Appendices - CSIR

CSIR 

Jan Cilliers Street 

PO Box 320 

Stellenbosch 7600 

South Africa 

Phone: +27 21 888 2400 

Fax: +27 21 888 2693 

Email: plochner@csir.co.za 

Curriculum Vitae 

Paul Lochner 

Name of firm CSIR 

Name of staff Paul Andrew Lochner 

Profession Environmental Assessment and Management 

Position in firm Project Leader in Environmental Assessment & Management 

Date of birth 13 June 1969 

Years with firm 17 years 

Nationality South African 

CSIR – July 2012 

pg 1 

Appendix A: CVs 

Biographical sketch Paul Lochner commenced work at CSIR in 1992, after completing a 

degree in Civil Engineering and a Masters in Environmental Science, 

both at the University of Cape Town. His initial work at CSIR focused 

on sediment dynamics and soft engineering applications in the coastal 

zone, in particular, beach and dune management. He conducted 

several shoreline erosion analyses and prepared coastal zone 

management plans for beaches. He also prepared wetland 

management plans. 

As the market for environmental assessment work grew, he led 

Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs), in particular for coastal 

resort developments and large-scale industrial developments located 

on the coast; and Environmental Management Plans (EMPs), in 

particular for wetlands, estuaries and coastal developments. He has 

also been involved in researching and applying higher-level 

approaches to environmental assessment and management, such as 

Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA). In 1998 and 1999, he


pg 2 


coordinated the SEA research programme within the CSIR, and was a 

lead author of the Guideline Document for SEA in South Africa, 

published jointly by CSIR and the national Department of 

Environmental Affairs and Tourism in February 2000. 

In 1999 and 2000, he was the project manager for the legal, 

institutional, policy, financial and socio-economic component of the 

Cape Action Plan for the Environment (“CAPE”), a large-scale multidisciplinary 

study to ensure the sustainable conservation of the Cape 

Floral Kingdom. This was funded by the Global Environmental Fund 

(GEF) and prepared for WWF-South Africa. The study required 

extensive stakeholder interaction, in particular with government 

institutions, leading to the development of a Strategy and Action Plan 

for regional conservation. 

In July 2003, he was certified as an Environmental Assessment 

Practitioner by the Interim Certification Board for Environmental 

Assessment Practitioners of South Africa. In 2004 he was lead author 

of the Overview of IEM document in the updated Integrated 

Environmental Management (IEM) Information Series published by 

national Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT). In 

2004-2005 he was project manager for an Environmental and Social 

Impact Assessment (ESIA) conducted for a bauxite mine and alumina 

refinery in the Komi Republic (Russia), prepared in accordance with 

World Bank and EU policies, guidelines and standards. 

In 2004-2005, he was part of the CSIR team that coordinated the 

preparation of the series of Guidelines for involving specialists in EIA 

processes prepared for the Western Cape Department of 

Environmental Affairs and Development Planning (DEADP); and 

authored the Guideline for Environmental Management Plans published 

by the Western Cape government in 2005. 

Over the past 6 years has been closely involved with several 

environmental studies for industrial and port-related projects in 

Coega Industrial Development Zone (IDZ), near Port Elizabeth. This 

included an EIA and EMP for a proposed aluminium smelter, and 

assistance with environmental permit applications for air, water and 

waste. He has also conducted environmental assessments for port 

development, manganese export and rail development at the Coega 

IDZ and port. 

He is currently leading the EIA for a desalination plant in Namibia; an 

EIA for a wind energy facility near Jeffrey’s Bay, South Africa; and an 

EIA for a proposed crude oil refinery at Coega.

Education 

Employment record 

Experience record 

1990 B.Sc. Civil Engineering 

(awarded with Honours) 


pg 3 


University of Cape 

Town 

1992 M. Phil. Environmental Science University of Cape 

Town 

January 1992 to June 1992: Completed Masters thesis, working in 

conjunction with the Environmental Evaluation Unit at the University 

of Cape Town. The thesis investigated the potential future ecological 

and socio-economic impacts resulting from the closure of a large 

diamond mining operation, and developed actions to mitigate these 

impacts. 

October 1992 to present: Employed by the CSIR in Stellenbosch. 

Involved in coastal engineering studies; and various forms of 

environmental assessment and management studies. (A track record of 

experience is listed below). 

PROFESSIONAL INVOLVEMENT IN COMMITTEES: 

1996/97: Committee Member of the Western Cape 

Branch of the International Association for 

Impact Assessment (IAIA) 

1997/98: Chairperson of the Western Cape Branch of 

IAIA and member of the national IAIA 

committee 

1998/99: Committee Member of the Western Cape 

Branch of IAIA 

1996 to present: Chairperson of the Intaka Island/Blouvlei 

Environmental Committee at Century City, 

Cape Town (This committee is tasked with 

overseeing the management of a wetland in the 

midst of a new mixed-use urban development) 

The following table presents an abridged list of projects that Paul 

Lochner has been involved in, indicating his role in each project:

Completion 

Date 

2009/2010 

(in progress) 

2009/2010 

(in progress) 

2009/2010 

(in progress) 

2009/2010 

(in progress) 

2009/2010 

(in progress) 

2009/2010 

(in progress) 

Project description Role Client 

EIA for the proposed Biotherm wind energy 

project, Overberg region, South Africa 

Basic Assessment (BA) for monitoring 

masts for the proposed Biotherm wind 

energy project, Overberg region, South Africa 

EIA for the proposed InnoWind wind 

energy project, Western Cape, South Africa 

BA for the proposed InnoWind test 

turbines and monitoring masts, Western 

Cape, South Africa 

EIA for the proposed Electrawinds Phase 2 

wind energy facility, Coega IDZ, Eastern Cape 

BA for the national wind Atlas for South 

Africa 

2009/2010 EIA for the proposed Gecko soda plant, 

(in progress) Otjivalunda and Arandis, Namibia 

2009 BA for the proposed Electrawinds test 

turbine and monitoring mast, Coega IDZ, 

Eastern Cape 

2009 

EIA for the proposed desalination plant at 

Swakopmund, Namibia 

2009 EMP for the Operational Phase of the Berg 

River Dam, Franschoek, South Africa 

2009/2010 EIA for the proposed crude oil refinery at 

(in progress) Coega, South Africa 

2008 Environmental Risk Review for proposed 

LNG/CNG import to Mossel Bay, South Africa 

2008 Review of the Business Plan for catchment 

management for the Berg Water Dam Project, 

Franschoek, South Africa 

2007 – 2008 EIA for proposed Jacobsbaai Tortoise 

(in progress) Reserve eco-development, Saldanha, 

Western Cape 

2007 – 2008 Independent reviewer for the EIA proposed 

(in progress) Amanzi lifestyle development, Port Elizabeth 

2007 – 2008 

(in progress) 

EIA for proposed Kouga wind energy and 

pumped storage scheme, Eastern Cape 


pg 4 


Project leader Biotherm South Africa 

(Pty) Ltd 

Project leader Biotherm South Africa 

(Pty) Ltd 

Project leader InnoWind South Africa 

(Pty) Ltd 

Project leader InnoWind South Africa 

(Pty) Ltd 

Project leader Electrawinds N.V. 

(Belgium) 

Project leader SANERI and SA Wind 

Energy Programme, 

Dept of Energy 

Project leader Gecko, Namibia 

Project leader Electrawinds N.V. 

(Belgium) 

Project leader NamWater, Namibia 

Project leader and 

report co-author 

Project leader and lead 

author 

Project leader and lead 

author 

Project reviewer and 

co-author 

Project Leader and coauthor 

Independent reviewer 

appointed to advise 

EAP 

Project Leader and coauthor 

TCTA, South Africa 

PetroSA, South Africa 

PetroSA, South Africa 

TCTA, South Africa 

Jacobsbaai Tortoise 

Reserve (Pty) Ltd 

Public Process 

Consultants and Pam 

Golding 

Genesis Eco-Energy


pg 5 


Completion 

Date 


2007 Review of EIA for the proposed Hanglip Co-author of review of Dept of Environmental 

Eco-Development, Plettenberg Bay, Western EIA, undertaken on Affairs & Development 

Cape 

behalf of DEADP Planning, Western 

Cape 

2006-2007 Environmental Impact Assessment for the Project Leader and co- Eskom and iGas 

(in progress) proposed Coega LNG-to-Power Project at 

the Port of Ngqura, Coega IDZ 

author 

2006-2007 Guideline for Scoping, Environmental Impact Project leader and co- Dept of Minerals and 

(in progress) Assessment and Environmental Management author 

Energy (DME), South 

Plans for mining in South Africa 

Africa 

2006 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for Project Leader and co- Transnet 

the extension of the Port of Ngqura, Eastern 

Cape 

author 

2006 Integrating Sustainability Into Strategy: Project Leader and co- CSIR (STEP research 

Handbook (Version 1) 

author 

report) 

2005 Technology Review for the proposed 

Project Leader and Alcan, Canada 

aluminium smelter at Coega, South Africa lead author 

2005 Environmental and Social Impact 

Project manager and Komi Aluminium, 

Assessment (ESIA) report for the proposed 

alumina refinery near Sosnogorsk, Komi 

Republic, Russia 

co-author 

Russia, IFC, EBRD 

2005 Guideline for Environmental Management Author Dept of Environmental 

Plans (EMPs) for the Western Cape province, 

Affairs & Development 

including conducting a training course for 

Planning, Western 

provincial government 

Cape 

2005 Guideline for the review of specialist 

Member of Steering Dept of Environmental 

studies undertaken as part of environmental Committee and project Affairs & Development 

assessments 

facilitator 

Planning, Western 

Cape 

2004 Review of Strategic Management Plan for Reviewer and co- South African National 

Table Mountain National Park (2001-2004) author 

Parks 

2004 Strategic Needs Assessment Process for Researcher and co- CSIR (internal 

mainstreaming sustainable development into 

business operations 

author 

research) 

2004 Environmental Monitoring Committees Contributing author Department of 

booklet in the IEM Information Series for 

Environmental Affairs 

DEAT 

and Tourism (DEAT) 

2004 Overview of Integrated Environmental Lead author and DEAT 

Management (IEM) booklet in the IEM 

Information Series 

researcher


pg 6 


Completion 

Date 


2003 Environmental Screening Study for gas Project Manager and Eskom, iGas and Shell 

power station, South Africa 

lead author 

2003 Environmental Management Programme Project Manager and Pechiney, France 

(EMP) Framework for the proposed Coega 

Aluminium Smelter; and assistance with 

preparing permit and licence applications 

lead author 

2003 Environmental Management Plan for the Project leader and lead Century City Property 

Operational Phase of the wetlands and canals 

at Century City, Cape Town 

author 

Owners’ Association 

2002 Environmental Impact Assessment for the Project Manager and Pechiney, France 

proposed Pechiney aluminium smelter at 

Coega, South Africa 

lead author 

2002 - 2003 Research project: Ecological impact of large- Project Manager Water Research 

scale groundwater abstraction on the Table 

Mountain Group aquifer 

Commission 

2002 Environmental Management Plan for the 

Eskom Wind Energy Demonstration Facility in 

the Western Cape 

Co-author Eskom 

2001-2002 Environmental Impact Assessment for the Quality control & co- Eskom 

Eskom Wind Energy Demonstration Facility in 

the Western Cape 

author 

2001 Environmental Due Diligence study of four Project manager and SFF Association 

strategic oil storage facilities in South Africa co-author 

2000 Cape Action Plan for the Environment: a Project manager and World Wide Fund for 

biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan for the contributing writer Nature (WWF): South 

Cape Floral Kingdom - legal, institutional, 

policy, financial and socio-economic 

component 

Africa 

1999 Environmental Management Plan for the Project manager and Monex Development 

establishment phase of the wetlands and 

canals at Century City, Cape Town 

lead author 

Company 

1999 Environmental Management Programme Process design and Co- Chris Mulder 

for the Thesen Islands development, Knysna author 

Associates Inc; Thesen 

and Co. 

1999 Management Plan for the coastal zone 

Project manager and Heartland Properties 

between the Eerste and Lourens River, False lead author 

and Somchem (a 

Bay, South Africa 

Division of Denel) 

1998 Environmental Assessment of the Mozal Project manager and SNC-Lavalin-EMS 

Matola Terminal Development proposed for 

the Port of Matola, Maputo, Mozambique 

author.


pg 7 


Completion 

Date 


1998 Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Project manager and Somchem, a Division of 

for the Somchem industrial complex at 

Krantzkop, South Africa 

co-author 

Denel 

1997 Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) SEA project manager Coega IDZ Initiative 

for the proposed Industrial Development Zone 

and Harbour at Coega, Port Elizabeth, South 

Africa 

and report writer Section 21 Company 

1996 Environmental Impact Assessment of Project manager and Thesen and Co. 

Development Scenarios for Thesen Island, 

Knysna, South Africa 

report writer 

1996 Environmental Impact Assessment of the Project manager and Ilco Homes Ltd (now 

Management Options for the Blouvlei 

wetlands, Cape Town 

report writer 

Monex Ltd) 

1995 Environmental Impact Assessment for the Report writing and Saldanha Steel Project 

Saldanha Steel Project, South Africa 

management of 

specialist studies 

1994 Environmental Impact Assessment for the Member of the project Schneid Israelite and 

upgrading of resort facilities on Frégate Island, management team, co- Partners 

Seychelles 

author, process 

facilitator 

1994 Environmental Impact Assessment for Project manager and Chevron Overseas 

exploration drilling in offshore Area 2815, 

Namibia 

co-author 

(Namibia) Limited 

1994 Management Plan for the Rietvlei Wetland Project manager and Southern African 

Reserve, Cape Town 

lead author 

Nature Foundation 

(now WWF-SA) 

1993 Beach management plan for Stilbaai 

Project manager and Stilbaai Municipality 

beachfront and dunes, South Africa 

lead author 

1993 Beach and dune management plan for Project manager and Nel and De Kock 

Sedgefield for the beach east of the mouth of 

the Swartvlei estuary 

lead author 

Planners, George 

1993 Coastal Stability analysis and beach 

Project manager and Milnerton Municipality 

management plan for the Table View 

coastline north of Blaauwberg Road, Cape 

Town 

lead author

Publication record 


pg 8 


A comprehensive list of publications, book chapters and contract 

reports is available upon request, with a summary provided below. 

Publications in journals, peer reviewed conference proceedings and CSIR 

internal research reports: 

Lochner P, Munster F and Burns M, 2006. Integrating Sustainability 

into Strategy (ISIS): a process to inform sustainability strategies and 

frameworks, In: IAIA South Africa Annual Conference proceedings, 

South Africa. 

Rossouw N and Lochner P, 2006. Environmental Monitoring 

Committees (EMCs): purpose, function and structure. In: IAIA South 

Africa Annual Conference proceedings, South Africa. 

Munster F and Lochner P, 2006, Integrating Sustainability Into 

Strategy: Handbook (Version 1) – describing a process to inform 

sustainability strategies, frameworks and reports, CSIR Report ENV-S-I 

2005-001, ISBN 0-7988-5560-6, Stellenbosch. 

Van Zyl H, de Wit M, Munster F, Lochner P, Gerber G, 2005. Economics 

in Environmental Impact Assessment: demystifying the theory and 

practice, In: Conference Proceedings of the IAIA South Africa 2005 

Annual National Conference. South Africa. 

Lochner P, Weaver A, Gelderblom C, Peart R, Sandwith T and Fowkes S, 

2003. Aligning the diverse: the development of a biodiversity 

conservation strategy for the Cape Floristic Region. Biological 

Conservation Vol. 112, ISSN: 0006-3207. 

Lochner P, Münster F, Msutu M, Wren S, 2003. The role of stakeholder 

engagement in the EIA for the Coega Aluminium Smelter. In: 

Conference Proceedings of the IAIA South Africa 2003 Annual National 

Conference. ISBN 1-919891-04-8. South Africa. 

