basic assessment report - hilland

BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED EXPANSION OF THE EXISTING EGG PRODUCTION FACILITY AT JJ

VAN DER SCHYFF & SEUN (Pty) Ltd TO INCLUDE AN ADDITIONAL 3 CHICKEN HOUSES ON

A PORTION OF PORTION 10 OF THE FARM KRANSHOEK 432, PLETTENBERG BAY

Compiled by: HilLand Environmental

Date: March 2016

Reference: PLE/311/14

DEADP Case Officer: Shireen Pullen

DEADP ref no: 16/3/3/1/D1/8/0010/15

DEADP Pre App ref no: 16/3/3/6/7/1/D1/8/0118/15

Hilland Environmental PLE15/311/14

of 51

HilLand Environmental Basic Assessment Report - JJ van der Schyff & Seun, Kranshoek Plettenberg Bay

BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT

(AUGUST 2010)

Basic Assessment Report in terms of the NEMA Environmental Impact Assessment

Regulations, 2010

AUGUST 2010

Kindly note that:

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

and must be completed for all Basic Assessment applications.

2. This report must be used in all instances for Basic Assessment applications for an environmental authorisation in

terms of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998) (NEMA), as amended, and

the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2010, and/or a waste management licence in terms of the

National Environmental Management: Waste Act, 2008 (Act 59 of 2008) (NEM: WA), and/or an atmospheric

emission licence in terms of the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, 2004 (Act No. 39 of 2004)

(NEM: AQA).

3. This report is current as of 2 August 2010. It is the responsibility of the Applicant / EAP to ascertain whether

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

4. The required information must be typed within the spaces provided in the report. The sizes of the spaces

provided are not necessarily indicative of the amount of information to be provided. It is in the form of a table

that will expand as each space is filled with typing.

5. Incomplete reports will be rejected. A rejected report may be amended and resubmitted.

6. The use of “not applicable” in the report must be done with circumspection. Where it is used in respect of

material information that is required by the Department for assessing the application, this may result in the

rejection of the report as provided for in the regulations.

7. While the different sections of the report only provide space for provision of information related to one

alternative, if more than one feasible and reasonable alternative is considered, the relevant section must be

copied and completed for each alternative.

8. Unless protected by law all information contained in, and attached to this report, will become public

information on receipt by the competent authority. If information is not submitted with this report due to such

information being protected by law, the applicant and/or EAP must declare such non-disclosure and provide

the reasons for the belief that the information is protected.

9. This report must be submitted to the Department at the postal address given below or by delivery thereof to the

Registry Office of the Department. No faxed or e-mailed reports will be accepted. Please note that for waste

management licence applications, this report must be submitted for the attention of the Department’s Waste

Management Directorate (tel: 021-483-2756 and fax: 021-483-4425) at the same postal address as the Cape

Town Office Region A.

10. Unless indicated otherwise, two electronic copies (CD/DVD) and three hard copies of this report must be

submitted to the Department.

DEPARTMENTAL DETAILS


of 51


CAPE TOWN OFFICE REGION A

(Cape Winelands, City of Cape Town:

Tygerberg and Oostenberg

Administrations)

CAPE TOWN OFFICE REGION B

(West Coast, Overberg, City of Cape Town:

Helderberg, South Peninsula, Cape Town

and Blaauwberg Administrations

GEORGE OFFICE

(Eden and Central Karoo)

Department of Environmental Affairs

and Development Planning

Attention: Directorate: Integrated

Environmental Management (Region

A2)

Private Bag X 9086

Cape Town,

8000

Registry Office

1st Floor Utilitas Building

1 Dorp Street,

Cape Town

Queries should be directed to the

Directorate: Integrated Environmental

Management (Region A2) at:

Tel: (021) 483-4793 Fax: (021) 483-3633

Department of Environmental Affairs and

Development Planning


Environmental Management (Region B)

Private Bag X 9086

Cape Town,

8000

Registry Office

1st Floor Utilitas Building

1 Dorp Street,

Cape Town



Management (Region B) at:

Tel: (021) 483-4094 Fax: (021) 483-4372

Department of Environmental Affairs

and Development Planning


Environmental Management (Region

A1)

Private Bag X 6509

George,

6530

Registry Office

4th Floor, York Park Building

93 York Street

George



Management (Region A1) at:

Tel: (044) 805 8600 Fax: (044) 874-2423

View the Department’s website at http://www.capegateway.gov.za/eadp for the latest version of this

document.

DEPARTMENTAL REFERENCE NUMBER(S) File reference number (EIA): DEADP reference number – 16/3/3/1/D1/8/0010/15, File reference number (Waste):

File reference number (Other): pre-app ref 16/3/3/6/7/1/D1/8/0118/15

PROJECT TITLE The expansion of the existing egg production facility at JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd to

include an additional 3 chicken houses on a portion of portion 10 of the farm Kranshoek

432,Plettenberg Bay

DETAILS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PRACTITIONER (EAP)

Environmental Assessment

Practitioner (EAP): Hilland Environmental

Contact person: Cathy Avierinos Postal address: P O Box 590

George Postal code: 6560

Telephone: ( 044) 889 0229 Cell: 082 558 6589 E-mail: [email protected] Fax: ( 086 ) 542 5248

EAP Qualifications BSc (Hons) 23 years EIA experience in EIA processes, specialist

assessment and environmental compliance monitoring.

EAP Registrations/Associations IAIAsa, Bot Soc, SAAB.

Details of the EAP’s expertise to carry out Basic Assessment procedures

Cathy Avierinos has 23 years of experience as an Environmental Assessment Practitioner

specialising in Impact Assessments and Environmental Control and Monitoring. Included in

this was the process of Environmental Authorisation for the existing egg production facility

which was facilitated (approval 26.05.2004 - EG12/2/1-284 Kranshoek 432/10).

http://www.capegateway.gov.za/eadp


of 51


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE CONTENT OF THE BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT: See attached Executive Summary

SECTION A: ACTIVITY INFORMATION 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

(a) Is the project a new development? YES NO

(b) Provide a detailed description of the development project and associated

infrastructure. The project entails the upgrading of the existing large scale egg production facility (JJ van der

Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd) by the construction of a further 3 chicken houses to add to the existing 6

operational chicken houses.

The existing facility consists of an office block (that includes the packing store), a free-standing

‘hanger’ and six chicken houses.

Each chicken house contains three rows of batteries, each with four tiers of cages (6 chickens

per cage). Each chicken house can house a maximum of 29 952 chickens (3 chicken houses

will house a maximum of 89 856 chickens). Each tier has its own feeding and egg removal

conveyor band. Under the cages is another conveyor belt which extends under the rows of

batteries on each level. This transverse conveyor travels through the southern end of each

chicken house, receiving the manure from the battery conveyors in each and finally delivering

the load to an elevator conveyor from which it is loaded directly onto the trucks that remove

the manure. Each chicken house is ventilated by means of 6 large extractor fans that ventilate

the batteries. Depending on the temperature, not all 6 extractor fans operate at the same time.

The dimensions of each chicken house are as follows:

Length: 72m

Width: 9m

Constructional footprint: 648m 2

Eaves height: 4.5m

Ridge height: 5.5m

The proposed addition of 3 chicken houses will be constructed to fit the same dimensions as

described above. They will also be operated using the same conveyor system. The internal

tier system will follow the manufacturer's specifications at the time of order and delivery and

are such that the combined systems will be fully functional and will either be a four or five tier

system (egg collection, manure conveyor, feeding and water etc). The proposed chicken

houses will thus be integrated with the existing 6 chicken houses to form part of an already fully

functioning high quality egg production process.

The facility meets the South African Poultry Association's code of practice 2012 for Pullet

Rearing and Table Egg Production (see EMPr Appendix H, annexure 7) which covers the

industry requirements for Table Egg Production. All aspects of Housing Poultry, Preparation of

the Houses, Health Safety and Sanitation, Management Practices and Health Controls are

covered in the Industry Code of Practice and are not repeated in this application. The

expansion will conform to these codes.


of 51


Water supply:

Water for the farm is extracted from a borehole located on the farm. The farm has water rights

to extract 6000 cubic meters per year from the existing borehole. The existing facility uses

approximately 6000 litres per day (an average of 2 190 cubic meters of water per year). The

addition of the 3 proposed chicken houses will increase the yearly water use to 3285 cubic

meters which is still well under the maximum allowed for the farm and is within the required

capacity for production. No expansion of water supply is required.

Power supply:

Electricity to the facility is 3 phase Eskom power with a standby generator that switches on and

off automatically in cases of power failure. The generator switches off only once the full 3

phase electricity is restored. The existing power supply will be sufficient, no upgrading in terms

of power supply will be needed for the addition of the 3 proposed chicken houses

JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd underwent an environmental scoping process during Dec

2002 – June 2003. During the environmental scoping process impacts were identified and

assessed and recommendations were made accordingly. Issues previously associated with JJ

van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd were addressed and mitigations were made to ensure

compliance with environmental legislation. Environmental Authorisation was granted by the

competent authority on 26 May 2004 (see EG12/2/1-284 Kranshoek 432/10).

(c) List all the activities assessed during the Basic Assessment process:

GN No. R.983

Activity No(s):

Describe the relevant Basic Assessment

Activity(ies) in writing as per Listing Notice 1

(GN No. R. 983) of the 2014 Impact Assessment

Regulations

Describe the portion of the development as per the

project description that relates to the applicable listed

activity.

40 The expansion and related operation of

facilities for the concentration of poultry,

excluding chicks younger than 20 days,

where the capacity of the facility will be

increased by—

(i) more than 1 000 poultry

where the facility is situated

within a urban area; or

more than 5 000 poultry per facility

situated outside an urban area.

The expansion of JJ van der Schyff & Seun

(Pty) Ltd to include an additional 3 chicken

houses – The expansion of facilities for the

concentration of poultry, more than 5 000

poultry per facility situated outside an urban

area.

If the application is also for activities as per Listing Notice 2 and permission was granted to subject the application to

Basic Assessment, also indicate the applicable Listing Notice 2 activities:

GN No. R. 545

Activity No(s):

If permission was granted in terms of Regulation 20,

describe the relevant Scoping and EIA Activity(ies)

in writing as per Listing Notice 2 (GN No. R. 545)

Describe the portion of the development as per the

project description that relates to the applicable listed

activity.

N/A N/A N/A

Waste management activities in terms of the NEM: WA (Government Gazette No. 32368):

GN No. 718 - Category A

Activity No(s): Describe the relevant Category A waste management activity in writing.

N/A N/A Please note: If any waste management activities are applicable, the Listed Waste Management Activities

Additional Information Annexure must be completed and attached to this Basic Assessment Report as Appendix I.

If the application is also for waste management activities as per Category B and permission was granted to subject

the application to Basic Assessment, also indicate the applicable Category B activities:


of 51


GN No. 718 – Category B

Activity No(s): Describe the relevant Category B waste management activity in writing.

N/A N/A

Atmospheric emission activities in terms of the NEM: AQA (Government Gazette No. 33064):

GN No. 248

Activity No(s): Describe the relevant atmospheric emission activity in writing.

N/A N/A

(D) PLEASE PROVIDE DETAILS OF ALL COMPONENTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND ATTACH DIAGRAMS (E.G.

ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS OR PERSPECTIVES, ENGINEERING DRAWINGS, PROCESS FLOW CHARTS ETC.).

(Please see Appendix B and G)

Buildings YES NO

Provide brief description:

The construction of 3 additional chicken houses with a construction footprint of 648 m2 per chicken

house and a total of ±1944 m2 . The construction will be done on a combination of gravel areas and

lawn (Pennisetum clandestinum).

The dimensions of each chicken house will be as follows:

Length: 72m

Width: 9m

Constructional footprint: 648m 2

Eaves height: 4.5m

Ridge height: 5.5m

The existing facility consists of an office block (includes the packing store), a free-standing

‘hanger’ and six chicken houses. The 3 new chicken houses will link onto this system.

