final basic assessment report - cape eaprac cavalier...cape eaprac 3 final basic assessment report...

Cape Environmental Assessment Practitioners (Pty) Ltd Reg. No. 2008/004627/07

Telephone: (044) 874 0365 1st Floor Eagles View Building

Facsimile: (044) 874 0432 5 Progress Street, George

Web: www.cape-eaprac.co.za PO Box 2070, George 6530

D.J. Jeffery Directors L. van Zyl

FINAL BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT

For

CAVALIER ABATTOIR EXPANSION, UPGRADE &

BIOGAS PLANT

Portions 6 & 83 of 288, Tweefontein

In terms of the

National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998), as amended & National Environmental Management: Waste Act, 2008 (Act 59 of 2008)

Prepared for Applicant: Cavalier Abattoir (Pty) Ltd By: Cape EAPrac

Report Reference: TSH168/13 GDARD Ref: Gaut: 002/12-13/W0033

Case Officer: Faith Mlambo Date: 22 May 2013

APPOINTED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PRACTITIONER:

Cape EAPrac Environmental Assessment Practitioners

PO Box 2070

George

6530

Tel: 044-874 0365

Fax: 044-874 0432

Report written & compiled by: Melissa Mackay (ND Nature Conservation), who has

seven years’ experience as an environmental practitioner.

Report reviewed by: Louise-Mari van Zyl (MA Geography & Environmental Science

[US]; Registered Environmental Assessment Practitioner with the Interim Certification

Board for Environmental Assessment Practitioners of South Africa, EAPSA);

Committee Member of the Southern Cape International Association for Impact

Assessments (IAIA). Ms van Zyl has over eleven years’ experience as an

environmental practitioner.

PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT: For public review & comment

APPLICANT: Cavalier Abattoir (Pty) Ltd

CAPE EAPRAC REFERENCE NO: TSH168/13

SUBMISSION DATE 22 May 2013

Cavalier Abattoir Expansion, Expansion and Biogas Plant TSH168/13

Cape EAPrac Final Basic Assessment Report

DRAFT BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT in terms of the

National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998), as amended & National Environmental Management: Waste Act, 2008 (Act 59 of 2008)

CAVALIER ABATTOIR EXPANSION, UPGRADE & BIOGAS PLANT

Portion 6 and 83 of 288 Tweefontein

Submitted for: Departmental Compliance

This report is the property of the Author/Company, who may publish it, in whole, provided that:

Written approval is obtained from the Author and that Cape EAPrac is acknowledged in the

publication;

Cape EAPrac is indemnified against any claim for damages that may result from any publication of

specifications, recommendations or statements that is not administered or controlled by Cape

EAPrac;

The contents of this report, including specialist/consultant reports, may not be used for purposes

of sale or publicity or advertisement without the prior written approval of Cape EAPrac;

Cape EAPrac accepts no responsibility by the Applicant/Client for failure to follow or comply with

the recommended programme, specifications or recommendations contained in this report;

Cape EAPrac accepts no responsibility for deviation or non-compliance of any specifications or

recommendations made by specialists or consultants whose input/reports are used to inform this

report; and

All figures, plates and diagrams are copyrighted and may not be reproduced by any means, in any

form, in part or whole without prior written approved from Cape EAPrac.

Report Issued by: Cape Environmental Assessment Practitioners

Tel: 044 874 0365 PO Box 2070 Fax: 044 874 0432 5 Progress Street Web: www.cape-eaprac.co.za George 6530



ORDER OF REPORT

Basic Assessment Report

EAP Declaration Form

Appendix A : Site Plans

Appendix B : Photographs

Appendix C : Facility Illustrations

Appendix D : Route Position Information

Appendix E : Public Participation Information

Appendix E1 : Proof of site notice

Appendix E2 : Notifications

Appendix E3 : Proof of Newspaper Advertisements

Appendix E4 : Stakeholder Correspondence

Appendix E5 : Minutes of Public meetings (Not Applicable)

Appendix E6 : Comments and Responses Table

Appendix E7 : Draft BAR Comments

Appendix E8 : Final BAR Comments (Pending)

Appendix E9 : I&AP Register

Appendix E10 : Application / BID Comments

Appendix E11 : Other

Appendix F : Permits / Licenses

Appendix G : Specialist Reports

Appendix G1 : Botanical Specialist Report

Appendix G2 : Biogas Engineering Report

Appendix G3 : Planning Application

Appendix G4 : Heritage Report

Appendix G5 : Services Report

Appendix H : Environmental Management Programme

Appendix I : Other Information

Appendix I1 : Biodiversity Overlays



Appendix I2 : Authority Correspondence

Appendix I3 : Borehole Test Certificates

Appendix I4 : National Register of Water Use Certificate

Appendix I5 : Title Deed Documents



TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION A: ACTIVITY INFORMATION .................................................... 2

1 ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION .......................................................................................................... 2

2 APPLICABLE LEGISLATION, POLICIES AND/OR GUIDELINES ............................................ 5

3 ALTERNATIVES ........................................................................................................................ 5

4 PHYSICAL SIZE OF THE ACTIVITY ......................................................................................... 6

5 SITE ACCESS ........................................................................................................................... 6

6 SITE OR ROUTE PLAN ............................................................................................................. 7

7 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS .............................................................................................................. 7

8 FACILITY ILLUSTRATION ........................................................................................................ 7

SECTION B: DESCRIPTION OF RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT ................. 8

1 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ...................................................................................................... 9

2 ACTIVITY POSITION ................................................................................................................. 9

3 GRADIENT OF THE SITE .......................................................................................................... 9

4 LOCATION IN LANDSCAPE ..................................................................................................... 9

5 GROUNDWATER, SOIL AND GEOLOGICAL STABILITY OF THE SITE ................................. 9

6 AGRICULTURE ....................................................................................................................... 10

7 GROUNDCOVER ..................................................................................................................... 11

8 LAND USE CHARACTER OF SURROUNDING AREA ........................................................... 12

9 SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONTEXT ............................................................................................... 14

10 CULTURAL/HISTORICAL FEATURES ................................................................................... 15

SECTION C: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ................................................... 16

1 ADVERTISEMENT ................................................................................................................... 16

2 LOCAL AUTHORITY PARTICIPATION ................................................................................... 17

3 CONSULTATION WITH OTHER STAKEHOLDERS ............................................................... 17

4 GENERAL PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REQUIREMENTS ........................................................ 24

5 APPENDICES FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ....................................................................... 24

SECTION D: RESOURCE USE AND PROCESS DETAILS ..................... 25

1 WASTE, EFFLUENT AND EMISSION MANAGEMENT .......................................................... 25

2 WATER USE ............................................................................................................................ 27

3 POWER SUPPLY .................................................................................................................... 28



4 ENERGY EFFICIENCY ............................................................................................................ 29

SECTION E: IMPACT ASSESSMENT ..................................................... 30

1 ISSUES RAISED BY INTERESTED AND AFFECTED PARTIES ............................................ 30

2 IMPACTS THAT MAY RESULT FROM THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONAL PHASE ..................................................................................................................................... 31

3 IMPACTS THAT MAY RESULT FROM THE OPERATIONAL PHASE ................................... 35

4 IMPACTS THAT MAY RESULT FROM THE DECOMISSIONING AND CLOSURE PHASE ... 38

5 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ......................................................................................................... 39

6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT ............................................................................. 40

7 IMPACT SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSAL OR PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE ....................... 42

8 RECOMMENDATION OF PRACTITIONER ............................................................................. 42

9 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMME (EMPR) ................................................. 43

SECTION F: APPENDICES ...................................................................... 44

FIGURES

Figure 1: Cavalier Abattoir site

Figure 2: Cavalier Feedlot site

Figure 3: Preferred Alternative One Layout

Figure 4: Proposed expanded feedlots

Figure 5: 500m Radius on Feedlots and Abattoir and Biogas sites

Figure 6: City of Tshwane Investment Map


Cape EAPrac 1 Final Basic Assessment Report

List of all organs of state and State Departments where the draft report has been submitted, their full contact details and contact person Kindly note that:

1. This Basic Assessment Report is the standard report required by GDARD in terms of the EIA Regulations, 2010.

2. This application form is current as of 2 August 2010. It is the responsibility of the EAP to ascertain

whether subsequent versions of the form have been published or produced by the competent authority.

3. A draft Basic Assessment Report must be submitted to all State Departments administering a law relating to a matter likely to be affected by the activity to be undertaken. The draft reports must be submitted to the relevant State Departments and on the same day, two CD’s of draft reports must also be submitted to the Competent Authority (GDARD) with a signed proof of such submission of draft report to the relevant State Departments.

4. The report must be typed within the spaces provided in the form. The size of the spaces provided is not

necessarily indicative of the amount of information to be provided. The report is in the form of a table that can extend itself as each space is filled with typing.

5. Selected boxes must be indicated by a cross and, when the form is completed electronically, must also

be highlighted.

6. An incomplete report shall be rejected.

7. The use of “not applicable” in the report must be done with circumspection because if it is used in respect of material information that is required by the competent authority for assessing the application, it may result in the rejection of the application as provided for in the regulations.

8. Five (5) copies (3 hard copies and 2 CDs-PDF) of the final report and attachments must be handed in at

offices of the relevant competent authority, as detailed below. 9. No faxed or e-mailed reports will be accepted. Only hand delivered or posted applications will be accepted.

10. Unless protected by law, and clearly indicated as such, all information filled in on this application will become public information on receipt by the competent authority. The applicant/EAP must provide any interested and affected party with the information contained in this application on request, during any stage of the application process.

DEPARTMENTAL DETAILS Gauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Development Attention: Administrative Unit of the Sustainable Utilisation of the Environment (SUE) Branch P.O. Box 8769 Johannesburg 2000 Administrative Unit of the Sustainable Utilisation of the Environment (SUE) Branch 18th floor Glen Cairn Building 73 Market Street, Johannesburg Admin Unit telephone number: (011) 355 1345 Department central telephone number: (011) 355 1900

Gauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (GDARD)

Development

Basic Assessment Report in terms of the National

Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of

1998), as amended, and the Environmental Impact

Assessment Regulations, 2010 (Version 1)



Submission to State Departments (Number 3 above)

Has a draft report for this application been submitted to all State Departments administering a law relating to a matter likely to be affected as a result of this activity? Is a list of State Departments referred to above been attached to this report?

if no, state reasons for not attaching the list.