Lochner P, Brooks W, Pesch P & Münster M. 2003, Stakeholder 

engagement process in the EIA of an aluminium smelter, Published in 

Light Metals 2003 (Ed. Paul Crepeau), Published by TMS (the Minerals, 

Metals & Materials Society), ISBN Number 0-87339-531-X, USA. 

Rossouw N, Audouin M, Lochner P, Heather-Clark S and Wiseman K, 

2000. Development of strategic environmental assessment in South 

Africa. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. Vol 18, no. 3, pp 217- 

223. United Kingdom. 

Lochner P and Fowkes S, 2000. Building partnerships for the 

conservation of the biodiversity of the Cape Floral Kingdom:

Language 

capability 


pg 9 


experiences and lessons learnt from the Cape Action Plan for the 

Environment. IAIA-SA Conference Proceedings 2000. South Africa. 

Lochner P and Rossouw N, 1997. The development of an 

Environmental Management Plan for incorporating a wetland into a 

large mixed use development: the Century City example. IAIA-SA 

Conference Proceedings 1997. South Africa. 

Speaking Reading Writing 

English Excellent Excellent Excellent 

Afrikaans Average Average Average


Jan Cilliers Street 

PO Box 320 


South Africa 

Phone: +27 21 888 2400 

Fax: +27 21 888 2693 

Email: rdutoit@csir.co.za 

Curriculum Vitae 

Rudolph du Toit 

Name of Firm: CSIR 

Name of Staff: Rudolph du Toit 

Profession: Environmental Management 

Date of Birth: 23 May 1978 

Nationality: South African 

EDUCATION 


pg 10 


BA Environmental and Development Studies (2005) (Stellenbosch University) 

BPhil Sustainable Development Planning & Management (2006) (Stellenbosch University) 

MPhil Sustainable Development Planning & Management (2009) (Stellenbosch University) 

KEY QUALIFICATIONS 

Project Management Principles & Practice course (University of Pretoria) 

Project management, coordination and client liaison for environmental projects (mainly Southern 

Africa with limited West African experience) 

Management and coordination of specialist studies (of both the biophysical and socio-economic 

environments) 

Integration of specialist disciplines to address the environmental issue of concern 

Coordination and compilation of integrative reports and specialist study reports 

Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) Project Development training (Danish Energy 

Management (Pty) Ltd)

AFFILIATIONS 

International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIAs), Western Cape – 2010 to 2011. 

EMPLOYMENT RECORD 


pg 11 


2008 to 2009: Junior Environmental Manager at Strategic Environmental Focus (SEF) (Pty) Ltd. 

2010 to present: Project Manager at the CSIR (Environmental Management Group) 

PROJECT EXPERIENCE RECORD 

The following table presents an abridged list of projects that Rudolph has been involved in, indicating his 

role in each project: 

PROJECT ROLE DATE 

Apollo Brick (Pty) Ltd energy efficiency 

and fuel switching CDM project 

Junior Environmental Manager August 2008 

Mxit Lifestyle (Pty) Ltd carbon footprint 

audit 

Junior Environmental Manager January 2009 

Bottelary Road Upgrade: Van der Merwe 

Venter Twenty Group and Silmore Trust 

Environmental Control Officer July 2009 

MTN Remote Hub: Umbutho Civil & 

Electrical 

Environmental Control Officer July 2009 

Basic Assessment: Hermanus (Overberg Junior Environmental Manager and co- August 2009 

Municipality) substation upgrade & 

underground cable 

author 

Basic Assessments (x 4) for the InnoWind Project Manager and lead author January 2010 to 

Western Cape wind energy project: Single 

test turbine construction 

August 2011 

EIA for InnoWind Western Cape wind Project Manager and lead author January 2010 to 

energy project: Proposed construction of 

200 MW installed capacity 

present 

EIA for Addax Petroleum: Off-shore 

Research team: collection of benthic August 2010 

exploration/appraisal drilling; Ngosso macrofauna samples and bio- 

Permit, Cameroon 

indicators for water quality analysis 

EIA for the Electrawinds (NL) Coega IDZ Project Manager January 2010 to 

Wind Energy Project: Proposed 

construction of 75 MW installed capacity 

October 2010 

EIA for Glencore Exploration (UK): On- Project Manager November 2010 

shore and off-shore exploration drilling 

operation; Matanda Block, Cameroon 

to present 

EIA for Glencore Exploration (UK): Off- Research team: collection of benthic February 2011 

shore exploration drilling, Bolongo Block, macrofauna samples and bio-


pg 12 


PROJECT ROLE DATE 

Cameroon indicators for water quality analysis 

EIA for Noble Energy (Cameroon): Off- 

• Management, integration April 2011 

shore exploration drilling, Yoyo Concession 

drafting of water quality 

and Tilapia Exploration Block, Cameroon 

section (Chapter 4) of the EIA 

report. 

• Research team: collection of 

benthic macrofauna samples 

and bio-indicators for water 

quality analysis 

PUBLICATIONS 

Du Toit, R. (2009). Developing a Scorecard for Sustainable Transport: A Cape Town Application. 

Stellenbosch University Press 

LANGUAGE CAPABILITY 

LANGUAGES SPEAKING READING WRITING 

English Excellent Excellent Excellent 

Afrikaans Excellent Excellent Excellent


pg 1 

Appendix B : 

NEMA – DEA Application


pg 2 

Appendix B : 



pg 3 

Appendix B : 



pg 4 

Appendix B : 


CSIR –July 2012 

pg 1 

Appendix C : Site notices 

Vleesbaai 

Vleesbaai 

KEY 

Site notice A: Unmarked gravel road turning off main road to Vleesbaai 

Site notice B: Fork in gravel road to Kanon 

Site notice C: Kanon gravel road & R325 intersection 

Site notice D: Entrance to Johnson’s Post 

Site notice E: R325 T-junction with road to Vleesbaai and N2 highway 

Site notice F: Intersection between gravel roads from Boggomsbaai & 

N2 highway and R325 & Vleesbaai main entrance road

Site Notice A located at: S 34° 17.3396’ by E 21° 54.0159’ 


pg 2 

Appendix C : Site notices

Site notice B located at: S 34° 18.9745’ by E 21° 52. 7923’ 


pg 3 


Site notice C located at: S 34° 17.3402’ by E 21° 50. 9913’ 


pg 4 


Site notice D located at: S 34° 17. 0283’ by E 21° 50. 3714’ 


pg 5 


Site notice E located at: S 34° 16. 6568’ by E 21° 49. 9916’ 


pg 6 


Site notice F located at: S 34° 15. 858’ by E 21° 52. 9333’ 


pg 7 



pg 1 

Appendix D : Advertisements


pg 1 

Appendix E : I&AP Database 

VLEESBAAI WIND ENERGY EIA: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION DATABASE 

NAME ROLE/INTEREST 

Competent & commenting authorities: 

Nyiko Ngoveni National Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA): Case Officer 

Charl Moller Mossel Bay Municipality: Head of Planning 

Morton Hubbe Eden District Municipality: Head of District Waste Management 

Lizell Stroh Civil Aviation Authority 

Paul Hardcastle Dept of Environmental Affairs & Development Planning: Western Cape 

Danie Swannepoel Dept of Environmental Affairs & Development Planning: Western Cape, George 

Section 

Jan Smit Dept of Agriculture: Western Cape 

Belinda Mutti Heritage Western Cape 

Rene de Kock South African National Roads Agency LTD 

Samantha Ralston Cape Nature: Scientific Services 

Benjamin Walton Cape Nature: Scientific Services (Central Karoo & Eden District) 

Riaan Smith ESKOM: Head of network planning 

Henk Landman ESKOM: Senior Supervisor: Land & Rights 

Anneliza Collet 

Interest groups: 

Department of Agriculture, Forestry & Fisheries: Land Use & Soil Management 

Sharon Brink Southern Overberg Branch of the Botanical Society of South Africa 

Pam Barret Birdlife South Africa 

Willem Louw South African National Parks (SANParks): Conservation Planning Manager 

Mark D’Alton Overberg Crane Group: Chairman 

Claire Patterson Endangered Wildlife Trust: BAT Working Group: Head of project 

Talitha Venter Springerbaai Home Owners Association 

Dr Martin Pauw Vleesbaai Dienste (Edms) Bpk & Vleesbaai Aandeleblok Bpk 

A. Basson Visbaai Aandeleblok Bpk 

J.E. Theart Keerom Beleggings Aandeleblok Bpk 

Marilize du Plessis Karmosyn Huiseienaarsvereniging Bpk 

Joe Roux Driehoek Huiseienaarsvereniging Bpk 

Cindy Nelson Mossel Bay Archaeology Project (MAPCRM) cc 

Roland Scholtz Fransmanshoek Conservancy 

Roger Johnson Cape Vacca Estates (Pty) Ltd 

Patricia E. Nurse 

Landowners 

Lakes Bird Club 

Anthony Steffens Landowner 

Elsie Embrensie Gertruida Jackson Landowner 

John David Johnson Landowner 

Johan Louw Müller Landowner 

Mathys Johannes du Toit Landowner 

Steven Stirk Landowner


pg 2 




Christoffel Fivaz Landowner 

Vincent de Vries Landowner 

Rickie van Rensburg Landowner 

Pierre Fouche Landowner 

Jannie Coetzee Landowner 

Andre Kriek Landowner 

Johan Jacob van Rensburg Landowner 

Thor Cornelius Landowner 

Rial Kruger Landowner 

Fred Orban Landowner 

Christo Muller Landowner 

Wynand Heywood 

Interested & Affected Parties 

Landowner 

Jacob Graaf I&AP 

Dr Martin Pauw I&AP 

J.E. Theart I&AP 

Philip Oberholster I&AP 

Chris van Zyl I&AP 

Danie Gildenhuys I&AP 

Fred Orban I&AP 

Ria Joubert I&AP 

Hennie van der Watt I&AP 

Mary Rothman I&AP 

Prof H.P. Buchholz I&AP 

Attie van Zyl I&AP 

Wayne Meyer I&AP 

John McKenzie Johnson I&AP 

Wolfgang Knechtel I&AP 

Rob Bass I&AP 

Herman van Vuuren I&AP 

Melissa Mackay I&AP 

Gert Steyn I&AP 

Johan Lambrechts I&AP 

R.M. Lambrechts I&AP 

Charl de Villiers I&AP 

Gerrit Olivier I&AP 

Pieter de W la Grange I&AP 

Wolf Rohloff I&AP 

Dave Whitelaw I&AP


pg 3 




Jansie Besaans I&AP 

James McFarlane I&AP 

Nic & Gail Hanekom I&AP 

Dr Bernhard Scheffler I&AP 

BJC Honiball I&AP


pg 1 

Appendix F : Correspondence 

to I&APs


pg 2 


to I&APs


pg 3 


to I&APs 

From: Rudolph du Toit 

To: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; 

CC: Douglas Harrowsmith; Friederike von Petersdorff 

BC: Anne-Marie Taylor 

Date: 13/10/2011 13:47:14 

Subject: Proposed Wind Energy Facility near Vleesbaai: Background Information Document 

Dear Sir/Madam 

RE: NOTICE OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND A BASIC ASSESSMENT 

PROCESS FOR THE PROPOSED VLEESBAAI INDEPENDENT POWER PRODUCER (VIPP) 

WIND ENERGY PROJECT AT THE NEAR VLEESBAAI, WESTERN CAPE PROVINCE 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

This serves as notification that an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is being conducted by the 

CSIR on behalf of VIPP (Pty.) Ltd. This EIA deals with the construction and operation of a commercial 

wind energy facility. The facility would utilise wind turbines of between 2.5 to 5 MW each, with a 

combined installed capacity of approximately 140 MW. The facility will be erected on the following 

sites near Vleesbaai: 

Farm name, number and portion 

1. Portion 12 of Farm 259, Brakkefontein 

2. Portion 11, being the remaining extent of the Farm Brakkefontein 259 

3. Portion 5, being the remaining extent of the Farm Vleesch Baai 251 

4. Portion 0, Farm 263, being the remaining extent of the Farm Ingang 263 

5. Remaining extent of Farm Vleesch Baai 251 

6. Portion 5 of Farm 259, Misgunst 

7. The farm Brakkefontein West 260 (portion 0) 

8. Portion 31 of the farm Brakkefontein no. 256 

9. The farm Zoutpan No. 261 (portion 0) 

10. The remaining portion 0 of the Gouritz River Farm 306, Farm Number 306 

11. Portion 1 of the Gouritz River Farm 306, Farm Number 306 

12. Portion 4 of the Gouritz River Farm 259, Farm Number 259 

13. The remaining extent of the farm Brakkefontein 258 

14. Portion 9 of the farm Brakkefontein 256 

15. Portion 6 of Farm 259, Brakkefontein 

16. Portion 29, the remaining extent of farm Brakkefontein 259 



19. Portion 6, of the farm Vleesch Baai 251 

20. Portion 7, the remaining extent of the farm Vleesch Baai 251 

21. Portion 13, the remaining extent of the farm Brakkefontein 256 

22. Portion 18, the remaining extent of the farm Brakkefontein 256 

23. Portion 19, of the farm Brakkefontein 256 

24. Portion 34, of the farm Brakkefontein 256 

25. Portion 2 (the remaining extent) of the farm Vleesch Baai 251 

26. Portion 13 of the farm Vleesch Baai 251 

27. Portion 17 of the farm Brakkefontein 256

28. The remaining extent of Farm 262/0, Brakkefontein Oos 

29. The farm Brakkefontein 259 portion 3 (the remaining extent) 

30. The farm Vleesch Baai 251, portion 4 (the remaining extent) 

31. The farm Misgunst aan de Gouritz Rivier 257, portion 10 

32. Farm 390 Vleesch Baai measuring 

33. Portion 2 of Farm Brakkefontein 258 

34. Portion 35 (a portion of portion 33) of the farm Brakkefontein 256 

35. The remaining extent of Portion 33 of the farm Brakkefontein 256 


pg 4 


to I&APs 

Regulations for Environmental Impact Assessments were promulgated under Chapter 5 of the 

National Environmental Management Act (NEMA, Act 107 of 1998) in Government Gazette 33306 on 

18 June 2010. The activities proposed by the VIPP Vleesbaai project requires full Scoping and 

Environmental Impact Reporting (S&EIR) in terms of GN.R545, and includes basic assessments 

required for activities listed in GN.R544 and GN.R546. 

Opportunity to be involved 

Should you wish to obtain further information on the project or to provide any comments on the 

Environmental Impact Assessment and/or Basic Assessment process, the CSIR invites you to register 

as an Interested and/or Affected Party by no later than 2 nd November 2011. Please note that the 

I&AP register will be updated continuously during the BA and EIA processes. 

We have enclosed with this email a registration and comments form to assist you with registration 

and the submission of your comments. Please provide your full name, full postal address, phone 

numbers, and/or email and state your matter of interest and/or area of concern. The form must reach 

the CSIR by no later than 2 nd November 2011 and must be send to the Environmental 

Assessment Practitioner, Rudolph du Toit (see contact details below). Please note that once you have 

registered as an Interested and Affected Party you will also be able to provide comments on the Draft 

Scoping Report which will be released later for a 40 day period for public review. 

We have also attached a Background Information Document (BID) to this email to provide you 

with more information about the project. 

We look forward to your participation in this process. 