Each chicken house will contain three rows of batteries, each with four or five tiers of cages (6

chickens per cage). Each tier has its own feeding and egg removal conveyor band. Under

the cages there is another conveyor belt which extends under the rows of batteries on each

level. This transverse conveyor travels through the southern end of each chicken house,

receiving the manure from the battery conveyors in each and finally delivering the load to an

elevator conveyor from which it is loaded directly onto the trucks that remove the manure.

Each chicken house is ventilated by means of 6 large extractor fans that ventilate the batteries.

Depending on the temperature, not all 6 extractor fans operate at the same time.

The proposed addition of 3 chicken houses be operated using the same conveyor systems as

the existing houses. The proposed additional chicken houses will be integrated with the

existing 6 chicken houses to form part of an already fully functioning high quality egg

production process, meeting the standards of the SAPA Code of Practice.

Infrastructure (e.g. roads, power and water supply/ storage) YES NO

Roads:

Access to the farm is from an existing dirt road that turns off the airport/Kranshoek road. This is

not a private road and serves as an access road to other farms/businesses as well. The

Airport/Kranshoek road carries a moderate amount of traffic. Heavy vehicles currently

generate dust when using the dirt road. This road DR1770 upgrade is in progress and will help

alleviate the current issues. The road is being upgraded to a surfaced road (tar road) and will

in turn entirely eliminate the generation of dust currently associated with this road.

Water supply:

Water for the farm is extracted from a borehole located on the farm. The farm has water rights

to extract 6000 cubic meters per year from the said borehole. The existing facility uses


of 51


approximately 6000 litres per day (an average of 2 190 cubic meters of water per year). The

addition of the 3 proposed chicken houses will increase the yearly water use to 3285 cubic

meters which is still well under the capacity available for the farm.

Power supply:

Electricity to the facility is 3 phase Eskom power with a standby generator that switches on and

off automatically in cases of power failure. The generator switches off only once the full 3

phase electricity is restored. The existing power supply will be sufficient, no upgrading in terms

of power supply will be needed for the addition of the 3 proposed chicken houses.

Traffic:

JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd is a large scale egg production facility; as such traffic to and

from the facility is inevitable. The current incoming traffic to the facility includes chicken feed

deliveries, 1 truck 3 times per week and delivery of eggs, one truck per month. The outgoing

traffic includes egg delivery, 2 trucks daily and the manure collecting, 3 trucks per week. All

the above mentioned incoming and outgoing deliveries takes place during daytime hours with

the exception of outgoing egg deliveries which takes place between 02:00 and 03:00 AM.

After the proposed expansion of the facility the traffic will increase slightly by 1 additional

outgoing egg delivery truck, 1 additional manure collection truck, 1 additional feed truck, all

as per schedule mentioned above. The trucks delivering eggs to the farm will no longer be

needed.

Processing activities (e.g. manufacturing, storage, distribution) YES NO

Provide brief description:

The production and packaging of eggs for distribution is undertaken on site in the existing

facility. Demand current exceeds supply and they currently have to import eggs from other

regions in order to meet their orders. The additional 3 production houses will alleviate this

problem for the short to medium term. There is no requirement to expand the existing storage

and packaging areas.

Chicken feed is stored in fully enclosed silos that prevent water from entering or exiting the

silos.

Distribution of the eggs from the facility will remain unchanged. The facility is currently

importing eggs from elsewhere in the country in order to meet their distribution requirements.

Storage facilities for raw materials and products (e.g. volume and substances to be stored)

Provide brief description YES NO

Chicken feed is stored in fully enclosed silos that prevent water from entering or exiting the silos.

Eggs are stored in the packing shed prior to being distributed.

Manure is not stored on site but is removed from the conveyor system directly onto the trucks for

transport to farms as fertilizer.

Storage and treatment facilities for solid waste and effluent generated by the project Yes NO

Provide brief description

The solid waste produced during the proposed activity will consist of construction waste which

will be disposed of at the nearest appropriate landfill site along with other solid waste

generated on a daily bases on the facility.

During the operational phase solid waste in the form of chicken manure is produced. As this is

already a fully functioning farm, a system for the disposal of the manure is in place.

Manure was previously stored in heaps on outside concrete slabs in order to dry for fertiliser.

The dry manure was then ground and packaged in the ‘hanger’ for sale. These operations

were a source of odour and as a result of complaints regarding the smell of the manure, these

activities were ceased.

Chicken manure is removed from the chicken houses three times per week and loaded


of 51


directly onto the trucks that transport it from the site. The trucks that remove the manure use to

be open trucks but as a result of complaints regarding the smell of the manure and manure

spillage onto the road, the trucks are now covered with tarpaulin to prevent spillage. The entire

procedure is termed a “dry brush-operation”. Chicken houses and the manure pit are dry-

brushed every second day. The material removed after the dry brushing is added to the solid

waste that is removed from site daily.

The manure that is collected and loaded onto Interlink trucks 3 times a week is then used as

fertilizer for large scale dairy farmers in the Tsitsikama area. By collecting the manure in this

manner and within this time frame, flies do not have time to hatch and cause sanitary issues

Household type solid waste during the operational phase is gathered daily after closing time.

The waste is disposed of at the local Plettenberg Bay refuse site. The Bitou municipality

confirmed that JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd dispose of their solid waste at the municipal

refuse site.

Any dead chickens are removed daily from the chicken houses and safely disposed of. Dead

chickens are placed in large disinfected plastic containers and transported off the premises.

The dead chickens are then taken to the Wolf Sanctuary, cut into smaller pieces and boiled

before being fed to wolves and pigs. The feeding to pigs is in accordance with the required

regulations as prescribed by Regulation 2026 of 26 Sept 1986, Reg 24 (1) (c). The plastic

containers are then disinfected by Mr Pieter Botha before returning them to JJ van der Schyff &

Seun (Pty) Ltd.

No contaminated chickens are to be fed to pigs, only chickens having died as a result of

trauma or natural causes are allowed to be fed to pigs. Mr Pieter Botha from the Wolf

Sanctuary confirmed that he disposes of the carcasses by first removing the feathers from the

carcasses, after which they are burned at a high temperature and cut into pieces, boiled and

fed to pigs and wolfs at the Wolf Sanctuary.

If dead chickens are deemed to be contaminated, the Bitou Municipality must be notified in

advance. The requirements of the Code of Practice and the State Vet must be met and will

dictate the required disposal procedure. This is the required standard operating procedure.

This is likely to require the use of an underground septic tank on the premises for the safe

disposal of contaminated dead chickens. The dead chickens must be disposed of into the pit,

covered with lime and a layer of soil

Other activities (e.g. water abstraction activities, crop planting activities) Yes No

Provide brief description

Borehole water as per existing use - no additional abstraction for the proposed expansion.

2. PHYSICAL SIZE OF THE ACTIVITY

Size of the property:

(a) Indicate the size of the property (cadastral unit) on which the activity is to be undertaken.

Portion 10 of the Farm

Kraanshoek 432

(363755m2)

Size of the facility:

(b) Indicate the size of the facility (development area) on which the activity is to be undertaken.

Area within the fence

approx

40,000 m2

Size of the activity:

(c) Indicate the physical size (footprint) of the activity together with its associated infrastructure: Expansion Approx

2000 m2


of 51


Total facility approx

1.6ha

(d) Indicate the physical size (footprint) of the activity:

Approx 1944 m2

(e) Indicate the physical size (footprint) of the associated infrastructure:

Part of existing total

facility

16 000 m2

and, for linear activities:

Length of the activity:

(f) Indicate the length of the activity: N/A

3. SITE ACCESS

(a) Is there an existing access road? YES NO

(b) If no, what is the distance over which a new access road will be built? N/A

(c) Describe the type of access road planned:

Access to the farm is from an existing dirt road that turns off from the airport/Kranshoek road DR

1770. This is not a private road and serves as an access road to other farms/businesses as well.

The Airport/Kranshoek road is in the process of being upgraded to a surfaced road.

Please Note: indicate the position of the proposed access road on the site plan.

4. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY ON WHICH THE ACTIVITY IS TO BE UNDERTAKEN AND THE

LOCATION OF THE ACTIVITY ON THE PROPERTY

(a) Provide a description of the property on which the activity is to be undertaken and the location of the activity

on the property.

The site is located west of Plettenberg Bay on a portion of portion 10 of the Farm Kranshoek 342. This

property is situated in recently approved small industrial park within the rural area around Kranshoek.

The farm is surrounded with other smallholdings where agriculture, rural occupation and tourism

activities take place.

The extent of the whole property (portion 10) is 36.3755 ha.

The proposed upgrading will take place on a small area (Approx 1944 m2) on the western part of the

Agriculture II portion of the property within an area currently fenced off for the existing chicken egg

production facility.

Approximately 4,2ha is currently fenced off within which the existing and the proposed expansion will

occur.

The Kranshoek settlement is located approximately 500m to the south west of the farm.


of 51


(B) PLEASE PROVIDE A LOCATION MAP (SEE BELOW) AS APPENDIX A TO THIS REPORT WHICH SHOWS THE LOCATION OF

THE PROPERTY AND THE LOCATION OF THE ACTIVITY ON THE PROPERTY; AS WELL AS A SITE MAP (SEE BELOW) AS

APPENDIX B TO THIS REPORT; AND IF APPLICABLE ALL ALTERNATIVE PROPERTIES AND LOCATIONS.

Locality map: Please see

Appendix A

The scale of the locality map must be at least 1:50 000. For linear activities of more than 25 kilometres, a

smaller scale e.g. 1:250 000 can be used. The scale must be indicated on the map. The map must indicate the

following:

an accurate indication of the project site position as well as the positions of the alternative sites, if

any;

road names or numbers of all the major roads as well as the roads that provide access to the

site(s)

a north arrow;

a legend;

the prevailing wind direction (during November to April and during May to October); and

GPS co-ordinates (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 degrees and

decimal minutes. The minutes should have at least three decimals to ensure adequate accuracy.

The projection that must be used in all cases is the WGS84 spheroid in a national or local

projection).

Site Plan:

Please see

Appendix B

Detailed site plan(s) must be prepared for each alternative site or alternative activity. The site plan must

contain or conform to the following:

The detailed site plan must be at a scale preferably at a scale of 1:500 or at an appropriate scale.

The scale must be indicated on the plan.

The property boundaries and numbers of all the properties within 50m of the site must be indicated

on the site plan.

The current land use (not zoning) as well as the land use zoning of each of the adjoining properties

must be indicated on the site plan.

The position of each element of the application as well as any other structures on the site must be

indicated on the site plan.

Services, including electricity supply cables (indicate above or underground), water supply

pipelines, boreholes, sewage pipelines, storm water infrastructure and access roads that will form

part of the development must be indicated on the site plan.

Servitudes indicating the purpose of the servitude must be indicated on the site plan.

Sensitive environmental elements within 100m of the site must be included on the site plan,

including (but not limited to):

o Rivers.

o Flood lines (i.e. 1:10, 1:50, year and 32 meter set back line from the banks of a river/stream).

o Ridges.

o Cultural and historical features.

o Areas with indigenous vegetation (even if it is degraded or infested with alien species).

Whenever the slope of the site exceeds 1:10, then a contour map of the site must be submitted.

(c) For a linear activity, please also provide a description of the route.

N/A

Indicate the position of the activity using the latitude

and longitude of the centre point of the site. The co-

ordinates must be in degrees, minutes and seconds.

The minutes should be given to at least three

decimals to ensure adequate accuracy. The

projection that must be used in all cases is the

WGS84 spheroid in a national or local projection.

