proposed 400 kv kokerboom substation to auas...

PROPOSED 400 kV KOKERBOOM SUBSTATION TO AUAS SUBSTATION TRANSMISSION POWER LINE

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT PROCESS

Final Scoping Report Environmental Assessment Practitioner: Mrs Jaana-Maria Ball

March 2018

i Kokerboom to Auas Transmission Line EIA Version 1 / March 2018 Scoping Report

March 2018

DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

I, Jaana-Maria Ball, confirm my independence as an Environmental Scientist and declare that I

have no interest, be it business, financial, personal or other, in any proposed activity, application

or appeal in respect of which Lithon Project Consultants (Pty) Ltd was appointed to manage the

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process or I was appointed as the Environmental

Assessment Practitioner (EAP), in terms of the Environmental Management Act, 2007 (Act No.

7 of 2007) and the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations, 2012, other than fair

remuneration for worked performed, specifically in connection with the EIA process for the

construction and operation of the 400 kV transmission power line from the Kokerboom

Substation to the Auas Substation. I further declare my objectivity in these assessments and

that I am confident in the results of the studies undertaken and conclusions drawn as a result –

within the limitations as are described in the associated reports.

___________________________

Full Name: Jaana-Maria Ball

Title / Position: Environmental Consultant

Qualification(s): BSc (Botany and Zoology), BSc (Hons), MSc (Botany), MBA, Dip.

Proj. Man, Dip. Bus. Man.

Experience: years: >20 years

Professional

registrations and date of

first registration:

Pr. Sci. Nat. (400049/98), 1998 SAIE&ES, 1998

SAAB, 2000 EAPAN, 2014

Contact details: Email: [email protected]; Cell: +27 83 650 5489

mailto:[email protected]

ii Kokerboom to Auas Transmission Line EIA Version 1 / March 2018 Scoping Report

Related expertise and experience in undertaking EIAs for power infrastructure developments is:

NUCLEAR-1 EIA AND EMP - Project Director and Manager (2007 – 2013)

Mega-EIA for the proposed construction, operation and decommissioning of a conventional nuclear power

station and associated infrastructure (including transmission lines from the power stations to the

substations) in the Western, Northern and Southern Cape Provinces, South Africa. The EIA included the

screening and selection of a suitable site for the nuclear plant as well as the transportation of fuel and

spent fuel, as well as a scoping process and detailed environmental impact assessment. The study

involved 29 detailed, independent specialist studies that required integration, the assessment process, a

complex consultation process, review studies and compilation of Environmental Management

Programmes (EMPs) for the construction and operational phases.

PEBBLE BED MODULAR REACTOR EIA AND EMP - Project Director and Reviewer (2007 – 2010)

Mega-EIA for the proposed construction, operation and decommissioning of the Pebble Bed Modular

Reactor and associated infrastructure (including power lines from the station to the substation) in the

Western Cape, South Africa. The EIA included a detailed environmental impact assessment, specialist

studies, public consultation and compilation of EMPs.

PERSEUS - GAMMA, HYDRA - GAMMA AND HYDRA - PERSEUS TRANSMISSION LINE EIAS AND

EMPS – Project Director (1999 – 2007)

Multiple EIAs and Public Consultation Processes for the proposed 765 kV transmission power lines from

various substations in the Northern Cape and Free State, South Africa. The EIAs included the assessment

of turn-ins to the substations and their expansion, as well as associated infrastructure and included the

integration of numerous independent specialist studies. EMPs were compiled for the construction and

operational phases. A post-authorisation ‘walkdown’ of the line was undertaken with specialists to

determine final pylon placement.

BANTAMSKLIP TRANSMISSION LINE EIA AND EMP - Project Director (2008 – 2012)

The EIA was undertaken for the proposed construction, operation and decommissioning of the over 9 000

km of 765 kV transmission lines from the Bantamsklip Nuclear Power Station to the Kappa and Bacchus

Substation, the Bacchus to Kappa Substations and the 400 kV transmission line from the Bacchus to

Muldersvlei Substations, as well as all associated infrastructure at the Bantamsklip Power Station site

(Western Cape, SA) and expansions required at the substations. The EIA included the screening and

selection of suitable corridors, as well as a scoping process and detailed impact assessment. The EIA

included a complex consultation process and legal review.

BRAAMHOEK PUMPED STORAGE SCHEME EIA AND EMP - Team Leader (2004 – 2005)

Mega-EIA, Public Consultation Process, EMP, Water Use Licensing Applications, General Authorisation

for Water Use and the South African Department of Mineral and Energy Affairs Applications for the

proposed Eskom Braamhoek Pumped Storage Scheme in the Drakensberg. The proposed scheme

comprises two reservoirs, interconnected by enclosed tunnel systems, with pump turbine units with a

potential generation capacity of approximately 1 333 MW.

A full Curriculum Vitae detailing my knowledge and experience in undertaking assessments,

including knowledge of the Environmental Management Act, 2007, the Environmental Impact

Assessment Regulations, 2012, and the related guidelines, that have relevance to the proposed

activity, is appended in Appendix A: Curriculum Vitae of Mrs. Jaana-Maria Ball.

iii Kokerboom to Auas Transmission Line EIA Version 1 / March 2018 Scoping Report

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR THE PROPOSED 400 kV TRANSMISSION POWER LINE FROM THE KOKERBOOM

SUBSTATION TO THE AUAS SUBSTATION, NAMIBIA

SCOPING REPORT

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

NamPower, the electricity utility of the Republic of Namibia, intends to construct a single-

circuit 400 kV transmission power line from the Kokerboom Substation (near Windhoek)

to the Auas Substation (near Keetmanshoop), a distance of approximately 500 km. The

conductor would be strung onto 45 m high steel pylons placed approximately 500 m

apart. Pylons will be of the cross-rope suspension tower, strain tower or the self-

supporting suspension (open-V) tower design.

The Kokerboom and Auas Substations have been operated by NamPower for the past

37 (with the new section for the 400 kV power line entry being commissioned 17 years

ago) and 17 years, respectively. A 400 kV and a 220 kV transmission power line have

been operational between the two substations for the past 17 and 37 years, respectively.

The existing line infrastructure cannot meet future power requirements and needs to be

supplemented with another transmission power line to ensure system reliability.

Additional benefits include improved network stability and redundancy, improved

network capacity to supply the system demands, improved dynamic stability and lower

network power losses. The proposed new 400 kV power line is being constructed in

order to strengthen Namibia’s overall transmission network. The proposed project needs

to be completed by 2023, or as soon thereafter as possible, to avoid constraints to power

supply.

An application for an Environmental Clearance Certificate was submitted to the

Environmental Commissioner on 20 April 2016. This independent Scoping Assessment

was undertaken and submitted, in terms of the Environmental Management Act, 2007,

(Act No 7 of 2007) and the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2012.

Given the technical nature of the work, NamPower will invite companies that have

experience and expertise in transmission line construction to tender for the construction

work. The construction period will be approximately twenty four (24) months and it is

likely to proceed on multiple construction fronts. The existing transmission power lines

will remain operational during this period and into the future.

The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the Kokerboom to Auas transmission

power line assessed the environmental acceptability of constructing and operating the

power line within an identified power line corridor alignment (of approximately 500 km

length and 500 m width [250 m from the proposed centreline], as well as an access road

that is proposed to run parallel to the power line and within the same corridor. The

transmission power line will have a final servitude of 80 m width, with 12 m of that being

cleared for an access track. The access track will be used to bring in construction

materials, as well as to access the power line and its associated pylons for maintenance

purposes, throughout the infrastructure’s life span.

Emphasis within the EIA process (and especially the scoping phase) was placed on the

optimisation of proposed power line corridor route (and its centreline i.e. the position of

power line pylons) as well as cumulative impacts of three power lines within the study

iv Kokerboom to Auas Transmission Line EIA Version 1 / March 2018 Scoping Report

area. The initial proposed power line corridor presented to the EIA Team ran parallel to

the existing 220 kV power line, in the northern part, for some of its length. A number of

alternative power line corridors alignments were assessed during scoping. Based on

feedback from the technical specialists, the power line corridor was screened/ scoped

and adapted to avoid biophysical and social receptors. Each successive alternative

alignment put forward for assessment further avoided potential negative biophysical

(e.g. traversing mountains and sensitive avifaunal habitats) as well as socio-economic

impacts (e.g. bisecting land parcels and traversing over areas with incompatible land

uses). Input on the proposed power line corridor and centreline alignment was also

obtained during an extensive public consultation process, which included public

meetings in towns (Keetmanshoop, Tses, Gibeon, Mariental, Kalkrand, Rehoboth,

Dordabis and Windhoek) within the proposed power line corridor. A further amendment

to the proposed power line corridor route was suggested by the avifaunal specialist at

the end of scoping and investigated further in subsequent phases of the EIA.

Alternatives (e.g. ‘no-go’, transmission corridor alignments, technology, methods for

construction and operation, equipment, and mitigation measures) to the proposed

project were considered, and either scoped out or assessed in detail.

This Scoping Report, which documents the scoping assessment, aims to provide a:

Description of the proposed project and its alternatives

Record of the scoping assessment, including the public consultation process

Summary of and feedback on comments received from the authorities, public,

and directly affected and neighbouring landowners; stating how each of the

issues has been addressed

Preliminary assessment of potential environmental impacts and a

Terms of Reference for how these impacts will be assessed in detail, as well as

suggestions for mitigation measures and management actions made to either

avoid or reduce potential negative impacts and enhance positive impacts.

Five independent technical studies informed the scoping assessment, namely an:

Avifaunal Assessment

Vegetation Assessment

Floodline Evaluation

Archaeology Assessment and

Social Assessment.

The results and recommendations from these specialist studies are:

Landuse

The proposed power line corridor comprises Bushveld Savannah vegetation and is

dominated by commercial stock farming, mostly on private land. Further to the north,

large stock farming is dominant while small stock is more prevalent in the south.

Commercial game farms are also encountered.

Avifauna

Over 200 bird species were recorded from 207 survey visits to the nineteen quarter

degree (15’ x 15’) squares traversed by the proposed 400 kV transmission line from

Kokerboom near Keetmanshoop to Auas near Windhoek, drawn from information

contained in Namibia’s Avifaunal Database. The avifaunal assemblages were assessed

v Kokerboom to Auas Transmission Line EIA Version 1 / March 2018 Scoping Report

for each of the four vegetation types through which the line is expected to pass. The

number of Threatened and Near Threatened Red Data species range from 8 to 12 for

the four vegetation types while species endemic and near-endemic to Namibia are

confined mainly to the northern section of the transmission line in the Highland Shrubland

vegetation, between Rehoboth and Auas. The number of birds endemic to the south-

west arid zoo-geographic zone of southern Africa range from 33 to 63 with 14 species

having 40% or more of their global populations within Namibia.

Given that the study area is rich in bird species, and that similar infrastructure contributes

to bird injuries and deaths, the potential impacts on birds will be assessed in more detail

during the assessment phase of the EIA. In particular the following potential impacts are

to be assessed during the construction and operational phases, namely the impact of

the infrastructure on bird collision and electrocution; and during the operational phase

only, risks to the proposed infrastructure as a result of bird perching and roosting.

The specialist specifically recommended that two high risk avifauna areas (the Karas

Dwarf Shrubland and the Ecotone between the Dwarf Shrub and Kalahari Savanna near

Kalkrand) be avoided by means of a shifting of the centreline of the proposed power line.

He further recommended that in areas where the existing and the proposed 400 kV

power lines run adjacent and parallel to each other that the pylons be “staggered” to

further reduce unnecessary bird mortalities. This recommendation was supported by an

independent avifaunal specialist, Dr. Rob Simmons, after a site visit. The

recommendations were taken forward into the remainder of the EIA process.

Terrestrial Ecology

The proposed Kokerboom to Auas power line corridor traverses three distinct vegetation

zones, of which the Highland Savanna is the most sensitive, supporting numerous

endemic and/or protected species. However, in that zone most of the species of high

concern occur on the slopes of koppies and mountains, which are largely avoided.

Damage to flora and fauna is predicted to be limited, and of a low significance, if careful

planning and mitigation of collateral damage to the surrounding natural environment is

implemented, both during construction and operation. Potential impact throughout the

proposed power line area will be highest on protected trees, which must be conserved

as far as possible. Given careful placement of pylon sites and strict control of tree

removal and unnecessary collateral damage, as well as uncontrolled wood/ pod

harvesting, the impact on plants could be relatively low. The species of highest concern

is camel thorn (Acacia erioloba).

As a precautionary measure the potential impacts on plants will, however, be assessed

in more detailed during the assessment phase of the EIA. In particular the following

predicted impacts are to be confirmed by means of a desk-top assessment for both the

construction and operational phases, namely the impact of unnecessary collateral

damage due to track proliferation, resulting in high loss of vegetation and increased

visual damage; impact of illegal wood collection; as well as the impact of illegal plant

collection.

Floodline

The proposed power line corridor was sub-divided into three sections related to drainage characteristics, namely:

Section 1 commences at the Kokerboom sub-station and extends north for

approximately 75 km. This section of the powerline traverses the eastern edge

vi Kokerboom to Auas Transmission Line EIA Version 1 / March 2018 Scoping Report

of the Fish River catchment. Five catchments of interest drain towards, and cross

the power line route.

Section 2 extends north for a further 210 km up to the town of Kalkrand. This

section of the line runs mainly along the top of the plateau which forms the

eastern border of the Fish River catchment. For most of its length the power line

runs along the watershed that forms the catchment boundary between the Fish

River to the west and the Auob River to the east. Except for two relatively small

catchments there are no drainage areas of interest. The two catchments are the

Dabib and Auob Rivers that flow into the Fish River north of Mariental.

Section 3 extends from Kalkrand northwards to the Auas sub-station over a

distance of approximately 170 km. This section traverses the area with the

biggest challenge related to drainage. The area principally drains from the Auas

Mountains just south of Windhoek. This is also the area with the highest rainfall

within the proposed corridor alignment. The largest catchment is the one that

drains the Oanob River. This is a large catchment with a significant 1 in 100 year

flow magnitude.

The elements of the environment around which the floodline study was centred are

essentially the catchment areas and the streams which they feed. Run-off with return

periods of 50 and 100 years were calculated and the flood levels for the larger

catchments were estimated. There are some significant drainage catchments in the

northern part of the proposed transmission line corridor that may affect the construction

of the proposed power line. Approximately 300 km of the proposed transmission line

corridor alignment will not be affected by flooding. The affected environment has a high

tolerance to disturbance from the envisaged infrastructure.

No negative impacts of a high significance are foreseen, however, during both the

construction and operational phases, erosion could potentially be a problem. As a

precautionary measure, the potential impacts of run-off flows on erosion and of flood

water on the proposed infrastructure will be assessed in more detailed during the

assessment phase of the EIA.

Heritage and Cultural Resources

The proposed power line corridor will traverse a potentially sensitive archaeological

landscape. Pleistocene stone artefact finds are associated with the generally deflated

surface of the Nama Karoo Basin and the retreating scarp line of the Weissrand Plateau.

In confirmation of observations from earlier archaeological surveys the Kalahari

Sandveld and Khomas Hochland are generally associated with younger archaeological

sites related to Holocene occupation of the central arts of Namibia. Previous

archaeological surveys in this area have revealed traces of intermittent human

occupation over the last approximately 400 000 years. Early colonial settlement remains

including graves are a significant feature of this area. The baseline archaeological survey

will locate and document any sites that may be affected by the proposed development

and this will form the basis of a detailed archaeological impact assessment. Most of the

area to be affected by the proposed transmission line project are considered to be of

relatively low archaeological sensitivity.

Negative impacts on archaeological sites may occur during the construction phase.

Potential negative impacts may be mitigated by adjustment of the power line centreline

alignment. Where this is not possible, mitigation to reduce the significance of the impact

could include the use of minimum buffer zones for the positioning of pylons, buffer zones

for deviations in the servitude track, the use of high visibility barrier mesh around the

vii Kokerboom to Auas Transmission Line EIA Version 1 / March 2018 Scoping Report

sites during construction, the rehabilitation of the construction phase track used during

the stringing of the transmission line, and detailed documentation as well as possible

excavation of affected archaeological sites.

An Archaeological Chance Finds Procedure will be included in the Environmental

Management Plans (EMPs). This includes guidelines for mitigation of new

archaeological finds that may be made in the course of construction and operation.

Social

The transmission line corridor centreline has been revised to avoid impacts on existing

infrastructure. This realignment has served to avoid and reduce potential negative

impacts of the proposed Project on socio-economic receptors (notably infrastructure).

The potential negative social impacts of the construction phase are expected to be

relatively minor and manageable through effective mitigation.

The positive impact associated with the construction and operation of the proposed

transmission line is the improved transmission network nationally. This impact may serve

to enhance the economy as commercial and private electricity provision becomes more

reliable and consistent potentially enabling business enhancements and a generally

better quality of life. Some direct, indirect and induced employment opportunities will be

created by the Project itself and through procurement spend. Benefits will be limited in

the local area as the successful contractor (to be determined through an open tender

process) is likely to use skilled workers that are already known and trusted by them.

Some short-term contract employment should be available to local people.

The negative impacts linked to the proposed Project are likely to be localised and affect

land owners, land users and tourists differently. Existing agricultural activities will largely

be able to continue unhindered during the construction and operation phases. Planning

and control will be required to minimise disruptions during construction. Tourism

activities may be more sensitive to the construction phase nuisance factors and the

visual intrusion of the line during the operational phase; these could impact on the sense

of place for some receptors. Where the line is visible, specifically from private

residences, some of the land owners and users may also experience a negative effect

on sense of place. The power line may negatively affect farm management in some

cases. The cumulative visual impact and hence the impact on sense of place, and the

cumulative impact on disruption to farm management will be assessed in more detail in

the assessment phase.

The “No-go” alternative (i.e. leave the status quo and do not construct the power line), is

not recommended given the need to strengthen the overall power supply system in

Namibia, as well as the need for NamPower to fulfil its mandate as a national utility.

viii Kokerboom to Auas Transmission Line EIA Version 1 / March 2018 Scoping Report

A summary of the predicted impacts, made by the Environmental Assessment

Practitioner, after the scoping assessment for the construction and operation of the

transmission power line between the Kokerboom and Auas Substations within the

identified corridor alignment are:

Environmental Aspect

Project Phase Significance of Potential Impact

without Mitigation

Significance of Potential Impact with Mitigation

Avifauna Construction Low (-) Low (-)

Operation High (-) Low (-)

Flora Construction Low (-) Low (-)

Operation Low (-) Low (-)

Fauna Construction Low (-) Low (-)

Operation Moderate (-) Low (-)

Archaeology and Heritage Resources

Construction Moderate (-) Low (-)


Floodlines Construction Low (-) Low (-)


Social Construction (Disruption to livelihoods, activities and lifestyles, Destruction or disruption of homesteads and farm infrastructure)

Low-Medium (-) Very Low (-)

Operation (Change of sense of place, Disruption to farm management)

Moderate (-) Low-Moderate (-)

Economic Construction (Employment and procurement)

Low (+) Low-Moderate (+)

Operation (Benefits to the economy)

Low-Moderate (+) Low-Moderate (+)

Note: 1. These findings are from a preliminary assessment and will be confirmed in the

Impact Assessment phase of the EIA through detailed studies. 2. Impacts can be Negative (-), Neutral (*) or Positive (+). 3. The significance of a potential impact is based on the combination of consequence

of the impact and probability of the impact occurring, and defines the level to which the impact will influence the proposed project and/or the environment. It determines whether mitigation measures need to be identified and implemented or whether the resource is irreplaceable and/or the activity has an irreversible impact. Significance is rated as either Low, Moderate (Medium) or High.

The majority of potential environmental impacts of constructing and operating the

proposed transmission power line between the Kokerboom and Auas Substations, that

have been identified in the scoping assessment, do not raise major ‘red flags’ except for

the avifaunal issues. The negative impacts are manageable through effective mitigation

ix Kokerboom to Auas Transmission Line EIA Version 1 / March 2018 Scoping Report

and/ or management and the positive impacts will generate long-term socio-economic

benefits. This, however, will be confirmed through detailed studies

As part of the EIA process a public consultation process was undertaken. It aimed to

inform Interested and Affected Parties (I&APs) about the proposed project, the EIA

process and the potential environmental impacts, as well as obtain their views on the

proposed Project. The affected landowners, neighbouring landowners, organs of state

and public, who involved themselves in the environmental process, recognise the need

to strengthen the transmission power line network. There was general support of the

conclusions and recommendations of the scoping assessment as presented at the public

meetings.

Concerns about potential impacts on individual farms and inhabitants were, however, voiced by affected landowners and include:

Concerns over the impacts on avifauna, change of sense of place, long-term

disruption to livelihoods (e.g. high-end tourism) and life (including homesteads

and farm infrastructure) as well as short-term disruption to farm management

(including safety concerns regarding use of gyrocopters near power lines).

Suggestions were made to realign the power line away from established

infrastructure (e.g. landing strips, graves) to minimise/ avoid impacts to

livelihoods, as well as away from habitats that support sensitive avifauna (e.g.

rare and endangered bird breeding sites and from their flight paths) and flora (e.g.

forests). There was also support for the avifaunal specialist’s recommendation to

place the pylons close to the existing pylons, but in a staggered arrangement.

Some landowners were concerned about the cumulative impacts of multiple

power lines within a particular area (e.g. around the Substations).

A number of specific mitigation measures/ management actions were proposed for investigation in the assessment phase.

There was support for the proposed EMPs for the construction and operational phases in order to mitigate potential detrimental impacts.

Public consultation process: request to be registered and informed as the process proceeds.

In conclusion, it is recommended that the following detailed studies be undertaken in the

assessment phase of the EIA:

Assessment of potential impacts on the avifauna, and suggestions for mitigation

of any negative impacts and enhancement of any positive impacts

Assessment of potential impacts on the vegetation, and suggestions for

mitigation of any negative impacts and enhancement of any positive impacts

Assessment of potential impacts of erosion due to water runoff, and potential

impacts of water runoff on the proposed infrastructure, and suggestions for

mitigation of any negative impacts and enhancement of any positive impacts

Assessment of potential impacts on the archaeology and heritage resources, and

suggestions for mitigation of any negative impacts and enhancement of any

positive impacts

Assessment of potential social impacts, and suggestions for mitigation of any

negative impacts and enhancement of any positive impacts

Project specific EMPs for the construction and operational phases will be prepared,

which included all of the proposed management actions/ mitigation measures

recommended in the EIA and its associated public consultation process. These Plans

x Kokerboom to Auas Transmission Line EIA Version 1 / March 2018 Scoping Report

shall include an Avifaunal Monitoring Plan for the pre- and post-construction phases as

well as detailed specifications for vegetation and flood management, as well as

archaeological chance finds.

After the Assessment Report has been put out for public review and finalised it will be

submitted to the Environmental Commissioner for review and consideration as to

whether an Environmental Clearance Certificate should be granted. Once a decision is

made, any person aggrieved by a decision made; may on points of law only, appeal

against that decision to the High Court within the prescribed time and in the prescribed

manner.

