BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT - Cape EAPrac … RE Capital 3/BA... · 2015-09-04 · This Basic Assessment Report is available for a 30 day review and comment ... power line and substation

Cape Environmental Assessment Practitioners (Pty) Ltd

Reg. No. 2008/004627/07

Telephone: (044) 874 0365 1st Floor Eagles View Building

Facsimile: (044) 874 0432 5 Progress Street, George

Web: www.cape-eaprac.co.za PO Box 2070, George 6530

D.J. Jeffery Directors L. van Zyl

BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT

for

DYASONSKLIP 1 & 2 AND SIRIUS SOLAR PV

PROJECT 1 – GRID CONNECTION

on

RE/454,RE/638 and Agricultural Holding 1080

In terms of the

National Environmental Management Act (Act No. 107 of 1998, as amended) & 2014

Environmental Impact Regulations

Prepared for Applicant: Scatec Solar SA 163 (Pty) Ltd

By: Cape EAPrac

Report Reference: SIY231b/04

Department Reference: 14/12/16/3/3/1/1447

Case Officer: To be allocated (enquiries: Ms Salome Mambane)

Date: 24 August 2015

APPOINTED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PRACTITIONER:

Cape EAPrac Environmental Assessment Practitioners

PO Box 2070

George

6530

Tel: 044-874 0365

Fax: 044-874 0432

Report written & compiled by: Dale Holder(Ndip, Nat Con), who has 12 years’

experience as an environmental practitioner.

Report reviewed by: Louise-Mari van Zyl (MA Geography & Environmental Science

[US]; Registered Environmental Assessment Practitioner with the Interim Certification

Board for Environmental Assessment Practitioners of South Africa, EAPSA);

Committee Member of the Southern Cape International Association for Impact

Assessments (IAIA). Ms van Zyl has over ten years’ experience as an environmental

practitioner.

PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT:

Public Participation

APPLICANT:

Scatec Solar SA 163 (Pty) Ltd

CAPE EAPRAC REFERENCE NO:

SIY231b/04

DEPARTMENT REFERENCE:

14/12/16/3/3/1/1447

SUBMISSION DATE

24 August 2015

DK1&2 and Sirius Grid Connection SIY231b/04

Cape EAPrac Basic Assessment Report

BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT

in terms of the

National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998), as amended &

Environmental Impact Regulations 2014

DYASONSKLIP 1 & 2 AND SIRIUS SOLAR PV

PROJECT 1 – GRID CONNECTION

RE/454,RE/638 and Agricultural Holding 1080

Submitted for:

Stakeholder Review & Comment

This report is the property of the Author/Company, who may publish it, in whole, provided

that:

Written approval is obtained from the Author and that Cape EAPrac is acknowledged in

the publication;

Cape EAPrac is indemnified against any claim for damages that may result from any

publication of specifications, recommendations or statements that is not administered or

controlled by Cape EAPrac;

The contents of this report, including specialist/consultant reports, may not be used for

purposes of sale or publicity or advertisement without the prior written approval of Cape

EAPrac;

Cape EAPrac accepts no responsibility by the Applicant/Client for failure to follow or

comply with the recommended programme, specifications or recommendations contained

in this report;

Cape EAPrac accepts no responsibility for deviation or non-compliance of any

specifications or recommendations made by specialists or consultants whose

input/reports are used to inform this report; and

All figures, plates and diagrams are copyrighted and may not be reproduced by any

means, in any form, in part or whole without prior written approved from Cape EAPrac.

Report Issued by:

Cape Environmental Assessment Practitioners

Tel: 044 874 0365 PO Box 2070

Fax: 044 874 0432 5 Progress Street

Web: www.cape-eaprac.co.za George 6530



ORDER OF REPORT

Summary

Basic Assessment Report

Appendix A : Maps

Appendix A1 : Location & Topographical Maps

Appendix A2 : Biodiversity Overlays

Appendix B : Photographs

Appendix C : Facility Illustrations

Appendix D : Specialist Reports

Appendix D1 : Ecological Specialist Assessment (Todd, 2015)

Appendix D2 : Agricultural Statement (Lubbe, 2015)

Appendix D3 : Visual Impact Statement (Stead, 2015)

Appendix D4 : Heritage Impact Statement (De Kock, 2015)

Appendix D5 : Preliminary Design Report – Power lines (TAP, 2015)

Appendix D6 : Preliminary Design Report – Dyasonsklip onsite Sub Station

(TAP,2015)

Appendix D7 : Preliminary Design Report – Sirius onsite Sub Station (TAP,2015)

Appendix E : Public Participation

Appendix E1 : Advertisements & Site Notices

Appendix E2 : Proof of written notification to stakeholders

Appendix E3 : Comments & Responses table

Appendix E4 : Proof of written notification to Authorities & Organs of State

Appendix E5 : Registered I&AP List

Appendix E6 : Copies of correspondence & Meeting minutes

Appendix F : Impact Assessment

Appendix G : Other Information

Appendix H : Details of EAP and expertise

Appendix I : Specialist’s declaration of interest

Appendix J : Additional Information



TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... I 1

TECHNICAL DETAILS AND CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVE POWERLINE 2ALIGNMENTS ....................................................................................................................................... II

IMPACT ON THE BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT (FAUNA AND FLORA) ....................................... IV 3

3.1 IDENTIFICATION & NATURE OF IMPACTS ........................................................................................... IV

3.1.1 Construction Phase ........................................................................................................... v

3.1.2 Operational Phase ............................................................................................................. v

3.2 ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS............................................................................................................... VI

3.2.1 Construction Phase .......................................................................................................... vi

1.2 OPERATIONAL PHASE .................................................................................................................... VII

3.3 CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................... IX

POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON HERITAGE RESOURCES ..................................................................... IX 4

4.1 DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA ......................................................................................................... IX

4.2 HISTORIC BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................. X

4.3 HERITAGE RESOURCES AND ISSUES ................................................................................................. XI

4.3.1 Cultural Landscape Context ............................................................................................ xi

4.3.2 Archaeology ..................................................................................................................... xii

4.3.3 Palaeontology ................................................................................................................. xiii

4.3.4 Eco-Tourism .................................................................................................................... xiii

4.4 HERITAGE INFORMANTS AND ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS .................................................................. XIV

4.4.1 Cultural Landscape Context .......................................................................................... xiv

4.4.2 Archaeology .................................................................................................................... xiv

4.4.3 Palaeontology .................................................................................................................. xv

4.5 RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................................................................... XV

4.5.1 Recommended Conditions of Approval ........................................................................ xv

ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS ON AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES ................................................ XV 5

5.1 VEGETATION .................................................................................................................................. XV

5.2 CLIMATE....................................................................................................................................... XVI

5.3 SOILS ........................................................................................................................................... XVI

5.4 LAND CAPABILITY AND SUITABILITY FOR AGRICULTURE ................................................................... XVI

5.5 EROSION POTENTIAL ..................................................................................................................... XVI



5.6 POSSIBLE IMPACTS OF GRID CONNECTION LINES ON EROSION ........................................................ XVII

5.7 POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES .................................................................... XIX

5.8 MITIGATION MEASURES ................................................................................................................. XIX

5.9 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................. XX

ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS ON VISUAL RESOURCES ............................................................... XX 6

6.1 PROJECT VISIBILITY ....................................................................................................................... XX

6.2 KEY LANDMARKS........................................................................................................................... XX

6.3 SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS ................................................................................................ XXI

6.4 PRELIMINARY FINDINGS ................................................................................................................. XXI

6.5 MITIGATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................... XXIII

6.5.1 Preferred Routing ......................................................................................................... xxiii

6.5.2 Alternative 1 Routing .................................................................................................... xxiii

6.6 CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................................. XXIII

CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................ XXIV 7

SECTION A: ACTIVITY INFORMATION ...................................................................................................... 2

PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................................... 2 1

FEASIBLE AND REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES ............................................................................. 3 2

PHYSICAL SIZE OF THE ACTIVITY .................................................................................................... 9 3

SITE ACCESS ..................................................................................................................................... 10 4

LOCALITY MAP .................................................................................................................................. 11 5

LAYOUT/ROUTE PLAN ...................................................................................................................... 12 6

SENSITIVITY MAP .............................................................................................................................. 12 7

SITE PHOTOGRAPHS ........................................................................................................................ 12 8

FACILITY ILLUSTRATION ................................................................................................................. 12 9

ACTIVITY MOTIVATION ..................................................................................................................... 13 10

APPLICABLE LEGISLATION, POLICIES AND/OR GUIDELINES ................................................... 18 11

WASTE, EFFLUENT, EMISSION AND NOISE MANAGEMENT ....................................................... 19 12

WATER USE ....................................................................................................................................... 21 13

ENERGY EFFICIENCY ....................................................................................................................... 22 14

SECTION B: SITE/AREA/PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ............................................................................. 23

GRADIENT OF THE SITE ................................................................................................................... 25 1

LOCATION IN LANDSCAPE .............................................................................................................. 25 2

GROUNDWATER, SOIL AND GEOLOGICAL STABILITY OF THE SITE ........................................ 25 3

GROUNDCOVER ................................................................................................................................ 26 4



SURFACE WATER ............................................................................................................................. 26 5

LAND USE CHARACTER OF SURROUNDING AREA ..................................................................... 27 6

CULTURAL/HISTORICAL FEATURES .............................................................................................. 28 7

SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTER .................................................................................................... 28 8

BIODIVERSITY .................................................................................................................................... 29 9

SECTION C: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION .................................................................................................... 34

ADVERTISEMENT AND NOTICE ....................................................................................................... 34 1

DETERMINATION OF APPROPRIATE MEASURES ........................................................................ 34 2

ISSUES RAISED BY INTERESTED AND AFFECTED PARTIES ..................................................... 34 3

COMMENTS AND RESPONSE REPORT .......................................................................................... 35 4

AUTHORITY PARTICIPATION ........................................................................................................... 35 5

CONSULTATION WITH OTHER STAKEHOLDERS ......................................................................... 35 6

SECTION D: IMPACT ASSESSMENT ....................................................................................................... 42

IMPACTS THAT MAY RESULT FROM THE PLANNING AND DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, 1OPERATIONAL, DECOMMISSIONING AND CLOSURE PHASES AS WELL AS PROPOSED MANAGEMENT OF IDENTIFIED IMPACTS AND PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES ............ 42

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT ....................................................................................... 48 2

SECTION E. RECOMMENDATION OF PRACTITIONER .............................................................. 53

SECTION F: APPENDIXES ........................................................................................................................ 56

REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................................. 1

FIGURES

Figure 1: Preferred Layout...................................................................................................................... ii

Figure 2: Alternative Layout.................................................................................................................... iii

Figure 3: Showing proposed single grid connection corridors compared to those authorised. ............ iv

TABLES

Table 1: Assessment of ecological impacts during the construction phase. .......................................... vi

Table 2: Assessment of Ecological Impacts during the Operational Phase .......................................... vii

Table 3: Potential Erosion and Drainage Impacts of the Preferred Grid Connection .......................... xvii

Table 4: Impacts on Erosion and Drainage associated with alternative alignment ........................... xviii

Table 5: Potential Impacts during Construction .................................................................................... xxi

Table 6: Potential Impacts during Operation ........................................................................................ xxi


Cape EAPrac i Basic Assessment Report

REPORT SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION 1

Cape EAPrac was appointed by Scatec Solar 163 (PTY) LTD, as independent environmental

practitioner (EAP), to facilitate the Basic Assessment (BA) process required in terms of the

National Environmental Management Act (NEMA, Act 107 of 1998) for this project.

The purpose of this Basic Assessment Report is to describe the environment to be

affected, the proposed project, the process followed to date (focussing on the outcome of the

Draft Basic Assessment public participation process), to present specialist findings and

recommendations to avoid or minimise impacts, and provide a description of how the

development concept has been adjusted to consider the above.

NOTE: The RE Capital 3, RE Capital 3b and Sirius Solar PV Project 1 (all 3 projects are

DOE preferred bidders) have separate power lines and on site Sub Stations Authorised as

part of their respective EA’s. It is the intention of this project to strategically establish a single

powerline and two on site sub-stations to replace the 3 power lines and 3 on site substations

that have already been authorised. This report should therefore be considered in conjunction

with the Final Environmental Impact Assessment Reports for the RE Capital 3, RE Capital 3b

and Sirius Solar PV Project 1 (14/12/16/3/3/2/538, 14/12/16/3/3/2/538/1, 14/12/16/3/3/2/469)

This Basic Assessment Report is available for a 30 day review and comment period

extending from 31 August 2015 to 30 September 2015. All comments must be submitted to

Cape EAPrac in writing by no later than 30 September 2015 to the details below:

Cape EAPrac

Att: Dale Holder

PO Box 2070, George, 6530

Email: [email protected]

Fax: 044 874 0432.

mailto:[email protected]


Cape EAPrac ii Basic Assessment Report

TECHNICAL DETAILS AND CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVE 2POWERLINE ALIGNMENTS

The applicant intends constructing two on site substations and a single 132kV line to connect

three renewable energy projects (DOE Preferred bidders) to the national grid via the Eskom

Upington MTS substation.

Trans Africa Projects were appointed as the technical specialists to provide expertise into the

power line and substation design and implementation. Please refer to Appendix D5 – D7 for

copies of the preliminary design reports. The proposal is that Dyasonsklip 1 and 2 will share

a substation, called Dyasonsklip Substation and evacuate generated power to Sirius

substation by means of a single circuit (SCt) Twin Tern line. From Sirius substation the

power shall be evacuated by means of a SCt Twin Tern line to the new Upington MTS.

Eskom planning has opted for the use of Twin Tern to accommodate future generating plants

planned in the area.

Two alternative powerline alignments are under consideration and have been assessed in

this Basic Assessment Process. These are shown in the figures and described below.

Figure 1: Preferred Layout

The preferred alignment follows the Dyasonsklip 1 and 2 and Sirius 2 solar farm boundaries,

crossing over a dirt access road, to connect to Sirius substation. From Sirius substation it

follows a straight trajectory towards McTaggerts 132kV Line where it makes an underpass


Cape EAPrac iii Basic Assessment Report

crossing. The line then bends in a south-east direction towards the existing Oranje-Oasis

132kV wood pole line where it crosses over at approximately midspan and heads towards its

final bend before termination at the new Upington MTS. The corridor adjacent to McTaggerts

132kV Turn-in Lines has been earmarked as a 400kV line corridor to the new Upington MTS.

In addition to this, the corridor will host a planned access road to the planned Eskom CSP

plant located on the eastern side of the Khi Solar One CSP (Concentrated Solar Power)

facility. The underpass crossing at the McTaggerts 132kV Turn-in Line will be made such

that clearance to the planned 400kV line and access road is maintained.

Figure 2: Alternative Layout

The alternative alignment follows the solar farm boundaries of Dyasonsklip 1 and 2 and

bends toward the existing Oranje-Oasis 132kV line where it runs parallel until turning into

Sirius Substation. The line exits Sirius Substation in a southern direction towards the existing

wood pole line, where it crosses over at approximately midspan and bends to again run

parallel to the existing 132kV line. The last two bends allows it to turn and terminate at the

new Upington MTS.


Cape EAPrac iv Basic Assessment Report

Figure 3: Showing proposed single grid connection corridors (both alternatives shown) compared to the

powerlines already authorised.

IMPACT ON THE BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT (FAUNA, 3AVIFAUNA AND FLORA)

The following considerations and assessment are extracted from the Ecological Impact

Assessment report compiled by Mr Simon Todd and attached in Appendix D1.

3.1 IDENTIFICATION & NATURE OF IMPACTS

In this section, the potential impacts and associated risk factors that may be generated by

the development are identified. In order to ensure that the impacts identified are broadly

applicable and inclusive, all the likely or potential impacts that may be associated with the

development are listed. The relevance and applicability of each potential impact to the

current situation are then examined in more detail in the next section.