Kind regards, 


Project Manager 

CSIR (Council for Scientific & Industrial Research) 

Environmental Management Services 

P.O. Box 320 / Jan Cilliers Street 


Ph: +27 (0)21 888 2538 

Fax: +27 (0)21 888 2693 

Attachments: TEXT.htm, VIPP_BID_A4_Website_Oct2011_lr.pdf, Registration 

form_Vleesbaai_Eng_Website.pdf, Registration form_Vleesbaai_Afr_Website.pdf


pg 5 


to I&APs


pg 6 


to I&APs


pg 7 


to I&APs


pg 8 


to I&APs


pg 9 


to I&APs


pg 0


pg 1 

Appendix G: Comments received


pg 2 



pg 3 



pg 4 



pg 5 



pg 6 


ATTENTION: CSIR – RUDOLPH DU TOIT 

VLEESBAAI INDEPENDANT POWER PRODUCER, WIND ENERGY FARM 

Herewith the Fransmanshoek Conservancy’s comments regarding the BID: 


pg 7 

Appendix G: Comments received 

27 th October 2011 

Firstly, we welcome the idea of wind turbines in the area. We feel that it is a step in the right direction for a 

sustainable future. 

We have some concerns though, they are as follows: 

• We would like to see all power-lines, whether between turbines, to sub-stations or to Eskoms power 

station, be placed underground. We understand that this is more costly to do, however feel it is a 

small compromise to make. While the turbines might contribute to the loss of the ‘rural feel’ of the 

area, it can be argued that they will not change it drastically. However, large power-lines attached to 

power-line towers, will greatly increase the industrial look to the area. Furthermore, power lines are 

possibly even more damaging to collision prone bird species, and will increase the danger areas for 

collision prone bird species greatly. 

• We would like the hydrology and aquatic report to take into account the many seasonal pans in and 

around the project area. While these pans may be dry for years, good rains fill them up and water 

may be present for up to a year after the rains. The amount of ephemeral pans in the projects area 

render it unique. Each pan, under classification is in fact a wetland, vital in the hydrology cycle, and 

vital to water birds. We would like to see a respectable buffer being placed around each pan, where 

no turbine, road or power line is to pass through. 

• We feel that no turbines, roads or power lines should be placed on or around the ‘toes’ and ravines 

around the Johnsons Post saltpan. The ravines and pan, although semi invaded with certain alien 

plants, still represent good examples of indigenous Gouritz Valley Thicket and provide important 

corridors for plants and animals moving through the Gouritz corridor. The salt pan also attracts large 

numbers of birds, including many species found on the Bird Life South Africa Priority Species List for 

wind turbines. 

• We also feel the name Vleesbaai Independant Power Suppliers, is not appropriate. Most of the 

farmers who have signed up are sub divisions of the original farm ‘Brakkefonteine’. We feel the 

inclusion of Vleesbaai in the name, label Vleesbaai as an industrial power supplier rather than a quiet 

sea side village. We request a name change in order to be more suitable to the locality of the wind 

farm and in consideration of Vleesbaai’s image. 

• We request proof of the approval of the substation located 1km west of Vleesbaai. If this has not 

been approved, we don’t see how plans to transport the energy can be made on proposed 

substations? We also request proof of the associated servitudes approval. 

Roland Scholtz 

Senior Ranger 

Fransmanshoek Conservancy 

082 084 2791 

ranger@fransmanshoek.co.za


pg 8 



pg 9 



pg 10 



pg 11 



pg 12 



pg 13 



pg 14 


Comments – BID 27 October 2011 

It is unacceptable that the BID, and future EIA documents/notices, are so big that many people will 

not be able to receive them in email or download them from the respective webpage. Public 

documents should be kept to under 1 MB to ensure that everyone will be able to access them. 

Comments with regards to the study: 

• No development should be done on naturally vegetated areas to ensure that the existing 

network of biological corridors is sustained. 

• No fencing should be erected which would hinder the movement of the natural fauna 

through the above-mentioned corridor system. 

Regards 

Wayne Meyer


pg 15 


From: "Johan Lambrechts" 

To: Rudolph du Toit 

CC: JOHANINA 

Date: 17/10/2011 17:15:58 

Subject: Proposed Wind Energy Facility:DEA reference no.DEA/12/12/20/2408 

Geagte mnr du Toit 

As inwoners en eienaar van erf 25 te Driehoek, Vleesbaai wens ek u te versoek om ons as 

geaffekteerde party te registreer met inagneming van u advertensie insake die voorgestelde 

omgewingsimpak studie relevant tot die daarstelling van energieopwekking dmv wind. 

Dit sal waardeer word as u ons kan voorsien van al die relevante brondokumente om ons sodoende in 

staat te mag stel om n sinvolle inset te kan lewer. 

Die verifiering dmv voorgestelde terreinplanne van u fasiliteit sal waardeer word. 

Geliewe kennis te neem dat my eggenote mev R.M.Lambrechts die geregistreerde eienaar is van die 

eiendom te Vleesbaai derhalwe sal dit waardeer word indien u die dokumentasie na beide e-pos 

adresse kan aanstuur. 

dankie 

Mnr. J.D. en Mev. R.M. Lambrechts 

Attachments: Header.txt, TEXT.htm, Mime.822 

From: Cindy Nelson 


CC: Curtis Marean 

Date: 02/11/2011 16:03:06 

Subject: Re: VIPP wind energy facility - I & AP registration query 

Dear Rudolph, 

Please can the following concerns, and attached document, be included in Appendix G of the Draft 

Scoping Report due for release in early November? 

1) the archaeological resources in this region, surrounding the proposed wind farm, are extremely 

rich and of major national and international significance 

2) other reports from surrounding plots in this area document rich archaeology 

3) surface survey alone cannot rule out the potential for rich sites underground 

4) we recommend that any earth-moving activities be monitored by an archaeologist. 

Feel free to comment/ask if anything is unclear. 

Kind Regards 

From: Curtis Marean 

To: Rudolph du Toit; Cindy Nelson

Date: 02/11/2011 19:09:08 

Subject: RE: VIPP wind energy facility - I & AP registration query 

Dear Rudolph, 


pg 16 


Thanks for your response. One of the problems that we regularly encounter is that the construction 

workers engaged in the earthmoving are not trained to recognize archaeology. This is of course 

understandable as it typically requires direct training to be able to recognize a stone tool from a 

normal rock. Also, they do not have the training to discern when there has been a shift from 

background scatter, low density artifacts, to higher density scatters that signal an important site has 

been encountered. 

As you probably know, the region in and about Mossel Bay has one of the world’s most important 

records for human origins. It is so rich that the Mossel Bay Municipality has become engaged in 

developing a plan to conserve it, and eventually turn it to economic advantage for archaeo-tourism. 

They have asked our assistance, and as we have noted to them, documenting and conserving that 

record is the first step. Heritage Western Cape has begun to move forward on developing a World 

Heritage site nomination for the sites along the coast, and we are also assisting with that. 

Given the above, it is crucial that major earthmoving in this area be monitored by people who can 

recognize when important archaeology is encountered. This is not really an onerous burden, as 

typically a large earthmoving site can be monitored by a single trained archaeologist. We hope that 

you will put in place such a system so that these precious heritage resources are not inadvertently 

destroyed. 

We are happy to help with recommendations if you wish. 

Best, 

Curtis 

Dr. Curtis W. Marean 

Institute of Human Origins 

School of Human Evolution and Social Change 

PO Box 872402 

Arizona State University 

Tempe, AZ 85287-2402 USA 

e-mail curtis.marean@asu.edu 

Office Phone: 480-965-7796 

Lab Phone: 480-965-2718 

South Africa Mobile â€“ 0768906153 

From: John McKenzie Johnson 

To Rudolph du Toit

CC: Douglas Harrowsmith 

Date: 21/10/2011 10:36:17 

Subject: Re: Vleesbaai wind energy EIA: BID 

Dear Sirs 


pg 17 


I would like to express my profound disappointment in only having recently (17 October 2011) been 

made aware of this project. 

Recent discussions with neighbours indicate that many land owner’s and affected parties in the area 

were informed as long as 8 – 12 months ago. 

I am left with no choice other that to seek representation in this matter, and opinions from 

professionals in the associated fields. 

Faithfully 

___________________________________ 

John McKenzie Johnson 

m +27 83 647 5282 f +27 86 671 9102 o +27 11 955 4480 e jmckj@mweb.co.za w www.capevacca.com w 

www.boltcorporation.co.za w www.cbc.co.za p p o box 3003 kenmare 1745 

Please consider the environment before printing this email 

From: Rudolph du Toit 

Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 12:12:06 +0200 

To: John McKenzie Johnson 

Cc: Douglas Harrowsmith 

Subject: Re: Vleesbaai wind energy EIA: BID 

Dear Mr Johnson, 

Thank you for registering your interest in this EIA. 

You are now entered into the project database and will receive regular correspondence updating you 

on the EIA process. 

We thank you for your participation and look forward to working with you on this project. 

Kind regards, 







Ph: +27 (0)21 888 2538 

Fax: +27 (0)21 888 2693 

>>> John McKenzie Johnson 17/10/2011 11:59 >>>

Dear Rudolph 

Thank you for your email. 


pg 18 


As representative of Cape Vacca Estates (Pty) Ltd and her parent company, please take note of the 

following: 

1. Cape Vacca Estates (Pty) Ltd hereby requests registration as an affected and interested party; 

2. Cape Vacca Estates (Pty) Ltd hereby declares in the strongest possible terms our intention to 

oppose the application; 

3. We await your response wherein we will copy our attorneys. 

Our rights remain reserved. 

Yours faithfully 

___________________________________ 


m +27 83 647 5282 f +27 86 671 9102 o +27 11 955 4480 e jmckj@mweb.co.za w www.capevacca.com w 

www.boltcorporation.co.za w www.cbc.co.za p p o box 3003 kenmare 1745 



Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 11:06:10 +0200 

To: John McKenzie Johnson 

Cc: Douglas Harrowsmith 

Subject: Vleeasbaai wind energy EIA: BID 

Dear Mr Johnson, 

Attached please find a Background Information Document (BID) regarding the proposed Vleesbaai 

Wind Energy project. 

You are hereby invited to register as an interested and affected party on the project database. To 

register, please email me your postal address as well as any comments and/or concerns you might 

have regarding the proposed project. 

You are also welcome to visit our website to obtain further project detail at: www.csir.co.za/eia 

(follow the Vleesbaai links). 

Please feel free to contact me should you require any further information. 

Kind regards, 


Project Manager





Ph: +27 (0)21 888 2538 

Fax: +27 (0)21 888 2693 


pg 19 


-- 

This message is subject to the CSIR's copyright terms and conditions, e-mail legal notice, and implemented Open Document 

Format (ODF) standard. 

The full disclaimer details can be found at http://www.csir.co.za/disclaimer.html. 

This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner , 

and is believed to be clean. 

-- 

This message has been scanned for viruses and 

dangerous content by Pinpoint Securemail, 


-- 

This message is subject to the CSIR's copyright terms and conditions, e-mail legal notice, and implemented Open Document 

Format (ODF) standard. 


This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner , 


Attachments: Header.txt, TEXT.htm, Mime.822 

From: "Etienne Theart" 


Date: 18/10/2011 18:36:13 

Subject: Registrasie - VIPP Windenergie aanleg voorstel - Keerom Beleggings Aandeleblok 

Mnr Rudolph du Toit 


Stellenbosch 

Geagte mnr. Du Toit 

Registreer Keerom Beleggings Aandeleblok (Edms) Beperk asseblief as Belangstellende en 

Geaffekteerde Party tot hierdie voorgestelde projek: 

DEA/12/12/20/2408 

NEAS DEA/EIA/0000507/2011 

Die ingevulde vorm is aangeheg. Dit word aanvaar dat ons mettertyd ons kontakbesonderhede kan 

wysig. 

Dankie 

J. E. Theart 

Voorsitter van Direksie 

0838005216

From: Justin Bradfield 


Date: 19/10/2011 08:27:24 

Subject: VIPP wind energy project, Vleesbaai 

Dear Mr Du Toit 


pg 20 


Heritage Western Cape (HWC) would like to acknowledge receipt of your Background Information 

Document for the above project, DEA reference # DEA/12/12/20/2408; NEAS reference # 

DEA/EIA/0000507/2011. 

Please note that as this application is submitted in terms of NEMA, but will undoubtedly affect 

heritage resources, HWC acts as a commenting authority to the DEA&DP. All applications that come 

to us in this regard must be accompanied by a Notification of Intent to Develop (NID) form 

(attached). HWC will not comment on any applications submitted without this document. 

Your application will be held in abeyance pending the submission of the NID form to our offices. In 

addition we require an electronic copy of all documentation relevant to the submission. This must be 

provided on a CD and not emailed. 

Please feel free to contact me should you require any further information or clarification regarding our 

processes. The HWC case number for this application will be 111018JB12. 

Sincerely 

Justin Bradfield 

Heritage Officer (Archaeology) 

Heritage Western Cape 

Department of Cultural Affairs and Sport 

3 rd floor, Protea Assurance Building 

Greenmarket Square 

Cape Town 

8000 

Tel. 021 483 9543 

Fax. 021 483 9842 

"All views or opinions expressed in this electronic message and its attachments are the view of the sender and do not 

necessarily reflect the views and opinions of the Provincial Government of the Western Cape ("the PGWC'). No employee of the 

PGWC is entitled to conclude a binding contract on behalf of the PGWC unless he/she is an accounting officer of the PGWC, or 

his or her authorised representative. The information contained in this message and its attachments may be confidential or 

privileged and is for the use of the named recipient only, except where the sender specifically states otherwise. If you are not 

the intended recipient you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone." 

Attachments: Header.txt, TEXT.htm, HWC 002 01 ED NID.doc, Mime.822 

From: 

To: Rudolph du Toit; 

CC: Anne-Marie Taylor; 

Date: 17/10/2011 11:00:06 

Subject: RE: Info regarding Wind Farms near Vleesbaai: BID

Hi Rudolph, 


pg 21 


Baie dankie vir die inligting. Ek sal dit aan die ander eienaars aanstuur. 

Ja, dit sal gaaf wees as ek kan registreer as belanghebbende party, ook namens die ander: 

Naam & van: Gert Steyn 

Kontaknommer: 012 329 1985 

Email: gert.steyn@accenture.com 

Posadres: 

Postnet Suite 473 

Private Bag X15 

Menlo Park 

0102 

Groete, 

Gert 

Gert Steyn 

Senior Manager 

Accenture South Africa 

Technology Consulting 

Mobile +27 82 444-2263 

Telephone +27 11 208-4711 

Telefax +27 11 507-5400 

gert.steyn@accenture.com 

Accenture is an innovative global management consulting, technology services and outsourcing company. Accenture is 

committed to delivering innovation and sound business solutions. We collaborate with our clients to help them become highperformance 

businesses and governments. 

High performers push the envelope. They transform industries. They outperform their competition, and themselves. Accenture 

shows them how. 

From: Rudolph du Toit 

To: Johan Lambrechts 

CC: JOHANINA 

Date: 18/10/2011 11:06:19 

Subject: Re: Proposed Wind Energy Facility:DEA reference no.DEA/12/12/20/2408 

Dear Mr & Mrs Lambrechts, 

Thank you for registering your interest in this project. 

Here with confirmation of your registration on the Interested & Affected Party (I&AP) database. 

Also, please find attached a Background Information Document (BID) providing a general overview 

of the proposed wind energy facility. Please visit our website for more detailed project information 

at: 

www.csir.co.za/eia (follow the Vleesbaai links) 

Kindly note that layout plans are not yet available at this early stage of the impact assessment and 

will be informed by the results of the scoping phase of the assessment. The environmental impact


pg 22 


assessment can be divided into two phases, namely; the scoping phase (aimed at designing a plan of 

study & determining high-level environmental parameters) and the impact assessment phase 

(determining the actual environmental impact through implementation of the plan of study). 

Please feel free to contact me should you have any queries. 

Kind regards, 







Ph: +27 (0)21 888 2538 

Fax: +27 (0)21 888 2693 

>>> "Johan Lambrechts" 17/10/2011 17:15 >>> 

Geagte mnr du Toit 

As inwoners en eienaar van erf 25 te Driehoek, Vleesbaai wens ek u te versoek om ons as 

geaffekteerde party te registreer met inagneming van u advertensie insake die voorgestelde 

omgewingsimpak studie relevant tot die daarstelling van energieopwekking dmv wind. 