1 Kokerboom to Auas Transmission Line EIA Version 1 / March 2018 Scoping Report

EIA FOR THE PROPOSED 400 kV TRANSMISSION POWER LINE BETWEEN THE KOKERBOOM AND AUAS SUBSTATIONS, NAMIBIA

FINAL SCOPING REPORT

CONTENTS

Chapter Description Page

GLOSSARY OF TERMS, DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS 5

1 INTRODUCTION 10

1.1 Background 10

1.2 Environmental Study Objectives 12

1.3 Report Content 14

1.4 Details of the Principal Parties 14

1.5 Environmental Study Approach 15 1.5.1 Methodology 18 1.5.2 Assumptions and Limitations 21

1.6 Policy, Legal and Administrative Framework 22

2 NEED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT 24

3 DESCRIPTION OF AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 25 3.1.1 Climate 26 3.1.2 Terrestrial Ecology 27

(a) Section A (Dwarf Shrub Savanna) 28 (b) Section B (Mixed Tree and Shrub Savanna) 28 (c) Section C (Highland Savanna) 29

3.1.3 Critical Biodiversity Areas 34 3.1.4 Avifauna 35 3.1.5 Floodline 38 3.1.6 Heritage and Cultural Resources 42 3.1.7 Social 46 3.1.8 Administration and Organisation 46 3.1.9 Population Demographics 48

(a) Size and Distribution 48 (b) Sex and Age 49 (c) Language 50

3.1.10 Literacy and Education 50 3.1.11 Economy, Employment and Income 51

(a) Economic Overview 51 (b) Agriculture 52 (c) Tourism 53 (d) Economically Active and Inactive Population 54


(e) Income 56 3.1.12 Health and Welfare 57 3.1.13 Infrastructure and Services 59

(a) Water and Sanitation 59 (b) Energy Sources 60 (c) Housing 60

3.1.14 Land Tenure and Management 60 3.1.15 Project Area 61

(a) Farm Status 61 (b) Land Use 64 (c) Infrastructure and Services 64

4 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 65

4.1 Alternatives 68

5 POTENTIAL IMPACTS 70

5.1 Identification of Potential Impacts 71 5.1.1 Construction Phase 71 5.1.2 Operational Phase 74 5.1.3 Cumulative Impacts 76

5.2 Mitigation of Impacts 77

5.3 Summary of Identified Potential Impacts 80

6 PUBLIC CONSULTATION PROCESS 84

7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 86

8 REFERENCES 92


FIGURES Figure 1: Project Area showing existing power line network

Figure 2: EIA process flow diagram

Figure 3: Mean annual rainfall for Namibia

Figure 4: Overview of vegetation sections within the proposed power line corridor route

alignment

Figure 5: Section A traverses Dwarf Shrub Savanna vegetation

Figure 6: Section B traverses a mixed tree and shrub savanna on an area of red sandy

dunes interspersed by gravelly valleys

Figure 7: Section C traverses the Highland Savanna, an area of high diversity and

endemism.

Figure 8: Drainage map of the Study Area

Figure 9: Drainage – Section 1



Figure 12: The archaeological setting of the proposed Kokerboom to Auas power line

Figure 13: Government system in Namibia

Figure 14: Land tenure map showing freehold and communal areas

Figure 15: Proposed routing of ‘bird-friendly’ deviation of the proposed Auas – Kokerboom

400 kV transmission line

TABLES

Table 1: Species assessed that require mitigation within the proposed power line

corridor.

Table 2: Number of bird species recorded, Red Data species, Namibian endemic and

near-endemic species, and southern African endemics, for the quarter degree

(15’ x 15’) squares in the four vegetation types (of two biomes) traversed by the

proposed Kokerboom to Auas 400 kV transmission line corridor.

Table 3: The local status of Red Data bird species in different sections of the proposed

Kokerboom to Auas 400 kV transmission line corridor

Table 4: The local status of endemic and near endemic birds to Namibia in different

sections of the proposed Kokerboom to Auas 400 kV transmission line corridor.

Table 5: Population size and distribution

Table 6: Vulnerable households

Table 7: Sex and age composition

Table 8: Distribution of first languages spoken at household level

Table 9: Levels of literacy and education

Table 10: Economic activity

Table 11: Primary income sources

Table 12: Health indicators

Table 13: Public infrastructure


APPENDICES APPENDIX A: CURRICULUM VITAE OF MRS. JAANA-MARIA BALL APPENDIX B: LOCALITY PLANS APPENDIX C: PHOTOGRAPHS APPENDIX D: FACILITY ILLUSTRATIONS APPENDIX E: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION INFORMATION APPENDIX E1: PROOF OF SITE NOTICE APPENDIX E2: WRITTEN NOTICES ISSUED AS REQUIRED IN TERMS OF THE

REGULATIONS APPENDIX E3: PROOF OF NEWSPAPER ADVERTISEMENTS APPENDIX E4: COMMUNICATIONS TO AND FROM INTERESTED AND AFFECTED

PARTIES APPENDIX E5: MINUTES OF ANY PUBLIC AND/OR STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS APPENDIX E6: COMMENTS AND RESPONSES REPORT APPENDIX E7: COPIES OF COMMENT RECEIVED APPENDIX E8: REGISTER OF INTERESTED AND AFFECTED PARTIES APPENDIX F: COPY OF APPLICATION FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE

CERTIFICATE APPENDIX G: TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE DETAILED ASSESSMENT APPENDIX H: TECHNICAL SPECIALIST’S REPORTS

- AVIFAUNAL ASSESSMENT SCOPING REPORT – OCTOBER 2015

- VEGETATION ASSESSMENT SCOPING REPORT – SEPTEMBER 2015

- FLOODLINE EVALUATION SCOPING REPORT – SEPTEMBER 2015

- ARCHAEOLOGY ASSESSMENT SCOPING REPORT – SEPTEMBER 2015

- SOCIAL ASSESSMENT SCOPING REPORT – MAY 2016


GLOSSARY OF TERMS, DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS

Affected

Environment

Those parts of the socio-economic and biophysical

environment impacted on by development

Alternatives A possible course of action, in place of another, that would

meet the same purpose, need and requirements of the

proposal. Alternatives can refer to any of the following but are

not limited hereto: alternatives sites (location) for development,

type of activity, alternative site layouts, alternative designs,

alternative technology (including processes and materials),

operational aspects. In Integrated Environmental Management

the so-called “no action” (‘no go”) alternative may also require

investigation in certain circumstances.

Application An Application for an Environmental Clearance Certificate in

terms of the EIA Regulations (2012).

Assessment The process of collecting, organising, analysing, interpreting

and communicating data that are relevant to the decision.

Assessment

Register

Assessment Register referred to in regulation 27 of the EIA

Regulations (2012).

Catchment area An area of land where surface water from rain, converges to a

single point at a lower elevation, usually the exit of the basin.

Construction

Activity

A construction activity is any action taken by the Contractor,

his subcontractors, suppliers or personnel during the

construction process.

Construction

Phase

The period during which activities pertaining to the preparation

for and the physical construction of the proposed development

take place.

Contractor That main organisation appointed by the Developer, through

the Project Manager (PM), to undertake construction activities

on the site.

Cumulative effect The effect of an activity that in itself may not be significant but

may become significant when added to the existing and

potential effects eventuating from similar or diverse activities or

undertakings in an area.

DEA Directorate of Environmental Affairs

Decommissioning To take out of active service permanently or dismantle partly

or wholly, or closure of a facility to the extent that it cannot be

readily re-commissioned.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface_water

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rain


Developer (or

Project Proponent/

Applicant)

NamPower, the electricity utility of the Republic of Namibia

EAP Environmental Assessment Practitioner who has been

designated by the proponent to manage the assessment

process.

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

ECD Early Childhood Development

EIR Environmental Impact Report; A report describing the process

of examining the environmental effects of a development

proposal, the expected impacts and the proposed mitigation

measures.

EMP Environmental Management Plan: The EMP for the project

sets out general instructions that will be included in a contract

document for the construction phase of the project. It describes

how activities that may have significant environmental effects

on the receiving environment are to be mitigated, controlled

and monitored. The EMP will ensure the construction activities

are undertaken and managed in an environmentally sound and

responsible manner.

Environment Means the surroundings within which humans exist and that

are made up of:

The land, water and atmosphere of the earth.

Micro-organisms, plant and animal life.

Any part or combination of a) and b) and the interrelationships

among and between them.

The physical, chemical, aesthetic and cultural properties and

conditions of the foregoing that influence human health and

well-being.

Environmental

Specifications (ES)

Instructions and guidelines for specific construction activities

designed to help prevent, reduce and/or control the potential

environmental implications of these construction activities.

EPC Engineering, Procurement, and Construction

Floodline A line on a topographic map which defines the level to which

flood waters will rise for a specified return period.

Flood return period 1 in 50 year flood has a return period of 50 years. Also referred

to as a flood that has an annual probability of exceedance of

2% which is statistically more correct.


GDP Gross Domestic Product

GIS Geographical Information System

Gini Coefficient The Gini coefficient indicates the level of concentration of

wealth (0 being an equal distribution and 1 a totally unequal

distribution).

Holocene From 10 000 years ago, continuing

Hydrology The science of collecting and analysing data needed to predict

runoff from a catchment and using the data to determine flows

(normally in m3/s) at a defined point in a stream for different

return periods

I&APs Interested and Affected Parties: In relation to the assessment

of the listed activity includes any person, group of persons or

organisation interested in or affected by an activity, and any

organ of state that may have jurisdiction over any aspect of the

activity.

kV Kilo volts

MET Ministry of Environment and Tourism

Method Statement A written submission by the Contractor to the Project Manager

in response to the Specification setting out the plant, materials,

labour, timing and method the Contractor proposes using to

carry out an activity. The Method Statement shall cover

applicable details with regard to:

Construction procedures.

Materials and equipment to be used.

Getting the equipment to and from site.

How the equipment/material will be moved while on site.

How and where material will be stored.

The containment (or action to be taken if containment is not

possible) of leaks or spills of any liquid or solid material that

may occur.

Timing and location of activities.

Compliance/ non-compliance with the Specifications.

Any other information deemed necessary by the Project

Manager.

m3/s cubic metres per second

My Million years


NAD Namibia’s Avifaunal Database

NHC National Heritage Council

OIS Oxygen Isotope Stage

Pleistocene From 2 million years ago to approximately 40 000 years ago

Operational Phase The period following the Construction Phase, during which the

proposed development will be operational. Also known as the

Post-Construction Phase.

PM Project Manager: Appointed firm responsible for overall

management of the construction phase of the project including

the management of all contractors.

PMI Project Management Implementation (a NamPower business

unit)

PPP Public Participation (Consultation) Process: A process referred

to in Regulation 21 of the EIA Regulations (2012), in which

potential interested and affected parties are given an

opportunity to comment on, or raise issues relevant to, specific

matters.

Project This refers to all construction activities associated with the

proposed activities.

PSD Project System Development (a NamPower business unit)

Rehabilitation Rehabilitation is defined as the return of a disturbed area,

feature or structure to a state that approximates to the state

(where possible) that it was before disruption, or to an

improved state.

Scoping Report A document prepared by the proponent (or someone appointed

by them) to present the case for the assessment of an activity

as part of the initial assessment process.

SIA Social Impact Assessment

SHEW Safety, Health, Environment and Wellness

Solid Waste Means all solid waste, including construction debris, chemical

waste, excess cement/concrete, wrapping materials, timber,

tins and cans, drums, wire, nails, food and domestic waste

(e.g. plastic packets and wrappers).

the Act or EMA Environmental Management Act, 2007 (Act No. 7 of 2007).

ToR Terms of Reference: A document which forms part of a

Scoping Report (Appendix G: Terms of Reference for the


Detailed Assessment) and sets out how an impact

assessment must be carried out.

TX Transmission

TXMP NamPower Transmission Management Plan

Kokerboom to Auas Transmission Line EIA 10 Version 1 / March 2018 Scoping Report

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

NamPower proposes to construct a single-circuit 400 kV transmission power line

(hereafter referred to as the power line) from the Kokerboom Substation (near

Keetmanshoop) to the Auas Substation (near Windhoek), a distance of approximately

500 km. The pylon (tower) height will be approximately 45 m and the distance between

pylons approximately 500 m. The steel pylons proposed are the cross-rope suspension

tower, strain tower or the self-supporting suspension (open-V) tower design. The

transmission line corridor studied between the two substations is 500 m wide and is

referred to as the Study/ Project Area.

There are two existing transmission lines connecting the Kokerboom and Auas

Substations, a 400 kV and a 220 kV line, but this infrastructure alone is considered

inadequate to meet the future demand needs of the country (also refer to Section 4.1).

The existing power line network within the Project Area is shown in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1: Project Area showing existing power line network


The purpose of the proposed Project is to strengthen the overall transmission network

in Namibia. It is proposed that the line be constructed in approximately 5 - 10 years’

time (i.e. by 2023 or as soon thereafter as possible), and possibly earlier if the Kudu

Gas Project comes on line earlier than is currently expected. NamPower’s

Transmission Master Plan (TXMP) assumes that the proposed Kudu Project will be

constructed and come into operation in 2018/ 2019. The proposed Kokerboom to Auas

400 kV line is part of the Kudu integration solution. The TXMP also indicates that

without the proposed Kudu Project, this transmission line is required based on the last

signed-off power supply scenarios. Without upgrades to the transmission line network

future electricity supply in Namibia will become constrained, and as a result, restrict

development (mining, industrial and residential) and negatively impact quality of life in

the country as a whole.

The proposed transmission power line is for the benefit of the Namibian electricity

transmission backbone and Namibian economy as a whole. It does not serve only the

specific area where the transmission power line is to be constructed. The expected

Namibian electricity load growth together with possible transfer of power northwards,

via the Zambezi Link Interconnector High Voltage DC (HVDC) scheme, requires this

transmission line to be operational. Also, the number of cases where an outage of the

existing 400 kV line can be accommodated (hence relying only on the 220 kV

interconnector from South Africa) is becoming less and less each year as the Namibian

electricity load grows.

The transmission line route (within the proposed power line corridor) has been revised

to avoid impacts on existing infrastructure, as far as possible. NamPower identified a

suitable routing option for the transmission line with input from the environmental

consultants and relevant specialists. The line was realigned several times to avoid and

reduce potential negative impacts of the proposed Project on the environment, and in

particular socio-economic receptors (notably infrastructure) and areas sensitive from

an ecological perspective (Appendices B: Locality Plans and C: Photographs).

The proposed transmission line route runs north from the Kokerboom Substation, which

is 23 km north east of Keetmanshoop, to the Auas Substation near the Hosea Kutako

international airport 30 km east of Windhoek.

The Project Area can be described as Bushveld Savannah and is dominated by

commercial stock farming, mostly on private land. Further to the north, large stock

farming is dominant while small stock is more prevalent in the south. Commercial game

farms are also common.

The proposed power line corridor traverses three (3) regions, namely Khomas, Hardap

and //Karas. Khomas is comprised of 10 constituencies with the capital being

Windhoek. Hardap’s capital is Mariental and comprises six (6) constituencies, and

//Karas has six (6) constituencies with Keetmanshoop as the capital. Khomas region is

one of the most densely populated regions of Namibia; it is home to the national capital,

Windhoek. It is landlocked and centrally located in Namibia. South of Khomas is the

Hardap region and south of Hardap is the //Karas region; both extend across Namibia

(west to east) and together comprise southern Namibia. The potentially affected


constituencies are: Windhoek Rural, Mariental Rural, Mariental Urban, Rehoboth Rural,

Gibeon, Berseba and Keetmanshoop Rural.

Hardap and //Karas regions are geographically extensive regions with low levels of

population density; large parts of these regions comprise the Namib and Kalahari

deserts. The Project Area is also defined by high levels of poverty, relatively low levels

of access to infrastructure, and poor quality rangelands. Livestock agriculture and game

farming is the most dominant economic sector in the Project Area. The majority of the

employed population derive income as employees. There are no formal settlements

located underneath the proposed power line. The area is used for grazing

(domesticated livestock and game) and some eco-tourism and hunting activities. There

are some private residences and tourist facilities located in close proximity to the

proposed transmission line.

1.2 Environmental Study Objectives

This independent Scoping Study (or scoping assessment) forms part of the

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process undertaken, and which the

documentation emanating there from, will be submitted to the competent authority, The

Directorate of Environmental Affairs: Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET-DEA),

for consideration and decision-making by the Environmental Commissioner.

According to Section 3(2)(e) of the Environmental Management Act (Act No 7 of 2007)

“assessments must be undertaken for activities which may have a significant effects on

the environment or the use of natural resources." As per the Annexure to the

Government Notice No. 29 of 2012, List of Activities that May Not Be Undertaken

Without Environmental Clearance Certificate, “the erection or construction of facilities

for the commercial transmission and supply of electricity with the exception of power

supply lines of less than 2 km in length” may not be undertaken without an

Environmental Clearance Certificate. As such an Application for Environmental

Clearance was submitted to the Environmental Commissioner on 20 April 2016

(Appendix F: Copy of Application for an Environmental Clearance Certificate).

The study identified a preferred power line corridor alignment, within which an access

track is proposed to run parallel to the power line. The transmission power line will have

a final servitude of 80 m width, with 12 m of that being cleared for the access track. The

track will be used to bring in construction materials, as well as to access the power line

and its associated poles for maintenance purposes, throughout the infrastructure’s life

span. The two substations are not proposed to be expanded or upgraded by NamPower

as part of this proposed project.

The EIA assessed the environmental acceptability of constructing, operating and

maintaining a power line in corridor alignment with a length of approximately 500 km

and width of 500 m (250 m each side of the original proposed centre line). Emphasis


was placed on the optimisation of the corridor route, as well as cumulative impacts of

three power lines within the Study Area.

This Scoping Study, and its independent technical specialist studies, considered the

potential impacts of constructing and operating (including maintaining) the transmission

power line and its associated infrastructure (i.e. access road) within the identified

transmission line corridor alignment between the Kokerboom and Auas Substations

(Appendix D: Facility Illustrations).

The environmental scoping assessment’s objectives are to assess potential

alternatives, scope the potential issues surrounding the proposed development and

provide an assessment of the potential impacts (negative, neutral or positive) of the

proposed activities, as well as suggest mitigation measures/ management actions to

be implemented to avoid or reduce potential negative impacts. It also makes

suggestions for further studies in the detailed assessment phase.

The decision as to whether to grant Environmental Clearance on the findings,

conclusion and recommendations of the EIA process, or even refuse Environmental

Clearance, will rest with the Environmental Commissioner.

Given the above, the aim of this Scoping Report which documents the Scoping Study

for the proposed construction and operation of a transmission power line between the

Kokerboom and Aussenkehr Substations, is to provide a:

Description of the proposed expansion project

Record of the Scoping process (or Study), including the public consultation

process

Summary of and feedback on comments received from the authorities, public

and directly affected and neighbouring landowners, stating how each of the

issues has been addressed

Preliminary assessment of potential environmental impacts and

Terms of Reference for the assessment phase of the EIA, which includes a

detailed impact assessment and suggestions for mitigation measures and

management actions to either avoid or reduce potential negative impacts and

enhance positive impacts.

In order to achieve this, five independent, technical specialist studies were undertaken

to inform the overall assessment, conclusions and recommendations. The specialists

undertaking each of these assessments is presented in Section 1.4 and their

declarations of independence, as well as experience and qualifications in the front of

their respective Scoping Assessment Reports which are found in Appendix G:

Technical Specialist’s Reports. The findings, conclusions and recommendations of

the studies are summarised within this Scoping Report in Sections 5 and 7.


1.3 Report Content

The content of this Scoping Report is consistent with the requirements as set out in the

EIA Regulations, 2012, and in summary the Scoping Report contains:

Details and experience of the person who undertook the assessment and

prepared the Report (Declaration of Independence signed by Mrs. Ball and

located above, Section 1.4 below and Appendix A: Curriculum Vitae of Mrs.

Jaana-Maria van der Merwe [nee’ Ball])

Description of the policy, legal and administrative/ institutional framework within

which the proposed project is proposed and is being assessed in relation to

(Section 1.6)

Description of the need and desirability of the proposed project and alternatives

considered (Section 2)

Description of the proposed activity and its alternatives (Section 3)

Description of the proposed site and the proposed activities’ location, as well as

the study area (Section 3)

Detailed description of the environment that may be affected by the proposed

activity and the manner in which the geographical, physical, biological, social,

economic and cultural aspects of the environment may be affected by the

proposed listed activity (Section 3)

Methodology used (Appendix G: Assessment Methodology), as well as the

assumptions and limitations of the environmental study (Section 1.5.2)

Details of the public consultation process conducted in terms of regulation 7(1)

(Section 6, Appendices E1 – E8: Public Participation Information)

Description of the anticipated potential environmental impacts (including

cumulative impacts) (Section 5), which require further assessment in the

detailed assessment phase; and for which a description of recommended

methods and procedures for mitigating these identified negative impacts and

enhancing the identified positive impacts will be made

Terms of Reference for any further studies in the assessment phase or

monitoring (Section 7) and

References (Section 8).

1.4 Details of the Principal Parties

The Project Proponent/ Applicant is NamPower, the Namibian state power utility.

The EIA process is being managed by Lithon Project Consultants (Pty) Ltd and the

appointed independent Environmental Assessment Practitioner (EAP) is Mrs. Jaana-

Maria van der Merwe (nee’ Ball) who is a registered Reviewer and Lead Practitioner

with the Environmental Assessment Practitioners Association of Namibia (EAPAN).

She prepared all the documentation emanating from this process.


The independent technical specialist studies that were undertaken to inform the

scoping assessment of any potential impacts arising from the proposed development

were undertaken by:

Avifuanal Assessment – Dr. CJ Brown of Sustainable Solutions Trust

Vegetation (botanical) Assessment – Dr. Colleen Mannheimer

Drainage Assessment – Mr. Chris Muir

Social Impact Assessment – Mrs. Kerryn McKune-Desai

Archaeology Assessment – Prof. John Kinahan of Quaternary Research

Services

Their contact details, expertise and experience as well as Declarations of

Independence are found in in the front of their respective Scoping Reports which are

found in Appendix H: Technical Specialist’s Reports.

Mr. Johan van Rensburg was the spatial mapping expert who undertook all

Geographical Information System (GIS) the mapping for the EIA.

1.5 Environmental Study Approach

The EIA will assess the environmental acceptability of constructing, operating and

maintaining a power line from the Kokerboom to the Auas Substation, with a length of

approximately 500 km and width of 500 m (250 m from the centreline) and a final

servitude of 80 m width, with 12 m of that being cleared for an access track. Emphasis

was placed on the optimisation of the power line corridor alignment as well as

cumulative impacts of three power lines within the study area.

A number of alternative power line corridors alignments were assessed during this

scoping assessment. An original power line corridor with a proposed centreline

alignment was presented to the EIA Team and reviewed by the technical specialists.

