Heritage Cases

The Ruigtevallei – Dreunberg powerline is currently under construction. The powerline was subject to a Basic Assessment which received Environmental Authorisation on 29 November 2012. Three route alternatives were identified in the BA Report. eThembeni Cultural Heritage undertook a Phase 1 Heritage Impact Assessment of the three alternatives and submitted a report dated 31 October 2011 to the South African Heritage Resources Agency for review and comment. SAHRA upheld the recommendations of the report, which identified Route 3 as the preferred alternative. The Department of Environmental Affairs issued Environmental Authorisation for Route 3 to be constructed. eThembeni proposed that an archaeologist complete a walk-down of the final selected power line route option and all other activity areas prior to the start of any construction activities and assess direct impacts on discrete resources such as archaeological sites. Eskom’s preferred route in the original BA was Route 1 and they appointed Umlando to undertake the walk-down and heritage inspection. Umlando undertook this task and submitted a report to SAHRA, which was approved by the heritage authority. However, the BAR recommended Route 3, which was authorised by the DEA. Eskom nonetheless started construction on an alignment that was essentially Route 1 but with some deviations. This route is now being called Route 4 and for the purposes of this Section 24G report Route 4 is now Eskom’s preferred route. Eskom now seeks authorisation to complete construction along Route 4. eThembeni was appointed to undertake a walk-down of this route to identify any heritage resources already affected by the constructed line and that might be affected by its completion, and recommend mitigation measures. eThembeni was also tasked with assessing the other powerline route alternatives.