Section 38 of NHRA P R E S E N T A T I O N & NEMA in practise 6 … · 2020. 8. 11. · Section 38...

11
www.sahra.org.za Section 38 of NHRA & NEMA in practise PRESENTATION IAIAsa Mpumalanga Branch Heritage Workshop Natasha Higgitt Impact Assessment Officer – Archaeology, Palaeontology and Meteorites Unit /FACEBOOK @TWITTER WWW.SAHRA.ORG.ZA 6 August 2020 SOUHERITAGETH AFRICAN RESOURCES AGENCY

Transcript of Section 38 of NHRA P R E S E N T A T I O N & NEMA in practise 6 … · 2020. 8. 11. · Section 38...

  • www.sahra.org.za

    Section 38 of NHRA & NEMA in practiseP R E S E N T A T I O N

    IAIAsa Mpumalanga Branch Heritage Workshop

    Natasha Higgitt

    Impact Assessment Officer –Archaeology, Palaeontology and

    Meteorites Unit

    /FACEBOOK @TWITTER

    W W W . S A H R A . O R G . Z A

    6 A u g u s t 2 0 2 0

    SOUHERITAGETH AFRICANRESOURCES AGENCY

  • www.sahra.org.za

    • Currently – NEMA section 24(4)b(iii) states “investigation, assessment and evaluation of the impact

    of any proposed listed or specified activity on any national estate referred to in section 3(2) of the

    National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (Act No.25 of 1999), excluding the national estate

    contemplated in section 3(2)(i)(vi) and(vii) of that Act.

    • NHRA section 38(8) states “The provisions of this section do not apply to a development as described

    in subsection (1) if an evaluation of the impact of such development on heritage resources is

    required in terms of the Environmental Conservation Act, 1989 (Act No.73 of 1989) or the integrated

    environmental management guidelines issued by the Department of Environment Affairs and

    Tourism, or the Minerals Act, 1991 (Act No. 50 of 1991), or any other legislations: Provided that the

    consenting authority must ensure that the evaluation fulfils the requirements of the relevant

    heritage resources authority in terms of subsection (3), and any comments and recommendations of

    the relevant heritage resources authority with regards to such development have been taken into

    account prior to the granting of consent.

    • Future – NEMA section 24(5)(a) and (h) and 44

    • Protocol for the assessment and minimum report content requirements for Environmental

    Impacts on Heritage Resources

    NHRA & NEMA

    /FACEBOOK @TWITTER

    W W W . S A H R A . O R G . Z A

  • /FACEBOOK @TWITTER

    W W W . S A H R A . O R G . Z A

    NEMA EST

    A N A G E N C Y O F T H E D E P A R T M E N T O F S P O R T S , A R T S A N D C U L T U R E

    Assessment levels based on heritage sensitivity levels

    Includes requirements of NHRA section 38(3)

    Includes requirements of current HIA Minimum Standards and elements of the draft HIA Minimum Standards

    Includes SAHRIS requirements

    Similar to draft Avifauna Protocols issued in May 2019

    Possible gazette for public comment in October 2020

    HERITAGE PROTOCOLS

  • EAPs and Heritage Consultants

    Heritage Consultants need all the correct information, location, infrastructure and listed activities, and design changes

    Heritage Consultants must be included from the start

    EAPs must consider the advice of the Heritage Consultants

    Open and clear communication, roles to be clear

    EAPs must understand that heritage is sensitive, people-oriented and

    ToR/Scope can change during a project BUDGETS CAN CHANGE

    Access issues make it difficult for Heritage Consultants to do fieldwork

    The relationship between EAPs and Heritage Consultants can make or break a project. It is crucial to consider the following as key points to fostering relationships with heritage consultants

    /FACEBOOK @TWITTER

    W W W . S A H R A . O R G . Z A A N A G E N C Y O F T H E D E P A R T M E N T O F S P O R T S , A R T S A N D C U L T U R E

  • M A N A G I N G H E R I T A G E

    D E V E L O P M E N T R E Q U I R E M E N T S

    F O R M A N A G I N G H E R I T A G E I N T H E I R

    A P P L I C A T I O N A R E A S

  • National Legislation

    • NHRA Section 38(4): Limitations or conditions to be applied to the development

    • NEMA Section 4(a)iii: Sustainable development must not disturb the nations cultural heritage, and where not possible, disturbance is minimised and remedied

    • NEMA 2017 Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations Section 19, 23, 26, 34-37 and Appendix 4

    National Guidelines

    • SAHRA Guidelines for the Development of Plans for the Management of Heritage Sites and Places