Based on feedback, the power line corridor was adapted to avoid biophysical and social

receptors. Each successive alternative alignment was screened/ scoped and a new

‘improved’ alternative alignment put forward for assessment that further avoided

potential negative biophysical (e.g. traversing over mountains) as well as socio-

economic impacts (e.g. bisecting land parcels and traversing over incompatible land

uses). The technical specialists assessed a corridor of 500 m wide and approximately

500 km in length.

The ‘no-go’ alternative of not constructing the transmission power line is not a

reasonable and feasible option as the demand for power is continually increasing within

Namibia (Sections 2 and 4.1).

This scoping assessment was undertaken after an initial screening of corridor alternatives, as per Figure 2: EIA Process Flow Diagram overleaf.


Figure 2: EIA process flow diagram


The scoping assessment was undertaken in three parts as follows: a) Desktop Study

All available secondary documents were gathered for the Project Area and the

proposed project itself. This information was reviewed and relevant information

extracted. Gaps were identified and every effort was made to fill these gaps during this

phase; where this was not possible, the gaps will be addressed during the Impact

Assessment Phase. The types of secondary documents gathered and reviewed

include:

Previous Scoping and Assessment Reports and associated annexures for

infrastructure in the Study Area

A description of the project activities

Maps and figures

National and local census reports

Biophysical data

Health reports

Economic reports

Studies for similar projects and

NamPower policies, procedures as well as the generic Environmental

Management Programme (EMP) for the construction phase.

b) Field Visits

The EAP and technical specialists visited the project site to undertake their field work

for their scoping assessment between July and October 2015 and in May 2016. They

undertook key informant interviews with NamPower and representatives of the

potentially affected farms; and other Interested and Affected Parties (I&APs). Follow-

up telephonic interviews were undertaken. The objectives of the site visits and

interviews were to:

Meet the project team and the Applicant

Observe the Project Area (notably the proposed project corridor site, the

Kokerboom and Auas Substations and nearby towns and settlements)

Meet selected I&APs and key project stakeholders, including representatives of

the affected farms

Refine the area of influence in consultation with the project team and

NamPower

Verify secondary information gathered and address gaps identified and

Gather additional secondary data and maps.

c) Scoping Report

The results of the field assessment were then written up and incorporated into the

desktop assessment, and documented in this Scoping Report. The technical specialists

were provided with a Scoping Report template. These Scoping Reports were in turn


used by the EAP to compile this Scoping Report. The Scoping Reports (including this

one) used information gathered from primary and secondary sources to develop an

appropriately detailed baseline description, and to identify the potential impacts to be

further described and assessed in the Scoping Assessment. The Scoping Report was

further informed by additional independent technical input by an avifaunal specialist,

Dr. Rob Simmons of Birds and Bats Limited, who confirmed the assessment findings

and recommendations undertaken by avifaunal specialist Dr. Chris Brown.

Key sections of the Scoping Report include:

A baseline project description (fit for a Scoping)

Scoping of issues

Preliminary identification of potential impacts and

Refinement of the scope of work for the Impact Assessment, including

information gaps.

As part of the environmental study an extensive public consultation process was undertaken in accordance with the EIA Regulations, 2012. This process is documented in Section 6 and Appendix E: Public Participation Information.

1.5.1 Methodology The terms of reference for the independent technical scoping studies is presented below: Avifaunal Assessment

Compile a list of birds known to occur within the four quarter degree squares

(2817Ad, 2817Bc, 2817Cb and 2817Da) from Namibia’s avifaunal database.

Assess this list in terms of Endemic and Red Data species, and species

potentially at risk from electrocution, collision or any other impacts

Assess the list in terms of bird species likely to impact on the proposed

substation.

A field visit to assess the proposed transmission power line corridor site, paying

particular attention to micro-habitat, high-risk species, sensitive and high risk

areas to birds, potential flight path conflict areas, nesting areas and any

potential issues of birds having a negative impact the operation of the

substation.

Submission of an avifaunal scoping assessment report, including a preliminary

assessment of potential impacts and issues.

The Avifaunal Scoping Assessment was based on national long-term bird data

collection projects which are contained within Namibia’s Avifaunal Database

(NAD). The NAD provides data on the occurrence, distribution and relative

abundance of all bird species in Namibia, per 15 min by 15 min (quarter degree)

grid square. A list of bird species recorded in the project area was derived from

the NAD. Each species was then assessed in terms of its Red Data status and

whether it is endemic to Namibia and to southern Africa. This forms the basis

of an assessment of the risk that each species might face as a result of the


proposed project, based on experiences from surveys of other power

infrastructure in Namibia.

Vegetation Assessment:

By means of a review of relevant information (e.g. published papers and known plant species distribution according to the National Herbarium Database (BRAHMS), identify the plant species and habitats that occur or are thought to occur along the route, with emphasis on those that are valuable from a biodiversity and/or ecological point of view.

Identify areas with sensitive vegetation (species that are endemic, protected, or otherwise of high conservation value) along the proposed route and, where pertinent, explain the value of each site.

Identify relevant national and international guidelines, protocols, legal and permit requirements (if any) to ensure compliance with such.

Undertake a preliminary assessment of potential impacts.

Suggest mitigation and management actions to avoid/ reduce detrimental impacts.

Assess the need for further studies.

Nomenclature in the Vegetation Assessment Report follows Klaassen and

Kwembeya (eds) 2013.

Floodline Evaluation:

Collect available rainfall and run-off data.

Define the floodlines for the larger rivers and their catchments.

Evaluate the proposed project with respect to the risk of possible flooding.

Carry out the hydrological and floodline analysis, and estimate the 1 in 50 and

1 in 100 year flows. This will be done in accordance with the Namibian Drainage

Manual (Roads Authority Manual, 2012).

Provide suggestions for the optimisation of the power line corridor alignment taking environmental constraints into consideration

Undertake a preliminary assessment of the environmental acceptability of constructing, operating and maintaining a power line within the study area.

Indicate mitigation measures to be considered in order to ensure that the power line is constructed and operated in the most sustainable manner.

The information sources for the study were the: Namibia Meteorological

Services, Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry, Namibia Water

Corporation (Pty) Ltd, NamPower and South African Weather Services.

Social Assessment:

Prepare a socio-economic baseline description.

Identify potential socio-economic impacts.

Undertake a preliminary assessment of potential impacts.

Suggest mitigation and management actions to avoid/ reduce detrimental impacts

List information gaps to be filled during the Assessment phase and monitoring

to be undertaken.

The Social Assessment Report was aligned with the principles and

commitments as outlined in The Constitution of the Republic of Namibia, of


1990, and drew on international best practice (International Finance

Corporation Performance Standards of 2012) to inform social performance and

practice.

The proposed project does not affect any communal land, as such the recently

adopted revised Compensation Policy and Guidelines for Communal Land

Areas in Namibia do not apply.

Archaeology Assessment:

Review of all known archaeological occurrences within the power-line corridors.

Compile GIS files for the archaeology of the corridors, including predicted occurrence of unrecorded occurrences.

Field survey of the power-line corridors with emphasis on areas of predicted archaeological sensitivity.

Submit an assessment report and proposals for mitigation measures including procedures for the handling of chance finds such as human remains discovered in the course of site development work.

The Archaeological Scoping Assessment was based on available field survey

observations from the area surrounding the proposed Kokerboom to Auas

transmission line corridor. No previous archaeological survey or assessment

had been carried out in the area to be directly affected by the power

infrastructure.

The Archaeological Assessment was based on protocols developed for

archaeological assessment in Namibia, intended to take into account the terms

of the National Heritage Act (2004). The study aimed to identify potential

sources of risk posed by the proposed project. These sources of risk are specific

to the archaeology of the area as it is known from existing data and the results

of the additional field survey reported here.

Archaeological Assessment in Namibia follows a basic three-phase process of

evaluation; followed by assessment based on field survey with limited sampling

and including proposals for mitigation of impacts and mitigation, which involves

detailed field investigation, laboratory analysis and the preparation of site

management plans.

The Scoping Assessment was based on existing archaeological survey data,

including archaeological GIS and project design data and the Impact

Assessment phase entailed direct field survey of ground not covered by

previous surveys. Archaeological sites were assessed according to standard

criteria, including the physical setting of the site – mainly with reference to

geological or topographic features; the type of archaeological site; the affinity of

the site – based on a field estimation of the site age and cultural affinity, and

observations, and where pertinent, on the size, density and characteristic

features of the site. Project development activities were evaluated according to

parallel 0 - 5 scales, which allows for independent assessments of significance

and vulnerability.


1.5.2 Assumptions and Limitations

The assumptions and limitations of this Scoping Assessment are:

The assessment is based on the project information provided at the time of the study. It was assumed that information provided by NamPower is accurate and up to date, and that the technical specifications of the proposed project and site selection are in accordance with the relevant legislative and regulatory requirements.

This Scoping Report and scoping assessment depends on the accuracy of the secondary data. The data was considered sufficient for the purposes of this study.

The contact details of all the key stakeholders were not available at the time of drafting this Scoping Report. As such, some current activities, opinions and concerns have not been incorporated. These will be incorporated into the Assessment Report.

The site visits and technical assessments were carried out between July and October 2015 and May 2016 and are a ‘snap shot’ of the environmental conditions. Birds, for example, are highly mobile and respond rapidly to changing environmental conditions. Most arid-zone animals are nomadic in nature. They may be absent from areas seasonally or for many years when rainfall is low, but very common when conditions are favourable.

The opinions expressed by I&APs during PPP were provided by members of the public who attended the meetings and made verbal or written comment. These opinions are thus peoples’ individual opinions and should not necessarily to be taken to represent the views of all the community members who are based in the Project Area.

The Scoping Report was compiled by the EAP, based on the Scoping Assessments Reports compiled by the technical specialists, as well as Dr. Rob Simmon’s (independent avifaunal specialist of Birds and Bats Limited) recommendations of early 2018.

The technical specialist Scoping Assessments were finalised on: - Avifauna – October 2015 - Vegetation – September 2015 - Floodline – September 2015 - Archaeology – September 2015 - Social – May 2016

All assessments of vegetation sensitivity were made in the context of the nature of this proposed project, which is narrow and linear. These sensitivities would not necessarily apply to the greater area if the impact was broader or more extensive, or if the project was re-routed. The Vegetation Scoping Assessment was a desktop study and no field assessment was undertaken because it was deemed unnecessary by the technical specialist.

The Archaeological Assessment relied on the indicative value of surface finds, augmented by the results of excavations carried out in the Study Area. Based on these data, it is possible to predict the likely occurrence of further archaeological sites with some accuracy, and to present a general statement of the local archaeological site distribution. Since the Archaeology Scoping Assessment is limited to surface observations, it is necessary to caution the proponent that hidden, or buried archaeological remains might be exposed as the project proceeds. A further limitation, regarding the Archaeological Assessment, is that continuing development in the project area will over time


raise the significance of finds reported here as the extent of undisturbed ground diminishes.

For the Floodline Evaluation Study it was assumed that sufficient rainfall data with the required accuracy will be available for the study area and that the available digital elevation model is sufficiently accurate. The lack of run-off data for the Study Area with which to calibrate the hydrological analysis is a limitation to the Floodline Evaluation Study.

This Social Impact Report and assessment depended on the legitimacy and accuracy of the secondary data, such as Census Data. The data was considered sufficient for the purpose of conducting the assessment.

The Social assessment is based on project information available and provided at the time of the study. Limited information was available about employment, skills development and procurement. This will only be determined once the Engineering, Procurement, and Construction (EPC) Contractor is appointed.

Selected land owners and land users were contacted and interviewed, not all details provided by the Deeds Office were correct and some land owners were unreachable.

Impacts for the construction and operational phases of the project have been predicted and assessed. No assessment has been undertaken for possible decommissioning phase impacts as this is not anticipated.

The environment is dynamic and constantly adapts to changes. Often this makes it challenging to predict project specific impacts as if they happen in a vacuum, uninfluenced by pre-existing conditions.

1.6 Policy, Legal and Administrative Framework

This environmental study is focused on sound environmental management practices

and is based on national and international best practices, and relevant legislation,

policies and guidelines. The following Acts, Ordinances, policies, and conventions were

considered in the preparation of this Scoping Assessment Report and the technical

specialist Scoping Reports:

The Constitution of the Republic of Namibia, 1990

Electricity Act, Act No. 4 of 2007

Nature Conservation Ordinance, 4 of 1975

Nature Conservation Amendment Act, Act No. 5 of 1996

Forestry Act, Act No.12 of 2001

National Development Plan: Vision for 2030

Environmental Management Act, Act No. 7 of 2007

Environmental Assessment Policy for Sustainable Development and

Environmental Conservation, 1995

Convention on Biological Diversity, 1992

Convention to Combat Desertification, 1994

EIA Regulations, 2012 (GN No 28-30, GG No 4878)

Labour Act, Act No. 11 of 2007

Health and Safety Regulations (GN 156/1997)

Public Health Act, Act No. 36 of 1919


Water Act, Act No. 54 of 1956

Town Planning Ordinance 18 of 1954

Burial Places Ordinance, 27 of 1966

As the Forest Act (Act no. 12 of 2001) has no regulations, the proposed new list of

protected species (S. Loots, Red Data and in situ conservation officer, Namibia

National Botanical Research Institute, pers. comm. by Dr. C. Mannheimer) was applied

in the Vegetation Assessment.

The principal instrument of legal protection for heritage resources in Namibia is the

National Heritage Act (Act No. 27 of 2004). Part V Section 46 of the Act prohibits

removal, damage, alteration or excavation of heritage sites or remains (defined in Part

1, Definitions 1), while Section 48 ff sets out the procedure for application and granting

of permits such as might be required in the event of damage to a protected site

occurring as an inevitable result of development. Section 51 (3) sets out the

requirements for impact assessment. Part VI Section 55 Paragraphs 3 and 4 require

that any person who discovers an archaeological site should notify the National

Heritage Council (NHC).

No regulations have been formulated for the implementation of the National Heritage

Act, and there is no official procedure concerning impact assessment. However,

archaeological impact assessment of large projects has become accepted practice in

Namibia, especially where project proponents need also to consider international

guidelines. The appropriate international guidelines are those of the World Bank OP

and BP 4.11 guidelines in respect of “Physical Cultural Resources” (R2006-0049,

approved April 17, 2006). Of these guidelines, those relating to project screening,

baseline survey and mitigation are the most relevant.

Recent or historical grave sites, their conservation and possible removal where impact

is unavoidable is governed by the Burial Places Ordinance, 27 of 1966. Permits for the

excavation, collection and appropriate deposition of archaeological materials are

issued by the NHC, while permits for the possible removal of recent or historical graves

are issued by the Office of the President.

The list of applicable legislation provided above is intended to serve as a guideline only

and is not exhaustive nor inclusive.


2 NEED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT

The purpose of the proposed Project is to strengthen the overall transmission network

in Namibia. It is proposed that the line be constructed in approximately 5 - 10 years’

time (i.e. before 2026), and possibly earlier if the Kudu Gas Project comes on line earlier

than is currently expected. NamPower’s Transmission Master Plan (TXMP) assumes

that the proposed Kudu Project will be constructed and come into operation in

2018/2019. The proposed Kokerboom to Auas 400 kV line is part of the Kudu

integration solution. The TXMP also shows that without the proposed Kudu Project, this

transmission line is required based on the last signed-off power supply scenarios.

Without upgrades to the transmission line network future electricity supply in Namibia

will become constrained, and as a result, restrict development (mining, industrial and

residential) and negatively impact quality of life in the country as a whole.

The proposed transmission power line is for the benefit of the Namibian electricity

transmission backbone and Namibian economy as a whole. It does not serve only the

specific area where the transmission power line is to be constructed. The expected




existing 400 kV line can be accommodated (hence relying only on the 220 kV

interconnector from South Africa) is becoming less and less each year as the Namibian

electricity load grows.


3 DESCRIPTION OF AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

The Kokerboom Substation is located approximately 23 km North of Keetmanshoop

and the Auas Substation is located approximately 30 km East of Windhoek near the

Hosea Kutako international airport and farming settlement of Dordabis (refer to

Appendices B: Locality Plan and C: Photographs). The surrounding land use is

mainly game farming.

The Kokerboom Substation is currently connected to the Auas Substation by a 500 km

long 400 kV and 220 kV transmission power lines. The proposed new 400 kV power

line is proposed to run North East from the Kokerboom Substation and enter the Auas

Substation from the South West.

The majority of the proposed project corridor (Project Area) is defined by low population

densities, high levels of poverty, relatively low levels of access to infrastructure, and

poor quality rangelands.

The proposed power line corridor traverses two biomes and four vegetation types, and

crosses a rainfall gradient of about 200 mm, from just under 200 mm in the south to

about 400 mm in the north. The average annual rainfall in the Fish River catchment,

which is typical of the southern and central areas of the proposed corridor, is between

150 and 250 mm. The variations from these values can be considerable. As an

illustration the area experienced rainfall of 675 mm for the big rain year of 1933/34 and

only 45 mm for the drought year 1944.

In the south the transmission line passes through Karas Dwarf Shrubland (Kokerboom

to near Mariental) and across the eastern edge of the Dwarf Shrub Savanna (near

Mariental to Duineveld), both in the Nama Karoo biome. The topography comprises

mainly gravel and rocky undulating plains with low shrubs and grassland. The

transmission line then runs along the western edge of the Southern Kalahari (Duineveld

to near Rehoboth) and into the Highland Shrubland (Rehoboth to Auas), both in the

Acacia Tree-and-shrub Savanna biome. The topography of the Southern Kalahari

comprises wind-blown red kalahari sand forming linear partly vegetated dunes with

grassy inter-dune “valleys”. The land rises in the Highland Savanna to about 1,800 m

and consists of an undulating highland plateau with mountain ranges rising to over

2,500 m. In the Mariental area the line corridor passes near to the Hardap Dam, the

only large water body (a man-made impoundment) near the proposed alignment.

The proposed transmission line corridor traverses three regions (namely Khomas,

Hardap and //Karas). Khomas is comprised of 10 constituencies with the capital being

Windhoek. The potentially affected constituencies are: Windhoek Rural, Mariental

Rural, Mariental Urban, Rehoboth Rural, Gibeon, Berseba and Keetmanshoop Rural.

Hardap’s capital is Mariental and comprises six (6) constituencies, and //Karas has six

(6) constituencies with Keetmanshoop as the capital. Khomas region is one of the most

densely populated regions of Namibia; it is home to the national capital, Windhoek. It

is landlocked and centrally located in Namibia. South of Khomas is the Hardap region


and south of Hardap is the //Karas region. Both regions are extensive, geographically,

extending across Namibia from west to east. The regions contain the Namib and

Kalahari deserts, and together comprise southern Namibia.

Livestock agriculture is the dominant economic sector in the proposed Project area.

The majority of the employed population derive income as employees (i.e. private,

commercial agriculture and government). There are 89 potentially affected farms within

the Study Area. These are predominantly owned privately (freehold tenure) or by the

state and used as communal land. No formal settlements are traversed by the proposed

centreline. The Study Area is predominantly used for grazing (domesticated livestock

and game) and some eco-tourism and hunting activities. There are some private

residences and tourist facilities located in close proximity to the proposed transmission

line.

3.1.1 Climate The Study Area is characterised by extreme droughts and years of high rainfall. The

average annual rainfall in the Fish River catchment, which is typical of the southern and

central areas of the project area, is between 150 and 250 mm. The variations from

these values can be considerable. Keetmanshoop, with a mean annual rainfall of

150 mm is considerably drier than Windhoek which has a mean annual rainfall of

360 mm. A map of the mean annual rainfall of Namibia is shown in Figure 3 for

Namibia.

The average maximum temperature at Keetmanshoop during the hottest month is 34 -

36°C while in Windhoek it is 32 - 34°C. Temperature averages about 20°C. In summer

temperatures above 40°C are common.


Figure 3: Mean annual rainfall for Namibia

As a consequence of the climatic conditions described above, wind-blown dust is an

issue throughout Namibia as well as runaway fires, especially during the dry months.

3.1.2 Terrestrial Ecology

The Vegetation Assessment Scoping Report (Appendix H: Technical Specialist’s

Reports) reported that the proposed transmission line corridor traverses four different

vegetation types of two biomes, with varying sensitivity. For distinct vegetation types

exist within the power line corridor, namely:

1. Kokerboom to near Mariental, a distance of about 205 km through Karas Dwarf

Shrubland of the Nama Karoo biome, with the line passing through nine quarter

degree (15’ x 15’) squares;

2. Mariental to Duineveld, a distance of about 100 km through the eastern edge of

Dwarf Shrub Savanna of the Nama Karoo biome, passing through three quarter

degree squares;

3. Duineveld to near Rehoboth, a distance of about 70 km through the western edge

of the Southern Kalahari of the Acacia Tree-and-shrub Savanna biome, passing

through three squares; and

N


4. Rehoboth to Auas, a distance of about 85 km through Highland Shrubland of the

Acacia Tree-and-shrub Savanna biome, and passing through four squares.

The section of the route from the Kokerboom substation to just north of Mariental

(Section A) traverses the Dwarf Shrub Savanna (Giess 1998), which forms part of the

Nama-Karoo Biome, for approximately 300 km, to approximately 15 km north of

Kalkrand. From there it continues through the Mixed Tree and Shrub Savanna of the

Southern Kalahari for about 55 km (Section B), until it reaches the foothills of the

Highland Savanna, which it traverses for about 100 km before reaching the Auas

substation (Section C). Figures 4 - 7 depict these three sections.

(a) Section A (Dwarf Shrub Savanna)

This zone is characterised by shallow, stony soils that carry a predominance of grasses

and Karoo shrubs (Giess 1998). Sizeable woody species known from that zone are

largely confined to drainage lines and the verges of seasonally wet depressions and

pans, including protected species such as Acacia erioloba, Ziziphus mucronata,

Searsia lancea and Euclea pseudebenus. Protected woody species of a more scattered

distribution in the zone include Aloe dichotoma, Albizia anthelmintica, Boscia albitrunca

and Maerua schinzii. Although 18 endemic and 11 protected species are recorded for

the general area, no species of high conservation concern (range or habitat restricted

endemic or protected species) are presently known or expected to occur in any

meaningful numbers along the route in this vegetation zone. Those recorded there are

all reasonably widespread and very unlikely to be threatened by this proposed project.

However, Aloe dichotoma (Kokerboom, Quiver tree) does occasionally form dense

stands which would make them of concern in that instance. The sensitivity of this

section is Low.

(b) Section B (Mixed Tree and Shrub Savanna)

This is largely an area of red sandy dunes generally slanting from north-west to south-

east interspersed with harder inter-dune valleys with stonier, harder substrates. Harder,

more compact soils are also characteristic of the river banks, and many small pans

(often with clay/calcrete substrates) are scattered throughout the zone. Although only

one wide-ranging endemic herb is recorded from the vicinity of the route, several

protected trees species are common in this vegetation type, including Acacia erioloba,

Albizia anthelmintica, Boscia albitrunca and Maerua schinzii. Ziziphus mucronata is

also typical along rivers and drainage lines. The route east of Tsumis between

approximately 23° 42’ 14” s and 23° 51’ 34” S is of concern regarding the dense stands

of Acacia erioloba and dune areas along this section also support large specimens of

Acacia erioloba and Albizia anthelmintica that are valued by farmers for the shade and

the forage they offer to stock animals. This is valuable woodland that raises the relative

sensitivity of this zone. The sensitivity of this section is Medium to High.