Potential ecological impacts resulting from the development of the Grid Connection options

for the Dyasonsklip and Sirius facilities would stem from a variety of different activities and

risk factors associated with the construction and operational phases of the project including

the following:

Planning & Construction Phase

Vegetation clearing & site preparation

Operation of heavy machinery at the site

Human presence


Cape EAPrac v Basic Assessment Report

Operational Phase

Servitude maintenance activities

Power line presence

Human presence

Decomissioning

Operation of heavy machinery at the site

Human presence

The above impacts would be likely to result in the following impacts which are described

briefly below and assessed for each phase of the development as appropriate thereafter:

3.1.1 Construction Phase

Impacts on vegetation and protected plant species

The abundance of protected species such as Acacia erioloba, Boscia albitrunca and Boscia

foetida is high along some parts of the power line routes and some impact on these species

is likely. Should the power line corridor be cleared of all woody vegetation, then the number

of affected trees would be high. Apart from a direct impact on protected species, the clearing

is also likely to impact the vegetation composition and diversity within the affected as well.

Direct Faunal impacts

Increased levels of noise, pollution, disturbance and human presence will be detrimental to

fauna during construction. Sensitive and shy fauna would move away from the area during

the construction phase as a result of the noise and human activities present, while some

slow-moving species would not be able to avoid the construction activities and might be

killed. Some mammals or reptiles would be vulnerable to illegal collection or poaching during

the construction phase as a result of the presence of construction personnel or greater site

access. This impact is however transient and there are not likely to be any long-term

consequences on terrestrial fauna during the operational phase.

3.1.2 Operational Phase

Avifaunal Impacts

Large raptors and many larger bird species such as cranes and bustards are vulnerable to

collisions with or electrocution from power line infrastructure. This can be a particular

problem if the power line lies within the movement or migration pathway of the birds. As

many of the vulnerable species are long-lived slow-breeding species, collisions with power

lines can be a major source of mortality for such species and may threaten the viability of

local or regional populations. Insulating electrical components and fitting bird flight diverters


Cape EAPrac vi Basic Assessment Report

can provide effective mitigation against such impacts and is recommended as standard

practice for new power line infrastructure. Bird flight diverters are however not 100%

effective and reductions in collisions of around 60-70% have been reported from studies

examining the effectiveness of this mitigation measure. As this represents a long-term

cumulative impact associated with the lifetime of the power lines, even relatively low levels of

mortality at any one time can generate significant long-term impacts on local populations of

affected species. Areas near to water bodies, along the tops of ridges and valley heads are

usually areas which generate a lot of collisions and which require specific attention.

Degradation of ecosystems

Maintenance activities such as vegetation clearing as well as the large amount of

disturbance created during construction will leave the site vulnerable to degradation through

alien plant invasion and soil erosion. Areas near to wetlands and watercourses are usually

particularly vulnerable to alien plant invasion and disturbance in these areas should be kept

to a minimum to reduce this risk.

3.2 ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS

3.2.1 Construction Phase

Table 1: Assessment of ecological impacts during the construction phase.

Nature of impact: Impacts on vegetation and listed or protected plant species resulting from construction activities

Alternative Spatial

Extent Duration Intensity Probability Reversibility

Significance and

Status Confidence

level Without

Mitigation

With

Mitigation

Alternative 1 Local Long-

Term Moderate High Low

Medium

Negative

Low

Negative

High

Alternative 2 Local Long-

Term Moderate High Low

Medium

Negative

Low

Negative

High

No-Go

Alternative Local

Long-

Term

Moderate-

High High Low

Medium-

High

Negative

Low

Negative

High

Mitigation/Management Actions

Preconstruction walk-through of the power line route in order to locate species of conservation concern that can be

translocated as well as comply with the Northern Cape Nature Conservation Act and DENC/DAFF permit conditions.

Construction and vegetation clearing to commence only after walk through has been conducted and necessary permits

obtained.

No large woody species should be cleared from the power line servitude. It may be necessary to remove some individuals


Cape EAPrac vii Basic Assessment Report

Nature of impact: Impacts on vegetation and listed or protected plant species resulting from construction activities

Alternative Spatial


Significance and

Status Confidence

level Without

Mitigation

With

Mitigation

from the area directly beneath the power line due to safety concerns, however, within the wider servitude the presence of

large woody species does not increase the fire risk and so there are no valid reasons to remove such trees. If these are too

tall and cause safety problems, they can be cut to a lower height rather than removed and, as growth rate in arid areas is

slow, it would take many years before such trees would need to be trimmed again. Such trees can be trimmed to 1m height

if necessary.

Preconstruction environmental induction for all construction staff to ensure that basic environmental principles are adhered

to. This includes awareness as to no littering, appropriate handling of pollution and chemical spills, avoiding fire hazards,

minimizing wildlife interactions, remaining within demarcated construction areas etc.

Vegetation clearing along the power line corridor should only be conducted where necessary and should not be cleared

using herbicides or with a bulldozer. Vegetation can be cleared manually with bush cutters to 0.5m height where

necessary.

Temporary lay-down areas should be located within previously transformed areas or areas that have been identified as

being of low sensitivity.

Nature of impact: Direct Faunal Impacts During Construction

Alternative Spatial


Significance and

Status Confidence

level Without

Mitigation

With

Mitigation

Local Short-

Term Medium High High

Medium

Negative

Low

Negative

High

Local Short-


Medium

Negative

Low

Negative

High

Local Short-


Medium

Negative

Low

Negative

High


All personnel should undergo environmental induction with regards to fauna and in particular awareness about not harming

or collecting species such as snakes, tortoises and owls, which are often persecuted out of superstition.

Any fauna threatened by the construction activities should be removed to safety by the ECO or appropriately qualified

environmental officer.

All construction vehicles should adhere to a low speed limit to avoid collisions with susceptible species such as snakes and

tortoises.

All hazardous materials should be stored in the appropriate manner to prevent contamination of the site. Any accidental

chemical, fuel and oil spills that occur at the site should be cleaned up in the appropriate manner as related to the nature of

the spill.

If holes or trenches need to be dug, these should not be left open for extended periods of time as fauna may fall in and

become trapped in them. Holes should only be dug when they are required and should be used and filled shortly thereafter.

1.2 OPERATIONAL PHASE

Table 2: Assessment of Ecological Impacts during the Operational Phase


Cape EAPrac viii Basic Assessment Report

Nature of impact: Avifaunal impact due to collision or electrocution from power line.

Alternative Spatial


Significance and Status

Confidence

level Without

Mitigation

With

Mitigation

Alternative 1 Local Long-term Medium High Low Medium

Negative

Low

Negative High

Alternative 2 Local Long-term Medium High Low Medium

Negative

Low

Negative High

No-Go

Alternative Local Long-term Medium High Low

Medium

Negative

Low

Negative High


All new power line infrastructure should be bird-friendly in configuration and adequately insulated (Lehman et al. 2007).

The sections of the line over ridges and near drainage lines should be fitted with bird flight diverters (flappers) and the live

components should be insulated to reduce electrocution problems. Sections to be fitted with flappers should be identified

during the walk-through of the final route and informed by bird movements in the area.

Surveys along the power line for dead birds should be conducted monthly for a year after construction to ascertain if there

are any sections present which are generating a high impact on avifauna and where additional mitigation is necessary.

Nature of impact: Ecosystem degradation along the power line route due to erosion and alien plant invasion.

Alternative Spatial

Extent Duration Intensity Probability

Reversibi

lity

Significance and Status

Confidence

level Without

Mitigation

With

Mitigation

Alternative 1 Local Long-term Medium High Low

Medium-

Low

Negative

Low

Negative High

Alternative 2 Local Long-term Medium High Low

Medium-

Low

Negative

Low

Negative High

No-Go

Alternative Local Long-term Medium High Low

Medium-

Low

Negative

Low

Negative High


Regular erosion and alien plant management along the power line servitude.

Herbicides should only be used on alien species and should not be broadcast or sprayed and should only be used on cut-

stump type applications where it is applied by hand to specific plants.

During operation and maintenance of the power line servitudes, alien species especially large woody species such as

Prosopis glandulosa should be cleared from the power line servitudes.


Cape EAPrac ix Basic Assessment Report

3.3 CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS

The integrated, combined grid connection for the Dyasonsklip and Sirius PV facilities would

generate a lower overall impact than the original 3 grid connections. The main benefit would

be the need for a single line from the Dyasonsklip facilities compared to the current double

line.

In terms of the two alternatives considered for the combined grid connection, the main

difference between the two alternatives is that the Alternative 2, the southern route runs

adjacent to the existing Oranje-Oasis 132kV power line for a large proportion of the route.

This reduces the potential impact of this alternative as the same access route can be used

and some potentially important impacts such as avifaunal collisions may be significantly

lower as a result of the proximity to the existing line. However, this alternative also has

significant sections away from the existing Oranje-Oasis 132kV line, especially the section

looping in and out of the Sirius substation. Consequently, this difference is not considered

significant. As a result, there is not a significant difference between the two proposed

alternatives and both are considered acceptable alternatives from a terrestrial ecology point

of view.

The conclusion of this study is that either or the proposed alternatives would be acceptable

ecologically and that with reasonable mitigation applied, there would be no highly significant

long-term impacts associated with the grid connection. The current preferred alternative

from a technical perspective is Alternative 1 and there are no reasons that this alternative

should not be authorised in favour of Alternative 2.

POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON HERITAGE RESOURCES 4

Mr Stephan de Kock of Perception heritage planning provided an Intergrated Heritage Impact

Statement for this proposed development, from which the following summary is drawn.

Please refer to the Heritage Impact statement attached in Appendix D4 for further information

in this regard.

4.1 DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA

From a regional perspective the study area is situated ±28km southwest of Upington, ±25km

northeast of Keimoes and northwest of the Orange River (Figure 1). It is ±1.7km northwest of

the N14 National Road and adjoins the Khi Solar One CSP (Concentrated Solar Power)

facility currently under construction (see Figure 2). The study area is located within the ZF

Mgcawu district of the Northern Cape Province and jurisdiction area of the Khai Garib Local

Municipality.


Cape EAPrac x Basic Assessment Report

Morris (2013) describes the environment of the farm as an arid, gently sloping plain with

shallow drainage lines running through it. The landscape is very sparsely vegetated. Higher

ground drains towards multiple depressions (seasonal washes), forming waterways towards

the river corridor. No structures or ruins were noted along the proposed transmission line

alignments.

4.2 HISTORIC BACKGROUND

From a colonial perspective, early travellers such as Wikar and Gordon travelled along the

Orange River in the 1770s and described various communities living along the river (Penn

1995). By the mid-19th century the stretch of the Orange River to the west of Upington was

settled by the Korana, a Khoekhoen group whose origins are still unclear (Strauss 1979).

With increasing Trekboer encroachment from the south, the Korana became involved in a

struggle to maintain an independent existence. The attempt by the Korana to resist resulted

in two wars, that of 1868-9 and 1878-9.

According to Morris (2013), the name Dyason’s Klip is derived from events which occurred

during the Korana War of 1879-1880. Apparently a certain Captain Dyason of the Northern

Border Police was killed by Korana adversaries while walking between two rocks at this

place in 1880. However, it is not recorded exactly where these stones are situated. The

adjoining property of McTaggarts Camp also derives its name from events during the Korana

War when Captain McTaggart set up his military camp here. It is assumed that the camp was

located close to the river and that it is unlikely to have left much of an archaeological trace.

In his assessment of the farm Olyvenhout’s Drift, Dreyer (2006) reported finding a heavily

soldered food tin resembling British rations from the Anglo-Boer War (1899-1902). He

considered it possible that a British camp may have existed in the area. Van der Walt (2011)

reported the presence of a sandy track marking an old wagon-track on the farm Geel Kop to

the west of Dyason’s Klip. The wagon road between Keimoes and Upington crossed the farm

and is marked on maps dating to 1908 (Van der Walt 2011). To the north of the farm Geel

Kop, on the farm Van Rooi’s Vley 443, is the Rebellion Tree monument (Van der Walt 2011).

It marks the Rebellion of 1914 in which many Afrikaners opposed the plan of the South

African government to invade German South-West Africa at the commencement of World

War I (Van Vollenhoven 2012). The site is a Provincial Heritage site.

Van der Walt (2011) mentions the presence of mining exploration trenches on the farm Geel

Kop dating to 1929 and Morris (2013) also reports on tungsten mining on the north-western

portion of the farm McTaggarts Camp dating to the early 1930s. Morris (2013) identified two

ruined mud-brick structure, presumably that of 19th/20th century farm workers, on the farm

Dyason’s Klip.


Cape EAPrac xi Basic Assessment Report

Early mapping (1906-1914) shows the location of former farmsteads on early farms in

relation to the proposed site boundary. The mapping highlights the alignment of several

historic roads through the area, including that of the current N14, which remains roughly

unchanged. Mapping furthermore emphasises use of the area for sheep farming and

describes soil conditions as sandy, with several pans and dams within the proximity

Dyason’s Klip.

Basic historic background research did not identify or highlight any significant historic or

other heritage-related themes, which may be negatively impacted through the proposed

development.

4.3 HERITAGE RESOURCES AND ISSUES

4.3.1 Cultural Landscape Context

The term “cultural landscape” refers to the imprint created on a natural landscape through

human habitation and cultivation over an extended period of time. While the Cape has been

inhabited for many hundreds of thousands of years (pre-colonial history) prior to Western

settlement (colonial history), the nomadic lifestyles of early inhabitants are rarely as evident

within the landscape as the imprints made by humans during the last two – three hundred

years and more. Unlike ancient landscapes in parts of the world where intensive cultivation

over periods much longer than locally have allowed natural and cultural components of the

landscape to become interwoven, landscape components along the Southern Cape have not

yet developed in such a manner. The fact that natural and cultural landscape components in

the region is therefore more distinguished means that the cultural landscape tends to be very

vulnerable to the cumulative impact of inappropriate large-scale development.

“The concept of landscape gives expression to the products and processes of the spatial and

temporal interaction of people with the environment. It may thus be conceived as a particular

configuration of topography, vegetation cover, land use and settlement pattern which

establishes some coherence of natural and cultural processes and activities.” (Green,

B.H.1995).

Taken in conjunction of the above the study area therefore forms part of a cultural landscape,

which by itself, as well as within a broader context, provides a more lasting framework for the

understanding and management of heritage resources. While it itself a heritage resource,

cultural landscape could in a sense the cultural regarded as a “patchwork” within which all

other heritage resources are embedded and which adds to their meaning and sense of place.

While the NHRA does not clearly define the term “cultural landscape”, it is briefly referred to

in the schedule of definitions. Based on local and international best-practice and within the


Cape EAPrac xii Basic Assessment Report

context of definitions assigned to the terms heritage resource, place and cultural significance,

cultural landscape can be defined as “A place of cultural significance, which engenders

qualities relating to its aesthetic, architectural, historical, scientific, social, spiritual, linguistic,

technological, archaeological or palaeontological value ”.

The site may be described as forming part of a typical Kalahari landscape and defined by flat

and wide open spaces overgrown by sparse, low-growing vegetation. From a Pre-Modern

perspective, the site formed part of an area mostly used for small stock farming and so,

modern man-made features noted on the site included e.g. shallow pans, fences, wind

pumps and cement water reservoirs related to said land use. The study area is north of the

Orange/ Gariep River Corridor, which is characterised by intensive agricultural farming,

including vineyards. The landscape within the direct proximity of the study area is visually

dominated by the 200m high CSP structure, directly east of the subject site. Of further

relevance is the fact that several other solar energy facilities had already been authorised

within the study area. From a cultural landscape perspective therefore, the study area is

considered to be of no local cultural significance.

