1. AGENDA
1.Welcome and Introductions: Moses Mahlangu 2. Safety Protocol: 3. Purpose of the meeting: Moses Mahlangu 4. Meeting Procedure/Ground Rules: Moses Mahlangu 5. Project Background by Eskom: Henry Nawa 6. Environmental Presentation by Nsovo Environmental Consulting: Munyadziwa Rikhotso 7. Discussion 8. Way Forward and Announcements: Munyadziwa Rikhotso 9. Closure

2. MEETING CONDUCT Work via Chairperson – identify yourselves
No interruption – equal participation
Be Brief
Focus on purpose of meeting
Language of Choice
Switch off Cell Phones

3. Presentation By:Munyadziwa Rikhotso
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR THE PROPOSED FOSKOR-MERENSKY 275KV ±130KM POWERLINE AND ASSOCIATED SUBSTATION WORKS
Presentation By:Munyadziwa Rikhotso

4. OUTLINE Understanding the EIA Process Objectives of the EIA
Applicable Legislation
Proposed Activity
Project Locality
Alternatives
Public Participation Process
Environmental Impact Assessment
Specialist Studies
Proposed Mitigation Measures t

5. UNDERSTANDING EIA What? Why?
The process of identifying the future environmental consequences of a current or proposed action.
It is an Assessment tool that ensures environmental quality and social equity.
Why?
To assess the suitability of the site for the intended use as well as to assess the impact of the proposed development on the environment.
To ensure sustainable development i.e. the integration of social, economic and environmental factors into planning, implementation and decision making so as to ensure that development serves present and future generations

6. OBJECTIVES OF THE EIA
Facilitate approval of the project in terms of the requirements of regulations 22 (2) (a) of the regulations published in the GN R543 of 2010.
Meet the directives and guidelines for the implementation of sections 24(5), read with section 44 of the NEMA.
Find mechanisms for addressing issues raised during the Public Participation Process (PPP) as per the requirement of Section 54 of same.
Evaluate concerns and assess potential fatal flaws.
Provide information to the authorities as well as interested and affected parties on the proposed project;
Provide information regarding alternatives that are being considered;
Indicate how interested and affected parties have been and are still being afforded the opportunity to contribute to the project, verify that the issues they raised to date have been considered, and comment on the findings of the impact assessments;
Describe the baseline receiving environment;
Discuss the findings of the specialist studies undertaken in the Impact Assessment Phase; and
Present the findings of the Scoping and EIA Phase in a manner that facilitates decision- making by the relevant authorities.

7. APPLICABLE LEGISLATION
Nsovo fully understand that the proposed project will have to be compliant to primarily the following legislations and guidelines of South Africa:
SA Constitution (Act No 108 of 1996)
National Environmental Management, Act (Act 107 of 1998)
National Environmental Management Protected Area Act (Act 57 of 2003)
National Heritage Resources Act (Act 25 of 1999)
National Environmental Management Air Quality Act (Act 39 of 2004).
National Water Act ( Act 36 of 1998)
National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (Act 10 of 2004)
AGRICULTURE
PROTECTED AREAS ACT
Guidelines & manuals issued by the Provincial and National Governments
The proposed project is beneficial as it will allow for load growth in the region. At the local level, the benefits of the project would centre on ensuring improved reliability of supply as well as entrench the reach of electricity into communities. It is envisaged that the proposed project would ensure that marginal communities in the region are supplied with electricity. This will indirectly have an added benefit as it will reduce the community’s reliance on firewood as their primary energy source, thus allow for sustainable livelihoods.
Electrification has significant positive benefits from a socio-economic and ecological perspective. The provision of electricity leads to a number of social benefits for organs of state, individuals, industries and communities such as:
For organs of state:
• Electrification of educational and training facilities (schools and the like).
• Electrification of health facilities (clinics, hospitals and the like).
• Electrification of security facilities (police stations, court houses and the like).
• Electrification for the provision of essential services (water supply pumps and the like).
• Electrification of religious and cultural facilities.
• Enables rural development.
• Enables the provision of lightning, thereby vastly improving the safety and security of communities.
For individuals and communities:
• Electrification of homes (for cooking, heating and lighting of homes which improves the lives of the individuals within the home).
• Encourages small and medium enterprise development, and as a result, contributes to a rise in disposable income.
From an ecological perspective, the availability of electricity can lead to a decrease in the harvesting of firewood with resultant biodiversity benefits. This also leads to a decrease in respiratory disease due to a reduction of biomass burning. The relative efficiency of using electricity will reduce overall air emissions and can lead to an improved quality of life.

