Natura Viva Cc Section 24G Application for the Ruigtevallei to Dreunberg 132 Kv Powerline
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Natura Viva cc Section 24G Application for the Ruigtevallei to Dreunberg 132 kV Powerline Environmental Impact Report PALAEONTOLOGICAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT John E. Almond PhD (Cantab.) Natura Viva cc, PO Box 12410 Mill Street, Cape Town 8010, RSA [email protected] 15 June 2014 DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE I, Dr John Edward Almond, as duly authorised representative of Natura Viva cc, Cape Town, hereby confirm my independence (as well as that of Natura Viva cc) as the palaeontological heritage specialist for the Ruigtevallei to Dreunberg 132 kV Powerline project and declare that neither I nor Natura Viva cc have any interest, be it business, financial, personal or other, in any proposed activity, application or appeal in respect of which Arcus GIBB was appointed as environmental assessment practitioner in terms of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998), other than fair remuneration for work performed in terms of the NEMA, the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2010 and any specific environmental management Act) for the Ruigtevallei to Dreunberg 132 kV Powerline project. I further declare that I am confident in the results of the studies undertaken and conclusions drawn as a result of it. I have disclosed, to the environmental assessment practitioner, in writing, any material information that have or may have the potential to influence the decision of the competent authority or the objectivity of any report, plan or document required in terms of the NEMA, the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2010 and any specific environmental management Act. I have further provided the environmental assessment practitioner with written access to all information at my disposal regarding the application, whether such information is favourable to the applicant or not. I am fully aware of and meet the responsibilities in terms of NEMA, the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2010 and any other specific and relevant legislation (national and provincial), policies, guidelines and best practice. Signature: Full Name: John Edward Almond Date: 15 June 2014 Title / Position: Palaeontologist Qualification(s): PhD in palaeontology (University of Cambridge, UK) Experience: 24 years Registrations: Palaeontological Society of Southern Africa, Geological Society of South Africa (Western Cape), Association of Professional Heritage Practitioners (Western Cape) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Eskom are proposing to complete construction of a 132 kV transmission line of approximately 80 km length between the existing Ruigtevallei Substation, situated about 40 km east- northeast of Colesberg, and the existing Dreunberg Substation some 20 km northwest of Burgersdorp, Gariep Local Municipality, Eastern Cape. Four alternative routings are currently being assessed for the 132 kV Ruigtevallei – Dreunberg powerline (Figure 6 herein): (a) Route alternative 1: This was Eskom’s original preferred route, as assessed in the earlier basic assessment, and is c. 80 km long. (b) Route alternative 2: This was assessed during the basic assessment and is c. 81.5 km long. (c) Route alternative 3: This was the formally approved route, running alongside the existing 66 kV transmission line, with minor deviations. It is c. 85 km long. (d) Route alternative 4: This is Eskom’s currently preferred route. It follows the alternative 1 route for most of its length but entails two important diversions. Substantial sections of route alternative 4 have already been constructed. The transmission line route options traverse the outcrop areas of several different rock units of contrasting palaeontological sensitivity including: Late Permian to earliest Triassic fluvial sediments of the Lower Beaufort Group (= Adelaide Subgroup) that contain important assemblages of terrestrial vertebrates (reptiles, mammal-like reptiles, amphibians etc), plants and trace fossils (e.g. burrows) recording the major End Permian Mass Extinction Event on the supercontinent Gondwana (Palaeontological sensitivity = generally HIGH, locally VERY HIGH); • Early to Middle Triassic fluvial and lacustrine sediments of the Katberg and Burgersdorp Formations (Upper Beaufort Group = Tarkastad Subgroup) that contain important terrestrial assemblages of vertebrates, plants and traces documenting the gradual recovery of terrestrial life from the End Permian Mass Extinction Event (Palaeontological sensitivity = generally MODERATE TO HIGH, locally VERY HIGH); • Early Jurassic intrusions of the Karoo Dolerite Suite that are unfossiliferous (Palaeontological sensitivity = ZERO); • Quaternary to Recent superficial deposits – river alluvium, colluvium (scree and