4.3.2 Archaeology

Findings from archaeological impact assessments undertaken with relation to the already-

authorised solar energy facilities to which this proposal relate, did not identify or highlight any

archaeological resources considered of high or moderate cultural significance. These

findings may be summarised as outlined below:

While Morris (July 2013) identifies vleis as potential areas of interest from archaeological

perspective, none of these features occur along the proposed transmission line alignments.

Morris did not identify any archaeological resources of significance and did not recommend

any mitigation or archaeological monitoring to be undertaken.

During field work, ACO Associates (November 2014) identified, “Very ephemeral scatters of

ESA and MSA material; Some stone cairns which are unlikely to represent graves; A ruined

mud brick shepherd’s hut and Evidence for 20th century mining, possibly of tungsten”. The

report concludes that potential impacts of the proposal are likely to be limited and

controllable and does not recommend any mitigation or the need for archaeological

monitoring during the construction phase. The report recommends that:

- If any human remains are uncovered during construction, the ECO should have the

area fenced off and contact SAHRA (Tel: 021 462 4502) immediately;

- If there are any significant changes to the layout of the facility, the new design should

be assessed by a heritage practitioner.


Cape EAPrac xiii Basic Assessment Report

GA Heritage (October 2013) identified scatterings of Stone Age archaeological occurrences,

most of which were likely to be of Later Stone Age origin and one of Middle Stone Age origin.

The report indicates that finds were not concentrated or unique but recommends that

archaeological monitoring of construction excavations be undertaken.

4.3.3 Palaeontology

The findings and recommendations of three desktop palaeontological studies for each of the

already-permitted solar energy facilities, all of which were compiled by Natura Viva (Dr. John

Almond) conclude that no further related studies or mitigation were required for any of said

facilities. With relation to the Dyasonsklip area, the reports all indicate that, “The igneous

and metamorphic Precambrian basement rocks underlying the Dyasonsklip study area at

depth are entirely unfossiliferous. The overlying aeolian sands and stream gravels of the

Kalahari Group mantling the older bedrocks are generally of low palaeontological sensitivity”

and concludes that, “the proposed Dyasonsklip Solar Energy Facility 1 near Upington,

including the associated transmission line, is unlikely to have significant impacts on local

palaeontological heritage resources”.

The reports furthermore recommends that, pending the discovery of significant new fossils

remains before or during construction, exemption from further specialist palaeontological

studies and mitigation be granted” but that, “Should any substantial fossil remains (e.g.

mammalian bones and teeth) be encountered during excavation, however, these should be

safeguarded, preferably in situ, and reported by the ECO to SAHRA, i.e. The South African

Heritage Resources Authority, as soon as possible (Contact details: Mrs Colette

Scheermeyer, P.O. Box 4637, Cape Town 8000. Tel: 021 462 4502 (Email:

[email protected]), so that appropriate action can be taken by a professional

palaeontologist, at the developer’s expense. Mitigation would normally involve the scientific

recording and judicious sampling or collection of fossil material as well as associated

geological data (e.g. stratigraphy, sedimentology, taphonomy) by a professional

palaeontologist.”

4.3.4 Eco-Tourism

One of the goals of ecotourism is to offer tourists insight into the impact of human beings on

the environment, and to foster a greater appreciation of our natural habitats and from an

economic perspective, heritage resources may prove to be valuable resources when used in

sustainable manner through eco-tourism. This may for example include investment in

adaptive reuse of historic buildings so as to conserve and enhance the unique character and

historic themes pertinent to this area. Heritage tourism can therefore serve as a driver for

economic development, including infrastructure development and poverty alleviation through


Cape EAPrac xiv Basic Assessment Report

job creation. The broader region’s rich archaeological, palaeontological, historical and natural

heritage has the potential to provide unique tourism opportunities when developed and used

in responsible and sustainable ways.

Given the location as well as pattern of existing land use in and within the proximity of the

study area and furthermore, the very low density of heritage resources considered of cultural

significance noted as part of this assessment, we do not consider that the proposed

development would offer significant heritage-related eco-tourism opportunities.

4.4 HERITAGE INFORMANTS AND ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS

According to the requirements of Section 38(3) of the NHRA it is crucial that the land use

planning and EIA processes be informed by and incorporate heritage informants and

indicators as done through mapping and grading of relevant heritage resources identified as

part of a HIA. It is the purpose of this Section to summarise heritage informants and

indicators and the manner in which heritage resources should be incorporated into the

overall design of the proposed development.

4.4.1 Cultural Landscape Context

From a regional and natural landscape perspective, the proposed development site forms

part of a highly-transformed landscape that has already been altered through mining

activities as well as high concentration of proposals for development of renewable energy

(solar) facilities. The proposal put forward in this report would relate to a significant reduction

in the total distance of transmission lines required to be installed for the Sirius 1 and

Dyasonsklip 1 & 2 solar energy facilities by combining the three already approved

transmission line alignments into a single route alignment.

While the proposal would relate to a landscape modification, we are of the view that this

proposal would significantly reduce the overall visual impact of the proposal. Even if not the

case, we are of the view that none of the two route alignment alternatives would materially

alter any natural or cultural landscape of cultural significance.

4.4.2 Archaeology

Findings and recommendations from archaeological impact assessments undertaken with

relation to the already-authorised solar energy facilities to which this proposal relate, did not

identify or highlight any archaeological resources considered of high or moderate cultural

significance. Given the nature of the proposal, which would not traverse any archaeological

occurrences identified, it is the specialists view that none of the two route alignment

alternatives as put forward herewith would warrant any further archaeological investigation,


Cape EAPrac xv Basic Assessment Report

subject to the recommendations set out in Section 7.2 of the Heritage Report attached in

Appendix D4.

4.4.3 Palaeontology

It is concluded that none of the two route alignment alternatives are likely to have any

significant impacts on local palaeontological heritage resources. However, the

recommendations reflected in the desktop palaeontological study, shall be adhered to.

4.5 RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the information submitted and the findings of this assessment it is recommended

that the recommendations below be incorporated into the proposed development and that

the Department of Environmental Affairs be informed accordingly:

4.5.1 Recommended Conditions of Approval


area fenced off and contact SAHRA (Tel: 021 462 4502) immediately

- Should any substantial fossil remains (e.g. mammalian bones and teeth) be

encountered during excavation, however, these should be safeguarded, preferably in

situ, and reported by the ECO to SAHRA, i.e. The South African Heritage Resources

Authority, as soon as possible (Contact details: Mrs Colette Scheermeyer, P.O. Box

4637, Cape Town 8000. Tel: 021 462 4502 (Email: [email protected]), so

that appropriate action can be taken by a professional palaeontologist, at the

developer’s expense. Mitigation would normally involve the scientific recording and

judicious sampling or collection of fossil material as well as associated geological

data (e.g. stratigraphy, sedimentology, taphonomy) by a professional palaeontologist.

ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS ON AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES 5

Mr Christo Lubbe compiled an agricultural Impact Statement from which the following is

drawn. Please refer to the Agricultural Impact Statement Attached in Appendix D2 for further

information in this regard.

5.1 VEGETATION

All three projects and this grid connection are situated in the Nama Karoo Bushmanland Eco

zone. The region is marked by Karoo and Karroid veld types. Sweet grass and shrub veld

occur, while tree density is less than 5%. The Normalised Difference Vegetation Index

(NDVI) is low. Grazing capacity is low at 31 to 40 hectares per large stock unit (LSU).


Cape EAPrac xvi Basic Assessment Report

5.2 CLIMATE

This is an arid zone with few perennial rivers. Summers are hot to extremely hot, while

winters may cool down to -5°C. Frost occurs from late April through to October, thus

rendering is a very short growing season for frost–sensitive crops. Summer rainfall peaks in

March, ranging between 0-200mm in this specific area. Unpredictable drought is a feature of

the entire Eco zone.

5.3 SOILS

Soils associated with arid landscapes and mineral composition presence in this area, are

Silicic soils - soils that have a subsurface horizon cemented by silica. The hard set

subsurface layer (known as Dorbank) limits rooting depth. Calcium is another dissolved

product of rock weathering that, like silica, remains behind to form a cemented soil as a

result of water evaporation in arid environments. The two layers formed as such ((i) soft and

(ii) hardpan carbonate horizons) also acts as depth limiting factor.

5.4 LAND CAPABILITY AND SUITABILITY FOR AGRICULTURE

Land capability involves the consideration of the risk of land damage from erosion and other

causes and the difficulties in land use owing to physical land characteristics, including

climate.

The potential agricultural capability of the project based on the natural resources identified

shows that the site is largely unsuitable for cultivation due to the following limiting factors:

Low annual rainfall, high evaporation and extreme temperatures restrict dry land cultivation.

The very shallow soil depth with its limited water holding capacity that restricts root development

The very fine sand grade of top soil influences the stability and increases erodibility potential.

Low clay percentage results in low water holding capacity and low nutrient availability, resulting in low soil fertility.

5.5 EROSION POTENTIAL

In this arid climate, the erosivity (the potential ability of rain to cause erosion) is low, but the

erodability (vulnerability of the soil to erosion) is high due to the low clay percentage and

shallow soil depth. Possible erosion caused by water is low, due to the characteristics of the

terrain, i.e.:

Low annual rainfall

Regular slope of 1.6%

Length of slope is short

Small catchment area, because water drain naturally away from the ridge.


Cape EAPrac xvii Basic Assessment Report

The risk of erosion caused by wind is high, due to the low clay percentage of the soil and the

fact that the soil is usually dry - therefore prone to blow away. To combat this erosion,

vegetation is needed, but the severe climatic conditions prevent possible mechanical

conservation measures. However, this erosion risk already exists and the proposed grid

connection lines will have a low impact.

5.6 POSSIBLE IMPACTS OF GRID CONNECTION LINES ON EROSION

The Tables below show the routes of the alternatives ant their potential impacts on erosion

and drainage patterns.

Table 3: Potential Erosion and Drainage Impacts of the Preferred Grid Connection

Stretch Remarks

1-2 Low influence on down flow because it lies on the ridge and water will drain outwards

2-3 Will catch down flow and provision for diversion drains. The specialist has recommended

that provision for low water bridge must be made to cross the main drain. The project

engineers have however confirmed that it will not be necessary to construct formal

maintenance tracks across this watercourse. Furthermore, Pylons will be constructed

outside of the watercourses.

3-5 In the valley, it will have a low influence on run-off. The specialist recommended that

where the road crosses the main drainage line, provision for a low water bridge must be

made to ensure that no blockages occur in the down flow. The project engineers have

however confirmed that it will not be necessary to construct formal maintenance tracks

Main drainage

Ridge

Concrete Furrow


Cape EAPrac xviii Basic Assessment Report

across this watercourse. Furthermore, Pylons will be constructed outside of the

watercourses. Provision for diversion drains must be made.

4-5 On both sides of the ridge, it will have a low influence on down flow. Water will drain away

from the road naturally.

5-10 Provision for diversion drains should be made as the road lies perpendicular on the flow

direction.

Table 4: Impacts on Erosion and Drainage associated with alternative alignment

Stretch Remarks

1-2 Low influence on down flow because it lies on the ridge and water will drain

outwards

2-4 Will catch down flow and provision for diversion drains must be made. The

specialist confirmed that where the road crosses main drainage lines, provision

for low water bridges must be made to ensure that no blockages occur in down

flow.

The project engineers have however confirmed that it will not be necessary to

construct formal maintenance tracks across this watercourse. Furthermore,

Pylons will be constructed outside of the watercourses.

3-4 Provision for diversion drains must be made.

4-5 On both sides of the ridge, it will have a low influence on down flow. Water will

Main drainage

Ridge

Concrete furrow

Main drainage

Ridge

Concrete furrow


Cape EAPrac xix Basic Assessment Report

drain away from the road naturally.

5-10 Provision for diversion drains should be made as the road lies perpendicular on

the flow direction.

5.7 POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES

Potential impacts of the proposed project on agriculture were identified and considered, with

particular attention to the following aspects:

The possibility of permanent loss of high potential agricultural land;

Impairment of land capability due to construction;

Veld conditions for grazing may deteriorate.

Analysis of erosion risk because of altered drainage patterns and poor rehabilitation in erosion-sensitive areas.

Positive impacts are the following:

The single line would be more beneficial to the environment because two instead of three substations will be constructed.

The preferred alignment would have the least effect on the drainage because of the shorter distance spent in valley and longer on ridge.

The entrance into the drainage channel is with a wider angle and less obstructive to run off water.

The preferred alternative is closer to the PV station, resulting in a smaller area of the farm occupied, leaving bigger uninterrupted grazing space.

5.8 MITIGATION MEASURES

The following measures are recommended:

- Make use of veld strips to combat wind erosion. Carbonate is a very fine material for

road building, increasing cohesion, thus improving resistance to wind erosion. Ridge

left by grader that is perpendicular to the direction of the prevailing wind increase

roughness of soil surface combat erosion. Ridges must not be higher than 40cm or

the wind will lop off the tops and speed up the erosion.

- Provide effective waterways to channel run-off water as part of its road network.

- Place diversion channels in the road to divert water out of the road. Place on intervals

of 40-50m and ensure that outflow is not deposited on the one beneath.

- Due to the flat topography, the gullys are not deep, but usually have a high

percentage of silt and sand washed or wind blown in its basin, making crossing

difficult. Low water bridges could overcome this problem. NB: It is not neccesary to

impliment this reccomendation, as the project engineers have confirmed that it is not

neccesary to include formal access tracks across the watercourses.


Cape EAPrac xx Basic Assessment Report

5.9 CONCLUSION

The Agricultural Specialist has concluded that it is his opinion that a single power line and

two on site substations to serve all three proposed PV Power plants, will have less impacts

on agriculture on site than the three separate grid connections and substations as authorised

during the previous EIAs of the three projects.

However, drainage patterns may be disturbed by construction of the grid line and poor

rehabilitation may increase erosion risks. These can be mitigated/avoided by following the

recommendations stated.

ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS ON VISUAL RESOURCES 6

The following was extracted from the Visual Impact Assessment Compiled by Mr Stephen

Stead as attached in Appendix D5.

6.1 PROJECT VISIBILITY

The visible extent, or viewshed, is ‘the outer boundary defining a view catchment area,

usually along crests and ridgelines’ (Oberholzer, 2005). This reflects the area, or extent,

where a landscape modification of a specified height would probably be seen. As the

viewsheds were undertaken for both the previous project transmission lines, indicating a

localised extent, a viewshed analysis was not undertaken for this transmission line.

However, an approximate zone of visual influence (ZVI) of the proposed activities was

defined. The ZVI was restricted to 4km as the monopoles have a relatively small visual

footprint, which dissipates in the surrounding middle ground areas. In addition, visibility

tends to diminish exponentially with distance, which is well recognised in visual analysis

literature ((Hull, R.B. and Bishop, I.E., 1988).

6.2 KEY LANDMARKS

Based on the 4km ZVI defined above, the following landmarks were identified as significant

in defining the surrounding areas characteristic landscape:

• Orange River

• Khi Solar One CSP Facility and Other Solar Energy Facilities

• Existing 132 kv Transmission Line

• Higher VAC levels along certain sections of the N14 National Road


Cape EAPrac xxi Basic Assessment Report

6.3 SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL VISUAL IMPACTS

Table 5: Potential Visual Impacts during Construction

Alternative Nature Extent Duration Intensity Probability Status Degree of

confidence

Level of

Significance

Significance

after

Mitigation

Status

Quo

Degradation

of scenic

resources

Local Short

Term Medium Likely Negative High Medium Medium

Preferred

Alternative

Degradation

of scenic

resources

Site Short

Term Low Likely Negative High Low Low

Alternative

1

Degradation

of scenic

resources

Site Short

Term

Medium

to Low Likely Negative High Low Low

Table 6: Potential Impacts during Operation

Alternative Nature of

Impact

Extent of

Impact

Duration of

Impact Intensity Probability

Status of

Impact

Degree of

confidence

Level of

Significance

Significance

after

Mitigation

Status

Quo

Degradation

of scenic

resources

Local Permanent Medium

to High

Distinctly

Possible Negative High

Medium

to High

(Cumul.)