Latitude (S): Longitude (E):

34o 04 ‘ 47.1939“ 23o 18‘ 9.274“

(d) or:

For linear activities: Latitude (S): Longitude (E):

Starting point of the activity N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Middle point of the activity

End point of the activity


of 51


Please Note: For linear activities that are longer than 500m, please provide and addendum with co-ordinates taken

every 100 meters along the route.

5. SITE PHOTOGRAPHS

Colour photographs of the site and its surroundings (taken of the site and from the site) with a description of each

photograph. The vantage points from which the photographs were taken must be indicated on the site plan, or

locality plan as applicable. If available, please also provide a recent aerial photograph. Photographs must be

attached as Appendix C to this report. It should be supplemented with additional photographs of relevant features

on the site. Date of photographs must be included. Please note that the above requirements must be duplicated for

all alternative sites.

Please see Appendix C.


of 51


SECTION B: DESCRIPTION OF RECEIVING

ENVIRONMENT

1. SITE/AREA DESCRIPTION

For linear activities (pipelines, etc.) as well as activities that cover very large sites, it may be necessary to complete

copies of this section for each part of the site that has a significantly different environment. In such cases please

complete copies of Section B and indicate the area which is covered by each copy No. on the Site Plan.

1. GRADIENT OF THE SITE

Indicate the general gradient of the sites (highlight the appropriate box).

Flat (river

shoreline

above the

retainer)

Flatter than 1:10 1:10 – 1:4

Steeper than 1:4 (retaining

bank is currently vertical in

two steps)

2. LOCATION IN LANDSCAPE

(a) Indicate the landform(s) that best describes the site (highlight the appropriate box(es).

Ridgeline Plateau Side slope of

hill/mountain

Closed

valley

Open

valley

Plain

(coastal

estuary

flood plain)

Undulating

plain/low

hills

Dune Sea-front

(b) Please provide a description of the location in the landscape.

The site is located west of Plettenberg Bay on a portion of portion 10 of the Farm Kranshoek

342. This property is situated in a small industrial node within the rural area near

Kranshoek.

The farm (portion 10) is surrounded with other smallholdings.

The extent of the whole property is 36.3755 ha. Approximately 4,2ha of the property is

currently fenced off and the existing chicken egg production facility takes place in this

area. This is the Agriculture II portion.

The industrial subdivision approval (NEMA and LUPO) took into account the sensitivities of

the site and set aside certain wetland areas and buffers which are not affected by this

proposed expansion.

The Kranshoek settlement is located approximately 500m to the south west of the farm.

3. GROUNDWATER, SOIL AND GEOLOGICAL STABILITY OF THE SITE

(a) Is the site(s) located on or near any of the following (highlight the appropriate boxes)?

Shallow water table (less than 1.5m deep) YES NO UNSURE

Seasonally wet soils (often close to water bodies) YES NO UNSURE Unstable rocky slopes or steep slopes with loose soil YES NO UNSURE Dispersive soils (soils that dissolve in water) YES NO UNSURE Soils with high clay content YES NO UNSURE Any other unstable soil or geological feature YES NO UNSURE An area sensitive to erosion YES NO UNSURE An area adjacent to or above an aquifer. YES NO UNSURE An area within 100m of the source of surface water YES NO UNSURE


of 51


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

the Department.

(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).

(c) Please indicate the type of geological formation underlying the site.

Granite Shale Sandstone Quartzite Dolomite Dolorite Other

(describe)

Please provide a description.

Under laying clay soil with heaving potential. NHBRC (National Home Builders Registration

Council) classification H1, which means: “Fine grain soils with moderate to very high plasticity,

potentially expansive. Expected reign of total soil movement is 7.5 - 15mm.” As a result all

structures have reinforced foundations and floors. There are no issues with the current buildings

and new building plans will take these conditions into account.

4. SURFACE WATER (a) Indicate the surface water present on and or adjacent to the site and alternative sites (highlight the

appropriate boxes)?

Perennial River YES NO UNSURE

Non-Perennial River YES NO UNSURE

Permanent Wetland YES NO UNSURE

Seasonal Wetland YES NO UNSURE

Artificial Wetland YES NO UNSURE

Estuarine / Lagoonal wetland YES NO UNSURE

(b) Please provide a description.

N/A

5. BIODIVERSITY Please note: The Department may request specialist input/studies depending on the nature of the biodiversity

occurring on the site and potential impact(s) of the proposed activity/ies. To assist with the identification of the

biodiversity occurring on site and the ecosystem status consult http://bgis.sanbi.org or [email protected].

Information is also available on compact disc (cd) from the Biodiversity-GIS Unit, Ph (021) 799 8698. This information

may be updated from time to time and it is the applicant/ EAP’s responsibility to ensure that the latest version is

used. A map of the relevant biodiversity information (including an indication of the habitat conditions as per (b)

below) and must be provided as an overlay map to the property/site plan as Appendix D to this report.

(a) Highlight the applicable biodiversity planning categories of all areas on site and indicate the reason(s)

provided in the biodiversity plan for the selection of the specific area as part of the specific category).

Systematic Biodiversity Planning Category If CBA or ESA, indicate the reason(s) for its selection in

biodiversity plan

Critical

Biodiversity

Area

(CBA)

Ecological

Support

Area (ESA)

Other

Natural

Area

(ONA)

No Natural

Area

Remaining

(NNR)

A very small part of the proposed construction

falls within an area mapped as Degraded CBA.

At the scale concerned this would appear to be

a minor mapping error as the site is totally

transformed and holds no ecological potential.

Please see CBA map.

NEMA Authorisation for the industrial and

existing uses took this into account.

(b) Highlight and describe the habitat condition on site.

http://bgis.sanbi.org/

mailto:[email protected]


of 51


Habitat Condition

Percentage of

habitat

condition class

(adding up to

100%)

Description and additional Comments and Observations

(including additional insight into condition, e.g. poor land management

practises, presence of quarries, grazing/harvesting regimes etc).

Natural 0%

Near Natural

(includes areas with low

to moderate level of alien

invasive plants)

%

Degraded

(includes areas heavily

invaded by alien plants)

0%

Transformed

(includes cultivation,

dams, urban, plantation,

roads, etc)

100%

The entire site has been completely transformed into lawns

around the existing buildings (Pennisetum clandestinum) and

gravel driving surfaces.

(c) Complete the table to indicate:

(i) the type of vegetation, including its ecosystem status, present on the site; and

(ii) whether an aquatic ecosystem is present on site.

(d) Please provide a description of the vegetation type and/or aquatic ecosystem present on site, including any

important biodiversity features/information identified on site (e.g. threatened species and special habitats)

The entire site has been completely transformed into lawns and gravel driving surfaces or

concrete aprons. There are no important biodiversity features located where the proposed

expansion will take place.

6. LAND USE OF THE SITE

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.

Untransformed area Low density

residential

Medium density

residential

High density

residential Informal residential

Retail Commercial &

warehousing Light industrial Medium industrial Heavy industrial

Power station Office/consulting

room

Military or police

base/station/compound

Casino/entertainment

complex

Tourism &

Hospitality facility

Open cast mine Underground

mine Spoil heap or slimes dam

Quarry, sand or

borrow pit Dam or reservoir

Hospital/medical center School Tertiary education facility Church Old age home

Sewage treatment plant Train station or

shunting yard Railway line

Major road (4 lanes or

more) Airport

Harbour Sport facilities Golf course Polo fields Filling station

Landfill or waste treatment site Plantation Agriculture River, stream or

wetland

Nature

conservation area

Mountain, koppie or ridge Museum Historical building Graveyard Archeological site

Other land uses (describe): Rural area

Terrestrial Ecosystems Aquatic Ecosystems

Ecosystem threat status as per the

National Environmental

Management: Biodiversity Act (Act

No. 10 of 2004)

Critical Wetland (including rivers,

depressions, channelled

and unchanneled

wetlands, flats, seeps

pans, and artificial

wetlands)

Estuary Coastline

Endangered

Vulnerable

Least

Threatened YES NO UNSURE YES NO YES NO


of 51


(a) Please provide a description.

The site is zoned Agriculture II and supports an existing egg production facility. It is

located west of Plettenberg Bay on a portion of portion 10 of the Farm Kranshoek 342.

The existing facility consists of an office block (that includes the packing store), a free-

standing ‘hanger’ and six chicken houses. This property totally transformed and

includes an existing large scale egg production facility.

7. LAND USE CHARACTER OF SURROUNDING AREA (a) Highlight the current land uses and/or prominent features that occur within +/- 500m radius of the site and

neighbouring properties if these are located beyond 500m of the site.

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.

Untransformed area Low density

residential

Medium density

residential

High density

residential Informal residential

Retail Commercial &

warehousing Light industrial Medium industrial Heavy industrial

Power station Office/consulting

room

Military or police

base/station/compound

Casino/entertainment

complex

Tourism &

Hospitality facility

Open cast mine Underground

mine Spoil heap or slimes dam

Quarry, sand or

borrow pit Dam or reservoir

Hospital/medical center School Tertiary education facility Church Old age home

Sewage treatment plant Train station or

shunting yard Railway line

Major road (4 lanes or

more) Airport

Harbour Sport facilities Golf course Polo fields Filling station

Landfill or waste treatment site Plantation Agriculture River, stream or

wetland

Nature

conservation area

Mountain, koppie or ridge Museum Historical building Graveyard Archeological site

Other land uses (describe): Rural area

(b) Please provide a description, including the distance and direction to the nearest residential area and industrial

area.

The site is located west of Plettenberg Bay on a portion of portion 10 of the Farm Kranshoek

342. This property is situated within an industrial approved area surrounded by other

smallholdings and the Kranshoek settlement is located approximately 500m to the south west

of the farm.


of 51


8. SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS Describe the existing social and economic characteristics of the community in order to provide baseline information.

The socio-economic characteristics of the Pletteberg Bay area is a large disparity

between the wealthy and the poorer communities. There is a high degree of

unemployment in the area and there are not many production farms in the area.

Many of the traditional agricultural areas have become residential / lifestyle farms

(where a family lives but does not necessary utilize for production).

JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd are an existing highly successful egg production

facility. They have recently added 10 Pick and Pay’s and Spar DC (who distributes

eggs to 120 Spar stores) to their ever growing supply list, these new clients were

assigned to them by Hoëveld Eierkooperasie (responsible for the national marketing of

eggs for all the largest chains companies in the egg industry) as a result of other egg

production facilities failing to keep up with the growing demand.

The upgrading of JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd is therefore critical in terms local

economy and will form part of the national sustainable food production plan. The

upgrading of JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd will create 24 temporary and 12

permanent employment opportunities.

In order to meet their current demand they have to import eggs from outside the

region which is contrary to sound environmental management and sustainability

principles.

9. HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL ASPECTS (a) Please be advised that if section 38 of the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (Act No. 25

of 1999), is applicable to your proposed development, then you are requested to furnish this

Department with written comment from Heritage Western Cape as part of your public

participation process. Section 38 of the Act states as follows: “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, power line, 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;

I 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.”

(b) The impact on any national estate referred to in section 3(2), excluding the national estate contemplated in

section 3(2)(i)(vi) and (vii), of the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (Act No. 25 of 1999), must also be

investigated, assessed and evaluated. Section 3(2) states as follows: “3(2) Without limiting the generality of

subsection (1), the national estate may include—

(a) places, buildings, structures and equipment of cultural significance;

(b) places to which oral traditions are attached or which are associated with living heritage;

I historical settlements and townscapes;

(d) landscapes and natural features of cultural significance;

(e) geological sites of scientific or cultural importance;

(f) archaeological and palaeontological sites;

(g) graves and burial grounds, including—

(i) ancestral graves;


of 51


(ii) royal graves and graves of traditional leaders;

(iii) graves of victims of conflict;

(iv) graves of individuals designated by the Minister by notice in the Gazette;

(v) historical graves and cemeteries; and

(vi) other human remains which are not covered in terms of the Human Tissue Act, 1983 (Act No. 65 of

1983);

(h) sites of significance relating to the history of slavery in South Africa;

(i) movable objects, including—

(i) objects recovered from the soil or waters of South Africa, including archaeological and

palaeontological objects and material, meteorites and rare geological specimens;

(ii) objects to which oral traditions are attached or which are associated with living heritage;

(iii) ethnographic art and objects;

(iv) military objects;

(v) objects of decorative or fine art;

(vi) objects of scientific or technological interest; and

(vii) books, records, documents, photographic positives and negatives, graphic, film or video material or

sound recordings, excluding those that are public records as defined in section 1(xiv) of the National

Archives of South Africa Act, 1996 (Act No. 43 of 1996).”