Dit sal waardeer word as u ons kan voorsien van al die relevante brondokumente om ons sodoende 

in staat te mag stel om n sinvolle inset te kan lewer. 

Die verifiering dmv voorgestelde terreinplanne van u fasiliteit sal waardeer word. 

Geliewe kennis te neem dat my eggenote mev R.M.Lambrechts die geregistreerde eienaar is van die 

eiendom te Vleesbaai derhalwe sal dit waardeer word indien u die dokumentasie na beide e-pos 

adresse kan aanstuur. 

dankie 

Mnr. J.D. en Mev. R.M. Lambrechts 

Attachments: TEXT.htm


pg 23 



pg 24 



pg 25 


From: 

To: 

Date: 23/01/2012 11:19 

Subject: (Fwd) - Vleesbaai Dienste Boodskap: 11 (VI18) 

Attachments: WPM$3B93.PM$ 

Beste Mnr du Toit 


pg 26 


Ek weet nie hoe dit gebeur het nie, maar die kennisgewings omtrent die voorgestelde 

windenergie-projek het my heeltemal ontgaan. 

Ek was ook nie Desember op Vleesbaai nie en dra dus ook nie kennis van enige besluite 

wat op die vergadering geneem is nie. 

Of dit raadsaam/nuttig sal wees om op hierdie laat tydstip nog 'n kopie van die Konsep 

Omvangsbepalingsverslag te bekom, is te betwyfel. My gesondheid is waffers nie en ek 

moet hierdie week hospitaal toe vir 'n onbepaalde tyd. Ek kan dus nie juis aandag daaraan 

gee nie. 

Ek versoek egter om as Belanghebbende en Geaffekteerde Persoon geregistreer te 

word. 

Met vriendelike groete 

G C Olivier 

Elwelaan 18 Visbaai 

Olivier en Randlehoff Familietrust 

=====================================

------- Forwarded message follows ------- 

From: Admin To: golivier@mighty.co.za 

Send reply to:vleesbaai@iafrica.com 

Date sent: 23 Jan 2012 08:56:17 +0200 

Subject: VBD - Vleesbaai Dienste Boodskap: 11 (VI18) 

Geagte Olivier en Randlehoff Familietrust 

INSAKE: Vleesbaai Independent Power Producer - VIPP 


pg 27 


Please remember to submit your comments regarding the draft Scoping Report before 28 January 

2012 

Almal dra reeds kennis van die voorgestelde windenergie fasiliteit teenaan Vleesbaai en Boggomsbaai. 

Kennis is voorheen ook al gegee van die (Scoping Report) wat vrygestel is. 

Baie het ook die Publieke Inligtingsvergadering in Desember op Vleesbaai bygewoon. 

Hou asseblief in gedagte dat kommentaar op die konsepverslag voor 28 Januarie 2012 ingedien kan 

word by die 

Omgewingsbepalingspraktisyn, mnr Rudolph du Toit by: rdutoit@csir.co.za 

Die konsepverslag is ter insae by die Vleesbaai Dienste kantoor of kan van die internet afgelaai word 

by www.csir.co.za/eia 

Dit staan enige individu of entiteit ook nog vry om asby bg e-posadres te registeer. 

Martin Pauw 

Sekretaris 

Vleesbaai Dienste 

044 699 1038 

084 951 0242 

------- End of forwarded message ------- 

Attachments: C:\DOCUME~1\Gerrit\LOCALS~1\Temp\WPM$11CD.PM$ 


Gerrit Olivier 

Clarkstraat 422 

0181 Waterkloof 

tel. 012 460 4212 

-- 


dangerous content by Pinpoint, and is 

believed to be clean.


pg 28 


From: "wolf.rohloff@gmail.com" 

To: "rdutoit@csir.co.za" 

Date: 23/01/2012 19:58 

Subject: application to register for EIA for Vleesbaai Solar Farm 

Sent from my Nokia phone 


pg 29 



pg 30 



pg 31 



pg 32 



pg 33 



pg 34 



pg 35 



pg 36 



pg 37 



pg 38 



pg 39 



pg 40 



pg 41 



pg 42 



pg 43 



pg 44 



pg 45 



pg 46 



pg 47 



pg 48 



pg 49 



pg 50 



pg 51 



pg 52 



pg 53 



pg 54 



pg 55 


From: "Douglas Harrowsmith" 

To: "Rudolf du Toit" 

CC: "Doug Wimble" 

Date: 11/01/2012 12:33 

Subject: John Johnson 

Dear Rudolf, 

I made mention of this letter yesterday; here it is. I have not responded to 

it as I understand that this needs to be handled through CSIR. Please 

confirm and let me know how we should address this I&AP. 

Thanks , 

Doug 

Yours sincerely, 

Vleesbaai Independent Power Producer (Pty) Ltd 

per D R Harrowsmith 

Director 

Telephone ++ 27 21 715 2531 

Facsimile 086 662 0309 

Mobile 082 461 2531 

Confidentiality & disclaimer: The information herein is intended for the 

person or entity to which it is addressed, only, and may contain private, 

confidential, proprietary and/or privileged material. Any review, 

retransmission, dissemination, or any other use of or taking of any action 

in reliance upon this information, by persons or entities other than the 

intended recipient, is prohibited. If you received this in error, please 

contact the sender and delete the material from all storage media. The 

company or author of this is transmission is not liable for complete 

transmission of the information contained in this communication, any delay 

in its receipt, nor that the mail is virus-free. 

From: John McKenzie Johnson [mailto:jmckj@mweb.co.za] 

Sent: 25 December 2011 08:36 

To: Douglas Harrowsmith 

Subject: Re: Meeting Monday 

Dear Doug 

Whilst I had sent a reply to your email previously, and whilst it seems 

formal interaction is required, I feel it necessary to respond as follows 

hereunder. 


pg 56 


The letter of yours deals with aspects relating to public participation. You 

state that 


pg 57 


"I place it on record that we offered to meet with you, personally, to 

discuss any impact that may concern you, which is the fundamental purpose of 

an EIA process. This offer you rejected." 

Your letter indicates that you feel that we are not co-operating with you in 

the public participation process. 

You then continue by saying 

"You are set on duplicating work that we have, in the course of our EIA 

process, caused to be undertaken by qualified professionals, via the CSIR. 

It remains to be seen if they reveal any aspect we have not covered 

adequately" 

This indicates that you feel that you have had studies done, that you seem 

to regard the work to be adequate and that our reaction will duplicating the 

work already done. Furthermore, you see it as an exercise in determining who 

is right because you appear to labour under the incorrect impression that 

that will be the basis on which a decision will be made. 

This troubled and upset me. You list the many aspects that I regard as 

important. They are valid concerns. I get the feeling that you are trying to 

foist your proposed project on me, regardless of whether I like it or not or 

whether or not I would be prejudiced financially or otherwise. The 

impression gained is that you need to produce a paper trail of 

"consultations" with the "public" in order to show the environmental 

authorities that you had done your public participation work. Another 

checkbox ticked of. I took advice on this aspect and was told the following: 

In the National Environmental Management Act, 107 of 1998 (NEMA) it is said 

in section 2(4)(f) 

"The participation of all interested and affected parties in environmental 

governance must be promoted, and all people must have the opportunity to 

develop the understanding, skills and capacity necessary for achieving 

equitable and effective participation, and participation by vulnerable and 

disadvantaged persons must be ensured." 

In section 2(4) (g) it is said " 

"Decisions must take into account the interests, needs and values of all 

interested and affected parties, and this includes recognising all forms of 

knowledge, including traditional and ordinary knowledge." 

Section 2 (3) states that 

"Development must be socially, environmentally and economically

sustainable". 

Regard must be had to the definition of sustainable development. Itreads 

(section 1 of NEMA) 

"sustainable development means the integration of social, economic and 

environmental factors into planning, implementation and decision-making so 

as to ensure that development serves present and future generations;" 

Added to that is the financial realities of any project. It is stated in 

section 2(4) of NEMA that 


pg 58 


"(p) The costs of remedying pollution, environmental degradation and 

consequent adverse health effects and of preventing, controlling or 

minimising further pollution; environmental damage or adverse health effects 

must be paid for by those responsible for harming the environment." 

These are only some of the aspects that indicate that public participation 

is not that basic. It is simply not a process where one or more very general 

meeting is held at which the intentions of the proposed project and what the 

proponent shall do is explained to the public. Of course the public will be 

given the opportunity to "voice their concerns." Their comments or concerns 

will be dutifully filed and listed and then ignored. Having done this, the 

proponent feels that public participation had been done. 

In order to comply with the requirements set out above, a far more 

interactive and constructive process is required. It is best set out in 

thecase of Bengwenyama Minerals (Pty) Ltd and Others v Genorah Resources 

(Pty) Ltd and Others 2011 (4) SA 113 (CC) at 140D to F. This case deals with 

mining related rights but the principles toestablish the requirements of 

public participation in environmental matters are the same. 

It reads 

"[67] The consultation process required by s 16(4)(b) of the Act thus 

requires that the applicant must: (a) inform the landowner in writing that 

his application for prospecting rights on the owner's land has been accepted 

for consideration by the regional manager concerned; (b) inform the 

landowner in sufficient detail of what the prospecting operation will entail 

on the land, in order for thelandowner to assess what impact the prospecting 

will have on the landowner's use of the land; (c) consult with the landowner 

with a view to reach an agreement to the satisfaction of both parties in 

regard to the impact of the proposed prospecting operation;." 

If the words "prospecting right" is replaced with "wind chargers" the duty 

of the EAPO is adequately described. 

An example of the depth of the duty of the proponent is shown by evaluating 

the financially related duties of the proponent. It should be pointed out 

that the proponent is liable for the costs or damages that I suffer. The 

only way in which such costs can be ascertained is not in a casual notice of

a meeting nor is it on being told what the wind farm plans are all about. It 

is a hard-nosed process of negotiation in which is established the expenses 

I will suffer and generating ways of compensating people such as myself for 

the cost, inconvenience and damage suffered. 

You certainly do not think that you could demand of your neighbours to pay 

part of your operating costs. This is what you will be doing if you 

establish your wind farm without consulting with the landowners and other 

interested and affected parties. 


pg 59 


The evaluation of impacts only comes later. If for example the adverse 

economic impacts cannot be removed your application must be refused. This is 

however a later step. At this stage we need to get hold of your full agenda, 

the information that you have and the information that we reasonably are 

entitled to demand and a proper consultation to identify and define such 

adverse impacts as there may be, their cost and what mitigatory steps can be 

introduced. It is after that had been done that further principles such as 

public participation, cumulative impacts and the consideration of 

alternatives can be dealt with. 

We currently await your agenda and further information as required. 

Please acknowledge receipt of this mail. 

Merry Christmas, and have a prosperous 2012. 

Yours sincerely 

John Johnson (Cape Vacca Estates (Pty) Ltd and Parent Companies) 

___________________________________ 


m +27 83 647 5282 f +27 86 671 9102 o +27 11 955 4480 e 

 

jmckj@mweb.co.za w www.capevacca.com w www.boltcorporation.co.za w 

www.cbc.co.za w www.jmckjholdings.com 

Please consider the environment before printing this email

From: Douglas Harrowsmith 

Organization: D R Harrowsmith & Son (Pty) Ltd 

Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2011 10:00:02 +0200 

To: John Johnson 

Cc: , Rudolf du Toit , Doug 

Wimble 

Subject: RE: Meeting Monday 

Dear John, 

Thank you for confirming our telephonic conversations, and that neither you 

nor any representative of yours will be attending our first public EIA 

meeting this coming Monday, as notified, in Vleesbaai. 

I felt it necessary to write and express my disappointment in that, in the 

contact I made with you [the first call] you talked of someonefrom your 

group [Danie, or possibly your Dad] attending; you cut the call short saying 

you would call back, which you did a short while thereafter. 


pg 60 


In the second call your attitude was quite the opposite. You stated neither 

you nor anyone from your company, Cape Vacca Estates the I&AP of record, 

would be attending the meeting [as confirmed in your subsequent mail, below] 

and continued by adding, inter alia that: 

. you had been in the area for the past 50 years, which, in your 

view gave you certain rights, notably the use of a landing strip on an 

adjacent property; 

. you were vitally concerned about the preservation of birds in 

particular the Blue Crane; 

. you have an emotional attachment/investment in the area, and want 

to conserve it as it is; 

. you have contracted with and electrical engineer, an archeologist 

from UCT and appointed a lawyer to act on your behalf. 

. you made the point that your "nugget at the end of the rainbow" 

was not my "nugget" and you intended to oppose the establishment of our WEF 

project, in toto, repeating that you wanted the whole area to be conserved 

as is. 

Note: We were advised by one of the participating land owners, Ant Steffens, 

that you had been in communication with him and conveyed much the same 

message, above, to him. 

I place it on record that we offered to meet with you, personally, to 

discuss any impact that may concern you, which is the fundamental purpose of 

an EIA process. 

This offer you rejected.

You are set on duplicating work that we have, in the course of our EIA 

process, caused to be undertaken by qualified professionals, via the CSIR. 

It remains to be seen if they reveal any aspect we have not covered 

adequately. 

Please acknowledge receipt of this mail. 

Thank you 


Vleesbaai Independent Power Producer (Pty) Ltd 

per D R Harrowsmith 

Director 

Telephone ++ 27 21 715 2531 

Facsimile 086 662 0309 

Mobile 082 461 2531 

Confidentiality & disclaimer: The information herein is intended for the 

person or entity to which it is addressed, only, and may contain private, 

confidential, proprietary and/or privileged material. Any review, 

retransmission, dissemination, or any other use of or taking of any action 

in reliance upon this information, by persons or entities other than the 

intended recipient, is prohibited. If you received this in error, please 

contact the sender and delete the material from all storage media. The 

company or author of this is transmission is not liable for complete 

transmission of the information contained in this communication, any delay 

in its receipt, nor that the mail is virus-free. 


pg 61 


From: John McKenzie Johnson [mailto:jmckj@mweb.co.za] 

Sent: 15 December 2011 10:50 

To: doug@harrowsmith.net 

Cc: duard@envirolaw.co.za 

Subject: Meeting Monday 

Hi Doug 

Just to confirm, we will not be sending a representative to the meeting on 

Monday. 

However, please send me the information as minuted. 

Thank you for the call & for keeping me posted. 

Regards 

___________________________________ 


m +27 83 647 5282 f +27 86 671 9102 o +27 11 955 4480 e 

 

jmckj@mweb.co.za w www.capevacca.com w www.boltcorporation.co.za w 

www.cbc.co.za w www.jmckjholdings.com 


-- 




-- 





pg 62 



pg 63 


From: 

To: "Rudolph du Toit" 

Date: 23/01/2012 14:12 

Subject: Re: (Fwd) - Vleesbaai Dienste Boodskap: 11 (VI18) 

Dear Mr du Toit 


pg 64 


Thank you for reply. I have read the comments of Keerom Beleggings and Vleesbaai 

Dienste respectively and I would gladly add my voice of support to both of these. I have 

nothing more to add. 

I would prefer to rexceive further communications electronically. 

Thank you for your kind wishes. 

Sincerely 


Date sent: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 13:07:39 +0200 

From: "Rudolph du Toit" 

To: 

Subject: Re: (Fwd) - Vleesbaai Dienste Boodskap: 11 (VI18) 

Dear Mr Olivier, 

This serves as acknowledgment of your registration on the project 

database. 

I have used your contact details provided in the email to register 

you. Accordingly, you will receive correspondence electronically. 

Please indicate whether you would prefer correspondence in hard copy 

format, in which case I would require your postal address as well. 

