Media Statement Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism FRIDAY, 09 MAY 2008: The Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Mr Marthinus
van Schalkwyk, has considered the appeals against the Department's decision
to grant authorisation to the applicant for the proposed construction of a 765kV
transmission line and its associated infrastructure from Zeus substation,
Mpumalanga, to Mercury substation, North West Province. After evaluating all the appeals and relevant information submitted to him, the Minister
has come to a decision as attached hereto. APPEAL DECISION APPEALS AGAINST THE ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION OF THE
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF A 765kV TRANSMISSION LINE AND
ITS ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE FROM ZEUS SUBSTATION,
MPUMALANGA, TO MERCURY SUBSTATION, NORTH WEST PROVINCE 1.INTRODUCTION In terms of section 22 of the Environment Conservation Act, 1989 (ECA), read with
the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations published in Government
Notice No. R1182 of 5 September 1997, the Director-General of the Department
of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) on 2 March 2007 authorised
Eskom to proceed with the construction of a 765kV transmission
line and its associated infrastructure between the Zeus substation near Secunda,
Mpumalanga, and the Mercury substation near Orkney, North West Province.
After the record of decision (ROD) had been issued, eight appeals were submitted
against the authorisation. 2.BACKGROUND 2.1 This transmission line will form part of an important component of the Alpha (near Standerton,
Mpumalanga); Hydra (near De Aar, Northern Cape); Gamma (near Koeberg, Western Cape)
765kV network. This network will also be extended with a 765kV link between the Hydra substation
and the Grassridge substation near Port Elizabeth. Thus, the current 400kV transmission network
providing the Eastern and Western Cape will be substantially upgraded. The 400kV network
is expected to reach its transfer limits during 2008. 2.2 The development will comprise of a transmission line of approximately 260km in length and
of the expansion of the Mercury and Zeus substations to accommodate the new 765kV
transformers. At Zeus the additional area will be 28 ha (700m x 400m), while at Mercury the
additional area will be 44 ha (1100m x 400m). Access and service roads will also have
to be constructed where necessary. 3.APPEALS 3.1 Eight appeals were submitted against the authorisation of the proposed transmission
line by the DEAT. The appeals originated from an area limited to a stretch of line
approximately 12km in length, situated between Potchefstroom and the Vredefort
Dome World Heritage Site (VDWHS). Three different route alternatives had been
identified in this area, namely an eastern alternative (closest to the VDWHS), a western
alternative (farthest away from the VDWHS) and a central alternative, which follows
the route of the existing 400kV transmission line. While the eastern alternative was
singled out as the preferred option in the environmental impact report (EIR),
the western alternative was authorised by the DEAT. All the appeals were submitted
by land owners along the western alternative. 3.2 The following emerged as the major grounds of appeal: - The authorisation of the western alternative is contradictory to the recommendation
of the eastern alternative as the preferred route in the EIR. No reasons were provided
the authorisation of the western alternative. - None of the land owners along the western route were consulted about the identification
of that route as the preferred route. - Although the visual impact on the VDWHS of a line along the western route will be
minimal, the line will have a major visual impact as well as an impact on land use in
the area which it will traverse.
3.3 The appellants persuaded Eskom to undertake an extended study of the three alternative
route alignments as well as of any other reasonable route options in the area. During the EIA
phase of the project, the study of the three alternatives focused mainly on visual aspects. It
was then agreed that the study team for the extended study, in addition to a visual impact
specialist, would also include an ecologist, archaeologist, ornithologist and a social
. In view of the additional information assembled during the extended study, it
concluded that the anticipated impact of a line along the central route will be more
acceptable than on any of the other alignment options. 4. DECISION 4.1 In reaching my decision on the appeals against the authorisation of this proposed
development, I have taken the following into consideration: 4.1.1 The information contained in: - The project file (ref. 12/12/20/433).
- The appeals submitted by the eight appellants against the authorisation of the
construction of the transmission line along the western route alignment in the
area between Potchefstroom and the VDWHS. - The response of the applicant and the DEAT to the grounds of appeal.