SECTION A: ACTIVITY INFORMATION

1 ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION

Project title (must be the same name as per application form):

The Cavalier Abattoir is located on Portion 83 of 288 Tweefontein near Cullinan. The existing facilities

currently include:

High Throughput slaughter facilities for 200 units Sheep / Goats. In terms of quantities this equates

to 1 200 sheep;

Series of four oxidation ponds for the on site processing of effluent;

Feedlot for the production of sheep;

Slurry dams for collection of manure from the feedlot;

Irrigated grazing lands and pastures;

Associated infrastructure such as sheds, offices etc.

Figure 1: Cavalier Abattoir site (Source: Google Earth Pro June 2012)

(For official use only) File Reference Number:

Application Number:

Date Received:

YES

YES



Figure 2: Cavalier Feedlot site (Source: Google Earth Pro October 2012)

The proposal is for the Upgrade and Expansion of the existing Cavalier Abattoir & Feedlots, and the

Construction of a Biogas waste-to-energy plant at the same location to improve waste management activities

associated with operating the feedlot(s) and abattoir.

The Applicant intends to expand the existing feedlot/abattoir operations as follows:

Expansion of the existing abattoir to include cattle lairages and slaughter facilities for an additional

150 cattle per day;

An on-site packaging plant to deal with organic liquids;

Addition of cattle feedlots accommodating 6 000 animals and additional slurry dams to

accommodate nutrient rich runoff;

An anaerobic Biogas digestion plant which will make use of all the abattoir by-products (i.e. blood,

wastewater and offal) to be converted to renewable energy. Abattoir waste products are rich in

organic matter which can be used in digesters to extract biogas (methane) from biological material,

which can be used to run electrical generators.



Figure 3: Preferred Alternative One layout of the Cavalier Abattoir

Figure 4: Proposed expanded feedlots

Select the appropriate box

The application is for an upgrade of an existing development

X The application is for a new development

Other, specify

Does the activity also require any authorisation other than NEMA EIA authorisation?



YES NO

If yes, describe the legislation and the Competent Authority administering such legislation

Rezoning for the Biogas facility in terms of the Peri Urban Areas Town Planning Scheme 1975. If yes, have you applied for the authorisation(s)? YES NO If yes, have you received approval(s)? (attach in appropriate appendix) YES NO

2 APPLICABLE LEGISLATION, POLICIES AND/OR GUIDELINES

List all legislation, policies and/or guidelines of any sphere of government that are applicable to the application as contemplated in the EIA regulations: Title of legislation, policy or guideline: Administering authority: Promulgation

Date: National Environmental Management Act No. 107 of 1998 as amended.

National & Provincial 1998

National Environmental Management: Waste Act (Act 59 of 2008)

National & Provincial 2008

Peri-Urban Areas Town Planning Scheme 1975 Provincial 1975 National Water Act (Act 36 of 1998) National 1998 National Heritage Resources Act (Act 25 of 1999) National 199 Meat Safety Act (Act 40 of 2000) National 2000 Animal Protection Act (Act 71 of 1962) National 1962 Guideline for Environmental Management Plans Western Cape DEA&DP 2005 Guideline on Public Participation Western Cape DEA&DP 2010 Guideline on Need & Desirability Western Cape DEA&DP 2010 Companion Guidelines to the EIA Regulations National DEA 2012 GDARD Requirements for Biodiversity Assessments Version 2

Gauteng GDARD

2012

Integrated Development Plan 2011 – 2016 Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality

2011

3 ALTERNATIVES

Describe the proposal and alternatives that are considered in this application. Alternatives should include a consideration of all possible means by which the purpose and need of the proposed activity could be accomplished. The determination of whether the site or activity (including different processes etc.) or both is appropriate needs to be informed by the specific circumstances of the activity and its environment. The no-go option must in all cases be included in the assessment phase as the baseline against which the impacts of the other alternatives are assessed. Do not include the no go option into the alternative table below. Note: After receipt of this report the competent authority may also request the applicant to assess additional alternatives that could possibly accomplish the purpose and need of the proposed activity if it is clear that realistic alternatives have not been considered to a reasonable extent. Provide a description of the alternatives considered No. Alternative type, either alternative: site on

property, properties, activity, design, technology, operational or other(provide details of “other”)

Description

1 Proposal

Expansion and upgrade of abattoir and feedlots and Biogas plant located adjacent to farm entrance (Preferred Alternative)

The expansion and upgrade of the abattoir includes the addition of larger cattle slaughtering facilities, additional sheep lairages and a processing plant. Two (2) new feedlots are proposed to expand the capacity for cattle production. A Biogas plant is proposed adjacent to the property entrance as per the attached site plans.

2 Expansion and upgrade of abattoir and feedlots and Biogas plant located within abattoir facility

The expansion and upgrade of the abattoir includes the addition of larger cattle slaughtering facilities, additional sheep lairages and a processing plant.



Two (2) new feedlots are proposed to expand the capacity for cattle production. A Biogas plant is proposed within the abattoir facility as per the attached site plans.

In the event that no alternative(s) has/have been provided, a motivation must be included in the table below. NOTE: The numbering in the above table must be consistently applied throughout the application report and process

4 PHYSICAL SIZE OF THE ACTIVITY

Indicate the total physical size (footprint) of the proposal as well as alternatives. Footprints are to include all new infrastructure (roads, services etc), impermeable surfaces and landscaped areas: Size of the activity: Proposed activity Abattoir & Processing Plant Existing: 1.04ha

New: 3.45ha Total: 4.49ha

Feedlots Existing: 3.03ha New: 12.50ha Total: 15.53ha

Biogas New: 0.11ha Total footprint (existing and

new) Existing: 4.07ha

New: 16.06ha Alternatives: Alternative 1 (if any) As above Alternative 2 (if any) As above Alternative 3 0 Ha/ m2 or, for linear activities: Length of the activity: Proposed activity Alternatives: Alternative 1 (if any) Alternative 2 (if any) k/km Indicate the size of the site(s) or servitudes (within which the above footprints will occur): Size of the site/servitude: Proposed activity Alternatives: Alternative 1 (if any) Alternative 2 (if any) Ha/m2

5 SITE ACCESS

Proposal Does ready access to the site exist, or is access directly from an existing road? YES NO If NO, what is the distance over which a new access road will be built m Describe the type of access road planned: Include the position of the access road on the site plan. Alternative 1 Does ready access to the site exist, or is access directly from an existing road? YES NO If NO, what is the distance over which a new access road will be built m Describe the type of access road planned: Include the position of the access road on the site plan. Alternative 2



Does ready access to the site exist, or is access directly from an existing road? YES NO If NO, what is the distance over which a new access road will be built m Describe the type of access road planned: Include the position of the access road on the site plan.

PLEASE NOTE: Points 6 to 8 of Section A must be duplicated where relevant for alternatives

(only complete when applicable)

6 SITE OR ROUTE PLAN

A detailed site or route (for linear activities) plan(s) must be prepared for each alternative site or alternative activity. It must be attached as Appendix A to this document. The site or route plans must indicate the following: the scale of the plan, which must be at least a scale of 1:2000 ( scale can not be larger than 1:2000 i.e. scale can not be 1:2500

but could where applicable be 1:1500) the property boundaries and numbers of all the properties within 50m of the site; the current land use as well as the land use zoning of each of the properties adjoining the site or sites; the exact position of each element of the application as well as any other structures on the site; the position of services, including electricity supply cables (indicate above or underground), water supply pipelines, boreholes,

street lights, sewage pipelines, septic tanks, storm water infrastructure and telecommunication infrastructure; walls and fencing including details of the height and construction material; servitudes indicating the purpose of the servitude; sensitive environmental elements on and within 100m of the site or sites including (but not limited thereto):

Rivers and wetlands; the 1:100 and 1:50 year flood line; ridges; cultural and historical features; areas with indigenous vegetation (even if it is degraded or infested with alien species);

for gentle slopes the 1m contour intervals must be indicated on the plan and whenever the slope of the site exceeds 1:10, the 500mm contours must be indicated on the plan; and

the positions from where photographs of the site were taken. Where a watercourse is located on the site at least one cross section of the water course must be included (to allow the 32m

position from the bank to be clearly indicated)

7 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS

Colour photographs from the center of the site must be taken in at least the eight major compass directions with a description of each photograph. Photographs must be attached under the appropriate Appendix. It should be supplemented with additional photographs of relevant features on the site, where applicable.

8 FACILITY ILLUSTRATION

A detailed illustration of the activity must be provided at a scale of 1:200 for activities that include structures. The illustrations must be to scale and must represent a realistic image of the planned activity. The illustration must give a representative view of the activity. To be attached in the appropriate Appendix.

Section A 6-8 has been duplicated 2 Number of times



SECTION B: DESCRIPTION OF RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT

Note: Complete Section B for the proposal and alternative(s) (if necessary) Further: Instructions for completion of Section B for linear activities

1) For linear activities (pipelines etc) it may be necessary to complete Section B for each section of the site that has a significantly different environment.

2) Indicate on a plan(s) the different environments identified 3) Complete Section B for each of the above areas identified 4) Attach to this form in a chronological order 5) Each copy of Section B must clearly indicate the corresponding sections of the route at the top of the next page.

Instructions for completion of Section B for location/route alternatives

1) For each location/route alternative identified the entire Section B needs to be completed 2) Each alterative location/route needs to be clearly indicated at the top of the next page 3) Attach the above documents in a chronological order

(complete only when appropriate)

Instructions for completion of Section B when both location/route alternatives and linear activities are applicable for the application Section B is to be completed and attachments order in the following way

All significantly different environments identified for Alternative 1 is to be completed and attached in a chronological order; then All significantly different environments identified for Alternative 2 is to be completed and attached chronological order, etc.

Section B has been duplicated for sections of the route "insert No. of duplicates" times

Section B has been duplicated for location/route alternatives times



Section B - Section of Route (complete only when appropriate for above)

Section B – Location/route Alternative No. (complete only when appropriate for above)

1 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

Property description: Portions 6 and 83 of 288 Tweefontein (Farm name, portion etc.)

2 ACTIVITY POSITION

Indicate the position of the activity using the latitude and longitude of the centre point of the site for each alternative site. The co-ordinates should be in decimal degrees. The degrees should have at least six decimals to ensure adequate accuracy. The projection that must be used in all cases is the WGS84 spheroid in a national or local projection.

