well as adequate local electricity provision.

(3) Development must be socially, environmentally and economically sustainable.

The overall goal of this Basic Assessment is to predict, identify and manage potential positive and negative impacts in the socio-economic, cultural-heritage and biophysical environments. This must be done in order to meet the needs of present generations without compromising the needs of future generations (sustainable development). The distribution and local provision of electricity will be a continuous and sustainable process while environmental impacts will be acceptably mitigated.

(4)(a) Sustainable development requires the consideration of all relevant factors including the following:

i. That the disturbance of ecosystems and loss of biological diversity are

avoided, or, where they cannot be altogether avoided, are minimised and

remedied;

ii. that pollution and degradation of the environment are avoided, or, where

they cannot be altogether avoided, are minimised and remedied;

iii. that the disturbance of landscapes and sites that constitute the nation´s

cultural heritage is avoided, or where it cannot be altogether avoided, is

minimised and remedied;

iv. that waste is avoided, or where it cannot be altogether avoided, minimised

and reused or recycled where possible and otherwise disposed of in a

responsible manner;

v. that the use and exploitation of non-renewable natural resources is

responsible and equitable, and takes into account the consequences of the

depletion of the resource;

vi. that the development, use and exploitation of renewable resources and the

ecosystems of which they are part do not exceed the level beyond which

their integrity is jeopardised;

vii. that a risk-aversive and cautious approach is applied, which takes into

account the limits of current knowledge about the consequences of

decisions and actions; and

viii. that negative impacts on the environment and on people´s environmental

rights be anticipated and prevented, and where they cannot be altogether

prevented, are minimised and remedied.

An Environmental Management Program Report (EMPr) was compiled to mitigate and manage all activities during the planning, construction and operational phases.


35

(b) Environmental management must be integrated, acknowledging that all elements of

the environment are linked and interrelated, and it must take into account the effects of

decisions on all aspects of the environment and all people in the environment by

pursuing the selection of the best practicable environmental option.

All aspects, including socio-economic, cultural-heritage and biophysical was evaluated and

assessed in order to identify and minimize potential negative impacts which will give effect to

Integrated Environmental Management, as set out in Chapter 5 of NEMA, 1998.

(c) Environmental justice must be pursued so that adverse environmental impacts shall

not be distributed in such a manner as to unfairly discriminate against any person,

particularly vulnerable and disadvantaged persons.

A public participation process will be undertaken in terms of Section 41 of the NEMA EIA

Regulations, which came into effect on 4 December 2014, in order to give effect to Section

32 of the Constitution in such a way that adherence is given to Section 24 of the

Constitution.

(d) Equitable access to environmental resources, benefits and services to meet basic

human needs and ensure human wellbeing must be pursued and special measures

may be taken to ensure access thereto by categories of persons disadvantaged by

unfair discrimination.

The proposed project will serve as an alternative energy option to reduce the impact on a

constrained electricity grid.

(e) Responsibility for the environmental health and safety consequences of a policy,

programme, project, product, process, service or activity exists throughout its life cycle.

The EMPr will be applicable throughout the lifecycle of the project.

(f) The participation of all interested and affected parties in environmental governance

must be promoted, and all people must have the opportunity to develop the

understanding, skills and capacity necessary for achieving equitable and effective

participation, and participation by vulnerable and disadvantaged persons must be

ensured.

A comprehensive public participation process will be undertaken in terms of Section 41 of

the NEMA EIA Regulations, which came into effect on 4 December 2014, in order to give

effect to Section 32 of the Constitution in such a way that adherence is given to Section 24

of the Constitution.

(g) Decisions must take into account the interests, needs and values of all interested and

affected parties, and this includes recognising all forms of knowledge, including

traditional and ordinary knowledge.

The competent authority/Department Environmental Affairs’ (DEA) decision making process

has to be in accordance with the above.


36

(h) Community wellbeing and empowerment must be promoted through environmental

education, the raising of environmental awareness, the sharing of knowledge and

experience and other appropriate means.

(i) The social, economic and environmental impacts of activities, including disadvantages

and benefits, must be considered, assessed and evaluated, and decisions must be

appropriate in the light of such consideration and assessment.

This Basic Assessment Report gives effect to Section 5 of NEMA whereby all social,

economic and environmental impacts of activities were considered, assessed and evaluated

in order to determine the most appropriate mitigation.

(j) The right of workers to refuse work that is harmful to human health or the environment

and to be informed of dangers must be respected and protected.

Human rights will be taken into account during all phases of the proposed project.

(k) Decisions must be taken in an open and transparent manner, and access to

information must be provided in accordance with the law.

The decision will take place in an open and fair manner to give effect to Section 32 of the

Constitution. I & AP’s will be notified of the final decision in terms of the requirements as set

out in Section 41 of the NEMA EIA Regulations, 2014.

(l) There must be intergovernmental coordination and harmonisation of policies,

legislation and actions relating to the environment.

All relevant governmental authorities will be considered during the Basic Assessment

process to give their inputs on the project.

(m) Actual or potential conflicts of interest between organs of state should be resolved

through conflict resolution procedures.

Actual or potential conflicts of interest between organs of state will be adequately managed

in order to attempt to resolve through conflict resolution procedures.

(n) Global and international responsibilities relating to the environment must be

discharged in the national interest.

(o) The environment is held in public trust for the people, the beneficial use of

environmental resources must serve the public interest and the environment must be

protected as the people´s common heritage.

Through the appointment of various specialists, mitigation measures have been determined

to ensure that the impacts of the proposed project are reduced to acceptable levels.

(p) The costs of remedying pollution, environmental degradation and consequent adverse

health effects and of preventing, controlling or minimising further pollution,

environmental damage or adverse health effects must be paid for by those responsible

for harming the environment.


37

An EMPr was compiled in order to prevent or minimize any potential negative impacts to the

environment. It will be the responsibility of the applicant and associated contractor to adhere

to all measures set out in the EMPr, in order to give effect to Section 28 (1) of NEMA.

(q) The vital role of women and youth in environmental management and development

must be recognised and their full participation therein must be promoted.

(r) Sensitive, vulnerable, highly dynamic or stressed ecosystems, such as coastal shores,

estuaries, wetlands, and similar systems require specific attention in management and

planning procedures, especially where they are subject to significant human resource

usage and development pressure.

A Sensitivity map containing all vulnerable vegetation, significant water courses and

ecosystems was created in order to ensure that the potential impacts of the proposed project

on such areas will be minimised as far as reasonably possible.


38

11. APPLICABLE LEGISLATION, POLICIES AND/OR GUIDELINES

List all legislation, policies and/or guidelines of any sphere of government that are applicable to the application as contemplated in the EIA regulations, if applicable:

Title of legislation, policy or guideline

Applicability to the project Administering authority

Date

Legislation

Constitution of the

Republic of South Africa,

Act No. 108 of 1996

The constitution

recognises the right to a

safe and healthy

environment for all citizens

of the republic. As such,

this forms a guiding

principle of environmental

management.

South African

Government

1996

National Environmental

Management Act (Act

107 of 1998) (NEMA), as

amended, and the EIA

Regulations of 4

December 2014

promulgated in terms of

Section 24(5) of NEMA

and Listing Notices

(Government Notice No.

R. 983 and 985)

The proposed project

triggers activities that

would require

environmental

authorisation to be granted

as set out in GN R No. 983

and GN R No. 985.

Department of

Environmental

Affairs (DEA)

1998,

2014

National Environmental

Management Biodiversity

Act (Act 10 of 2004)

(NEMBA)

Under NEMBA the project

proponent is required to

take appropriate

reasonable measures to

limit the impacts on

biodiversity, to obtain

permits if required and to

invite SANBI to provide

Department of

Environmental

Affairs (DEA) and

South African

National

Biodiversity Institute

(SANBI)

2004


39



Date

commentary on any

documentation resulting

from the proposed

development.

National Forests Act (Act

84 of 1998)

The aim of the National

Forests Act is to promote

the sustainable usage,

management and

development of forests for

the benefit of all in South

Africa. The Act also makes

special provisions for the

protection of specific

forests and tree species

which duly require formal

protection in order to

ensure their prolonged

existence.

The National Forests Act

was therefore utilised to

determine the potential

presence of any protected

forests or tree species in

the proposed project area

in order to ensure that the

correct processes are

followed for the approval

of any listed activities for

which a permit may be

necessary regarding such

forests or species, should

it be required.

Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF)

1998

Northern Cape Nature

Conservation Act (Act 9

This Act also makes

provision for the protection Department of Environment and

2009


40



Date

of 2009) and sustainable utilisation

of wild animals, aquatic

biota and plants on a

provincial scale in the

Northern Cape Province.

It is therefore used in

conjunction with NEMBA

and the National Forests

Act to determine the

ecological/biodiversity

significance, value and

subsequent management

of the proposed project

area. The Act is also used

to determine the potential

presence of any

provincially protected

species in the proposed

project area in order to

ensure that the correct

processes are followed for

the approval of any listed

activities for which a

permit may be necessary

regarding such species,

should it be required.

Nature Conservation in the Northern Cape Province

National Heritage

Resources Act (Act 25 of

1999) (NHRA)

In terms of section 38 of

the NHRA, Heritage

Impact Assessment (HIA)

is triggered by the

proposed project due to

the linear activity

exceeding 300 m.

South African

Heritage Resources

Association

(SAHRA).

1999


41



Date

A case must be opened on

the South African Heritage

Resources Association

(SAHRA) website.

National Water Act (Act

36 of 1998) (NWA)

The development takes

place within a 500 m

radius of a watercourse,

and therefore a water use

license is required with

regards to water uses (c)

and (i) of the NWA.

Department of

Water Affairs and

Sanitation (DWS)

1998

Conservation of

Agricultural Resources

Act (Act No. 43 of 1983)

(CARA)

CARA aims to provide for

the protection and control

over utilisation of the

country’s agricultural

resources in order to

promote conservation of

soils, water and natural

vegetation as well as the

combatting of weeds and

invader plants.

CARA was therefore used

for determining the

agricultural significance,

value and subsequently

the adequate management

of the proposed project

area.