8. PROPOSED ACTIVITY
Eskom Holding SOC Limited to strengthen the existing network by constructing a second Foskor Merensky 275kV 131km power line and associated substation work.
In terms of Government Notice R545 (Listing Notice 2) Activity No. 8 applies to the proposed development, i.e. The construction of facilities or infrastructure for the transmission and distribution of electricity with the capacity of 275 kilovolts or more, outside an urban area or industrial complex.
The proposed activity is a listed activity, therefore requires Environmental Authorisation from the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA).
The EA will be obtained through the undertaking of a Full EIA process which comprises the Scoping and EIA phases as per the requirements of the regulation.

9. PROJECT MOTIVATION
The Foskor-Merensky load centre is driven by mines and rural development.
The proposed project will ensure the following:
The power line will form part of the link to strengthen the supply network between Foskor and Merensky Substations.
Improvement in the reliability of electricity supply which will benefit users in the region.
Improve the economic status of the country.
Benefits
At the local level, the benefits of the project would centre on ensuring improved reliability of supply as well as entrench the reach of electricity to communities.
At the regional level, the project will allow for load growth and therefore contribute to reliability of power supply .
At the national level, the project would contribute to implementing South Africa’s new energy policy as embodied in the White Paper on Energy (DME 1998).
The proposed project is beneficial as it will allow for load growth in the region. At the local level, the benefits of the project would centre on ensuring improved reliability of supply as well as entrench the reach of electricity into communities. It is envisaged that the proposed project would ensure that marginal communities in the region are supplied with electricity. This will indirectly have an added benefit as it will reduce the community’s reliance on firewood as their primary energy source, thus allow for sustainable livelihoods.
Electrification has significant positive benefits from a socio-economic and ecological perspective. The provision of electricity leads to a number of social benefits for organs of state, individuals, industries and communities such as:
For organs of state:
• Electrification of educational and training facilities (schools and the like).
• Electrification of health facilities (clinics, hospitals and the like).
• Electrification of security facilities (police stations, court houses and the like).
• Electrification for the provision of essential services (water supply pumps and the like).
• Electrification of religious and cultural facilities.
• Enables rural development.
• Enables the provision of lightning, thereby vastly improving the safety and security of communities.
For individuals and communities:
• Electrification of homes (for cooking, heating and lighting of homes which improves the lives of the individuals within the home).
• Encourages small and medium enterprise development, and as a result, contributes to a rise in disposable income.
From an ecological perspective, the availability of electricity can lead to a decrease in the harvesting of firewood with resultant biodiversity benefits. This also leads to a decrease in respiratory disease due to a reduction of biomass burning. The relative efficiency of using electricity will reduce overall air emissions and can lead to an improved quality of life.

10. SCOPE OF WORK
Upgrading the Foskor 275/132kV transformation by installing a 3rd 250MVA275/132Kv
Establish a spare 275kV feeder bay at Merensky MTS to create space for the proposed 2nd Merensky-Foskor 275kV line
Install and equip 1x 275kV feeder bay for the proposed 2nd Merensky- Foskor 275kV line at Foskor Substation
Construct the 2nd Foskor–Merensky 150km Kingbird 275kV line
Equip and commission all new infrastructures with all associated primary and secondary plant equipment.
Upgrade under-rated switchgear at Merensky Substation
Install Capacitor Bank at Foskor Substation
Extend Foskor Substation to accommodate all the work associated with the new power line.
Relocation of Acornhoek-Foskor terminal tower to accommodate the new power line
Relocation of the existing oil holding dam to accommodate the new power line

11. PROPOSED ACTIVITY

12. PROJECT LOCALITY
The proposed 275kV Foskor Merensky power line stretches a distance of approximately 130 kilometres across various farms between Phalaborwa and Steelpoort in the jurisdiction of Greater Sekhukhune, Capricorn and Mopani District municipalities in the Limpopo Province of South Africa.
The lines will transverse various farms, predominantly game farms that are privately owned as well as tribal authorities and council owned land.