- The report on the Vredefort Dome Extended Study.
4.1.2 The dire need for the establishment of this 765kV link to ensure a stable supply
of electricity to the Western Cape and to essential development initiatives such as the
Coega Industrial Zone near Port Elizabeth. 4.1.3 The indication in the Vredefort Dome Extended Study that, with the exception
of its visual impact, the anticipated impact of a line along the central route on the
biodiversity of the area, on the avifauna, on land-use, on sense of place and
on social attributes is more acceptable than on any of the other alignment options. 4.1.4 The fact that none of the alternative route alignments identified encroaches
upon the buffer zone of the VDWHS. With a buffer zone of 5km, the direct impact
on the Dome area itself of a transmission line along any of the identified routes will be minimal. 4.2 Having considered the above information I have concluded that: 4.2.1 The need for the development has been adequately demonstrated. 4.2.2 The appeals against the construction of the transmission line along the western route
alignment are substantive. 4.2.3 The anticipated impacts associated with the construction of the transmission line
along the central route alignment will be more acceptable than along any of the other
identified route alignments. 4.2.4 The VDWHS will be minimally affected by the construction of the transmission
line along the central route alignment option. 4.2.5 The conditions enclosed in the attached Record of Decision are deemed adequate
to mitigate the identified impacts to acceptable levels. 4.3 Hence, in terms of section 35(4) of the Environment Conservation Act, 1989
(Act 73 of 1989) I have decided to - 4.3.1 Uphold the appeals against the environmental authorisation of this development
the Director-General of the DEAT; and 4.3.2 vary the original environmental authorisation in that, in the area between
Potchefstroom and the Vredefort Dome World Heritage Site, the transmission
line must be erected along the central route alignment option, as is described in
paragraph 1(a) of the attached Record of Decision and in accordance with the
conditions set out in paragraph 3 thereof. MARTHINUS VAN SCHALKWYK, MP
MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND TOURISM RECORD OF DECISION
ISSUED BY THE MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND TOURISM: APPEALS AGAINST THE ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION BY
THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND TOURISM
OF THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF A 765kV TRANSMISSION LINE
AND ITS ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE FROM THE ZEUS SUBSTATION,
MPUMALANGA, TO THE MERCURY SUBSTATION, NORTH WEST
PROVINCE (PROJECT REFERENCE 12/12/20/433) In terms of section 22(3), read with section 35(4) of the Environment Conservation
, 1989 (Act No. 73 of 1989) ("the Act") I, Marthinus van Schalkwyk,, hereby authorise
Eskom to undertake the activity described below, subject to the conditions contained herein. 1. DESCRIPTION, EXTENT AND LOCATION OF THE ACTIVITY: The proposed project comprises of the following: - Construction of a 765kV transmission line from the Zeus substation near Standerton
in Mpumalanga to the Mercury substation, near Orkney in North West Province.
The proposed transmission line will be approximately 255km in length. It will follow
the ZM 1 corridor as recommended in the environmental impact report (EIR) dated
July 2006. Eskom will acquire an 80m servitude (40m on either side of the centre line)
within this corridor. In the area north-west of the Vredefort Dome World Heritage
Site (VDWHS) and south-east of Potchefstroom the ZM1 corridor must follow the
central alignment. Between the point where the central alignment crosses the
boundary between the farm Rooipoortje 453 IQ and the farm Roodekraal 454
IQ, and the point where the central alignment crosses the road on the farm
Vogelzang 467 IQ, the ZM 1 corridor will be extended south eastwards for a distance
of two kilometres. Within the extended corridor thus formed (hereinafter called the
"Extended Corridor"), Eskom must complete the determination of the final alignment
of the transmission line through negotiation with every land owner whose property
will be traversed by the line. Once the final alignment in the Extended Corridor has
determined, it must be submitted to me for approval. - The line will consist of 55m high cross-rope suspension towers with strain towers
on difficult terrain and on bends greater than 3º. - ; Expansion of the Mercury and Zeus substations to accommodate the new 765kV
transformers. At Zeus the additional area will be 28 ha (700m x 400m), while at
the additional area will be 44 ha (1100m x 400m). - Construction of access roads where necessary and the installation of gates where
the line crosses farm boundaries.