Department of

Agriculture,

Forestry and

Fisheries (DAFF)

and the Department

of Agriculture, Land

Reform and Rural

Development in the

Northern Cape

Province

1983

National Veld and Forest Fire Act, Act No. 101 of 1998

The purpose of the NVFFA

is to prevent and combat

veld, forest and mountain

fires throughout the

Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries

1998


42



Date

Republic. As such, fire

prevention as an aspect of

the EMPr must be

accounted for.

Guidelines

Public Participation

Guideline, 2012

In terms of NEMA, the

Public Participation

Process is required as part

of the Basic Assessment

for this project.

Department of

Environmental

Affairs

2012

Impact Assessment

Guidelines, 2002

To evaluate the

significance of

environmental impacts of

the proposed project.

Department of

Environmental

Affairs

2002

Specialist Studies

Guidelines, 2002

To gather information on

the positive and negative

impacts associated with

the project alternatives. To

determine

recommendations for

mitigation actions that may

either enhance potential

benefits or minimize

harmful effects.

Department of

Environmental

Affairs

2002

Guidelines for

Environmental

Management Plans, 2004

An Environmental

Management Programme

should be included as part

of the BA for this project.

Department of

Environmental

Affairs

2004

Tsantsabane Municipality

Integrated Development

Plan (IDP)

Each municipality is

required to produce an

IDP which would address

Tsantsabane

Municipality

2014/2015


43



Date

pertinent issues relevant to

their municipality.

Common concerns include

municipal transformation

and development, and

service delivery and

infrastructural

development. With regards

to the latter, electricity,

amongst other municipal

services, is highlighted as

a priority issue warranting

attention, in particular the

provision of access to

electricity to affected

communities and the

improvement of the

electricity infrastructure

(mini-subs, cables).

Integrated Strategic

Electricity Planning

(ISEP), 2005

The ISEP provides a

framework for Eskom to

investigate a wide range of

new supply-side and

demand-side technologies

with a view to optimising

investments and returns.

Eskom 2005


44

12. WASTE, EFFLUENT, EMISSION AND NOISE MANAGEMENT

a) Solid waste management

Will the activity produce solid construction waste during the construction/initiation phase?

YES

If YES, what estimated quantity will be produced per month? Unknown

How will the construction solid waste be disposed of (describe)? All solid waste collected shall be disposed of at the registered/licensed municipal landfill site. Skip waste containers and waste collection bins will be maintained on site and the contractor will arrange for them to be collected regularly when needed and transported to the licensed landfill site. Waste separation will be implemented. Under no circumstances will waste be burned or buried on site. No solid waste shall be produced during operation phase.

Where will the construction solid waste be disposed of (describe)? All construction rubble will be disposed of by the contractor at the registered/licensed municipal landfill site

Will the activity produce solid waste during its operational phase? NO

If YES, what estimated quantity will be produced per month? n/a

How will the solid waste be disposed of (describe)?

n/a

If the solid waste will be disposed of into a municipal waste stream, indicate which registered landfill site will be used.

n/a

Where will the solid waste be disposed of if it does not feed into a municipal waste stream (describe)?

n/a

If the solid waste (construction or operational phases) will not be disposed of in a registered landfill site or be taken up in a municipal waste stream, then the applicant should consult with the competent authority to determine whether it is necessary to change to an application for scoping and EIA.

Can any part of the solid waste be classified as hazardous in terms of the NEM:WA? NO

If YES, inform the competent authority and request a change to an application for scoping and EIA. An application for a waste permit in terms of the NEM:WA must also be submitted with this application.

Is the activity that is being applied for a solid waste handling or treatment facility? NO

If YES, then the applicant should consult with the competent authority to determine whether it is necessary to change to an application for scoping and EIA. An application for a waste permit in terms of the NEM:WA must also be submitted with this application.


45

b) Liquid effluent

Will the activity produce effluent, other than normal sewage, that will be disposed of in a municipal sewage system?

NO

If YES, what estimated quantity will be produced per month? n/a m3

Will the activity produce any effluent that will be treated and/or disposed of on site? NO

If YES, the applicant should consult with the competent authority to determine whether it is necessary to change to an application for scoping and EIA.

Will the activity produce effluent that will be treated and/or disposed of at another facility?

NO

If YES, provide the particulars of the facility:

Facility name: n/a

Contact person:

Postal address:

Postal code:

Telephone: Cell:

E-mail: Fax:

Describe the measures that will be taken to ensure the optimal reuse or recycling of waste water, if any:

n/a

c) Emissions into the atmosphere

Will the activity release emissions into the atmosphere other that exhaust emissions and dust associated with construction phase activities?

NO

If YES, is it controlled by any legislation of any sphere of government? NO

If YES, the applicant must consult with the competent authority to determine whether it is necessary to change to an application for scoping and EIA. If NO, describe the emissions in terms of type and concentration: Dust and vehicle, construction machine emissions during the construction phase of the proposed development will be the only emissions released into the atmosphere.

d) Waste permit

Will any aspect of the activity produce waste that will require a waste permit in terms of the NEM:WA?

NO

If YES, please submit evidence that an application for a waste permit has been submitted to the competent authority e) Generation of noise

Will the activity generate noise? YES

If YES, is it controlled by any legislation of any sphere of government? NO


46

Describe the noise in terms of type and level: The proposed construction of the new 132 kV powerline and decommissioning and diversion of the existing Eskom 132 kV powerline will generate noise during the construction phase. Noise will be generated during vegetation clearing activities, by vehicles transporting equipment, and by construction activities around the powerline. These impacts are not considered to be significant enough to warrant a formal noise impact assessment. During the operational phase, the powerline may produce a corona (low ‘buzzing’ or ‘crackling’ noise). A corona can be caused by water droplets forming on a conductor resulting in the breakdown of air molecules perceived as the crackling noise. However, corona rings will be used on conductors to prevent/reduce the noise. In addition, the transformer within the substation will also produce a low level humming noise. There are however no significant settlements or homesteads in the immediate/close vicinity which will be affected by this type of noise. To ensure that the noise generated during the construction phase is minimised, the following mitigation measures are proposed (these will be included in the Environmental Management Programme for the project, attached as Appendix G):

All equipment used on site shall be fitted with suitable silencers to control noise pollution;

The following will prevail:

Unless otherwise specified by the EO/ECO, normal working hours will apply (i.e. from 06h30 to 17h00, Mondays to Fridays);

Ensure that employees and staff conduct themselves in an acceptable manner while on site, both during work hours and after hours;

No loud music will be permitted on site or in the site camp.

If blasting is required during the construction period of the 132 kV power line, the following guidelines will be followed:

The type, duration and timing of the blasting procedures will be planned with due cognisance of other land uses and structures in the vicinity;

The local landowners and communities will be adequately informed ahead of any blasting event;

The use of nitrate-free explosives will be favoured wherever possible (i.e. methods including drilling and black powder, expanding mortar or old fashioned plugs and feathers);

Noise mufflers and/or soft explosives will be used by staff during blasting;

Appropriate measures to limit undesired flyrock will be taken;

Audible warning of a pending blast will be given at least 3 minutes in advance of a blast; and

All flyrock (of diameter 150mm and larger) which falls beyond the cleared working area, together with the rock spill, will be collected and removed.


47

13. WATER USE

Please indicate the source(s) of water that will be used for the activity by ticking the appropriate box(es):

Municipal

If water is to be extracted from groundwater, river, stream, dam, lake or any other natural feature, please indicate the volume that will be extracted per month:

n/a

Does the activity require a water use authorisation (general authorisation or water use license) from the Department of Water Affairs?

YES

If YES, please provide proof that the application has been submitted to the Department of Water Affairs.

See Appendix I for the confirmation of water use letter received from the municipality.

The project requires a Water Use License from the Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS) for construction within 500m of a wetland. A pre-application meeting was conducted with DWS on 15 July 2016 and an application will be submitted to DWS (see proof of pre-application meeting in Appendix I).

The proof of application submission will be included in the Final Basic Assessment Report.

14. ENERGY EFFICIENCY

Describe the design measures, if any, which have been taken to ensure that the activity is energy efficient: The activity will not use electricity but rather distribute electricity to a substation from where it is divided into smaller voltages for distribution to end-users.

Describe how alternative energy sources have been taken into account or been built into the design of the activity, if any: Not applicable to this project given that the activity does not utilise electricity but rather distributes it.


48

SECTION B: SITE/AREA/PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Important notes: 1. For linear activities (pipelines, etc) as well as activities that cover very large sites, it may be

necessary to complete this section for each part of the site that has a significantly different environment. In such cases please complete copies of Section B and indicate the area, which is covered by each copy No. on the Site Plan.

Section B Copy No. (e.g. A): n/a

2. Paragraphs 1 - 6 below must be completed for each alternative.

3. Has a specialist been consulted to assist with the completion of this section? YES

If YES, please complete the form entitled “Details of specialist and declaration of interest” for each specialist thus appointed and attach it in Appendix J. All specialist reports must be contained in Appendix D.

See specialist declarations of interest in Appendix J

See specialist reports in Appendix D Property description/physical address:


49

Province Northern Cape Province

District Municipality

ZF Mgcawu District Municipality

Local Municipality Tsantsabane Local Municipality

Ward number(s) Hay Road Ward 3

All farms fall within the same district and local municipality

Farm name(s) and number(s)

Farm Kapstewel No. 436

Portion number(s) Remaining Extent

SG Code C 03100000000043600000


Farm No. 437


SG Code C 03100000000043700000


Farm No. 588


SG Code C 03100000000058800000


Farm No. 589


SG Code C 03100000000058900000


Farm No. 589

Portion number(s) Portions 8

SG Code C 03100000000058900008


Farm No. 589

Portion number(s) Portions 14

SG Code C 03100000000058900014


Farm Groenwater No 453


SG Code C 03100000000045300000



Portion number(s) Portion 3

SG Code C 03100000000045300003

Where a large number of properties are involved (e.g. linear activities), please attach a full list to this application including the same information as indicated above.


50




SG Code C 03100000000045300004




SG Code C 03100000000045300005

Current land-use zoning as per local municipality IDP/records:

The proposed project will traverse through land zoned as agricultural land (stock farm with or without dwellings).