14. PROJECT LOCALITY Province Limpopo Province District Municipality
Sekhukhune
Capricorn
Mopani
Local Municipality
Ba-Phalaborwa Local Municipality
Maruleng Local Municipality
Greater Tubastse
Lepelle Nkumpi
Fetakgomo Local Municipality
Towns
Class 1 – Phalaborwa and Hoedspruit
Class 2 – Gamarota, Burgersfort, Orighstad and Steelpoort
Class 3 – Diphuthi, Mica, Kromkloof and Brandraai
Villages
Finale
Diphuti
Die Oaks
Ga-Marota
Ga Moraba
Makgwareng
Lebohang
Monareng
Ga-Sepaka

15. CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES
Another key driver towards a successful EIA is the thorough identification and investigation of feasible alternatives.
Definition of alternatives includes all aspects of the proposed activity i.e. activity alternatives, process alternatives, scheduling alternatives, demand alternatives; design alternatives and the No-go alternative. Hence the proposed project has considered several route alternatives which will be considered and discussed in terms of their practicality and feasibility.
September 2012

16. ALTERNATIVES
The selection of the most suitable corridor alternative will be based on the following:
Public input, ascertained through the PPP
Specialists’ recommendations
Environmental constraints
Technical feasibility
Optimisation of existing infrastructure, such as access roads
Economic cost-benefit analysis
Best practicable environmental option i.e. the option that provides the most benefit or causes the least damage to the environment as a whole at a cost acceptable to society in both the long and short term.

17. STRUCTURAL ALTERNATIVES
Two design alternatives have been proposed for this project, the Cross-Rope suspension type and the Self- supporting type.
Where the line crosses mountainous terrains and when it changes direction at an angle, there may be need to use self- supporting towers.
Narrow base towers may be utilised on sections where space is a problem.
The topography will largely dictate the type of tower that will be used.
Cross Rope
Self-Supporting
Narrow Base

18. ROUTE ALTERNATIVES IDENTIFIED
No Go Alternative
This line will start from existing Foskor substation in Phalaborwa in a North Easterly direction along the secondary Road 530 towards Mica.
It crosses the R40 and continues towards the same direction within the Phuza Moya Game Farm.
It then passes within the Diphuti and Finale villages in Maruleng and then cross the R36 towards the Orchards.
Shortly after that it crosses the R36 twice then continues in the mountainous areas that are prone to lightning.
After the mountainous areas the line descends in a south-westerly direction towards the low lying Burgersfort villages until it passes the R37 to Burgersfort town where it continues along the Secondary Road 555 to Steelpoort, which it eventually crosses to the Merensky substation.
The line will start from the existing Foskor substation in Phalaborwa in a North Easterly direction; for approximately 5km,
it bends westward for another 5km and then bends southward towards Hoedspruit following the existing 132kV line.
Just before Hoedspruit town it crosses the R40 and bends westwards and moves between the existing 275kV and secondary road 527 on the eastern side of Diphuti and Finale villages.
It then cross the secondary road 531 and head for the mountainous area that are lightning prone.
After the mountainous areas the line descends towards the low lying Burgersfort villages until it passes the R37 to Burgersfort town where it continues along the Secondary Road 555 to Steelpoort, which it eventually crosses to Merensky substation.
This line will start from the existing Foskor substation in Phalaborwa in a North Easterly direction along the secondary Road 530 towards Mica.
Shortly after that it crosses the R36 twice then continues in a southerly direction along the R36 in the mountainous areas that are lightning prone.
After the mountainous areas the line descends in a southerly direction towards Orighstad along a river and bends westwards along the secondary road 555 pass Kromkloof and Burgersfort until the Merensky substation in Steelpoort.
This alternative maintains the status quo.

19. ALTERNATIVE COMPARISON
Route 1
Route 2
Route 3
Route 4
Distance
131
Shortest route therefore minimal disturbance.
138
154
Longest route
Least preferred
145
Preferred
Satisfactory
Ecological
Large properties are game farms and lodges which are effectively conserved.
Same as route 1
High ecological sensitivity as it crosses sensitive mountain foot slopes and crosses rivers and roads several times.
Runs through nine vegetation types and over high steep mountains with two endangered ecosystems and several threatened ecosystems.
Preferred route
satisfactory
Agricultural
No fatal flaw
Route 2 crosses less of an area with steep rocky soils but more of an area with high potential soils.
Least preferred due to high agricultural potential soil.
It crosses irrigated agricultural enterprises.
Heritage
9 cultural and heritage sites identified.
From an archaeological perspective the route is satisfactory.
3 cultural and heritage sites identified.
8 cultural and heritage sites identified.
Sites identified are of high heritage value.
High negative impact is anticipated. .
7 cultural and heritage sites identified.
September 2012