Alternative: ALTERNATIVE 1 PREFERRED Latitude (S): Longitude (E): Abattoir expansion 28.482⁰ -25.626⁰ Feedlot 1 28.484⁰ -25.62⁰ Feedlot 2 28.487⁰ -25.623 Biogas 28.482⁰ -25.628⁰ Alternative: ALTERNATIVE 2 Latitude (S): Longitude (E): Abattoir expansion 28.482⁰ -25.626⁰ Feedlot 1 28.484⁰ -25.62⁰ Feedlot 2 28.487⁰ -25.623 Biogas 28.482⁰ -25.627⁰ In the case of linear activities: Alternative: Latitude (S): Longitude (E): Starting point of the activity o o Middle point of the activity o o End point of the activity o o

For route alternatives that are longer than 500m, please provide co-ordinates taken every 250 meters along the route and attached in the appropriate Appendix

Addendum of route alternatives attached

3 GRADIENT OF THE SITE

Indicate the general gradient of the site.

Flat 1:50 – 1:20 1:20 – 1:15 1:15 – 1:10 1:10 – 1:7,5 1:7,5 – 1:5 Steeper than 1:5

4 LOCATION IN LANDSCAPE

Indicate the landform(s) that best describes the site.

Ridgeline Plateau Side slope of hill/ridge Valley Plain Undulating

plain/low hills River front

5 GROUNDWATER, SOIL AND GEOLOGICAL STABILITY OF THE SITE

a) Is the site located on any of the following? Shallow water table (less than 1.5m deep) YES NO Dolomite, sinkhole or doline areas YES NO Seasonally wet soils (often close to water bodies) YES NO Unstable rocky slopes or steep slopes with loose soil YES NO



Dispersive soils (soils that dissolve in water) YES NO Soils with high clay content (clay fraction more than 40%) YES NO Any other unstable soil or geological feature YES NO An area sensitive to erosion YES NO

(Information in respect of the above will often be available at the planning sections of local authorities. Where it exists, the 1:50 000 scale Regional Geotechnical Maps prepared by Geological Survey may also be used). b) are any caves located on the site(s) YES NO If yes to above provide location details in terms of latitude and longitude and indicate location on site or route map(s) Latitude (S): Longitude (E):

o o c) are any caves located within a 300m radius of the site(s) YES NO If yes to above provide location details in terms of latitude and longitude and indicate location on site or route map(s) Latitude (S): Longitude (E):

o o

d) are any sinkholes located within a 300m radius of the site(s) YES NO If yes to above provide location details in terms of latitude and longitude and indicate location on site or route map(s) Latitude (S): Longitude (E):

o o If any of the answers to the above are “YES” or “unsure”, specialist input may be requested by the Department

6 AGRICULTURE

Does the site have high potential agriculture as contemplated in the Gauteng Agricultural Potential Atlas (GAPA 3)? YES NO

Please note: The Department may request specialist input/studies in respect of the above.

According to the AGIS information above, the property is located on Non Arable, Low to Moderate potential

grazing land. The abattoir and feedlots thus provide high intensity, high potential mechanism by means of

concentration of animals to compensate for the lower agricultural potential.



7 GROUNDCOVER

To be noted that the location of all identified rare or endangered species or other elements should be accurately indicated on the site plan(s).

Natural veld - good condition

% =

Natural veld with scattered aliens

% = ± 50 natural and 12 alien

Natural veld with heavy alien infestation

% =

Veld dominated by alien species

% =

Landscaped (vegetation) % =

Sport field % =

Cultivated land % = ±35

Paved surface (hard landscaping)

% =

Building or other structure % = ±3

Bare soil % =

Please note: The Department may request specialist input/studies depending on the nature of the groundcover and potential impact(s) of the proposed activity/ies. Are there any rare or endangered flora or fauna species (including red list species) present on the site

YES NO

If YES, specify and explain:

The following species were identified in the specialist vegetation survey:

2 species identified in the Red List of South African Plants namely Hypoxis hemerocallidea and Boophone disticha, both classified as “declining”.

No species from the Gautent C-Plan list were identified. 2 species identified in the Appendix II category of CITES namely Aloe greatheadii and Aloe

marlothii. No Protected trees in terms of the National Forest Act were identified.

Are there any rare or endangered flora or fauna species (including red list species) present within a 200m (if within urban area as defined in the Regulations) or within 600m (if outside the urban area as defined in the Regulations) radius of the site.

YES NO

If YES, specify and explain:

The following species were identified in the specialist vegetation survey within the area defined by the proposed development and the 200m buffer as specified by GDARD. Please see the specialist report for the detailed survey.

2 species identified in the Red List of South African Plants namely Hypoxis hemerocallidea and Boophone disticha, both classified as “declining”.

No species from the Gautent C-Plan list were identified. 2 species identified in the Appendix II category of CITES namely Aloe greatheadii and Aloe

marlothii. No Protected trees in terms of the National Forest Act were identified.

Are there any special or sensitive habitats or other natural features present on the site? YES NO If YES, specify and explain: Was a specialist consulted to assist with completing this section

YES NO

If yes complete specialist details Name of the specialist: Dr Noel van Rooyen for Ekotrust cc Qualification(s) of the specialist: Bsc (Agric), Bsc (Honours), MSc (1978) and DSc (1984) in Plant Ecology. Postal address: 272 Thatcher’s Field, Lynwood, Pretoria Postal code: 0081 Telephone: 012 348 9043 Cell: 082 882 0886 E-mail: [email protected] Fax: 012 348 9043 Are any further specialist studies recommended by the specialist?

YES NO

If YES, specify: If YES, is such a report(s) attached? YES NO If YES list the specialist reports attached below Signature of specialist:

Date: 20/03/2013



= Site

Please note; If more than one specialist was consulted to assist with the filling in of this section then this table must be appropriately duplicated

8 LAND USE CHARACTER OF SURROUNDING AREA

Using the associated number of the relevant current land use or prominent feature from the table below, fill in the position of these land-uses in the vacant blocks below which represent a 500m radius around the site

1. Vacant land 2. River, stream, wetland

3. Nature conservation area 4. Public open space 5. Koppie or ridge

6. Dam or reservoir 7. Agriculture 8. Low density residential

9. Medium to high density residential

10. Informal residential

11. Old age home 12. Retail 13. Offices 14. Commercial & warehousing

15. Light industrial

16. Heavy industrialAN 17. Hospitality facility 18. Church 19. Education

facilities 20. Sport facilities

21. Golf course/polo fields 22. AirportN 23. Train station or

shunting yardN 24. Railway lineN 25. Major road (4 lanes or more)N

26. Sewage treatment plantA

27. Landfill or waste treatment

siteA 28. Historical building 29. Graveyard 30. Archeological

site

31. Open cast mine 32. Underground mine

33.Spoil heap or slimes damA 34. Small Holdings

Other land uses (describe):

Cavalier Feedlots:

Shown as blue circle in image below.

NORTH

WEST

7 7 & 2 7 & 2 7 & 31

7 & 31

EAST 7 & 5 7 & 5 7 & 6 7 7

7 7 7 7 7 & 6

7 7 7 & 6 7 7

7 & 6 7 7 7 7

SOUTH

NOTE: Each block represents an area of 250m X250m



= Site

Cavalier Abattoir and Biogas facility:

Shown as yellow circle in image below.

Figure 5: 500m Radii on the Cavalier Feedlots (blue) and the Abattoir and proposed Biogas (yellow). Note: More than one (1) Land-use may be indicated in a block Please note: The Department may request specialist input/studies depending on the nature of the land use character of the area and potential impact(s) of the proposed activity/ies. Specialist reports that look at health & air quality and noise impacts may be required for any feature above and in particular those features marked with an “A“ and with an “N” respectively. Have specialist reports been attached YES NO If yes indicate the type of reports below

NORTH

WEST

7 7 7 7 7

EAST 7 & 5 7 7 & 6 7 7

7 7 7 7 & 6 7

7 7 7 7 7

7 7 7 7 & 6 7

SOUTH



9 SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONTEXT

Describe the existing social and economic characteristics of the area and the community condition as baseline information to assess the potential social, economic and community impacts. The area immediately surrounding the Cavalier Abattoir is characterized by agricultural properties, both

small and large scale agricultural units. The Abattoir is the largest commercial employer within the

immediate area. There is evidence of historic diggings to the north of the site, however this is no longer in

operation.

The town of Cullinan, located approximately 30kms east of Pretoria, is the closest main center to the study

site. It was established as a diamond mining center after diamonds were first discovered in 1902.

Diamonds are still mined in the Cullinan area with the Premier Mine being the third largest diamond mine in

South Africa.

The Cullinan / Refilwe area has been identified as one of the areas within the City of Tshwane (CoT)

municipal area as being one of the 12 areas within the municipal are with the highest densities, along with

having high social facilities area, coupled with a high dependence on welfare and high unemployment (IDP

2011 – 2016). The development of the Abattoir is supported by the outcome issues for the new growth path

as envisaged by CoT. An investment map indicates the spatial development programmes that were created

as a measure to support the implementation of the City’s developmental outcomes and Spatial Development

Framework. The Cullinan area is circled in red below.

Figure 6: City of Tshwane Investment Map (Source: IDP 2011 – 2016)



10 CULTURAL/HISTORICAL FEATURES

Please be advised that if section 38 of the National Heritage Resources Act 25 of 1999 is applicable to your proposal or alterantives, then you are requested to furnish this Department with written comment from the South African Heritage Resource Agency (SAHRA) – Attach comment in appropriate annexure 38. (1) Subject to the provisions of subsections (7), (8) and (9), any person who intends to undertake a development categorised as- (a) the construction of a road, wall, powerline, pipeline, canal or other similar form of linear development or barrier exceeding 300m in

length; (b) the construction of a bridge or similar structure exceeding 50m in length; (c) any development or other activity which will change the character of a site- (i) exceeding 5 000 m2 in extent; or (ii) involving three or more existing erven or subdivisions thereof; or (iii) involving three or more erven or divisions thereof which have been consolidated within the past five years; or (iv) the costs of which will exceed a sum set in terms of regulations by SAHRA or a provincial heritage resources

authority; (d) the re-zoning of a site exceeding 10 000 m2 in extent; or (e) any other category of development provided for in regulations by SAHRA or a provincial heritage resources authority, must at the

very earliest stages of initiating such a development, notify the responsible heritage resources authority and furnish it with details regarding the location, nature and extent of the proposed development.