In instances where there is more than one current land-use zoning, please attach a list of current land use zonings that also indicate which portions each use pertains to, to this application.

See Appendix E for current land uses

Is a change of land-use or a consent use application required? YES

See Appendix E for land owner consent letter letters. 15. GRADIENT OF THE SITE

Indicate the general gradient of the site. Proposed new 132 kV powerline: Alternative 1 (preferred):

Flat 1:50 – 1:20 1:20 – 1:15 1:15 – 1:10 1:10 – 1:7,5 1:7,5 – 1:5 Steeper than 1:5

Alternative 2:


Decommissioning and diversion of existing powerline: Alternative 1 (preferred):


Alternative 2:



51

16. LOCATION IN LANDSCAPE

Indicate the landform(s) that best describes the site:

2.1 Ridgeline 2.4 Closed valley 2.7 Undulating plain / low hills X

2.2 Plateau 2.5 Open valley 2.8 Dune

2.3 Side slope of hill/mountain 2.6 Plain X 2.9 Seafront

2.10 At sea

17. GROUNDWATER, SOIL AND GEOLOGICAL STABILITY OF THE SITE

Is the site(s) located on any of the following? Proposed new 132 kV powerline: Alternative 1

(preferred): Alternative 2:

Shallow water table (less than 1.5m deep) YES YES

Dolomite, sinkhole or doline areas NO NO

Seasonally wet soils (often close to water bodies)

YES

YES

Unstable rocky slopes or steep slopes with loose soil

NO

NO

Dispersive soils (soils that dissolve in water) NO NO

Soils with high clay content (clay fraction more than 40%)

NO

NO

Any other unstable soil or geological feature NO NO

An area sensitive to erosion NO NO

Decommissioning and diversion of existing powerline: Alternative 1


Shallow water table (less than 1.5m deep) NO NO

Dolomite, sinkhole or doline areas NO NO

Seasonally wet soils (often close to water bodies)

NO

NO

Unstable rocky slopes or steep slopes with loose soil

NO

NO

Dispersive soils (soils that dissolve in water) NO NO

Soils with high clay content (clay fraction more than 40%)

NO

NO

Any other unstable soil or geological feature NO NO

An area sensitive to erosion NO NO

If you are unsure about any of the above or if you are concerned that any of the above aspects may be an issue of concern in the application, an appropriate specialist should be appointed to assist in the completion of this section. Information in respect of the above will often be available as part of the


52

project information or at the planning sections of local authorities. Where it exists, the 1:50 000 scale Regional Geotechnical Maps prepared by the Council for Geo Science may also be consulted. 18. GROUNDCOVER

Indicate the types of groundcover present on the site. The location of all identified rare or endangered species or other elements should be accurately indicated on the site plan(s).

Natural veld - good conditionE

Natural veld with scattered aliensE

Natural veld with heavy alien infestationE

Veld dominated by alien speciesE

Gardens

Sport field Cultivated land Paved surface Building or other structure

Bare soil

If any of the boxes marked with an “E “is ticked, please consult an appropriate specialist to assist in the completion of this section if the environmental assessment practitioner doesn’t have the necessary expertise. See Appendix D for specialist reports

19. SURFACE WATER

Indicate the surface water present on and or adjacent to the site and alternative sites? Proposed new 132 kV powerline: Alternative 1


Perennial River No No

Non-Perennial River Yes Yes

Permanent Wetland No No

Seasonal Wetland Yes Yes

Artificial Wetland No No

Estuarine / Lagoonal wetland No No

If any of the boxes marked YES or UNSURE is ticked, please provide a description of the relevant watercourse. In accordance with the specialist report (See Appendix D), both alternatives 1 and 2 will cross a number of small seasonal watercourses. These streams are all classified as first order streams meaning they are headwater streams, which only flow when it is raining in their catchments. These seasonal streams are sodic sites with high concentrations of salts in them. Moderately modified. The Present Ecological Status (PES) of these watercourses have been classified as class C by the specialist meaning that loss and change of natural habitat and biota have occurred, but the basic ecosystem functions are still predominantly unchanged.

Both alternatives 1 and 2 will also pass in close proximity (within 500 m) to a number of small seasonal wetlands and salt pans.


53

Decommissioning and diversion of existing powerline: Alternative 1


Perennial River No No

Non-Perennial River No No

Permanent Wetland No No

Seasonal Wetland No No

Artificial Wetland No No

Estuarine / Lagoonal wetland No No

If any of the boxes marked YES or UNSURE is ticked, please provide a description of the relevant watercourse.

n/a

A water use license application will be submitted to the Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS) for developing within 500 m of a watercourse.

See Appendix I for proof of pre-application meeting for a WULA held with DWS on 15 July 2016.

20. LAND USE CHARACTER OF SURROUNDING AREA

Indicate land uses and/or prominent features that currently occur within a 500 m radius of the site and give description of how this influences the application or may be impacted upon by the application: Natural area Dam or reservoir Polo fields

Low density residential Hospital/medical centre Filling station H

Medium density residential School Landfill or waste treatment site

High density residential Tertiary education facility Plantation Informal residential A Church Agriculture

Retail commercial & warehousing Old age home River, stream or wetland

Light industrial Sewage treatment plantA Nature conservation area

Medium industrial AN Train station or shunting yard N Mountain, koppie or ridge

Heavy industrial AN Railway line N Museum

Power station Major road (4 lanes or more) N Historical building

Office/consulting room Airport N Protected Area

Military or police base/station/compound

Harbour Graveyard

Spoil heap or slimes damA Sport facilities Archaeological site

Quarry, sand or borrow pit Golf course Other land uses (describe)

If any of the boxes marked with an “N “are ticked, how will this impact / be impacted upon by the proposed activity? Specify and explain:

n/a


54

If any of the boxes marked with an "An" are ticked, how will this impact / be impacted upon by the proposed activity? Specify and explain:

n/a

If any of the boxes marked with an "H" are ticked, how will this impact / be impacted upon by the proposed activity? Specify and explain:

n/a

Does the proposed site (including any alternative sites) fall within any of the following:

Critical Biodiversity Area (as per provincial conservation plan) YES

Core area of a protected area? NO

Buffer area of a protected area? NO

Planned expansion area of an existing protected area? NO

Existing offset area associated with a previous Environmental Authorisation? NO

Buffer area of the SKA? NO

If the answer to any of these questions was YES, a map indicating the affected area must be included in Appendix A (Sensitivity map).

See Appendix A for Sensitivity map 21. CULTURAL/HISTORICAL FEATURES

Are there any signs of culturally or historically significant elements, as defined in section 2 of the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999, (Act No. 25 of 1999), including Archaeological or paleontological sites, on or close (within 20m) to the site? If YES, explain:

NO

Noting significant within the proposed servitude area or in the immediate vicinity.

If uncertain, conduct a specialist investigation by a recognised specialist in the field (archaeology or palaeontology) to establish whether there is such a feature(s) present on or close to the site. Briefly explain the findings of the specialist:


55

The Specialist Heritage Impact Assessments found no significant heritage artefacts or potential areas to be preserved or further investigated. See Appendix D for specialist reports.

Conclusion from Archaeological Impact Assessment Report

Seven archaeological and cultural heritage sites are situated within, or in proximity to the

approximate 150 m assessment corridor of the proposed Metsimatala 150MW CSP Solar

Energy Facility – Power Lines study site. Of the identified sites three constitute cemetery

sites, two of which, Site MVIA3 and MPL3, are located within the assessment corridor. Site

MPL1, a newly identified cemetery is situated more than 2 km from the proposed Power

Line Option A alignment. Three sites are classed as Colonial Period farmstead sites,

namely Sites MPL2, HH-PL1 and HH-PL2. All identified Colonial Period farmsteads are

situated in proximity to the assessment corridor only; none of the sites will be impacted by

development. Site G-S1, a Colonial Period/contemporary mining complex, is also situated

in proximity to the assessment corridor only and will not be impacted by development. The

two cemetery sites situated within the assessment corridor (Sites MVIA3 and MPL3)

need to be conserved: Formal conservation of Site MVIA3 is recommended, while

formal conservation measures are already in place at Site MPL3 – inferred to be the

result of heritage compliance relating to construction of the exiting power line. The

identification of three cemetery sites during the field assessment, cautions against the

possibility that poorly demarcated or unmarked graves may be discovered during the

course of construction. Realignment: Site MVIA3 is situated along proposed Realignment

Option A. Recommended conservation measures should suffice for purposes of

development.

Powerline:

Site MPL3 is situated along Power Line alternative 2. Permanent conservation measures,

complying with SAHRA Minimum Standards for site conservation are already in place,

inferred to be the result of heritage compliance relating to development of the existing

power line. From an archaeological and cultural heritage perspective neither of the power

line options, Power Line alternative 1 or Power Line alternative 2, poses a threat to

identified sites. It is therefore recommended that development of the approved power lines

proceed without the developer having to comply with additional heritage compliance

requirements pertaining to lithic Stone Age deposits, such as Phase 2 mitigation, prior to

construction impact.


56

Conclusion from Palaeontological Impact Assessment Report

The footprints of route Alternatives 1 & 2 traverse Asbestos Hills (Vak, Vad), Quaternary

windblown sand and Campbellrand (Vgl) Subgroup strata, respectively considered to be of

moderate, low and moderate palaeontological sensitivity. Given the nature of the proposed

development (erection of pylons and creation of road servitudes), direct impact on potential

fossil heritage within the section mantled by Quaternary windblown sand is considered to be

low. This section is assigned a site rating of Generally Protected C (GP.C). Direct impact on

potential fossil heritage within the section underlain by Campbellrand (Vgl) and Asbestos

Hills (Vad, Vak) Subgroup strata, is considered to be low to moderate. There are no major

palaeontological grounds to halt the development of the preferred Alternative Route 1 or 2,

but it is advised that sites marked for erection of pylons or construction of associated

infrastructure, which will require excavation into fresh bedrock sediments of the

Campbellrand and Asbestos Hills Subgroup, is mapped and recorded prior to the

construction phase of the development. These sections are assigned a site rating of

Generally Protected B (GP.B).