20. Cont.. September 2012 Route 1 Route 2 Route 3 Route 4 Visual
Route 1
Route 2
Route 3
Route 4
Visual
Its alignment along existing lines causes the least impact. Advantage is that viewers are already exposed to a similar perception.
Least Preferred
Its alignment is along the existing line for a relatively longer distance.
Least preferred
Preferred
Satisfactory
Avifauna
Based on key avifaunal scores which include the length of the route, the distance through important bird areas, distance from Kruger Park, length of line adjacent to existing line as well as major river crossed. Route 1 scored 22 which is the lowest.
Based on key avifaunal scores which include the length of the route, the distance through important bird areas, distance from Kruger Park, length of line adjacent to existing line as well as major river crossed. Route 2 scored 32
Based on key avifaunal scores which include the length of the route, the distance through important bird areas, distance from Kruger Park, length of line adjacent to existing line as well as major river crossed. Route 3 scored 27
Based on key avifaunal scores which include the length of the route, the distance through important bird areas, distance from Kruger Park, length of line adjacent to existing line as well as major river crossed. Route 3 scored 26
Socioeconomic
At finale village alternative 1 is positioned at a school gate and passes over number of dwellings.
Impact on Balule Nature reserve as indicated above
No fatal flaw
Ecotourism
September 2012

21. Advantages and Disadvantages
Route Alternatives
Advantages
Disadvantages
Route 1
Shortest Route
Relatively reduced impact on avifauna
Reduced visual impact due to the already existing alignment
Access roads already exist
Transverse game farms in the northern part.
Route 2
Transverse game farms
Transect areas of high agricultural soil potential
Relatively higher visual impact
Route 3
Longest Route
Directly impact on the proposed development in Burgersfort as well as Khumula Estate
Route 4
Minimal impact on heritage
Transect critically sensitive environments for the longest distance
No-Go Alternative
No disturbance of the physical environment
No expenditure
No construction cost but greater economic disadvantage
Unhappy communities
Stagnant economy
September 2012

22. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS
What?
A tool to inform I&APs of a proposed project
A tool to help integrate the comments of the I&APs into the relevant phases of a proposed project
Why?
To raise public awareness of activities taking place within your surroundings.
Facilitated the involvement of those potentially affected by providing them with an opportunity to raise their concerns, issues, suggestions or comments regarding the proposed project.
Provided participants with the information they need to participate in a meaningful way.
Ensures transparency
Relevant Legislation
NEMA (Act 107 of 1998) Sect 54-57

23. STAKEHOLDER’S ROLE IN THE PROJECT
Your involvement will enhance the applicability and completeness of the EIA Process.
Your involvement in the Environmental Impact Assessment process is two-fold:
 To ensure that your interests/concerns regarding the proposed activity are recorded and/addressed, you need to register with Nsovo as an I&AP.
To utilise opportunities provided to raise issues and provide comments throughout the process.

24. PROCESS UNDERTAKEN TO DATE
Application Phase
Submission of Application 02 September 2011
Acknowledgement receipt from from DEA on 14 September 2011
Scoping Phase
Public Announcement and Call to Register (Via Notices, Newspaper Adverts) Sowetan and Beeld (20/10/2011) and ( Lethaba Herald and Mopani Herald (21/10/2011)
Placement of A2 Notices – (24th and 25th October 2011)
One-on –one with key stakeholders (22-24 November 2011)
Draft Scoping Report Availability for Public Review (17th January – 24th February 2012)
Invitation to Public Meeting and Announcement of report availability –( 17th-19th Jan 2012)
Public Meetings – (31st January to 2nd February 2012)
Submission of Scoping Report to DEA on the February 2012
EIA Phase
Public Announcement and Call to Register (Via Notices, Newspaper Adverts) Hoedspruit and Phalaborwa Herald , Kruger to Canyon, and Steelburger (24/08/2012)
Placement of A2 Notices – (23th and 24th August 2012)
Draft EIA Report Availability for Public Review (17th August– 30 September 2012)
Public Meetings – (18st September to 20th September 2012)

25. PPP PROCESS Announcement and Invitation to Register
Invitation to Public Meeting
Announcement of Availability of Report

26. BASELINE ENVIRONMENT
This section outlines parts of the socio-economic and biophysical environment that could be affected by the proposed development.
Details of the receiving environment that will form the backdrop of impact assessment
Geology
Topography
Natural Vegetation
Heritage
Land Use
Surface Water
Animal Life
Visual
Noise
Economic Profile

30. LAND USES Mining Commercial and Industrial Residential Tourism
Agriculture
Sensitive sites
July 2011

31. KEY ISSUES IDENTIFIED DURING SCOPING
The key issues identified during the Scoping process, and to be assessed in detail during the EIA phase are as follows:
Impacts on Ecology
Impacts on Heritage Resources
Visual Impact
Impact on Avifauna
Impact on Socioeconomic
Specialists were appointed to study the key issues identified so as to enable informed decision making.