The project falls within the ambit of items 1(a) and (d) of Government Notice R.1182
promulgated under section 21 of the Act. 2. KEY FACTORS INFORMING THE DECISION: 2.1 In reaching my decision on the appeals against the authorisation of this proposed
development, I have taken the following into consideration: 2.1.1 The information contained in: - The project file (ref. 12/12/20/433).
- The appeals submitted by the eight appellants against the authorisation of the
construction of the transmission line along the western route alignment in the area
between Potchefstroom and the VDWHS. - The response of the applicant and the DEAT to the grounds of appeal.
- The Vredefort Dome Extended Study which was produced by Margen Industrial
Services (Eskom's consultants) in response to a request by affected land owners.
2.1.2 The grounds of appeal which focused on the following areas: - Dissatisfaction with the process followed: none of the owners along the western
alternative were consulted about the identification of that route as the preferred one. - Concerns about the contradiction between the EIR, which recommended the
eastern alternative, and the record of decision (ROD) which authorised the
western alternative. - Concerns about the visual impact and the impact on the land-use of a line
along the western route on the area it will traverse.
2.1.3. The dire need for the establishment of this 765kV link to ensure a stable supply
of electricity to the Western Cape and to essential development initiatives such as the
Coega Industrial Zone near Port Elizabeth. 2.1.4. The indication in the Vredefort Dome Extended Study that, with the exception
of its visual impact, the anticipated impact of a line along the central route on the biodiversity
of the area, on the avifauna, on land-use, on sense of place and on social attributes is more
acceptable than on any of the other alignment options. 2.1.5. No one of the alternative route alignments identified encroaches upon the buffer zone
of the VDWHS. With a buffer zone of 5km, the direct impact on the Dome area itself of a
transmission line along any of the identified routes will be minimal. 2.2 Having considered the above information I have concluded that: - The need for the development has been adequately demonstrated.
- The appeals against the construction of the transmission line along the western route
alignment are substantive. - The anticipated impacts associated with the construction of the transmission line along
the central route alignment will be more acceptable than along any of the other identified
route alignments. - The conditions enclosed in this ROD are deemed adequate to mitigate the identified
impacts to acceptable levels. - By implementing the mitigation measures contained in this ROD, the principles of section
2 of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998) (NEMA) can be substantially complied with.
3. CONDITIONS
3.1 Specific conditions 3.1.1 Environmental Control Officer (ECO) 3.1.1.1 Eskom must appoint an ECO one month before construction commences.
The Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) must be notified of such an appointment. 3.1.1.2 The ECO will be responsible for monitoring, on a daily basis, compliance of the
project with these conditions as well as with relevant environmental legislation and with
the recommendations contained in the environmental management plan (EMP). 3.1.1.3 The ECO must ensure that independent environmental performance audits are
undertaken quarterely for the duration of construction. The audit reports must be submitted
to the Director-General of the DEAT (attention Director: Environmental Impact Evaluation).