Medium

to High

(Cumul.)

Preferred

Alternative

Degradation

of scenic

resources

Local Permanent Low Likely Negative High Low Low

Alternative

1

Degradation

of scenic

resources

Local Permanent Medium Distinctly

Possible Negative Medium

Medium

to High

(Cumul.)

Medium

to High

(Cumul.)

6.4 PRELIMINARY FINDINGS

The nature of the impact was defined as negative due the potential degradation of local

scenic resources, which includes open and undulating Kalahari landscapes, as well as

drainage lines. Topographically, both routes have similar spatial statistics, but with the

Preferred Alternative routed over a small rise between two river valleys, but not to the degree

where it becomes prominent to the surrounding areas. Due to the closer proximity of

Alternative 1 to the N14 National Road, which falls within the route ZVI, the routing is slightly

more visually prominent.

The construction phase extent of the visual impact (zone of visual influence) would be

contained on site for the two new routing alternatives, but the status quo is rated local due to


Cape EAPrac xxii Basic Assessment Report

the larger coverage of the multiple routes. Operation phase extent was rated local for all

routings, it is unlikely that the negative effects of the proposed power line routings would

extend beyond the local extent due to the small visual footprint of the proposed landscape

modification. The duration of the impact was rated short term for the construction phase, and

permanent for the operation, as it is likely that the proposed power lines will remain in the

landscape for longer than 20 years.

The intensity of the construction phase was rated medium for the Status Quo, low for the

Preferred Alternative and medium to low for the Alternative 1. This is due to the higher visual

absorption capacity of the landscape for all routes. The Status Quo and Preferred

Alternative would be routed adjacent to the authorized SEF’s, and the Alternative 1 would be

routed adjacent the existing Eskom 132kV power line. Operational phase intensity was rated

medium to high for the Status Quo, low for the Preferred, and medium for Alternative 1. The

higher ratings for the Status Quo relate to the wider distribution of the impact, which like the

Alternative 1 Routings, also falls within the N14 National Highway zone of visual influence

(hence rated higher than the Preferred which is located further away from the N14 National

Road).

Construction phase impacts are likely to take place, but there is a distinct possibility of the

Status Quo operational impacts taking place due to the wider visual distribution, and lack of

coordinated alignment to existing cadastral or infrastructure in the landscape, creating a

cluttered landscape effect. It is also distinctly possible for the Alternative 1 Routings impacts

to take place, which falls within the N14 zone of visual influence. Due to the background

position of the Preferred Routing, which is routed adjacent the authorized SEF projects, the

impact is likely on the small area of slightly raised ground between the two river valleys.

Construction phase visual impact significance was rated medium for the Status Quo, due to

the medium intensity and local extent, and low for both the new routing options (due the

small visual footprint of the construction phase impacts). Operation phase visual impact

significance was rated medium to high for the Status Quo, due to the cumulative visual

impacts from the cluttering of the landscapes, setting a precedent for un-aligned routing

corridors taking place in the future. Alternative 1 significance was also rated medium to high

due to the north-south section of the line (Sirius SS LILO), creating a structure barrier that

would force any future power line routings to follow the same route, crossing over the

existing Eskom 132kV line, and creating a power line corridor to the south of the existing line

that is in close visual proximity to the N14 National Road. This barrier effect is not apparent

for the Preferred Alternative, which would allow for a new power line corridor, running parallel

to the existing Eskom 132kV line, but with a suitable gap and with the routing corridor

location outside of the ZVI of the N14 National Road (hence the Preferred Routing was rated


Cape EAPrac xxiii Basic Assessment Report

low). As mitigation would not likely reduce the resultant visual impacts, significance for all

the routings was rated the same as without mitigation. However, mitigations in terms of best

practice are recommended.

6.5 MITIGATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.5.1 Preferred Routing

It is the recommendation of the study that the Preferred Routing Alternative is visually

preferred, with the following mitigations:

- Utilisation of existing northsouth access roads to access the corridor;

- Location of the pylons outside of drainage lines, or significant biodiversity areas (as

per the ecology specialists findings);

- Soil erosion management along the maintenance road along the proposed corridor.

- The Preferred Alternative makes a kink to follow the Sirius SEF footprint areas. If

possible, it is recommended that the route be aligned as straight as possible, so that

any further power lines from future SEF projects to the west, will also be routed in a

straight line (adjacent the proposed routing).

6.5.2 Alternative 1 Routing

It is the recommendation of the study that Alternative 1 Routing is not implemented, due to

the higher visual impacts associated with cumulative degradation of the landscapes falling

within the N14 National Road. Should this alternative be implemented, the following

mitigations are proposed:

- Future power lines should be routed to the north of the authorised;

- Utilisation of existing northsouth access roads to access the corridor;

- Location of the pylons outside of drainage lines, or significant biodiversity areas (as

per the ecology specialists findings);

- Soil erosion management along the maintenance road along the proposed corridor.

6.6 CONCLUSION

It is the recommendation of the study that the Preferred Routing Alternative is visually

preferred. Operation phase visual impact significance was rated medium to high for the

Status Quo option, due to the cumulative visual impacts from the cluttering of the

landscapes, setting a precedent for un-aligned routing corridors taking place in the future.

Alternative 1 significance was also rated medium to high due to the north-south section of the

line (Sirius SS LILO), creating a structure barrier that would force any future power line

routings to follow the same alignment, crossing over the existing Eskom 132kV line,

essentially setting a precedent for a power line corridor to the south of the existing line. This


Cape EAPrac xxiv Basic Assessment Report

routing corridor is in close visual proximity to the N14 National Road, which carries tourist

traffic and should be recognised as a tourist view corridor. This barrier effect is not apparent

for the Preferred Alternative, which would allow for a new power line corridor, running parallel

to the existing Eskom 132kV line, but with a suitable gap and with the routing corridor

location outside of the ZVI of the N14 National Road (hence the Preferred Routing was rated

low). As mitigation would not have a major reduction in the resultant visual impacts,

significance for all the routings was rated the same as without mitigation. Mitigations in

terms of best practice were recommended, to straighten the proposed routing and much as

possible, setting in place a precedent for a future power line corridor running parallel, but

further to the north, of the existing Eskom 132kV power line.

CONCLUSION 7

Cape EAPrac is of the opinion that the information contained in this Draft Basic Assessment

Report and the documentation attached hereto is sufficient to allow the general public and

key stakeholders to apply their minds to the potential negative and positive impacts

associated with the development of the Dyasonsklip 1 & 2 and Sirius Solar PV Project 1 Grid

Connection.

All participating specialists have confirmed that both the preferred alignment as well as the

alternative alignment (including sub-station positions) will result in an overall lower impact

that of the substations and powerlines that are already authorised.

The proposed powerline alignment alternatives were assessed in this environmental process

as corridors (300m wide) to allow for minor adjustments / flexibility during the final design /

micro-siting phase post environmental decision, and to avoid protracted administrative

amendment processes as a result of these potential minor adjustments.

Aside from potential negative impacts, it is submitted that the this proposed Grid Connection

has notable positive impacts, in that it aligns with, and is in furtherance of, international,

national, regional and local strategies to support alternative / renewable energy projects.

These include the distribution of much-needed ‘clean’ electricity into the national grid,

provision of local electrical infrastructure for use in long-term, and the provision of

employment opportunities during the construction and operation phases for members of local

communities.

Sufficient mitigation has been recommended to reduce potential negative impacts to an

acceptable level. It is submitted that the proposed installation of the preferred overhead

powerline alternatives will be sustainable in the long term and the preferred alternative can


Cape EAPrac xxv Basic Assessment Report

be considered to be the most feasible / viable option, from environmental and practical

perspectives.


Cape EAPrac xxvi Basic Assessment Report

ABBREVIATIONS

AIA Archaeological Impact Assessment

BGIS Biodiversity Geographic Information System

BID Background Information Document

CBD Central Business District

ACMP Archaeological Conservation Management Plan

CDSM Chief Directorate Surveys and Mapping

CEMP Construction Environmental Management Plan

dBA Decibel (measurement of sound)

DEA Department of Environmental Affairs

DEA&DP Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning

DEIR Draft Environmental Impact Report

DME Department of Minerals and Energy

DSR Draft Scoping Report

FEIR Final Environmental Impact Report

EAP Environmental Impact Practitioner

EHS Environmental, Health & Safety

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

EIR Environmental Impact Report

EMP Environmental Management Programme

GPS Global Positioning System

GWh Giga Watt hour

HIA Heritage Impact Assessment

HWC Heritage Western Cape

I&APs Interested and Affected Parties

IDP Integrated Development Plan

IFC International Finance Corporation

IPP Independent Power Producer

KNP Karoo National Park

KOP Key Observation Point

kV Kilo Volt

LAeq,T Time interval to which an equivalent continuous A-weighted sound level

LLRC Low Level River Crossing

LUDS Land Use Decision Support

LUPO Land Use Planning Ordinance

MW Mega Watt

NEMA National Environmental Management Act

NEMAA National Environmental Management Amendment Act

NEMBA National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act

NERSA National Energy Regulator of South Africa

NHRA National Heritage Resources Act

NID Notice of Intent to Develop

NSBA National Spatial Biodiversity Assessment

NWA National Water Act

PIA Paleontological Impact Assessment


Cape EAPrac xxvii Basic Assessment Report

PM Post Meridiem; “Afternoon”

SACAA South African Civil Aviation Authority

SAHRA South African National Heritage Resources Agency

SANBI South Africa National Biodiversity Institute

SANS South Africa National Standards

SDF Spatial Development Framework

SMME Small, Medium and Micro Enterprise

SAPD South Africa Police Department

TIA Traffic Impact Assessment

VIA Visual Impact Assessment

DK1&2 and Sirius Grid Connection BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT SIY231b/04


SECTION 1:

BASIC ASSESSMENT

REPORT

DK1&2 and Sirius Grid Connection SIY231/04

Cape EAPrac 1 Basic Assessment Report

(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.

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.



SECTION A: ACTIVITY INFORMATION

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

If YES, please complete the form entitled “Details of specialist and declaration of interest” for the specialist

appointed and attach in Appendix I.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1

a) Describe the project associated with the listed activities applied for

Three adjacent renewable energy projects situated West of Upington in the Northern Cape have been selected as

preferred bidders by the Department Of Energy, these are:

Dyasonsklip 1 (RE Capital 3 Pty (Ltd))

Dyasonsklip 2 (RE Capital 3B (Pty) Ltd)

Sirius Solar PV Project 1 (Sirius Solar PV Project One (Pty) Ltd)

Each one of these three projects have an authorised on-site substation and an authorised 132 kV powerline from

the on-site substation to the ESKOM Upington MTS substation.

In order to reduce the cumulative impacts of having 3 separate power lines (already authorised) and 3 separate on-

site substations (already authorised) evacuating power to the same ESKOM substation, the proposal is to construct

a single power line to evacuate power from all three power generators.

The proposal is that Dyasonsklip 1 and 2 will share a substation, called Dyasonsklip Substation and evacuate

generated power to Sirius substation by means of a single circuit (SCt) Twin Tern line. From Sirius substation the

power shall be evacuated by means of a SCt Twin Tern line to the new Upington MTS. Eskom planning has opted

for the use of Twin Tern to accommodate future generating plants planned in the area.

From economic and environmental perspectives, replacement of these various transmission lines by a single

alignment, designed to evacuate generated electricity through a single transmission line, would therefore make

sense. The proposal is therefore that Dyasonsklip 1 and 2 will share a substation, called Dyasonsklip Substation

and evacuate generated power to Sirius substation by means of a single circuit (SCt) Twin Tern line. From Sirius

substation the power shall be evacuated by means of a SCt Twin Tern line to the new Upington MTS. Eskom

planning has opted for the use of Twin Tern to accommodate future generating plants planned in the area.

Please refer to the preliminary design reports compiled by Trans Africa Projects, attached in Annexure D5 – D7 for

detailed description of the project components.

Two power line corridor alternatives of approximately 300m wide have been assessed as part of the Basic

Assessment Process.



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

Listed activity as described in GN 734, 735 and 736 Description of project activity

Example:

GN 734 Item xx xx): The construction of a bridge

where such construction occurs within a

watercourse or within 32 metres of a

watercourse, measured from the edge of a

watercourse, excluding where such construction

will occur behind the development setback line.

A bridge measuring 5 m in height and 10m in

length, no wider than 8 meters will be built over

the Orange river

GN983 Item 11(i): The development of facilities or

infrastructure for the transmission and distribution of

electricity (i) outside urban areas or industrial

complexes with a capacity of more than 33 but less

than 275 kilovolts.

Construction of a 132Kv powerline and two on site

substations to connect three renewable energy

generation facilities (PV) to the National Grid.

These facilities include:

- Dyasonsklip 1 (RE Capital 3)

- Dyasonsklip 2 (RE Capital 3b); and

- Sirius Solar PV Project 1

FEASIBLE AND REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES 2

“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.

a) Site alternatives

Alternative 1 (preferred alternative)

Description Lat

(DDMMSS)

Long

(DDMMSS)

Two powerline routes have been proposed for the line connections

between the three substations. The figure below shows the

preferred route (line in green, corridor in maroon).

The route follow Dyasonsklip 1 and 2 and Sirius 2 solar farm

boundaries, crossing over a dirt access road, to connect to Sirius

substation. From Sirius substation it follows a straight trajectory

towards McTaggerts 132kV Line where it makes an underpass

crossing. The line then bends in a south-east direction towards the

existing Oranje-Oasis 132kV wood pole line where it crosses over

at approximately midspan and heads towards its final bend before

termination at the new Upington MTS.

Linear

Activity –

see below

Linear

Activity –

see below



Alternative 2

Description Lat

(DDMMSS)

Long

(DDMMSS)

The second route option Alternative, (line marked in yellow, corridor

in green) is depicted in the image below

This alternative also follows the solar farm boundaries of

Dyasonsklip 1 and 2 and bends toward the existing Oranje-Oasis

132kV line where is runs parallel until turning into Sirius 1

substation. The line exists Sirius 1 substation in a southernly

direction towards the existing wood pole line, where it crosses over

at approximately midspan and bends to again follow parallel to the

existing 132kV line. The last two bends allows it to turn and

terminate at the new Upington MTS.

Linear

Activity –

see below

Linear

Activity –

see below



Alternative 3

Description Lat

(DDMMSS)

Long

(DDMMSS)

In the case of linear activities:

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

Alternative S1 (preferred)

Starting point of the activity 28°34’34” 21°03’45”

Middle/Additional point of the activity 28°33’29” 21°06’03”

End point of the activity 28°32’44” 21°08’06”

Alternative S2 (if any)

Starting point of the activity 28°34’34” 21°03’45”

Middle/Additional point of the activity 28°33’57” 21°06’41”

End point of the activity 28°32’44” 21°08’06”



Alternative S3 (if any)

Starting point of the activity

Middle/Additional point of the activity

End point of the activity

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.

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.

b) Lay-out alternatives

The different alignments and as discussed above could be considered as both site and layout alternatives. For the

purpose of this basis Assessment Report, they have been discussed and considered as Site Alternatives, rather

than layout alternatives.


Description Lat (DDMMSS) Long (DDMMSS)

Alternative 2


Alternative 3


c) Technology alternatives


Conductor: Twin Tern Conductors (ungreased)

Shield wire: OPGW with 2 X 48-cores rated for 20kA at 0.5 second fault withstand (or equivalent). (Total rating

40kA)



Insulators: Insulator type to be used on this line shall be as per IEC 60815 specifications. Composite long rod

insulators for 132kV applications shall be used. The creepage shall be 20mm/kV as specified for inland regions.