Is section 38 of the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999, applicable to the development? YES NO

UNCERTAIN

If YES, explain:

Will the development impact on any national estate referred to in section 3(2) of the National

Heritage Resources Act, 1999?

YES NO

UNCERTAIN

If YES, explain:

Will any building or structure older than 60 years be affected in any way? YES NO UNCERTAIN

If YES, explain:

Please Note: If uncertain, the Department may request that specialist input be provided.

10. APPLICABLE LEGISLATION, POLICIES AND/OR GUIDELINES (a) Please list all legislation, policies and/or guidelines that have been considered in the preparation of this Basic

Assessment Report.

LEGISLATION ADMINISTERING AUTHORITY

TYPE

Permit/ license/

authorisation/comment / relevant

consideration (e.g. rezoning or

consent use, building plan

approval)

DATE

(if already

obtained):

NEMA Department Environmental Affairs &

Development Planning

NEMA Environmental

Authorisation

Subject to

completion

of the EIA

process.

Building plan

approval Bitou Municipality Building plan approval In progress

POLICY/ GUIDELINES ADMINISTERING AUTHORITY

Guideline for Public Participation Report DEADP

Guideline for Need and Desirability DEADP

Guideline for Alternatives DEADP

Guideline on Public Participation DEADP

Guideline on Exemptions DEADP

Guideline on EMP’s DEADP

Code of Practice 2012 Poultry Association SAPA


of 51


(b) Please describe how the legislation, policies and/or guidelines were taken into account in the preparation of

this Basic Assessment Report.

LEGISLATION / POLICY / GUIDELINE DESCRIBE HOW THE LEGISLATION / POLICY / GUIDELINE WERE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT

(e.g. describe the extent to which it was adhered to, or deviated from, etc).

NEMA (Act No. 107 of 1998)

and the Environmental

Impact Assessment

Regulations 2014.

Under the NEMA Act and EIA Regulations 2014 listed activities are

triggered. These activities’ impacts are assessed and alternatives

proposed within the Basic Assessment Report to mitigate the

associated impacts as far as possible.

The Biodiversity Sector Plan

The guidelines, criteria and definitions described in the Sector Plan

were used when ground truthing the Critical Biodiversity Areas as

described from the BGIS biodiversity plan on the proposed property.

Guideline for Public

Participation Report This guideline was used to complete the public participation report

Guideline for Need and

Desirability

This guideline was used to complete the section on need and

desirability

Code of Practice 2012

This is the South African Poultry Association's Code that regulates its

member's in the Pullet Rearing and Table Egg Production industry and

is applicable to the existing facility and its proposed expansion.

Please note: Copies of any permit(s) or licences received from any other organ of state must be attached this

report as Appendix E.

SECTION C: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

The public participation process must fulfil the requirements outlined in NEMA, the EIA Regulations,

and if applicable the NEM: WA and/or the NEM: AQA. This Department’s Guideline on Public

Participation (August 2010) and Guideline on Exemption Applications (August 2010), both of

which are available on the Department’s website (http://www.capegateway.gov.za/eadp), must

also be taken into account.

Please highlight the appropriate box to indicate whether the specific requirement was undertaken

or whether there was a deviation that was agreed to by the Department.

1. Were all potential interested and affected parties notified of the application by –

(a) fixing a notice board at a place conspicuous to the public at the boundary or on the fence of -

(i) the site where the activity to which the application relates is to be undertaken; and YES DEVIATED

(ii) any alternative site mentioned in the application; YES DEVIATED

(b) giving written notice to –

(i) the owner or person in control of that land if the applicant is not the owner or person in

control of the land; YES N/A

(ii) the occupiers of the site where the activity is to be undertaken and to any alternative site

where the activity is to be undertaken; - occupiers are the applicant YES DEVIATED

(iii) owners and occupiers of land adjacent to the site where the activity is to be undertaken

and to any alternative site where the activity is to be undertaken; YES DEVIATED

(iv) the municipal councillor of the ward in which the site and alternative site is situated

and any organisation of ratepayers that represent the community in the area; YES DEVIATED

(v) the municipality which has jurisdiction in the area; YES DEVIATED

(vi) any organ of state having jurisdiction in respect of any aspect of the activity; and YES DEVIATED

(vii) any other party as required by the competent authority; YES DEVIATED

I placing an advertisement in -

(i) one* local newspaper; and YES DEVIATED

(ii) any official Gazette that is published specifically for the purpose of providing public

notice of applications or other submissions made in terms of these Regulations; YES DEVIATED N/A

(d) placing an advertisement in at least one* provincial newspaper or national

newspaper, if the activity has or may have an impact that extends beyond the

boundaries of the metropolitan or local municipality in which it is or will be

undertaken.

YES DEVIATED N/A

* Please note: In terms of the NEM: WA and NEM: AQA a notice must be placed in at least two

newspapers circulating in the area in which the activity applied for is to be carried out.



of 51


AND

AND

3. Please provide an overall summary of the Public Participation Process that was followed. (The detailed outcomes of

this process must be included in a comments and response report to be attached to the final Basic Assessment Report

(see note below) as Appendix F).

See Public Participation Report in Appendix F

Please note:

Should any of the responses be “No” and no deviation or exemption from that requirement was

requested and agreed to /granted by the Department, the Basic Assessment Report will be rejected.

A list of all the potential interested and affected parties, including the organs of State, notified and a

list of all the register of interested and affected parties, must be submitted with the final Basic

Assessment Report. The list of registered interested and affected parties must be opened,

maintained and made available to any person requesting access to the register in writing.

The draft Basic Assessment Report must be submitted to the Department before it is made available

to interested and affected parties, including the relevant organs of State and State departments

which have jurisdiction with regard to any aspect of the activity, for a 30-day commenting period.

With regard to State departments, the 30-day period commences the day after the date on which

the Department as the competent/licensing authority requests such State department in writing to

submit comment. The applicant/EAP is therefore required to inform this Department in writing when

the draft Basic Assessment Report will be made available to the relevant State departments for

comment. Upon receipt of the Draft Basic Assessment Report and this confirmation, this Department

will in accordance with Section 24O(2) and (3) of the NEMA request the relevant State departments

to comment on the draft report within 40 days.

All comments of interested and affected parties on the draft Basic Assessment Report must be

recorded, responded to and included in the Comments and Responses Report included as

Appendix F to the final Basic Assessment Report. If necessary, any amendments in response to

comments received must be effected in the Basic Assessment Report itself. The Comments and

Responses Report must also include a description of the public participation process followed.

The final Basic Assessment Report must be made available to registered interested and affected

parties for comment before submitting it to the Department for consideration. Unless otherwise

indicated by the Department, a final Basic Assessment Report must be made available to the

registered interested and affected parties for comment for 30 days. Comments on the final Basic

2. Provide a list of all the state departments that were consulted:

Department of Water and Sanitation

Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planing - George Office

Department of Agriculture – Outeniqua, W.C., Elsenburg State Veterinarian

Department of Agriculture

Department of Provincial Health

Department of Water and Sanitation

Department of Water and Sanitation (Gouritz Breede Catchment Management Agency)

Organs of State:

Heritage Western Cape

CapeNature

Bitou Municipality

Eden District Municipality

NGO’s

Plettenberg Bay Community Environmental Forum

Plettenberg Bay Business Chamber

Ward Councillor


of 51


Assessment Report does not have to be responded to, but the comments must be attached to the

final Basic Assessment Report.

The minutes of any meetings held by the EAP with interested and affected parties and other role

players which record the views of the participants must also be submitted as part of the public

participation information to be attached to the final Basic Assessment Report as Appendix F.

Proof of all the notices given as indicated, as well as of notice to the interested and affected parties

of the availability of the draft Basic Assessment Report and final Basic Assessment Report must be

submitted as part of the public participation information to be attached to the final Basic Assessment

Report as Appendix F.

SECTION D: NEED AND DESIRABILITY

Please Note: Before completing this section, first consult this Department’s Guideline on Need and Desirability

(August 2010) available on the Department’s website (http://www.capegateway.gov.za/eadp).

1. Is the activity permitted in terms of the property’s existing land use rights? YES NO Please explain

JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd is an existing large scale egg production facility and are within their

rights to expand and upgrade the existing facility. The farm is zoned as Agricultural Zone II and has

an existing chicken farm for the production of eggs. 2. Will the activity be in line with the following?

(a) Provincial Spatial Development Framework (PSDF) YES NO Please explain

No change. The farm has been producing for the past 11 years and as such no change in relation to

planning context. (b) Urban edge / Edge of Built environment for the area YES NO Please explain

Outside the urban edge within a small industrial park (recently approved LUPO and NEMA). (c) Integrated Development Plan and Spatial Development Framework of the

Local Municipality (e.g. would the approval of this application compromise the

integrity of the existing approved and credible municipal IDP and SDF?).

YES NO Please explain


planning context. The facility is currently meeting important food production and job creation goals

of the IDP. (d) Approved Structure Plan of the Municipality YES NO Please explain


planning context. Falls within the recently approved industrial node. (e) An Environmental Management Framework (EMF) adopted by the Department

(e.g. Would the approval of this application compromise the integrity of the

existing environmental management priorities for the area and if so, can it be

justified in terms of sustainability considerations?)


No change (f) Any other Plans (e.g. Guide Plan) YES NO Please explain

3. Is the land use (associated with the activity being applied for) considered

within the timeframe intended by the existing approved Spatial Development

Framework (SDF) agreed to by the relevant environmental authority (i.e. is the

proposed development in line with the projects and programmes identified as

priorities within the credible IDP)?



planning context. 4. Should development, or if applicable, expansion of the town/area concerned

in terms of this land use (associated with the activity being applied for) occur

here at this point in time?


The existing production facility has not been able to meet the demand for eggs.

JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd recently added 10 Pick and Pay’s and Spar DC (who

distributes eggs to 120 Spar stores) to their ever growing supply list, these new clients were

assigned to them by Hoëveld Eierkooperasie as a result of other egg production facilities failing

to keep up with the growing demand.



of 51


The upgrading of JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd is therefore critical in terms local economy

and will form part of the national sustainable food production plan. The upgrading of JJ van

der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd will create 12 new permanent employment opportunities as well as

24 temporary jobs.

5. Does the community/area need the activity and the associated land use

concerned (is it a societal priority)? (This refers to the strategic as well as local

level (e.g. development is a national priority, but within a specific local context

it could be inappropriate.)


Yes. The upgrading of JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd critical in terms local economy and forms

part of the national sustainable food production plan. The upgrading of JJ van der Schyff & Seun

(Pty) Ltd will create 12 new permanent employment opportunities as well as 24 temporary jobs. 6. Are the necessary services with adequate capacity currently available (at the

time of application), or must additional capacity be created to cater for the

development? (Confirmation by the relevant Municipality in this regard must

be attached to the final Basic Assessment Report as Appendix E.)


There is sufficient water and electricity and backup generator capacity for the facility to

expand.

The existing facility consists of an office block (that includes the packing store), a free-standing

‘hanger’ and six chicken houses. Space for upgrading of the facility was taken into account

during its construction, this space will be utilised during the proposed upgrading.