Copies of the audit reports must also be submitted to the Mpumalanga Department of
Agriculture and Land Administration, the Gauteng Department of Agriculture, Conservation
and Environment, the Northwest Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Environment
and to the Free State Department of Tourism, Environmental and Economic Affairs. 3.1.1.4 The ECO shall maintain the following on site: - A daily site diary
- A non-conformance register
- A public complaint register
- A register of audits
3.1.1.5 The ECO shall submit an environmental compliance report on a two-monthly basis to
the Director-General of the DEAT of which copies must also be submitted to the Mpumalanga
Department of Agriculture and Land Administration, the Gauteng Department of Agriculture,
Conservation and Environment, the Northwest Department of Agriculture, Conservation and
Environment and to the Free State Department of Tourism, Economic and Environmental Affairs. 3.1.1.6 The ECO shall remain employed until all measures required for the rehabilitation of
construction damage have been completed and the site has been handed over to Eskom by
the contractor. 3.1.1.7 The ECO shall report to and be accountable to Eskom. 3.1.2 Environmental Management Plan (EMP) 3.1.2.1 Eskom must submit a construction EMP, subject to clause 3.1.2.2 below, to the
DEAT for approval before commencement of any of the activities referred to in this ROD
Copies of the EMP must also be submitted to the Mpumalanga Department of
Agriculture and Land Administration, the Gauteng Department of Agriculture, Conservation
and Environment, the Northwest Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Environment
and to the Free State Department of Tourism, Environmental and Economic Affairs to enable
them to comment to the DEAT on the EMP. The envisaged construction EMP must cover, but
must not be limited to, the following aspects: - Rehabilitation of areas to be disturbed during the construction of the transmission line
and associated structures. - Location and management of construction camps.
- Access roads to individual construction areas.
- Plant search and rescue before commencement of any construction related activity.
- Waste avoidance and minimisation during construction.
- Management of traffic during the construction phase, especially where the power line
crosses roads and other transportation networks. - Measures to reduce soil erosion during the construction phase.
- Measures to control invasive plant species and weeds.
3.1.2.2 A construction EMP for that section of the line within the Extended Corridor, must
be compiled after the route alignment in the Extended Corridor has been completed and
approved in terms of paragraph 1(a). After approval of the EMP for the line in the Extended
Corridor by the DEAT, that EMP must be added as an addendum to the EMP for the rest of the line. 3.1.2.3 The EMP, as approved by the DEAT, will be regarded as a dynamic document.
However, subsequent changes in the EMP must be submitted to the DEAT for approval
before such changes could be implemented. 3.1.2.4 Compliance with the EMP must form part of the project documentation of all
contractors working on the project, and must be clearly indicated in all contracts. 3.1.3 Rehabilitation after construction Eskom must ensure that no exotic plant species are used for rehabilitation purposes.
Only indigenous plants endemic to the area may be used. 3.1.4 Monitoring and auditing 3.1.4.1 The DEAT reserves the right to monitor and audit the development throughout
its full life cycle to ensure that it complies with the conditions stipulated in this ROD
as well as with the mitigation measures contained in the EIR dated July 2006 and
with the construction and operational EMPs. 3.1.4.2 The ECO must ensure that the records relating to monitoring and auditing
to in 3.1.1.2 and 3.1.1.3 are made available on a quarterly basis to officials of the
DEAT and of the Mpumalanga, Northwest, Gauteng and Free State provincial environmental
authorities. 3.1.5 Land acquisition 3.1.5.1 This development is authorised on condition that Eskom acquires the necessary
servitude for the corridor of the transmission line. Eskom must negotiate with all affected
landowners within the preferred corridor prior to commencing with construction.
Proof of negotiation with affected land owners must be made available on request to the DEAT. 3.1.5.2 Any route adjustment outside the corridor necessitated by local circumstances
must be reported to the DEAT in writing. Construction of the transmission line may
only commence once such route adjustments have been accepted by the DEAT. 3.1.6 Compliance with other legislation 3.1.6.1 Artificial features and structures older than 60 years and archaeological remains
are protected in terms of the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (Act No. 25 of 1999).