Are there any signs of culturally (aesthetic, social, spiritual, environmental) or historically significant elements, as defined in section 2 of the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999, (Act No. 25 of 1999), including archaeological or palaeontological sites, on or close (within 20m) to the site?

YES NO

If YES, explain: If uncertain, the Department may request that specialist input be provided to establish whether there is such a feature(s) present on or close to the site. Briefly explain the findings of the specialist if one was already appointed:

Will any building or structure older than 60 years be affected in any way? YES NO Is it necessary to apply for a permit in terms of the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (Act 25 of 1999)?

YES NO

If yes, please attached the comments from SAHRA in the appropriate Appendix

The site is located on a quartzitic hillside. The site contains ruins of historic period buildings thought to be

of European settler origin. These are regarded as historical architectural heritage resources, hence their

assessment from architectural-historical perspective. The date of origin remains unestablished and could

potentially range from the 1850‘s to the 1940‘s although oral history indicates a 1980’s origin. The age of

the structures is contentious, and their age is inferred from site-evidence and not from current oral history

which contradicts the site evidence. The proposed development only affects the remains of a historical

built environment and therefore no separate Archaeological Impact Assessment (AIA) investigation was

considered necessary. The site also does not contain known or visible graves.

Documentation of the ruins prior to construction activities commencing will be sufficient as a mitigation

measure.

A copy of the Heritage Impact Assessment Report is included as Appendix G4.



SECTION C: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

1 ADVERTISEMENT

The Environmental Assessment Practitioner must follow any relevant guidelines adopted by the competent authority in respect of public participation and must at least – 1(a) Fix a site notice at a conspicuous place, on the boundary of a property where it is intended to undertake the activity which states

that an application will be submitted to the competent authority in terms of these regulations and which provides information on the proposed nature and location of the activity, where further information on the proposed activity can be obtained and the manner in which representations on the application may be made;

1(b) inform landowners and occupiers of adjacent land of the applicant’s intention to submit an application to the competent authority; 1(c) inform landowners and occupiers of land within 100 metres of the boundary of the property where it is proposed to undertake the

activity and whom may be directly affected by the proposed activity of the applicant’s intention to submit an application to the competent authority;

1(d) inform the ward councillor and any organisation that represents the community in the area of the applicant’s intention to submit an application to the competent authority;

1(e) inform the municipality which has jurisdiction over the area in which the proposed activity will be undertaken of the applicant’s intention to submit an application to the competent authority; and

1(f) inform any organ of state that may have jurisdiction over any aspect of the activity of the applicant’s intention to submit an application to the competent authority; and

1(g) place an advertisement in one local newspaper and any Gazette that is published specifically for the purpose of providing notice to the public of applications made in terms of these regulations.

A public participation (stakeholder engagement) process (PPP) has been undertaken in accordance with the

requirements of the NEMA EIA Regulations: Guideline and Information Document Series (Guideline on

Public Participation July 2005/2007 and 2010).

Site notices were placed on all prominent entrances and boundaries of the property. Interested and

Affected Parties (I&APs) were requested to register with Cape EAPrac.

An advertisement was placed in two local newspapers (Die Beeld on 11 December 2012 and Streek

News / Nuus on 14 December 2012). The advert calls for Interested and Affected Parties (I&APs) to

register with Cape EAPrac should they wish to participate in the EIA process within a 21 day period

which excluded the December holidays.

A Background Information Document (BID) was made available to provide additional information on

the proposal and process.

Key Stakeholders were identified and notified of the EIA process.

A Stakeholder Register was opened for all I&APs.

Notification of the availability of the Draft BAR has been provided to all registered I&APs and

relevant State Departments;

The Draft BAR was made available to all registered I&APs. Hard copies of this report were made

available at the Rayton Library (Cnr Oakley & Montrose Streets, Rayton) and the former Nokeng

Tsa Taemane Local Municipality Offices (Cnr Oakley & Montrose Streets, Rayton).

Digital copies of the DBAR were made available to all identified key stakeholders, which include

relevant State Departments, Organs of State, local and provincial authorities. A digital copy was

also available on the website at www.cape-eaprac.co.za/active.

The Final BAR has been made available to all registered I&APs. Hard copies of this report were

made available at the Rayton Library (Cnr Oakley & Montrose Streets, Rayton) and the former

Nokeng Tsa Taemane Local Municipality Offices (Cnr Oakley & Montrose Streets, Rayton).

http://www.cape-eaprac.co.za/active



Digital copies of the FBAR were made available to all identified key stakeholders, which include

relevant State Departments, Organs of State, local and provincial authorities. A digital copy was

also available on the website at www.cape-eaprac.co.za/active.

The Draft Basic Assessment Report (DBAR) was made available for comment for a period of 40 days from

Tuesday 2nd April to Monday 13th May 2013. The Department of Water Affairs will be afforded a 60 day

comment period as per the 2010 EIA Regulations, this is running concurrently with the 21 day comment

period provided to other I&APs on the Final BAR. The 21 day comment period extends from Wednesday

22nd May to Tuesday 11th June 2013. The Final BAR has been compiled after the comment period closed.

No comments were received during the initial 40 day comment period on the Draft BAR.

The application for rezoning was received by the City of Tshwane officials and a request was made for a

Services Report as part of the Planning Application. This has been completed and has been included in this

document to ensure that all relevant authorities have access to the same documentation. It must be noted

that the City of Tshwane had no objections to the proposal. A copy of the email received from them has

been included in Appendix E7 and the Services Report is available as Appendix G5.

The Final BAR has not been changed in any significant manner from the Draft and as such this document is

being submitted to GDARD to commence with the decision making process. Any comments received during

the 21 day comment period will be provided to GDARD.

2 LOCAL AUTHORITY PARTICIPATION

Local authorities are key interested and affected parties in each application and no decision on any application will be made before the relevant local authority is provided with the opportunity to give input. The planning and the environmental sections of the local authority must be informed of the application at least thirty (30) calendar days before the submission of the application to the competent authority (GDARD). Has any comment been received from the local authority? YES NO If “YES”, briefly describe the comment below (also attach any correspondence to and from the local authority to this application): Local authorities were notified of the commencement of the EIA process and provided with a Background

Information Document (BID) but did not submit any interim comment. Copies of the Draft BAR have been

provided to them and no comments on the DBAR have been received.

Comments were received on the planning application as submitted by Developlan (copies included in

Appendix E7 of this report). The City of Tshwane responded by requesting a Services Report (included in

this FBAR as Appendix G5), but have no objection to the proposal. If “NO” briefly explain why no comments have been received

3 CONSULTATION WITH OTHER STAKEHOLDERS

Any stakeholder that has a direct interest in the activity, site or property, such as servitude holders and service providers, should be informed of the application at least thirty (30) calendar days before the submission of the application and be provided with the opportunity to comment. Has any comment been received from stakeholders? YES NO If “YES”, briefly describe the feedback below (also attach copies of any correspondence to and from the stakeholders to this application): Please see Issues & Responses Table below. No further comments from registered I&APs were received

during the 40 day comment period. If “NO” briefly explain why no comments have been received

http://www.cape-eaprac.co.za/active

Cavalier Abattoir Expansion, Upgrade and Biogas Plant TSH168/13


ISSUES AND RESPONSES TABLE

CAVALIER ABATTOIR, CULLINAN, GAUTENG

COMMENT / ISSUES RESPONSES Bezuidenhout, Gladys - Plot 36 Bynespoort Request registration as an I&AP. Registered.

14-D

ec-1

2

1. The terrible smell; this derives from the fact that (a) biogas is 2/3 methane and (b) it is composed of manure and other decomposed organic waste.

Cape EAPrac: Modern biogas digester plants are designed to contain the manure/organic material in order to capture all the methane gas which is then burnt off to provide energy to generate renewable electricity. The loss or uncontrolled release of such methane gas from a biogas digester is counteractive to the process as it will not be able to generate renewable power which is a valuable commodity to the owner/operator of the Farm as it reduces his overall electricity demand and contributes to cost savings. The biogas plant which is planned thus eliminates any existing odours associated with manure and organic waste currently emanating from the farming operations and it is intended to capture/re-use all the methane gasses from the future operations as well. This Draft Basic Assessment Report (DBAR) includes all the technical specifications and explanations regarding the operation of the proposed biogas plant. iBERT (designers/operators of the proposed biogas digester): A biogas plant works on the principle of anaerobic digestion, which means without oxygen. The digester is therefore totally sealed off from the outside atmosphere. No smells can escape from the digester. Methane is in fact an odourless gas and does not smell at all. Gasses that can cause a smell are Ammoniac and sulphur, these gasses are mostly present in the pre pit or storage tank that acts as collection point for the wastes before it is fed into the digester, this storage tank however is again sealed in a concrete tank which is fitted with an extraction fan that sucks the air/gasses out of the storage tank, these gasses are then blown through a Bio-Air Filter. The Bio-Air filter consists of wet wood chips that capture all smells from the air before it is released into the atmosphere.



2. There is also an issue of pollution, since production of bio gas can increase the amount of ammonia that is evaporated into the atmosphere – we already have problems with pollution caused by the abattoir and feedlot!

Cape EAPrac: Biogas plants use all the gas generated during the decomposition of the manure/organic waste which is then burnt off to generate energy. No gasses are released in the process.

3. Continuous supply of biomass is required to generate biomass energy – in other words the feedlot will be over stocked! We need a copy of the license to operate this feedlot.

Cape EAPrac: Stocking of feedlots is controlled by several legislative processes including the National Environmental Management Act, Animal Health Act, Meat Safety Act as well as bylaws of the relevant municipality. The Biogas plant that is being proposed is being designed to accommodate the existing and proposed maximum capacity for the sheep/cattle feedlots and the abattoir. The capacity of the feedlots and the abattoir is self-regulatory and as such overstocking is highly unlikely. Furthermore overstocking, above the allowable densities will be a contravention of licenses/permits from the Department of Agriculture. Please see Appendix F for the current Throughput Capacity Certificate for the abattoir.

4. Biogas plant requires space have they applied for an increase in land use? Are you aware that they have applied to increase the existing facilities with the City of Tshwane – why 2 separate processes?