Please note that the public commenting period on the Draft Scoping 

Report is still open until 28 January 2011. Kindly ensure that all 

comments reach me before this date. To view the report electronically 

go to: http://www.csir.co.za/eia/vleesbaai.html 

Please feel free to contact me should you have any further queries and 

best wishes for a speedy recovery. 

Kind regards, 

Rudolph du Toit






Ph: +27 (0)21 888 2538 

Fax: +27 (0)21 888 2693 

>>> 23/01/2012 11:18 >>> 

Beste Mnr du Toit 

Ek weet nie hoe dit gebeur het nie, maar die kennisgewings omtrent 

die voorgestelde windenergie-projek het my heeltemal ontgaan. 

Ek was ook nie Desember op Vleesbaai nie en dra dus ook nie kennis van 

enige besluite wat op die vergadering geneem is nie. 

Of dit raadsaam/nuttig sal wees om op hierdie laat tydstip nog 'n 

kopie van die Konsep Omvangsbepalingsverslag te bekom, is te betwyfel. 

My gesondheid is waffers nie en ek moet hierdie week hospitaal toe vir 

'n onbepaalde tyd. Ek kan dus nie juis aandag daaraan gee nie. 

Ek versoek egter om as Belanghebbende en Geaffekteerde Persoon 

geregistreer te word. 

Met vriendelike groete 

G C Olivier 

Elwelaan 18 Visbaai 

Olivier en Randlehoff Familietrust 

===================================== 


pg 65 


------- Forwarded message follows ------- 

From: Admin To: 

golivier@mighty.co.za 

Send reply to: vleesbaai@iafrica.com 

Date sent: 23 Jan 2012 08:56:17 +0200 

Subject: VBD - Vleesbaai Dienste Boodskap: 11 (VI18) 

Geagte Olivier en Randlehoff Familietrust 

INSAKE: Vleesbaai Independent Power Producer - VIPP 

Please remember to submit your comments regarding the draft Scoping 

Report before 28 January 2012 

Almal dra reeds kennis van die voorgestelde windenergie fasiliteit 

teenaan Vleesbaai en Boggomsbaai. 

Kennis is voorheen ook al gegee van die (Scoping Report) wat vrygestel 

is. 

Baie het ook die Publieke Inligtingsvergadering in Desember op 

Vleesbaai bygewoon. 

Hou asseblief in gedagte dat kommentaar op die konsepverslag voor 28 

Januarie 2012 ingedien kan word by die Omgewingsbepalingspraktisyn, 

mnr Rudolph du Toit by: rdutoit@csir.co.za 

Die konsepverslag is ter insae by die Vleesbaai Dienste kantoor of kan 

van die internet afgelaai word by www.csir.co.za/eia 

Dit staan enige individu of entiteit ook nog vry om asby bg e-posadres 

te registeer. 

Martin Pauw 

Sekretaris 

Vleesbaai Dienste 

044 699 1038 

084 951 0242 


Attachments: C:\DOCUME~1\Gerrit\LOCALS~1\Temp\WPM$11CD.PM$ 





tel. 012 460 4212 

-- 




-- 

This message is subject to the CSIR's copyright terms and conditions, 

e-mail legal notice, and implemented Open Document Format (ODF) 


pg 66 


standard. 

The full disclaimer details can be found at 

http://www.csir.co.za/disclaimer.html. 

This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by 

MailScanner, 


G C Olivier 



Tel.012.460.4212 

-- 


dangerous content by Pinpoint, and is 

believed to be clean. 


pg 67 


From: george enslin 

To: Rudolph du Toit 

Date: 26/01/2012 23:52 

Subject: Re: Aternative energy 

Dear Mr Du Toit, 


pg 68 


Thank you for your prompt and thoughtful reply, I am however still concerned about the visual 

impact such a project will bring about to the natural beauty of the area and the environmental impact 

which may result from the subsequent proposal. I am sure there are more secluded areas away from 

the public eye, if you could pardon the pun. 

I would further very much like correspondence to be sent to the above e-mail address if I may 

register as an I&AP please. 

Regards 

Dr Enslin 


To: george enslin 

Sent: Tuesday, 24 January 2012, 8:40 

Subject: Re: Aternative energy 

Dear Dr Enslin, 

Thank you for your correspondence. 

I would like to clarify that CSIR is not proposing the development of this wind energy facility but is 

rather the appointed company responsible to determine the environmental impact which might result 

form the proposed development. As such, CSIR should not be confused with the physical attributes or 

aims of this project. The wind energy facility is being proposed by a private developer named the 

Vleesbaai Independent Power Producer (Pty) Ltd (VIPP). 

Your concern relating to the development of wind energy facilities along the South African coast is 

however noted. The South African context does differ from that of Europe in terms of our general sea 

state and depth. Owing to our particularly rough seas (in the areas which holds the best wind 

resources) and the depth of our coastal waters, the development of offshore wind energy facilities is 

difficult and costly. The comparative availability of onshore space and quality of the local wind 

resource accordingly makes onshore wind energy development a viable alternative in the South 

African context. The potential impacts resulting of such a development is however a reality and is the 

subject of an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). 

Would you like to register as an Interested and Affected Party (I&AP)on the project database? Such 

registration will ensure that you receive the latest project information and will enable you to actively 

participate in the EIA process. Your involvement and insights will add to the quality and robustness of 

the EIA. 

Should you be interested to register, kindly forward me the address (electronic or postal) to which 

CSIR should forward correspondence. Please also note that your comment will be included in the next 

report (Final Scoping Report, Chapter 5 "Issues and Responses Trail") and will also be responded to 

more thoroughly for the benefit of all the I&APs registered on this project.

Please feel free to contact me should you have any queries. 

Best regards, 







Ph: +27 (0)21 888 2538 

Fax: +27 (0)21 888 2693 

>>> george enslin 24/01/2012 10:13 >>> 

Dear sirs, 


pg 69 


To my absolute disbelieve, I have learnt that you are proposing a windfarm on the coast in SA. I shall 

appreciate it if you could advise me of comparison done on any impact studies in the rest of the 

world, esp in Europe where they have discontinued onshore windfarms. I refer especially to the UK 

situation. Very interesting to take note of this! I wonder then why a forward thinking company like 

yours are contemplating such unsightly monstrosities at an area of natural beauty?? I look forward to 

your self justified reply. 

Regards 

Dr G Enslin 

-- 

This message is subject to the CSIR's copyright terms and conditions, e-mail legal notice, and 

implemented Open Document Format (ODF) standard. 


This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, 

and is believed to be clean.


pg 70 


Directorate Land Use and Soil Management, Private Bag x120, Pretoria, 0001 

Delpen Building, c/o Annie Botha & Union Streets, Riviera 

From: Director: Land Use and Soil Management 

Tel: (012) 319 7678 Fax: (012) 329 5938 e-mail: agriland@nda.agric.za 


P.O. Box 320 STELLENBOSCH 

7599 

2011/12/14 

Dear Sir/Madam 

This serves as a notice of receipt and confirms that your application has been 

captured in our electronic AgriLand tracking and management system. It is strongly 

recommended that you use the on-line AgriLand application facility in future. 

Detail of your application as captured: 

Type: EIA 

Your reference number: 12/12/20/2408 

Dated: 01 DECEMBER 2011 

Please use the following reference number in all enquiries: 

AgriLand reference number: 2011_12_0082 

Enquiries can be made to the above postal, fax or e-mail address. 


L. Mongoato 

pp DIRECTOR: LAND USE AND SOIL MANAGEMENT

Online application available at: http://www.agis.agric.za/agriland 


pg 71 


From: 

To: 

Date: 15/12/2011 09:25 

Subject: EIA FOR THE PROPOSED VLEESBAAI INDEPENDENT POWER PRODUCER 

(VIPP)(PTY) LTD WIND ENERGY FACILITY NEAR VLEESBAAI, WESTERN CAPE PROVINCE 

Correspondence Reference: 766231 

File Reference: 16/2/2 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT / ONTVANGSERKENNING 

We acknowledge receipt of your letter regarding the abovementioned matter and wish to confirm that 

the matter is receiving attention. 

Ons erken ontvangs van u skrywe in bogemelde verband en bevestig dat die saak aandag geniet. 

Yours faithfully / Die uwe 

MOSSEL BAY MUNICIPALITY 

MOSSELBAAI MUNISIPALITEIT


pg 72 



pg 73 




Date: 27/01/2012 18:48 

Subject: VIPP Windenergie aanleg Kommentaar - Keerom Beleggings Aandeleblok en JE 

Theart 



Stellenbosch 

DEA/12/12/20/2408 

NEAS DEA/EIA/0000507/2011 


Verwys asseblief na die konsep Omvangsbepalingsverslag (“DSR“) insake die voorgestelde 

windenergieplaas naby Vleesbaai. 

Ons voeg net die volgende punte by: 

1. Die inligtingsvergadering te Vleesbaai op 19 Desember 2011 is bygewoon en daar is kennis 

geneem van die ontwikkellaar se stellings. 

2. Daar is ook kennis geneem van die inhoud van Vleesbaai Dienste se terugvoer gedateer 28 

Januarie 2012. Dit sal geen sin maak om die inhoud te herhaal nie en daarom gaan ons 

akkoord daarmee. 

3. Ons herhaal tog weereens die volgende uit ons eie kommunikasie aan u: “ Behalwe vir die 

punt van sigbaarheid sou ons nie graag ŉ turbine nader as sewe kilometer van Vleesbaai af 

soek nie.“ 

4. Dan wil ons graag weet hoe verseker gaan word dat toestande wat mag aanvaarbaar wees 

net na oprigting (veral geraas), volgehou gaan word gedurende instandhouding die toekoms 

in. Ook watter remedie ons as Vleesbaai inwoners het indien dit nie op ŉ aanvaarbare vlak 

gehou sou word nie. 

Ons stel dit weer dat eienaars van huise in die omgewing van oor die hele land kom en dat dit 

verwag sal word dat terugvoering in die vorm van vergaderings nie net in die Vleesbaai omgewing sal 

wees nie. Wat word daaraan gedoen? 

Bevestig ontvangs asseblief 

Dankie

J. Etienne Theart 

Namens Belanghebbende en Geaffekteerde Partye 

Keerom Beleggings Aandeleblok (Edms) Bpk. - As Voorsitter van die Direksie 

EN ook in persoonlike hoedanigheid. 

0838005216 

_____ 


pg 74 


From: Etienne Theart [mailto:thearte@iafrica.com] 

Sent: 12 November 2011 11:08 PM 


Subject: VIPP Windenergie aanleg voorstel - Keerom Beleggings Aandeleblok - JE Theart 



Stellenbosch 

DEA/12/12/20/2408 

NEAS DEA/EIA/0000507/2011 


Daar is deur die dokumentasie gegaan op die toepaslike webwerf. 

Dit is grootliks gefundeer op ander studies en dus ook akademies van aard. Daarop gaan ons nie nou 

kommentaar lewer nie. 

Almal is maar te bewus daarvan dat daar na groen energie toe beweeg moet word en ons is 

geensens daarteen nie. Die vraag is hoe? 

Die feit is dat hierdie windenergie generators enige omgewing afskuwelik skend. Dit is ook nie iets 

waaraan gewoond geraak word soos in die geval van kommunikasietorings nie. Die bewegende 

blaaie trek deurlopend die aandag en is daarom geensens iets wat in die omgewing saamsmelt en 

aan gewoond geraak kan word nie. Aanvaar dit as ŉ feit wat geen omgewingsevaluasie kan verskans 

nie. Om daardie rede moet daar met groot sorg te werk gegaan word hoe plasing van die turbines 

gedoen word indien die projek sou realiseer. 

Dit is aan my as oud Eskom werknemer maar te bekend wat die behoefte aan elektriese krag is en 

net so die moontlikhede wat in Suid-Afrika en Afrika bestaan vir skoon krag.


pg 75 


Wat ek hier bo genoem het maak windenergie ŉ onaanvaarbare oplossing in ŉ gebied van ons land 

wat grootliks toegespits is op toerisme. 

Dit is bekend dat hierdie voorgestelde projek saam met twee ander wat voorgestel word vir die sowat 

20 kilometer radius om die Eskom kragstasie langs PetroSA te Mosselbaai. 

Op hierdie stadium handel ons net met ŉ paar punte wat u hopelik in die “Draft Scoping Report“ 

reeds sal aanspreek. 

1. U word daarop gewys dat hierdie voorgestelde projek ŉ besliste beduidende invloed gaan hê 

op die besondere aantreklikheid van die Vleesbaai omgewing en so ook die waarde van 

beleggings wat daar gemaak is in hoofsaaklik vakansiehuise. 

2. Dit is ook ŉ deel van ons land waar die voël populasie bevorder moet word in stede van om 

dit te belemmer met projekte soos hierdie. 

3. Die benutting van sonenergie en optimale benutting van lynkrag sal veel meer aanvaarbaar 

wees. Die hele Karoo is daar waar ons ernstig kan kyk na kragopwekking deur middel van 

sonenergie. 

4. Juis op hierdie stadium onderhandel President Zuma in die DRK om die nodige samewerking 

ten opsigte van die Inga hidro-elektriese kragopwekking te bewerkstellig waar meer krag 

opgewek kan word as wat tans in die grootste deel van Afrika opgewek word en Suid-Afrika 

dit grootliks kan benut terwyl ander minder ergelike bronne ontwikkel word en veral die 

kultuur van energie besparing ernstige aandag kry. 

5. Dit is ŉ feit dat hierdie installasies ŉ geraas maak wat onaanvaarbaar is in ŉ vakansie 

omgewing soos hierdie. 

6. Die vraag kan dus gevra word hoekom daar na windenergie in hierdie omgewing op hierdie 

skaal gekyk word. Die voorstel is dus dat indien daar voortgegaan word dat dit afgeskaal 

moet word en die norm moet wees dat dit optimaal onopsigtelik moet wees vir dorpsgebiede 

soos Vleesbaai, Boggomsbaai en Gouritzmond. 

7. Behalwe vir die punt van sigbaarheid sou ons nie graag ŉ turbine nader as sewe kilometer 

van Vleesbaai af soek nie. 

8. Almal was geskok toe die projek ook skielik die naam Vleesbaai in sy identifikasie dra. Dit 

alleen word al as ŉ negatiewe aspek beskou. 

Neem asseblief deeglik kennis van ons kommer oor die negatiewe aspekte van hierdie voorgestelde 

projek wat ons glo aangespreek moet word. 

Neem ook kennis dat eienaars van huise in die omgewing van oor die hele land kom en dat dit 

verwag sou word dat terugvoering in die vorm van vergaderings nie net in die Vleesbaai omgewing 

sal wees nie. 

Dankie 


Namens Belanghebbende en Geaffekteerde Partye



0838005216 



Stellenbosch 

DEA/12/12/20/2408 

NEAS DEA/EIA/0000507/2011 



pg 76 


Verwys asseblief na die konsep Omvangsbepalingsverslag (“DSR“) insake die voorgestelde 

windenergieplaas naby Vleesbaai. 

Ons voeg net die volgende punte by: 

1. Die inligtingsvergadering te Vleesbaai op 19 Desember 2011 is bygewoon en daar is kennis 

geneem van die ontwikkellaar se stellings. 

2. Daar is ook kennis geneem van die inhoud van Vleesbaai Dienste se terugvoer gedateer 28 

Januarie 2012. Dit sal geen sin maak om die inhoud te herhaal nie en daarom gaan ons 

akkoord daarmee. 

3. Ons herhaal tog weereens die volgende uit ons eie kommunikasie aan u: “ Behalwe vir die 

punt van sigbaarheid sou ons nie graag ŉ turbine nader as sewe kilometer van Vleesbaai af 

soek nie.“ 

4. Dan wil ons graag weet hoe verseker gaan word dat toestande wat mag aanvaarbaar wees 

net na oprigting (veral geraas), volgehou gaan word gedurende instandhouding die toekoms 

in. Ook watter remedie ons as Vleesbaai inwoners het indien dit nie op ŉ aanvaarbare vlak 

gehou sou word nie. 