Should any archaeological artefacts or such artificial features and structures be found during
construction or be exposed during excavation, all construction or excavation activities in
the vicinity of such a find must be stopped. Under no circumstances shall such artefacts,
features or structures be destroyed or removed from the site. The ECO must call an archaeologist
to the site for an inspection and evaluation. Should it be concluded that the finds are of real
, the South African Heritage Resources Agency must be consulted in this regard. Their
recommendations must be included in the EMP and must be adhered to. 3.1.6.2 Eskom must ensure that no prospecting or mining activities or extraction of any
material is conducted within the proposed project area, or in relation to the proposed project
without necessary authorisation in terms of the Minerals and Petroleum Resources Development
Act, 2002 (Act No.28 of 2002). 3.1.6.3 The provisions of the following Acts must be adhered to: - the Occupational Health and Safety Act, 1993 (Act No. 85 of 1993);
- the National Water Act, 1998 (Act No. 36 of 1998);
- the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, 2004 (Act No. 39 of 2004);
- the Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Act, 1965 (Act No. 45 of 1965);
- the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act No. 10 of 2004)
- any other relevant legislation.
3.1.6.4 Eskom must obtain a permit from each relevant provincial department of nature
conservation for the removal of indigenous protected plant and animal species. 3.1.7 Construction and operational impacts The construction team must make use of existing access roads where possible. In addition
Eskom must ensure that the following conditions are adhered to during the implementation of
the project: 3.1.7.1 The route of the transmission line must be planned in such a way that areas with a
high potential for bird strikes are avoided. Overhead earth-wires must be used to
increase visibility; Anti-collision devices must be installed along those sections of the
line which have been identified by an avi-fauna specialist as sections with a high risk for bird strikes. 3.1.7.2 A safe distance from sensitive bird habitats and breeding areas such as wetlands, dams and
river crossings must be maintained. 3.1.7.3 No towers or access roads must be placed in wetlands. If this is unavoidable,
authorisation from the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry must be obtained prior to construction. 3.1.7.4 Vegetation, avi-fauna, wetland and heritage resources specialists must undertake a
site inspection of the position of each tower and of any new access roads to assess and ensure
that no endangered vegetation, sensitive avi-faunal habitat or heritage resources are compromised
and to advise on mitigation prior to construction. 3.1.7.5 Self-supporting strain towers must be protected with bird guards. 3.1.7.6 The route must be aligned in such a way that either distance or a suitable
topographical screening backdrop will mitigate the visual impact of the line. 3.1.7.7 Alignment of the route along the top of ridges must be avoided. Should it be necessary to
cross a ridge it is preferable to cross the ridge directly over rather than at an angle. This will limit
the visibility of the line. Where possible, ridges must be crossed at a depression such as a neck
or saddle in the ridge. This will limit the visual effect of any pylon standing above the ridgeline. 3.1.7.8 The final route of the transmission line must cross main roads at an angle as close to 90º as
possible. 3.2 GENERAL CONDITIONS 3.2.1 This authorisation is granted only in terms of section 22 of the Act and does not exempt
holder thereof from compliance with any other legislation. 3.2.2 This authorisation refers only to the activity as specified and described in the EIR dated
July 2006. Any other activity listed under section 21 of the Act which is not specified above,
is not covered by this authorisation and must therefore comply with the requirements of
the NEMA and the environmental impact assessment regulations issued there under. 3.2.3 This authorisation is subject to the approval of the relevant local authorities in terms
of any legislation administered by those authorities. 3.2.4 One week's written notice must be given to the DEAT before commencement of construction
activities. Such notice shall make clear reference to the site location details and must include
the reference number given above. 3.2.5 One week's written notice must be given to the DEAT before commencement of the
operation of the transmission line. Such notice shall make clear reference to the site location
details and must include the reference number given above. 3.2.6 The applicant shall be responsible for ensuring compliance with the conditions contained
in this ROD by any person acting on his behalf, including but not limited to, an agent, servant or
employee or any person rendering a service to the applicant in respect of the activity, including
but not limited to, contractors and consultants. 3.2.7 The applicant must notify the DEAT in writing, within 24 hours if any condition of this