The proposed addition of 3 chicken houses will be constructed to fit the same dimensions as

the existing chicken houses. They will also be operated using the same conveyor system. The

proposed chicken houses will thus be integrated with the existing 6 chicken houses to form part

of an already fully functioning high quality egg production process.

7. Is this development provided for in the infrastructure planning of the

municipality, and if not what will the implication be on the infrastructure

planning of the municipality (priority and placement of services and

opportunity costs)? (Comment by the relevant Municipality in this regard must

be attached to the final Basic Assessment Report as Appendix E.)


Won’t have any impact on the infrastructure planning of the municipality. 8. Is this project part of a national programme to address an issue of national

concern or importance? YES NO Please explain

The expansion of JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd is critical in terms local economy and will form

part of the national sustainable food production plan.

9. Do location factors favour this land use (associated with the activity applied

for) at this place? (This relates to the contextualisation of the proposed land

use on this site within its broader context.)


JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd is an existing large scale egg production facility. The farm is zoned

as Agricultural Zone II and is within an Industrial node (recently approved) and has an established

chicken farm for the production of eggs and there is adequate space to add on 3 modular additional

units making use of all the existing infrastructure and supply chains and management. 10. How will the activity or the land use associated with the activity applied for,

impact on sensitive natural and cultural areas (built and rural/natural

environment)?


The proposed upgrading will not have any impact on sensitive natural or cultural areas. The whole of

portion 10 has been assessed and granted both Environmental Authorisation (NEMA) and planning

approval (LUPO). All sensitive areas were defined in that process and have been demarcated for

avoidance. 11. How will the development impact on people’s health and wellbeing (e.g. in

terms of noise, odours, visual character and sense of place, etc)? YES NO Please explain

No negative effect on people's health and wellbeing.

JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd underwent an environmental scoping process during Dec

2002 – June 2003. During the environmental scoping process impacts were identified and

assessed and recommendations were made accordingly. Issues previously associated with JJ

van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd were addressed and mitigations were made to ensure

compliance with environmental legislation. Environmental Authorisation was granted by the


of 51


competent authority on 26 May 2004.

All noise, odour and visual impacts were assessed during the environmental scoping process;

as a result these impacts are within legal boundaries and will not have any negative impact on

any person’s health and wellbeing.

The existing facility has been monitored and meets all the required health and safety and food

production standards.

The existing facility complies with the SAPA Code of Practice which covers all health and

wellbeing issues

12. Will the proposed activity or the land use associated with the activity applied

for, result in unacceptable opportunity costs? YES NO Please explain

No unacceptable opportunity costs linked to the project taking place. Should the expansion be

refused this would be considered an unacceptable opportunity cost. 13. What will the cumulative impacts (positive and negative) of the proposed

land use associated with the activity applied for, be? YES NO Please explain

The proposed expansion of JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd will create 12 permanent and 24

temporary employment opportunities.

Expanding the facility will ensure that JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd will be able to produce

enough eggs to satisfy the growing demand, this forms part of the national sustainable food

production plan.

Apart from the above named positive impacts, JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd are critical to the

local economy, food securing and employment.

Negative impacts associated with the facility have previously been assessed and mitigations were

made accordingly, apart from negative impacts during construction (short term construction

impacts), no additional negative impacts are anticipated. 14. Is the development the best practicable environmental option for this

land/site? YES NO Please explain

Expansion of an existing well run facility is viewed as the best practicable environmental option for

this site.

The site on which the proposed chicken houses will be constructed is completely transformed and

currently being utilised for driving, parking and limited grazing purposes.

The facility has been designed in such a manner as to allow the addition of modular units that simply

feed into the existing facility management structures (conveyors, egg sorting, water supply,

electricity provision etc)

The facility design allows for expansion.

The facility is situated on Agricultural zone II land and as an existing large scale egg production

facility, they are within their rights to expand the facility if needed.

The facility conforms with the Cope of Practice of the SAPA.

15. What will the benefits be to society in general and to the local communities? Please explain

The expansion of JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd is critical in terms local economy and will form

part of the national sustainable food production plan.

The expansion of JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd will create 12 new permanent employment

opportunities as well as 24 temporary jobs. 16. Any other need and desirability considerations related to the proposed activity? Please explain

Since 2000 the egg market has more than doubled in the Eastern and Western Cape. JJ van

der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd are members of “Hoëveld Eierkooperasie” who’s responsible for the


of 51


(17) Please describe how the general objectives of Integrated Environmental Management as set out in section 23

of NEMA have been taken into account:

Section 23 requires the following general objectives:

(2) The general objective of integrated environmental management is to—

a. promote the integration of the principles of environmental management set

out in section 2 into the making of all decisions which may have a significant

effect on the environment;

b. identify, predict and evaluate the actual and potential impact on the

environment, socio-economic conditions and cultural heritage, the risks and

consequences and alternatives and options for mitigation of activities, with a

view to minimising negative impacts, maximising benefits, and promoting

compliance with the principles of environmental management set out in

section 2;

c. ensure that the effects of activities on the environment receive adequate

consideration before actions are taken in connection with them;

d. ensure adequate and appropriate opportunity for public participation in

decisions that may affect the environment;

e. ensure the consideration of environmental attributes in management and

decision-making which may have a significant effect on the environment; and

f. identify and employ the modes of environmental management best suited to

ensuring that a particular activity is pursued in accordance with the principles

of environmental management set out in section 2.

These are achieved as follows:

a) Decision making based on the findings of the BAR process

b) Impacts have been identified, predicted and evaluated in terms of environmental,

socio-economic and cultural heritage environment. The risks, consequences and

alternatives and options for mitigation have been evaluated.

c) This BAR process and the EMP ensure that the effects of the activities on the

environment receive adequate consideration before actions are taken in connection

with them.

d) There will have been adequate and appropriate opportunity for public participation

that will lead to the decision being taken.

e) Environmental attributes have been considered in management and decision

making.

f) The modes best suited to environmental management for this activity have been

followed and recommended.

national marketing of eggs for all the largest chains companies in the egg industry and expects

sustainability from their producers.

Because of the high demand in the egg market as well as JJ van der Schyff & Seun’s (Pty) Ltd

limitations in terms of production, they have been forced to import eggs from other provinces in

order to keep up with the growing demand.

This causes a number of problems of which profitability, sustainability and lack of quality are

the major issues.

Because of the above mentioned concerns expansion JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd is an

immediate priority to ensure that egg production requirements are met.


of 51


(18) Please describe how the principles of environmental management as set out in section 2 of NEMA have been

taken into account:

NEMA Section 2 requires:

(2) Environmental management must place people and their needs at the forefront of its

concern, and serve their physical, psychological, developmental, cultural and social

interests equitably.

This has been achieved as follows:

The environmental management relating to the expansion of JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty)

Ltd by the construction of the proposed chicken houses has been set up in such a way as to

place the needs of people at the forefront of its concern while addressing the environmental

issues concerning the upgrading of the facility.

The facility has been designed to allow for addition of modules utilizing the same

infrastructure which allows for true sustainable management.

SECTION E: ALTERNATIVES

Please Note: Before completing this section, first consult this Department’s Guideline on Alternatives (August 2010)

available on the Department’s website (http://www.capegateway.gov.za/eadp).

“Alternatives”, in relation to a proposed activity, means different means of meeting the general purposes and

requirements of the activity, which may include alternatives to –

(a) the property on which, or location where, it is proposed to undertake the activity;

(b) the type of activity to be undertaken;

I the design or layout of the activity;

(d) the technology to be used in the activity;

(e) the operational aspects of the activity; and

(f) the option of not implementing the activity.

The NEMA prescribes that the procedures for the investigation, assessment and communication of the potential

consequences or impacts of activities on the environment must, inter alia, with respect to every application for

environmental authorisation –

ensure that the general objectives of integrated environmental management laid down in NEMA and the

National Environmental Management Principles set out in NEMA are taken into account; and

include an investigation of the potential consequences or impacts of the alternatives to the activity on the

environment and assessment of the significance of those potential consequences or impacts, including the

option of not implementing the activity.

The general objective of integrated environmental management is, inter alia, to “identify, predict and evaluate the

actual and potential impact on the environment, socio-economic conditions and cultural heritage, the risks and

consequences and alternatives and options for mitigation of activities, with a view to minimising negative impacts,

maximising benefits, and promoting compliance with the principles of environmental management” set out in

NEMA.

1. In the sections below, please provide a description of any indentified and considered alternatives and

alternatives that were found to be feasible and reasonable.

Please note: Detailed written proof the investigation of alternatives must be provided and motivation if no

reasonable or feasible alternatives exist.

(a) Property and location/site alternatives to avoid negative impacts, mitigate unavoidable negative impacts and

maximise positive impacts, or detailed motivation if no reasonable or feasible alternatives exist:



of 51


One site alternative – the existing facility requires expansion to ensure future sustainability in

terms of egg production. The facility was designed to enable modular expansion.

The listed activity (expansion of an existing facility) precludes any location alternatives other

than looking at the location on the property itself. The modular design dictates the location

of the expansion on site so as to tie in with the existing infrastructure.

The location of a wetland buffer in one corner of the site precludes the consideration of any

activities in that area (as defined by the EA for the Industrial subdivision)

Construction of a whole new facility at a new location was screened out as the capital

expenditure would be too great in order to meet the desired increase in capacity.

Development of another facility would fragment management and operation and would not

maximise the sustainable use of the existing resources at the existing facility.


of 51


(b) Activity alternatives to avoid negative impacts, mitigate unavoidable negative impacts and maximise positive

impacts, or detailed motivation if no reasonable or feasible alternatives exist:

Activity alternatives are alternatives which meet the same desired outcome. These would be

as follows:

Expansion of the existing facility through the construction of an additional 3 chicken houses:

Construction of each of the 3 chicken houses during different constructional phases

as demand of egg production increases: Impacts associated with construction will

not be restricted to a single constructional phase. At least 2 chicken houses are

needed to keep up with the current demand; as such this alternative will not be the

best economic approach.

Construction of all 3 proposed chicken houses during a single constructional phase:

The impacts associated with the constructional phase (noise, dust and traffic) will be

restricted to a limited timeframe. Production can be increased to more than equal

the demand.

Construction of the first 2 chicken houses with the option to construct a third if egg

production demands can’t be met in the future: JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd are

currently not reaching the demand in terms of egg production. To meet the growing

demand they have been forced to import eggs from other provinces; as such the

construction of at least 2 of the 3 chicken houses as soon as possible is critical in

order to produce enough without having to import eggs.

Besides the construction period variation there is no significant difference between

these alternatives and it is recommended that the Environmental authorisation does

not specify or prescribe the construction as this will be a purely market driven and

financial decision for the applicant to make at the time when they are ready to

commence with implementation of the expansion.


of 51


(c) Design or layout alternatives to avoid negative impacts, mitigate unavoidable negative impacts and maximise

positive impacts, or detailed motivation if no reasonable or feasible alternatives exist:

One layout alternative – The existing facility requires expansion to ensure future sustainability

in terms of egg production.

During the construction of the existing facility modular expansion was considered a potential

future need and as such the design caters for the modular expansion and linking to all the

facilities.

In order to connect to all the existing infrastructure the size and layout of the new sheds is

limited to replicate those already on site.

The proposed additional chicken houses will be integrated together with the 6 existing

chicken houses; as such the proposed chicken houses will have the same layout plan as the

existing chicken houses in order to form part of the already fully functioning egg production

process.

(d) Technology alternatives (e.g. to reduce resource demand and resource use efficiency) to avoid negative

impacts, mitigate unavoidable negative impacts and maximise positive impacts, or detailed motivation if no

reasonable or feasible alternatives exist:

Technology alternatives– The proposed additional chicken houses will be integrated together

with the 6 existing chicken houses; as such the proposed chicken houses will be designed

based on existing chicken houses in order to form part of the already fully functioning egg

production process.