Cape EAPrac: The proposed biogas plant is in a footprint area of approximately 1000m² located adjacent to the existing abattoir facility. In terms of the legislative processes, the proposal triggers listed activities in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA, Act 107 of 1998 and the National Environmental Management: Waste Act (NEM:WA, Act 59 of 2008) and therefore has to undergo an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). In terms of land use planning legislation, the properties are zoned for Agriculture and in order to obtain assent from the Tshwane Municipality for the activity, the Applicant has undergone a planning application over and above the EIA process. The planning permission may only be issued on completion of the EIA process. The anticipate change in land use, and increase in footprint forms part of the environmental and planning application processes.



5. It is difficult to store biogas in cylinders – how will this be stored and how safe is it?

Cape EAPrac: The gas is stored in a fixed gas balloon that is housed inside a protective gashouse structure which is designed to accommodate up to 48hrs worth of gas. Emergency valves are fitted to relieve pressure if needed. Please see the attached document which provides a brief summary of the proposed plant. iBERT: The biogas at Cavalier will contain roughly 61%. Methane only burn in conjunction with oxygen, the biogas in the gasbag does not contain any oxygen, and even if it is released into the atmosphere it will not burn when exposed to a flame or spark, due to the high methane percentage. The Gashouse and gasbag will be fitted with gas sensors and alarms. The plant will also have a biogas boiler, which will act as an emergency flare when the generator is not in use and the gasbag is full, the gas will then be burned in the biogas boiler to generate hot water and to get rid of the gas safely. Explosion zones will be implemented on the plant, in these zones all equipment will be intrinsically safe according to South African safety standards. All gas lines and the complete gas system will be signed off by an accredited gas technician, as stated by SA law.

627048,1 Biogas p.a. m³380450,0 Total CH4 p.a m³

1717,9 Total Biogas p day m³1042,3 Total CH4 day m³

71,6 Total Biogas p hour m³43,4 Total CH4 p hour m³61% Percentage CH4 %

TOTAL



6. Transportation of biogas through pipes over distances is difficult – will this be done and how?

Cape EAPrac: The fermented gas is processed immediately on site and is not piped over any significant distance. The gas production and use is not generated for commercial purposes, it will be used solely for the operation (warm water, heat and renewable electricity) of the abattoir. Please see the attached summary document. iBert: The CHP will be situated directly next to the digesters, the gas lines all are according to SA standards and are signed off and tested by an accredited technician as stated by law.

7. There is little or no control on the rate of gas production, although the gas can, to some extent be stored and used as required. What amounts of biogas do they plan to produce per day?

Cape EAPrac: Based on the amount of biomass waste expected to be produced on site, iBert propose to construct a 2 x 600m³ iBert bio-reactor to process 37.6 ton/ waste per day for a fermentation period of 32 days. This will produce gas that will be combusted in a 360 kW CHP generator that will produce at least 300kW instantaneous electrical output for 4 785 hours per year or +- 300kW for 20 hours per weekday day and about 100kW for 16 hours per Saturday and Sunday. iBERT: All gas will be used in the CHP, if the CHP is down or in service the gas will be burned in the biogas boiler.

8. Safety is an additional issue – will this be safe? Cape EAPrac: Biogas plants have been shown to have high safety levels based on EU standards. iBert conforms to all standards set out by the EU.

9. How will waste water be handled and discharged into the environment?

Cape EAPrac: The biogas plant uses a large quantity of water to promote decomposition and fermentation. Cleaning water from the abattoir will be re-used during this process. Any excess wastewater that is generated will be processed via the existing sludge ponds that are currently being used for the feedlot and abattoir. This system filters the water to ensure quality control before being discharged into the natural system. iBert: The slurry that exits the digester will be treated according to the SA water standards



and will be saved for reuse as cleaning water or to flow back into the system.

10. Gas leakages from reactor or pipelines may occur in biogas plants. This problem has a high negative impact on human life and equipment due to the ignition property of methane gas – What about humans and animals in the area – how will they prevent veld fires in case of ignition?

Cape EAPrac: A Fire and Explosion Risk Safety Management Plan will be developed as part of the operational management of the plant to address all scenarios. The ignition of the methane gas is not done by “flaring” (open flame) but rather as a Combined Heat and Power unit (CHP) which uses gas with heat (not an open flame). This significantly reduces the impacts of potential ignition. Furthermore all property owners must undertake to prevent veld fires and must have suitable management strategies in place to deal with such events.

Bezuidenhout, Kerneels - Plot 36 Bynespoort Request registration as an I&AP. Registered.

Botha, Grant - Gauteng Heritage Resouces Authority (GHRA)

Automatically registered as I&AP Joubert, Patrys - Plot 36 Bynespoort

Request registration as an I&AP. Registered as an I&AP. Joubert, Piet - Plot 36 Bynespoort Request registration as an I&AP. Registered as an I&AP.

Magolela, Japhta - City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality (Agriculture) Automatically registered as I&AP

Matlamela, Phuti - Department of Agriculture Automatically registered as I&AP

Meintjies, Louis - AgriSA Automatically registered as I&AP

Mukheli, Rudzani - City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality Automatically registered as I&AP

Neethling, Gerhard - Red Meat Abattoir Association Automatically registered as I&AP

Roosendaal, Paula - Neighbour

01-

Jan- 13 Request registration as an I&AP.

I want to ensure that I am informed of the developments in my Noted.



area. To ensure that a proper and thorough EIA is done prior to commencement of work, and that all necessary permits are applied for according to NEMA.

Noted.

Siphuma, Livhuwani - City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality (Environmental) Automatically registered as I&AP



4 GENERAL PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REQUIREMENTS

The Environmental Assessment Practitioner must ensure that the public participation is adequate and must determine whether a public meeting or any other additional measure is appropriate or not based on the particular nature of each case. Special attention should be given to the involvement of local community structures such as Ward Committees and ratepayers associations. Please note that public concerns that emerge at a later stage that should have been addressed may cause the competent authority to withdraw any authorisation it may have issued if it becomes apparent that the public participation process was inadequate. The practitioner must record all comments and respond to each comment of the public / interested and affected party before the application is submitted. The comments and responses must be captured in a Comments and Responses Report as prescribed in the regulations and be attached to this application.

5 APPENDICES FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

All public participation information is to be attached in the appropriate Appendix. The information in this Appendix is to be ordered as

detailed below

Appendix 1 – Proof of site notice

Appendix 2 – Written notices issued to those persons detailed in 1(b) to 1(f) above

Appendix 3 – Proof of newspaper advertisements

Appendix 4 –Communications to and from persons detailed in Point 2 and 3 above

Appendix 5 – Minutes of any public and/or stakeholder meetings

Appendix 6 - Comments and Responses Report

Appendix 7 –Comments from I&APs on Basic Assessment (BA) Report

Appendix 8 –Comments from I&APs on amendments to the BA Report

Appendix 9 – Copy of the register of I&APs

Appendix 10 – Comments from I&APs on the application

Appendix 11 - Other



SECTION D: RESOURCE USE AND PROCESS DETAILS

Note: Section D is to be completed for the proposal and alternative(s) (if necessary) Instructions for completion of Section D for alternatives

1) For each alternative under investigation, where such alternatives will have different resource and process details (e.g. technology alternative), the entire Section D needs to be completed

4) Each alterative needs to be clearly indicated in the box below 5) Attach the above documents in a chronological order

(complete only when appropriate)

Section D Alternative No.

"insert alternative number" (complete only when appropriate for above)

1 WASTE, EFFLUENT AND EMISSION MANAGEMENT

Solid waste management Will the activity produce solid construction waste during the construction/initiation phase? YES NO If yes, what estimated quantity will be produced per month? ±8m3 How will the construction solid waste be disposed of (describe)?

Construction waste must be disposed of correctly according to the type of material. Wherever recycling of

material can be accommodated it must implemented. Any material that cannot be reused in an unharmful

manner must be disposed of at a suitable disposal site.

Where will the construction solid waste be disposed of (describe)? Will the activity produce solid waste during its operational phase? YES NO If yes, what estimated quantity will be produced per month? `m3 Waste quantities are calculated based on a daily generation and working days. Please see the table below

for the estimated waste quantities of the various waste streams or substrates generated by an abattoir and

feedlot.

How will the solid waste be disposed of (describe)?

Biodegradable solid waste (or bio waste) generated by the abattoir such as faecal matter from animals as

well as other abattoir waste which includes inedible parts of animals (e.g. organs, integument, ligaments,

tendons and blood vessels) are the key elements required to generate biogas.

These substrates are transported from the point of origin into a storage tank from which they are processed.

Section D has been duplicated for alternatives "insert No. of duplicates" times



The primary energy source in a biogas plant is the methane rich biogas that is produced when bio waste

goes through the natural decomposing process, also called anaerobic digestion (AD). To utilize the energy

from the biogas, this gas is burned in a Combined Heat and Power Unit, also known as a CHP; this is

basically a gas motor that converts the methane rich biogas into mechanical energy (movement) which in

turn is converted by an electrical generator into electrical power for use on-site. The heat that is produced in

the combustion process and friction in the gas motor will be used to heat water for the slaughter process and

drying of the slurry to produce a rich natural fertilizer.

Has the municipality or relevant service provider confirmed that sufficient air space exists for treating/disposing of the solid waste to be generated by this activity? YES NO

Where will the solid waste be disposed if it does not feed into a municipal waste stream (describe)?

All solid waste generated by the abattoir will be disposed of on site. All slaughter waste will be used as

substrate for the biogas facility.

General waste generated by the office and processing plant should be recycled wherever possible and

disposed of at a registered facility.

Note: If the solid waste (construction or operational phases) will not be disposed of in a registered landfill site or be taken up in a municipal waste stream, the applicant should consult with the competent authority to determine whether it is necessary to change to an application for scoping and EIA. Can any part of the solid waste be classified as hazardous in terms of the relevant legislation? YES NO If yes, inform the competent authority and request a change to an application for scoping and EIA. Is the activity that is being applied for a solid waste handling or treatment facility? YES NO If yes, the applicant should consult with the competent authority to determine whether it is necessary to change to an application for scoping and EIA. Describe the measures, if any, that will be taken to ensure the optimal reuse or recycling of materials:

Recycling of all paper, plastic, tin and glass should take place. Sufficient and correctly labeled bins must be

provided on site. Given the distance from the nearest towns, it may be necessary to ensure sufficient space

on site for accumulation of recyclable material up to a period of one week. The material should be taken to a

certified recycling facility for disposal.