(c) Section C (Highland Savanna)

This is one of the zones of highest plant diversity and endemism in Namibia. It is a

mixed tree and shrub savanna that includes many protected tree species, such as

Acacia erioloba, Aloe littoralis, Boscia albitrunca, Albizia anthelmintica, Maerua schinzii

and Erythrina decora as well as those typical of drainage lines, ie: Ziziphus mucronata

and Searsia lancea. Thirty six (36) endemic and 9 protected species have been

recorded in the area around the route. Species of potential concern include the

protected trees and a number of other protected and/or restricted range endemics (e.g.

Anacampseros filamentosa subsp. tomentosa, Aloe viridiflora). With the exception of

Acacia erioloba, which occurs in dense stands over much of this section, and other

protected trees that occur as scattered individuals (e.g. Boscia albitrunca, Albizia

anthelmintica), the species of highest concern occur entirely or mostly on high-lying

slopes or at the edges of pans, which are not affected to any large extent by this project.

The sensitivity of this section is High.

An annotated list of species of potential concern is provided within Appendix 1 of the

Vegetation Scoping Assessment Report (refer to Appendix H: Technical

Specialist’s Reports) to give an overview of their extent of occurrence, conservation

status, known occurrence in the vicinity of the proposed route and notes on action

needed regarding this proposed project. Those requiring mitigation are summarised in

Table 1: Species assessed that require mitigation within the proposed power line

corridor. No Red Data species belonging to any threatened category were listed.


Figure 4: Overview of vegetation sections within the proposed power line corridor route alignment.

(Note the proposed centreline of the power line corridor is indicated by a white line)


Figure 5: Section A traverses Dwarf Shrub Savanna vegetation.

(Note the proposed centre line of the power line corridor is indicated by a white line)


Figure 6: Section B traverses a mixed tree and shrub savanna on an area of red sandy dunes interspersed by gravelly valleys.



Figure 7: Section C traverses the Highland Savanna, an area of high diversity and endemism.



Table 1: Species assessed that require mitigation within the proposed power line corridor.

Species Conservation

status

Range in

Namibia

Habitat if

restricted

Occurrence in

vicinity of

proposed

route if of

possible

concern

Notes

Acacia

erioloba

Protected Widespread Dense

populations

near Tsumis as

well as

scattered from

just south of

bend point 4 to

the Hohewarte

area, as well as

in riparian

areas alongside

drainage lines

and on dune

areas.

Albizia

anthelmintica

Protected Widespread

Aloe

dichotoma

Protected Widespread,

sometimes in

dense stands

Aloe littoralis Protected Widespread,

sometimes in

dense stands

Boscia

albitrunca


Cyperus

rehmii

Endemic Known

distribution

highly

restricted but

almost

certainly

undercollected

Pans,

seasonally

wet areas

Farm

Binsenheim/

Rietfontein

Unlikely to

be affected,

but can

mitigate

Euclea

pseudebenus


Maerua

schinzii


Ziziphus

mucronata


3.1.3 Critical Biodiversity Areas

Areas along the route east of Tsumis, as well as the southern parts of Section C and

the portion south and north of Bend Point 4 carry dense populations of Acacia erioloba.


However, there are scattered densities of this species over much of the route in

Sections B and C. This species, and other protected species, such as Albizia

anthelmintica, often favour dune areas. It is thus virtually impossible to define a “critical”

area regarding these species without including most of Sections B and C.

Slopes of koppies and mountains in the Highland Savanna (Section C) carry numerous

species of concern and should be avoided as far as possible. At present this habitat is

almost untouched by the proposed route.

Pan verges and banks of rivers and drainage lines are known to harbour higher than

average numbers and sizes of protected woody species, as well as sedges such as

Cyperus rehmii. Although it is very likely that this species is severely undercollected

(most sedges are in Namibia), and may be more widespread and common than is

presently known, the precautionary principle should be followed by avoiding this habitat

for pylon sites. This will also favour the protected trees.

Dense stands of Aloe dichotoma, although rare, may be encountered in the

southernmost extent of the route. They are very easy to identify and, if encountered,

should be avoided for pylon placement. Service tracks should easily be able to

circumvent the majority of individuals, which are usually sufficiently widely scattered.

3.1.4 Avifauna

The Avifaunal Assessment Scoping Report (Appendix H: Technical Specialist’s

Reports and Appendix 1 of the Avifaunal Assessment Scoping Report) reported

that birds often perch on the 400 kV and 220 kV power lines between the Kokerboom

and Auas Substations within the Study Area, making them potentially vulnerable to

electrocution, but also causing flash-overs which impact on power supply.

The proposed 400 kV power line corridor traverses two biomes and four vegetation

types. The Tree-and-shrub Savanna supports a number of near endemic birds to

Namibia, for which Namibia has primary global responsibility. The Nama Karoo and

Acacia Tree-and-shrub Savanna biomes provides the core range of a number of large

cursorial birds such as bustards (e.g. Ludwig’s Bustard and Kori Bustard), korhaans

and Secretarybird which are at high risk from power line collision. These three species

have recently been listed at threatened in Namibia because of high incidents of

mortality on power lines. Other species could also potentially be impacted, including

vultures, eagles and flamingos (e.g. Great Flamingo). Both biomes provide important

habitat for many species endemic to the south-west arid zoo-geographic zone of

southern Africa, with 14 of these species having 40% or more of their global populations

within Namibia. The Highland Shrubland is particularly important for species near-

endemic to Namibia. The proposed transmission line passes near to the Hardap Dam,

the only large artificial impoundment with a significant fish-eating bird population along

the proposed route. Wetland birds often perch on nearby power line support structures,

making them potentially vulnerable to electrocution, but also causing flash-overs which

impact of power supply.


Specifically within each of the four vegetation types traversed by the proposed

transmission line, the following emerged during the avifaunal scoping assessment:

1. Karas Dwarf Shrubland of the Nama Karoo biome, Kokerboom to near Mariental

(about 205 km, nine quarter degree squares) – 113 bird species from 41 survey

visits (refer to Appendix 1 of the Avifaunal Scoping Assessment Report). Of

these, eight species are listed as “Threatened” or “Near Threatened” in Namibia’s

Red Data book (Simmons et al. 2015). There were no species endemic to Namibia

reported from this section of the proposed line but 41 species are endemic to the

south-west arid zoo-geographic zone of southern Africa (Table 2: Number of bird

species recorded, Red Data species, Namibian endemic and near-endemic

species, and southern African endemics, for the quarter degree (15’ x 15’)

squares in the four vegetation types (of two biomes) traversed by the

proposed Kokerboom to Auas 400 kV transmission line corridor) of which eight

species have 40% or more of their global range within Namibia.

Table 2: Number of bird species recorded, Red Data species, Namibian endemic and near-endemic species, and southern African endemics, for the quarter degree (15’ x 15’) squares in the four vegetation types (of two biomes) traversed by the proposed Kokerboom to Auas 400 kV transmission line corridor.

Section of transmission line

Approx. distance

(km) Biome Vegetation type

No. survey visits No. bird

species

No. Red Data

species

No. Namibia endemic

s

No. southern African

endemics

Kokerboom to Mariental

205 Nama Karoo Karas Dwarf Shrubland

41 113 8 0 41

Mariental to Duineveld

100 Nama Karoo Dwarf Shrub Savanna (eastern edge)

193 200 12 1 63

Duineveld to Rehoboth

70 Acacia Tree-and-shrub Savanna

Southern Kalahari (western edge)

16 117 8 0 33

Rehoboth to Auas

85 Acacia Tree-and-shrub Savanna

Highland Shrubland

57 177 11 7 41

2. Dwarf Shrub Savanna of the Nama Karoo biome, Mariental to Duineveld (about 100

km, three quarter degree squares) – 200 bird species from 193 survey visits (refer

to Appendix 2 of the Avifaunal Assessment Scoping Report). This large species

diversity is influenced by the presence of Hardap Dam and its wetland habitat within

an otherwise arid and semi-arid landscape. Twelve species along this section of

the proposed line corridor are listed as Threatened or Near Threatened, one

species is near-endemic to Namibia and 63 species are endemic to southern Africa

of which 14 have 40% or more of the global range within Namibia.

3. Southern Kalahari of the Tree-and-shrub Savanna biome, Duineveld to near

Rehoboth (about 70 km, three quarter degree squares) – 117 bird species from 16

survey visits (refer to Appendix 3 of the Avifaunal Scoping Assessment

Report). This stretch of line has received the least bird survey work, reflected in the

recorded species diversity. Eight species along this section of the proposed line are


listed as Threatened. There are no Namibian endemic or near-endemic species

here but 33 southern African endemics of which 10 species have 40% or more of

their global range in Namibia.

4. Highland Savanna of the Tree-and-shrub Savanna biome, near Rehoboth to Auas

(about 85 km, four quarter degree squares) – 177 bird species from 57 survey visits

(refer to Appendix 4 of the Avifaunal Scoping Assessment Report). This section

of the proposed line has 11 Threatened and Near Threatened bird species, six

species near-endemic to Namibia and 41 southern African endemics of which 12

species have 40% or more of their global range in Namibia.

In total 16 species of Threatened and Near Threatened birds have been recorded in

the vicinity of the proposed transmission line (Table 3: The local status of Red Data

bird species in different sections of the proposed Kokerboom to Auas 400 kV

transmission line corridor), one Critically Endangered species, six Endangered, four

Vulnerable and five Near Threatened species.

Table 3: The local status of Red Data bird species in different sections of the proposed Kokerboom to Auas 400 kV transmission line corridor.

Red Data Category

Species Red Data bird status in the Kokerboom to Aus corridor

Kokerboom to Mariental

Mariental to Duneveld


Rehoboth to Auas

Critically Endangered

Cape Vulture - Rare - -

Endangered

White-backed Vulture Uncommon Uncommon Common Uncommon

Tawny Eagle - Rare Rare Uncommon

Booted Eagle Rare Uncommon - -

Martial Eagle Uncommon Uncommon Uncommon Rare

Black Harrier - Rare - Rare

Violet Wood-Hoopoe - - - Rare

Vulnerable

Greater Flamingo - Rare -

Ludwig’s Bustard Rare Uncommon - -

Secretarybird Uncommon Rare Uncommon Uncommon

Lappet-faced Vulture Rare Rare Common Uncommon

Near Threatened

Marabou Stork - - Rare Rare

Verreaux’s Eagle Common Uncommon - Uncommon

Kori Bustard Common Uncommon - Rare

Rüppell’s Parrot - - Common Uncommon

Sclater’s Lark - Rare - -

Seven near endemic bird species have been recorded in the vicinity of the proposed

line (Table 4: The local status of endemic and near endemic birds to Namibia in

different sections of the proposed Kokerboom to Auas 400 kV transmission line

corridor), all occurring in the section of through the Highland Savanna vegetation type

and only one being recorded from Dwarf Shrub Savanna.


Table 4: The local status of endemic and near endemic birds to Namibia in different sections of the proposed Kokerboom to Auas 400 kV transmission line corridor.

Species Kokerboom to Mariental

Mariental to Duneveld


Rehoboth to Auas

Rüppell’s Parrot - - - Uncommon

Violet Wood-Hoopoe - - - Rare

Damara Hornbill - Rare - Rare

Monteiro’s Hornbill - - - Rare

Carp’s Tit - - - Rare

Rockrunner - - - Uncommon

White-tailed Shrike - - - Uncommon

Dr. Simmons (an independent avifaunal specialist who was consulted independently to

the appointed EIA specialist) confirmed that the main habitats where the red data

species were concentrated were as follows:

Two (Red Data) Verreaux’s Eagle Aquila verreauxii nest sites in the first major

Schaap River valley on the farm Volmoed, 13 km west of Dordabis;

Up to 100 (Red Data) White-backed Vultures Gyps africanus reported and

Black-chested Snake Eagles Circaetus pectoralis recorded in the KlipVlei and

Wilderness farms 70 km and 135 km south of Auas Substation; and

Threatened Ludwig’s Bustard Neotis ludwigii mortalities on the existing 400 and

220 kV lines occurred throughout, but were highest in the open (Karas Dwarf)

shrubland in the south – particularly in open gravel/grassy plains areas and

particularly under 400 kV lines.

3.1.5 Floodline

The Floodline Evaluation Scoping Report (Appendix H: Technical Specialist’s

Reports) reports that the elements of the environment around which the floodline study

was centred are essentially the catchment areas and the streams which they feed.

There are some significant drainage catchments in the northern part of the proposed

transmission line corridor that may affect the construction of the proposed power line.

Approximately 300 km of the proposed transmission line corridor alignment will not be

affected by flooding. The affected environment could thus be categorised as having a

high tolerance to disturbance from the envisaged infrastructure.

Apart from the five border rivers, namely the Kunene, Okavango, Linyanti and Zambezi

Rivers in the north and Orange River in the south, there is no river in Namibia that

conveys water throughout the year. The largest river in the interior is the Fish River,

which is impounded by the Hardap Dam near Mariental. Even this river flows only a few

weeks to some months in the year. Nevertheless, considerations related to floods are

decisive in estimating extreme flows in the ephemeral rivers which prevail in the study

area.

A drainage Map of the Study Area is shown in Figure 8.


The study area is characterised by extreme droughts and years of high rainfall. The

average annual rainfall in the Fish River catchment, which is typical of the southern and

central areas of the project area, is between 150 and 250 mm. The variations from

these values can be considerable. As an illustration the area experienced rainfall of 675

mm for the big rain year of 1933/34 and only 45 mm for the drought year 1944.

Runoff values show an even stronger variation than the rainfall values. Variations in the

annual water flows measured in the Fish River vary between 1 x 106 and 1 000 x 106.

Namibia may be a very dry country, but it is in general not a country with low flood

runoff. High intensity rainfall often falls in a very short time and catchments also run off

in a short time. This results in steep flood waves with high peak values. A reasonably

reliable estimate of floods requires the availability of rainfall and runoff values. While

there is a reasonable record of rainfall measurements, runoff measurements are

scarce.

Figure 8: Drainage map of the Study Area


It should be noted that the proposed centreline of the proposed 400 kV line does not

traverse the Fish River catchment. However, the existing 400 kV line does.

For purposes of describing the affected environment, the route was sub-divided into

three sections, with differing drainage characteristics (Figures 9 – 11):

Section 1 commences at the Kokerboom sub-station and extends north for

approximately 75 km. This section of the powerline traverses the eastern edge of the

Fish River catchment. Five catchments of interest drain towards, and cross the power

line route.

Section 2 extends north for a further 210 km up to the town of Kalkrand. This section

of the line runs mainly along the top of the plateau which forms the eastern border of

the Fish River catchment. For most of its length the power line runs along the watershed

that forms the catchment boundary between the Fish River to the west and the Auob

River to the east. Except for two relatively small catchments there are no drainage

areas of interest. Within this section the two catchments are the Dabib and Auob Rivers

that flow into the Fish River north of Mariental.

Section 3 extends from Kalkrand northwards to the Auas sub-station over a distance

of approximately 170 km. This section traverses the area with the biggest challenge

related to drainage. The area principally drains from the Auas Mountains just south of

Windhoek. This is also the area with the highest rainfall within the proposed corridor

alignment. The largest catchment within this section is the one that drains the Oanob

River. This is a large catchment with a significant 1 in 100 year flow magnitude.


Kokerboom SS

25 km

N


Figure 10: Drainage –Section 2


100 km

Auas SS

Kalkrand

25 km

N

N

Kalkrand


3.1.6 Heritage and Cultural Resources

The Archaeological Assessment Scoping Report (Appendix H: Technical

Specialist’s Reports) reports that due to its aridity, southern Namibia presents a

marginal environment for human occupation, and in the past, particularly during periods

of climatic cooling and hyper-aridity, the region may have been quite inimical to

settlement. These conditions are reflected in the available archaeological evidence,

which spans the last 0.8 million years with a sequence that is characterized by short

periods of relatively intensive occupation, and long periods in which there appears to

have been little or no human presence.

The regional sequence may be simplified as follows:

Early to mid-Pleistocene (ca. 2my to 0.128my; OIS 6, 7, 19 &c): represented by

surface scatters of stone tools and artefact debris, usually transported from

original context by fluvial action, and seldom occurring in sealed stratigraphic

context.

Mid- to upper Pleistocene (ca. 0.128my to 0.040my; OIS 3, 4 & 5a-e):

represented by dense surface scatters and rare occupation evidence in sealed

stratigraphic context, with occasional associated evidence of food remains.

Late Pleistocene to late Holocene (ca. 0.040my to recent; OIS 1 & 2):

represented by increasingly dense and highly diverse evidence of settlement,

subsistence practices and ritual art, as well as grave sites and other remains.

Historical (the last ca. 250 years): represented by remains of crude buildings,

livestock enclosures, wagon routes and watering points. Some evidence of

trade with indigenous communities, including metals, ceramics and glass

beads.

For the most part, early to mid-Pleistocene sites are associated with pans, outwash

gravels, drainage lines and river gravels. These sites are difficult to detect and are

usually overlooked in the course of construction work. Mid- to upper Pleistocene sites

occur in similar contexts to the earlier material, but hill foot-slopes and outcrops of rock

suitable for artefact production (e.g. chert, fine-grained quartzites) are also focal points.

Late Pleistocene to late Holocene sites occur in almost every terrain setting, with the

exception of very steep slopes and mountain tops. These sites often exhibit locally

integrated distribution patterns which allow some reconstruction of land-use and

subsistence. Major sites include rock shelters with well stratified occupation deposits,

containing an array of organic and inorganic residues. Early historical sites tend to be

concentrated along routes suitable for wagon transport, and a more recent, broader

landscape distribution associated with the establishment of farming settlement.

Southern and central Namibia is the area to be affected by the planned Kokerboom to

Auas power line project and is not well studied archaeologically, but the small number


of field surveys that have been carried out indicate that the archaeological sequence

as set out in the previous section is represented over the whole of southern and central

Namibia. The physical setting of the known archaeological sites while focussed on the

main river valleys, also emphasizes the higher and mid- slopes of the hill, as well as a

number of localized resources such as small springs and outcrops.

The most detailed available data for the area to be affected by the proposed Kokerboom

to Auas power line project comes from an archaeological survey of the route for the

existing 200 kV line carried out in 1999 (QRS Report 14) (Figure 11: The

archaeological setting of the proposed Kokerboom to Auas power line).

Figure 12: The archaeological setting of the proposed Kokerboom to Auas power line.

Note: Yellow squares are precise locations of archaeological sites recorded during the survey of the existing

power-line); green squares are low precision data gleaned from the archaeological accessions register of the

National Museum of Namibia. The latter sites have a relative precision of 5 km.


At the time of that survey very little was known of the archaeology of central and

southern Namibia in the affected area and for that reason a detailed foot survey was

carried out over the entire 714 km distance from Aries on the Orange River, to Auas.

The survey located and described a total of 189 archaeological sites covering the last

two million years of human occupation. More importantly, however, the survey helped

to define the most sensitive landscape contexts that would require detailed assessment

for new projects.

Pre-Quaternary (<2my):

The previous survey examined a number of exposures of Palaeozoic shale beds in the

area near the existing Kokerboom Substation. These included fossiliferous Ecca

Whitehill and Prince Albert formations. Other sites of palaeontological potential located

in the course of the survey were associated with the Zamnareb member of the Nababis

formation at the crossing of the Packriem River. Overall, the survey route was

considered to have very low palaeontological potential.

Mid- to late Pleistocene (1 million to 40 000 years):

Archaeological sites dating to the second half of the Pleistocene formed a major

component of the survey results, although most were dispersed scatters with very low

artefact densities, or isolated finds. The 68 mid- to late Pleistocene sites comprised

36% of all archaeological sites. In some area, particularly those least affected by active

drainage and wind-blown sand cover, these sites accounted for up to 53% of all finds.

Mid- to late Pleistocene sites were very strongly associated with outcrops of rock types

such as fine-grained quartzites which are suitable for the manufacture of stone artefacts

and the presence of these sites is therefore to some extent predictable.

Of particular interest is the fact that no mid- to late Pleistocene sites were found north

of 23° South latitude. This was considered to be a reflection of the relatively youthful

drainage systems in the central highland area, associated with steep stream gradients,

sharply defined bank profiles and heavy boulder and pebble loads. Although the overall

distribution pattern of these sites was informative it is relevant to the present scoping

exercise that only two of the sites were found to be in a stratigraphically sealed context

where further investigation might be justified. The survey concluded that the power-

line project would have very little impact on the archaeological record of this period.

Late Pleistocene to early Holocene (40 000 years to 5 000 years):

Reliable identification of late Pleistocene material requires the presence of specific

diagnostic artefact evidence which is frequently lacking from dispersed scatters such

as are characteristic of this area. Identification in the field is therefore based on intuitive

assessment or core size, flaking patterns and indications of retouch. As a provisional

estimate, sites of this period comprised 19% of finds over the entire survey, with some

significant local concentrations such as in the areas of Tses and Kokerboom where

Late Pleistocene to early Holocene sites comprised about 40% of all finds. As with the

Mid- to late Pleistocene component of the sequence, very few sites were found north

of 23° South latitude. Of particular relevance to the present scoping exercise is a

consistent association of late Pleistocene to early Holocene sites with small pans and

related endoreic drainage features. Only two sites of this period were considered to be

important to the archaeological record of this period, both associated with pan features.


Late Holocene to recent pre-colonial (5 000 years to 250 years):

The previous survey yielded a total of 75 Late Holocene to recent pre-colonial sites,

comprising approximately 40% of all sites. The prominence of this group is underlined

by the fact that this period represents approximately 0.5% of the time-span of the

archaeological sequence. The group included a total of 21 suspected burial sites,

including a number of large, elaborately constructed examples that probably represent

elite burials. However, most of the suspected burials were relatively informal stone

cairns, usually located on stream terraces or other substrate that would be suitable for

the excavation of a grave shaft. The burial sites are considered to be highly sensitive.

In addition to the suspected burial sites, the survey located a number of large stone

cairns along natural routes of access between drainage basins or across watersheds.

These marker cairns are well known throughout Namibia and although they usually do

not contain burials, they do provide important evidence of human movement.

Associated with these suspected routes were the remains of several nomadic pastoral

encampment sites. These consist of several rings of anchor stones, usually with a

diameter of about 5m marking the perimeter of a portable mat hut. These structures

were widely used in southern Namibia until the early colonial era when nomadic

movement ceased.