32. Specialist Input Specialist Studies Organisation Specialist Contact
Heritage Impact Assessment
Heritage Contracts
Jaco van der Walt
Cell:
Fax: 086 
Ecological Specialist
Eco-Agent
George Bredenkamp
Cell:
Fax:
Social Impact Assessment
Dr. Neville Bews and Associates
Dr. Neville Bews
Cell:
Fax:
Avifauna
Wild Skies
Jon Smallie
 Cell:
Soil and Agricultural Potential
Agricultural Research Council
Garry Paterson
Tel :
Fax: 012 
Eco Tourism
Seaton Thomson and Associates
Brian Gardner
Tel : 012 
Fax: 012 
Visual Impact Assessment
Outline Landscape Architects
Kathrin Hammel-Louw
Cell :
Fax:

33. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
CONSTRUCTION
Aspect
Impact
Rating
Change in land Use
Negative
Medium/Low
Flora
Fauna
Traffic
Surface and groundwater pollution
Fire hazards
Visual Impact
Impact on Agriculture
Influx of job seekers
Resettlement
High/ Medium
Safety and Security
High/Low
Employment Creation
Positive

34. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
OPERATIONAL
Aspect
Impact
Rating
Avifauna (Collision and electrocution)
Negative
Medium/Low
Visual
High/Low
Economic
Positive
High/High
Employment Creation
Low

35. Response to I&AP COMMENTS/ISSUES
The proposed Route
Visual
Fauna (Poaching of Black and White Rhino and issue of bird collision)
Flora
Ecotourism
Resettlement

36. Proposed Route (I&AP)
July 2011

37. EIA PROCESS
We are HERE!
Public Review for 40 days
Next

38. RECOMMENDATIONS
That given all the reasons discussed above Alternative 1 is supported.
That a final walkthrough of the approved corridor must take place to identify sensitivities and assist in identifying areas that require conservation within the 3km buffer of the route.
That all mitigation measures made by the specialist are taken into consideration during both the construction and operational phase.
That all necessary permits and licenses required by any Act, Policy, Law or By-Law be obtained prior construction.
That the Environmental Management Plan be a living document that guides the construction and operational phases of the proposed project.
That all Water Use Licenses are obtained as applicable from the Department of Water Affairs
That issue of landownership is dealt with prior to construction.
Detailed geological studies of the preferred route must be undertaken to determine the exact location of sinkholes and dolomites so as to ensure recommendation of appropriate foundation.

39. CONT..
A detailed phase 1 Archaeological survey of the preferred corridor must take place in accordance with the requirements of Section 38 (3) of the National Heritage Resources Act (Act 25 of 1999).
The National Environmental Management principles must be adopted and strict adherence maintained.
The proposed line must be placed as close as possible to the existing transmission line.
Sensitive seepage zones and wetlands must be avoided for pylon placement. This must be identified by an ecologist during the walk down assessment.
No movement of heavy construction vehicles is allowed in the seepage zones and the wetlands.
The applicant must ensure that the following takes place with regard to the power line to reduce the identified impacts
Sections of the power line crossing adjacent to dams, rivers, drainage lines and watercourses are marked with bird flappers on the earth wires to reduce the impact on avifauna.
Where power lines runs parallel to riverine, riparian and wetland areas, the design should be in accordance with the requirement of the National Water Act (Act 36 of 1998).
The identified areas of red data floral and other sensitive vegetation be avoided at all times.
The spans between the towers must be increased to the maximum necessary to meet technical and safety requirements in order to limit the impact on sensitive areas.
Specialist report must inform the nature and positioning of the power lines to ensure that no sensitive environments are impacted upon.

40. CONCLUSION
The findings of the investigations, comments from affected and interested stakeholders are documented .
No fatal flaws or highly significant impacts were identified during the scoping phase that would necessitate substantial redesign or termination of the project.
The undertaking of this EIA has fully complied with the requirements of the NEMA (Act 107 of 1998) and associated regulations. It is therefore recommended that the proposed project proceed.

41. ANNOUNCEMENTS Availability of Report for Review:
The Draft EIA Report will be available for Public Review from 17th August th September The report may be reviewed from the following venues and sources:

42. CONTACT DETAILS 1056 Crescentwood Estate, 8th Road, Noordwyk, 1687
Postnet Suite 697, P/Bag x29, Gallo Manor, 2052
Cell:
Fax:

43. QUESTIONS