authorisation cannot, or is not, adhered to. The notification must be supplemented with
reasons for such non-compliance. 3.2.8 A copy of the authorisation and of this ROD shall be available on site during
construction. All staff, contractors and sub-contractors shall familiarise themselves with
or be made aware of the contents of this ROD. 3.2.9 Compliance/non-compliance records must be kept and shall be made available on
request to any relevant authority within five days of receipt of such a request. 3.2.10 Any changes to or deviations from the project description contained in this ROD
must be approved, in writing, by the DEAT before such changes or deviations may be
effected. In assessing whether to grant such approval or not, the DEAT may request such
information as it deems necessary to evaluate the significance and impacts of such changes or deviations. 3.2.11 The Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism may from time to time, by
notice in writing to the applicant, amend, add or remove a condition contained in this ROD. 3.2.12 In the event of the anticipated impacts exceeding the significance as predicted
by the independent consultant in the EIR dated July 2006, the authorisation may be withdrawn
after proper procedures have been followed. 3.2.13 In the event of any dispute concerning the significance of a particular impact, the opinion
of the DEAT will prevail. 3.2.14 The applicant must notify the DEAT in writing at least ten days prior to the change of
ownership, project developer or the alienation of any similar rights for the activity described
in this ROD. The applicant must furnish a copy of this ROD to the new owner, developer or
person to whom the rights accrue and inform the new owner, developer or person to whom
the rights accrue that the conditions contained herein are binding on them. 3.2.15 Where any of the applicant's contact details change, including the name of the
responsible person, the physical or postal address and/or telephonic details, the applicant
must notify the DEAT as soon as the new details become known to the applicant. 3.2.16 National, provincial or local government institutions or committees appointed in
terms of the conditions of this ROD or by or in terms of any other public authority or
authorisation shall not be held responsible for any damages or losses suffered by the
applicant or his successor in title in any instance where construction or operation
subsequent to construction is temporarily or permanently stopped for reasons
of non-compliance by the applicant with the conditions contained in this ROD
or in any other subsequent document emanating from these conditions. 3.2.17 If any condition imposed in terms of this ROD is not complied with, the authorisation
of this development may be withdrawn in accordance with Part 3 of Chapter 4 of
the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2006 (the Regulations), published
under the NEMA. 3.2.18 Failure to comply with any of these conditions shall be regarded as an offence
and may be dealt with in terms of regulation 81(1)(d) and regulation 81(2) of the
Regulations, as well as any other appropriate legal mechanisms. 3.2.19 Unless otherwise specified, the applicant shall be responsible for all costs
necessary to comply with the conditions contained in this ROD. 3.2.20 Any complaint from the public during construction must be attended to
as soon as possible to the satisfaction of the parties concerned. A complaints register
must be maintained and shall be produced upon request. 3.2.21 DEAT officials shall be given access, at all reasonable times, to the
construction areas referred to in the project description above for the purpose
of assessing and/or monitoring compliance with the conditions contained in this ROD. 3.2.22 All outdoor advertising associated with this activity, whether on or off the
property concerned, must comply with the South African Manual for Outdoor
Advertising Control (SAMOAC) which is available from the DEAT. 3.3 Duration of authorisation If the activity hereby authorised does not commence within 4 years from the
date of signature of this ROD, the authorisation will lapse and the applicant
will need to reapply in terms of the applicable legislation. 4. CONSEQUENCES OF NON-COMPLIANCE The applicant must comply with the conditions contained in this ROD. Failure
to comply with any of the above conditions may result in, inter alia, the Minister
of Environmental Affairs and Tourism withdrawing the authorisation, issuing directives
to address the non-compliance - including an order to cease the activity - as well as
instituting criminal and/or civil proceedings to enforce compliance.
5. APPLICANT: Eskom Holdings Limited
P O Box 1091
JOHANNESBURG
2000 Contact person: Ms J M Mashiteng
Tel: (011) 800 4623
Fax: (011) 800 3917 6. CONSULTANT: Margen Industrial Services
P O Box 12822
LERAATSFONTEIN
1038
Contact person: Mr M Mahlangu
Tel: (013) 699 0749
Fax: (013) 699 0917 MARTHINUS VAN SCHALKWYK, MP
MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND TOURISM ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
No comments:
Post a Comment