Route alternative 2 for the diversion of the existing power line may potentially traverse

Griquatown Formation iron stones (Vad) considered to be of moderate palaeontological

sensitivity. The footprint is primarily mantled by a Quaternary windblown sand overburden

that is underlain by Postmasburg Group lavas and subordinate siliclastic sediments of the

Ongeluk Formation (Vo), considered to be of moderate palaeontological sensitivity. Given

the nature of the proposed development (erection of pylons and creation of road servitudes),

direct impact on potential fossil heritage within the section underlain by Griquatown

Formation, and mantled by Quaternary windblown sand is considered to be low. Direct

impact on potential fossil heritage within the section underlain by Postmasburg Group strata

is considered to be low. There are no major palaeontological grounds to halt this

development and it is exempted from further palaeontological investigation. The proposed

footprint is assigned a site rating of Generally Protected C (GP.C).

Route Alternative 2 for diversion of the existing power line traverses Asbestos Hills (Vak,

Vad), Postmasburg Group lavas and Quaternary windblown sand, respectively considered to

be of moderate and low palaeontological sensitivity. Given the nature of the proposed

development (erection of pylons and creation of road servitudes), direct impact on potential

fossil heritage within the section mantled by Quaternary windblown sand is considered to be

low. This section is assigned a site rating of Generally Protected C (GP.C). Direct impact on

potential fossil heritage within the section underlain Asbestos Hills (Vad, Vak) Subgroup

strata, is considered to be low to moderate. There are also no major palaeontological


57

grounds to halt the development of Alternative Route 1 or 2, but it is advised that sites

marked for erection of pylons or construction of associated infrastructure, which will require

excavation into fresh bedrock sediments of the Asbestos Hills Subgroup, is mapped and

recorded prior to the construction phase of the development. These sections are assigned a

site rating of Generally Protected B (GP.B).

Will any building or structure older than 60 years be affected in any way?

NO

Is it necessary to apply for a permit in terms of the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (Act 25 of 1999)?

NO

If YES, please provide proof that this permit application has been submitted to SAHRA or the relevant provincial authority. 22. SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTER

a) Local Municipality Please provide details on the socio-economic character of the local municipality in which the proposed site(s) are situated. Level of unemployment: According to the stats the unemployment figure has drastically reduced from 4466 in 2001 to 3795 in 2011 which shows a decrease of -15%. Employment has increased with 69% in 2011, which translates into more people working in 2011 than 2001. The proposed project will positively assist in further reducing unemployment by means of job creation and skills development mainly during the construction but also the subsequent operational phase of the proposed project.

Adapted from Tsantsabane Municipality IDP (2014-2015)

Economic profile of local municipality: The population figures in terms of census 2011 is 35 093 compared to 31 014 in 2001. The male population has increased by 24% while the female population has increased by only


58

2.7% since 2001. These increases can be relatively influenced by job migration and other factors.


Level of education: The statistics indicate that although there is a high number of students enrolling for primary school, a very low number of students actually complete Grade 12. This results in a significantly reduced low probability for employment. Only 5 % of those who enrolled for Grade 1 successfully proceed into tertiary education. Less than 15 % of the population has a tertiary qualification or have completed Grade 12.

It must, however, be mentioned that the education level is affected negatively by the urbanization process as it mostly involves matriculants and those with a better qualification who tend to move to the bigger cities for employment opportunities due to the lack of local job opportunities.


59


b) Socio-economic value of the activity

What is the expected capital value of the activity on completion? R 175 million

What is the expected yearly income that will be generated by or as a result of the activity?

Not applicable.

Will the activity contribute to service infrastructure? YES

Is the activity a public amenity? YES

How many new employment opportunities will be created in the development and construction phase of the activity/ies?

30 temporary jobs

What is the expected value of the employment opportunities during the development and construction phase?

R 3.6 million

What percentage of this will accrue to previously disadvantaged individuals? 60 % - 90 %

How many permanent new employment opportunities will be created during the operational phase of the activity?

None, once the construction is completed the powerline will be handed over to Eskom.

What is the expected current value of the employment opportunities during the first 10 years?

Not applicable as it will be transferred to Eskom.

What percentage of this will accrue to previously disadvantaged individuals? Not applicable as it will be transferred to Eskom.


60

23. BIODIVERSITY

Please note: The Department may request specialist input/studies depending on the nature of the biodiversity occurring on the site and potential impact(s) of the proposed activity/ies. To assist with the identification of the biodiversity occurring on site and the ecosystem status consult http://bgis.sanbi.org or [email protected]. Information is also available on compact disc (cd) from the Biodiversity-GIS Unit, Ph (021) 799 8698. This information may be updated from time to time and it is the applicant/ EAP’s responsibility to ensure that the latest version is used. A map of the relevant biodiversity information (including an indication of the habitat conditions as per (b) below) and must be provided as an overlay map to the property/site plan as Appendix D to this report. a) Indicate the applicable biodiversity planning categories of all areas on site and indicate

the reason(s) provided in the biodiversity plan for the selection of the specific area as part of the specific category)

Systematic Biodiversity Planning Category If CBA or ESA, indicate the reason(s) for its selection in biodiversity plan

Critical Biodiversity Area (CBA)

Ecological Support

Area (ESA)

Other Natural

Area (ONA)

No Natural Area

Remaining (NNR)

The small area classified as a CBA (see

sensitivity map in Appendix A) where the

proposed powerline traverses, is due to

the presence of a NFEPA categorised

watercourse. The powerline will be

constructed across the watercourse and

should cause minimal impact.

ESA’s are included due to the fact that

less than 10 % of the surface has been

transformed or degraded. Belonging to

this category are mostly natural land that

are considered to represent prime

corridor areas.

Other Natural Areas are natural

vegetation that has not been classified as

CBA or ESA.

See Appendix A for the Sensitivity map indicating the presence of CBA’s and ESA’s b) Indicate and describe the habitat condition on site

Habitat Condition

Percentage of habitat

condition class (adding up to 100%)

Description and additional Comments and Observations

(including additional insight into condition, e.g. poor land management practises, presence of quarries,

grazing, harvesting regimes etc).

Natural % 80

Near Natural (includes areas with

low to moderate level %

20

http://bgis.sanbi.org/

mailto:[email protected]


61

of alien invasive plants)

Degraded (includes areas

heavily invaded by alien plants)

%

Transformed (includes cultivation,

dams, urban, plantation, roads, etc)

%

c) Complete the table to indicate:

(i) the type of vegetation, including its ecosystem status, present on the site; and (ii) whether an aquatic ecosystem is present on site.

Terrestrial Ecosystems Aquatic Ecosystems

Ecosystem threat status as per the

National Environmental Management:

Biodiversity Act (Act No. 10 of 2004)

Critical Wetland (including rivers, depressions, channelled and unchanneled wetlands, flats,

seeps pans, and artificial wetlands)

Estuary Coastline Endangered

Vulnerable

Least Threatened YES NO NO

See Appendix A for the Vegetation map indicating the vegetation types


62

d) Please provide a description of the vegetation type and/or aquatic ecosystem present on site, including any important biodiversity features/information identified on site (e.g. threatened species and special habitats)


63

The following section was extracted from the specialist Ecological Impact

Assessment report (see Appendix D for full specialist report)

Vegetation Types

The four vegetation types through which the proposed powerline route crosses and the

Metsimatala Solar substation is situated are the Olifantshoek Plains Thornveld (SVk 13);

Kuruman Mountain Bushveld (SVk 10); Postmasburg Thornveld (SVk 14) and Kuruman

Thornveld (SVk 9). They are all classified as least threatened by Mucina & Rutherford,

2006.

The decommissioning and diversion of the existing Eskom powerline is situated in the

Olifantshoek Plains Thornveld (SVk 13); and the Kuruman Mountain Bushveld (SVk 10)

vegetation types which are both least threatened (Mucina & Rutherford, 2006).

The proposed powerline route also crosses through a small portion classified as a Critical

Biodiversity Area as well as a small portion classified as an Ecological Support Area (see

Appendix A for Sensitivity map). The reason for the CBA classification is due to the

presence of a NFEPA categorised watercourse.

Protected Species

The Ecological Impact Assessment identified a number of nationally and provincially

protected plant species in the vicinity of the proposed powerline route.

Shepherd’s Tree (Boscia albitrunca), the Camel Thorn (Acacia erioloba) and False Camel

Thorn (Acacia haematoxylon) are three nationally protected tree species which are present

in the proposed project area. If any individuals of these species are to be impacted by the

construction of the powerline, permits will firstly have to be obtained for the removal or

relocation of these individuals prior to the constriction activities.

The Ecological Impact Assessment identified a number of seasonal streams which the

proposed powerline route will cross as well as a number of seasonal pans and wetlands in

close proximity to the proposed powerline route. A water use license application will be

submitted due to the development activities crossing watercourses and taking place within

500 m of a watercourse.

Conclusion

There are some sensitive systems which would be affected by the proposed power line

routes. They include the rocky outcrops of the Kuruman Mountain Bushveld (SVk10) and

the episodic streams as well small wetlands/pans on the plains between the rocky ridges.

No Red or Orange data species were found to occur along the powerline routes although a

protected species namely Olea europaea subsp. africana occur on the rocky outcrops

while Acacia erioloba, Acacia haematoxylon and Boscia albitrunca occur on sandy plains.


relatively similar impacts.


64

The following section was extracted from the specialist Avifaunal Impact Assessment

report (see Appendix D for full specialist report)

Conclusion

Based on a thorough desk based study and three seasonal site surveys conducted over a

6 month period, it can be concluded that the project site has a moderate sensitivity in terms

of avifauna.

The species of most concern are the Critically Endangered White-backed Vulture and the

Endangered Martial Eagle. It was noted though that the former species was recorded on one

occasion only in the surveys conducted and has a generally low reporting rate in the SABAP

data considered. A pair of Martial Eagle was seen regularly in the summer and the

abundance and flight activity levels of all raptors and priority species recorded on the project

site was generally relatively low. Other species of concern included Lanner Falcon, Black-

chested Snake Eagle, Greater Kestrel, Northern Black Korhaan and Ludwig’s Bustard,

although the latter was not recorded on the project site during the surveys. Northern Black

Korhaan was relatively abundant and, although believed to be less at risk from burning

impacts, is at high risk from collisions with powerlines and disturbance and displacement

impacts.