The previous survey located a number of rock painting and rock engraving sites in the

area to the north of 23° South latitude. These are considered especially important under

Namibian heritage regulations. Rock art sites were in some instances associated with

small rock shelters with sealed deposits of occupation debris. These are also

considered important although their value is usually not apparent prior to test

excavation. Rock shelter deposits with rock art are uncommon, however, and only two

examples were located during the survey.

Colonial (250 years to present):

In southern Namibia the colonial period effectively begins at the end of the eighteenth

century when missionary settlement and regular contact with the Cape Colony and the

outside work were established. By the end of the nineteenth century colonial settlement

and communications networks covered the whole of the central and southern parts of

the country and anti-colonial uprisings had begun in several areas. The proposed

Kokerboom to Auas power line route traverses a region which saw several outbreaks

of fighting, culminating with the South African invasion in 1915. The area contains

numerous relics of this period and the previous survey located several fortifications,

early settler farm sites, wells and military bivouac sites. The survey also located a

number of early colonial quarry and small-scale mining sites.

On the basis of the available evidence, the transmission power line corridor area is

fairly certain to contain some archaeological sites. These will in all likelihood include

mid- to late Holocene pre-colonial and early colonial sites. There is a high likelihood

that the project area will contain graves and that these may require some mitigation

work prior to the construction phase of the project. On the whole, however, the survey

of the project area is not expected to yield high densities of archaeological sites.


Nevertheless the precautionary principle should be applied as the greater area is rich

in archaeological sites.

The generally open and unobstructed character of the terrain over most of the proposed

Kokerboom to Auas power line route means that archaeological sites are highly visible

and easy to locate. Archaeological survey in such conditions usually provides excellent

results with high levels of confidence. On the other hand, this sort of terrain is highly

sensitive to physical disturbance, thus affecting the preservation of archaeological

remains, and highly sensitive to visual impact on the landscape setting of the

archaeology. Under Namibian law National Heritage Act 27 of 2004) archaeological

remains and their physical setting are both protected. In view of these two

considerations, the study area has potentially a “low tolerance” to disturbance.

In the light of the evidence found during the previous survey, a field survey of the

proposed Kokerboom to Auas power line route is expected to yield the following results:

1. Pre-Quaternary palaeontological evidence in insignificant quantity and mainly in the

vicinity of Palaeozoic shale outcrops near Kokerboom

2. Generalized occurrence of mid- to late Pleistocene artefact scatters primarily to the

south of 23° South latitude

3. Generalized occurrence of late Pleistocene to early Holocene artefact scatters

primarily to the south of 23° South latitude

4. Moderately high density of late Holocene to recent pre-colonial archaeological sites

throughout the extent of the power-line route, including burial cairns and remains of

nomadic pastoral encampments, as well as possibly some rock art sites and rock

shelter sites containing sealed occupation debris

5. Generalized occurrence of colonial era sites, including farm settlements, battlefield

sites and related remains.

3.1.7 Social

The Social Assessment Scoping Report (Appendix H: Technical Specialist’s

Reports) reports that the proposed transmission line corridor traverses three (3)

regions (namely Khomas, Hardap and //Karas). Khomas Region is centrally located

and landlocked; it has a population density of 9.3 people per km². Hardap has a low

population density of 0.7 people per km2. The //Karas Region is the most southern and

largest region in Namibia, with an area of 161,215 km²; it is the least densely populated

of Namibia’s 14 regions with only 0.5 people per km². The line passes through 6

constituencies, the majority of which are rural.

3.1.8 Administration and Organisation

Namibia has a three-tier system of governance comprising of central government,

regional councils and local authorities; the Decentralisation Policy of Namibia was

launched in 1998. The aim of decentralisation is to enable:

Economic, cultural and socio-economic development;

Broad public participation in decision-making; and

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regions_of_Namibia


Democracy - based on National ideals and values1.

Local authorities are established in urban areas and are responsible for service

delivery. Municipal councils (2 types), town councils and village councils are

responsible for governing the affairs of the local authorities. Regional councils are

responsible for specified service delivery in rural areas. The 14 Regional Councils run

the regions; Municipal, Town and Village Councils are not sub-ordinate to them2.

Figure13: Government System in Namibia presents the government system in

Namibia.

Figure 13: Government system in Namibia

CENTRAL GOVERMENT

President, prime minister, other ministers Parliament:

National Assembly National Council

REGIONAL GOVERMENT

14 Regions Regional council

Governor

PART 1 MUNICIPALITY

Municipal council

PART 2 MUNICIPALITY

Municipal council

TOWN

Town council

VILLAGE

Village council

Source: Adapted from Peltola 2008, in Local Government System in Namibia, 2009.

To make provision for the direct involvement of the community, Statutory Development

Committees were established. These committees are responsible for identifying

problems and needs of their specific constituencies; their specific functions include the

coordination of planning and development within the constituencies. Statutory

Development Committees operate at regional and local levels and are focused on the

region, the regional constituencies, the local authority, village and settlement. Although

each is composed differently, they are constituted to involve elected members,

traditional authorities and representatives from non-governmental and community-

based organisations3.

1 Local Government System in Namibia, 2009. 2 Local Government System in Namibia, 2009. 3 Local Government System in Namibia, 2009.


3.1.9 Population Demographics

(a) Size and Distribution

Table 5: Population size and distribution, 2011

Indicator Namibia Khomas Hardap //Karas

2011 2001 2011 2001 2011 2001 2011 2001

Total population 2,113,077 1,830,330 342,141 250,262 79,507 68,249 77,421 69,329

Annual growth rate 1.4 2.6 3.1 1.9 1.5 0.3 1.1 1.1

Population density

(persons/km2)

2.6 2.1 9.2 6.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4

% Urban 43 33 95 93 60 28 54 54

%Rural 57 67 5 7 40 72 46 46

# of Households 464,839 346,455 89,438 58,580 19,307 15,039 21,283 16,839

Household size 4.4 5.1 3.7 4.2 4.0 4.4 4.2 4.7

Source: Population and Housing Census Main Report (2013), Population and Housing Census: Khomas Regional

Profile (2014), Population and Housing Census: Hardap Regional Profile (2014), and Population and Housing Census:

//Karas Regional Profile (2014).

Table 5: Population size and distribution provides an overview of the population size

and distribution in Namibia, and the affected regions in 2001 and 2011. The national

population grew steadily to ~2.1 million in 2011, an average 1.5% per annum increase

since 2001. The majority of the population reside in rural areas (57%), and the

remaining 43% live in urban centres. There are high rates of rural-urban migration in

Namibia; since 2001, the urban population grew by ~50% and the rural population

decreased by ~1.5%.

With a population of 342,141, Khomas accounts for 16% of Namibia’s total population.

Khomas is significantly more populated than Hardap and //Karas which comprise 3.8%

and 3.7% of the national population, respectively. The total population in all regions has

increased consistently overtime; Khomas had a significantly higher population growth

rate than Namibia, Hardap and //Karas between 2001 and 2011. Differing from the

national distribution, the majority of the population in all 3 regions reside in urban

centres; 95% in Khomas, 60% in Hardap and 54% in //Karas.

The average population density in Namibia is 2.6 people/ km2, this is low but it is

significantly higher than Hardap and //Karas regions which have densities of 0.7% and

0.5%, respectively. Khomas is more densely populated with 9.2 people/ km2. In the

project-affected constituencies, the population density is even lower; ranging from

0.2 people/km2 in Gibeon to 0.6 people/km2 in Windhoek Rural.

Between 2001 and 2011, household size has reduced across the project affected area.

National level household size is the largest (4.4 people), followed by //Karas

(4.2 people), Hardap (4 people) and then Khomas (3.7 people).


Households headed by females, children and orphans are considered to be vulnerable;

in the project area there are a small percentage of these, as outlined in Table 6:

Vulnerable Households.

Table 6: Vulnerable households, 2011

Namibia Khomas Hardap //Karas

Female headed households 43.8 38.8 36.4 37.1

Child headed households 1.7 1.1 1.2 1.1

Orphan headed households 0.6 0.4 0.6 0.4




(b) Sex and Age

Table 7: Sex and Age Composition shows the sex and age composition of the

population in the potentially affected project area. The distribution of men and women

varies across the affected area and over time. There are more females than males in

Namibia and in Khomas at 52% and 50.4%, respectively. In Hardap and //Karas there

were more males (51% each) than females (49% each) in 2011. The dominance of

mining in these regions may account for the elevated number of males.

The Namibian population is relatively young with 37% of people below the age of

15 years. Khomas, Hardap and //Karas have a smaller portion of people below the age

of 15 years (27%, 32% and 30%, respectively); at the constituency level, there are

slightly more people in this age category, however still fewer than a the national level.

The majority of the population in Namibia, Khomas, Hardap and //Karas are of working

age (between the ages of 15 and 59 years); Khomas and //Karas have a particularly

high percentage of people of working age at 69% and 63%, respectively. The high

percentage of working age people in the region may indicate that people migrate to the

area for work opportunities or that younger and older people migrate out of the area

(particularly //Karas) for schooling and care facilities. However, in the project affected

constituencies, the percentage of working age people are far lower (62% in Windhoek

Rural to 53% in Berseba.


Table 7: Sex and age composition, 2011


2011 2001 2011 2001 2011 2001 2011 2011

Total Population 2,113,077 1,830,330 342,141 250,262 79,507 68,249 77,421 69,329

% Male 48 49 49.6 50.6 51 50.6 51 58

% Female 52 51 50.4 49.4 49 49.4 49 42

Sex ratio: Males/ 100

females

94 94 98 103 104 103 104 114

Age composition (%)

Under 5 years 14 13 11 11 11 13 11 11

5-14 years 23 26 16 18 21 23 19 20

15-59 years 57 52 69 67 59 55 63 63

60+ years 7 7 4 4 7 8 6 6




(c) Language

The main languages spoken in households differed significantly nationally and across

the 3 regions (see Table 8). In Namibia and Khomas, Oshiwambo languages were by

far the most commonly spoken first language (~49% and ~41%, respectively). In

Hardap, Nama/Damara and Afrikaans were almost equally as dominant at ~43% and

41%, respectively. While in //Karas there were 3 fairly dominant first languages, namely

Afrikaans (~36%), Oshiwambo languages (27%), and Nama/Damara (24%).

Table 8: Distribution of first languages spoken at household level, 2011

Namibia Khomas Hardap //Karas

Oshiwambo languages

(~49%)

Oshiwambo languages

(~41%) Nama/Damara (~43%) Afrikaans (~36%)

Nama/Damara (11%) Afrikaans (~18%) Afrikaans (41%) Oshiwambo languages

(27%)

Afrikaans (10%) Nama/Damara (~12%) Oshiwambo languages

(~10%) Nama/Damara (24%)

Otjiherero languages (9%) Herero languages (~10%)

Kavango languages (9%) English (~9%)




3.1.10 Literacy and Education

Table 9: Levels of literacy and education presents selected statistics reflecting levels

of literacy and education in the affected project area. In 2011, literacy rates in people

aged 15 years and older were 97% in Khomas and //Karas, and 91% in Hardap. Hardap

and //Karas saw a significant increase in literacy from 2001. These rates are higher


than the national rate of 89%. Literacy levels at the constituency level are lower than

the regional levels (specifically in Hardap), they are closely aligned with the national

literacy level. At a national and regional level, adult literacy was higher in urban areas

than in rural areas and there was little difference between males and females. Youth

literacy (15-24 years) was highest in //Karas (99%), followed by Khomas (98%), then

Hardap (96%); the national average was 94%, similar to the constituencies.

Approximately 13% of children aged 0-4 years attended early childhood development

programmes (ECD) (ie. pre-primary school/ kindergarten) in Namibia. This number was

significantly higher in urban areas (~19%) than in rural areas (~10%). Slightly more girls

than boys were enrolled in ECD programmes in both rural and urban areas. In Khomas,

nearly 23% of children attend pre-primary school; with a significantly higher rate of

attendance in the urban areas. Approximately 18% of children in //Karas attend pre-

primary, with a slightly higher percentage in the urban areas. A low percentage of

children are enrolled into ECD programmes in Hardap region (~7%).

At the national level, a high percentage of the population have no or incomplete Primary

school education (25%). At the regional level, Hardap has the highest proportion of

people with incomplete Primary education (~34%), followed by //Karas (~19%) and

Khomas (~17%). The majority of the population have completed Primary school

education as their highest qualification (~49% in Namibia, 39% in Khomas, 43% in

Hardap, and ~54% in //Karas). The population of Khomas have attained the highest

levels of education; ~31% have completed secondary schooling and 13% completed

tertiary level education.

Table 9: Levels of literacy and education, 2011


2011 2001 2011 2001 2011 2001 2011 2011

Literacy rate, 15+ years (%) 89 81 97 96 91 83 97 87

ECD attendance, 0-4 years (%) 13.3 - 22.9 - 7.3 - 16.9 -

Urban 19.4 - 23.7 - 8.1 - 18.2 -

Rural 9.8 - 8.7 - 6.2 - 15.2 -

Highest education level, 15+ years (%)

No formal education 1.5 - 0.8 - 1 - 0.7 -

Incomplete Primary 23.7 - 16 - 33.4 - 18.7 -

Complete Primary 48.5 - 39 - 43 - 53.9 -

Complete Secondary 20.5 - 31.2 - 19.9 - 22.9 -

Complete Tertiary 5.8 - 13 - 2.7 - 3.8 -




3.1.11 Economy, Employment and Income

(a) Economic Overview

The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of Namibia has grown in excess of 5% per annum

since 2010, with the latest GDP growth accelerating to 5.3% for 2014. Strong


construction and mining sector activities have been the primary drivers of the consistent

domestic economic recovery. However, this has substantially slowed for 2014, due to

a general slowdown in demand for commodities in global markets. It is expected that

over the next few years, the economy will continue to grow as a result of external

demand for goods and services produced in the economy4. Namibia’s GDP growth

exceeded global GDP growth (2.5%) over the medium-term, thus confirming Namibia’s

relatively healthy economic status.

Namibia’s tight monetary policy aimed to keep inflation at 3-6% per annum; this was

successfully achieved with the latest inflation rate being 3.3% as at end July 20155.

There is thus no concern over an overheated economy, which allows for more stability

on the repo rate of the country.

Growth in the primary sector (which represents 20% of the GDP) remained unchanged

in 2014. The key reasons for this near zero growth were: a decline in agricultural

growth, a fall in the global price of uranium, and weak offshore mining slowed mining

growth. Mining dominates the primary sector (63%) with diamonds contributing the

largest share. Due to the arid climate, livestock production forms the largest share of

the agricultural sector. In order to address Namibia’s socio-economic disparities across

the regions/ constituencies, deeper structural reforms are required to broaden non-

mineral diversification and intensify added value in agriculture6.

Khomas houses the capital city of Windhoek; making it the administrative, legislative

and judicial centre of Namibia. It is also the commercial/ business, educational and

transport (ie. rail, road, air) centre of the country; most farming goods produced in the

surrounding areas are marketed through Windhoek. Khomas borders Hardap along its

southern boundary. This area forms the northern part of the former Rehoboth Gebiet7,

comprising an area which is predominantly cattle-producing (characteristic of central

Namibia). Hardap, however, is predominantly characterised by small livestock farming

as is the rest of southern Namibia.

The //Karas region is rich in natural resources, such as alluvial gold, diamonds, iron

and zinc, and hosts the country’s largest mining activities (predominantly in the region’s

western constituencies). The perennial Orange River is also a valuable resource to the

region, offering high potential for green scheme (irrigation) projects and tourism (eg.

river rafting). These projects could have a poverty reducing impact, especially in

Berseba, Keetmanshoop Rural and Karasburg constituencies8.

(b) Agriculture

At the national level, crop farming was the most common type of agriculture as it is

practiced by nearly 33% of households, followed by livestock farming (25%) and poultry

4 African Economic Outlook: Namibia, 2015. 5 African Economic Outlook: Namibia, 2015. 6 African Economic Outlook: Namibia, 2015. 7 The Rehoboth Basters, amongst other ‘Baster’ groups, migrated north of the Orange River, as they were not permitted to own land in the Cape. They searched for new homes and secure pastures. With Independence, their Gebiet ceased to exist; what remained were farms in the personal possession of individual Basters, making it difficult to maintain the cultural cohesion of the group. 8 Namibia Poverty Mapping, 2015.


farming (13.5%). In rural areas, more than half (57%) of households are involved in

crop farming followed by livestock farming (42%). Namibia is the most arid country in

sub-Saharan Africa; as such land is fragile and productivity is low. In addition, there is

substantial land degradation due to large numbers of livestock exceeding the carrying

capacity of the rangeland, as well as inappropriate agricultural practices9.

Due to the arid climate, pastoral livestock farming was the most common agricultural

practice in all regions of the project area (~8% in Khomas, ~19% in Hardap, and 12%

in //Karas). Crop and poultry farming were considerably less significant, specifically in

Hardap and //Karas. The project-affected constituencies throughout the 3 regions are

largely rural in nature and heavily reliant on small livestock farming. Overall, livestock

farming was even more significant at the constituency-level throughout the Project area

(Berseba (~45%), Gibeon (~37%), Rehoboth Rural (~26%), Keetmanshoop Rural

(~24%), Mariental Rural (~21%), and Windhoek Rural (~17%))10.

In the west, south and central areas of Namibia, the majority of households live in small

villages and their livestock forage in the surrounding commonage pastures (communal

land). On average, households have no more than 10 cattle, goats or sheep11.

All the potentially Project-affected farms interviewed indicated that they are involved in

agriculture. The majority of the farms are used for commercial livestock farming (cattle,

sheep and goats), the animals are sold on auction or to the local abattoirs. Many of the

farms also farm game; the game is sold for meat, for relocation to other farms or for

hunting.

(c) Tourism

In 2014, there were nearly 1.5 million foreign visitors to Namibia. The majority (~89%)

of the visitors were tourists; tourism grew by 34% between 2010 and 2014 and by 12%

between 2013 and 201412. During this time, Africans accounted for the largest

proportion of tourists to Namibia (notably Angolans, South Africans and Zambians at

40%, 26% and 11%, respectively), European tourists totalled 17% (predominantly

Germans at 7%), and 2% were North Americans. The reason for tourist travel to

Namibia differed by the origin of the tourists; most Africans (~56%) entered the country

to visit family and friends, while 75% of European and 73% of American tourists were

holidaymakers13.

The total economic contribution of travel and tourism equated to nearly 15% of

Namibia’s GDP in 2014, and is forecast to rise by 5.6% in 2015, and to rise by 7.2%

per annum until 2025 (21.6% of GDP)14. The total economic contribution includes all

9 Property Rights and Resource Governance Profile: Namibia, 2010. 10 Population and Housing Census Main Report (2013), Population and Housing Census: Khomas Regional Profile (2014), Population and Housing Census: Hardap Regional Profile (2014), and Population and Housing Census: //Karas Regional Profile (2014). 11 An Overview of Communal Land Tenure in Namibia, 2012. 12 Tourist Statistical Report, 2014. 13 Tourist Statistical Report, 2014. 14 Travel and Tourism Economic Impact Namibia, 2015.


direct, indirect and induced expenditure across the economy. Domestic tourists

accounted for more than 56% of all direct expenditure in this sector15.

The project affected regions are sparsely populated and generally valued for their vast

open spaces. Tourist attractions are focussed along the coast, with a number of specific

attractions located throughout the regions; namely the Hardap Dam, Fish River Canyon

and the hot water springs at Ai-Ais. The Project area is primarily used for stock farming;

increasingly some of the farmers are offering hunting and eco-tourism (hiking, horse

riding, mountain biking) experiences (see Section 3.1.15).

(d) Economically Active and Inactive Population

Khomas is the main employment centre in Namibia; providing jobs to 21% of the

employed population. As a result, Khomas (specifically Windhoek) sees high levels of

in-migration of rural dwellers in search of employment opportunities. //Karas region

provides about 5% of Namibia’s employment. Hardap region provides the least

employment of these regions.

Table 10: provides a summary of the labour force participation rates in the project area.

Of the country’s economically active population (employed and unemployed), 64% of

the national population aged 15 years and above were economically active and ~29%

were economically inactive16. The economically active population at the regional level

was significantly higher at 70% in Khomas, 71% in Hardap and 75% in //Karas.

Consequently, the percentage of economically inactive people is lower. In all regions,

more males are economically active than females; this is most notable in Hardap and

//Karas. There are slightly higher levels of economically active people in urban areas

across the project area, with the exception of //Karas where it was equal.

Across the project area, the levels of employment decreased between 2001 and 2011

and the levels of unemployment have increased; with the exception of Khomas where

employment levels remained the same. The highest unemployment rate is experienced

at the national level (37%), followed by Hardap (35%), then //Karas (32%), and Khomas

(30%).

Table 10: Economic Activity, 2011


2011 2001 2011 2011 2011 2001 2011 2011

Economically active, 15+ years (%) 64 54 74 76 71 64 75 67

Employed 63 69 70 70 65 66 68 71

Unemployed 37 31 30 30 35 34 32 29

Economically inactive, 15+ years (%) 29 39 21 21 23 29 19 24

Student 52 35 69 55 31 29 39 28

Homemaker 15 43 8 24 20 37 15 40

Retired, too old, etc. 27 22 15 21 39 33 35 32

15 Travel and Tourism Economic Impact Namibia, 2015. 16 Economically inactive people (ie. students, homemakers and income recipients) accounted for 28.5% of the population and information on 7.5% of the population was not available.





According to the Labour Force Survey (2014), the dependency ratio in Namibia is high,

at nearly 70%. As such, approximately 7 people must be sustained by every 10 people

of economically active age.

The primary employer at the national and regional level is the agricultural sector, with

the exception of Khomas where agriculture only accounts for 3% of employment. Retail

and construction are also relatively large employers. Administrative work is the most

dominant activity in the Khomas region and the second most dominant nationally.

Mining is the second largest employer in //Karas region but it is not significant

elsewhere. There are some tourist facilities located throughout the area, however these

are not significant contributors as regional employers. The main employers are listed

below.

Main employers in Namibia17:

Main employers in Khomas Region18:

agriculture, forestry and fishing (30%) administration and support (13%)

administration and support (9%) construction (11%)

wholesale and retail trade (7%) wholesale and retail trade (10%)

construction (7%) transportation and storage (7%)

Main employers in Hardap Region19:

Main employers in //Karas Region20:

agriculture, forestry and fishing (29%) agriculture, forestry and fishing (32%)

construction (12%) mining and quarrying (9%)

activities of private households (10%) wholesale and retail trade (6%)

wholesale and retail trade (8%) construction (6%)

17 Population and Housing Census Main Report (2013). 18 Population and Housing Census: Khomas Regional Profile (2014). 19 Population and Housing Census: Hardap Regional Profile (2014). 20 Population and Housing Census: //Karas Regional Profile (2014)


The main occupations of the employed population at the national and regional levels

are listed below.