Earthing: Footing resistance values shall be adopted from the Eskom Distribution (DX) Earthing standard

(SCSASABF9 - line earthing) where earthing is necessary. For 132kV lines the maximum acceptable footing

resistance is 20Ù. These values shall be measured during construction and additional earthing installed if

required.

Corona & Audible Noise: The selected conductor, Tern, satisfies Eskom’s requirements in terms of corona and

noise parameters with sufficient margin of safety.

Hardware: Standard hardware components have been used.

Towers : Self-supporting monopoles and guyed monopoles.

Foundations: Standard pad and plinth foundations for the self-supporting towers. Dead-man anchor/stay plate

anchor foundations for stays and a central plinth for tower mast will be used for the guyed monopoles.

Corrosion protection: Standard galvanizing as per SANS 121 and ISO 9223 for C2 corrosion categories.

Length: Dyasonsklip - Sirius 132kV line is approximately 6km and Sirius - new Upington MTS is approximately

3km.

Line Profile: Lines templated at 70°C maximum operating temperature.

Furthermore the project will entail the construction of 2 on site-substations:

- Dyasonsklip Sub Station

- Sirius Substation

Alternative 2

No additional technology alternatives are under investigation as part of this environmental

process.

Alternative 3



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


Alternative 2

Alternative 3

e) No-go alternative

The no go alternative is the option of not commencing with the activity, which in this case is

deemed to be continuation with three separate powerline and three separate on site sub

stations as already authorised by the respective project EA’s. Implementation of the no go

alternative in this case is not preferred, as the reduced impacts associated with the

construction of a single power line (as opposed to three separate power lines) will not be

realised.

Paragraphs 3 – 13 below should be completed for each alternative.

PHYSICAL SIZE OF THE ACTIVITY 3

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

(footprints):

Alternative: Size of the activity:

Alternative A11 (preferred activity alternative) m2

Alternative A2 (if any) m2


1 “Alternative A..” refer to activity, process, technology or other alternatives.



or, for linear activities:

Alternative: Length of the activity:

Alternative A1 (preferred activity alternative) Approx 8880 m

Alternative A2 (if any) Approx 11740 m

Alternative A3 (if any) m

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

Alternative: Size of the site/servitude:

Alternative A1 (preferred activity alternative) m2



SITE ACCESS 4

Does ready access to the site exist? YES NO

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



Describe the type of access road planned:

There are numerous existing roads in close vicinity that will be used to access the power line corridor for construction. These are indicated in the figure below:

Apart from these existing roads, all three of the solar facilities have authorised access roads (authorised as part of their respective EIA’s) that can also be used to access the site. Formal roads will not be constructed underneath the powerlines for maintenance purposes. Access for maintenance purposes will be limited to jeep tracks.

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.

LOCALITY MAP 5

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

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).

A locality map complying to the above criteria is attached in Appendix A1.



LAYOUT/ROUTE PLAN 6

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.

The Route Plans for the proposed powerline (both preferred and alternative layouts) are attached in Appendix A1 and Appendix C. Detailed design reports are also included in Appendices D5, D6 and D7

SENSITIVITY MAP 7

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.

All Biodiversity maps are attached in Appendix A2 to this report. Please also refer to the discipline

specific sensitivity mapping included in the respective specialist reports contained in Appendix D1

– D7.

SITE PHOTOGRAPHS 8

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.

The required photographic plates are attached in Appendix B.

FACILITY ILLUSTRATION 9



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.

These are included in Appendix C as well as in the preliminary design reports attached in Appendix D5 – D7.

ACTIVITY MOTIVATION 10

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 NO Please explain

The Applicant have engaged with landowners of the farms to be traversed by the preferred powerline alignment, as well as the alternative route considered. The applicant is engaging directly with landowners regarding the option agreements and servitudes.

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

(a) Provincial Spatial Development Framework (PSDF) YES NO Please explain

In terms of Electricity infrastructure related to forms of renewable energy, the spatial distribution of supply should aim be follow clearly defined corridors, with electricity services being highly concentrated close to the major routes and high capacity electricity infrastructure (PSDF, 2011). This project aims to link to existing and approved electrical infrastructure associated with renewable energy projects (Solar PV Developments) and the Eskom national grid network (via the Upington MTS substation).

This grid connection is associated with three renewable energy projects that are all preferred bidders in term of the Department of Energy REIPPP.

One of the sustainable development objectives of the PSDF is to utilize renewable resources as opposed to non-renewable resources. This grid connection is associated with the generation of electricity from a renewable resource. It also promotes the concept of Bioregionalism as enshrined in the PSDF.

(b) Urban edge / Edge of Built environment for the area YES NO Please explain

The nature of Power lines dictates that they need not be situated within an urban edge or within the edge of built up areas.

(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 NO Please explain

The IDP defines public infrastructure development such as energy generation as a critical action within the municipal area

(d) Approved Structure Plan of the Municipality YES NO Please explain

To the best of our knowledge, there is no specific structure plan adopted for the Khai Garib local municipality. The project is however compliant with other relevant planning policies.

(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?)


There are no specific Environmental Management Frameworks for the Khai Garib Municipal area.

(f) Any other Plans (e.g. Guide Plan) YES NO Please explain

To the best of our knowledge, there is no specific guide plan adopted for the Khai Garib local municipality. The project is however compliant with other relevant planning 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)?


The spatial development framework defines the renewable energy sector as a focus area for this municipal district.

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.)


This grid connection is related to three renewable energy projects that have been selected as preferred bidders under the Department of Energy’s Renewable Energy Independent Power Producers procurement programme.

The preliminary results of the Strategic Environmental Assessment for introducing renewable energy in South Africa, have identified this specific area as a renewable energy development zone.

Given the context of PV farm developments in the local context, this proposed powerline can be considered to be in-line / associated with the local investment already placed in this emerging renewable energy landscape. Care has been taken to avoid impacting on the agricultural land-use in the area, as well as the scenic / cultural landscape, by aligning the preferred powerline route along existing lines and breaks i.e. existing tracks, fences and fire-breaks etc.

On a strategic level, the proposed powerline aligns with the regional, national and international need for the distribution of ‘green electricity’ from renewable energy.

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.)


The activity itself is a service that has been specifically designed for its purpose. It does

not require the availability of any ancillary services.

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.)


The development does not require municipal service provision.



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


The generation of ‘green / clean electricity’ from a renewable energy resource (Solar)

forms part of a national programme to reduce reliance of coal-powered generation of

electricity. The proposed powerline will serve to transmit / distribute the electricity to be

generated by three renewable energy development into the national Eskom grid.

Securing renewable energy sources into the overall energy matrix has been highlighted as

a priority by the Department of Energy. The Renewable Energy Independent Power

Producers Procurement Programme was established as a result of this (The three solar

projects are preferred bidders under this programme).

This project is furthermore deemed to constitute a Strategic Infrastructure Project and

confirmation of this status has been sought from the relevant SIP coordinators.

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.)


This powerline connects 3 renewable energy preferred bidders to the National Grid. These

projects will be generating 225MW of electricity for inclusion into the National Grid.

The proposed powerline will align as far as possible along landscape divides (i.e. farm

roads/tracks, fence lines, fire breaks) so as to avoid impacting of the agricultural landuse

and ecological sensitive areas. In addition, the pylons/towers will not be located on

prominent landscape or sensitive features, and would become a smaller component of the

greater Solar Energy Facility landscape emerging in the area.

9. Is the development the best practicable environmental option for this land/site? YES NO Please explain

This proposed powerline provides a far more environmentally sustainable option to having

three separate powerlines as already authorised. This powerline reduces cumulative

impact of facilities already authorised, by combining infrastructure across multiple projects.

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


The potential negative impacts associated with the preferred powerline corridor alignment

were found to be medium to low (with mitigation), and thus acceptable, given the context.

Aside from the employments benefits associated with the construction and operation /

maintenance of the powerline, the benefit of allowing the input of ‘clean electricity’ into the

national grid is considerable.

It must be further noted that the impacts of this powerline area also significantly lower than

those impacts associated with the no-go alternative. i.e. building three separate

powerlines, as has been authorised.



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


Several solar facilities (including PV and CSP facilities) have been approved for

development in this area, which will all require connection to the national grid, via overhead

powerlines. This proposal reduces negative precident, by combining multiple into a single

powerline.

Considering the manner in which the powerline has been designed to avoid impacting on

the landuse and sensitive features (environmental and heritage/cultural) in the landscape,

as well as combining projects to reduce cumulative impact, it can be argued that it will set

a positive precedent for any future powerlines in the area.

12. Will any person’s rights be negatively affected by the proposed activity/ies? YES NO Please explain

As mentioned above, the preferred powerline alternative has been aligned / designed to

have the least possible impact on existing landuse as it has been aligned along boundaries

and existing tracks as far as possible.

Furthermore, a detailed public participation process took place as part of the previous 3

EIA’s (for the facilities and powerlies). No major concerns nor objections were raised in

these three separate environmental processes.

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


Although falling outside of the developed areas of Upington and Keimoes, as a linear

activity, the proposed powerline will not compromise the urban edges of the Khai Garib

Municipality.

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


SIP 8: Support sustainable green energy initiatives on a national scale through a

diverse range of clean energy options as envisaged in the IPR2010

The distribution of electricity generated from renewable resource (solar) by the three

preferred bidders that will connect to the national grid via this powerline.

SIP 9: Electricity Generation to support socio-economic development

The distribution of electricity generated from renewable resource (Solar) by the by the

three preferred bidders that will connect to the national grid via this powerline.

SIP 10: Electricity Transmission and Distribution for all.

As the proposed powerline is associated with renewable energy projects (preferred

bidders) under the Independent Power Producer (IPP) Procurement Programme, it can be

considered as a Strategically Important Development ("SID"), due to their potentially

significant contribution to the regional and national economy.

Confirmation in this regard has been sought from the relevant SIP co-ordinators.



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

Addition of much needed electricity into the national grid.

This powerline will distribute 225mw of “clean-electricity” generated by the three Solar

Developments from a renewable resource (solar) into the national electrical grid, which is

currently under enormous pressure. The national grid currently relies heavily of coal for

electricity generation, has associated pollution and climate-change repercussions, thus this

project indirectly contributes to minimising these impacts through its associated with

renewable energy generation.

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

The studies undertaken as part of this environmental process, as well as those associated

with the solar farms in the area, contribute to a greater understanding of the landscape and

context and the sensitive elements within it (e.g. remnant natural vegetation and

watercourses, cultural heritage areas, archaeological and palaeontological resources,

avifaunal species and populations etc.), as well as the protection and rehabilitation of these

elements (e.g. implementation of buffers, removal and monitoring of alien vegetation etc.).

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

Contribution to the provision of electricity to the nation, and investment in electrical

infrastructure for its distribution (as part of the strategy to remedy the electricity crisis of

2008 and that associated with the future demands).

This powerline aligns with the one of the prioritised infrastructure investments listed in the

NDP: “Procuring at least 20 000MW of renewable electricity by 2030, importing electricity

from the region, decommissioning 11 000MW of ageing coal-fired power stations and

stepping up investments in energy-efficiency”, as well as one the key proposals to

“Implement the 2010 Integrated Resource Plan (procuring at least 20 000MW of electricity

from renewables) to reduce carbon emissions from the electricity industry from 0.9kg per

kilowatt-hour to 0.6kg per kilowatt-hour.

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 investigation, assessment and communication of potential impacts of this proposal on

the receiving environment have considered alternatives (the no-go) and cumulative

impacts, and recommended mitigation and monitoring measures to ensure that potential

negative impacts are kept to a minimum and potential positive impacts are enhanced.

Among these is the recommendation for on-going monitoring of the access tracks to avoid

erosion and removal alien plants. This proposal reduces the cumulative impact of multiple

projects utilising a single grid connection option.



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

It is argued that the proposed development of this integrated grid solution will be socially,

environmentally and economically sustainable, due to the following:

Further disturbance to the local ecosystems / loss of biodiversity is likely to be negligible

as the powerline, and associated access tracks and switching stations, will be positioned

along / on existing transformed / disturbed areas in the landscape i.e. the powerline and

access tracks will align as far as possible along cadastral lines, existing farm tracks, fence

lines and fire breaks, while the switching stations will be placed on disturbed areas

associated with the Substations of Solar developments in the area.

Mitigation and monitoring measures have been recommended to minimise and avoid

potential degradation of the environment, as well as rehabilitate the current disturbed

context where possible.

APPLICABLE LEGISLATION, POLICIES AND/OR GUIDELINES 11

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

National Environmental Management Act.

Basic Assessment Department of Environmental Affairs

Act 107 of 1998 as amended

National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act.

Endangered / Vulnerable vegetation types and Protected Species (TOPS)

DENC Act 10 of 2004

National Spatial Biodiversity Assessment

Critical Biodiversity Areas & Ecological Support Areas across alignment

DENC

2011

Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act

Agricultural land traversed by powerline.

Alien vegetation in and surrounding site

Department of Agriculture, Forestry & Fisheries

Act 43 of 1983

National Veld and Forest Fire Act

Alien infested Thicket and Fynbos in relation to fire risk.

Department of Agriculture, Forestry & Fisheries

Act 101 of 1998

Nature & Environment Conservation Ordinance

Lists Endangered & Protected animals & plants (species) in Schedules 1-4.

DENC Ordinance 19 of 1974

National Heritage Activity on site greater than SAHRA Act 25 of



Resources Act 5000m² in extent.

1999

WASTE, EFFLUENT, EMISSION AND NOISE MANAGEMENT 12

a) Solid waste management

Will the activity produce solid construction waste during the construction/initiation phase? YES NO

If YES, what estimated quantity will be produced per month? 5m3

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

Construction waste will be stored in a skip on site and periodically removed to a licenced

landfill by a service provider. Confirmation of the capacity of the municipality to handle this

construction waste was obtained as part of the three previous environmental processes.

Where will the construction solid waste be disposed of (describe)?

Construction waste will be stored in a skip on site and periodically removed to a licenced

landfill by a service provider. Confirmation of the capacity of the municipality to handle this

construction waste was obtained as part of the three previous environmental processes.

The Khai Garib municipality has confirmed this to be in order as long as no Medical Waste

or industrial Effluent is dumped.

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


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

No Solid Waste will be generated during the operational phase of this proposal.

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


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




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? YES 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? YES 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.

b) Liquid effluent

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

sewage system? YES NO


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

If YES, provide the particulars of the facility:

Facility name:

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:

Wastewater will not be generated during the construction nor operation phases of this

activity.

c) Emissions into the atmosphere

Will the activity release emissions into the atmosphere other that exhaust emissions and dust

associated with construction phase activities?

YES NO

If YES, is it controlled by any legislation of any sphere of government? YES 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:

Atmospheric Emissions will not be generated during the construction nor operation phases

of this activity.

d) Waste permit

Will any aspect of the activity produce waste that will require a waste permit in terms of the NEM:WA? YES 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 NO

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

Describe the noise in terms of type and level:

The activity will not generate any noise during the operational phases. Limited noise

associated with construction vehicles is expected during the construction phase. This will

be of a low – very low significance.

WATER USE 13



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

Municipal Water board Groundwater River, stream,

dam or lake Other

The activity

will not use

water

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: 0 litres

Does the activity require a water use authorisation (general authorisation or water use license) from

the Department of Water Affairs? YES NO

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

It is unlikely that a Water Use Licence is required for this powerline, as all infrastructure is

to be situated outside of the watercourses (A general authorisation, may however be

relevant in this regard). Notwithstanding, SRK consulting has been appointed to compile

the Water Use Licence Application (WULA) for the PV Facilities and this will include

engagement with the Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS) regarding this powerline.