The facility is already utilizing state of the art egg sorting and packing systems, manure

conveyor removal systems and ventilation and feeding systems. As new technology is

developed this will be incorporated where practical and possible.

(e) Operational alternatives to avoid negative impacts, mitigate unavoidable negative impacts and maximise

positive impacts, or detailed motivation if no reasonable or feasible alternatives exist:

Operational alternatives – The proposed chicken houses will be integrated together with the 6

existing chicken houses; as such the proposed chicken houses will be designed and operated

based on the existing chicken houses in order to form part of the already fully functioning egg

production process. As and when alternative operational procedures are developed, these will

be incorporated where possible.

(f) the option of not implementing the activity (the No-Go Option):

Upgrading of the facility does not take place and a new facility will have to be developed to

meet the demand elsewhere in the area.

This does not meet the applicant's need or desirability and is not viewed as a sustainable use

of existing resources.


of 51


(g) Other alternatives to avoid negative impacts, mitigate unavoidable negative impacts and maximise positive

impacts, or detailed motivation if no reasonable or feasible alternatives exist:

JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd underwent an environmental scoping process during

Dec 2002 – June 2003. During the environmental scoping process impacts were

identified and assessed and recommendations were made accordingly. Issues

previously associated with JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd were addressed and

mitigations were made to ensure compliance with environmental legislation.

Environmental Authorisation was granted by the competent authority on 26 May 2004.

Impacts investigated:

Smell:

Foul smells from the chicken manure and chicken feed on site. An olfactory expert

was appointed to do site inspections and provide an objective opinion relating to the

presence of offensive odour.

The general findings of the report were as follows:

Air inside production units carried a smell of feed and “chicken”, but could not be

described as offensive or foul.

In the event where chicken manure was observed outside the buildings (small

localised spillages) the odour could not be detected from a distance greater than

5m.

The ventilator system expels air that smells of “chicken”, and could be detected

up to 5m from the ventilator fans.

The maintenance of this level and type of odour (not deemed as overpowering, foul or

intrusive) will be entirely dependent upon the continuation of diligent “housekeeping”

practices which ensure frequent removal of chicken manure and other organic waste

which may generate from time to time. Thus far all the necessary measures are taken

to prevent any odour.

Noise:

The noise that the emergency generator on the property makes when it runs (when

there is a power failure). Noise surveys were conducted and based on the

recommendations the necessary changes were made. The survey concluded that the

decibel readings were dramatically lower than during previous surveys. The noise level

is now within the legal boundaries and within acceptable standards.


of 51


Potential surface and groundwater contamination:

The operation is deemed a dry-brush operation. No water is used to clean any of the

chicken sheds. The sheds are all brushed and vacuumed twice a week. Chicken feed

is stored in fully enclosed silos that prevent water from entering or exiting the silos. Solid

waste, including dead chickens and left over feed are removed from site everyday

and disposed as required by the regulations. Mature live birds are sold to local farmers

once they have exceeded their productive years.

Sewerage:

The property has existing conservancy tanks. The conservancy tanks is pumped by the

Bitou Municipality.

Solid waste:

The solid waste produced during the proposed activity will consist of construction

waste which will be disposed of at the nearest appropriate landfill site along with other

solid waste generated on a daily bases on the facility.

Solid waste during the operational phase is gathered daily after closing time. The

waste is disposed of at the local Plettenberg Bay refuse site.

Dead chickens are removed daily in accordance with the required regulations.

Death due to disease requires containment in accordance with the regulations and is

prescribed by the State Vet.

Manure was previously stored in heaps on outside concrete slabs in order to dry for

fertiliser. The dry manure was then ground and packaged in the ‘hanger’ for sale.

These operations were a source of odour and as a result of complaints regarding the

smell of the manure, these activities were ceased and the current conveyor system

delivery straight onto the trucks was implemented.


of 51


Roads:

Access to the farm is from an existing dirt road that turns off from the airport/Kranshoek

road. This is not a private road and serves as an access road to other farms/businesses

as well. The Airport/Kranshoek road carries a moderate amount of traffic and is in the

process of being upgraded to a surfaced road by District roads. Alternative access is

not an option.

Storm water:

Storm water will be required to be part of the new storm water system as part of the

approved rezoning and services agreement.

Traffic:

JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd is a large scale egg production facility; as such traffic

to and from the facility is inevitable. The current incoming traffic to the facility includes

chicken feed deliveries, 1 truck 3 times per week and delivery of eggs, one truck per

month. The outgoing traffic includes egg delivery, 2 trucks daily and the manure

collecting, 3 trucks per week. All the above mentioned incoming and outgoing

deliveries takes place during daytime hours with the exception of outgoing egg

deliveries which takes place between 02:00 and 03:00 AM.

After the proposed expansion of the facility the traffic will increase slightly by 1

additional outgoing egg delivery truck, 1 additional manure collection truck, 1

additional feed truck, all as per schedule mentioned above. The trucks delivering eggs

to the farm will no longer be needed.

(h) Please provide a summary of the alternatives investigated and the outcomes of such investigation:

Please note: If no feasible and reasonable alternatives exist, the description and proof of the investigation of

alternatives, together with motivation of why no feasible or reasonable alternatives exist, must be provided.

Alternatives Summary

No-Go alternative - No expansion at this site

Would not meet the need and desirability objectives or the sustainability objectives.

A new facility would be required in the area to meet the growing demand.

Expansion of existing facility

Modular expansion - allows for the new chicken houses to be built to link to the

existing infrastructure and operational management systems. This is viewed as the

preferred alternative as it is the best practical environmental alternative and is most

appropriate sustainable use of existing infrastructure. No significant impact will be

associated with the timing of the building of the 3 additional modules. Building one at

a time, or 2 followed by the 3rd or building all 3 together. The only difference would

be to the applicant in terms of cashflow and an extended construction period. These

impacts are not viewed as significant and the applicant should be permitted to

decide on the method that suites his means the best and the EMPr will cover the

construction impacts during construction.

Non-modular expansion - would require excessive additional costs to service the

facility and link to the collection and delivery systems already in place. The

remaining area within the Agricultural II zone does not specifically suit the

development of anything other than a modular expansion.


of 51


Alternative methods of handling the manure have already been considered in the past and

the current system meets the desired outcomes.

Alternative technology in relation to the facility and its operation will be used as and when

required in order to meet the high standard of production required. The current system, into

which the 3 new laying houses will feed, is already state of the art and running under

capacity.

Alternative sites have not been assessed as these would not fall under the listed activity

which pertains to expansion of existing facilities and not to the development of new facilities.

SECTION F: IMPACT ASSESSMENT, MANAGEMENT,

MITIGATION AND MONITORING MEASURES Please note: The information in this section must be duplicated for all the feasible and reasonable alternatives

(where relevant).

1. PLEASE DESCRIBE THE MANNER IN WHICH THE DEVELOPMENT WILL IMPACT ON THE

FOLLOWING ASPECTS: (a) Geographical and physical aspects:

The site upon which construction of the proposed chicken houses will take place is entirely

transformed and consists mostly of gravel and lawn (Pennisetum clandestinum). The

proposed construction will have little to no impact in terms of the physical aspects of the site.

The surface upon which the proposed construction will take place is flat; as such no

excavation or earthworks in addition to foundation excavation of the chicken houses will be

necessary.

The ground conditions require raft foundations which is a design issue that has been

successfully implemented in all the existing structures.

Therefore no adverse impacts on geographical or physical aspects.

(b) Biological aspects:

Will the development have an impact on critical biodiversity areas (CBAs) or ecological support areas

(ESAs)? YES NO

If yes, please describe:

N/A

Will the development have an impact on terrestrial vegetation, or aquatic ecosystems (wetlands,

estuaries or the coastline)? YES NO

If yes, please describe:

N/A Please describe the manner in which any other biological aspects will be impacted:

(c) Socio-Economic aspects:

What is the expected capital value of the activity on completion? R9 678 300.00 What is the expected yearly income or contribution to the economy that will be generated

by or as a result of the activity? R28 500 000.00

Will the activity contribute to service infrastructure? YES NO


of 51


How many new employment opportunities will be created in the construction phase of the

activity?

Approximately

36

What is the expected value of the employment opportunities during the construction

phase?

± R180 000

What percentage of this will accrue to previously disadvantaged individuals? 100%

How will this be ensured and monitored (please explain):

Applicant will appoint a local contractor to construct the buildings. Temporary jobs will be

created for local labour as this is a very labour intensive process. Through compliance with

the EMP and inclusion in tender documents. This will be monitored by the ECO. How many permanent new employment opportunities will be created during the

operational phase of the activity? 12

What is the expected current value of the employment opportunities during the first 10

years? ± R57 000 000.00

What percentage of this will accrue to previously disadvantaged individuals? 90%

How will this be ensured and monitored (please explain):

Part of the permanent maintenance staff. Through compliance with the EMP and inclusion in

tender documents. This will be monitored by the ECO

Any other information related to the manner in which the socio-economic aspects will be impacted:

The expansion of JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd plays a critical role in the local economy

and does not only provide employment opportunities but will form part of the national

sustainable food production plan.

(d) Cultural and historic aspects:

There should be no impact on cultural or historic aspects as the expansion will be done to an

existing facility. The farm has been subjected to prior NEMA and ECA scoping process, and

previous disturbance within the area render any heritage resources to be out of context.

2. WASTE AND EMISSIONS

(a) Waste (including effluent) management

Will the activity produce waste (including rubble) during the construction phase? YES NO

If yes, indicate the types of waste (actual type of waste, e.g. oil, and whether hazardous or not) and

estimated quantity per type? M3

The waste produced during the proposed activity will consist of construction

waste which will be disposed of at the nearest appropriate landfill site.

Very

limited as

building

process

not

designed

to be

wasteful

Will the activity produce waste during its operational phase? YES NO

If yes, indicate the types of waste (actual type of waste, e.g. oil, and whether hazardous or not) and

estimated quantity per type? M3

Manure and the occasional dead chickens.

Normal Agri-Industry waste

11 m3

Per Day

Where and how will the waste be treated / disposed of (describe)?

If yes, indicate the types of waste (actual type of waste, e.g. oil, and whether hazardous or not) and estimated quantity per

type per phase of the development?

Operational "domestic type" waste to the Municipal refuse site.

Manure to farming sector as fertilizer (viewed as a resource not waste)

Dead chickens suitable for animal consumption to the Wolf Sanctuary under control of


of 51


regulations (viewed as a resource not waste)

Contaminated chicken to Municipal waste site under specific protocols or as directed by the

State Vet if the need arises.

Sewage collected by Municipality for disposal in the WWTW.

Has the municipality or relevant authority confirmed that sufficient capacity exist for treating / disposing of

the waste to be generated by this activity(ies)? If yes, provide written confirmation from Municipality or

relevant authority

YES NO

Will the activity produce waste that will be treated and/or disposed of at another facility other than into a

municipal waste stream? (other waste is used as a resource (manure or food) and is not disposed). YES NO

If yes, has this facility confirmed that sufficient capacity exist for treating / disposing of the waste to be

generated by this activity(ies)? Provide written confirmation from the facility and provide the following

particulars of the facility:

YES NO

Does the facility have an operating license? (If yes, please attach a copy of the license.) YES NO

Facility name:

Contact person:

Postal address:

Postal code:

Telephone: Cell:

E-mail: Fax:

Describe the measures that will be taken to reduce, reuse or recycle waste:

Manure- reused as a resource in the agricultural sector.

Dead Chickens - reused as a food source at the Wolf Sanctuary.

Broken eggs during sorting are used in the catering sector.

.