Main occupations in Namibia21:

Main occupations in Khomas Region22:

skilled agricultural/ fishery workers

(26%)

service workers (17%)

elementary occupations (16%) elementary occupations (16%)

service workers (14%) craft and related trade workers (16%)

craft and related trade workers (12%) professionals (12%)

technician/associate professionals

(10%)

Main occupations in Hardap Region23:

Main occupations in //Karas Region24:

elementary occupations (24%) elementary occupations (26%)

skilled agricultural/fishery workers

(21%)

skilled agricultural/fishery workers

(20%)

craft and related trade workers (17%) service workers (13%)

service workers (13%) craft and related trades workers (12%)

(e) Income

Table 11: Primary income source shows the primary income sources across the

project area. At the national level, wages and salaries accounted for nearly half (48%)

of all household income. The second main source of income was farming (16%),

followed by pensions (14%), and non-farming business activities (12%). In urban areas,

68% of households reported wages and salaries as the main source of income, followed

by non-farming business activities (15%). The rural areas were very different, reporting

farming to be the primary income source (~30%), followed by wages and salaries (28%)

and pensions (22.5%).

At the regional level, wages and salaries also dominated as the primary source of

income, followed by business in Khomas and pensions in Hardap and //Karas. Despite

the prominence of agriculture as the primary employer and occupations, farming

accounted for only 7% and 5% in Hardap and //Karas, respectively and just 1% in

Khomas. Agriculture is a subsistence/ lifestyle activity for the majority of the population,

only those with the means to irrigate, apply fertilisers and employ labour can produce

adequate surpluses to be sold25. A similar pattern of income distribution is evident at

the constituency-level.

21 Population and Housing Census Main Report (2013) 22 Population and Housing Census: Khomas Regional Profile (2014). 23 Population and Housing Census: Hardap Regional Profile (2014). 24 Population and Housing Census: //Karas Regional Profile (2014) 25 An Overview of Communal Land Tenure in Namibia, 2012.


Table 11: Primary income sources, 2011 (%)


2011 2001 2011 2011 2011 2001 2011 2011

Farming 16 28 1 1 7 9 5 7

Wages/ Salaries 48 41 73 74 64 61 72 69

Cash remittance 5 6 5 7 7 7 5 6

Business (non-farming) 12 9 14 11 4 5 5 5

Pension 15 11 4 3 15 15 11 10




Wealth in Namibia is unevenly distributed, with a national Gini coefficient of 0.42.

Wealth inequalities are higher in rural areas (0.45) than in urban areas (0.24). Relative

to other regions, //Karas has one of the lowest wealth disparities at (0.28)26. However,

the incidence of poverty in //Karas is estimated at 14%, having decreased by 3.4% over

the past ten years. About 7% of the regional population is estimated to be severely

poor, having declined by 2.6% since 200127.

The incidence of poverty is estimated to be 17% in Hardap (highest in Gibeon,

Rehoboth Rural and Mariental Rural constituencies), 14% in //Karas (with Berseba

registering the highest incidence of poverty) and nearly 5% in Khomas region.

At the national level, the average monthly wage is N$6,626. The highest average wage

is N$21,749 per month (Mining and Quarrying), while the lowest is N$1,168 per month

(private household work). The average monthly wages recorded in the sectors

dominant in the project area are listed below28; for the majority of sectors males earn

more than females with the exception of agriculture and construction.

Sector Average Monthly Wage

mining and quarrying - N$21,749

service workers - N$4,665

administration and support - N$4,611

wholesale and retail trade - N$4,474

construction - N$4,140

agriculture, forestry and fishing - N$2,114

elementary occupations - None recorded

3.1.12 Health and Welfare

Nationally, there are 14 Regional Health Directorates that oversee service delivery in

34 health districts. The role of each district is to implement regionally directed

programmes and projects. Throughout Namibia, there are 30 public district hospitals,

26 The Namibia Demographic and Health Survey, 2014. 27 Namibia Poverty Mapping, 2015. 28 Labour Force Survey, 2014.


44 health centres, and 269 clinics. Given the vastness of the country, the sparse

distribution of the population, and the lack of access to permanent health facilities in

some communities, outreach (mobile clinic) services are provided at about 1,150

outreach points across the country. The national referral hospital (Windhoek Central

Hospital) provides support to the district hospitals29.

In Namibia, the average number of children born per woman dropped by almost 50%

to 3.6 children compared to 4.1 children in 2001 and 6.1 children in 1991. There has

been no change in fertility over the last 6 years30. In 2011, this rate was lower in urban

areas (3%) and higher in rural areas (4.3%). The regional and constituency level rates

are lower than the national rate at ~3% each (see Table 12:).

Nationally, the maternal median age of first births is 21.6 years; however there was an

increase in the percentage of young mothers (aged 15-19 years) from 15% in 2006/7

to 19%31. Teenage pregnancy is more than three times higher among young women in

the lowest wealth quintile than among those in the highest wealth quintile. Only half of

women make use of contraception; use is highest amongst those aged 25-29 years

and those living in urban areas. Contraceptive use is positively associated with

women’s level of education and wealth32

The crude death rate (number of deaths / 1,000 people) was the same for Namibia and

//Karas (10.7), lower in Khomas (6.7) and higher in Hardap (13). There were a higher

number of deaths in rural areas than in the urban centres, across Namibia, Khomas

and //Karas; in Hardap, deaths in urban areas exceeded those in rural areas (see Table

12: Health indicators).

Table 12: Health indicators, 2011


2011 2001 2011 2011 2011 2001 2011 2011

Average number children/

women (%)

3.6 4.1 2.8 4.9 3.5 3.6 3.1 3.1

Number of deaths/ 1,000 people 10.7 - 6.9 - 13 - 10.7 -

Urban 8.6 - 6.7 - 13 - 10.2 -

Rural 12.2 - 11.5 - 12 - 11.2 -

Disability (%) 5 5 3 4 4 6 4 3




Across the country, the HIV prevalence rate has been on the decline since 200233.

Between 2006 and 2014, the HIV prevalence rate amongst pregnant women receiving

antenatal care has gradually declined nationally from ~20% to 17%34.

29 The Namibia Demographic and Health Survey, 2014. 30 The Namibia Demographic and Health Survey, 2014. 31 The Namibia Demographic and Health Survey, 2014. 32 The Namibia Demographic and Health Survey, 2014. 33 National HIV Sentinel Survey, 2008. 34 Surveillance Report of the 2014 National HIV Sentinel Survey, 2014.


3.1.13 Infrastructure and Services

Table 13: Public infrastructure presents an overview of selected public infrastructure

in the project area. This is discussed further below.

Table 13: Public infrastructure, 2011 (%)


2011 2001 2011 2011 2011 2001 2011 2011

Safe water 80 87 99 98 93 95 92 94

Flush toilet (various) 40 - 76.2 - 54.5 - 64 -

No toilet facilities 49 69 20 20 35 34 23 26

Electricity for lighting 42 32 68 69 66 51 67 50

Wood/charcoal for cooking 54 62 8 9 45 20 28 35




(a) Water and Sanitation

In 2013, 87% of Namibian households had access to safe water sources (ie. 37% from

piped water into the dwelling, 14% from water piped to the yard, and 26% from a public

tap)35. Almost all urban households (98%) have access to safe water as compared to

76% of rural households36. Over half of households can access water immediately on

their premises, while 31% take less than 30 minutes to obtain drinking water, and 15%

take more than 30 minutes.

At the regional level, a far higher percentage of households have access to safe water

(99% in Khomas, 93% in Hardap, and 92% in //Karas). At the regional level, households

in urban areas largely had access to safe water; these levels were lower in rural areas.

The constituencies of Rehoboth Rural and Berseba have notably lower levels of access

to safe water at 84% and 85%, respectively.

A range of flush toilets are used across the project area. Flush toilets are dominant at

the regional level. At the national level, 49% of households have no toilet facilities.

Households with no toilet facilities are considerably higher in the rural areas. The

majority of the project area is located in rural constituencies with no access to toilet

facilities for over 45% of households in the project-affected constituencies in Hardap

and //Karas.

Poor sanitation and inadequate access to safe water are public health concerns as they

can create conditions conducive to the spread of diseases.

35 Namibia Demographic and Health Survey (2014). 36 Namibia Demographic and Health Survey, 2014.


(b) Energy Sources

The most dominant energy sources differ for lighting, cooking and heating. In Namibia,

the most common source of energy for lighting is electricity from the main grid (~42%);

with over two-thirds (70%) of urban households relying on electricity, and half of rural

households using candles for lighting. On the contrary, 54% of households use wood

for cooking (with over 86% relying on wood in the rural areas) and 33% use electricity.

At the regional level, the most common source of energy for lighting was electricity

(between 66% and 68%). The majority of households in urban and rural areas relied

on electricity (most dominant in urban areas), followed by candles.

Electricity is the main energy source used for cooking in Khomas, Hardap and //Karas

(64%, 49% and 42%). In Khomas, the second most common fuel sources were paraffin

and gas (14% each) and in //Karas, it was gas (29%). In Hardap, wood was almost as

commonly used for cooking as electricity at 45%. The majority of urban households use

electricity while wood is the most common fuel for cooking in rural areas.

(c) Housing

The most common house type varies across the project area. Nationally, traditional

dwellings are the most common (~38%), regionally, detached houses are the most

common; most notably in Hardap. The next most common house types nationally were

detached houses (~30%) and shacks (16%); shacks were the second most common

regionally. Traditional houses comprised 11% in //Karas and less than 0.6% in Khomas

and Hardap.

3.1.14 Land Tenure and Management

When Namibia gained independence in 1990, approximately 5,000 commercial farms

(averaging 7,200 ha in size) were owned by white farmers. These were primarily

commercial livestock farms. Communal land was largely used for subsistence/ livestock

farming and hunter-gatherer activities by approximately 1.5 million people

(predominantly Black)37. The Ministry of Lands and Resettlement38 was established and

was mandated to “manage, administer and ensure equitable access to Namibia’s land

resource”, as such, their mission was to ensure that Namibia’s land resources were

equitably allocated, efficiently managed and sustainably used for the benefit of all

Namibians39.

Private individuals, entities and the state are all able to own land40. There are 5 tenure

types specified in Namibia; namely ownership/freehold (private), communal,

conservancies, leasehold, and occupancy in informal settlements41. Of relevance to

this Project are private farms (ownership/ freehold tenure), and state-owned land

(communal and leasehold tenure); these are described further below.

37 Property Rights and Resource Governance Profile: Namibia, 2010. 38 Now the Ministry of Land Reform. 39 Ministry of Lands and Resettlement: Strategic Plan 2013-2017, 2013. 40 Legal Assistance Centre (2005) in Property Rights and Resource Governance Profile: Namibia, 2010. 41 Property Rights and Resource Governance Profile: Namibia, 2010.


Private ownership/ freehold tenure: Owners of freehold land in Namibia have

rights to hold the land in perpetuity, to use, transfer, and dispose of the land, and to

exclude others from the land. Forty-four percent of Namibia’s land comprises

freehold tenure.

Communal tenure: About 38% of Namibia is designated communal land. All

communal land is held in trust by the state, as stipulated in Article 17 (1) of the

Communal Land Reform Act of 2002: “Subject to the provisions of this Act, all

communal land areas vest in the State in trust for the benefit of the traditional

communities residing in those areas and for the purpose of promoting the economic

and social development of the people of Namibia, in particular the landless and

those with insufficient access to land who are not in formal employment or engaged

in non-agriculture business activities.”

Communal land cannot be sold; transfers of use rights are permissible and must be

administered by Traditional Authorities and Land Boards. Traditional Authorities

and Land Boards are responsible for allocating land for residences, agriculture, or

other uses recognised by the Minister. All communal land is registered with the

Land Board.

Leasehold tenure: Common law and the Communal Land Reform Act allow for

land leases. Leases of communal and commercial land can be granted by

Communal Land Boards and government officials for a period of 99 years and may

be transferred, inherited, renewed, and mortgaged. Namibians, who were

historically unable to access land, can apply for the use of commercial agricultural

land. The relevant authority will assign land to these farmers on a contract basis,

they are referred to as ‘resettlement farmers’; it is expected that the land must be

farmed commercially42.

3.1.15 Project Area

(a) Farm Status

The proposed transmission line passes through 89 farms43, the distribution and

ownership status44 of these farms is presented in Table 13: Distribution and tenure

status of affected farms. Figure 14: Land tenure map showing freehold and

communal areas illustrates the freehold and communal areas in the 3 project-affected

regions. Appendix 2 in the Social Assessment (refer to Appendix H: Technical

Specialist Reports) lists the details as provided by the Surveyor General, and the

affected farms have been mapped and highlighted for reference.

42 Pers comms, various respondents, October 2016. 43 This information was collected from the Deeds Office. The accuracy of the information is variable. 44 The ownership status is as captured at the Deeds Office in 2009.


Table 13: Distribution and tenure status of affected farms

Region Constituency Total Farms Private State-

Owned

Unknown

Individuals Companies

Khomas Windhoek Rural 28 22 6 - -

Hardap Mariental Rural 19 10 5 3 1

Mariental Urban 1 1 - - -

Rehoboth Rural 18 13 2 3 -

Gibeon 10 - - 10 -

//Karas Berseba 6 - 1 5 -

Keetmanshoop Rural 7 2 - 5 -

TOTAL 89 50 14 24 1

Source: Surveyor General, May 2016 and personal interviews, October 2016.

Figure 14: Land tenure map showing freehold and communal areas

Source: Adapted from An Overview of Communal Land Tenure in Namibia, 2012.

The farms located in Windhoek Rural are 100% privately owned by individuals or

companies. In Mariental Rural, Mariental Urban and Rehoboth Constituencies, ~82%

of the farms are privately owned and 16% are state-owned.

The Rehoboth ‘Baster Gebiet’ is largely located in Rehoboth Constituency and crosses

the boundary into the southern parts of Windhoek Rural Constituency. ‘Baster Gebiet’

Khomas

Hardap

//Karas


refers to land located in the vicinity of Rehoboth, Duineveld and Kalkrand towns. The

Rehoboth Basters, amongst other ‘Baster’ groups, migrated north of the Orange River,

as they were not permitted to own land in the Cape. They searched for new homes and

secure pastures. With Namibian independence, their communal ‘Gebiet’ ceased to

exist; the land was divided up into privately owned freehold farms (registered to

individual Basters); together with other factors, this made it difficult for the Baster

community to retain historical cultural cohesion45. These farms are often divided

between family members following the death of the registered owners; this occurs

informally and is not reflected at the Deeds Office. As such, in practice, these farms

may be smaller than those recorded at the Deeds Office.

South of Kries, almost 100% of the farms are state-owned in Gibeon and Berseba

constituencies. Five of the 7 affected farms in Keetmanshoop Rural (71%) are state-

owned and the remaining 2 are private. In Gibeon and Berseba, some of the state-

owned land is leased on a contract basis as ‘resettlement farms’; however, the majority

of state land is communal and under the jurisdiction of the Traditional Authorities. The

Ministry of Land Reform has over-arching responsibility for all state-owned land.

Straddling the boundary of the Hardap and //Karas regions is the communal land (this

includes the ‘pre-independence private farms); see Figure 14: and Appendix 2. The

proposed transmission line will run through this area, ending approximately 23km north-

east of Keetmanshoop. The communal area is referred to as Namaland and is occupied

and used by the Nama people. Kries, Gibeon, Amper-Bo, and Tses are some of the

established settlements that accommodate many of the Nama households, education

and healthcare facilities. There are structures (including kraals, water points, small

houses) scattered throughout the communal area, however these are sparsely

distributed.

Based on the information available from the Deeds Office, the farms vary from large

commercial farms to subsistence based farms. The farms range in size as follows:

Windhoek Rural – 55,7143 ha to 12486,3955 ha (average 4234 ha46);

Mariental Rural – 2132,5081 ha to 21125,4031 ha (average 6634 ha47);

Mariental Urban – 400,3935 ha48;

Rehoboth Rural– 0,1050 ha to 2950,5441 ha (average 1482 ha49);

Gibeon – 2184,8179 ha to10384,1156ha (average 6268 ha50);

Berseba – incomplete information51; and

Keetmanshoop Rural – 2158,2846 ha to 12483,0890ha (average 6724 ha52).

45 Rehoboth, Namibia – Past & Present, 2012. 46 Average based on 20 farms. 47 Average based on 16 farms. 48 Only 1 affected farm in Mariental Urban. 49 Average based on 10 farms. 50 Average based on 10 farms. 51 Farm area only provided for 1 out of 6 farms. 52 Average based on 6 affected farms.


(b) Land Use

Most Project affected farms are used for commercial livestock farming. Cattle, sheep

and goats are farmed across the Project area; the animals are sold to local abattoirs

and on auction. The private commercial farmers often own/ farm more than one farm;

this is most notable for the smaller land parcels that are not commercially viable when

farmed in isolation. Typically, each land parcel is divided into several camps (each one

fenced) to enable rotational grazing and effective farm management.

There are several other farms that practice commercial livestock agriculture and have

relatively significant tourism offerings (hunting and eco-tourism including (hiking/

walking, horse riding, mountain biking, and photography); they include but are not

limited to Hohenau, Hohewarte, Voigtland, Koichas, Rem. Of Ptn. 5 of Orab,

Wilderness Rem Ptn53.

There are 3 known farms that are used solely for tourism activities; namely Rem of

Gravenstein, Ptn 2 of Duineveld and Ptn 3 of Duineveld. Over the past 5 years, all

infrastructure and domesticated livestock have been removed and game introduced to

restore these farms to their natural and pristine state. The farms offer exclusive hunting

and eco-tourism options to guests.

Tourist numbers are reported to have been increasing into the area54, specifically to the

farms in Khomas and Rehoboth Rural constituencies due to their relative proximity to

Windhoek. The tourists that visit these farms include Namibians, South Africans,

Americans and Europeans.

Most of the commercial farmers reside on the farms together with their workers. Some

landowners live and work in town and use their farms as weekend retreats, the workers

manage the livestock in the absence of the landowner.

The ‘resettlement farms’ are required, by contract, to be farmed commercially. The

communal land is expansive and largely unfenced, livestock roam freely over the area

and due to the general lack of effective land management and lack of water, the area

is currently extremely over-grazed and degraded. There are no reports of tourism or

other economic activities on the ‘resettlement farms’ or communal land.

(c) Infrastructure and Services

It seems that almost all the potentially affected farms have some form of infrastructure

on them; notably residential dwellings, out-buildings, water sources, large fenced

camps, small kraals, gravel roads, fire breaks.

Access to reliable electricity supply, telephone lines and internet varies across the area.

53 This information is based on key informant interviews; not all land owners/users were contacted/ available for interviews. 54 Several of the land owners reported that the tourism market is increasing.


4 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

The proposed project comprises the construction and operation of a new 400 kV

transmission power line between the Kokerboom and Auas Substations. The proposed

transmission line corridor between the two substations is approximately 457 km long

and 500 m wide.

The proposed centreline of the power line was changed a number of times during the

scoping process to avoid sensitive environmental features, most notably mountain

slopes which are susceptible to erosion and support sensitive biota, current and future

land use, infrastructure (e.g. landingstrips and homesteads) and high-value cultivated

land. It also avoided socio-economic receptors and areas of high avifaunal sensitivity.

The transmission line centre line between the Kokerboom and Auas Substations

assessed during the Scoping Phase is presented in Appendix B: Site Locality Plan.

The centreline pass a number of towns; including (from north to south):

Dordabis (~13.5 km[1]),

Groot Aub (~33 km),

Rehoboth (~37 km),

Duineveld (~1 km),

Hoachanas (~52 km),

Kalkrand (~0.5 km),

Stampriet (~44 km),

Mariental (~7 km),

Kries (~1 km),

Amper-Bo (~3 km) and

Tses (16.5 km).

The proposed 400 kV transmission line will enter the Auas Substation from the South

West and the Kokerboom Substation from the North East.

The infrastructure proposed is illustrated in Appendix D: Facility Illustrations. It

includes a 400 kV transmission line conductor strung onto 45 m-high steel pylons, of

the Open-V or the Self-Supporting design, placed approximately 500 m apart. These

pylons are to be placed on a 10 m by 10 m concrete base. The line needs to be at least

100 m away from the 220 kV power line.

The proposed construction work to be carried out on the power line includes:

Site establishment, including site demarcation and fencing (temporary and only

where required), layout and establishment of the contractor’s camps including

ablution and cooking facilities (this will only be established if required by the

appointed Contractor);

[1] Distances were measured from the point in town closest to the proposed transmission line to the centre line.


Bush clearing at pylon base sites and to facilitate access (where necessary), for

construction and safe operation of the power line;

Excavation of holes for the concrete pylon base and foundations;

Casting of concrete platforms for the pylons (10 m x 10 m);

Transportation of plant, machinery and equipment to site;

Transport of the conductor into position by means of a pulley system or by rolling

large coils of conductor into position;

Hoisting and lifting of the pylons into position;

Stringing and regulation of the conductor;

Construction of the access road;

Rehabilitation of disturbed areas and erosion prevention;

Final inspection and handover for operation; and

Rehabilitation of the site.

The transmission power line will take approximately 24 months to construct, depending

on whether one or more Contractors are appointed to undertake the work and/ or the

working front is on both ends of the transmission line. Most experienced contractors

can string the lines at a rate of approximately 6 km/ day so the work will proceed along

the line relatively quickly. Each farmer will be ‘disturbed’ intermittently for a period of 6

to 8 weeks during the construction period. This period would depend on the length of

power line on each farm.

Prior to construction, a final ‘walkdown’ of the proposed centreline of the transmission

power line corridor alignment will be undertaken and the sites of each of the poles

finalised and demarcated. During final positioning of the poles sensitive features (e.g.

plant habitats and archaeological sites) will be avoided.

An Environmental Management Plan (EMP) for the construction phase will be

compiled. It will be included in the tender documentation and the Contract with the

appointed Contractor. It will contain all the mitigation measures/ management actions

proposed in this EIA process and will be included in draft format in the Assessment

Report, which will be compiled in the next phase of this EIA.

NamPower is required to negotiate with each individual affected property owner

regarding compensation and mitigation. If Environmental Clearance is granted and

prior to construction, NamPower will approach each one of the potentially affected

farmers with the view of negotiating use of a ‘right of way’ servitude (80 m i.e.

approximately 40 m either side of the centre line of the power line) over the affected

properties for the purpose of constructing and operating the proposed transmission line.

Negotiations will include access requirements (including gates), which will be locked at

all times; keys will be provided to both parties. Infrequent access will be required

(approximately every 3 years).

All areas marked as no-go areas, identified by means of the EIA process, located inside

the servitude shall be treated with the utmost care and responsibility. The final servitude

will need to be registered and the land handed over to NamPower. Access to the


servitude will need to be negotiated and the necessary infrastructure erected e.g.

access roads and gates.

After construction the power line will immediately put into operation and if appropriately

maintained will have a lifespan of at least 30 years plus.

All parties operating the power lines or performing ongoing maintenance must comply

with NamPower’s safety standards.

NamPower has operated the existing 400 kV and 220 kV powerlines between the

Kokerboom and Auas Substations for the past 17 and 37 years, respectively. The

Kokerboom and Auas Substations have been operated by NamPower for the past 37

(with the new section for the 400 kV power line entry being commissioned 17 years

ago) and 17 years, respectively. These substations will not be expanded in this

proposed Project.