Although a relatively diverse number of species and a high number of Red Data species

were found to be potentially present after examining the SABAP data, many of these species

were not recorded by monitoring, and many are unlikely to occur on the project site due to

unsuitable habitat. In most cases the frequency of records and the activity (especially flight

activity) of priority species and Red Data species on the project site was low. Vantage point

passage rates were also particularly low when compared with the specialists experience in

other parts of South Africa.

Commercial scale solar farms, and particularly CSP developments, are relatively new in

South Africa and little information therefore exists on the potential impacts of these

technologies on South African avifauna. Some information is available internationally which

shows that the main potential impacts may include: burning; collision; electrocution;

disturbance and displacement; habitat destruction; water pollution; and excessive use of

water. Impacts of associated infrastructure (e.g. the grid connection power lines) are

however well understood.


65




from an avifaunal perspective with neither being preferred. Similar ratings were obtained for

the powerline diversion, and both route alternatives are acceptable, with alternative two

being slightly preferred only as it runs along the main tar road.


66

SECTION C: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 24. ADVERTISEMENT AND NOTICE

Publication name Ghaap newspaper & Kalahari Bulletin

Date published Ghaap: Friday 29 July 2016 & Kalahari Bulletin Thursday 21 July 2016

Site notice position Latitude Longitude Will be completed for Final BA Report submission

Date placed Will be completed for Final BA Report submission

Include proof of the placement of the relevant advertisements and notices in Appendix E1. See Appendix E for all proof in the Public Participation Process Report (the PPP

Report will be completed after conclusion of the PPP and will therefore only be submitted with the Final Basic Assessment Report)

25. DETERMINATION OF APPROPRIATE MEASURES

Provide details of the measures taken to include all potential I&APs as required by Regulation 41(2)(e) and 41(6) of GN 733.

A comprehensive Public Participation Process (PPP) will be undertaken with all stakeholders

and Interested and Affected Parties (I & AP’s), including the relevant Organs of State and

competent authority (Department of Environmental Affairs DEA) as identified.

The PPP will be conducted in accordance with the requirements of Regulation 41 of the EIA

Regulations, 2014 and the designated Public Participation Officer will ensure that the PPP is

facilitated in a manner which ensures reasonable opportunity for all stakeholders and

registered I & AP’s to comment and provide input on the proposed project.

Notifications have been placed in two local free, newspapers (Ghaap newspaper on 29

July 2016 and Kalahari Bulletin on 21 July 2016).

Site notices have will be placed at the entrance to the proposed site location,

Postmasburg Municipal Offices, public library as well as the entrance to the

Metsimatala local informal settlement.

Hardcopies of the report will be placed at the Postmasburg Municipal Offices and the

public library.

A comprehensive list of stakeholders was identified during the PPP of the proposed

CSP facility. This list will be utilised for the purposes of the powerline PPP as well.

A notification email will be sent to all stakeholders and I & AP’s.


67

Key stakeholders (other than organs of state) identified in terms of Regulation 41(2)(b) of GN 733 Title, Name and Surname Affiliation/ key stakeholder status

Contact details (tel number or e-mail address)

M Mathobela Municipal Manager Postmasburg [email protected]

Cecile Mathe Municipal Environmental Officer [email protected]

Theys Julius Municipal Environmental Officer [email protected]

Andrea van Gense ESKOM [email protected]

Jolene van Wyk-Towell Department of Water and Sanitation [email protected]

Lerato Mokhoantle Department of Water and Sanitation [email protected]

K Bosman Ward counsilor (Ward 3) [email protected]

Kelly Hannie Northern Cape Department of Roads and Public Works [email protected]

Muhammad Essop DEA - Competent Authority [email protected]

Tsholo Makaudi NCDENC - Commenting Authority [email protected]

I Manyane Northern Cape Department of Social Development [email protected]

Phillip Hine SAHRA [email protected]

Kagisho Lekwene Landowner (Groenwater CPA) [email protected]

Denise SA Astronomy [email protected]

Harry Roberts SA Civil Aviation [email protected]

Vincent Muila DMR [email protected]

N Yede

Northern Cape Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development [email protected]

Dennis Seemela NERSA [email protected]

Simon Gear BirdlifeSA [email protected]

Henning Myburg Agri Noordkaap [email protected]

Stanley Tshitwamulomoni Seoka Lekota

DEA: Biodiversity and Conservation Directorate

[email protected] [email protected]

Include proof that the key stakeholder received written notification of the proposed activities as Appendix E2. This proof may include any of the following:

e-mail delivery reports;

registered mail receipts;

courier waybills;

signed acknowledgements of receipt; and/or

or any other proof as agreed upon by the competent authority. See Appendix E for all proof in the Public Participation Process Report (the PPP























68

26. ISSUES RAISED BY INTERESTED AND AFFECTED PARTIES

Summary of main issues raised by I&APs Summary of response from EAP

All issues raised during the PPP will be included into the Final Basic Assessment Report

27. COMMENTS AND RESPONSE REPORT

The practitioner must record all comments received from I&APs and respond to each comment before the Draft BAR is submitted. The comments and responses must be captured in a comments and response report as prescribed in the EIA regulations and be attached to the Final BAR as Appendix E3. See Appendix E for all proof in the Public Participation Process Report (the PPP


28. AUTHORITY PARTICIPATION

Authorities and organs of state identified as key stakeholders:

Authority/Organ of State

Contact person (Title, Name and Surname)

Tel No e-mail

Municipal Manager Postmasburg

M Mathobela 053 313 7300 [email protected]

Municipal Environmental Officer

Cecile Mathe 083 388 6263 [email protected]

Municipal Environmental Officer

Theys Julius 083 634 1385 [email protected]

ESKOM Andrea van Gense

082 482 7579 [email protected]

Department of Water and Sanitation

Jolene van Wyk-Towell


Department of Water and Sanitation

Lerato Mokhoantle


Ward counsilor (Ward 3) K Bosman

053 313 7300/0781343101

[email protected]

Northern Cape Department of Roads and Public Works Kelly Hannie

053 839 2249

[email protected]

DEA - Competent Authority

Muhammad Essop 012 399 9406 [email protected]

NCDENC - Commenting Tsholo Makaudi 053 807 7300 [email protected]












69

Authority

Northern Cape Department of Social Development I Manyane 053 874 4832 [email protected]

SAHRA Phillip Hine 021 462 4502 [email protected]

SA Astronomy Denise 021 447 0025 [email protected]

SA Civil Aviation Harry Roberts 011 545 1071 [email protected]

DMR Vincent Muila 053 870 1716 [email protected]

Northern Cape Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development N Yede 053 838 9100 [email protected]

NERSA Dennis Seemela 012 4014794 [email protected]

Agri Noordkaap Henning Myburg 053 8329595 [email protected]

DEA: Biodiversity and Conservation Directorate

Stanley Tshitwamulomoni Seoka Lekota 012 399 9573

[email protected] [email protected]

Include proof that the Authorities and Organs of State received written notification of the proposed activities as appendix E4. In the case of renewable energy projects, Eskom and the SKA Project Office must be included in the list of Organs of State. See Appendix E for all proof in the Public Participation Process Report (the PPP


29. CONSULTATION WITH OTHER STAKEHOLDERS

Note that, for any activities (linear or other) where deviation from the public participation requirements may be appropriate, the person conducting the public participation process may deviate from the requirements of that sub-regulation to the extent and in the manner as may be agreed to by the competent authority. Proof of any such agreement must be provided, where applicable. Application for any deviation from the regulations relating to the public participation process must be submitted prior to the commencement of the public participation process. A list of registered I & APs must be included as appendix E5. Copies of any correspondence and minutes of any meetings held must be included in Appendix E6. See Appendix E for all proof in the Public Participation Process Report (the PPP












70

SECTION D: IMPACT ASSESSMENT The assessment of impacts must adhere to the minimum requirements in the EIA Regulations, 2014 and should take applicable official guidelines into account. The issues raised by interested and affected parties should also be addressed in the assessment of impacts.

30. IMPACTS THAT MAY RESULT FROM THE PLANNING AND DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONAL, DECOMMISSIONING AND CLOSURE PHASES AS WELL AS PROPSOED MANAGEMENT OF IDENTIFIED IMPACTS AND PROPSOED MITIGATION MEASURES

Provide a summary and anticipated significance of the potential direct, indirect and cumulative impacts that are likely to occur as a result of the planning and design phase, construction phase, operational phase, decommissioning and closure phase, including impacts relating to the choice of site/activity/technology alternatives as well as the mitigation measures that may eliminate or reduce the potential impacts listed. This impact assessment must be applied to all the identified alternatives to the activities identified in Section A (2) of this report. Methodology

The tables below indicate and explain the methodology and criteria used for the

evaluation of the Environmental Risk Ratings as well as the calculation of the final

Environmental Significance Ratings of the identified potential environmental impacts.

Each potential environmental impact is scored for each of the Evaluation

Components as per table below.

Evaluation Component

Rating Scale and Description/criteria

MAGNITUDE of NEGATIVE IMPACT (at the

indicated spatial scale)

10 - Very high: Bio-physical and/or social functions and/or processes might be severely altered.

8 - High: Bio-physical and/or social functions and/or processes might be considerably altered.

6 - Medium: Bio-physical and/or social functions and/or processes might be notably altered.

4 - Low : Bio-physical and/or social functions and/or processes might be slightly altered.

2 - Very Low: Bio-physical and/or social functions and/or processes might be negligibly altered.

0 - Zero: Bio-physical and/or social functions and/or processes will remain unaltered.

10 - Very high (positive): Bio-physical and/or social functions and/or processes might be substantially

enhanced.

MAGNITUDE of POSITIVE IMPACT (at the

indicated spatial scale)

8 - High (positive): Bio-physical and/or social functions and/or processes might be considerably

enhanced.

6 - Medium (positive): Bio-physical and/or social functions and/or processes might be notably

enhanced.

4 - Low (positive): Bio-physical and/or social functions and/or processes might be slightly enhanced.