(b) Emissions into the atmosphere

Will the activity produce emissions that will be disposed of into the atmosphere? YES NO

If yes, does it require approval in terms of relevant legislation? YES NO

Describe the emissions in terms of type and concentration and how it will be treated/mitigated:

N/A

3. WATER USE

Please indicate the source(s) of water for the activity by ticking the appropriate box(es)

Municipal Water

board Groundwater

River, Stream,

Dam or Lake Other The activity will not use water

If water is to be extracted from a groundwater source, river, stream, dam, lake or any other natural feature, please

indicate

the volume that will be extracted per month:

273.75m3

Please provide proof of assurance of water supply (eg. Letter of confirmation from municipality / water user

associations, yield of borehole)

Does the activity require a water use permit / license from DWAF? YES NO

If yes, please submit the necessary application to Department of Water Affairs and attach proof thereof to this

application.

Describe the measures that will be taken to reduce water demand, and measures to reuse or recycle water:

Water for the farm is extracted from a borehole located on the farm. The farm has water

rights to extract 6000 cubic meters per year from the said borehole. The existing facility

uses approximately 6000 litres per day (an average of 2 190 cubic meters of water per

year). The addition of the 3 proposed chicken houses will elevate the yearly water use

to 3285 cubic meters which is still well under the maximum allowed for the farm.


of 51


4. POWER SUPPLY

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

Electricity to the facility is 3 phase Eskom power with a standby generator that switches

on and off automatically in cases of power failure. The generator switches off only

once the full 3 phase electricity is restored. The existing power supply will be sufficient,

no upgrading in terms of power supply will be needed for the addition of the 3

proposed chicken houses

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

N/A

5. ENERGY EFFICIENCY

Describe the design measures, if any, that have been taken to ensure that the activity is energy efficient:

The construction design limits work to make maximum use of available energy as efficiently

as possible. Describe how alternative energy sources have been taken into account or been built into the design of the activity,

if any:

No alternative energy sources have been taken into account because the proposed activity

entails the upgrading of an existing facility. Energy will be supplied in the same manner as

the rest of the existing facility. No additional power will be required.


of 51


6. DESCRIPTION AND ASSESSMENT OF THE SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACTS PRIOR TO AND AFTER

MITIGATION

Please note: While sections are provided for impacts on certain aspects of the environment and certain

impacts, the sections should also be copied and completed for all other impacts.

(a) Impacts that may result from the planning, design and construction 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 planning, design and construction phase.

Potential impacts on geographical and physical

aspects:

Soil disturbance during construction of chicken houses

and installation of services resulting in potential for

erosion.

Nature of impact: Neutral - no impact (already disturbed site)

Extent and duration of impact: Short term and site specific

Probability of occurrence: Definite

Degree to which the impact can be reversed:

Low. Foundations to be excavated for permanent

structures.

Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable

loss of resources:

Low

Cumulative impact prior to mitigation:

Increased runoff from hard surface - suited to rain

water harvesting off the roof

Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation

(Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High)

Low

Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: High

Proposed mitigation: None required other than sound work methods.

Cumulative impact post mitigation: Slight increase in runoff from hard surfaces.

Significance rating of impact after mitigation


Low

Potential impact on biological aspects:

None anticipated. Expansion onto gravel and lawn

area.

Nature of impact:

Extent and duration of impact:

Probability of occurrence:



loss of resources:





of 51


Degree to which the impact can be mitigated:

Proposed mitigation:

Cumulative impact post mitigation:



Potential impacts on socio-economic aspects:

Construction phased employment (24 short term

employment opportunities)

Nature of impact: Positive

Extent and duration of impact: Local and short term

Probability of occurrence: High

Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Not necessary to reverse


loss of resources:

No loss of resources

Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: None



Low



EMP to ensure local labour, work method labour

intensive

Cumulative impact post mitigation: Short term employment opportunities



low

Potential impacts on cultural-historical aspects: None anticipated

Nature of impact:





loss of resources:









Potential noise impacts: Noise during construction phase

Nature of impact: Neutral


of 51


Extent and duration of impact: Short term and Site specific



Not necessary to reverse, negligible working noise from

building operations.


loss of resources: No irreplaceable loss – short term impact

Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: None anticipated


(Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Low

Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: Low


None necessary other than normal standard good

practice.

Cumulative impact post mitigation: None anticipated



Potential visual impacts: No visual impact during construction (rural area)

Nature of impact: Extent and duration of impact: Probability of occurrence: Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable

loss of resources:

Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation


Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: Proposed mitigation: Cumulative impact post mitigation: Significance rating of impact after mitigation


(b) 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.

Potential impacts on the geographical and physical

aspects: Smell.

Nature of impact: Neutral

Extent and duration of impact: Short term site specific Probability of occurrence: Low Degree to which the impact can be reversed: High Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable

loss of resources: Low

Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Already resolved in terms of existing operation. Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation




Continuation of diligent “housekeeping”

practices which ensure frequent removal of

chicken manure and other organic waste which

may generate from time to time. Thus far all the

necessary measures are taken to prevent any


of 51


odour.

Cumulative impact post mitigation: None anticipated



Potential impact biological aspects: Disease and health risks Nature of impact: Negative

Extent and duration of impact: Short term Probability of occurrence: Possible

Degree to which the impact can be reversed: High - protocols in place to rapidly identify potential for

disease and prevent or respond accordingly Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable

loss of resources: Low - protocols in place limit the risk

Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Low - risk limited to the immediate chicken house



Low - the mitigation measures are in place and are

required in terms of the code of practice and Animal

Disease Act.

Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: High - measures in place

Proposed mitigation: Protocol in place for monitoring and rapid

response. Vet on standby when required.

Cumulative impact post mitigation: Low


(Low, Medium, Medium-High, High, or Very-High) Low - risk limited and managed

Potential impacts on the socio-economic aspects: 12 new permanent employment opportunities

Nature of impact: Positive

Extent and duration of impact: Long term permanent employment


Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Not necessary to reverse


loss of resources:

No irreplaceable loss

Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: 12 Long term permanent employment opportunities



Low


Proposed mitigation: No mitigation needed

Cumulative impact post mitigation: Creating 12 permanent employment opportunities



High


of 51


Potential impacts on the cultural-historical aspects:

None anticipated.

Nature of impact: Extent and duration of impact: Probability of occurrence: Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable

loss of resources:





Potential noise impacts: Noise created by backup generator and additional

traffic

Nature of impact: Neutral - already screened generator and negligible

increase in traffic.

Extent and duration of impact: Short term site specific Probability of occurrence: Low Degree to which the impact can be reversed: High Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable

loss of resources: Low

Cumulative impact prior to mitigation: Noise from backup generator and delivery trucks Significance rating of impact prior to mitigation


Degree to which the impact can be mitigated: Medium


The generator room was enclosed to reduce

ambient noise and trucks limited to day time

deliveries with the exception of long hull egg

deliveries that leave between 2-3am.


Slight increase in noise through additional vehicles

although the surfacing of the airport road underway

will reduce this impact



Potential visual impacts: No change Nature of impact:





loss of resources:









(c) Impacts that may result from the decommissioning 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.


of 51


Potential impacts on the geographical and physical

aspects: No decommissioning likely

Nature of impact:





loss of resources:









Potential impact biological aspects: No decommissioning likely

Nature of impact:





loss of resources:









Potential impacts on the socio-economic aspects: No decommissioning likely

Nature of impact:





of 51



loss of resources:









Potential impacts on the cultural-historical aspects: No decommissioning likely Nature of impact:





loss of resources:









Potential noise impacts: No decommissioning likely

Nature of impact:





loss of resources:









Potential visual impacts: No decommissioning likely

Nature of impact:





loss of resources:










of 51


(d) Any other impacts:

Potential traffic impact: Nature of impact: Extent and duration of impact: Probability of occurrence: Degree to which the impact can be reversed: Degree to which the impact may cause irreplaceable loss of

resources:





7. SPECIALIST INPUTS/STUDIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Please note: Specialist inputs/studies must be attached to this report as Appendix G. Also take into account

the Department’s Guidelines on the Involvement of Specialists in EIA Processes available on the Department’s

website (http://www.capegateway.gov.za/eadp).

Specialist inputs/studies and recommendations:

No specialist input requested to date or anticipated as being necessary. Specialist inputs from

the original application are in place and effective.

The South African Poultry Association Code of Practice 2012 is the current code to which the

operation needs to comply and the existing facility complies with this code so no additional

studies are deemed necessary.

8. IMPACT SUMMARY

Please provide a summary of all the above impacts.

Construction phase impacts These are limited to the constructional of the proposed chicken houses.

Noise impacts during construction - limited to the usual anticipated building noises. No impact.

Socio-economically short term employment will be created for the construction of the chicken

houses. 24 short term employment opportunities will be created. These should go to local

residents.



of 51


Operational impacts

Smell:

Manure collection and disposal methods such as to keep the operation dry and to

avoid smells by disposal directly into the trucks for delivery to the farms requiring the

fertilzer. EMPr management protocols to ensure continued efficient management and

control of potential impacts.

Noise:

The noise that the existing emergency generator on the property makes is now within

the legal boundaries and within acceptable standards. No change to this is anticipated

with the expansion.

Potential surface and groundwater contamination:

The operation is a dry-brush operation. No water is used to clean any of the chicken

sheds. The sheds are all brushed and vacuumed twice a week. Chicken feed is stored

in fully enclosed silos that prevent water from entering or exiting the silos. Solid waste,

including dead chickens and left over feed are removed from site everyday and

disposed of at the Municipal refuse site resulting in no potential for contamination.

Potential disease outbreaks:

The potential for disease outbreaks is always there and can only be avoided by

implementing efficient vaccination programs as well as ensuring regular cleaning of

chicken houses as well as sound “housekeeping”. JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd

conceders itself as a leader in the industry with regards to the implementation of the

above mentioned activities. Regular vaccinations for diseases like Salmonella,

Newcastle Disease and Avian Influenza are implemented and all the sanitary

precautions are in place (Please see Appendix J Annexure 5). The Animal Disease Act

(Act number 35 of 1984) must be complied with. The SAPA Code of Practice 2012

attached to the EMPr currently governs the operations on site and will continue to do so.

General sanitation and biological hazard control:

Prevention / Control

- Only staff members assigned to work in the hen houses is permitted entry.

- Staff members who work in the hen houses are not permitted to keep any fowl of any

kind to prevent possible spread of disease / bacteria to hen houses.

- When advice from consulting vet is required, samples of carcasses, birds, bloods etc is

sent to him. Consulting vet is the ONLY visitor permitted to enter the hen houses.

- Under no circumstances will ANY other visitor be allowed access to hen houses.

Reaction

- A Crisis Management team will be elected by the Farm Owner to deal with any

outbreak of a disease that may occur.

- Risk assessment performed for each occurrence and determine what further steps are

to be taken to prevent contamination of the product, to protect the health of the staff,

the health of the consumer, and any steps necessary to contain contamination to

prevent further spread of any disease. These actions could be any of the following:

Restricted movement, additional sanitizing, foot dips, incineration of product, additional

veterinary medicines to layers, inoculations and whatever other restrictions that the

situation dictates


of 51


Emergency situations

- State Vet in consultation with the facility vet will alert the local authorities and a plan

devised to suit the situation.

- Should the situation dictate so, the Crisis Management Plan will be implemented to deal

with the various aspects of recalling of product, the media etc.

- The risk of Avian influenza is very low, as the houses are sealed and wild birds do not

enter, and water is chlorinated.

- In case of an outbreak the State Vet prescribes the procedure to deal with

contaminated birds on site. Most likely buried underground in a sealed septic tank and

the birds shall be covered with lime and soil within the septic tank.

Vaccination and cleaning of waterlines and chicken houses:

Hens are vaccinated every month, one month with Bioral IB H120 spry, which are

normally done in the middle of each month, at the end of each month hens are

vaccinated with Abic NCD Lasota / ND Clone 30.