Ons stel dit weer dat eienaars van huise in die omgewing van oor die hele land kom en dat dit verwag 

sal word dat terugvoering in die vorm van vergaderings nie net in die Vleesbaai omgewing sal wees 

nie. Wat word daaraan gedoen? 

Bevestig ontvangs asseblief 

Dankie 





0838005216


pg 77 


From: Etienne Theart [mailto:thearte@iafrica.com] 

Sent: 12 November 2011 11:08 PM 


Subject: VIPP Windenergie aanleg voorstel - Keerom Beleggings Aandeleblok - JE Theart 



Stellenbosch 

DEA/12/12/20/2408 

NEAS DEA/EIA/0000507/2011 


Daar is deur die dokumentasie gegaan op die toepaslike webwerf. 

Dit is grootliks gefundeer op ander studies en dus ook akademies van aard. Daarop gaan ons nie 

nou kommentaar lewer nie. 

Almal is maar te bewus daarvan dat daar na groen energie toe beweeg moet word en ons is 

geensens daarteen nie. Die vraag is hoe? 

Die feit is dat hierdie windenergie generators enige omgewing afskuwelik skend. Dit is ook nie iets 

waaraan gewoond geraak word soos in die geval van kommunikasietorings nie. Die bewegende 

blaaie trek deurlopend die aandag en is daarom geensens iets wat in die omgewing saamsmelt en 

aan gewoond geraak kan word nie. Aanvaar dit as ŉ feit wat geen omgewingsevaluasie kan verskans 

nie. Om daardie rede moet daar met groot sorg te werk gegaan word hoe plasing van die turbines 

gedoen word indien die projek sou realiseer. 

Dit is aan my as oud Eskom werknemer maar te bekend wat die behoefte aan elektriese krag is en 

net so die moontlikhede wat in Suid-Afrika en Afrika bestaan vir skoon krag. 

Wat ek hier bo genoem het maak windenergie ŉ onaanvaarbare oplossing in ŉ gebied van ons land 

wat grootliks toegespits is op toerisme. 

Dit is bekend dat hierdie voorgestelde projek saam met twee ander wat voorgestel word vir die sowat 

20 kilometer radius om die Eskom kragstasie langs PetroSA te Mosselbaai. 

Op hierdie stadium handel ons net met ŉ paar punte wat u hopelik in die “Draft Scoping Report“ reeds 

sal aanspreek.


pg 78 


1. U word daarop gewys dat hierdie voorgestelde projek ŉ besliste beduidende invloed gaan hê 

op die besondere aantreklikheid van die Vleesbaai omgewing en so ook die waarde van 

beleggings wat daar gemaak is in hoofsaaklik vakansiehuise. 

2. Dit is ook ŉ deel van ons land waar die voël populasie bevorder moet word in stede van om 

dit te belemmer met projekte soos hierdie. 

3. Die benutting van sonenergie en optimale benutting van lynkrag sal veel meer aanvaarbaar 

wees. Die hele Karoo is daar waar ons ernstig kan kyk na kragopwekking deur middel van 

sonenergie. 

4. Juis op hierdie stadium onderhandel President Zuma in die DRK om die nodige samewerking 

ten opsigte van die Inga hidro-elektriese kragopwekking te bewerkstellig waar meer krag 

opgewek kan word as wat tans in die grootste deel van Afrika opgewek word en Suid-Afrika 

dit grootliks kan benut terwyl ander minder ergelike bronne ontwikkel word en veral die kultuur 

van energie besparing ernstige aandag kry. 

5. Dit is ŉ feit dat hierdie installasies ŉ geraas maak wat onaanvaarbaar is in ŉ vakansie 

omgewing soos hierdie. 

6. Die vraag kan dus gevra word hoekom daar na windenergie in hierdie omgewing op hierdie 

skaal gekyk word. Die voorstel is dus dat indien daar voortgegaan word dat dit afgeskaal 

moet word en die norm moet wees dat dit optimaal onopsigtelik moet wees vir dorpsgebiede 

soos Vleesbaai, Boggomsbaai en Gouritzmond. 

7. Behalwe vir die punt van sigbaarheid sou ons nie graag ŉ turbine nader as sewe kilometer 

van Vleesbaai af soek nie. 

8. Almal was geskok toe die projek ook skielik die naam Vleesbaai in sy identifikasie dra. Dit 

alleen word al as ŉ negatiewe aspek beskou. 

Neem asseblief deeglik kennis van ons kommer oor die negatiewe aspekte van hierdie voorgestelde 

projek wat ons glo aangespreek moet word. 

Neem ook kennis dat eienaars van huise in die omgewing van oor die hele land kom en dat dit 

verwag sou word dat terugvoering in die vorm van vergaderings nie net in die Vleesbaai omgewing 

sal wees nie. 

Dankie 





0838005216


pg 79 


ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR THE VIPP 

DRAFT SCOPING REPORT 

CSIR REPORT NO: CSIR/CAS/EMS/ER/2011/0030/B 

Herewith a few comments pertaining to the sections dealing with Mammals and Reptiles. 

3.4.2.1 Mammals 

Picture taken of a Large Grey Mongoose. Date: 28 Dec 2011. Location: west of the Gourits River. 

[Farm: Va-ti-ka-ki] 

I find it strange that no mention is made of Bushbuck in the thickets! 

Birds 

The importance of Voelvlei needs to be stressed. In years with high rainfall (as was the case in 2011) 

Voelvlei is home to tens of thousands of birds. 

In December 2011 / January 2012 Langvlei became known amongst borders country wide due to the 

presence of a Hudsonian Godwit, at least 7 Pectoral Sandpipers and Baillon’s Crakes (which were 

breeding there). It also hosted many African and Greater Painted-Snipes. The close proximity of


pg 80 


wind turbines (wiht the associated construction work) may have a huge impact on this very important 

vlei and pan. 

Many surveys to identify species present have been carried out in the area surrounding Vleesbaai 

over the past 4 years. The data have been submitted to the SABAP2 team and the data can be 

viewed on their web site. 

The Vleesbaai pentad (3415_2150) (ie the area bordered by -34 deg 15 min and -34 deg 20 min and 

also 21 deg 50 min & 21 deg 55 min) had been surveyed 65 times and a total of 205 species have 

been recorded. The pentad just north of it (which includes Langvlei) has 12 cards and 143 species, 

not including the recent rarities. The pentad to the west of the Vleesbaai pentad, which includes the 

middle section of Voelvlei, has 43 cards wth 224 species. 

3.4.2.2 Reptiles 

Reference is made to the possibility of Padlopers. In December 2011 Padlopers were seen within the 

boundaries of Vlees Bay and one was photographed. They have also been seen (and photographed) 

on the road from Gouritzmond to the N2 

2 Ryma street, Driehoek, Vleesbaai, 27 Dec 2011 

Pieter la Grange 

This is the Southern African Rare Bird News Report issued at 22h00 on Thursday, 12 January 2012. Information 

has been gleaned from various websites, email groups as well as from individual observers who have passed on 

their sightings. This report cannot be taken as being totally comprehensive as it is based only on information 

made available at the time of writing. All bird sightings reported here are reported in good faith based on 

information as provided by the observers. Any inaccuracies are totally unintentional and the writer cannot be held 

liable for these. For those who may have only joined the group recently and are interested in finding out what has 

been seen in the past, previous reports can be viewed at http://groups.google.co.za/group/sa-rarebirdnews 

Slowly starting to get back into the swing of things. I hope I haven’t missed too much while skimming through my 

emails, but here goes… 

Starting in the Western Cape, the PECTORAL SANDPIPER on Pan P1 at Strandfontein Sewage Works 

continues to entertain and was still showing well yesterday. Other long staying birds include the AFRICAN PIED


pg 81 


WAGTAIL at the Postcard Café near Jonkershoek and the EURASIAN OYSTERCATCHER at Seeberg in the 

West Coast National Park, both still being reported on the weekend. 

Elsewhere in the province, the Vleesbaai region near Mossel Bay seems to be delivering some fantastic birds at 

the moment. A vlei about 6km north-west of Vleesbaai is currently hosting at least 7 PECTORAL SANDPIPERS, 

but there may be as many as 10 individuals there. Also of interest at this vlei are at least 2 breeding pairs of 

BAILLON’S CRAKES whilst the best of all is a Godwit which is there as well. Originally reported as a Blacktailed 

Godwit, when I first got to see the photos earlier yesterday, I raised some concerns about the identity of the 

bird. I discussed this bird yesterday with friends Phil Hockey, Peter Ryan and Cliff Dorse (thanks for your input 

guys!) and then sent a request for additional photos out on SARBN. I have received further confirmation today 

from observers that were there today and the bird has now been confirmed as a HUDSONIAN GODWIT. This 

represents only the 7 th known record of this species in Southern Africa, so it is indeed a mega! The first record 

was in March 1987 at the Swartkops River estuary in Port Elizabeth. This was followed in February 1989 by a 

bird at Bottlerey in the West Coast National Park, then a bird in February 1990 on the Berg River at Velddrif 

(which returned for a second season), then another bird at Geelbek in the West Coast National Park in December 

1999, a bird on the Walvis Bay Lagoon in December 2000 and, finally, a bird at Seeberg in the West Coast 

National Park in March 2010.


pg 82 



pg 83 



pg 84 


REFLECT 

VIPP WIND ENERGY FACILITY 


pg 85 


I have perused your Draft Scoping Report on the above-mentioned topic and find it 

commendable and structured on an actual crises. 

What follows is not research-based or an exhaustive deliberation, but merely a conclusion 

arising from logic and information derived from publications and the media. 

Persisting with current practices to generate electricity have confronted Nations with an 

indisputable crises threatening the survival of life in the medium term. Self created, the blame 

is to be borne and a “solution” is inevitable to avoid recrimination from future generations. 

Unfortunately, all do not agree, those disagreeing either perpetuate or promote outmoded 

practices under the noble pretence of development and creation of welfare, or for individual 

selfish enrichment. Those who do realise the crucial demand for renewable energy sources, 

are hopefully altruistically motivated; however, the ever presence of personal enrichment 

cannot be ignored. 

Although late in the day, the developed first world hopefully realises its dilemma and are 

morally impelled to seek a feasible alternative. It certainly possesses the intellect and 

technological innovative ability to attempt to curb a pending disaster. The question arises, 

however, whether they are committed. 

Wind Energy (green energy) is undoubtedly an alternative to fossil fuel (carbon footprint) 

receiving wide attention. The principle is praiseworthy and necessitates fair investigation. 

The norm should be altruistic and the means economically viable and feasible, as well as 

ecological- friendly and compatible. 

The economic need exists. The question of economic scale arises in terms of affordability 

and effectiveness. Affordability implies, inter alia, demand for resources (natural, 

capital/financial, manpower and technological), the effective and efficient application of the 

base and its denoted priority within a rational economic and social causality, without 

endangering/ retarding future public and private initiatives and realisation of household 

needs. Effectiveness implies, inter alia, achievement of goals rendering term benefits for the 

population. 

Regarding the ecology, i.e the relation between man and his environment. The survival of 

mankind is directly dependant upon the command and his responsibility to co-exist in 

harmony with his environment as life's sustenance. This gave rise to a moral code of conduct 

and a series of interrelated disciplines of human activity to arrange and endorse a sustainable 

civilisation. Man in conflict with himself and with disregard to his environment is an 

inevitable formula for disaster.


pg 86 


Given the above-mentioned perspective, I wish to respond as follows on your report: I 

1. support the comment of the involved persons incorporated in Chapter 5: Issues and 

responses trail; 

2. question the comprehensiveness of the research and neutrality of the presentation. 

There is ample more explicit professional information available exposing an objective 

view on the merits and deficiencies of the envisaged system which was deliberately 

disregarded or reflects superficial research: 

3. question the efficiency of the equipment to be installed due to experience elsewhere 

fraught with obsolete/redundant/outmoded dumping from the first world to divert 

attention and masquerade promotion of green peace in Africa; 

4. question the financial and fiscal impact on government and the shift of responsibility 

to households within a depressed local and international economy without any clear 

positive prospects; 

5. question VIPP's technical knowledge and access to professional knowledge and 

information to implement and maintain the project; 

6. question the import of material and products at a cost (a stressed fiscal base and 

unfavourable exchange rate), which can be produced locally with the spin-off of local 

capital investment, longer-term job creation and welfare distribution; 

7. question the share of local communities in upliftment from the initial, immediate and 

future remuneration of immediate beneficiaries; and 

8. have extreme doubts on the immediate availability of the technical capacity to assume 

specialized commissioned responsibilities; lack of appropriate training programs 

timeously can have disastrous results. 

Summarising. I support the critical search for alternate economic and ecologically 

beneficial energy sources. The search, however, demands intensive identification of 

alternatives, taking account of the present level of socio-economic development and 

supportive administrative systems, the capacity of the fiscal base and current state of 

financial markets, social and economic opportunity costs, economy of scale, the design 

of a “simple applicable functional”, viable, sustainable and affordable system that will 

meet the needs of society. 

Please reflect on and devote more effort toward a solution for alternate energy generation 

than the recent apparent rash an unsuccessful attempts by public/private enterprise such as, 

for example, PetroSA's soluble natural gas investigation in Vleesbay, SHELL's fracturing 

exploits, Road Toll Systems, etc. 

Please incorporate this entire submission in your following report. 

Yours friendly 

Jan Pieterse 

Hoekbaai 

Vleesbaai. 

Email: jmelchiorp@gmail.com

From: "Charl de Villiers" 

To: "'Rudolph du Toit'" 

Date: 27/01/2012 19:21 

Subject: Vleesbaai wind energy project 

Dear Rudolph 


pg 87 


Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft scoping report for the 

Vleesbaai wind energy project. I unfortunately don’t have the time to do 

justice to a comprehensive set of comments, but I would appreciate it if the 

following can be recorded. I apologise for the brevity. 

1. It is crucial that specific, geographically defined, sites are 

selected for impact assessment by the conclusion of the scoping process. At 

this stage, we simply have too little concrete detail about the alternative 

sites for the turbines and infrastructure, which significantly compromises 

one’s ability to make an informed submission on the potential impacts 

relating to the propose facility. This lack of clarity on where, precisely, 

the project may be located and how it may interact with specific components 

of the receiving environment will also translate into reduced predictve 

ability and reliability of the EIA. It is therefore strongly recommended 

that a final scoping report be withheld for public release until the project 

has been narrowed down to two or more specific sites to support an informed 

comparative assessment of the pros and cons of each. 

2. I am concerned that insufficient weight is attached to the 

proximity of Voëlvlei which, if memory serves me well, is one of the top 10 

water bodies in South Africa and Namibia that are frequented by migrant 

waders and other waterbirds during the summer months. It is strongly 

recommended that the Animal Demography Unit at UCT be contacted for its 

input in this regard. Voëlvlei, as pointed out in other comment submitted on 

this application, is surrounded by numerous natural and artificial 

depressional wetlands that, too, host notable numbers of migrant waders 

during summer. The EIA will have to consider how the movement of these and 

other waterbirds between these different water bodies may need to influence 

the siting of turbines and, more broadly, the desirability and 

appropriateness of the Vleesbaai area for a wind energy facility. 