2 - Very Low (positive): Bio-physical and/or social functions and/or processes might be negligibly

enhanced.

0 - Zero (positive): Bio-physical and/or social functions and/or processes will remain unaltered.


71

DURATION

5 - Permanent

4 - Long term: Impact ceases after operational phase/life of the activity > 60 years.

3 - Medium term: Impact might occur during the operational phase/life of the activity – 60 years.

2 - Short term: Impact might occur during the construction phase - < 3 years.

1 - Immediate

5 - International: Beyond National boundaries.

EXTENT

(or spatial scale/influence of impact)

4 - National: Beyond Provincial boundaries and within National boundaries.

3 - Regional: Beyond 5 km of the proposed development and within Provincial boundaries.

2 - Local: Within 5 km of the proposed development.

1 - Site-specific: On site or within 100 m of the site boundary.

0 - None

IRREPLACEABLE

loss of resources

5 – Definite loss of irreplaceable resources.

4 – High potential for loss of irreplaceable resources.

3 – Moderate potential for loss of irreplaceable resources.

2 – Low potential for loss of irreplaceable resources.

1 – Very low potential for loss of irreplaceable resources.

0 - None

REVERSIBILITY

of impact

5 – Impact cannot be reversed.

4 – Low potential that impact might be reversed.

3 – Moderate potential that impact might be reversed.

2 – High potential that impact might be reversed.

1 – Impact will be reversible.

0 – No impact.

PROBABILITY (of

occurrence)

5 - Definite: >95% chance of the potential impact occurring.

4 - High probability: 75% - 95% chance of the potential impact occurring.

3 - Medium probability: 25% - 75% chance of the potential impact occurring

2 - Low probability: 5% - 25% chance of the potential impact occurring.

1 - Improbable: <5% chance of the potential impact occurring.

Evaluation Component

Rating Scale and Description/criteria

CUMULATIVE

impacts

High: The activity is one of several similar past, present or future activities in the same geographical

area, and might contribute to a very significant combined impact on the natural, cultural, and/or socio-economic resources of local, regional or national concern.

Medium: The activity is one of a few similar past, present or future activities in the same geographical

area, and might have a combined impact of moderate significance on the natural, cultural, and/or socio-economic resources of local, regional or national concern.

Low: The activity is localised and might have a negligible cumulative impact.

None: No cumulative impact on the environment.


72

Once the Environmental Risk Ratings have been evaluated for each potential

environmental impact, the Significance Score of each potential environmental impact

is calculated by using the following formula:

SS (Significance Score) = (magnitude + duration + extent + irreplaceable +

reversibility) x probability.

The maximum Significance Score value is 150.

The Significance Score is then used to rate the Environmental Significance of each

potential environmental impact as per table below. The Environmental Significance

rating process is completed for all identified potential environmental impacts both

before and after implementation of the recommended mitigation measures.

Significance Score

Environmental Significance

Description/criteria

125 – 150 Very high (VH) An impact of very high significance will mean that the project cannot proceed, and that impacts are irreversible, regardless of available mitigation options.

100 – 124 High (H) An impact of high significance which could influence a decision about whether or not to proceed with the proposed project, regardless of available mitigation options.

75 – 99 Medium-high (MH) If left unmanaged, an impact of medium-high significance could influence a decision about whether or not to proceed with a proposed project. Mitigation options should be relooked.

40 – 74 Medium (M) If left unmanaged, an impact of moderate significance could influence a decision about whether or not to proceed with a proposed project.

<40 Low (L) An impact of low is likely to contribute to positive decisions about whether or not to proceed with the project. It will have little real effect and is unlikely to have an influence on project design or alternative motivation.

+ Positive impact (+) A positive impact is likely to result in a positive consequence/effect, and is likely to contribute to positive decisions about whether or not to proceed with the project.


73

31. CONSTRUCTION PHASE Environmental Risk and Significance Ratings for the Construction Phase

Bio-Physical Aspects

Route Alternative 2

Route Alternative 1 (preferred)

Diversion Alternative 1 (preferred)

Diversion Alternative 2

No-Go Alternative

Identified Environmental Impacts

Removal, destruction and transformation of natural vegetation, faunal and avifaunal habitats




The proposed development will not take place and as such this impact will not occur

Cumulative impact prior to mitigation:

Low Low Low Low -

Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

Low (33) Low (33) Low (33) Low (33) -

Proposed mitigation:

Strictly limit powerline construction and

development to the proposed project footprint.

Use existing roads as far as possible and limit

the number of additional roads constructed.

Strictly limit powerline construction and development to

the proposed project footprint.

Use existing roads as far as possible and limit the

number of additional roads constructed

-


74

Cumulative impact post mitigation:

Low

Low

Low

Low -

Significance rating of impact after mitigation (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

Low (30) Low (30) Low (30) Low (30) -

Route Alternative 2




No-Go Alternative


Removal, damage or destruction to protected species individuals






Low Low Low Low -

Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation (Low, Medium, Medium-High,

Low (34) Low (34) Low (30) Low (30) -


75

High, or Very-High)


If any protected individuals are present

within the proposed development corridor, which might be impacted upon obtain

removal/relocation permits prior to the

commencement of any development

activities.

If any protected individuals are present within the proposed

development corridor, obtain removal/relocation permits

prior to the commencement of any development activities. -


Low Low Low Low -


Low (32) Low (32) Low (28) Low (28) -

Route Alternative 2




No-Go Alternative


Damage to a watercourse

Damage to a watercourse

Damage to a watercourse Damage to a watercourse


Cumulative impact prior to

Low Low 0 0

-


76

mitigation:


Medium (42)

Medium (42)

0

0

-


Ensure that no pylons are constructed within 32

m of a watercourse.

Protect the integrity of all watercourses during

the construction phase and do not alter the

beds and the banks or divert any watercourse.

From an ecological perspective either route alternative 1 or 2 can be utilised due to their relatively similar impacts. Although the preferred alternative powerline route crosses through a small portion classified as a Critical Biodiversity Area as well as a small portion classified as an Ecological Support Area (see Appendix A for Sensitivity map) it is recommended from an ecological perspective that route alternative 1 (preferred) be approved due to it running a shorter distance to the Manganore substation.

0

-


Low Low

0 0

-

Significance rating of impact after

Low (28) Low (28)

0 0

-


77

mitigation (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

Route Alternative 2




No-Go Alternative


Avifaunal habitat

destruction

Avifaunal habitat

destruction

Avifaunal habitat destruction

Avifaunal habitat destruction The proposed

development will not take place and as such this impact will not occur


Medium Medium Medium Medium


Medium-High (75) Medium-High (65) Medium-High (65) Medium-High (65) -


A site specific Construction Environmental

Management Plan (CEMP) must be

implemented, which gives appropriate and

detailed description of how construction

activities must be conducted to reduce

unnecessary destruction of habitat. All

contractors are to adhere to the CEMP and

A site specific Construction Environmental Management Plan

(CEMP) must be implemented, which gives appropriate and detailed description of how construction activities must be conducted to reduce unnecessary destruction of habitat. All contractors are to adhere to the CEMP and should apply good environmental practice during construction

The minimum footprint areas of infrastructure should be


78

should apply good environmental practice

during construction

High traffic areas and buildings such as

offices, batching plants, storage areas etc.

should, where possible be situated in areas

that are already disturbed;

Existing roads and farm tracks should be

used where possible;

The minimum footprint areas of infrastructure

should be used wherever possible, including

road widths and lengths;

No off-road driving;

Environmental Control Officers to oversee

activities and ensure that the site specific

construction environmental management

plan (CEMP) is implemented and enforced;

Following construction, rehabilitation of all

areas disturbed (e.g. temporary access

tracks and laydown areas) must be

undertaken and to this end a habitat

restoration plan is to be developed by a

specialist and included within the

Construction Environmental Management

Plan (CEMP).

used wherever possible, including road widths and lengths; Environmental Control Officers to oversee activities and

ensure that the site specific construction environmental management plan (CEMP) is implemented and enforced;

Following construction, rehabilitation of all areas disturbed (e.g. temporary access tracks and laydown areas) must be undertaken and to this end a habitat restoration plan is to be developed by a specialist


Medium Medium Medium Medium -

Significance rating of

Medium (65) Medium (60) Medium (60) Medium (60) -


79

impact after mitigation (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

Route Alternative 2




No-Go Alternative


Avifaunal disturbance

and displacement

Avifaunal disturbance

and displacement

Avifaunal disturbance and

displacement

Avifaunal disturbance and

displacement





Medium (68) Medium (68) Medium (45) Medium (45)


A site specific Construction Environmental

Management Plan (CEMP) must be

implemented, which gives appropriate and

detailed description of how construction

activities must be conducted. All contractors

are to adhere to the CEMP and should apply

A site specific Construction Environmental Management

Plan (CEMP) must be implemented, which gives appropriate

and detailed description of how construction activities must

be conducted. All contractors are to adhere to the CEMP

and should apply good environmental practice during


80

good environmental practice during

construction.

Environmental Control Officers to oversee

activities and ensure that the site specific

construction environmental management

plan (CEMP) is implemented and enforced;

The appointed Environmental Control Officer

(ECO) must be trained by an avifaunal

specialist to identify the potential Red Data

species as well as the signs that indicate

possible breeding by these species. The

ECO must then, during audits/site visits,

make a concerted effort to look out for such

breeding activities of Red Data species, and

such efforts may include the training of

construction staff (e.g. in Toolbox talks) to

identify Red Data species, followed by

regular questioning of staff as to the regular

whereabouts on site of these species. If any

of the Red Data species are confirmed to be

breeding (e.g. if a nest site is found),

construction activities within 500 m of the

breeding site must cease, and an avifaunal

specialist is to be contacted immediately for

further assessment of the situation and

instruction on how to proceed.

Prior to construction, an avifaunal specialist

should conduct a site walkthrough, covering

the final road and power line routes as well

as the CSP layout, to identify any

nests/breeding/roosting activity of sensitive

species, as well as any additional sensitive

habitats. The results of which may inform the

final construction schedule in close proximity

to that specific area, including abbreviating

construction.