When the chicken houses are empty, the whole chicken house is washed with a high

pressure hose and disinfected using Virukill and Formaldehyde. After this procedure the

chicken house is left closed and empty for 24 hours before new hens are placed.

When new hens are placed, they are given Multi-vitamins through means of Dosartron.

After hen placing is completed and the chicken house is full. The following morning

hens are given Abic NCD VH strain though Dosartron in the water lines. The next day

Nobilis IB 4-91 are sprayed. The following week Poilvac E-coli vaccine is sprayed to

complete the procedure.

The water lines are flushed over a period of 3 days. First a sodium bicarbonate solution

is pumped and left in the waterlines for 24 hours, then flushed with clean water. There

after a Citric acid solution is pumped and left in the waterlines for 24 hours and flushed

using clean water afterwards. Finally an Auqua-clean solution is pumped and left in the


of 51


waterlines for 24 hours and once more flushed with clean water afterwards. After this

procedure the waterlines are deemed clean. Flushed water flows out of the chicken

houses as controlled runoff stormwater. This will eventually be picked up in the formal

storm water system of the larger industrial park, at present it infiltrates into the

surrounding grazing lands on the Agriculture II zone.

9. OTHER MANAGEMENT, MITIGATION AND MONITORING MEASURES

(a) Over and above the mitigation measures described in Section 6 above, please indicate any additional

management, mitigation and monitoring measures.

Compliance with the EMPr, current and new EA and specific measures indicated above.

Compliance with the industry Cope of Practice (SAPA) as updated and amended from time

to time.

ECO control during construction

Compliance reporting in operational phase.

(b) Describe the ability of the applicant to implement the management, mitigation and monitoring measures.

The applicant is already implementing the management of the existing facility in

accordance with the SAPA Code of Practice.

The reporting, management, mitigation and monitoring measures are already in place for the

existing 6 chicken houses and will be expanded to include the 3 new chicken houses as and

when they come on line.

The contractors during the construction phase will be contractually bound to comply with the

construction management requirements.

The applicant will appoint an ECO to ensure compliance monitoring during the construction

phase as per the EMPr and compliance reporting during the operational phase as prescribed

in the EMPr.

See Appendix H for the EMPr which includes all the current protocols as annexures to the

EMPr.

Please note: A draft ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMME must be attached this report as Appendix H.


of 51


SECTION G: ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGIES AND

CRITERIA, GAPS IN KNOWLEDGE, UNDERLAYING

ASSUMPTIONS AND UNCERTAINTIES

(a) Please describe adequacy of the assessment methods used.

The assessment methods used are considered adequate to the activity proposed.

Based on the nature of the expected impacts of the proposed chicken houses, the assessment

methods used are considered adequate as they are all known impacts.

As the facility is an existing facility the impacts are known and have been addressed and certified

as compliant.

The industry Code of Practice (SAPA) covers the requirements of the industry in terms of all aspects

of commercial egg production within which this facility falls and the expansion will fall.

The risks are known and the procedures to manage these risks are known and being

implemented already across the industry and at the site specifically.

(b) Please describe the assessment criteria used.

Assessment criteria based on the Convention of Assigning Significance Rating to Impacts

as attached in Appendix J. Sound judgment and knowledge of the existing facility and its operation where the impacts are

well known and have been easily avoided through sound environmental planning at the initial

stages of design and through modification of the systems where problems were experienced.

(c) Please describe the gaps in knowledge.

No gaps in knowledge. Expansion of existing and functioning facility. All impacts are known and

are already being addressed.

(d) Please describe the underlying assumptions.

It is assumed that all impacts have been identified.

It is assumed that the industry continually update their requirements to comply with sound

environmental management and that these are contained in the Code of Practice 2012.

(e) Please describe the uncertainties.

Uncertainties involve knowing when and if a disease outbreak will occur - the testing and

preventative protocols are in place and the systems in place to deal with an outbreak should one

occur.

SECTION H: RECOMMENDATION OF THE EAP

In my view (EAP), the information contained in this application form and the documentation

attached hereto is sufficient to make a decision in respect of the activity applied for. YES NO


of 51


If “NO”, list the aspects that should be further assessed through additional specialist input/assessment or whether this

application must be subjected to a Scoping & EIR process before a decision can be made:

N/A If “YES”, please indicate below whether in your opinion the activity should or should not be authorised:

Activity should be authorised: YES NO

Please provide reasons for your opinion

There are no adverse impacts associated with the proposed expansion of the facility by the

proposed addition of 3 chicken houses.

All possible impacts are known through the existing facility where sound management has

been documented. The Environmental Management Programme contains the required

methods

JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd have to continually expand their facility to keep up with

the ever growing market demands.

The upgrading of JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd is critical in terms local economy and

will form part of the national sustainable food production plan.

The sustainable use of resources is promoted by adding to an existing facility and its

infrastructure without having to build a whole new facility with all the infrastructure.

If you are of the opinion that the activity should be authorised, then please provide any conditions, including

mitigation measures that should in your view be considered for inclusion in an authorisation.

Compliance with the EMPr

Ensuring that the proposed chicken houses are operated in the same manner as the

existing facility is operated.

Duration and Validity:

Environmental authorisations are usually granted for a period of three years from the date of issue. Should a longer

period be required, the applicant/EAP is requested to provide a detailed motivation on what the period of validity

should be.

The standard 5 year period will be an adequate period of time in which to commence due to

the current urgency in increased demand. The completion of the 3 additional chicken sheds

is anticipated at 1 every 2nd year so a completion date of 6 years after commencement is

anticipated.


of 51


SECTION I: APPENDICES

The following appendices must be attached to this report:

Appendix

Tick the box

if Appendix

is attached

Appendix A: Locality map

Appendix B: Site plan(s)

Appendix C: Photographs

Appendix D: Biodiversity overlay map

Appendix E:

Permit(s) / license(s) from any other organ of state including service

letters from the municipality

Water Use Certificates

Certificates of Achievement

Historic Approvals

Appendix F:

Public participation information: including a copy of the register of

interested and affected parties, the comments and responses report,

proof of notices, advertisements and any other public participation

information as required in Section C above.

Appendix G: Specialist Report(s) N/A

Appendix H : Environmental Management Programme

Appendix I: Additional information related to listed waste management activities

(if applicable)

Appendix J:

Any Other (if applicable)

Municipal Approval

Chicken House Specifications

Costing of Expansion


of 51


DECLARATIONS

The applicant

I Mr JJ van der Schyff, in my personal capacity or duly authorised (please circle the

applicable option) by thereto hereby declare that I:

regard the information contained in this report to be true and correct, and

am fully aware of my responsibilities in terms of the National Environmental Management

Act of 1998 (“NEMA”) (Act No. 107 of 1998), the Environmental Impact Assessment

Regulations (“EIA Regulations”) in terms of NEMA (Government Notice No. R. 543 refers),

and the relevant specific environmental management Act, and that failure to comply

with these requirements may constitute an offence in terms of the environmental

legislation;

appointed the environmental assessment practitioner as indicated above, which meet

all the requirements in terms of regulation 17 of GN No. R. 543, to act as the independent

environmental assessment practitioner for this application;

have provided the environmental assessment practitioner and the competent authority

with access to all information at my disposal that is relevant to the application;

will be responsible for the costs incurred in complying with the environmental legislation

including but not limited to –

o costs incurred in connection with the appointment of the environmental assessment

practitioner or any person contracted by the environmental assessment practitioner;

o costs incurred in respect of the undertaking of any process required in terms of the

regulations;

o costs in respect of any fee prescribed by the Minister or MEC in respect of the

regulations;

o costs in respect of specialist reviews, if the competent authority decides to recover

costs; and

o the provision of security to ensure compliance with the applicable management and

mitigation measures;

am responsible for complying with the conditions that might be attached to any

decision(s) issued by the competent authority;

have the ability to implement the applicable management, mitigation and monitoring

measures;

hereby indemnify, the government of the Republic, the competent authority and all its

officers, agents and employees, from any liability arising out of, inter alia, the content of

any report, any procedure or any action for which the applicant or environmental

assessment practitioner is responsible; and

am aware that a false declaration is an offence in terms of regulation 71 of GN No. R.

543.

Please Note: If acting in a representative capacity, a certified copy of the resolution

or power of attorney must be attached.

Signature of the applicant:

JJ van der Schyff & Seun (Pty) Ltd

Name of company:

Date:


of 51


The independent environmental assessment practitioner (EAP)

I … Cathy Avierinos of HilLand Environmental cc …, as the appointed independent

environmental practitioner (“EAP”) hereby declare that I:

act/ed as the independent EAP in this application;

regard the information contained in this report to be true and correct, and

do not have and will not have any financial interest in the undertaking of the activity,

other than remuneration for work performed in terms of the NEMA, the Environmental

Impact Assessment Regulations, 2010 and any specific environmental management Act;

have and will not have no vested interest in the proposed activity proceeding;

have disclosed, to the applicant and competent authority, any material information that

have or may have the potential to influence the decision of the competent authority or

the objectivity of any report, plan or document required in terms of the NEMA, the

Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2010 and any specific environmental

management Act;

am fully aware of and meet the responsibilities in terms of NEMA, the Environmental

Impact Assessment Regulations, 2010 (specifically in terms of regulation 17 of GN No. R.

543) and any specific environmental management Act, and that failure to comply with

these requirements may constitute and result in disqualification;

have ensured that information containing all relevant facts in respect of the application

was distributed or made available to interested and affected parties and the public and

that participation by interested and affected parties was facilitated in such a manner

that all interested and affected parties were provided with a reasonable opportunity to

participate and to provide comments;

have ensured that the comments of all interested and affected parties were considered,

recorded and submitted to the competent authority in respect of the application;

have kept a register of all interested and affected parties that participated in the public

participation process;

have provided the competent authority with access to all information at my disposal

regarding the application, whether such information is favourable to the applicant or

not; and


543.

Note: The terms of reference must be attached.

Signature of the environmental assessment practitioner:

HilLand Environmental cc

Name of company:

Date:


of 51


The independent PERSON WHO COMPILED A SPECIALIST REPORT OR UNDERTOOK A

SPECIALIST PROCESS

I................................................., as the appointed independent specialist hereby declare that I:

act/ed as the independent specialist in this application;

regard the information contained in this report as it relates to my specialist input/study to

be true and correct, and

do not have and will not have any financial interest in the undertaking of the activity,

other than remuneration for work performed in terms of the NEMA, the Environmental

Impact Assessment Regulations, 2010 and any specific environmental management Act;

have and will not have no vested interest in the proposed activity proceeding;

have disclosed, to the applicant, EAP and competent authority, any material information

that have or may have the potential to influence the decision of the competent

authority or the objectivity of any report, plan or document required in terms of the

NEMA, the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2010 and any specific

environmental management Act;

am fully aware of and meet the responsibilities in terms of NEMA, the Environmental

Impact Assessment Regulations, 2010 (specifically in terms of regulation 17 of GN No. R.

543) and any specific environmental management Act, and that failure to comply with

these requirements may constitute and result in disqualification;

have ensured that information containing all relevant facts in respect of the specialist

input/study was distributed or made available to interested and affected parties and the

public and that participation by interested and affected parties was facilitated in such a

manner that all interested and affected parties were provided with a reasonable

opportunity to participate and to provide comments on the specialist input/study;

have ensured that the comments of all interested and affected parties on the specialist

input/study were considered, recorded and submitted to the competent authority in

respect of the application;

have ensured that the names of all interested and affected parties that participated in

terms of the specialist input/study were recorded in the register of interested and

affected parties who participated in the public participation process;

have provided the competent authority with access to all information at my disposal

regarding the application, whether such information is favourable to the applicant or

not; and


543.

Note: The terms of reference must be attached.

Signature of the specialist:

Name of company:

Date:

basic assessment report - hilland

Documents