3. The comments and response report refers to bird habitat being 

‘sterilised’ by cultivation. This is misleading. Cultivation has, in fact, 

contributed to habitat diversity in this area and creates niches for bird 

and other species that frequent grassland-type habitats. The direct and 

indirect impacts of largescale cultivation have had a signficantly adverse 

affect on biota associated with especially renoster-thicket vegetation 

types, but by the same token niches have been opened up that would otherwise 

not be available to many species. From a lay perspective, it would seem that 

larger birds such as Blue Crane, European Stork, Grey and Black-Headed heron 

and various raptors, for example (including the Black Harrier) have been


pg 88 


successful in establishing themselves in this transformed environment. All 

in all, the area between Gouritsmond, Vleesbaai and the N2 would seem to be 

unsuitable for a wind energy facility owing to a heightened risk of 

collisions and other adverse interactions between birds and these 

structures. 

4. Potential powerline corridors also need to be identified through a 

high-level screening process that draws on inter alia the Mossel Bay 

Municipality biodiversity sector plan and bird sensitivity. The process of 

corrdir selection would have to be co-ordinated with the identification 

distinct site alternatives on the basis of contextual limitations and 

environmental impacts. 

5. Trustfully the next few months will allow the project proponent to 

systematically eliminate areas that, contextually, would not be suitable for 

a wind energy facility. The result of such a process of elimination would 

trustfully conclude in one or two alternative sites that can be asssesed and 

evaluated with the requisite degree of detail and confidence in the findings 

which, at present, would have to be called into question due the factors 

outlined above. 


CHARL DE VILLIERS 

14 Bradwell Road 

Vredehoek 

CAPE TOWN 

8001 

email skua@mweb.co.za 

cell 083 785 0776 

fax 086 553 9256

From: "Whitelaw" 

To: 

Date: 23/01/2012 20:40 

Subject: Vleesbaai Windfarm 


pg 89 


Dear Sir/Madam, 

I would be grateful if you could registere me as an InAP regarding thsi proposed 

development. 

Regards, 

Dave Whitelaw 

Chairman: Cape Bird Club 

Conservation Committee

From: "Pieter la Grange" 

To: 

Date: 23/01/2012 10:23 

Subject: Vleesbaai windturbines 

Mnr du Toit 

As een van die huiseienaars van Vleesbaai wil ek graag registreer. 


pg 90 


Hoe maak ek? Is daar ‘n vorm waar ek my besonderhede moet invul beskikbaar? 

Pieter de W la Grange 

Rymastraat 2 

Driehoek 

Vleesbaai 

Woonagtig te Peekastraat 14 

Stellenbosch 

ID 4912255049084 

Sel: 082 466 7330 

Tel 021 887 3967 

Groete 

Pieter la Grange

From: "Smof Beetge" 

To: 

Date: 25/01/2012 18:02 

Subject: Voëlvlei, Langvlei, Vleesbaai Wundlaaiers 


pg 91 


Hiermee voeg ons, die ondergetekendes, ons name by diegene wat beswaar maak 

teen die oprigting van windlaaiers by so 'n sensitiewe area soos Voëlvlei, 

Langvlei en Vleesbaai. 

Verseker sal die voëllewe 'n baie ernstige knou kry indien die windlaaiers 

opgerig sou word. 

G J A Beetge en L C Beetge 

Posbus 706, Stilbaai 

Tel 028 754-3628

From: "Gert Kruger" 

To: 

Date: 26/01/2012 16:17 

Subject: Wind farm Vleesbaai 


pg 92 


Voëlvlei and Langvlei are regularly visited by us as birdwatchers for the 

variety of waders and ducks and other birds, we strongly object to the erection 

of any wind farm in that region as that will have a very harmful effect on the 

birdlife which is also a tourism attraction to foreign birders. 

Gert Kruger 

glkruger@telkomsa.net 

(Sel) +27845494090 

(H) +27287541244 

P O Box 204 

Stilbaai 

6674

From: "Peter Buchholz" 


Date: 25/01/2012 16:24 

Subject: Wind Turbines Vleesbaai - Gouritsmond 

Dear Mr du Toit 

what follows are my preliminary comments on the DSR. 


pg 93 


1. The scenic coastal location may render the area unsuitable for wind "farms". The attractiveness of 

the area for tourism is a fact and may be adversely affected by wind turbines in respect of e.g. bird 

life and noise/vibrations. 

2. I consider NOISE a very serious problem for Vleesbaai and Gouritsmond, the nearby residential 

villages. The assertion that noise is inaudible at a distance of 500 metres, due to ambient noise 

masking, can only be correct for a "best case" scenario. Other views, to which I subscribe, insist on a 

distance of more than 2 km from the turbine, in order for the "swish and thump" of the blades to be 

inaudible. The position of the turbines, higher than the villages, would in addition favour a greater 

distance. 

Ambient noise for e.g. Gouritsmond at night is almost zero for most houses! 

Noise must be measured both at source and in the residential areas affected. Such measuring must 

include the construction phase noise, and must be repeated at regular intervals during the life of the 

turbines. 

The 2-km+ distance is strongly supported by medical evidence, see Dr Nina Pierpont' s book on the 

"Wind Turbine Syndrome" (2009) ,dealing inter alia with the effects of low-frequency wind turbine 

noise on the organs of the inner ear, supported by many individual case studies. 

On Noise and Health Effects of Large Wind Turbines, see also 

http://www.wind-watch.org/ww-noise-health-p.php . This contains more alarming cases of headache, 

dizziness, sleep disturbance, etc. caused by wind turbine noise. 

I suggest that other areas for wind farms be investigated with a view to their position further away 

from settlements than the present proposal. 

I trust that my remarks will be considered. 


Prof Dr Peter Buchholz 

Gouritsmond


pg 94 


To: "rdutoit@csir.co.za" , jmelchiorp@gmail.com 

 

Date: 27/01/2012 16:24 

Subject: Windenergy facilities at Vleesbaai 

Dear Mr. du Toit 

I would like to comment as follows regarding the wind generation facility at Vleesbaai: 

I am mostly concerned about the low frequency noise that the rotors make. The wind is blowing most 

of the time between South East and South West. I would therefore object strongly if the wind 

generators are placed on the South Eastern, Southern or South Western side of any piece of the 

Vleesbaai border. 

However, should it not be possible, and the wind energy facilities need to be placed at all cost on the 

mentioned sides of Vleesbaai, it need to be at least 4 km away from Vleesbaai. 

Otherwise, I would be happy. 

Regards 

Willem van Schalkwyk 

9 Ysterhout street 

Vleesbaai. 

082 8595125


pg 0


pg 1 



pg 2 



pg 3 



pg 4 



pg 5 



pg 6 



pg 7 



pg 8 



pg 9 



pg 10 



pg 11 



pg 12 



pg 13 



pg 14 



pg 15 



pg 16 



pg 17 



pg 18 



pg 19 



pg 20 


EIA FOR THE PROPOSED VLEESBAAI INDEPENDENT POWER PRODUCER (VIPP) (PTY) LTD WIND ENERGY FACILITY 

NEAR VLEESBAAI,WESTERN CAPE PROVINCE 

(DEA REF:12/12/20/2408 – NEAS REF: DEA/EIA/0000507/2011): 

COMMENTS ON THE ADDENDUM TO THE DRAFT SCOPING REPORT 

The Lakes Bird Club (LBC) is a Registered Interested and Affected Party ( I & AP) for this project, as per a confirming 

email dated 6 th February 2012, from Rudolph du Toit, the Project Manager. In this repect, BirdLife South Africa, 

through its Regional Conservation Officer for the Western Cape, Dale Wright also applied to be registered at this 

time, but he was not advised about this Addendum, so is not sure that Birdlife has been registered. 

The Lakes Bird Club (LBC), a branch of BirdLife South Africa, was founded 24 years ago in Sedgefield. Today its 

membership of 170 is drawn from Knysna,Sedgefield,Wilderness,George,Great and Little Brak Rivers,Mossel Bay 

and Oudtshoorn. The club has outings on the first Saturday of every month, except January, and another one midweek, 

mid-month. The Voelvlei area, which will be impacted on by the proposed VIPP Wind Energy Facility is an 

area that the LBC has visited regularly over the years and hopes to do so for many more to come. 

Since 2006, the LBC has been doing regular counts, and controlled observations as citizen scientists on behalf of 

the Animal Demography Unit (ADU) of the University of Cape Town in the area. These counts have been 

undertaken especially to monitor the viability of the waterbird population. The area is also rich in other species as 

well, which are also monitored. Since the wetlands in the area are of an ephemeral nature, Voelvlei and other pans 

in the adjacent farmlands do not hold water continuously. 

Anyone visiting the area in a dry year might presume that the vlei was of little importance ! However, if there is 

heavy rain in the small catchment areas, all these pans fill quickly and become a magnet for both resident breeding 

water birds and Palearctic migrants. The LBC feels very strongly about the importance of these wetlands in wet 

years when they hold water and even in dry years their importance is significant. 

As mentioned above, the flooding of the area is not a regular occurrence but surely the very name of this 

ephemeral pan, Voelvlei, shows how important it has been for birds in both numbers and significant species for 

very many years. According to the Avian Wind Farm Sensitivity Map for South Africa, developed by Birdlife South 

Africa and the Endangered Wildlife Trust, this area rated a very high sensitivity score, due to the fact that many 

vulnerable and near–threatened species (according to the Red Data List) as well as endemic species occur. The 

data for this map was put together from information contained in the two Bird Atlas projects as well as other long 

running scientific surveys conducted by the ADU. 

In winter 2006,heavy rains filled Voelvlei to capacity and by the ensuing November the following birds were 

confirmed as breeding in the area: Little & Black-necked Grebe, Reed Cormorant, Grey & Black-headed Heron, 

African Spoonbill, Egyptian Goose, Yellow-billed Duck, Red-billed & Cape Teal, African Sacred Ibis, Red-knobbed 

Coot, Three-banded & Kittlitz’s Plover, Blacksmith Lapwing, Pied Avocet, Black-winged Stilt, Grey-headed Gull,


pg 21 


Whiskered Tern, Spotted Eagle Owl and Wattled Starling. By April 2007, Blue Crane and Horus Swift were also 

breeding. 

In July 2009, Cape Nature registered Voelvlei as a Co-ordinated Waterfowl Count (CWAC) site (Site Code 

34162149) and members of the LBC assisted with the count. At this stage Voelvlei was half full and 4917 birds of 

36 species were recorded. 

In June 2011 there was a huge cloud burst in the area, and all pans, especially Voelvlei, were the fullest a local 

farmer had observed since 1981. Voelvlei was so full that the access road around the shoreline was completely 

underwater and most of the CWAC on 3 rd August 2011 had to be done from the top of the surrounding hills. There 

were so many smaller pans east of Voelvlei containing so much water and so many birds that the LBC registered a 

further 3 new CWAC sites. 

The site codes for these are: 34162152 Vleeschbaai 

34152152 Buffelsfontein 

34142152 Langvlei. 

The total of birds counted on these new sites was 1187. During the 2011-2012 breeding season the following birds 

nested at these sites: Blue Crane, Little & Cattle Egret, Grey & Black-headed Heron, Black Crowned Night Heron, 

Little & Black-necked Grebe,Spurwing & Egyptian Goose, African Sacred Ibis, Red-knobbed Coot, Three-banded & 

Kittlitz’s Plover, Yellow-billed Duck, South African Shelduck,White-faced Duck, Maccoa Duck, Southern Pochard , 

Cape & Red-billed Teal, Cape Shoveler, African Marsh Harrier, Whiskered Tern, Baillon’s Crake, Painted & African 

Snipe and Wattled Starling. 

In January 2012, a very rare bird for South Africa, a Hudsonian Godwit, was sighted at Langvlei.Many birders from 

all over South Africa traveled to see this rarity during the 5-6 weeks that it was there. During that time regional 

rarities Pectoral Sandpiper, Painted and African Snipe and Baillon’s Crake were also at this same location. In 

February 2012 the number of birds counted on the Voelvlei CWAC was 8464. The number of Black-winged Stilts 

(859) represents 3.5% of the estimated South African population, which puts this wetland into the Global 

Important Bird Areas ( IBA) category, according to Professor Doug Harebottle of the ADU. Other species which are 

significant for regional IBA category status are White-fronted Plover, Pied Avocet, Whiskered Tern, Great Crested 

Grebe, African Spoonbill, South African Shelduck and Cape Shoveler. 

Apart from the breeding species in summer, large number of waders, mostly Palearctic migrants, gather to feed on 

these pans: Ruff, Little Stint, Common Greenshank, Curlew Sandpiper, Common Ringed Plover, White-fronted 

Plover, Marsh Sandpiper and Wood Sandpiper. Over the years we have recorded the following raptors in the area: 

African Fish Eagle, Black-shouldered Kite, Martial Eagle, Verreaux’s Eagle, Booted Eagle, Steppe Buzzard, Jackal 

Buzzard, Peregrine Falcon, Lanner Falcon, African Goshawk, African Marsh Harrier and Rock Kestrel. Secretary 

Birds are regularly seen and we know of a nesting site a few kilometers north of Voelvlei, where we have seen 

adults feeding chicks on a nest. Denham’s Bustards occur in the area and since 2006, the number of Blue Crane 

have increased considerably from less than 200 to about 350, due in part to successful breeding as a result of


pg 22 


optimal conditions in the area. There were 9 Black Storks on Voelvlei at the February 2012 count, and both Greater 

and Lesser Flamingo come to Voelvlei from time to time. 

With this wealth of birds in the area, many of which feature on the lists of endangered or threatened species, the 

members of the LBC are extremely concerned that the erection of the proposed huge turbines in the area will have 

a totally negative effect on the birdlife. Studies in the UK have proved that the breeding population of birds was 

reduced by up to half within 500m of such turbines. 

We are particularly concerned that the two recent additions of land, Buffelsfontein Farm 250 portions 1 and 29, 

will mean that the whole of the area around and including Langvlei will be available for the erection of turbines. 

The size of the birds in the area needs to be considered as many larger birds soar in display flights to great heights 

and raptors also move continuously over a large area while they are hunting. The migrant birds arrive from their 

northern homelands by long distance flights. 

Some of these turbines have been proposed to be sited on spurs of high land overlooking Voelvlei,east of 

Johnson’s Post and are possibly on the flight path of birds commuting between the smaller pans and Voelvlei and 

vice versa. The whole of the area between Voelvlei and Langvlei always holds large numbers of Blue Crane and we 

have seen them sitting on nests in this area as well as soaring to great heights over these hills while we have been 

on the shores of Voelvlei. Both Voelvlei and Langvlei are starting to get known as good birding destinations in 

birding circles and more people are looking for accommodation in the area which will be a boost for the economy. 

The Birding Routes brochure for the Eden District Municipality is currently being drafted and Voelvlei and the 

adjacent pans will be featured as a birding route. 

We are also concerned about the disturbance to the land during the construction phase. Many new roads will have 

to be made to give access to the erection sites and at each particular site, much clearing will have to be done. This 

area is the stronghold of the endemic Agulhas Long-billed lark, which has a very restricted distribution and which is 

listed as Near Threatened on the Red Data List ; Large-billed and Red-capped Larks, Capped Wheatear, Cape 

Longclaw and various pipits also occur in the grassland areas and their breeding is likely to be considerably 

disrupted by the land clearing and also the noise element both during construction and subsequent operation. 

It is to be hoped that the proponents of this scheme take very serious note of all the environmental issues that are 

raised, especially the reports on birds and bats from the year long monitoring exercise, so that the bird fatalities 

that occurred in some of the earlier wind farm schemes overseas are not repeated in this very special birding area 

and that the breeding success of so many birds is not prejudiced. 

This report and comment is endorsed by all members of the Lakes Bird Club. 