Environmental Control Officers to oversee activities and

ensure that the site specific construction environmental

management plan (CEMP) is implemented and enforced;

The appointed Environmental Control Officer (ECO) must be

trained by an avifaunal specialist to identify the potential Red

Data species as well as the signs that indicate possible

breeding by these species. The ECO must then, during

audits/site visits, make a concerted effort to look out for such

breeding activities of Red Data species, and such efforts

may include the training of construction staff (e.g. in Toolbox

talks) to identify Red Data species, followed by regular

questioning of staff as to the regular whereabouts on site of

these species. If any of the Red Data species are confirmed

to be breeding (e.g. if a nest site is found), construction

activities within 500 m of the breeding site must cease, and

an avifaunal specialist is to be contacted immediately for

further assessment of the situation and instruction on how to

proceed.

Prior to construction, an avifaunal specialist should conduct

a site walkthrough, covering the final road and power line

routes as well as the CSP layout, to identify any

nests/breeding/roosting activity of sensitive species, as well

as any additional sensitive habitats. The results of which

may inform the final construction schedule in close proximity

to that specific area, including abbreviating construction

time, scheduling activities around avian breeding and/or

movement schedules, and lowering levels of associated

noise.


81

construction time, scheduling activities

around avian breeding and/or movement

schedules, and lowering levels of associated

noise.


Low Low Low Low


Low (34) Low (34) Low (30) Low (30)

Route Alternative 2




No-Go Alternative


Reduction of agricultural potential of land






Low Low Low Low

Significance rating of impact prior to

Low (36) Low (36) Low (36) Low (36) -


82

mitigation (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)



development to the proposed project

footprint.



Ensure adequate erosion control measures are

implemented to reduce the risk of soil erosion

during the construction phase.



Use existing roads as far as possible and limit the

number of additional roads constructed.


implemented to reduce the risk of soil erosion during the

construction phase.

-


Low Low Low Low -


Low (33) Low (33) Low (33) Low (33) -


83

Route Alternative 2




No-Go Alternative


Dust generation and emissions






Low Low Low Low


Low (27) Low (27) Low (27) Low (27) -


Dust Management as well as Traffic

Management measures must be implemented

in order to manage and reduce unnecessary

traffic movement in the area and subsequently

decrease undesired dust emissions.

Dust Management as well as Traffic Management

measures must be implemented in order to manage and

reduce unnecessary traffic movement in the area and

subsequently decrease undesired dust emissions. -


Low Low Low Low -

Significance Low (24) Low (24) Low (24) Low (24) -


84

rating of impact after mitigation (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

Route Alternative 2




No-Go Alternative


Destruction of important heritage conservational sites

Destruction of important heritage conservational sites

Destruction of important heritage conservational cemetery sites (MVIA3 site)

Destruction of important heritage conservational cemetery sites (MVIA3 site)



Low Low Medium Low


Low (33) Low (33) Medium (42) Low (14) -


Upgrading of the cemetery boundary fence and

gates in order to implement access control to

the cemetery is recommended.

Upgrading of the cemetery boundary fence and gates in

order to implement access control to the cemetery is

recommended.


85


Low Low Low Low -


Positive (+8) Positive (+8) Positive (+8) Positive (+8) -

Route Alternative 2




No-Go Alternative


Transformation of early Proterozoic palaeontological heritage






Low Low Low Low




86


It is advised that sites marked for erection of

pylons or construction of associated

infrastructure, which will require excavation

into fresh bedrock sediments of the

Campbellrand and Asbestos Hills Subgroup,

be mapped and recorded prior to the

construction phase of the development.

Ensure development is restricted to the project

footprint.

It is advised that sites marked for erection of pylons or

construction of associated infrastructure, which will

require excavation into fresh bedrock sediments of the

Campbellrand and Asbestos Hills Subgroup, be mapped

and recorded prior to the construction phase of the

development.

Ensure development is restricted to the project footprint.

-


Low Low Low Low -


Low (39) Low (39) Low (39) Low (39) -

Route Alternative 2




No-Go Alternative


Visual disturbance of

natural landscape and

sense of place

Visual disturbance of

natural landscape and

sense of place

Visual disturbance of natural

landscape and sense of

place

Visual disturbance of natural


place



87




Low (39) Low (39) Low (39) Low (39) -



development to the proposed project footprint.



Adequate planning and management of

laydown areas

Strictly limit powerline construction and development to the

proposed project footprint.

Use existing roads as far as possible and limit the number

of additional roads constructed.

Adequate planning and management of laydown areas


Low Low Low Low -

Significance rating of impact after mitigation (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-

Low (33) Low (33) Low (33) Low (33) -


88

High)

Socio-Economic Aspects

Route Alternative 2




No-Go Alternative


Job creation,

empowerment and

skills development

Job creation,

empowerment and

skills development

Job creation, empowerment

and skills development





Positive Positive Positive Positive -




None None

-






89


Route Alternative 2




No-Go Alternative


Influx of construction

workers and job

seekers and damage to

property


workers and job

seekers and damage to

property


workers and job seekers and

damage to property


workers and job seekers and

damage to property



Low Low Low Low -




A designated security company will be

appointed to ensure the safety of the facilities

during construction.

A designated security company will be appointed to

ensure the safety of the facilities during construction. -

Cumulative Low Low Low Low -


90

impact post mitigation:


Low (24) Low (24) Low (24) Low (24) -


91

32. OPERATIONAL PHASE Environmental Risk and Significance Ratings for the Operational Phase

Bio-Physical Aspects

Route Alternative 2




No-Go Alternative


Continued destruction and transformation of natural vegetation, faunal and avifaunal habitats






Low Low Low Low -


Low (33) Low (33) Low (33) Low (33) -


Ensure no unnecessary expansion of the

project footprint occurs.

Ensure no unnecessary expansion of the project footprint

occurs. -


Low Low Low Low -


92


Low (30) Low (30) Low (30) Low (30) -

Route Alternative 2




No-Go Alternative


Continued damage or destruction to protected species individuals






Low Low Low Low -


Low (34) Low (34) Low (30) Low (30) -


If any protected individuals remain on site

without removal/relocation permits being

issued, these individuals must be buffered off in

If any protected individuals remain on site without

removal/relocation permits being issued, these individuals

must be buffered off in order to prevent any potential

-


93

order to prevent any potential damage to them. damage to them.


Low Low Low Low -


Low (32) Low (32) Low (28) Low (28) -

Route Alternative 2




No-Go Alternative


Continued damage to a watercourse



Continued damage to a watercourse The proposed



Low Low

0 0

-

Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation (Low, Medium, Medium-High,

Medium (42) Medium (42)

0 0

-


94

High, or Very-High)


Ensure that the constructed powerline and the

maintenance thereof during the operational

phase do not negatively impact within 32 m of a

watercourse.

Protect the integrity of all watercourses during

the operational phase and do not alter the beds

and the banks or divert any watercourse.

0

-


Low Low

0 0

-


Low (28) Low (28)

0 0

-

Route Alternative 2




No-Go Alternative


Avifaunal electrocution Avifaunal electrocution Avifaunal electrocution Avifaunal electrocution The proposed development will not take place and as such this impact will not occur


95


Very High Very High Very High Very High


Very High (130) Very High (130) High (104) High (104) -


Any grid connection power line/s must be of a

design that minimizes electrocution risk by using

adequately insulated ‘bird friendly’ monopole

structures, with clearances between live

components of 2 m or greater and which provide

a safe bird perch.

The pylon structures to be constructed must first

be approved by an avifaunal specialist who

should consult with the Endangered Wildlife

Trust’s (EWT) Wildlife and Energy Programme.

The operational monitoring programme for the site

must be in line with applicable guidelines and

must include regular (i.e at least every two

months) monitoring of the grid connection power

line and all new associated substations for

electrocution (and collision) mortalities. Any

mortalities should be reported to the EWT.

Any grid connection power line/s must be of a design that

minimizes electrocution risk by using adequately insulated

‘bird friendly’ monopole structures, with clearances between

live components of 2 m or greater and which provide a safe

bird perch.

The pylon structures to be constructed must first be

approved by an avifaunal specialist who should consult with

the Endangered Wildlife Trust’s (EWT) Wildlife and Energy

Programme.

The operational monitoring programme for the site must be

in line with applicable guidelines and must include regular

(i.e at least every two months) monitoring of the grid

connection power line and all new associated substations for

electrocution (and collision) mortalities. Any mortalities

should be reported to the EWT.


96


Medium-High Medium-High Medium-High Medium-High -



Route Alternative 2




No-Go Alternative


Avifaunal collision with

infrastructure

Avifaunal collision with infrastructure

Avifaunal collision with infrastructure

Avifaunal collision with infrastructure The proposed



High High High High

Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation (Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-

High (104) High (104) High (104) Medium-High (78)


97

High)


Where possible, grid infrastructure should avoid

sensitive avifaunal habitats.

Where possible, grid infrastructure should follow

existing servitudes such as existing power lines,

roads and fences.

An avifaunal specialist must conduct a site walk

through of the final Grid Connection route and

pylon positions prior to construction to determine

if, and where, bird flight diverters (BFDs) are

required.

Install bird flight diverters as per the instructions of

the specialist following the site walkthrough, which

may include the need for modified BFDs fitted

with solar powered LED lights on certain spans.

The operational monitoring programme for the site

must be in line with applicable monitoring

guidelines and must include regular (i.e. at least

every two months) monitoring of the grid

connection power line for collision (and

electrocution) mortalities. Any mortalities should

be reported to the Endangered Wildlife Trust

(EWT).

Where possible, grid infrastructure should avoid sensitive

avifaunal habitats.

Where possible, grid infrastructure should follow existing

servitudes such as existing power lines, roads and fences.

An avifaunal specialist must conduct a site walk through of

the final Grid Connection route and pylon positions prior to

construction to determine if, and where, bird flight diverters

(BFDs) are required.

Install bird flight diverters as per the instructions of the

specialist following the site walkthrough, which may include

the need for modified BFDs fitted with solar powered LED

lights on certain spans.

The operational monitoring programme for the site must be

in line with applicable monitoring guidelines and must

include regular (i.e. at least every two months) monitoring of

the grid connection power line for collision (and

electrocution) mortalities. Any mortalities should be reported

to the Endangered Wildlife Trust (EWT).