The DWS has also been given an opportunity to comment on this Basic Assessment

Process.

ENERGY EFFICIENCY 14

Describe the design measures, if any, which have been taken to ensure that the activity is energy efficient:

The activity is for the transmission of electricity generated from a renewable resource (PV)

and this will be done to Eskom Standards.

Describe how alternative energy sources have been taken into account or been built into the design of the activity, if any:

None – this activity is for the transmission of electricity generated from a renewable

resource (PV).



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.

It is not deemed necessary to complete this section for different sections of the powerline, as the powerline is

only approximately 8.8km long and the landscape character and vegetation component remain consistent.

Section B Copy No. (e.g. 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 NO

If YES, please complete the form entitled “Details of specialist and declaration of interest” for each specialist thus appointed

and attach it in Appendix I. All specialist reports must be contained in Appendix D.



Property

description/physica

l address:

Province Northern Cape Province

District Municipality ZF Mcgawu

Local Municipality Khai Garib

Ward Number(s) 7

Farm name and

number

Farm 454 Dyason’s Klip, Farm 638, & Agricultural

Holding 1080.

Portion number Farm 454 Dyason’s Klip, Farm 638, & Agricultural

Holding 1080.

SG Code Remainder of Dyasonsklip 454

C02800000000045400000

Remainder of Farm 638

C02800000000063800000

Agricultural Holding 1080

NO SG Number Available

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.

Current land-use zoning as

per local municipality

IDP/records:

The properties are currently zoned for agricultural use. Power

distribution lines are consistent with this use. The applicant is

however in the process of registering a long term lease over

portions of the properties for the purpose of operating the PV

facilities.

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.

Is a change of land-use or a consent use application required? YES NO



GRADIENT OF THE SITE 1

Indicate the general gradient of the site. Alternative S1:

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 S2 (if any):


1:5

Alternative S3 (if any):


1:5

LOCATION IN LANDSCAPE 2

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

2.1 Ridgeline 2.4 Closed valley 2.7 Undulating plain / low hills

2.2 Plateau 2.5 Open valley 2.8 Dune

2.3 Side slope of hill/mountain 2.6 Plain 2.9 Seafront

2.10 At sea

GROUNDWATER, SOIL AND GEOLOGICAL STABILITY OF THE 3SITE

Is the site(s) located on any of the following?

Alternative S1: Alternative S2 (if

any):

Alternative S3 (if

any):

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

Dolomite, sinkhole or doline areas YES NO YES NO YES NO

Seasonally wet soils (often close to water bodies) YES NO YES NO YES NO

Unstable rocky slopes or steep slopes with loose soil YES NO YES NO YES NO

Dispersive soils (soils that dissolve in water) YES NO YES NO YES NO

Soils with high clay content (clay fraction more than

40%) YES NO

YES NO

YES NO



Any other unstable soil or geological feature YES NO YES NO YES NO

An area sensitive to erosion YES NO YES NO YES 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 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.

An agricultural specialist has been appointed to provide input into this environmental process. Please refer to appendix D2 for a copy of this report.

GROUNDCOVER 4

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.

A botanical specialist has provided input into this Environmental Process. Please refer to appendix D1 for a copy of this report.

SURFACE WATER 5

Indicate the surface water present on and or adjacent to the site and alternative sites?

Perennial River YES NO UNSURE

Non-Perennial River YES NO UNSURE

Permanent Wetland YES NO UNSURE

Seasonal Wetland YES NO UNSURE

Artificial Wetland YES NO UNSURE

Estuarine / Lagoonal wetland YES NO UNSURE



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

The powerlines will cross two non-perennial rivers. The pylon infrastructure will however be situated outside of these watercourses as per the recommendation by the ecological specialist.

LAND USE CHARACTER OF SURROUNDING AREA 6

Indicate land uses and/or prominent features that currently occur within a 500m 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 residentialA 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:

None of the specific features highlighted in this table will be impacted upon by the

powerline

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:

None of the specific features highlighted in this table will have an impact on the powerline

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:

None of the specific features highlighted in this table will have an impact on the powerline

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

Critical Biodiversity Area (as per provincial conservation plan) YES NO Core area of a protected area? YES NO Buffer area of a protected area? YES NO Planned expansion area of an existing protected area? YES NO Existing offset area associated with a previous Environmental Authorisation? YES NO Buffer area of the SKA? YES NO



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

CULTURAL/HISTORICAL FEATURES 7

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:

YES NO

Uncertain

Not Applicable 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:

A Heritage specialist has been appointed to provide input into this Environmental Process. Please refer to Appendix D4 for a copy of this report.

Will any building or structure older than 60 years be affected in any way? YES NO Is it necessary to apply for a permit in terms of the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (Act 25 of 1999)?

YES NO

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

The South African Heritage Resources Authority has already authorised the three separate power lines as part of the three PV Facilities. No further approvals are needed in this regard.

SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTER 8

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 Khai Garib IDP, The current official unemployment rate in Kai !Garib population is 10.0 % (In comparison to 16.1 % in 2011)

Economic profile of local municipality:

The Orange River played an enormous role in the formation of the municipal area and most of the towns and settlements are to be found close to or adjacent thereto. The economy is heavily depended on the Agricultural Sector, both intensive and extensive. However the major roads (N14, R27 and R359) assist in the growth the municipal area experience. It is important to note that new opportunities have opened up for Kai !Garib municipal area since the need to facilitate the generation of sustainable energy was introduced in South Africa by Eskom and the South African government. According to SDF, Kai!Garib Municipality immediately became a hotspot for Solar Energy developments and numerous developments are currently in process and the resulting economic spin-offs are eagerly anticipated.

Level of education:

No Schooling – 9.0 % (14.7 % in 2001 = decrease with 5%) Higher Education – 3.9 % (3.7 % in 2001 = increase with 0.2 %)



Matric – 15.5 % (11.2 % in 2001 = increase with 4%)

b) Socio-economic value of the activity

What is the expected capital value of the activity on completion? ~R150m –

~R200m

What is the expected yearly income that will be generated by or as a result of the activity? R0

Will the activity contribute to service infrastructure? YES NO

Is the activity a public amenity? YES NO

How many new employment opportunities will be created in the development and construction

phase of the activity/ies?

~130

What is the expected value of the employment opportunities during the development and

construction phase?

~R10m

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

How many permanent new employment opportunities will be created during the operational

phase of the activity?

0

What is the expected current value of the employment opportunities during the first 10 years? R0

What percentage of this will accrue to previously disadvantaged individuals? 0%

BIODIVERSITY 9

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.

An ecological expert has been appointed to provide input into this environmental process. Please refer to his report attached in Appendix D1.

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

http://bgis.sanbi.org/

mailto:[email protected]



Critical Biodiversity Area (CBA)

Ecological Support

Area (ESA)

Other Natural

Area (ONA)

No Natural Area

Remaining (NNR)

There is no Critical Biodiversity Planning for

this area. The Namaqua Biodiversity

sector plan indicates the area along the

Orange River as a Critical Biodiversity

Area. This proposed powerline will not

have any impact on this the Orange River

or this corridor.

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 30% Includes natural veld that supports very limited stock grazing

Near Natural (includes areas with low to

moderate level of alien invasive plants)

30%

Includes natural overgrazed veld with limited disturbance from Alien Vegetation.

Degraded (includes areas heavily invaded by alien plants)

10% Includes heavily overgrazed areas and limited erosion

Transformed (includes cultivation,

dams, urban, plantation, roads, etc)

30%

Includes existing tracks and firebreaks.

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 UNSURE YES NO YES NO

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)

A desktop review of the available ecological information as well as a site visit and field

assessment of the proposed development area was conducted in order to identify and

characterize the ecological features of the site. The majority of the site consists of arid



grassland or grassy shrubland on open plains considered to be of moderate to low

sensitivity. A number of drainage lines of various sizes and significance are also present

and represent the major sensitive features along the power line route.

According to the national vegetation map (Mucina & Rutherford 2006), there are three

vegetation types within the boundaries of the site but only two within the current study

area. An additional two vegetation types are common in the wider area, but do not occur

in the vicinity of the affected area . In terms of the conservation status of the various

vegetation types of the area, only Lower Gariep Alluvial Vegetation is of concern and is

listed as Endangered. This vegetation type is however associated with the alluvium along

the Orange River and would not be impacted by the current development which is some

distance from the river itself.

Within the area affected by the proposed development, the two vegetation types that occur

are Kalahari Karroid Shrubland and Bushmanland Arid Grassland. Both Kalahari

Karroid Shrubland and Bushmanland Arid Grassland are classified as Least Threatened

and have been little impacted by transformation and more 99% of their original extent is

still intact. Both are considered Hardly Protected within formal conservation areas.

Mucina & Rutherford (2006), list 6 endemic species for Bushmanland Arid Grassland, while

no vegetation-type endemic species are known from Kalahari Karroid Shrubland. The

biogeographically important and endemic species known from these vegetation types tend

to be widespread within the vegetation type itself and local-level impacts are not likely to

be of significance for any of these vegetation types or species concerned. Bushmanland

Arid Grassland is widely distributed and represents one of the most extensive vegetation

types in South Africa. Kalahari Karroid Shrubland is less extensive, but represents a

transitional vegetation type between the northern Nama Karoo and Kalahari (Savannah)

vegetation types.

A number of different habitats are traversed by the power line, these have been described

in detail under the previous studies (For RE Capital 3, RE Capital 3b and Sirius Solar PV

Project 1) and are summarized here for the purposes of the current study.

Bushmanland Arid Grassland

The amount of vegetation consistent with this vegetation type is much greater than

suggested by the national vegetation map. Most areas on deeper soils are dominated by

various Stipagrostis species with a variable shrub layer. Common and dominant species

include Stipagrostis ciliata, S.obtusa, S.uniplumis and S.amabilis. Species of conservation

concern are not abundant in this habitat and the only species of concern that was

observed within this habitat type were very occasional Hoodia gordonii plants. Protected

species which occur in this habitat type include occasional individuals of Boscia foetida,

Boscia albitrunca and Acacia erioloba.

Kalahari Karroid Shrubland

Areas of shallow soils with exposed or underlying calcrete often occur on crests of hills or

on valley bottoms along drainage lines. These areas are usually shrub-dominated and

correspond loosely with the Kalahari Karroid Shrubland vegetation type. Typical species

include Leucosphaera bainesii, Hermannia spinosa, Monoechma genistifoilium, Salsola



rabieana, Aptosimum albomarginatum, A.spinecens, Kleinia longiflora, Limeum argute-

carinatum, Phyllanthus maderaspatensis, Zygophyllum dregeanum and grasses such as

Stipagrostis anomala, S.ciliata, S.uniplumis, S.hochstetteriana, S.uniplumis and Schmidtia

kalariensis.

Plains Wash

It is common in the area for wash areas to develop on the open plains. These are areas

where runoff may collect and flow during extreme rainfall events, but not to the extent that

that well-defined drainage lines develop. This is typical of arid areas and these areas are

not considered to be drainage lines and usually disappear or dissipate as soon as the soils

get deeper or the slope declines. As such these areas are not categorized as drainage

lines but are nevertheless considered more sensitive than the surrounding plains as these

areas are more vulnerable to disturbance and erosion. These areas are usually dominated

by perennial grasses such as Stipagrostis anomala, S.ciliata, S.uniplumis,

S.hochstetteriana, S.uniplumis and Schmidtia kalariensis. A scattered variable-density

taller woody layer is usually present, consisting of species such as Phaeoptilum spinosum,

Rhigozum trichotomum and Lycium oxycarpum, but there is often little overall

differentiation between the grass and low shrub layer of these areas and the surrounding

vegetation. Aside from Boscia foetida which is fairly common in these areas, there are few

listed or protected species which were observed in this habitat type.

Drainage Lines

There are a number of drainage lines of variable size which occur in the affected area, the

most significant of which are the Helbrandkloofspruit and the Helbrandleegte. These

represent the largest obstacles which would need to be traversed by the power line and all

options would need to traverse these these dry rivers. The drainage lines carry water only

for brief periods following heavy rainfall events and usually consist of a narrow sandy bed

flanked by tall shrubs and scattered trees. Larger drainage lines are dominated by species

such as Acacia erioloba, Boscia albitrunca, Zizyphus mucronata and Searsia lancea, while

the smaller drainage lines are typically dominated species such as Acacia mellifera, Boscia

foetida and Phaeoptilum spinosum. Due to the ecological role that drainage lines play as

well as their vulnerability to disturbance, these areas are considered sensitive and should

be avoided as much as possible. Protected tree species are concentrated along the

drainage lines with species such as Boscia foetida, Boscia albitrunca and Acacia erioloba

being found largely within this habitat type. For this reason, it is recommended that pylon

footprints and maintenance tracks be excluded from these two drainage features.

Listed And Protected Plant Species

According to the SANBI SIBIS database, 286 indigenous plant species have been

recorded from the quarter degree squares 2820 BD, DB and 2821 AC and CA. This

includes 7 species of conservation concern as listed below in Table 3. Two of these can

be confirmed present within the affected area, with Hoodia gordonii present in low numbers

and Acacia erioloba common along the larger drainage lines. There are also additional

species present which are either protected under the National Forests Act such as Boscia



albitrunca and Acacia erioloba or protected under the Northern Cape Nature Conservation

Act of 2009, which includes Boscia foetida, all Mesembryanthemaceae, , all species within

the Euphorbiaceae. Oxalidaceae, Iridaceae, all species within the genera Nemesia and

Jamesbrittenia. It is not likely that many Boscia albitrunca would be affected by the

development as this species is mostly restricted to the larger drainage lines at the site.

Boscia foetida is however common along the smaller drainage lines as well as in the open

veld, and it is likely that some of these would be affected. The ecological expert has been

appointed to undertake the site walk through for the biodiversity consents. The results of

this walkthrough will be submitted to DAFF and DENC in support of the Biodiversity

Consent Applications.



SECTION C: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

ADVERTISEMENT AND NOTICE 1

Publication name Die Gemsbok Date published 21 August 2015 Site notice position Latitude Longitude

28°36’21.1” 21°05’42.2” 28°35’47.9” 21°06’31.15” Date placed 04 August 2015

Include proof of the placement of the relevant advertisements and notices in Appendix E1.

Copies of the Newspaper Advert, Photographs of the Site Notices as well as a map indicating the position of the site notices are included in Appendix E1.

DETERMINATION OF APPROPRIATE MEASURES 2

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. 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)

Please refer to the Stakeholder Register attached in Appendix E5



Please refer to the Stakeholder Register attached in Appendix E5 for a full list of stakeholders, their status as well as their full contact details. 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.

ISSUES RAISED BY INTERESTED AND AFFECTED PARTIES 3

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

No issues have been raised to date. This

Section will be updated on completion of

the Public Participation process.



COMMENTS AND RESPONSE REPORT 4

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.

AUTHORITY PARTICIPATION 5

Authorities and organs of state identified as key stakeholders:

Authority/Organ of

State

Contact person

(Title, Name and

Surname)

Tel No Fax No e-mail Postal

address

Please refer to

the Organ of

State Register

attached in

Appendix E5

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.

Please refer to the Organ of State Register attached in Appendix E5 for a full list of Organs of State consulted, their status as well as their full contact details.

CONSULTATION WITH OTHER STAKEHOLDERS 6

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.

The table below indicates how the public participation has complied with the minimum

requirement contained in the regulations.

Regulated Requirement Description

(1) If the proponent is not the owner or

person in control of the land on which the

activity is to be undertaken, the proponent

must, before applying for an environmental

authorisation in respect of such activity,

obtain the written consent of the landowner

or person in control of the land to undertake

such activity on that land.

(2) Subregulation (1) does not apply in

respect of-.