Liquid effluent (other than domestic sewage) Will the activity produce effluent, other than normal sewage, that will be disposed of in a municipal sewage system? YES NO

If yes, what estimated quantity will be produced per month? m3 If yes, has the municipality confirmed that sufficient capacity exist for treating / disposing of the liquid effluent to be generated by this activity(ies)? YES NO

Will the activity produce any effluent that will be treated and/or disposed of on site? YES NO If yes, what estimated quantity will be produced per month? m3 If yes describe the nature of the effluent and how it will be disposed.

Liquid effluent from the abattoir is made up of faecal matter from animals, blood from slaughtered beasts and

wastewater from washing of floors and equipment. This liquid effluent will be used to generate biogas.

Please see quantities in the Substrate table above.

Note that if effluent is to be treated or disposed on site the applicant should consult with the competent authority to determine whether it is necessary to change to an application for scoping and EIA Will the activity produce effluent that will be treated and/or disposed of at another facility? YES NO If yes, provide the particulars of the facility: Facility name: Contact person: Postal address: Postal code: Telephone: Cell: E-mail: Fax: Describe the measures that will be taken to ensure the optimal reuse or recycling of waste water, if any:



Liquid effluent that is treated by means of the biogas plant will be reused as irrigation water on the property. Liquid effluent (domestic sewage) Will the activity produce domestic effluent that will be disposed of in a municipal sewage system? YES NO If yes, what estimated quantity will be produced per month? m3 If yes, has the municipality confirmed that sufficient capacity exist for treating / disposing of the domestic effluent to be generated by this activity(ies)? YES NO

Will the activity produce any effluent that will be treated and/or disposed of on site? YES NO If yes describe how it will be treated and disposed off.

The property currently treats its own effluent from the existing sheep abattoir and feed lots on site by means

of a series of existing oxidation dams.

Approximately 3 260kl per month will be generated on site with approximately 90% being generated by the

abattoir and packing plant. The existing oxidation dams contain sufficient capacity to accommodate any

additional effluent generated because of the upgrade.

The existing series of dams consists of the following:

Anaerobic dam with a capacity of 800kl and a backup storage of 3 – 5 days;

Facultative dam with a capacity of 3 600kl and a backup storage of 30 days;

Aerobic dam with a capacity of 1 200kl and a backup storage of 10 days.

Once the water is treated it is suitable for irrigation and is used to irrigate the existing grazing pastures.

Emissions into the atmosphere Will the activity release emissions into the atmosphere? YES NO If yes, is it controlled by any legislation of any sphere of government? YES NO If yes, the applicant should consult with the competent authority to determine whether it is necessary to change to an application for scoping and EIA.

If no, describe the emissions in terms of type and concentration:

2 WATER USE

Indicate the source(s) of water that will be used for the activity municipal Directly from

water board groundwater river, stream, dam or

lake other the activity will not use water

If water is to be extracted from groundwater, river, stream, dam, lake or any other natural feature, please indicate the volume that will be extracted per month: ±13 408 000 liters

Water use for the development is proposed as follows in kiloliters (kl) :

Per day Per month Operational days per month

1. Existing sheep feedlot 22 kl 668 kl 30.4

2. Existing abattoir 91 kl 2000 kl 21.6

3. Upgraded abattoir and 75 kl 1620 kl 21.6

packing plant

4. New cattle feedlot 300 kl 9120 kl 30.4

TOTAL 488 kl 13 408 kl

Future use is thus: 13 408 kl over 30.4 day month = 441 kl per day = 18.4 kl per hour over 24 hour

period. This is an increase from the existing usage (2 668kl per month) of 10 740kl per month.



The properties, on which the abattoir and feedlots are located and proposed, make up two of three

cadastral units (Portions 6, 83 and 22 of Tweefontein 288 on which there are eight (8) existing boreholes).

The boreholes have been tested and a registration process is currently underway for the following:

Flow Rate (lt/hr) Recommended Use

Portion 83

Borehole 1* 2400 1800

Borehole 2* 8000 6000

Portion 6

Monogat* 11840 10000

Waterbok* 9000 7500

Eskomgat 8181 5500

Portion 22

Stone se Gat 4000 3000

Spruitgat 10588 7100

Populiergat 12857 11000

TOTAL 67 000 liter 52 000 liter (77,6%)

* = boreholes currently in use.

The other 4 boreholes are spare holes not currently equipped for use.

Total available water if the boreholes are pumped at 77,6% capacity, is 52 kl per hour. The requirement as

shown above for the existing and new developments is 18,4 kl per hour. In addition, the pumps currently in

use provide a recommended 25 300lt per hour (flow rate of 31 240lt per hour) or 25.3kl which is more than

sufficient for the required water use.

If Yes, please attach proof of assurance of water supply, e.g. yield of borehole, in the appropriate Appendix Does the activity require a water use permit from the Department of Water Affairs? YES NO If yes, list the permits required

A National Register of Water Use Registration is required. Please find a copy of the NRWU Certificate in

Appendix I4 of this report.

If yes, have you applied for the water use permit(s)? YES NO If yes, have you received approval(s)? (attached in appropriate appendix) YES NO

3 POWER SUPPLY

Please indicate the source of power supply eg. Municipality / Eskom / Renewable energy source

Currently power is supplied to the farm by Eskom. Once the biogas facility is operational it will generate

approximately 50% of the energy requirements of the abattoir.



If power supply is not available, where will power be sourced from?

4 ENERGY EFFICIENCY

Describe the design measures, if any, that have been taken to ensure that the activity is energy efficient: The biogas facility will generate approximately 50% of the energy requirements of the abattoir. Describe how alternative energy sources have been taken into account or been built into the design of the activity, if any: The biogas facility is an alternative energy renewable source.



SECTION E: IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The assessment of impacts must adhere to the minimum requirements in the EIA Regulations, 2006, and should take applicable official guidelines into account. The issues raised by interested and affected parties should also be addressed in the assessment of impacts.

1 ISSUES RAISED BY INTERESTED AND AFFECTED PARTIES

Summarise the issues raised by interested and affected parties. The following issues have been raised by I&APs to date:

1. Smell of methane;

2. Pollution of the atmosphere;

3. Overstocking of the feedlots;

4. Increased land use;

5. Storage of biogas;

6. Safety of biogas;

7. Distribution of biogas;

8. Discharge of wastewater;

9. Risk of veld fires. Summary of response from the practitioner to the issues raised by the interested and affected parties (A full response must be provided in the Comments and Response Report that must be attached to this report):

The following responses to the issues raised has been provided:

1. A biogas plant works on the principle of anaerobic digestion, which means “without oxygen”, so the

digester is totally sealed off from the outside atmosphere. So no smells can escape from the

digester. Methane does not smell, it is an odorless gas. The gasses that can cause a smell are

Ammoniac and sulphur, these gasses are mostly present in the pre pit or storage tank that acts as

collection point for the wastes before it is fed into the digester, this storage tank is a sealed

concrete tank which is fitted with an extraction fan that sucks the air/gasses out of the storage tank,

these gasses are then blown through a Bio-Air Filter. The Bio-Air filter consists of wet wood chips

that capture all smells from the air before it is released into the atmosphere.

2. Biogas plants use all the gas generated during the decomposition of the manure which is then burnt

off to generate energy. Please see the summary of the plant and its processes contained in

Appendix G2 of the BAR.

3. Stocking of feedlots is controlled by several legislative processes including the National

Environmental Management Act, Animal Health Act, Meat Safety Act as well as bylaws of the

relevant municipality. The Biogas plant that is being proposed is being designed to accommodate

a certain amount of biomass, if more is produced the plant will not accommodate it and thus over

stocking is not expected to take place.

4. The proposed biogas plant is in a footprint area of approximately 1000m² located adjacent to the

existing abattoir facility. In terms of the legislative processes, the proposal triggers listed activities

in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA, Act 107 of 1998 and the National

Environmental Management: Waste Act (NEM:WA, Act 59 of 2008) and therefore has to undergo

an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). In terms of land use planning legislation, the

properties are zoned for Agriculture and in order to obtain assent from the Tshwane Municipality for



the activity, the applicant has undergone a planning application over and above the EIA process.

5. Bio gas is stored in a gasbag before being burnt in the Combined Heat & Power unit (CHP). All gas

will be used in the CHP, if the CHP is down or temporarily not in service the gas will be burned in

the biogas boiler.

6. The biogas at Cavalier will contain roughly 61% methane. Methane only burns in conjunction with

oxygen, the biogas in the gasbag does not contain any oxygen, and even if it is released into the

atmosphere it will not burn when exposed to a flame or spark, due to the high methane percentage.

The Gashouse and gasbag will be fitted with gas sensors and alarms. The plant will also have a

biogas boiler, which will act as an emergency flare when the CHP is not in use and the gasbag is

full, the gas will then be burned in the biogas boiler to generate hot water and to get rid of the gas

safely. Explosion zones will be implemented on the plant, in these zones all equipment will be

intrinsically safe according to South African safety standards. All as lines and the complete gas

system will be signed of by an accredited gas technician, as stated by SA law.

7. The CHP will be situated directly next to the digesters, the gas lines all are according to SA

standards and are signed off and tested by an accredited technician as stated by law.

8. The biogas plant uses a large quantity of water to promote decomposition and fermentation. Any

excess wastewater that is generated will be processed via the existing sludge ponds as is currently

undertaken and used for irrigation of lands.

9. A comprehensive Fire and Explosion Risk Safety Management Plan will be developed as part of

operational management of the plant to address all scenarios. The ignition of the methane gas is

not done by “flaring” (open flame) but rather as a Combined Heat and Power unit (CHP) which uses

gas with heat (not an open flame). This significantly reduces the impacts of ignition. All property

owners must undertake to prevent veld fires and must have suitable management strategies in

place to deal with any events. The Biogas Engineering report (Appendix G) includes the

specifications for a Fire & Explosion Risk Safety Management Plan.

2 IMPACTS THAT MAY RESULT FROM THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONAL PHASE

Briefly describe the methodology utilised in the rating of significance of impacts Criteria for Assessment

These criteria are drawn from the EIA Regulations, published by the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (April 1998).

These criteria include:

Nature of the impact

This is an appraisal of the type of effect the construction, operation and maintenance of a development would have on the affected environment. This description should include what is to be affected and how.