Medium (72) Medium (72) Medium (72) Medium (42)


98


Route Alternative 2




No-Go Alternative


Soil erosion Soil erosion Soil erosion Soil erosion



Low Low Low Low


Low (39) Low (39) Low (39) Low (39) -



implemented to reduce the risk of soil erosion

during the operational phase.


implemented to reduce the risk of soil erosion during the

operational phase. -


99


Low Low Low Low -


Low (33) Low (33) Low (33) Low (33) -

Route Alternative 2




No-Go Alternative


Continued dust generation and emissions



Continued dust generation and emissions The proposed



Low Low Low Low


Low (27) Low (27) Low (27) Low (27) -


100


Continued Dust Management as well as Traffic

Management measures must be kept in place

in order to manage traffic movement in the

area during the entire operational phase and

subsequently decrease undesired dust

emissions.

Continued Dust Management as well as Traffic

Management measures must be kept in place in order to

manage traffic movement in the area during the entire

operational phase and subsequently decrease undesired

dust emissions. -


Low Low Low Low -


Low (24) Low (24) Low (24) Low (24) -

Route Alternative 2




No-Go Alternative


Continued deterioration of important heritage conservational sites






Low Low Medium Low


101


Low (33) Low (33) Medium (42) Low (14) -


Continued maintenance and management to be

conducted once the upgrading of the cemetery

boundary fence and gates have been

completed.

Continued maintenance and management to be

conducted once the upgrading of the cemetery boundary

fence and gates have been completed.


Low Low Low Low -



Route Alternative 2




No-Go Alternative


Continued transformation of early Proterozoic palaeontological

Continued transformation of early Proterozoic palaeontological heritage



The proposed development will not take place and as such this


102

heritage impact will not occur


Low Low Low Low




Ensure no unnecessary expansion of the

project footprint occurs.

Ensure no unnecessary expansion of the project footprint

occurs. -


Low Low Low Low -


Low (39) Low (39) Low (39) Low (39) -


103

Route Alternative 2




No-Go Alternative


Continued visual

disturbance of natural


place

Continued visual disturbance of natural landscape and sense of place







Low (39) Low (39) Low (39) Low (39) -



development to the proposed project

footprint.





Use existing roads as far as possible and limit the number

of additional roads constructed.


Low Low Low Low -


Low (33) Low (33) Low (33) Low (33) -


104


Socio-Economic Aspects

Route Alternative 2




No-Go Alternative


Job creation,

empowerment and

skills development

Job creation,

empowerment and

skills development









Positive (+32)

Positive (+32) Positive (+32) Positive (+32)

-


None None

-

Cumulative Positive Positive Positive Positive -


105

impact post mitigation:


Positive (+32)

Positive (+32) Positive (+32) Positive (+32)

-


106

A complete impact assessment in terms of Regulation 19(3) of GN 733 must be included as Appendix F. See Appendix F for the full Impact Assessment Report

33. E NVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

Taking the assessment of potential impacts into account, please provide an environmental impact statement that summarises the impact that the proposed activity and its alternatives may have on the environment after the management and mitigation of impacts have been taken into account, with specific reference to types of impact, duration of impacts, likelihood of potential impacts actually occurring and the significance of impacts. Proposed new 132 kV powerline

Ecology

The impacts of both the two alternative route corridors for the proposed powerline are fairly

similar. There are some sensitive systems which would be affected by the proposed

powerline routes. They include the rocky outcrops of the Kuruman Mountain Bushveld

(SVk10) and the episodic streams as well small wetlands/pans on the plains between the

rocky ridges.

No Red or Orange data species were found to occur along the powerline routes or

substation footprint although a protected species namely Olea europaea subsp. africana

occur on the rocky outcrops while Acacia erioloba, Acacia haematoxylon and Boscia

albitrunca occur on sandy plains.


relatively similar impacts. Although the preferred alternative powerline route crosses

through a small portion classified as a Critical Biodiversity Area as well as a small portion

classified as an Ecological Support Area (see Appendix A for Sensitivity map) it is

recommended from an ecological perspective that route alternative 1 (preferred) be

approved due to it running a shorter distance to the Manganore substation.

Avifauna




from an avifaunal perspective with neither being preferred.

Heritage

From an archaeological and cultural heritage perspective neither of the powerline

alternatives, poses a threat to any potentially significant sites. It is therefore recommended

that development of the approved powerline proceed without the developer having to

comply with additional heritage compliance requirements pertaining to lithic Stone Age


107

deposits, such as Phase 2 mitigation, prior to construction impact.

There are also no major palaeontological grounds to halt the development of the preferred

Alternative Route 1 or 2, but it is advised that sites marked for erection of pylons or

construction of associated infrastructure, which will require excavation into fresh bedrock

sediments of the Campbellrand and Asbestos Hills Subgroup, is mapped and recorded

prior to the construction phase of the development.

No major impacts were identified for either of the powerline alternatives and Metsimatala Solar substation footprint and by implementing the recommended mitigation measures, the impacts will be adequately reduced to acceptable levels.


Ecology

The impacts of both the two alternative route corridors for the diversion of the existing

powerline are similar and low. It is thereof recommended that the preferred alternative 1 be

approved.

Avifauna

For the line diversion, similar ratings were obtained as for the new powerline, and both

route alternatives are therefore acceptable, with alternative two being slightly preferred

only as it runs along the main tar road.

Heritage

Although route alternative 1 passes in the proximity of identified significant cemetery site

MVIA 3, the site will not be impacted by the proposed powerline diversion. In fact, the

mitigations measures imposed will assist in the improvement of the integrity of the

identified site. Route alternative 2 for the diversion of the existing power line may

potentially traverse Griquatown Formation iron stones (Vad) considered to be of moderate

palaeontological sensitivity.

No major impacts were identified for either of the powerline diversion alternatives and by

implementing the recommended mitigation measures, the impacts will be adequately

reduced to acceptable levels.


108

No-go alternative (compulsory) The no-go alternative addresses the scenario of the status-quo remaining the same, with no development on the proposed site. The no-go alternative would entail that the current land use does not change.

Advantages

The negative environmental impacts associated with the proposed project and its

alternatives will be avoided if the proposed project is not implemented. No significantly high

rating impacts were however identified by any specialists.

Disadvantages

If the proposed project does not go ahead, the proposed CSP facility will not have an

adequate way of distributing its generated electricity into the local grid. The new powerline

construction and exiting line diversion is crucial for the successful operation of the

proposed CSP facility. The local communities will forego the significant economic benefits

which the project will have on the area such as immediate additional employment

opportunities and revenue streams during the construction phase and most importantly,

sustainable capacity building (skills, experience and resources development) for the future.

The development of alternative renewable energy sources and distribution of generated

electricity is crucial within the context of South Africa’s current energy crisis as well as the

commitment towards greenhouse gas emission reductions. The current electricity shortage

within the Metsimatala area will continue if the no-go alternative is considered.

The no-go option would not be preferable as the existing and proposed residential areas require adequate electricity provision, which can be supplied by this proposed development. The proposed development of the powerline has been assessed in this report against the no-go option. The no-go alternative is not considered a preferred alternative.


109

SECTION E: RECOMMENDATION OF PRACTITIONER

Is the information contained in this report and the documentation attached hereto sufficient to make a decision in respect of the activity applied for (in the view of the environmental assessment practitioner)?

YES

If “NO”, indicate the aspects that should be assessed further as part of a Scoping and EIA process before a decision can be made (list the aspects that require further assessment).

If “YES”, please list any recommended conditions, including mitigation measures that should be considered for inclusion in any authorisation that may be granted by the competent authority in respect of the application.

General recommendations of the EAP

All mitigation measures recommended by the various specialists as per Section D

should be strictly implemented.

The EMPr should be approved by the DEA prior to construction and its implementation

should form part of the conditions of the Environmental Authorisation.

An Environmental Control Officer (ECO) must be appointed by the applicant/developer

to actively assist and undertake environmental compliance audits to ensure that the

construction phase of the development is acceptably implemented in an

environmentally responsible and sustainable manner in accordance with the

recommendations of the EMPr. The ECO must also ensure compliance with the

conditions of approval in the EA to be issued by the competent authority.

Vegetation species removal permits need to be obtained prior to the commencement of

construction from the relevant national or provincial department if required on site.

Conclusion After careful consideration of the findings and outcomes during the Basic Assessment

process, Enviroworks is of the opinion that based on all information that was captured in

this report; the proposed development will not lead to unacceptable impacts or fatal flaws

and should be considered plausible in the framework of NEMA. It is indicated that the

majority of the anticipated impacts are rated as low to medium while the impacts rated as

medium-high to high (avifaunal) can be adequately addressed through the various

mitigation measures and reduced to an acceptable level.

Enviroworks also recommend that the preferred route layout alternative 1 for the new

proposed 132 kV powerline and the Metsimatala Solar substation be considered and

approved as well as the preferred route layout alternative 1 for the decommissioning and


110

diversion of the existing powerline due to its lesser impacts.

A comprehensive Public Participation Process will be conducted for public comment on the

draft Basic Assessment Report in order to provide all relevant parties with adequate time

for consideration.

Is an EMPr attached? YES NO

The EMPr must be attached as Appendix G. The details of the EAP who compiled the BAR and the expertise of the EAP to perform the Basic Assessment process must be included as Appendix H. If any specialist reports were used during the compilation of this BAR, please attach the declaration of interest for each specialist in Appendix I. Any other information relevant to this application and not previously included must be attached in Appendix J. ________________________________________ NAME OF EAP ________________________________________ _________________ SIGNATURE OF EAP DATE


111

SECTION F: APPENDICES The following appendixes must be attached: Appendix A: Maps Appendix B: Photo Report Appendix C: Facility illustration(s) Appendix D: Specialist reports Appendix E: Public Participation Process Appendix F: Impact Assessment Appendix G: Environmental Management Programme (EMPr) Appendix H: Details of EAP and expertise Appendix I: Municipal Confirmation Appendix J: Specialist’s declaration of interest Appendix K - I & AP registration

draft basic assessment report: the proposed …...the linear length of the existing eskom 132 kv...

Documents