other slope deposits), calcretes etc formed over the past c. 2.5 million years (Palaeontological sensitivity generally LOW, but may be locally HIGH to VERY HIGH where well -preserved fossil mammal bones and teeth are present). Numerous palaeontologically important rock exposures and Karoo vertebrate fossil localities of Late Permian to Middle Triassic age have already been recorded close to the Orange River between Colesberg, Burgersdorp and Aliwal North. These include, for example, one of the most informative fossiliferous sections across the Permo-Triassic mass extinction boundary in the Bethulie region, just north of the Gariep Dam, several key fossil sites in the Katberg Formation between Aliwal North and the Gariep Dam, and the rich Triassic vertebrate faunas of the Winnarsbaken and Burgersdorp areas (Burgersdorp Formation). None of the four transmission line route alternatives are fatally flawed in terms of potential impacts on fossil heritage. Significant additional impacts associated with deconstructing the partially built sectors of route alternative 1 are not expected since these areas are already disturbed. There are almost no substantial differences in impact significance between the four transmission line route options. This is because all routes traverse very similar geology in terms of both the bedrocks and the superficial sediments concerned. The palaeontological impact significance for all four transmission line route alternatives is rated as medium during the construction phase. However, this significance rating is probably inflated because impacts on fossil heritage, however modest, are of permanent duration and high probability. It is noted that the footprint of the individual transmission line pylons is small. No significant additional impacts are anticipated during the operational or decommissioning phases of the power line. Pending the discovery of significant new fossil remains during the construction phase, specialist palaeontological mitigation is not considered necessary in the case of route alternatives 2, 3 and 4. Should route alternative 1 be approved, however, pre-construction mitigation by a suitably qualified professional palaeontologist as outlined in Section 4.3 of this report would be necessary within the palaeontologically sensitive area of Farm 225 that is outlined in red in Figure 81 herein. The palaeontologist concerned with mitigation work will need a valid fossil collection permit from SAHRA and to arrange for an accredited palaeontological repository (e.g. museum, university) to accept and curate the fossil material collected. All work would have to conform to international best practice for palaeontological fieldwork and the study (e.g. data recording fossil collection and curation, final report) should adhere to the minimum standards for Phase 2 palaeontological studies published by SAHRA (2013). There is a small preference on palaeontological heritage grounds for route alternative 3, despite its slightly greater length and marginally higher potential impact on older alluvial deposits. This is because it avoids the most palaeontologically sensitive areas identified during this field study (i.e. Farm 225 and Broekpoortspruit close to the R58) and fewer new access roads would be required here. No specialist palaeontological monitoring is considered necessary for this transmission line project. Where potentially fossiliferous rocks are present within the development area, the Environmental Control Officer (ECO) should regularly monitor all substantial excavations into superficial sediments as well as fresh (i.e. unweathered) sedimentary bedrock for fossil remains. In the case of any significant fossil finds made by the ECO or by others during construction, these should be • Safeguarded - preferably in situ - by stopping work in the immediate vicinity and fencing off the area with tape to prevent further access; and • Reported by the ECO as soon as possible to the relevant heritage management authority, ECPHRA i.e. The Eastern Cape Provincial Heritage Resources Authority (Contact details: Mr Sello Mokhanya, 74 Alexander Road, King Williams Town 5600; [email protected]) so that appropriate mitigation by a palaeontological specialist can be considered. • A qualified palaeontological specialist should be appointed to inspect, record and (if warranted) sample or collect the fossil remains, at the developer’s expense. • Any further mitigation measures proposed by the palaeontologist should be implemented. • Work should be allowed to resume only once clearance is given in writing by the relevant authorities. These recommendations should be incorporated into the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) for the Ruigtevallei – Dreunberg powerline project. SECTION 24G APPLICATION FOR THE RUIGTEVALLEI TO DREUNBERG 132 KV POWERLINE CONTENTS Chapter Description Page 1 DETAILS OF SPECIALIST AND