Extent of the impact

Describe whether the impact will be: local extending only as far as the development site area; or limited to



the site and its immediate surroundings; or will have an impact on the region, or will have an impact on a national scale or across international borders.

Duration of the impact

The specialist should indicate whether the lifespan of the impact would be short term (0-5 years), medium term (5-15 years), long term (16-30 years) or permanent.

Intensity

The specialist should establish whether the impact is destructive or benign and should be qualified as low, medium or high. The specialist study must attempt to quantify the magnitude of the impacts and outline the rationale used.

Probability of occurrence

The specialist should describe the probability of the impact actually occurring and should be described as improbable (low likelihood), probable (distinct possibility), highly probable (most likely) or definite (impact will occur regardless of any prevention measures).

The impacts should also be assessed in terms of the following aspects:

Legal requirements

The specialist should identify and list the relevant South African legislation and permit requirements pertaining to the development proposals. He / she should provide reference to the procedures required to obtain permits and describe whether the development proposals contravene the applicable legislation.

Status of the impact

The specialist should determine whether the impacts are negative, positive or neutral (“cost – benefit” analysis). The impacts are to be assessed in terms of their effect on the project and the environment. For example, an impact that is positive for the proposed development may be negative for the environment. It is important that this distinction is made in the analysis.

Accumulative impact

Consideration must be given to the extent of any accumulative impact that may occur due to the proposed development. Such impacts must be evaluated with an assessment of similar developments already in the environment. Such impacts will be either positive or negative, and will be graded as being of negligible, low, medium or high impact.

Degree of confidence in predictions

The specialist should state what degree of confidence (low, medium or high) is there in the predictions based on the available information and level of knowledge and expertise.

Based on a synthesis of the information contained in the above-described procedure, you are required to assess the potential impacts in terms of the following significance criteria:

No significance: the impacts do not influence the proposed development and/or environment in any way.

Low significance: the impacts will have a minor influence on the proposed development and/or environment. These impacts require some attention to modification of the project design where possible, or alternative mitigation.

Moderate significance: the impacts will have a moderate influence on the proposed development and/or environment. The impact can be ameliorated by a modification in the project design or implementation of



effective mitigation measures.

High significance: the impacts will have a major influence on the proposed development and/or environment and will result in the “no-go” option on the development or portions of the development regardless of any mitigation measures that could be implemented. This level of significance must be well motivated.

Briefly describe and compare the potential impacts (as appropriate), significance rating of impacts, proposed mitigation and significance rating of impacts after mitigation that are likely to occur as a result of the construction phase for the various alternatives of the proposed development. This must include an assessment of the significance of all impacts. Alternative 1 (Preferred Alternative) & 2: Potential impacts:

Significance rating of impacts:

Proposed mitigation:

Significance rating of impacts after mitigation:

Direct: Loss of vegetation on the footprint of the development.

Moderate Development should be contained within the proposed footprint and unnecessary disturbance adjacent to the site should be avoided. Transplanting/relocation of individual species such as Aloe species and Boophone disticha. Indigenous trees and shrubs should be retained where possible and/or indigenous trees of the area should be planted in suitable areas at the site. Alien invasive species should be eradicated on site. Existing and dedicated roads should be marked and utilised by vehicles.

Low

Increased dust levels. Moderate in the short term.

Dust control measures as per the EMPr should be implemented during construction.

Low.

Loss of faunal habitat. Moderate Transplanting/relocation of individual species such as Aloe species and Boophone disticha. Indigenous trees and shrubs should be retained where possible and/or indigenous trees of the area should be planted in suitable areas at the site.

Low.

As a result of the loss of indigenous vegetation and resulting disturbance, declared alien species might invade the area.

Moderate Development should be restricted to the proposed abattoir and feedlot sites and the disturbance to the surrounding natural or indigenous vegetation be kept to a minimum. Rehabilitate disturbed areas as soon as possible following construction of the facility.

Low.



Establish a monitoring program for the early detection and control of alien invasive plant species. No alien invasive species should be used in landscaping or gardens on the site.

Construction phase employment opportunities.

Moderate. Make use of labour and skills from the surrounding area wherever possible.

Moderate.

Loss of heritage resources. Very Low Except for monitoring of chance finds during site preparation and construction work, no mitigation measures apply.

Very Low

Indirect: Loss of biodiversity. Moderate. Indigenous trees and shrubs

should be retained where possible and/or indigenous trees of the area should be planted in suitable areas at the site. Alien invasive species should be eradicated on site.

Low.

As a result of the loss of vegetation seed production and propagation will be reduced.

Moderate. Transplanting/relocation of individual species such as Aloe species and Boophone disticha. Indigenous trees and shrubs should be retained where possible and/or indigenous trees of the area should be planted in suitable areas at the site. Alien invasive species should be eradicated on site.

Low.

Increased dust levels during construction might negatively affect the plant growth.

Moderate in the short term.

Speed control and other dust control mechanisms must be implemented.

Low.

Removal of alien species and the rehabilitation of the habitat may favour indigenous plant species.

High positive impact.

Rehabilitate disturbed areas as soon as possible following construction of the facility. Establish a monitoring program for the early detection and control of alien invasive plant species. No alien invasive species should be used in landscaping or gardens on the site.


Disturbance will favour alien species and without follow-up control, alien species may spread through the area.

Moderate. Development should be restricted to the proposed abattoir and feedlot sites and the disturbance to the surrounding natural or indigenous vegetation be kept to a minimum. Rehabilitate disturbed areas as soon as possible following construction of the facility.

Low.



Establish a monitoring program for the early detection and control of alien invasive plant species. No alien invasive species should be used in landscaping or gardens on the site.

Effluent overflow. Moderate. Slurry dams will be enlarged or new ones be built to contain any effluent from the feedlots and prevent overflow into the drainage lines in the north-east and south of the property.

Low.

No Go Alternative Potential impacts:




Spread of alien invasive vegetation. Moderate. Management frameworks must be implemented to manage alien invasive vegetation.

Low.

Loss of socio-economic benefits to the area.

Moderate. Development of agrarian industries as per the Integrated Development Plan 2011 – 2016.


List any specialist reports that were used to fill in the above tables. Such reports are to be attached in the appropriate Appendix. Vegetation Survey (Van Rooyen, 2013)

Heritage Impact Assessment (Clarke, 2013)

3 IMPACTS THAT MAY RESULT FROM THE OPERATIONAL PHASE

Briefly describe and compare the potential impacts (as appropriate), significance rating of impacts, proposed mitigation and significance rating of impacts after mitigation that are likely to occur as a result of the operational phase for the various alternatives of the proposed development. This must include an assessment of the significance of all impacts. Alternative 1 (Preferred Alternative) & 2: : Potential impacts:




Direct: Increased dust levels on feedlot site. Moderate. Dust control measures should be

implemented during operation. Low.

Loss of faunal habitat. Moderate. Development should be contained within the proposed footprint of the development and unnecessary disturbance adjacent to the site should be avoided. Indigenous trees and shrubs of the area should be planted in suitable areas at the site. Alien invasive species should be eradicated on site.

Low.

As a result of the loss of indigenous vegetation and resulting disturbance, declared alien species might invade the area.

Moderate. Transplanted/relocated individuals of Aloe species and Boophone disticha should be monitored. Indigenous trees and shrubs

Low.



should be retained where possible and/or indigenous trees of the area should be planted in suitable areas at the site. Alien invasive species should be eradicated on site.

Additional employment opportunities. Moderate. Employment opportunities should benefit the local communities. Approximately 481 employment opportunities will be created by this proposal, this is an increase from the existing 150.

High positive impact

Re-use of previous waste materials in the biogas facility.

High. Implementation of the biogas facility.


Development of agrarian economy in the Rayton / Cullinan area.

Moderate. The economy of the area must benefit i.e. local employment, local materials etc.


Concentration of animals Low The concentration of animals minimises the impact that widespread grazing will have on the indigenous vegetation.

Low

Indirect: Loss of biodiversity. Moderate. Development should be contained

within the proposed footprint of the development and unnecessary disturbance adjacent to the site should be avoided. Slurry dams will be enlarged or new ones built to contain any effluent from the feedlots and prevent overflow into the drainage lines in the north-east and south of the property. Transplanted/relocated individuals of Aloe species and Boophone disticha should be monitored. Indigenous trees and shrubs should be retained where possible and/or indigenous trees of the area should be planted in suitable areas at the site. Alien invasive species should be eradicated on site. Existing and dedicated roads should be marked and utilised by vehicles.

Low.

Some disturbance will inevitably occur in the direct surroundings of the site.

Moderate. Development should be contained within the proposed footprint of the development and unnecessary disturbance adjacent to the site should be avoided. Existing and dedicated roads should be marked and utilised by

Low.



vehicles.

As a result of the loss of vegetation seed production and propagation will be reduced.

Moderate. Transplanted/relocated individuals of Aloe species and Boophone disticha should be monitored. Indigenous trees and shrubs should be retained where possible and/or indigenous trees of the area should be planted in suitable areas at the site. Alien invasive species should be eradicated on site.

Low.

Increased dust levels during operation of the feedlot might negatively affect the plant growth.

Moderate. Dust control measures should be implemented during operation.

Low.

Removal of alien species and the rehabilitation of the habitat may favour indigenous plant species.

High. Rehabilitate disturbed areas as soon as possible following construction of the facility. Establish a monitoring program for the early detection and control of alien invasive plant species. No alien invasive species should be used in landscaping or gardens on the site.


Disturbance will favour alien species and without follow-up control, alien species may spread through the area.

Moderate. Development should be restricted to the proposed abattoir and feedlot sites and the disturbance to the surrounding natural or indigenous vegetation be kept to a minimum. Rehabilitate disturbed areas as soon as possible following construction of the facility. Establish a monitoring program for the early detection and control of alien invasive plant species. No alien invasive species should be used in landscaping or gardens on the site.

Low.

Renewable energy production relieving pressure on ESKOM supply.

High positive.

By producing electricity on site the abattoir will relieve the pressure on existing ESKOM supply in the area.

High positive.

No Go Alternative: Potential impacts:




Spread of alien invasive vegetation. Moderate. Management frameworks must be implemented to manage alien invasive vegetation.

Low.