(a) linear activities;

The proposed grid connection is deemed to

constitute a linear activity and as such not

required to obtain landowner consent. Proof

of Landowner notification is attached to the

application. Landowners have also been

notified of the availability of this Basic

Assessment Report for review and comment.

The person conducting a public participation process must take into account any relevant

guidelines applicable to public participation as contemplated in section 24J of the Act and

must give notice to all potential interested and affected parties of an application or proposed

application which is subjected to public participation by -

(a) fixing a notice board at a place

conspicuous to and accessible by the public

at the boundary, on the fence or along the

corridor of -

(i) the site where the activity to which the

application or proposed application relates is

or is to be undertaken; and

(ii) any alternative site;

Two site notices have been placed along the

N14 near the existing access roads.

Proof of these notices is attached in

Appendix E1.




(b) giving written notice, in any of the manners provided for in section 47D of the Act, to -

(i) the occupiers of the site and, if the

proponent or applicant is not the owner or

person in control of the site on which the

activity is to be undertaken, the owner or

person in control of the site where the

activity is or is to be undertaken or to any

alternative site where the activity is to be

undertaken;

Th owner is the only current occupier of the

site. The landowners have been notified of

this application.

(ii) owners, persons in control of, and

occupiers of land adjacent to the site where

the activity is or is to be undertaken or to

any alternative site where the activity is to

be undertaken;

Owners of adjacent properties have been

notified of this environmental process. Such

owners have been requested to inform the

occupiers of the land of this environmental

process.

(iii) the municipal councillor of the ward in

which the site or alternative site is situated

and any organisation of ratepayers that

represent the community in the area;

The ward councillor has been notified of this

environmental process.

(iv) the municipality which has jurisdiction in

the area;

The Khai Garib municipality has been notified

of this environmental process.

(v) any organ of state having jurisdiction in

respect of any aspect of the activity; and

All organs of state and state departments

agreed upon during the pre-application

meeting have been notified of this

environmental process.

(vi) any other party as required by the

competent authority;

A pre application meeting was held with the

competent authority. At this meeting the

competent authority provided input into the

proposed Stakeholder register. All additional

parties identified at this pre-application

meeting have been included in the




stakeholder register and have received

notifications of the availability of the Basic

Assessment Report.

(c) placing an advertisement in -

(i) one local newspaper; or

(ii) any official Gazette that is published

specifically for the purpose of providing

public notice of applications or other

submissions made in terms of these

Regulations;

An advert has been placed in “Die Gemsbok”

newspaper.

There is currently no official Gazette that has

been published specifically for the purpose of

providing public notice of applications

(d) placing an advertisement in at least one

provincial newspaper or national

newspaper, if the activity has or may have

an impact that extends beyond the

boundaries of the metropolitan or district

municipality in which it is or will be

undertaken: Provided that this paragraph

need not be complied with if an

advertisement has been placed in an official

Gazette referred to in paragraph (c)(ii);and

Adverts will not be placed in provincial or

national newspapers, as the potential impacts

will not extend beyond the borders of the

municipal area.

(e) using reasonable alternative methods, as

agreed to by the competent authority, in

those instances where a person is desirous

of but unable to participate in the process

due to -

(i) illiteracy;

(ii) disability; or

(iii) any other disadvantage.

Notifications will include provision for

alternative engagement in the event of

illiteracy, disability or any other disadvantage.

In such instances, Cape EAPrac will engage

with such individuals in such a manner as

agreed on with the competent authority.

(3) A notice, notice board or advertisement

referred to in subregulation (2) must -

The notice board referred to above has

complied with these requirements.




(a) give details of the application or

proposed application which is subjected to

public participation; and

(b) state -

(i) whether basic assessment or S&EIR

procedures are being applied to the

application;

(ii) the nature and location of the activity to

which the application relates;

(iii) where further information on the

application or proposed application can be

obtained; and

(iv) the manner in which and the person to

whom representations in respect of the

application or proposed application may be

made.

(4) A notice board referred to in

subregulation (2) must -

(a) be of a size at least 60cm by 42cm; and

(b) display the required information in

lettering and in a format as may be

determined by the competent authority.

The notice board referred to above has

complied with these requirements.

(5) Where public participation is conducted

in terms of this regulation for an application

or proposed application, subregulation

(2)(a), (b), (c) and (d) need not be complied

with again during the additional public

participation process contemplated in

regulations 19(1)(b) or 23(1)(b) or the public

participation process contemplated in

regulation 21(2)(d), on condition that -

This will be complied with if final reports are

produced later on in the environmental

process.




(a) such process has been preceded by a

public participation process which included

compliance with subregulation (2)(a), (b), (c)

and (d); and

(b) written notice is given to registered

interested and affected parties regarding

where the -

(i) revised basic assessment report or, EMPr

or closure plan, as contemplated in

regulation 19(1)(b);

(ii) revised environmental impact report or

EMPr as contemplated in regulation

23(1)(b);or

(iii) environmental impact report and EMPr

as contemplated in regulation 21(2)(d);

may be obtained, the manner in which and

the person to whom representations on

these reports or plans may be made and the

date on which such representations are due.

(6) When complying with this regulation, the

person conducting the public participation

process must ensure that -

(a) information containing all relevant facts

in respect of the application or proposed

application is made available to potential

interested and affected parties; and

(b) participation by potential or registered

interested and affected parties is facilitated

in such a manner that all potential or

registered interested and affected parties

are provided with a reasonable opportunity

to comment on the application or proposed

All reports that are submitted to the

competent authority will be subject to a public

participation process. These include:

- Basic Assessment Report.

- Environmental Management

Programme.

- All Specialist Reports.




application.

(7) Where an environmental authorisation is

required in terms of these Regulations and

an authorisation, permit or licence is

required in terms of a specific environmental

management Act, the public participation

process contemplated in this Chapter may

be combined with any public participation

processes prescribed in terms of a specific

environmental management Act, on

condition that all relevant authorities agree

to such combination of processes.



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.

IMPACTS THAT MAY RESULT FROM THE PLANNING AND 1DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONAL, DECOMMISSIONING AND CLOSURE PHASES AS WELL AS PROPOSED MANAGEMENT OF IDENTIFIED IMPACTS AND PROPOSED 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.

Activity Impact summary Significance Proposed mitigation


Direct impacts: Impacts on vegetation and listed or protected plant species resulting from construction activities.

Medium Negative Low Negative with Mitigation

Preconstruction walk-through of the power line route in order to locate species of conservation concern that can be translocated as well as comply with the Northern Cape Nature Conservation Act and DENC/DAFF permit conditions. Construction and vegetation clearing to commence only after walk through has been conducted and necessary permits obtained. No large woody species should be cleared from the power line servitude. It may be necessary to remove some individuals from the area directly beneath the power line due to safety concerns, however, within the wider servitude the presence of large woody species does not increase the fire risk and so there are no valid reasons to remove such trees. If these are too tall and cause safety problems, they can be cut to a lower height rather than removed and, as growth rate in arid areas is slow, it would take many years before such trees would need to be trimmed again. Such trees can be trimmed to 1m height if necessary. Preconstruction environmental induction for all construction staff to ensure that basic environmental principles are adhered to. This includes awareness as to no littering, appropriate handling of pollution and chemical spills, avoiding fire hazards, minimizing wildlife interactions, remaining within demarcated construction areas etc. Vegetation clearing along the power line corridor should only be conducted where necessary and




should not be cleared using herbicides or with a bulldozer. Vegetation can be cleared manually with bush cutters to 0.5m height where necessary. Temporary lay-down areas should be located within previously transformed areas or areas that have been identified as being of low sensitivity.

Direct impacts: Direct Faunal Impacts during Construction

Medium Negative. Low negative with mitigation

All personnel should undergo environmental induction with regards to fauna and in particular awareness about not harming or collecting species such as snakes, tortoises and owls, which are often persecuted out of superstition. Any fauna threatened by the construction activities should be removed to safety by the ECO or appropriately qualified environmental officer. All construction vehicles should adhere to a low speed limit to avoid collisions with susceptible species such as snakes and tortoises. All hazardous materials should be stored in the appropriate manner to prevent contamination of the site. Any accidental chemical, fuel and oil spills that occur at the site should be cleaned up in the appropriate manner as related to the nature of the spill. If holes or trenches need to be dug, these should not be left open for extended periods of time as fauna may fall in and become trapped in them. Holes should only be dug when they are required and should be used and filled shortly thereafter.

Direct impacts: Degradation of Scenic Resources during construction

Low Utilisation of existing northsouth access roads to access the corridor; Location of the pylons outside of drainage lines, or significant biodiversity areas (as per the ecology specialists findings); Soil erosion management along the maintenance road along the proposed corridor. The Preferred Alternative makes a kink to follow the Sirius SEF footprint areas. If possible, it is recommended that the route be aligned as straigtht as possible, so that any further power lines from future SEF projects to the west, will also be routed in a straight line (adjacent the proposed routing).

Direct impacts: Degradation of Scenic Resources during operation

Low Utilisation of existing northsouth access roads to access the corridor; Location of the pylons outside of drainage lines, or significant biodiversity areas (as per the ecology specialists findings); Soil erosion management along the maintenance road along the proposed corridor.




The Preferred Alternative makes a kink to follow the Sirius SEF footprint areas. If possible, it is recommended that the route be aligned as straigtht as possible, so that any further power lines from future SEF projects to the west, will also be routed in a straight line (adjacent the proposed routing).

Direct impacts: Impacts on Cultural Landscape Context

Low None

Direct impacts: Impacts on Archaeological Resources

Low If any human remains are uncovered during construction, the ECO should have the area fenced off and contact SAHRA (Tel: 021 462 4502) immediately; If there are any significant changes to the layout of the facility, the new design should be assessed by a heritage practitioner.

Direct impacts: Impacts on Palaeontological resources

Low Should any substantial fossil remains (e.g. mammalian bones and teeth) be encountered during excavation, however, these should be safeguarded, preferably in situ, and reported by the ECO to SAHRA, i.e. The South African Heritage Resources Authority, as soon as possible (Contact details: Mrs Colette Scheermeyer, P.O. Box 4637, Cape Town 8000. Tel: 021 462 4502 (Email: [email protected])

Indirect impacts: Avifaunal impact due to collision or electrocution from power line.

Medium Negative. Low Negative with Mitigation.

All new power line infrastructure should be bird-friendly in configuration and adequately insulated (Lehman et al. 2007). The sections of the line over ridges and near drainage lines should be fitted with bird flight diverters (flappers) and the live components should be insulated to reduce electrocution problems. Sections to be fitted with flappers should be identified during the walk-through of the final route and informed by bird movements in the area. Surveys along the power line for dead birds should be conducted monthly for a year after construction to ascertain if there are any sections present which are generating a high impact on avifauna and where additional mitigation is necessary.

Indirect impacts: Ecosystem degradation along powerline route due to erosion and alien plant invasion.

Medium-low negative. Low Negative with Mitigation.

Regular erosion and alien plant management along the power line servitude. Herbicides should only be used on alien species and should not be broadcast or sprayed and should only be used on cut-stump type applications where it is applied by hand to specific plants. During operation and maintenance of the power line servitudes, alien species especially large woody species such as Prosopis glandulosa should be cleared from the power line servitudes.

Alternative 2

Direct impacts: Impacts on vegetation and

Medium Negative

Preconstruction walk-through of the power line route in order to locate species of conservation




listed or protected plant species resulting from construction activities.

Low Negative with mitigation.

concern that can be translocated as well as comply with the Northern Cape Nature Conservation Act and DENC/DAFF permit conditions. Construction and vegetation clearing to commence only after walk through has been conducted and necessary permits obtained. No large woody species should be cleared from the power line servitude. It may be necessary to remove some individuals from the area directly beneath the power line due to safety concerns, however, within the wider servitude the presence of large woody species does not increase the fire risk and so there are no valid reasons to remove such trees. If these are too tall and cause safety problems, they can be cut to a lower height rather than removed and, as growth rate in arid areas is slow, it would take many years before such trees would need to be trimmed again. Such trees can be trimmed to 1m height if necessary. Preconstruction environmental induction for all construction staff to ensure that basic environmental principles are adhered to. This includes awareness as to no littering, appropriate handling of pollution and chemical spills, avoiding fire hazards, minimizing wildlife interactions, remaining within demarcated construction areas etc. Vegetation clearing along the power line corridor should only be conducted where necessary and should not be cleared using herbicides or with a bulldozer. Vegetation can be cleared manually with bush cutters to 0.5m height where necessary. Temporary lay-down areas should be located within previously transformed areas or areas that have been identified as being of low sensitivity.



All personnel should undergo environmental induction with regards to fauna and in particular awareness about not harming or collecting species such as snakes, tortoises and owls, which are often persecuted out of superstition. Any fauna threatened by the construction activities should be removed to safety by the ECO or appropriately qualified environmental officer. All construction vehicles should adhere to a low speed limit to avoid collisions with susceptible species such as snakes and tortoises. All hazardous materials should be stored in the appropriate manner to prevent contamination of the site. Any accidental chemical, fuel and oil spills that occur at the site should be cleaned up in the appropriate manner as related to the nature of the




spill. If holes or trenches need to be dug, these should not be left open for extended periods of time as fauna may fall in and become trapped in them. Holes should only be dug when they are required and should be used and filled shortly thereafter.


Low Future power lines should be routed to the north of the authorised; Utilisation of existing north south access roads to access the corridor; Location of the pylons outside of drainage lines, or significant biodiversity areas (as per the ecology specialists findings); Soil erosion management along the maintenance road along the proposed corridor.


Medium to high (As a result of cumulative impact)

the authorised; Utilisation of existing north south access roads to access the corridor; Location of the pylons outside of drainage lines, or significant biodiversity areas (as per the ecology specialists findings); Soil erosion management along the maintenance road along the proposed corridor.


Low None


Low If any human remains are uncovered during construction, the ECO should have the area fenced off and contact SAHRA (Tel: 021 462 4502) immediately; If there are any significant changes to the layout of the facility, the new design should be assessed by a heritage practitioner.


Low Should any substantial fossil remains (e.g. mammalian bones and teeth) be encountered during excavation, however, these should be safeguarded, preferably in situ, and reported by the ECO to SAHRA, i.e. The South African Heritage Resources Authority, as soon as possible (Contact details: Mrs Colette Scheermeyer, P.O. Box 4637, Cape Town 8000. Tel: 021 462 4502 (Email: [email protected])

Indirect impacts: Avifaunal impact due to collision or electrocution from power line.

Medium Negative. Low Negative with Mitigation.

All new power line infrastructure should be bird-friendly in configuration and adequately insulated (Lehman et al. 2007). The sections of the line over ridges and near drainage lines should be fitted with bird flight diverters (flappers) and the live components should be insulated to reduce electrocution problems.




Sections to be fitted with flappers should be identified during the walk-through of the final route and informed by bird movements in the area. Surveys along the power line for dead birds should be conducted monthly for a year after construction to ascertain if there are any sections present which are generating a high impact on avifauna and where additional mitigation is necessary.

Indirect Impacts: Ecosystem degradation along powerline route due to erosion and alien plant invasion.


Regular erosion and alien plant management along the power line servitude. Herbicides should only be used on alien species and should not be broadcast or sprayed and should only be used on cut-stump type applications where it is applied by hand to specific plants. During operation and maintenance of the power line servitudes, alien species especially large woody species such as Prosopis glandulosa should be cleared from the power line servitudes.

Cumulative impacts:

No-go option It must be noted that the no go alternative in this case is deemed to be the continuation of constructing and operating three separate power lines as already authorised. For this reason, you will note that the significance of certain impacts associated with the No Go Alternative are higher than those of the current proposal.

Direct impacts: Impacts on vegetation and listed or protected plant species resulting from construction activities.

Medium – High Negative. Low Negative with mitigation.

None



None


Medium None


Medium – High (as a result of cumulative impact)

None


Low None


Low None


Low None

Indirect impacts: Medium None




Avifaunal impact due to collision or electrocution from power line.