NamPower Wires Business Section will be the owner and operator of the proposed

transmission power line. The operation and maintenance of the new power line will be

a continuation of the current NamPower operational and maintenance activities for

transmission lines, namely:

Transportation of plant, machinery and equipment to site in the event of

maintenance work or restringing being required;

Transport of the conductor into position by means of a pulley system or by rolling

large coils of conductor into position (if a conductor needs replacing);

Hoisting and lifting of any pylons parts into position (if needing repair/

replacement);

Stringing and regulation of the conductor in the event of maintenance work or

restringing being required;

Repair and maintenance of the access road;

Vegetation management, including herbicide application and manual vegetation

clearing;

Erosion prevention;

Final inspection and handover of any construction sites;

Site inspections, including Technical and Safety, Health, Environment and

Wellness (SHEW); and

Rehabilitation of any disturbed areas.

High voltage power lines require a clearance area for safety precautions. Shrubs which

interfere with the operation and/or reliability of the power line must be trimmed or

completely cleared. The clearing of vegetation must take place, with the aid of a

surveyor, along approved profiles and in accordance with this EMP and NamPower’s

standards for vegetation clearing. A vegetation specialist may need to be consulted

during initial and ongoing vegetation clearance.

After the power lines has reached the end of its lifespan it will be decommissioned.


The above construction and operational activities formed the development ‘proposal’

(hereafter referred to as the proposed project) as assessed in the environmental

assessment process.

An Environmental Management Plan (EMP) for the operational phase will also be

compiled. It will contain all the mitigation measures/ management actions proposed in

this EIA process and will be included in draft format in the Assessment Report, which

will be compiled in the next phase of this EIA.

4.1 Alternatives

A number of alternatives (‘no-go’, technology, methods of construction and operation,

equipment, and mitigation measures) to the construction and operation of the

transmission power line were considered by NamPower and assessed during the EIA

process.

The ‘no-go’ alternative is not recommended given the importance of the Kokerboom to

Auas Substation transmission line in the supply of power to Namibia and fulfilment of

the NamPower’s mandate. Without upgrades to the transmission line network future

electricity supply in Namibia will become constrained, and as a result, restrict

development (mining, industrial and residential) and negatively impact quality of life in

the country as a whole.

The purpose of the Kokerboom to Auas Substation 400 kV transmission line project is

to support system reliability. Additional benefits include improved network stability and

redundancy, improved network capacity to supply the system demands, improved

dynamic stability and lower network power losses. The proposed line will also enable

NamPower to accommodate increased electricity transfer and wheeling from south to

north and vice versa, thus increasing utilisation of the network to the benefit of all.

The proposed transmission power line does not only serve the specific area where the

transmission power line is to be constructed, but is for the benefit of the Namibian

electricity transmission backbone and Namibian economy as a whole. The expected




existing 400 kV line between Auas and Kokerboom Substations can be accommodated

(hence relying only on the 220 kV interconnector from South Africa) is becoming less

and less each year as the Namibian electricity load grows.

It is proposed that the line construction be completed by 2023, or as soon thereafter as

possible.


During this environmental process the transmission line route (centreline) was revised

to avoid impacts on existing infrastructure, as far as possible. NamPower identified a

suitable routing option for the transmission line with input from the environmental

consultants and relevant specialists. The line was realigned several times to avoid and

reduce potential negative impacts of the proposed Project on the environment, and in

particular socio-economic receptors (notably infrastructure) and areas sensitive from

an avifauna perspective. Each alternative was scoped and a new alternative put

forward for assessment that avoided potential negative biophysical as well as socio-

economic impacts. The favoured alternative is presented in Appendix B: Site Locality

Plan.

Mitigation and management alternatives were considered by the technical specialists

when making suggestions to avoid/ reduce negative impacts.

In sourcing the specific equipment for the proposed transmission line project,

NamPower will assess alternatives in terms of availability, efficiency, compatibility with

the existing equipment, cost and environmental sustainability, before making a final

decision.

Operational alternatives are limited as NamPower already has an operational protocol

for the existing 400 kV power lines, and specifically for the two lines between the

Kokerboom and Auas Substations, which is working well. Operational procedures will

be a continuation of the status quo, as new operational procedures are considered

unnecessary by NamPower given that the current ones are tried and tested and

considered effective, efficient and sustainable.


5 POTENTIAL IMPACTS

The objective of the impact assessment, in the context of this scoping assessment, was

to undertake a preliminary assessment of the significant environmental (biophysical

and socio-economic) impacts that may arise as a result of the proposed activities, in

terms of the following criteria:

a. Nature of the impact

b. Extent of the impact

c. Duration of the impact

d. Intensity

e. Reversibility

f. Irreplaceability

g. Consequence

h. Probability of occurrence

i. Significance

j. Degree of confidence in predictions

k. Cumulative impacts

A description of these criteria and how the results of the assessment methodology links

to recommendations for decision-making are presented in Appendix G: Assessment

Methodology.

The significance of a potential impact is based on the combination of consequence of

the impact and probability of the impact occurring, and defines the level to which the

impact will influence the proposed project and/or the environment. It determines

whether mitigation measures need to be identified and implemented or whether the

resource is irreplaceable and/or the activity has an irreversible impact. Significance is

rated as either Low, Medium (Moderate) or High.

Impacts of a Low significance should not have an influence on the decision to proceed

with the proposed project, if recommended mitigation measures to mitigate impacts are

implemented. Impacts of a Medium (Moderate) significance should influence the

decision to proceed with the proposed project, provided that recommended measures

to mitigate impacts are implemented. Impacts of a High significance strongly influence

the decision to proceed with the proposed project regardless of mitigation measures.

A summary table was completed for each identified impact in each phase of the project

lifetime, without and with effective mitigation measures in place. A detailed assessment

of all identified impacts, for both the construction and operational phases, will be

undertaken in the Assessment phase of the EIA and documented in the Assessment

Report. The Assessment phase technical specialist studies will identify the most

practical and economically viable management, mitigation and monitoring measures.


5.1 Identification of Potential Impacts

NamPower identified the transmission line corridor alignment (and its proposed

centreline position and subsequent amendments thereof) in consultation with the

directly affected land owners, key stakeholders, and with input from the environmental

consultants, relevant technical specialists and registered I&APs. The screening of

corridor alignments and the development of a “preferred” alignment has already served

to avoid and reduce potential negative impacts of the proposed project on biophysical

and socio-economic receptors, notably avifaunal sensitive areas, infrastructure and

cultivated land.

The key impacts that may arise as a result of the construction of the proposed 500 km

400 kV transmission power line from the Kokerboom Substation to the Auas Substation

for the construction and operational phase, as well as the cumulative impacts, are

briefly discussed below per technical discipline for the construction and operational

phases. Many of the potential impacts are

5.1.1 Construction Phase

Landuse:

The negative impacts linked to the proposed Project will be localised (and limited to a

demarcated construction site and is largely far away from development and

homesteads) and will affect land owners, land users and tourists in different ways.

Existing agricultural activities will largely be able to continue unhindered during the

construction and operation processes. As far as possible landing strips and farms used

for high-end tourism activities has been avoided.

Some planning will be required to minimise disruptions during construction. Tourism

activities may be more sensitive to the construction phase nuisance factors.

Visual and Sense of Place:

The area is characterised by wide open untouched spaces, agricultural lands (cattle

and game farming) and tourism ranches. The general sense of place could be affected

by visual, noise and dust impacts linked to the proposed Project if allowed to take place

without planning and management. Noise and dust impacts are likely to be generated

by construction vehicles and equipment, as well as an increased number of people on

the working site(s). These factors may change the ‘feel’ of the area and create

increased levels of annoyance during the 24 month construction phase.


Terrestrial Ecology:

The transmission line corridor has been realigned to avoid traversing areas of high

botanical diversity and endemism, as well as sensitivity. No fatal flaws were identified.

The northern section of the route traverses the Highland Savanna, a zone of high

diversity and endemism, but most of the species of high concern are concentrated on

slopes of mountains and koppies, which are largely avoided by the route. Should this

proposed corridor change then damage or destruction to endemic plant species would

be of concern.

However, the proposed powerline corridor traverses areas where there are dense

stands of the endemic Acacia erioloba, including many of appreciable size and age.

Because this is a slow-growing, protected species facing increasing cumulative impacts

country-wide, negative impacts on this species will have to be strictly constrained and

regulated. Illegal collection of plant material such as wood or pods should be prevented

within the construction site, once declared.

A “walkdown” of the proposed pylon sites by a professional botanist, prior to

construction, is recommended.

Given careful planning and placement of pylon sites and mitigation of unnecessary

collateral damage to vegetation specifically, damage to the flora could be very limited

due to the linear nature of the proposed facility and relatively narrow, greatly limiting

the probable extent of impact on any habitat or species.

Small animals that may be resident on the site are likely to move away.

Avifauna:

The proposed construction activities will be restricted to the site and thus potential

impacts on the avifauna are predicted to be low.

A potential impact of construction is that habitat degradation could occur due to

negligence on the part of the Contractor and this may be detrimental to bird breeding

or feeding conditions.

The potential impacts of the proposed development are estimated on the basis of

available data from long-term bird monitoring projects and from experience of impacts

from other power lines.

The field survey will investigate these aspects in relation to the bird species expected

to occur in the project area.

Floodline:

The proposed transmission power line is expected to have little impact on the

environment as it relates to floodlines. The impacts of the environment on the project

will be more significant. In this context the habitat is able to withstand significant


disturbance without a marked impact on its biodiversity. The affected environment

could thus be categorised as having a high tolerance to disturbance from the envisaged

infrastructure.

No negative impacts are foreseen on the floodline that cannot be effectively mitigated

to an acceptable significance.

The impacts in the construction phase will relate mainly to excavations required for the

pylon foundations. This may require blasting and the disposal of surplus excavation

material.

The floodline assessment will assist in ensuring that the power line route is selected

and optimised taking into consideration the preliminary route identified.

Archaeology and Heritage Resources:

The potential impacts of the proposed development are estimated on the basis of

available data from previous surveys. The proposed development may result in direct

disturbance to or destruction of archaeological remains, early colonial sites and grave

sites, as well as visual impact on the physical setting of the sites. The baseline

archaeological survey undertaken during the assessment phase will confirm the

presence or absence of archaeological sites in the area of the proposed development.

Social:

The positive impact associated with the construction of the proposed transmission line

is the improved transmission network nationally. This impact may serve to enhance the

economy as commercial and private electricity provision becomes more reliable and

consistent potentially enabling business enhancements and a generally better quality

of life. Some direct, indirect and induced employment opportunities will be created by

the Project itself and through procurement spend. Benefits will be limited in the local

area as the successful Contractor (origin still to be determined through an open tender

process) is likely to use skilled workers that are already known and trusted by them.

Some short-term contract employment should be available to local people.

The footprint of the proposed project will not result in the loss of agricultural land; the

transmission line has been aligned to avoid impacts to cultivated land. However,

agricultural activities could be disrupted during the course of the construction activities.

These disruptions could occur as a result of scheduling conflicts, interference with, or

damage to, farm infrastructure, (e.g. fences, gates and water resources).

Typically, an influx of workers and job-seekers can be anticipated into an area where

there are potential job opportunities. Influx can be associated with increased levels of

crime, increased spread of sexually transmitted diseases (including HIV/AIDS),

unwanted pregnancies, domestic violence, alcohol and drug abuse, and increased

levels of tension within the communities.


5.1.2 Operational Phase Land use:

Few operational impacts are predicted as a result of the proposed development as

NamPower and the surrounding farms have operated successfully in the past and very

few operational changes are expected as a result of the proposed Project. If operational

problems do arise these can be mitigated through altered management actions.

Visual and Sense of Place:

Tourism activities may be more sensitive to the visual intrusion of the power line (and

other infrastructure such as access roads) during the operational phase. These could

impact on the sense of place for some receptors. Where the power line is visible,

specifically from private residences, some of the land owners and users may also

experience a negative effect on sense of place. Not all tourists and land owners will

respond in the same way to the existence of the line. Local experience of existing power

lines, however, indicates that existing lines have not affected tourism or sense of place

for most receptors.

Terrestrial Ecology:

Minimal negative impacts are anticipated on the terrestrial ecology due to the fact that

access to the transmission line is only required infrequently.

Direct destruction of, or damage to, protected and/or endemic plant species, Acacia erioloba in particular. Illegal collection of plant material such as wood or pods. Avifauna:

The potential impacts of the proposed development on the avifauna were assessed on

the basis of available data from long-term bird monitoring projects and from experience

of operational impacts from other power lines.

The main impacts of power line operation on birds are:

Birds colliding with the lines. There are a number of species that are particularly

vulnerable to power line collision, to the extent that they are now considered

threatened specifically because of high mortality rates from power line

collisions resulting in declining populations. e.g. large cursorial birds such as

bustards, Secretarybird, wetland birds (e.g. flamingos), and birds of prey

(mainly vultures and large eagles). All these species have low reproductive

rates. This is the most important environmental issues from the perspective of

avifaunal conservation and power lines.

Birds being electrocuted on the lines, mainly large-bodied species and usually

on the towers, and mainly impacting large slow-breeding species. This threat

has largely been eliminated in the design of modern support structures and the

careful selection of infrastructure.


Degradation of breeding and/or feeding habitat. Disturbance and destruction of

nests during inspection and maintenance, mainly relevant to threatened

species breeding on the support structures.

The main impacts of birds on power lines are:

Birds causing short-circuits (flash-overs) and potential power outages and

damage to equipment. This can happen when birds are electrocuted, when

fish-eating birds perch above insulators and defecate over insulators;

Birds building nests in support towers which may cause short circuits,

particularly after rain, and catch fire causing damage to infrastructure; and

Defecation on insulators mainly by large, sometimes colonial, fish-eating birds

where power lines pass close to large water bodies.

The field survey will investigate these aspects in relation to the bird species expected

to occur in the Project Area.

Floodline:

The anticipated impacts are related to erosion damage to the access road, the

unsurfaced access track and to the pylons from stormwater runoff.


The predicted impacts on archaeological and heritage resources are the inadvertent

damage to archaeological sites within the project servitude during normal operational

activities, i.e. line maintenance; unregulated public use of servitude tracks resulting in

damage to archaeological sites.

Social:

The positive impact associated with the operation of the proposed transmission line is

the improved transmission network nationally. This impact may serve to enhance the

economy as commercial and private electricity provision becomes more reliable and

consistent potentially enabling business enhancements and a generally better quality

of life.

Some direct, indirect and induced employment opportunities will be created by the

Project itself although this is limited in the operational phase as work is mainly for highly

skilled and technical workers. Bush clearing opportunities do exist. This work should

be available to local Contractors and workers.

Tourism activities may be more sensitive to nuisance factors during the operational

phase.

The presence of transmission lines affects the ease with which helicopters/ gyrocopters

(and similar aircraft) can fly over the farms. These aircraft are used by a small number

of farmers as a means of managing farming activities. Flying becomes increasingly

risky as a result of the lines due to low visibility and an inability to fly close to the ground


in areas where lines are present. The addition of this proposed line will negatively affect

farm management for some farmers.

5.1.3 Cumulative Impacts

Land use: Limited cumulative impacts on land use are anticipated. Visual:

Visual damage due to uncontrolled creation of unsightly tracks.

Terrestrial Ecology: Acacia erioloba is being over-harvested for wood and for pods at present. Cumulative impacts are likely to be of concern in future.

Avifauna:

Every additional power line constructed poses an additional threat, particularly to

species vulnerable to collision. The more spread-out across the landscape are the

power lines, the greater the threat. Bundling transmission lines as closely as possible

reduces the geographic footprint and thus the exposure of a larger part of the

populations of vulnerable bird species to risk.

Floodline:

It is not expected that there will be long term cumulative impacts of the transmission

power lines running within the same Study Area and at times parallel to each other, on

the stormwater runoff and drainage of the catchments.

The access track will need to be planned carefully to avoid cumulative impacts of

channelling stormwater flows, which could eventually lead to erosion gullies.

The potential impact of floods on the proposed infrastructure is negligible if the

proposed mitigation measures and management actions are implemented. Without

mitigation the impact on the cost of repairs to pylons can be significant. Resulting power

outages can have major downstream impacts on the Namibian economy.

Social: The cumulative visual impact and hence the impact on sense of place, and the

cumulative impact on disruption to farm management - resulting from the addition of

the proposed transmission line - will exacerbate the already negative impacts

experienced as a result of existing lines for some receptors.



Encroachment of servitude tracks on archaeological sites and possible accelerated soil

erosion as a result of water run-off from compacted track surfaces is a concern. These

potential cumulative impacts can, however, be mitigated.

5.2 Mitigation of Impacts

The basic principle of mitigation is to guide development to either avoid potential

negative impacts or achieve the least possible negative impact on resources. Mitigation

measures and/ or management actions are designed to reduce the consequence or

probability of an impact, or to reduce both consequence and probability. Mitigation

measures will be refined and expanded upon in the detailed assessment phase, with

input from the technical specialists and NamPower. Mitigation measures aim to be

practicable with measurable targets, as far as possible.

The transmission line route has already been altered to avoid impacts on existing

infrastructure and cultivated land. NamPower identified suitable routing options for the

transmission line in consultation with the directly affected land owners, key

stakeholders, and with input from the environmental consultants and relevant

specialists. The realignment has already served to avoid and reduce potential negative

impacts of the proposed Project on socio-economic receptors (notably infrastructure

and cultivated land).

Further mitigation will strive to achieve the following:

Rectification: impact is mitigated after it has occurred e.g. rehabilitation of areas

disturbed by construction;

Compensation: providing a substitute resource for a resource that has been lost

because of the project (e.g. “conservation offsets”);

No action (least preferred); and

Enhancement: establish optimisation measures that will enhance the benefits

of the positive impacts.

Landuse: Mitigation of potential impacts will take the form of restriction of working areas and access routes and the rehabilitation of the construction phase track used during the stringing of the transmission line. Visual and Sense of Place: Visual disturbance and loss of sense of place can be largely mitigated by the sensitive alignment of the power line to avoid sensitive receptors and the use of the least visually intrusive infrastructure, as well as the careful placement thereof when the final alignment and pylon positioning is determined.


Terrestrial ecology: Whenever possible trees, in particular camel thorn trees (Acacia erioloba), should be trimmed rather than destroyed. This applies particularly to the construction and operational phases. Wherever possible pylon sites should be carefully selected and placed so as to avoid pan edges, banks of rivers and other drainage lines, and large camel thorn trees. Creation of additional tracks, including those made by bulldozers and other large construction vehicles, outside of the service track should be not be permitted unless absolutely necessary. Staff camps should be pre-determined and marked. Penalties should be in place for all Contractors and Sub-contractors that cause unnecessary collateral damage. Random collection of wood for fuel and/or heating should be forbidden. No harvesting of wood by operational/maintenance staff should be permitted. Any wood used by staff for any purpose whatsoever must be permitted wood supplied by the farmers along the route themselves, or be invader species wood sourced from elsewhere. Plant collection of any plants or parts thereof, including seeds and pods, should be forbidden. Penalties, including dismissal for repeat offenders, should be in place for all transgressors. Avifauna:

Avifaunal mitigation measures for power lines typically focus on (a) alignment to avoid

potential risk areas, (b) means to limit habitat degradation, (c) ways to reduce birds

colliding with lines, (d) avoid electrocution and (e) reduce the likelihood of flash-overs

that may cause power disruptions and damage to equipment. In addition, the

Environmental Management Plan usually requires a level of monitoring that would

reveal any unanticipated impacts.

The issue of birds colliding with power lines is usually significantly more important than

the other potential impacts. Reducing the extent of collision is usually best approached

by:

Aligning the power line to avoid the proximity of wetlands and bird flight paths,

as well as habitat that supports high populations of vulnerable species. In the

case of perhaps the most vulnerable cursorial species in the area of the

proposed Kokerboom to Auas 400kV transmission line, Ludwig’s Bustard, Kori

Bustard and Secretarybird, the gentry undulating sparsely vegetated shrub

karoo and semi-arid gravel and sandy plains of the savanna biomes, with

somewhat more vegetated ephemeral drainage lines to the east of the

Windhoek to Keetmanshoop road would be expected to support larger

populations of these high-risk species than the more broken, rocky and hilly

terrain to the west of the road;


Bundling power lines as closely together as possible, to reduce the geographic

impact across the population distribution of high-risk species;

Where an existing line of the same type (e.g. an existing 400 kV line of the same

configuration) exists, aligning the proposed new line as closely as possible to

this, so that the line and tower heights are approximately the same;

Adjusting the distribution of the support structures of the proposed new

transmission line to fall approximately mid-way between the support structures

of the existing line. This could increase the visibility of both lines, each mitigating

potential mid-line collision of the other, and may have a significant impact on

reducing the incidents of collision on both lines. It may also reduce the need for

the use of line markers; and

If, after field assessment, collision is considered to be a significant risk in

sections of the line, then line markers (e.g. flappers) may be considered for high

risk areas.

The design of the towers, insulators and line configuration is important to avoid

electrocution. Fitting perch dissuaders (e.g. wire brushes) above insulators or providing

alternative perch sites have been used where birds foul insulators, causing short

circuits. These possible mitigation approaches will be considered if due justification is

found from the field assessment.

Floodline: The footprint of construction activities must be clearly defined, especially during the initial clearing and levelling operations. Pylon footings must avoid all streams where possible. Where footings must, of necessity be placed in stormwater run-off channels they must be protected against erosion. Movement of vehicles needs to be strictly monitored. The access route must be identified and pegged before any construction work commences. Existing roads must be utilised where possible. Monitoring of erosion following any stormwater runoff is required so that damage can be assessed and repairs effected. It is recommended that more detailed studies be carried out during the assessment phase to make specific recommendations regarding the mitigation measures and management actions. Archaeology and Heritage Resources:

The basic principle of archaeological mitigation is to guide development to achieve the

least possible impact on protected archaeological resources. Thus, field survey,

documentation and evaluation of archaeological sensitivity are indispensable

precursors of mitigation. The field survey results not only inform the process towards

mitigation but also serve as a basic record of the archaeology in the event of inadvertent

impact. Where impact is an unavoidable consequence of development full


archaeological mitigation is required to comply with national laws, international

guidelines and professional best practice standards. This may involve higher level

documentation, collection and removal of archaeological remains and excavation of

sites such as graves. The decision as to the most appropriate mitigation course is taken

by the NHC in light of recommendations set out in a project mitigation proposal.

Archaeological mitigation may also include the fine adjustment of the power line

alignment during the “walkdown”, demarcation of archaeological “no-go” areas and

buffer zones for the positioning of pylons, buffer zones for deviations in the servitude

track; the proclamation of archaeological Conservation Areas under the National

Heritage Act, and negotiation of substantial changes in the project footprint. It is an

important principle that damage to archaeological sites is irreparable and must

therefore be avoided if at all possible. It is a further principle, also held in the National

Heritage Act, that both the archaeological site and its physical/ visual setting are

protected under the law. At all times the precautionary principal should be applied.