Continuation of existing waste Moderate Construction of the biogas facility High positive



management practices. with possible high negative impacts in the long term.

to utilise waste products for the generation of electricity to power the abattoir facility.

impact.

4 IMPACTS THAT MAY RESULT FROM THE DECOMISSIONING AND CLOSURE PHASE

Briefly describe and compare the potential impacts (as appropriate), significance rating of impacts, proposed mitigation and significance rating of impacts after mitigation that are likely to occur as a result of the decommissioning and closure phase for the various alternatives of the proposed development. This must include an assessment of the significance of all impacts. Alternative 1 (Preferred Alternative) & 2: : Potential impacts:




Direct: Loss of economic driver in the area. High

negative impact.

Support sustainable development of agrarian industries as per the Integrated Development Plan 2011 – 2016.


Indirect: Loss of biodiversity Moderate. Development should be

contained within the proposed footprint of the development and unnecessary disturbance adjacent to the site should be avoided. Slurry dams will be enlarged or new ones built to contain any effluent from the feedlots and prevent overflow into the drainage lines in the north-east and south of the property. Transplanted/relocated individuals of Aloe species and Boophone disticha should be monitored. Indigenous trees and shrubs should be retained where possible and/or indigenous trees of the area should be planted in suitable areas at the site. Alien invasive species should be eradicated on site. Existing and dedicated roads should be marked and utilised by vehicles.

Low.

No Go Alternative:



Potential impacts:




Spread of alien invasive vegetation Moderate. Management frameworks must be implemented to manage alien invasive vegetation.

Low.




Continuation of existing waste management practices.

Moderate with possible high negative impacts in the long term.

Construction of the biogas facility to utilise waste products for the generation of electricity to power the abattoir facility.


List any specialist reports that were used to fill in the above tables. Such reports are to be attached in the appropriate Appendix. Vegetation Survey (Van Rooyen, 2013)

Heritage Impact Assessment (Clarke, 2014)

5 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

Describe potential impacts that, on their own may not be significant, but is significant when added to the impact of other activities or existing impacts in the environment. Substantiate response:

The following cumulative impacts may occur:

Additional infrastructure development, for example, water pipelines, power lines and access roads;

the spread of alien invaders due to loss of natural vegetation; and increased water (effluent) runoff

leading to erosion could potentially exacerbate the negative impact of the development on the

vegetation and will lead to a loss of habitat for indigenous fauna and flora if not managed.

The establishment of declared weedy and alien invasive plant species on the disturbed site could

lead to their spread into the surrounding natural vegetation and onto neighbouring properties. Their

presence may also slow down the recovery of the natural vegetation.

The spread of alien invaders due to loss of natural vegetation and possible increased water runoff

leading to erosion will exacerbate the negative impact of the development on the vegetation and

will lead to a loss of habitat for indigenous fauna and flora if not managed.

The establishment of declared weedy and alien invasive plant species on the disturbed site could

lead to their spread into the surrounding natural vegetation and onto neighbouring properties. Their

presence may also slow down the recovery of the natural vegetation.

Improved socio-economic development within an area identified by the Integrated Development

Plan 2011 – 2016 is likely to have positive cumulative impacts on the local communities.

Improved waste management on site by means of the biogas facility as an alternative measure to

burning, burying or disposing of organic waste material elsewhere.

Sustainable provision of renewable energy for agrarian industries reducing the overall pressure on



already stressed municipal/Eskom supplies.

Improved carbon footprints for meat products as slaughtered carcasses will be processed on site

instead of being transported to Boksburg as is currently undertaken.

Improved carbon footprints for meat products as excess methane gas (greenhouse gas) is captures

and re-used rather than being released into the atmosphere.

6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

Taking the assessment of potential impacts into account, please provide an environmental impact statement that sums up the impact that the proposal and its alternatives may have on the environment after the management and mitigation of impacts have been taken into account with specific reference to types of impact, duration of impacts, likelihood of potential impacts actually occurring and the significance of impacts. Alternative 1 (Preferred Alternative):

Nature of Impact Extent Duration Intensity Probability Significance

Impact on

Natural Vegetation

(Construction)

Site specific Short term Medium Highly probable Low

Impact on Natural

Vegetation (Operation)

Site specific Long term (feedlots)

Permanent (Abattoir

and Biogas)

Medium Highly probable Low

Impact on Alien Vegetation (Construction)

Property Long term (depends

on ongoing

management)

High positive Highly probable High positive

Impact on Alien Vegetation

(Operation)


on ongoing

management)


Socio-Economic Region Long term High positive Highly probable High positive

Waste Management

Region Long term High positive Highly probable High positive

Alternative 2:


Impact on

Natural Vegetation (Construction)

Site specific Short term Medium Highly probable Low



Impact on Natural


Site specific Long term (feedlots)

Permanent (Abattoir

and Biogas)

Medium Highly probable Low

Impact on Alien Vegetation (Construction)


on ongoing

management)



(Operation)


on ongoing

management)


Socio-Economic Region Long term High positive Highly probable High positive

Waste Management

Region Long term High positive Highly probable High positive

No-go (compulsory)


Impact on Natural Vegetation

(Construction)

Site specific None None Highly probable Low

Impact on

Natural Vegetation (Operation)

Site specific None None Highly probable Low


(Construction)

Property None None Highly probable Medium

negative

Impact on Alien


Property None None Highly probable Medium

negative

Socio-Economic Region Long term Medium

negative

Highly probable Medium

negative

Waste

Management Region Long term Medium

negative

Highly probable Medium

negative



7 IMPACT SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSAL OR PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

For proposal:

The overall impacts for the proposed development have a Moderate impact on the receiving environment

but with mitigation are considered Low.

There is a High positive impact on waste management for the abattoir, as well as on the socio-economic

aspect for the region.

For alternative 1 (Preferred Alternative):

The overall impacts for the proposed development have a Moderate impact on the receiving environment

but with mitigation are considered Low.

There is a High positive impact on waste management for the abattoir, as well as on the socio-economic

aspect for the region.

Having assessed the significance of impacts of the proposal and alternative(s), please provide an overall summary and reasons for selecting the proposal or preferred alternative.

In addition to expanding the existing abattoir/feedlot operation, the aim of the proposal is to improve the

waste management of the abattoir by installing a biogas facility. This has the added benefit of reducing the

dependency on Eskom for the generation of electricity thus encouraging a more sustainable agrarian

industry.

The impacts of both alternatives are the same, both Low with mitigation; however the preferred alternative

layout incorporates certain food safety and health mechanisms required by the abattoir.

The expansion of the feedlots increases the potential viability of this agricultural property and business,

fulfilling the designs of the Integrated Development Plan for Tshwane. The concentration of animals through

feedlots minimizes the impact of widespread grazing over the various plant communities and maintains open

spaces for faunal movement. The impact on the receiving environment is Low.

The expansion of the abattoir on site, as well as the construction of the packaging plant, improves the food

chain by lessening the transport of slaughtered carcasses to the packaging plant (currently located in

Boksburg, approximately 87kms away). The combination of the feedlot, abattoir and packaging plant on the

same property completes the full circle in a single area and has huge cost benefits that can be transferred to

the consumer even making the Cavalier Abattoir more competitive. It will also increase employment

opportunities and skills development in the region. The impacts associated with this are of a Low impact on

the environment with a High positive impact on the socio-economic prospects for the region.

8 RECOMMENDATION OF PRACTITIONER

Is the information contained in this report and the documentation attached hereto sufficient to make a decision in respect of the activity applied for (in the view of the Environmental Assessment Practitioner). YES NO If “NO”, indicate the aspects that require further assessment before a decision can be made (list the aspects that require further assessment):



If “YES”, please list any recommended conditions, including mitigation measures that should be considered for inclusion in any authorisation that may be granted by the competent authority in respect of the application:

The following recommendations should be implemented:

Development should be contained within the footprint of the proposed expansion of the

abattoir/feedlots and unnecessary disturbance adjacent to the site should be avoided.

Minimise large-scale clearance of natural vegetation and disturbance at the sites.

Use existing and dedicated access roads to limit disturbance of the natural vegetation.

Dust control measures should be implemented during construction as per the EMPr.

The areas which have been denuded and disturbed as a result of construction on site, should be

re-vegetated as soon as possible.

Prevent soil erosion from the disturbed areas by rehabilitation of the sites.

All plant species recorded on site are considered as ‘least concern’, except for Boophone disticha

and Hypoxis hemerocallidea that are classified as “declining”. Only Boophone disticha occurs in the

footprint of the proposed development and because it is a geophyte, the success rate of

transplanting such a species is relatively high. The individuals should therefore be transplanted to

similar habitat adjacent to the proposed sites. This is also applicable to the Aloe species in

identified in the Botanical report.

Indigenous trees and shrubs should be retained where possible.

The denuded and disturbed areas on site should be landscaped and re-habilitated as soon as

possible with indigenous plants.

Continue with the current control program to combat declared alien invasive plant species.

Implement a monitoring program for the early detection of alien invasive plant species.

No alien invasive plant species should be used in landscaping or gardens on site.

Buffer zones should be provided where possible (see GDARD policy). A buffer zone is a collar of

land that filters out inappropriate influences from surrounding activities, also known as edge effects,

including the effects of invasive plant and animal species, physical damage and soil compaction

caused through trampling and harvesting, abiotic habitat alterations and pollution.

Monitoring should be done to verify environmental impact prediction and adequacy of mitigation

measures.

All requirements identified in the Environmental Management Programme must be adhered to.

The Fire and Explosion Risk Safety Management Plan for the biogas plant must be developed and

adhered to.

Continuous monitoring of irrigation water from slurry dams at the feedlot and from the biogas facility

must be implemented.

9 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMME (EMPR)

If the EAP answers yes to Point 7 above then an EMP is to be attached to this report as an Appendix

EMPr attached



SECTION F: APPENDICES

The following appendixes must be attached as appropriate: It is required that if more than one item is enclosed that a table of contents is included in the appendix Appendix A: Site plan(s) Appendix B: Photographs Appendix C: Facility illustration(s) Appendix D: Route position information Appendix E: Public participation information Appendix F: Water use license(s) authorisation, SAHRA information, service letters from municipalities,

water supply information Appendix G: Specialist reports Appendix H: EMPr Appendix I: Other information CHECKLIST To ensure that all information that the Department needs to be able to process this application, please check that:

Where requested, supporting documentation has been attached; All relevant sections of the form have been completed; and