Pat Nurse 

Chair 

Lakes Bird Club 

P.O.Box 792 

Sedgefield 6573 

Telephone: 044 382 0638 

Mobile: 082 402 6133 

Email : jgn@lantic.net


pg 23 



pg 24 



pg 25 



pg 26 



pg 27 



pg 28 


1 to 10: Comment noted 


pg 29 


11: Please note that the map included in the Addendum to the Draft Scoping Report only indicates 

the cadastral boundary of the proposed project. The actual turbine placements cannot extend up to 

the cadastral boundaries indicated on the map as the Land Use Planning Ordinance (of 1985 as 

amended in 2012) stipulates that a buffer of at least 1.5 turbine lengths (300m) must be maintained 

between the turbine footprint and a neighbouring property. Turbine placement will also be 

influenced by the findings and subsequent mitigation measures proposed by all the specialists 

involved in this EIA process. Turbines are therefore not expected to be located on cadastral 

boundaries. It should also be noted that properties included in the EIA will not necessarily be used 

for turbine erection, but may also be needed for supporting infrastructure, such as underground 

power lines and access roads. 

Impacts on property values, aesthetics as well as bird and bat mortality is currently being 

investigated by specialist studies commissioned for this EIA process. The results of these studies will 

be published in the Draft EIA Report. Please see response to 25 below for a reply to the question 

related to climate change. 

12. Comment noted. Please see response to 11 above. 

13. The guideline from which this distance is quoted is a decision support tool and not a legal 

requirement. Relaxation of or exemption from this guideline is permitted if the project proponent 

can offer a compelling reason for doing so. In this light, it should be noted that the Inca Energy 

Mossel Bay Project was placed on hold by the relevant project proponent. Furthermore, the 

InnoWind Mossel Bay project has not yet received Environmental Authorisation and the success of 

this project is subsequently uncertain. The uncertainty surrounding the abovementioned two 

projects lead the EAP to state that the resultant impacts of placing the VIPP project in close 

proximity to other projects must be assessed, but it remains the responsibility of government to 

decide whether it should be allowed. The Draft Scoping Report reads: “While the Vleesbaai 140MW 

wind farm site is not considered a large wind farm, it is proposed to be located within 10 km of the 

proposed 200MW Inca Energy Wind Farm. The decision-making authorities will need to decide 

whether these two medium sized wind farms with a combined total of 340MW are acceptable in the 

light of technical capacity and environmental considerations. The cumulative impacts of these two 

wind farms, together with the InnoWind 130MW wind farm to the north, will need to be assessed in 

the EIA.” (Chapter 3, page 29) 

14. 

15. Please see response to 11 above.


pg 30 


16. CSIR disagrees with this statement. Firstly, the responded does not introduce any issues which 

were not included in the original Draft Scoping Report. Secondly, the aim of having a draft version of 

any report is to allow for modifications and corrections. The responded fails to mention that 

additional issues resulting from the extension of the project footprint were identified by CSIR (i.e. 

fresh water ecology and terrestrial ecology impacts) and subsequently included in the Plan of Study 

for EIA published in the Addendum to the Draft Scoping Report (page 5). Finally, the respondent 

refers to “additional reasons for concern which were not addressed at all” but fails to indicate what 

these concerns are and how CSIR failed to address it. Accordingly, this statement is seen to be 

invalid. 

17. Caution should be taken when generalising environmental impacts resulting from similar 

projects. Environmental impacts are area and project specific and while some bird and bat 

mortalities might be expected, the magnitude and significance of such mortalities cannot be 

generalised from similar projects. 

The purpose and aim of the Scoping phase of the EIA process is not to assess impacts, nor to 

consider mitigation measures to reduce such impacts. Accordingly, the Draft Scoping Report 

(Chapter 1, page 16) states the following regarding the objectives of the Scoping Report: 

“The Scoping Phase of the EIA refers to the process of determining the spatial and temporal boundaries 

for the EIA. In broad terms, this involves three important activities: 

Confirming the process to be followed and opportunities for stakeholder engagement; 

Clarifying the project scope and alternatives to be covered; and 

Identifying the key issues to be addressed in the impact assessment phase and the approach to 

be followed in addressing these issues. “ 

From the above, it is clear that investigation into movement of turbines to reduce potential avifaunal 

mortalities and detailed assessment of the environmental suitability of the proposed area falls 

beyond the scope of the Scoping phase. Such issues will be addressed in the Impact Assessment 

phase of the EIA process which starts once the Final Scoping report is accepted by government. 

18. Please see response to 17 above. 

According to research conducted by Chou & Tu (2011), approximately 19% of turbine related 

accidents involves fire. In this study only a total of 715 turbine failures/accidents could be identified 

globally, of which only 136 involved fires. It should be noted that wind farms are in operation since 

the 1970’s. The total number of turbine accidents since turbine inception would therefore translate 

into 17.4 accidents per year globally of which only 3.3 would involve fire. Therefore, fire will only 

affect an extremely small number of the approximately 100 000 commercial wind turbines in 

operation globally (approximately only 0.003%). Accordingly, the fire hazard posed by wind turbines 

is of such a low magnitude that it does not merit assessment in this EIA.


pg 31 


It should also be noted that all turbines will have both active and passive fire prevention and control 

measures. Active controls include several fire detectors located in various locations within each 

turbines. These fire detectors are connected in a continuous circuit and if one should be triggered, 

the entire turbine would shutdown as well as all the cooling fans to reduce oxygen flow into the 

turbine. The transformer also automatically shuts down should one of the fire detectors be 

activated. From a passive fire control perspective; the entire tower and nacelle are constructed from 

steel and are fully enclosed to prevent fires. This structure subsequently also acts as a Faraday Cage 

which greatly reduces the potential fire risk resulting from lightning strikes. The turbine braking 

system is also enclosed in steel to prevent the danger of sparks. Furthermore, the turbine cooling 

system is fully enclosed, designed to prevent any cooling fluid to come into contact with the 

atmosphere. The cooling system uses a non-flammable water/glycol mixture. Finally, the vegetation 

cover below the turbine is trimmed and the soil is compacted to act as a hard standing surface for 

crane erection and turbine blade lay down area. This area also serves in controlling the spread of fire 

from the turbine to the surrounding vegetation. 

19. As indicated in the response to 17 above, the Scoping Report will not deal with the assessment, 

or consequences, of potential environmental impacts, but rather aims to identify such impacts. The 

Draft Scoping Report (Chapter 6, page 13,14 & 15) and the subsequent Addendum to the Draft 

Scoping Report (page 5) fulfils this aim by identifying the visual, noise and economic impacts 

(mentioned by the commentator) as potential environmental impacts to be considered in the Impact 

Assessment phase of the project. These impacts are being assessed through specialist studies which 

will be published in the Draft EIA Report. 

It is not clear how the commentator calculated the distance between residential properties in 

Springerbaai and the nearest turbine to these properties as no turbine layout was proposed in the 

Draft Scoping Report. Accordingly, the reference to turbines being situated less than the minimum 

required distance from residential properties appears to be premature. 

Acceptable noise levels are set by SANS 10103:2008 and are 45dB for rural (outdoor) areas. 

Perceived noise is a product of the energy of the sound wave and the distance such a sound wave 

travels before reaching a noise sensitive area. Given that no turbine positions were proposed in the 

Draft Scoping Report, and given that no anticipated dB rating was supplied for noise emitted by 

turbines; it is not clear how the commentator can calculate noise levels to be at unacceptable levels 

at houses within Springerbaai. The potential noise impact of the proposed project will be 

investigated through a Noise Impact Assessment commissioned for this EIA process. The findings of 

this assessment will be published in the Draft EIA Report. 

Potential impacts on property values are investigated in an Economic Impact Assessment 

commissioned for this EIA process. The findings of this assessment will be published in the Draft EIA 

Report.


pg 32 


20. Please note that the Draft Scoping Report is not submitted to an approval process by 

government; only The Final Scoping Report is submitted to such a process. As indicated earlier, the 

reason for having a draft version of the Scoping Report is to allow for uncertainty, growth or changes 

in the project scope. Final turbine positions where not proposed in the Draft Scoping Report as the 

environmental sensitivity of the study area was still being investigated at that time. Since the release 

of the Draft Scoping Report, specialist studies have progressed to such a level as to have a better 

understanding of the environmental constraints present in the area. As such, a turbine layout is now 

proposed in the Final Scoping Report. 

21. CSIR disagrees with this statement. 

Chapter 4 (pages 18 to 19) of the Draft Scoping Report clearly states the alternative turbine 

technology currently available and indicates way such a turbine design (Vertical Axis Wind Turbines) 

is not an option for MW-scale projects. Secondly, Chapter 2 (page 6) of the Draft Scoping Report 

provides a detailed description of the turbine design being proposed for this project and also 

provides an illustration of what this turbine design looks like. Consequently, this statement is 

considered to be invalid. 

22. Details regarding the wind resource (speed, direction, frequency, etc.) present in the area are 

universally considered to be privileged information. The project proponent has invested 

considerable resources in erecting a wind measurement mast at the project site and analysing the 

collected data. The resultant information obtained from this monitoring project is confidential in 

nature as it confers economic benefit to its holder (similar to the results of oil and gas exploration 

projects in the private sector). 

It stands to reason that the project proponent will not construct a multi-million Rand project in an 

area which will not provide sufficient return on investment. 


Please note that the EIA process does not consider the financial viability of the proposed project as 

an environmental impact to be considered in granting or withholding Environmental Authorisation. 


25. 

25.1 & 25.2: The commentator is correct in asserting that wind turbines can influence 

weather patterns. This assertion is however predicated on scale. The proposed project, 

combined with the potential impact of the proposed InnoWind and Inca Energy projects, 

would have a negligible local heating effect during evenings and a negligible cooling effect 

during daytime due to the mixing of upper and lower air behind the turbines.

26. 


pg 33 


Changes to weather patterns might only become noticeable when wind energy extraction 

reaches a level of 2 terawatts (TW) (1 TW = 1 000 000 MW). The total global wind energy 

extraction capacity at the end of 2011 only equalled 0.2 TW. This should be contrasted with 

the mere 470MW combined generation capacity of the proposed SEW, InnoWind and Inca 

Energy facilities. Research suggests that extracting as much as 11.5 TW of energy from the 

wind at an altitude of 100m would still only result in a 1% loss of wind kinetic energy. The 

resultant impact on temperature and rainfall would be so small as to be indistinguishable 

from natural variability (New Scientist: 2012). Accordingly, potential impacts resulting from 

changed weather patterns are so insignificant as to not merit inclusion in the EIA process. 

26.1: An Economic Impact Assessment was commissioned to investigate this issue. 

The commentator is referred to Chapter 6 (page 15) of the Draft Scoping Report which details the 

Terms of Reference for the Economic Impact Assessment. The relevant section states that the 

study should consider: 

“Impacts associated with environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated and have economic 

implications. This would focus on potential negative impacts on neighbouring land owners should 

they be relevant.” 

26.2: A continued efficiency is supposed as a turbine maintenance regime forms part of the wind 

energy facility management plan. Turbine blades will be cleaned and visually inspected on regular 

basis to ensure optimum generation capacity. 

27. From a planning perspective, the proposed project is not viewed as an industrial development. Under 

LUPO (1985) as amended in 2011, the project is viewed as a “renewable energy structure” which does not 

require industrial zoning, but rather consent use zoning. 

27.1: Please see response to 27 above. 

In addition to the proposed project not being viewed as an industrial development, cognisance 

should also be taken of the resource dependence and land availability applicable to the proposed 

project. The wind energy facility needs to be erected where the wind resource is in greatest 

abundance and where land is available for such development. The area around the “MossGass” 

plant experiences wind turbulence due to the numerous tall structures already present in the area 

and furthermore does not offer sufficient available land for the size of the proposed project. 

27.2: Please see response to 27 and 27.1 above 


29. Comment noted. 

Please note that private reserves and eco-estates do not carry the same importance and privilege, from a 

national conservation perspective, as national parks. Accordingly, it cannot be afforded the same buffers 

and boundaries as national parks.


pg 34 


30. As indicated in responses 1 to 29; no verifiable and significant inadequacies or inaccuracies have been 

demonstrated by the commentator. Secondly, the function of the Scoping Report appears to be 

misinterpreted by the commentator. The Scoping Report aspires to identify potential environmental 

impacts and methodologies to assess such impacts. It does not consider potential advantages or 

disadvantages; the severity of impacts or mitigatory actions applicable. Such considerations will be dealt 

with in the Impact Assessment Phase of the EIA process. Environmental impacts expected to result from 

the proposed project, as well as the additional areas mentioned in the Addendum to the Draft Scoping 

Report, were identified and are listed on page 5 of the Addendum to the Draft Scoping Report. 

The commentator’s statement is subsequently viewed as invalid. 



33. Please note that the Draft Scoping Report and the subsequent Addendum to it is not submitted for 

acceptation or rejection. Rather, it is placed in the public domain to be subjected to the scrutiny of all 

I&APs so as to ensure that all relevant environmental issues were identified and that proposed 

methodologies for investigating such impacts are acceptable. Subsequently, the identification of 

inaccuracies or inadequacies, even should it be present, is not sufficient grounds to reject the Draft 

Scoping Report. It should rather be seen as the aim of having a draft version of the report, as this allows for 

corrections in the Final version of the Scoping Report which will be submitted to government for 

acceptance or rejection.


pg 35 



pg 36 



pg 37 



pg 38 



pg 39 



pg 40 



pg 41 



pg 42 



pg 43 



pg 44 



pg 45 



pg 46 



pg 47 



pg 48 



pg 49 



pg 50 



pg 51 



pg 52 



pg 53 



pg 54 



pg 55 



pg 56 



pg 57 



pg 58 



pg 59 



pg 60 



pg 61 



pg 62 



pg 63 



pg 64 



pg 65 



pg 66 



pg 67 



pg 68 



pg 69 



pg 70 



pg 71 



pg 72 



pg 73 



pg 74 



pg 75 



pg 76 



pg 77 



pg 78 



pg 79 



pg 80 



pg 81 



pg 82 



pg 83 



pg 84 



pg 85 



pg 86 



pg 87 



pg 88 



pg 89 



To: 

Date: 30/05/2012 13:31 

Subject: VVIP - I&AP Comment to April Addendum 

Mr Rudolph du Toit 


CSIR/CAS/EMS/ER/2011/0030/B 

EMS0008 

DEA Ref Number: 12/12/20/2408 

Date: 

April 2012 


pg 90 


To be cited as: 

CSIR, 2011. Environmental Impact Assessment for the proposed VIPP Wind Energy Facility project near Vleesbaai, Western Cape: 

Draft Scoping Report Addendum. CSIR Report Number: CSIR/CAS/EMS/ER/2011/0030/B. Stellenbosch. 

Looking at the map it is clear that for all sorts of reasons the target area of the project is creeping closer to the developed areas like 

Vleesbaai and Boggomsbaai. We feel that the process is misused to effect this. 

We want to remind you that our previous comments are not to be ignored and we are getting the idea that just that is happening. We made it 

clear that we are not against green energy but against a wind farm to be too close to our developed area. We stated that seven kilometers is 

what we see as the minimum distance from the closest house to the first turbine. 

Resently the CSIR published a wind map that includes the area where this wind farm is proposed. We have got reason to believe that the 

wind patterns do not suit the proposed development optimally. We would like to insist that the report is amended to display the fit of the 

proposed project to what is regarded as optimal. This will have to be compared with the damage done to the environment, nature and the 

sense of living in our area. Nobody will persuade us that these devices will blend in to the environment and become "un-noticed". For that 

reason the very existance of it must be concidered carefully. 

Regards 

On behalf of I&AP: 

1 Jakobli Etienne Theart 

2 Keerom Beleggings Aandeleblok (Pty) Ltd. 

+27838005216 

012 6543696 

thearte@iafrica.com 

-- 

This message is subject to the CSIR's copyright terms and conditions, e-mail legal notice, and implemented Open Document Format (ODF) 

standard. 


This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, 


Please consider the environment before printing this email.


pg 0


pg 1 

Appendix H : 

Proof of public meeting 

and key stakeholders meetings


pg 2 

Appendix H : 




pg 3 

Appendix H : 




pg 4 

Appendix H :

Appendices - CSIR

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?