    International Guidelines and Principles

    • UNESCO Heritage Management Plan Guidelines

    • ICOMOS Charter for the Protection and Management of the Archaeological Heritage (1990)

    • Equator Principles

    • International Finance Co-operation Performance Standards 7 & 8

    /FACEBOOK @TWITTER

    W W W . S A H R A . O R G . Z A

    National Legislation and International Guidelinesfor heritage management

  • • Delegation of authority lies with the

    Provincial Heritage Authorities

    • Must contact the PHRA for permit

    procedures

    • Chapter II and III of NHRA Regulations

    (No. 21239 2 June 2000)

    Section 34 permits

    • Delegation of authority lies with the SAHRA

    (except WC, EC and KZN)

    • Permit applications on SAHRIS

    • R150 per permit application

    • Chapter II and IV of NHRA Regulations (No.

    21239 2 June 2000)

    • Permit applications take at least 30 days to

    be processed

    • Permit conditions are important

    • SAHRA may inspect at their discretion as

    per Chapter II of NHRA Regulations or

    section 50 of the NHRA

    Section 35 permits

    • Delegation of authority lies with the SAHRA

    (except WC, EC and KZN)

    • Permit applications on SAHRIS

    • R150 per permit

    • Chapter II and IX of NHRA Regulations (No.

    21239 2 June 2000)

    • Permit applications take at least 30 days to

    be processed

    • Permit conditions are important

    • SAHRA may inspect at their discretion as

    per Chapter II of NHRA Regulations or

    section 50 of the NHRA

    Section 36 permits

    Permit requirementsM i t i g a t i n g h e r i t a g e

    www.sahra.org.za

    • National Heritage Sites are

    administered by SAHRA

    • Provincial Heritage Sites are

    administered by the PHRA

    • PHS defined as archaeological,

    palaeontological or burial grounds in

    NC, NW, FS, MP, GP and LP are

    manged by SAHRA due to competency

    assessments

    • Permit application on SAHRIS/PHRA

    • R150 per permit application

    • Chapter II and III of NHRA Regulations

    (No. 21239 2 June 2000)

    Section 27 permits

    /FACEBOOK @TWITTER

    W W W . S A H R A . O R G . Z A

  • www.sahra.org.za

    Development Heritage Management Plans

    /FACEBOOK @TWITTER

    W W W . S A H R A . O R G . Z A

    A N A G E N C Y O F T H E D E P A R T M E N T O F S P O R T S , A R T S A N D C U L T U R E

    Draft SAHRA Development Heritage Management Plan GuidelinesCombining the NEMA EMPr requirements and SAHRA Guidelines for the Development of Plans for the Management of Heritage Sites and Places, the following will be required in an DHMP:

    Report requirements

    ▪ Description of approved activities, their impacts and risks on heritage resources;

    ▪ Must take into account context of development;

    ▪ Must be organised as per phase of development;

    ▪ The structure of the development management team and the company principles/policies with regards to heritage management;

    ▪ Integrated nature of the development area – other specialist mitigation measures may impact heritage i.e. alien vegetation management plans, stormwater management plans;

    ▪ Include recording forms, time frames, and reporting templates.

  • W W W . S A H R A . O R G . Z A

    SAHRIS Case ID 12292 – Square Kilometre Array HIA and CMP

    Digby Wells Environmental was contracted to conduct the HIA for the SKA and develop a CMP for the management of identified heritage resources within the development area.

    The CMP included the following:

    ▪ A Masterplan of action with distinct objectives along a timeline;

    ▪ A list of current and future risks to heritage resources;

    ▪ Preventative protection measures;

    ▪ Monitoring procedure and schedule during each phase of the development;

    ▪ Current developing training programme for contractors;

    ▪ Chance Finds Procedure;

    ▪ Interactive map and database for easy implementation of the CMP.

    A N A G E N C Y O F T H E D E P A R T M E N T O F S P O R T S , A R T S A N D C U L T U R E

    /FACEBOOK @TWITTERDu Piesanie & Van der Walt, 2018

  • 0201

    In summary

    • Relationships and communication between EAPs and Heritage consultants;

    • Incorrect submission of documents to SAHRA;

    • Lack of compliance by Environmental Assessment Practitioners and incomplete submission of documents on SAHRIS.

    • IAIAsa workshops to include heritage practitioners;

    • EAP Training workshop for NHRA and HIAs;

    • DEFF Environmental Screening Tool and Heritage Protocols;

    • Standardize reports (Standards and/or regulations).

    Challenges Way forward

    /FACEBOOK @TWITTER

    W W W . S A H R A . O R G . Z A A N A G E N C Y O F T H E D E P A R T M E N T O F S P O R T S , A R T S A N D C U L T U R E

  • Thank You