No specific sites are recommended for such actions at this stage. An Archaeological

Chance Finds procedure contains guidelines for mitigation of new archaeological finds

that may be made in the course of construction and operation and will be incorporated

into the EMPs for the Construction and Operational phases.

It is therefore likely that archaeological remains, if present, have been disturbed or

damaged. Disturbance or destruction of archaeological remains during construction is

a risk, as is the potential negative impact on the physical landscape setting of

archaeological sites.

Should artefacts be found these must be appropriately managed to avoid negative

impacts and preserve the remains and applicable legislation followed. If found, the

immediate advice of a professional archaeology specialist or the NHC must be sought

in this regard before any further damage is done. The area should be immediately

marked and cordoned off until expert instruction is obtained. Detailed documentation

should be kept and possible excavation of affected archaeological sites be actioned,

following advice.

Social:

Mitigation measures include the restriction of working hours, location of Contractor’s

Camps, a protocol for the communication of complaints, which will all be contained

within the EMP for the construction phase.

5.3 Summary of Identified Potential Impacts

Potential environmental and social impacts of the proposed construction and operation

of the 400 kV power line between the Kokerboom and the Auas Substations were

assessed as part of the EIA process. These potential positive and negative impacts

were spread through the four project phases. Some of the major impacts and the

proposed mitigation measures within each of the project phases.


Pre-Construction Phase

The first site activities before mobilization of equipment will be a survey, required for

final design of power line structures. It is advisable that walk downs by the vegetation,

avifaunal and heritage specialists be undertaken, and be used to inform the final pylon

prior to their finalisation. These are only required in areas that have been identified as

being sensitive. The avifaunal walk down should identify the spans that will require

mitigation devices to be installed, if required. There could be negative impacts on land

associated with storage of construction materials especially if on agriculturally

productive land or land utilised for wildlife tourism. Expectations of improvement in

livelihood among locals must be addressed. Construction contracts will include

environmental monitoring and management procedures and requirements. These must

be in place prior to the commencement of any construction activities.

Construction Phase

This phase of the activity will have both positive and negative impacts. The positive

impacts are some employment opportunities offered to the construction workers and

any other labourer who will be hired to provide their services during the construction

phase. The negative impacts would include wastes generated, accidents, health and

safety, air, dust and noise pollution, vegetation clearance, soil erosion, socio-

environmental issues, loss of trees, and compaction of soil. Most of the negative

impacts are minor and temporary. To mitigate negative impacts, the contractor shall

ensure that all staff have adequate protective clothing and are adequately trained. The

whole range of mitigation measures are however, outlined in the EMP for the

construction phase in this regard.

Operational Phase

The proposed project will have minimal negative effects which mainly relate to loss of

aesthetic value as well as nuisance to affected landowners. Operationally-related

nuisances (noise, dust, litter, disruption to livelihoods and activities) can be fully

mitigated to acceptable levels, provided mitigation measures stipulated in the EMP are

followed. An environmentalist from within NamPower’s SHEW Section should be

employed throughout the operation and during all maintenance activities on the line to

ensure mitigation is effectively implemented.

Decommissioning Phase

As with any project, the facilities used in this project will have a lifespan after which they

may no longer be cost effective to continue with operation or may degrade and become

inoperable. At that time (> 30 years after construction of the power line), the project

would be decommissioned, and the existing equipment removed and most likely

replaced. The mitigation measures highlighted in the construction phase will once again

become applicable as the construction of new infrastructure would essentially be

associated with similar activities and would likely result in similar impacts. The disposal

of materials from the decommissioned structures is not viewed as high risk. Much of

the material would be recyclable (steel structures) or inert (insulators, concrete

foundations, etc.). Very little contaminated soil, if any, is expected. These materials

would, however, need to be disposed of at a formal waste disposal or recycling centre.

Mitigation measures implemented during construction phase with regards to site

establishment and equipment will remain the same for the decommissioning phase.


Only existing access roads shall be used. Ongoing stakeholder involvement (via

community leaders and key affected stakeholders) is also recommended during this

phase, including notification of start and process to be followed, activities expected and

their scheduling, community health and safety, as well as a reporting channel should

problems arise. All exposed soil surfaces shall be revegetated to limit erosion. All exotic

vegetation must be removed from the site.

Based on the above information, it is unlikely that the project will have many adverse

social and environmental impacts. Most adverse impacts will be of a temporary nature

during the construction phase and can be managed to acceptable levels with

implementation of the recommended mitigation measures for the project such that the

overall benefits from the project will greatly outweigh the few adverse impacts. All the

negative impacts will either be moderate or lesser in rating and could be easily

mitigated. Generally, the proposed power line will result in appreciable benefits to the

people of Namibia and accompany opportunities for development in the country.

The potential impacts identified during the construction and operational phases are

summarised as follows:

Environmental Aspect

Project Phase Significance of Potential

Impact without Mitigation

Significance of Potential Impact with Mitigation

Avifauna Construction Low (-) Low (-)

Operation High (-) Low (-)

Flora Construction Low (-) Low (-)


Fauna Construction Low (-) Low (-)

Operation Moderate (-) Low (-)

Archaeology and Heritage Resources

Construction Moderate (-) Low (-)


Floodlines Construction Low (-) Low (-)


Social Construction (Disruption to livelihoods, activities and lifestyles, Destruction or disruption of homesteads and farm infrastructure)

Low-Medium (-) Very Low (-)

Operation (Change of sense of place, Disruption to farm management)

Moderate (-) Low-Moderate (-)

Economic Construction (Employment and procurement)

Low (+) Low-Moderate (+)

Operation (benefits to the economy)

Low-Moderate (+)

Low-Moderate (+)


Note: 1. These findings are from a preliminary assessment and will be confirmed in the

Impact Assessment phase of the EIA through detailed studies. 2. Impacts can be Negative (-), Neutral (*) or Positive (+). 3. The significance of a potential impact is based on the combination of

consequence of the impact and probability of the impact occurring, and defines the level to which the impact will influence the proposed project and/or the environment. It determines whether mitigation measures need to be identified and implemented or whether the resource is irreplaceable and/or the activity has an irreversible impact. Significance is rated as either Low, Moderate (Medium) or High.

This assessment, by the EAP, was based on the technical specialist’s scoping reports

on the sensitivity of the receiving environment, as well as the advice of Dr. Simmons

(avifaunal specialist).

Given the low significance of negative potential impacts, and the potential for positive

impacts of a high significance on social and economic development, as well as the fact

that the proposed project will have a positive impact on the ability of NamPower to

continue providing the services of power, the scoping phase of the EIA recommended

that the proposed project be subject to a detailed assessment. During this phase it is

proposed that EMPs for the construction and operational phases be prepared. These

EMPs would contain all the mitigation measures/ management actions, proposed by

the technical specialists and EAP, to avoid or reduce the potential negative impacts

and be implemented by the responsible parties, should the proposed project receive

Environmental Clearance.

It was not recommended that the ‘no-go’ alternative be considered given the

importance of the proposed additional power line between the Kokerboom and the

Auas Substations in the overall power supply system in Namibia.


6 PUBLIC CONSULTATION PROCESS

As required by the Environmental Management Act (Act No. 7 of 2007) and in terms of by the EIA Regulations, 2012, and the Competent Authority, a public consultation process (or Public Participation Process - PPP) was undertaken as part of the EIA process (refer to Appendix E: Public Participation Information for documents relating to this process and referred to below). The pubic consultation process aimed to inform all I&APs and Organs of State of the proposed transmission line project and the potential environmental impacts thereof. The process was considered adequate and special attention was given to the involvement of local communities within the proposed power line corridor. The process was facilitated in such a manner that all potential I&APs were provided with a reasonable opportunity to comment on the Application. All the comments received were recorded and responded to and this was captured in the Comments and Responses Report, as prescribed in the EIA Regulations, and is appended as Appendix E6: Comment and Response Report. As of 25 May 2016, seventy seven (77) I&APs were pre-registered to be included in the public consultation process. Most were Organs of State, neighbouring landowners and non-governmental Organisations, as required by the EIA Regulations. Each pre-identified individual/ organisation was included on the Register of I&APs (Appendix E8: Register of Interested and Affected Parties) and sent an individual letter requesting their involvement in the EIA process (Appendix E2: Written Notices Issued). The I&AP Register has grown significantly as the EIA process has progressed. This has been via word-of-mouth and active approach by the EIA Team. Information about the proposed project was disseminated to I&APs and the Organs of State via:

One–on-one meetings (and follow-up communication) have been held throughout the Scoping phase with pre-identified potentially affected landowners neighbouring landowners (Appendix E4: Communication to and from Interested and Affected Parties)

Regional Councillors from the three affected regions are registered I&APs.

Notice Boards placed on site at the Auas and Kokerboom Substations, as well as where the existing transmission powerlines traverse the national road, informing the public about the proposed project and the EIA process, process for registering on the register of I&APs, as well as the details for the public meetings (Appendix E1: Proof of Site Notice). These notices have been in place since May 2016.

Notices placed at public places, for example at shopping centres, bus stations, clinics etc. informing the public about the proposed project and the EIA process, process for registering on the register of I&APs, as well as the details for the public meetings (Appendix E2: Written Notices Issued). These notices were placed in May 2016.

Advertisement of the proposed project and the EIA process in the Republikein and The Namibian Newspapers for two consecutive weeks, namely on 03 and 10 May 2016 (Appendix E3: Proof of Newspaper Advertisements).

Introductory Letter sent to all neighbours and pre-identified I&APs within the proposed power line corridor inviting them to register as well as inform others


about the proposed project and EIA process Appendix E2: Written Notices Issued). The letter was sent in 25 April 2016.

Invitation to the public meetings sent to all neighbours and pre-identified I&APs within the proposed power line corridor (Appendix E2: Written Notices Issued) on 29 April 2016.

Documentation placed on a website (www.Lithon.com)

Public Consultation Office with which I&APs could communicate with verbally, via email, fax and post. This office has been operational since June 2015.

Public meetings held between 30 May and 01 June 2016 at the following venues:

- Keetmanshoop Show Hall, Keetmanhoop - Tses Community Hall, Tses - Gibeon Community Hall, Gibeon - Mariental Hotel, Mariental - Kalkrand Community Hall, Kalkrand - Hermann van Wyk Memorial Hall, Rehoboth - Dordabis Farmer’s Association Hall, Dordabis and - NamPOwer Convention Centre, Windhoek.

The Minutes of these meetings which were distributed to all attendees of the meetings on 16 June 2016 (Appendix E5: Minutes of any public or Stakeholder Meeting).

Forty six (46) I&APs have commented on the EIA process to date (for a copy of the I&AP details refer to Appendix E6: Comment and Response Report). Comment received during the Scoping phase fell broadly into the following categories:

Support of the conclusions and recommendations of the scoping assessment (as presented at the public meetings)

Confirmation of the need for the proposed project due to the unreliable electricity supply in the area and the need to strengthen the counties’ overall transmission line network, and the encouragement of NamPower to construct the proposed project

Support for the proposed EMPs for the construction and operational phases in order to mitigate potential detrimental impacts

Concerns over the impacts on avifauna, change of sense of place, long-term

disruption to livelihoods and life (including homesteads and farm infrastructure)

as well as short-term disruption to farm management. Suggestions were made

to realign the powerline away from established infrastructure to minimise/ avoid

impacts to livelihoods.

A number of specific mitigation measures/ management actions were proposed

for investigation in the Assessment Phase.

Public consultation process: request to be registered and informed as the process proceeds

Copies of comment received are appended in Appendix E7: Copies of Comment Received and transcribed and responded to in Appendix E6: Comment and Response Report. The public consultation process is ongoing and will continue into the assessment phase, with a review of the draft Assessment Report and a further round of public meetings to obtain comment on the Assessment Report before it is finalised.

http://www.lithon.com/


7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Given that the realignment of the proposed Kokerboom to Auas Substation

transmission power line corridor (i.e. screening of alternatives) has already served to

avoid and reduce potential negative impacts of the proposed project on the

environment, the low significance of any predicted negative potential impacts (after

mitigation/ management action is implemented) and the potential for positive impacts

of a high significance on the social and economic development, as well as the fact that

the proposed transmission line project will have a positive impact on the ability of

NamPower to continue providing the services of power, this Scoping Report

recommends that the proposed EIA process proceed into the next phase.

Specific conclusions and recommendations of the appointed technical specialists are

as follows:

Vegetation

The proposed power line corridor traverses three distinct vegetation zones, of which

the Highland Savanna is the most sensitive, supporting numerous endemic and/or

protected species. However, in that zone most of the species of high concern occur on

the slopes of koppies and mountains, which are largely avoided at present.

Impact throughout the route will be highest on protected trees, which must be

conserved as far as possible. Given careful placement of pylon sites and strict control

of tree removal and unnecessary collateral damage, as well as uncontrolled wood/pod

harvesting, the impact on plants could be relatively low. The species of highest concern

is camel thorn (Acacia erioloba).

The vegetation specialist further recommended that a field study for vegetation was

unnecessary for this proposed project and EIA process, unless the transmission line

corridor route reviewed here is altered such that it impinges to an appreciably greater

extent on the higher slopes and koppies of the Highland Savanna, in which case a field

study should be undertaken.

Avifauna

Power lines across the Karoo and semi-arid Tree-and-shrub Savanna biomes, in both

Namibia and South Africa, have been shown to have a significant impact on some bird

species, mainly as a result of birds flying into the lines. Ludwig’s Bustard, Kori Bustard

and Secretarybird are all listed as Threatened Red Data species. In the case of the

bustards, the main cause of mortality appears to be power line collisions, resulting in

significant population declines. For a number of other large Red Data bird species such

as flamingos, vultures and eagles, power line collision is an important contributing

factor to the level of threat that they face. Effective and cost-efficient mitigating

measures to power line collision are proving to be elusive, and the current best practice

approach is to bundle lines as closely as possible, avoid high risk areas and deploy line

markers.


This proposed transmission line offers the opportunity to test placing the two 400 kV

lines closely parallel to one another, with support towers of the new line mid-way

between those of the existing line. This might prove to be the most effective mitigation

measure to birds colliding with the lines, driving birds to fly higher and over the lines.

Because of the high risk posed to birds mainly by collision with power lines, all proposed

lines should be carefully evaluated in the field as part of the overall environmental

assessment, with particular attention on how bird collision could be mitigated.

Following the avifaunal specialist’s (Dr. Chris Brown) highlighting of the sensitivities

within the proposed power line corridor and his recommendations to slightly reroute the

power line corridor centreline and stagger the pylons with that of the existing 400 kV

power line for part of its route another independent specialist (Dr. Rob Simmons) was

asked to investigate and verify the validity of these recommendations. He visited the

power line corridor and undertook further detailed avifaunal surveys. He concurred with

Dr. Brown’s recommendations and specifically recommended that two most important

high risk areas from an avifaunal perspective should be avoided, namely the:

1. Karas Dwarf shrubland where collision-prone bustards are at high density and

risk from a new 400 kV line, and the

2. Ecotone between the Dwarf Shrub and Kalahari Savanna near Kalkrand where

breeding and Endangered White-backed Vultures and Lappet-faced Vultures

occur on the farms Wilderness Rem, Battle and Friesenland.

He suggested the avoidance of the above sensitive areas by rerouting the power line.

The proposed centreline (refer to Figure 15: Proposed rerouting of bird-friendly

proposed Auas – Kokerboom 400 kV transmission line overleaf) would head south

from the Auas Substation and then south of Rehoboth it would join the existing 400 kV

line to the south-west in the most direct and engineeringly-feasible way south of the

C25. The proposed centreline of power line would then run parallel with the existing

400 kV line all the way to Kokerboom substation with staggered pylons i.e. the tower of

one line lies in the mid-span of the adjacent line.


Figure 15: Proposed Routing of Bird-friendly proposed Auas – Kokerboom 400 kV transmission line.

The two avifauna specialists concurred on their recommendations for the final proposed

realignment of the centreline of the power line from the Kokerboom to the Auas

Substation (a distance of approximately 448 km) – this will subsequently be known as

the “bird” friendly” deviation of the proposed centreline in the EIA process. This included

the pylons of the new 400 kV power line being staggered with that of the existing

400 kV power line (the tower of one line lies in the mid-span of the adjacent line).

Floodline

Although at least 300 km of the 500 km proposed transmission line corridor will not be

impacted by flooding there are some significant drainage catchments in the northern

part of the proposed transmission line corridor.

No negative impacts are foreseen during the construction and operational phases that

cannot be effectively mitigated to an acceptable significance. The potential impact of

floods on the proposed infrastructure is expected to be negligible if the proposed

mitigation measures and management actions are implemented. Without mitigation the

impact on the cost of repairs to pylons can be significant. Resulting power outages can

have major downstream impacts on the Namibian economy.


Recommended mitigation measures during the construction phase include:

Halting construction activities in the rivers when there is flow

Not storing equipment or materials in the 1 in 100 year flood zone of the river Recommended mitigation measures during the operational phase include:

Proper design and construction of the access track to ensure that it does not create an obstacle to the flow

Not constructing pylons in the flood zone of the rivers, alternatively if pylons have to be constructed within the flood zone and the

Provision of proper erosion protection to pylon bases.

Archaeology

The proposed power line corridor will traverse of potentially sensitive archaeological

landscape. Previous archaeological surveys in this area have revealed traces of

intermittent human occupation over the last approximately 400 000 years. Early colonial

settlement remains including graves are a significant feature of this area. The baseline

archaeological survey will locate and document any sites that may be affected by the

proposed development and this will form the basis of a detailed archaeological impact

assessment.

Social

The potential negative social impacts of the construction phase are expected to be

relatively minor and manageable through effective mitigation.

The positive impact associated with the construction and operation of the proposed

transmission line is the improved transmission network nationally. This impact may

serve to enhance the economy as commercial and private electricity provision becomes

more reliable and consistent potentially enabling business enhancements and a

generally better quality of life. Some direct, indirect and induced employment

opportunities will be created by the Project itself and through procurement spend.

Benefits will be limited in the local area as some short-term contract employment should

be available to local people.

The negative impacts linked to the proposed Project are likely to be localised and affect

land owners, land users and tourists differently. Existing agricultural activities will

largely be able to continue unhindered during the construction and operation phases.

Planning and control will be required to minimise disruptions during construction.

Tourism activities may be more sensitive to the construction phase nuisance factors

and the visual intrusion of the line during the operational phase; these could impact on

the sense of place for some receptors. Where the transmission line is visible,

specifically from private residences, some of the land owners and users may also

experience a negative effect on sense of place. The power line may negatively affect

farm management in some cases. The cumulative visual impact and impact on sense

of place, and the cumulative impact on disruption to farm management will be assessed

in more detail in the assessment phase.


It is not recommended that the ‘no-go’ alternative be considered further given the

importance of the transmission lines between the Kokerboom and Auas Substations in

the overall power supply system in Namibia. As the existing transmission lines cannot

cope with Namibia’s future power requirements, it is recommended that an additional

power line be installed between the two Substations provided:

A bird-friendly centreline be investigated further;

The technical specialists assess the proposed power line corridor with the view

of identifying potential impacts; and that the

Proposed mitigation measures/ management actions recommended by the

specialists and I&APs be implemented and monitored.

It is anticipated that construction- and operational-related nuisances can be fully

mitigated to acceptable levels, provided mitigation measures are stipulated in the EMPs

for the construction and the operational phases are followed. It is recommended that

all the suggestions for mitigation measures/ management actions/ monitoring

suggested by the technical specialists and EAP be implemented in order to avoid and/

or minimise any potential negative impacts and enhance any positive impacts.

It is therefore concluded that the recommendation from this Scoping Assessment is that

the EIA should proceed into the assessment phase and that this assessment be

undertaken as proposed in Appendix G: Terms of Reference for the Detailed

Assessment. The assessment phase will culminate with the preparation and

submission of an Assessment Report to the Environmental Commissioner for his

decision on the ECC Application. EMPs for the construction and operational phases

will be included in the Assessment Report. The objectives of an EMP are to:

Ensure compliance with all relevant legislation and Regulations with bearing on the

proposed project.

Verify environmental performance through information on impacts as they occur.

Provide required management actions in order to respond to unforeseen events.

Provide feedback for continual improvement in environmental performance.

Refine identified mitigation measures to further reduce potential impacts to minimal

or insignificant levels.

Stipulate specific actions to assist in mitigating the environmental impact of the

project.

Identify measures that could optimize beneficial impacts.

Create management structures that address the concerns and complaints of

Interested and Affected Parties (I&APs) with regards to the proposed project

(development).

Establish a method of monitoring and auditing environmental management

practices during all phases of the activity.

Ensure that environmental safety recommendations are complied with.

Specify time periods within which mitigation measures must be implemented, where

appropriate.

The completion and operation of the project (should it receive the necessary

Environmental Clearance) is not delayed due to problems with landowners.


Included in the EMPs are details of the roles and responsibilities of all parties involved,

specifications for vegetation and soil management, an Archaeological Chance Finds

Procedure, as well as an avifaunal monitoring plan for both pre- and post- construction.

The latter monitoring plan is particular important given the avifaunal sensitivities within

the Study Area as well as the mitigation proposed by the avifaunal specialists, which is

new and as yet ‘untested’.

Based on the outcome of this detailed assessment and the contents of the Assessment

Report the Environmental Commissioner will decide whether Environmental Clearance

Certificate be granted for the proposed construction of the transmission power line

between the Kokerboom and Auas Substations, in terms of in terms of the

Environmental Management Act, 2007, (Act No 7 of 2007) and the Environmental

Impact Assessment Regulations, 2012.

Should the proposed project receive a Clearance Certificate by the environmental

authorities and after negotiations for a final alignment with landowners, the centre line

of the power line and co-ordinates of each bend point must be determined. Optimal

pylon types and positions must be identified and verified. The draft EMPs for the

construction and operational phases may require updating after this “walkdown”.


8 REFERENCES

Giess, W. 1998. A preliminary vegetation map of Namibia. Dinteria 4: 1 – 112. Klaassen, E.S. and Kwembeya, E.G. (eds). 2013. A Checklist of Namibian Indigenous and Naturalised Plants. Occasional Contributions No. 5, Windhoek: National Botanical Research Institute. Loots, S. 2005. Red Data Book of Namibian Plants. Southern African Botanical Diversity Network Report 38. Pretoria: SABONET. National Herbarium of Namibia (WIND). 2015. BRAHMS Database. National Herbarium of Namibia (WIND). Windhoek: National Botanical Research Institute. Roads Authority of Namibia. 2012. Namibian Drainage Manual.

Deacon, J. 1984. The Later Stone Age of southernmost Africa. Oxford, BAR. Namibia Statistics Agency. 2015. Namibia Labour Force Survey 2014 Report. Namibia Statistics Agency, Windhoek.

proposed 400 kv kokerboom substation to auas...

Documents