Negative. Low Negative with Mitigation.

Indirect Impacts: Ecosystem degradation along powerline route due to erosion and alien plant invasion.


None

A complete impact assessment in terms of Regulation 19(3) of GN 733 must be included as Appendix F.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 2

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. Alternative A (preferred alternative)

Ecological Impacts


generate a lower overall impact than the original 3 grid connections. The main benefit

would be the need for a single line from the Dyasonsklip facilities compared to the current

double line. However, as these two lines runs adjacent to one another, this benefit is not a

large as it would be if the two lines followed different routes.










alternatives and both are considered acceptable alternatives from a terrestrial ecology

point of view.

The conclusion of the ecological study is that either or the proposed alternatives would be

acceptable ecologically and that with reasonable mitigation applied, there would be no

highly significant long-term impacts associated with the grid connection. The current



preferred alternative from a technical perspective is Alternative 1 and there are no reasons

that this alternative should not be authorised in favour of Alternative 2.

Visual Impacts

It is the recommendation of the visual study that the Preferred Routing Alternative is also

visually preferred.

A barrier effect is not apparent for this Preferred Alternative, which would allow for a new

power line corridor, running parallel to the existing Eskom 132kV line, but with a suitable

gap and with the routing corridor location outside of the ZVI of the N14 National Road

(hence the Preferred Routing was rated low). As mitigation would not have a major

reduction in the resultant visual impacts, significance for all the routings was rated the

same as without mitigation. Mitigations in terms of best practice were recommended, to

straighten the proposed routing and much as possible, setting in place a precedent for a

future power line corridor running parallel, but further to the north, of the existing Eskom

132kV power line.

Heritage Impacts




(solar) facilities. The proposal put forward in this report would relate to a significant

reduction in the total distance of transmission lines required to be installed for the Sirius 1

and Dyasonsklip 1 & 2 solar energy facilities by combining the three already approved


While the proposal would relate to a landscape modification, we are of the view that this

proposal would significantly reduce the overall visual impact of the proposal. Even if not

the case, the specialist is of the view that none of the two route alignment alternatives

would materially alter any natural or cultural landscape of cultural significance.


relation to the already-authorised solar energy facilities to which this proposal relate, did

not identify or highlight any archaeological resources considered of high or moderate

cultural significance. Given the nature of the proposal, which would not traverse any

archaeological occurrences identified, it is the specialists view that none of the two route

alignment alternatives as put forward herewith would warrant any further archaeological



investigation.


significant impacts on local palaeontological heritage resources.

Alternative B

Ecological Impacts


generate a lower overall impact than the original 3 grid connections. The main benefit

would be the need for a single line from the Dyasonsklip facilities compared to the current

double line. However, as these two lines runs adjacent to one another, this benefit is not a

large as it would be if the two lines followed different routes.










alternatives and both are considered acceptable alternatives from a terrestrial ecology

point of view.

The conclusion of the ecological study is that either or the proposed alternatives would be

acceptable ecologically and that with reasonable mitigation applied, there would be no

highly significant long-term impacts associated with the grid connection.

Visual Impacts

The significance of this alternative was also rated medium to high due to the north-south

section of the line (Sirius SS LILO), creating a structure barrier that would force any future

power line routings to follow the same alignment, crossing over the existing Eskom 132kV

line, essentially setting a precedent for a power line corridor to the south of the existing

line. This routing corridor is in close visual proximity to the N14 National Road, which

carries tourist traffic and should be recognised as a tourist view corridor. As mitigation

would not have a major reduction in the resultant visual impacts, significance for all the



routings was rated the same as without mitigation. Mitigations in terms of best practice

were recommended, to straighten the proposed routing and much as possible, setting in

place a precedent for a future power line corridor running parallel, but further to the north,

of the existing Eskom 132kV power line.

Heritage Impacts




(solar) facilities. The proposal put forward in this report would relate to a significant

reduction in the total distance of transmission lines required to be installed for the Sirius 1

and Dyasonsklip 1 & 2 solar energy facilities by combining the three already approved


While the proposal would relate to a landscape modification, the specialist is of the view

that this proposal would significantly reduce the overall visual impact (compared to the

authorised powerlines). Even if not the case, we are of the view that none of the two route

alignment alternatives would materially alter any natural or cultural landscape of cultural

significance.


relation to the already-authorised solar energy facilities to which this proposal relate, did

not identify or highlight any archaeological resources considered of high or moderate

cultural significance. Given the nature of the proposal, which would not traverse any

archaeological occurrences identified, it is the specialists view that none of the two route

alignment alternatives as put forward herewith would warrant any further archaeological

investigation.


significant impacts on local palaeontological heritage resources.

Alternative C

No-go alternative (compulsory)

Ecological

The integrated, combined grid connection for the Dyasonsklip and Sirius PV facilities (this

proposal) would generate a lower overall impact than the No-go alternative (continuing with

the original 3 grid connections as authorised). The main benefit would be the need for a



single line from the Dyasonsklip facilities compared to the current double line. However,

as these two lines runs adjacent to one another, this benefit is not a large as it would be if

the two lines followed different routes.

Visual Impacts

Operation phase visual impact significance was rated medium to high for the Status Quo

option, due to the cumulative visual impacts from the cluttering of the landscapes, setting a

precedent for un-aligned routing corridors taking place in the future.

Heritage Impacts

The proposal put forward in this report would relate to a significant reduction in the total

distance of transmission lines required to be installed for the Sirius 1 and Dyasonsklip 1 &

2 solar energy facilities by combining the three already approved transmission line

alignments into a single route alignment and is thus preferred to the No Go Alternative.



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 NO

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).

NA

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.

- Preconstruction walk-through of the power line route in order to locate species of

conservation concern that can be translocated as well as comply with the Northern

Cape Nature Conservation Act and DENC/DAFF permit conditions.

- Construction and vegetation clearing to commence only after walk through has

been conducted and necessary permits obtained.

- No large woody species should be cleared from the power line servitude. It may be

necessary to remove some individuals from the area directly beneath the power

line due to safety concerns, however, within the wider servitude the presence of

large woody species does not increase the fire risk and so there are no valid

reasons to remove such trees. If these are too tall and cause safety problems, they

can be cut to a lower height rather than removed and, as growth rate in arid areas

is slow, it would take many years before such trees would need to be trimmed

again. Such trees can be trimmed to 1m height if necessary.

- Preconstruction environmental induction for all construction staff to ensure that

basic environmental principles are adhered to. This includes awareness as to no

littering, appropriate handling of pollution and chemical spills, avoiding fire hazards,

minimizing wildlife interactions, remaining within demarcated construction areas

etc.

- Vegetation clearing along the power line corridor should only be conducted where

necessary and should not be cleared using herbicides or with a bulldozer.

Vegetation can be cleared manually with bush cutters to 0.5m height where

necessary.

- Temporary lay-down areas should be located within previously transformed areas

or areas that have been identified as being of low sensitivity.



- All personnel should undergo environmental induction with regards to fauna and in

particular awareness about not harming or collecting species such as snakes,

tortoises and owls, which are often persecuted out of superstition.

- Any fauna threatened by the construction activities should be removed to safety by

the ECO or appropriately qualified environmental officer.

- All construction vehicles should adhere to a low speed limit to avoid collisions with

susceptible species such as snakes and tortoises.

- All hazardous materials should be stored in the appropriate manner to prevent

contamination of the site. Any accidental chemical, fuel and oil spills that occur at

the site should be cleaned up in the appropriate manner as related to the nature of

the spill.

- If holes or trenches need to be dug, these should not be left open for extended

periods of time as fauna may fall in and become trapped in them. Holes should

only be dug when they are required and should be used and filled shortly

thereafter.

- The contractor must utilise the existing north south access roads to access the

corridor;

- Location of the pylons to be outside of all drainage lines,


area fenced off and contact SAHRA (Tel: 021 462 4502) immediately;

- If there are any significant changes to the layout of the facility, the new design

should be assessed by a heritage practitioner.

- Should any substantial fossil remains (e.g. mammalian bones and teeth) be

encountered during excavation, however, these should be safeguarded, preferably

in situ, and reported by the ECO to SAHRA, i.e. The South African Heritage

Resources Authority, as soon as possible (Contact details: Mrs Colette

Scheermeyer, P.O. Box 4637, Cape Town 8000. Tel: 021 462 4502 (Email:

[email protected])

- All new power line infrastructure should be bird-friendly in configuration and

adequately insulated (

- The sections of the line over ridges and near drainage lines should be fitted with

bird flight diverters (flappers) and the live components should be insulated to

reduce electrocution problems. Sections to be fitted with flappers should be

identified during the walk-through of the final route and informed by bird

movements in the area.

- Surveys along the power line for dead birds should be conducted monthly for a



year after construction to ascertain if there are any sections present which are

generating a high impact on avifauna and where additional mitigation is necessary.

- Regular erosion and alien plant management must take place along the power line

servitude.

- Herbicides should only be used on alien species and should not be broadcast or

sprayed and should only be used on cut-stump type applications where it is applied

by hand to specific plants.

- During operation and maintenance of the power line servitudes, alien species

especially large woody species such as Prosopis glandulosa should be cleared

from the power line servitudes.

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



SECTION F: APPENDIXES

The following appendixes must be attached:

Appendix A: Maps

Appendix B: Photographs

Appendix C: Facility illustration(s)

Appendix D: Specialist reports (including terms of reference)

Appendix E: Public Participation

Appendix F: Impact Assessment

Appendix G: Environmental Management Programme (EMPr)

Appendix H: Details of EAP and expertise

Appendix I: Specialist’s declaration of interest

Appendix J: Additional Information

DK1 & 2 and Sirius Grid Connection SIY231b/04


REFERENCES

DWA (2001). Generic public participation guideline. Department of Water Affairs and

Forestry.

DEAT (2002). Integrated Environmental Management Information Series 3: Stakeholder

Engagement. Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Pretoria.

DEADP (2003). Waste Minimisation Guideline for Environmental Impact Assessment

reviews. NEMA EIA Regulations Guideline & Information Series, Department Environmental

Affairs & Development Planning.

DEAT (2004). Criteria for determining alternatives in EIAs, Integrated Environmental

Management, Information Series 11, Department of Environmental Affairs & Tourism,

Pretoria.

DEAT (2004). Environmental management Plans, Integrated Environmental management,

Informatino Series 12, Department Environmental Affairs & Tourism.

DEAT (2005). Assessment of Impacts and Alternatives, Integrated Environmental

Management Guideline Series, Department of Environmental Affairs & Tourism, Pretoria.

DEAT (2005). Guideline 4: Public Participation, in terms of the EIA Regulations 2005,

Integrated Environmental Management Guideline Series, Department of Environmental

Affairs and Tourism, Pretoria.

DEADP (2005). Guideline for the review of specialist input in the EIA process. NEMA EIA

Regulations Guideline & Information Document Series, Department of Environmental Affairs

& Development Planning.

DEADP (2005). Guideline for involving biodiversity specialists in the EIA process. NEMA

EIA Regulations Guideline & Information Document Series, Department of Environmental

Affairs & Development Planning.

DEADP (2005). Guideline for environmental management plans. NEMA EIA Regulations

Guideline & Information Document Series, Department of Environmental Affairs &

Development Planning.

DEADP (2005). Provincial urban edge guideline. Department Environmental Affairs &

Development Planning.

DEAT (2006). EIA Regulations in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act

No 107 of 1998) (Government Notice No R 385, R 386 and R 387 in Government Gazette No

28753 of 21 April 2006).



DEADP (2006). Guideline on the Interpretation of the Listed Activities. NEMA EIA

Regulations Guidelines & Information Document Series, Department of Environmental Affairs

& Development Planning.

DEADP (2007). Guide on Alternatives, NEMA EIA Regulations Guidelines & Information

Document Series, Department of Environmental Affairs & Development Planning.

DEADP (2007). Guideline on Appeals, NEMA EIA Regulations Guidelines & Information

Document Series, Department of Environmental Affairs & Development Planning.

DEADP (2007). Guideline on Exemption Applications. NEMA EIA Regulations Guidelines &

Information Document Series, Department of Environmental Affairs & Development Planning.

DEADP (2007). Guideline on Public Participation. NEMA EIA Regulations Guidelines &

Information Document Series, Department of Environmental Affairs & Development Planning.

DEADP (2009). Guideline on Need & Desirability, NEMA EIA Regulations Guideline and

Information Document Series, Department Environmental Affairs & Development Planning.

DEADP (2009). Guideline on Alternatives, NEMA EIA Regulations Guideline and


DEADP (2009). Guideline on Transitional Arrangements, NEMA EIA Regulations Guideline

and Information Document Series, Department Environmental Affairs & Development

Planning.

DEADP (2009). Guideline on Exemption Applications. NEMA EIA Regulations Guideline

and Information Document Series, Department Environmental Affairs & Development

Planning.

DEADP (2009). Guideline on Appeals. NEMA EIA Regulations Guideline and Information

Document Series, Department Environmental Affairs & Development Planning.

DEADP (2009). Guideline on Public Participation. NEMA EIA Regulations Guideline and


Keatimilwe K & Ashton PJ 2005. Guideline for the review of specialist input in EIA

processes. Department Environmental Affairs & Development Planning.

Lochner P (2005). Guideline for Environmental Management Plans. Department

Environmental Affairs & Development Planning.

Münster, F. (2005). Guidelines for Determining the Scope of Specialist Involvement in EIA

Processes: Edition 1. CSIR Report No ENV-S-C 2005 053 A. Republic of South Africa,

Provincial Government of the Western Cape, Department of Environmental Affairs and

Development Planning, Cape Town.



Oberholzer B (2005). Guideline for involving visual & aesthetic specialists. Department

Environmental Affairs & Development Planning.

Winter S & Beaumann N (2005). Guideline for involving heritage specialists in EIA

processes. Department Environmental Affairs & Development Planning.

DEA (2010). National Climate Change Response Green Paper 2010.

DEA (January 2008). National Response to South Africa’s Electricity Shortage.

Interventions to address electricity shortages.

DEA&DP. (May 2006). Strategic Initiative to Introduce Commercial Land Based Wind Energy

Development to the Western Cape: Specialist Study: Executive Summary - CNdV Africa

prepared for Provincial Government of the Western Cape.

Department of Mineral & Energy (1998). White Paper on Energy Policy of the Republic of

South Africa.

Department of Mineral & Energy (2003). The White Paper on Renewable Energy.

Hsai-Yang, F (Ed)(2006). Environmental Geotechnology Dictionary (online version).

University of North Caroline, Charlotte, USA.

Integrated Resource Plan for Electricity (Oct. 2010). Revision 2, Version8.

International Finance Corporation – World Bank Group. (April 2007). Environmental,

Health and Safety Guidelines for Electric Power Transmission and Distribution.

International Finance Corporation – World Bank Group. (April 2007). Environmental,

Health and Safety Guidelines for Wind Energy.

International Finance Corporation – World Bank Group. (April 2007). General

Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines.

Mucina, L. & Rutherford, M.C. (eds) 2006. The Vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and

Swaziland. Strelitzia 19. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria.

National Energy Regulator of South Africa (NERSA)(Feb.2010). Rules on selection

criteria for renewable energy projects under the REFIT Programme.

Saayman, I. (2005). Guideline for Involving Hydrogeologists in EIA Processes: Edition 1.

CSIR Report No ENV-S-C 2005 053 D. Republic of South Africa, Provincial Government of

the Western Cape, Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning, Cape

Town.



SANBI Biodiversity GIS (2007). South African National Biodiversity Institute, Cape Town,

South Africa.

Documents

BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT - Cape EAPrac … RE Capital 3/BA... · 2015-09-04 · This Basic Assessment Report is available for a 30 day review and comment ... power line and substation